Rome II

Nefaro · September 02, 2013, 10:20:10 AM

Quote from: Gusington on September 02, 2013, 10:17:12 AM
Eurogamer 7/10 on release day aint so bad for release day. Eurogamer also stated this: "The game has also had its AI revamped, and I'm pleased to report that it's somewhat cannier." That was for the tactical battles. The review mentioned that the campaign AI actually got a little dumber! Wonder where that came from.

Damn. I was hoping the campaign AI is as good as Shogun 2. As long as it's not marching all it's men around in numerous tiny armies of twos and threes ,continually, it'll still be better than the older ones.

Bison · September 02, 2013, 10:20:38 AM

Bison gamer gave it a 9.27845812346939281739938471616389593 pre-release score.

Gusington · September 02, 2013, 10:22:55 AM

^Bison's known to be stingy with his award points too.

Nefaro keep in mind that there is a release day patch to come, so there is a real chance that there could be a boost to both tactical and strategic AIs.

Or they could both implode :)

Bison · September 02, 2013, 10:26:29 AM

I'm going with server implosion, which I will sadly read about on my iphone at work instead of enjoying the opportunity to rage at the moment of release about a broken f'n game.

Gusington · September 02, 2013, 10:29:29 AM

You can pretend rage...channel that rage from not being able to play into some timely lies.

undercovergeek · September 02, 2013, 10:29:42 AM

lol - i fear now pages of posts whilst the preorderers try to justify their position over the naysayers - RPS mentions a rampant Rome AI while he builds a Celtic kingdom and mentions nothing about a shaky strategic/campaign AI - im sure theres hundreds of nuances that happen in everyones game that cause a 'huh?' moment

personally, im not worried

Bison · September 02, 2013, 10:31:32 AM

Well we all already know that the Greek city states are WAY TOO OVER POWERED! I CANNOT BELIEVE CA FREAKING MADE THEM SO FRACKIN OVERPOWERED!11!!!@111! WHAT THE HELL WHERE THEY THINKING??????????????????????????????? OMG!!!!!!1!!1111!!

mikeck · September 02, 2013, 10:40:44 AM

Funny... Nothing changes. Eurogamer says campaign Ai isn't good. Rock Paper Shotgun says Campaign Ai is pretty good.

Some of the complaints are valid...others are nitpicky. Like the complaint about army improvement. "You can choose to make your archers or infantry 3% better" it's stated as a complaint but I'm not sure why. Seems normal.

What I expected...you see what you want to see. If you want to see bad AI, you will pick up on stupid things the Ai does and convince yourself it sucks. If you want to believe the AI is good, then that's what you see.

Either way, I will buy it. I enjoyed Empires and that was the worst so I will like this. Take it for what it is

Bison · September 02, 2013, 10:43:14 AM

Quote from: mikeck on September 02, 2013, 10:40:44 AM
Some of the complaints are valid...others are nitpicky. Like the complaint about army improvement. "You can choose to make your archers or infantry 3% better" it's stated as a complaint but I'm not sure why. Seems normal.

I think he was just pissed off that there wasn't an option to upgrade to +5 magic missiles or the very least acid arrows of phalanx destruction.

Gusington · September 02, 2013, 10:43:58 AM

Agree.

I am about 90% sure I will start as Rome, although almost every other faction sounds great.

Interesting to note that both the more negative Euro review and the more positive RPS review both stated that all the factions played differently and felt very fleshed out. To me personally that is very important.

undercovergeek · September 02, 2013, 10:46:21 AM

Quote from: Gusington on September 02, 2013, 10:43:58 AM
Agree.

I am about 90% sure I will start as Rome, although almost every other faction sounds great.

Interesting to note that both the more negative Euro review and the more positive RPS review both stated that all the factions played differently and felt very fleshed out. To me personally that is very important.

and elephants seemed suitably full of rage - i am liking this

Sir Slash · September 02, 2013, 10:46:51 AM

If they support the modders like they say they will, then any problems will likely be corrected very shortly. Darthmod for FOTS had as challenging an Campaign AI as I've ever played-- on the "Hard" difficulity level. First thing I'm gonna do is check-out if any tech develops Gatling Ballistas. ::) ::)

Bison · September 02, 2013, 10:58:19 AM

Quote from: Sir Slash on September 02, 2013, 10:46:51 AM
First thing I'm gonna do is check-out if any tech develops Gatling Ballistas. ::) ::)

Whoa! This would be awesome especially with either giants or orcs as the weapons crew.

Gusington · September 02, 2013, 11:47:52 AM

One thing I haven't understood since Shogun 2 was the claim of 'most modded TW game'...how do they claim that if parts of the game like the map are hard coded?

Nefaro · September 02, 2013, 12:52:40 PM

Quote from: Bison on September 02, 2013, 10:43:14 AM
Quote from: mikeck on September 02, 2013, 10:40:44 AM
Some of the complaints are valid...others are nitpicky. Like the complaint about army improvement. "You can choose to make your archers or infantry 3% better" it's stated as a complaint but I'm not sure why. Seems normal.

I think he was just pissed off that there wasn't an option to upgrade to +5 magic missiles or the very least acid arrows of phalanx destruction.

Yeah.. I got the impression that the guy hadn't played Shogun 2, or N/ETW for that matter, since those also had the same size of incremental unit bonuses in the research.

He did point out the unusually dark lighting effects and it looks like they took them a step further with some of the washed-out looks in those screenshots. Kinda reminds me of the useless grainy overlay effects used in Silent Hunter: Wolves of the Pacific that nobody liked and was so often modded off. Change for the sake of change isn't necessarily good by default.