Looks like available on February 12
http://store.steampowered.com/app/227060/
Early access though. It won't be finished.
Looking forward to it. I've got high hopes, but that being said I'm pretty burnt out on early access games being the new norm. Pay to beta test is not cool if it ever was cool.
I question why this is taking so long to develop. Is it an entirely new engine from the prior game in the series? If so, how will this game differ from its predecessor, aside from the obvious?
I've been lookng forward to this for a long time, but not for early access. I'm waiting for the full release too.
Quote from: Jarhead0331 on February 06, 2014, 07:06:15 AM
I question why this is taking so long to develop. Is it an entirely new engine from the prior game in the series? If so, how will this game differ from its predecessor, aside from the obvious?
Now this is what concerns me: originally this game is going to be out anyear ago..now it's coming out in two weeks now for Alpha stage? I don't know just don't see a great game coming out here will say
Maybe the Longbow folks are just hardcore perfectionists? :-\
Just trying to look on the bright side of these delays, which I agree, don't necessarily bode well. I had (have?) high hopes for Hegemony Rome. When Hegemony Philip of Macedon came out, it really impressed me as a very polished game, especially for such a small developer. I hope Rome comes to similar fruition.
Quote from: Jarhead0331 on February 06, 2014, 07:06:15 AM
I question why this is taking so long to develop. Is it an entirely new engine from the prior game in the series?
I've no idea, but FWIW, I seem to recall
Philip of Macedon took forever to develop -- from initial announcement to release -- as well.
I wonder if
sandman's question isn't closer to the mark (that perhaps Longbow are OCD/perfectionist) than any of us realize. Not that that would make it any less frustrating for the long development time (even if it is, in fact, the case), but it would certainly explain quite a bit.
Quote from: Jarhead0331 on February 06, 2014, 07:06:15 AM
If so, how will this game differ from its predecessor, aside from the obvious?
Another good question. I seem to recall the map is going to be both much larger and more detailed, but I'll admit I don't remember what else might be different (other than the content, of course).
I'm hoping the new mechanics, and the extensive background history narrated in the background, are what is taking them a long time.
And testing. I'd much rather they take their sweet time and test the hell out of it. Much to their credit, Longbow Games put out a lot of patches for the first Hegemony for quite a long time after release. As far as I know they're probably still doing so if there are any issues still being reported. So I get the impression that they probably are perfectionists if the previous game is any indication.
These days, with so many video and tabletop games backed up on my play list, I would prefer developers take their sweet time in getting these things out in excellent condition from day 1. Because I just end up shelving the buggy unfinished stuff that I pay top dollar for on release day, waiting until it's been patched months later (for a couple reasons). I'm not into buying PC games early these days because I just end up waiting on patches and not playing them. Defeats the purpose of buying early, ya know?
Hopefully they are getting everything tidied up so the release day reviews are glowing. I'm sure most developers want this, but not all of them have as much control over it as these small companies. :D
^Yeah IIRC Longbow is really made up of three guys...
I'd rather they take as much time with is as they need. If they want to release an early access/paid public beta, more power to them IMO. No ones holding a gun to your head and forcing you to purchase it early. But in my experience if the developers actually listen to their early access buyers, are willing to mike changes to their game design, and can weed through all the crap, it makes for a much better final product. Most recent example for me has been the Command developers, who have literally added things into the game or onto the list of things to add, with only a simple request from someone in Baloogans jabbr chat room. Not sure if the longbow guys fall into that category, but I have high hopes after Hegemony Gold.
Quote from: Gusington on February 06, 2014, 08:28:25 PM
^Yeah IIRC Longbow is really made up of three guys...
IIRC, Who fund their war games buy making casual/arcade games.
Quote from: Kushan on February 06, 2014, 09:40:03 PM
I'd rather they take as much time with is as they need. If they want to release an early access/paid public beta, more power to them IMO. No ones holding a gun to your head and forcing you to purchase it early. But in my experience if the developers actually listen to their early access buyers, are willing to mike changes to their game design, and can weed through all the crap, it makes for a much better final product. Most recent example for me has been the Command developers, who have literally added things into the game or onto the list of things to add, with only a simple request from someone in Baloogans jabbr chat room. Not sure if the longbow guys fall into that category, but I have high hopes after Hegemony Gold.
Absolutely. I'm all for Early Access buy-ins as it tends to add a lot more potential testers to the mix and far more feedback. I think doing this is a win-win for everyone if the developers are willing to make good use of such feedback.
I was referring to any 'Official' release when saying I hope it comes out in good shape from the extra time it has taken them. If they put it out on Early Access and mark it as such then it's really not officially finished yet. I'm more down on big company games that release $50 or $60 worth of buggy unfinished crap that was never
in an Early Access state, or one that was in such an Early Release but was deemed finished when it wasn't. Mostly the prior situation. Then you end up having to wait much longer for all the patching to slow down before digging seriously into a campaign because some update will inevitably break something and/or fix some big issues but only if you start with a fresh campaign. I think you guys have all experienced this with at least one game before, and likely more. You end up putting it away for a long time in the hopes that everything will get fixed up at some point and you can start a new game that will run awhile without being interrupted.
As for Longbow Games, specifically, my experience with them has been superb. Probably one of the most customer friendly bunch I've given money to. Not only regarding an excellent stance on draconian DRM but practically giving away the Gold upgrade to those who purchased the earlier version of Hegemony, after it was re-released. I think that I paid around five bucks to get the Gold version, which essentially made it cheap DLC since it added a sandbox mode and more. I have no reason to doubt that they will get things done right in more ways than one. :D
SOooooo... early access is out-- anyone playing?
I've never paid for early access, but this might be the exception. I thought Hegemony Philip of Mac. was fantastic and want these guys at Longbow to succeed --
I've been enjoying Chapter 1 of the campaign, but there are some pretty glaring bugs at this point. Be prepared for this being early access.
Still it is playable, fun and extremely promising.
Quote from: Jarhead0331 on February 12, 2014, 09:52:18 PM
I've been enjoying Chapter 1 of the campaign, but there are some pretty glaring bugs at this point. Be prepared for this being early access.
Still it is playable, fun and extremely promising.
Thanks for the info JH.
I expect the dev team to have the bugs & such all fixed up eventually. They really went the extra mile doing so with the previous game.
are there 'epic' battles? the screenshots on steam seem to show minor skirmish sized engagements
Quote from: undercovergeek on February 13, 2014, 03:40:04 AM
are there 'epic' battles? the screenshots on steam seem to show minor skirmish sized engagements
The largest battle I have experienced so far was three Legions against a mixed force of brigands from Gaul. I wouldn't call it epic.
I'm not sure if it is me, if it is the unfinished nature of the game or if it's just the way it will be, but true command and control during a battle is practically non-existent. It all boils down one mob fighting another. I don't think the battles in this game will ever approach e magnificence of the battles in Rome II.
thanks for that JH - that was pretty much the deal breaker i needed to cross it off the list
Quote from: undercovergeek on February 13, 2014, 07:42:18 AM
thanks for that JH - that was pretty much the deal breaker i needed to cross it off the list
OK...but in fairness to the game, I really do not think it is attempting to compete with the tactical battle prowess of the Total War series. It is a very different game scratching a totally different strategic itch. Just throwing that out there...
yeah, its cool - i thought it might be a more detailed combat simulator to rival the battles of Rome II but without the turn based map section
It does look a great game, just not one for me
What are the building options and city management like?
Quote from: Gusington on February 13, 2014, 09:01:19 AM
What are the building options and city management like?
Again, I haven't played much and the game is an unfinished product, but so far as I can tell, cities are used exclusively as a source of supply and to recruit military units and workers. Workers are then sent to farms, logging camps and mines to gather supplies and gold. Each of these resource camps are separate locations on the map and can be raided and destroyed.
Sounds like the first one.
I think they were supposed to be adding more city building options in this one. Nothing to rival a city-builder but more than
Hegemony.
One of the things I didn't like about the first one was that the chokepoints took up too much of the map and most battles were very cramped affairs where getting more than one unit into a fighting formation didn't happen very often without a bunch of troops colliding together. The map was cramped with a lot of mountains and few open spaces. That was appropriate for grand strategy in Greece, of course, but the traffic jams with more than one unit forming up were common. I certainly don't want them large enough to turn it into a never ending Benny Hill chase but being able to line up more than one unit would be nice. Are the maps a bit more "open" now?
Quote from: undercovergeek on February 13, 2014, 08:21:12 AM
yeah, its cool - i thought it might be a more detailed combat simulator to rival the battles of Rome II but without the turn based map section
It does look a great game, just not one for me
As for comparing them with the TW series.. I don't think they're quite the same style of strategy games. Longbow's system is just a real-time grand strategy system from a small indie company. While there is no detailed Tactical Battles, the system models something that many others don't (or don't do well): Supply. The supply mechanics in
Hegemony were tough enough to often make it your primary concern, especially when your army is a distance away from home. It also makes raiding a viable option if you see the opportunity. The AI was aggressive enough to do so. It even had seasonal differences in supply, which I thought was really cool. Little details like that helped give it the praise it receives. The base campaign in
Hegemony also followed a more historical tack, including an interesting narrative about all the cutthroat stuff that happened at the time. Yet it still managed to progressively open up your options as you played so it wasn't on rails. A good mix in such areas that often don't get much attention. The military side of things really wasn't all that detailed and there was very little unit variety, so it's more abstract in the warfare details.
They're definitely not Total War clones, so I don't recommend directly comparing the two. The stuff from Longbow are something unusual. I enjoy TW's turn-based grand strategy but
Hegemony had some different facets that made it unique and it played quite differently. I expect their Rome version to be improved more, once they're finished.
Quote from: Jarhead0331 on February 13, 2014, 07:37:57 AM
I'm not sure if it is me, if it is the unfinished nature of the game or if it's just the way it will be, but true command and control during a battle is practically non-existent. It all boils down one mob fighting another. I don't think the battles in this game will ever approach e magnificence of the battles in Rome II.
I felt similarly about Hegemony PoM, although I was always vaguely aware that there was more I could be doing to direct combat if I had a better grasp of the UI. That is, it seemed there were more sophisticated formations etc. that I just never really used, letting phalanxes just crash into eachother and sort the battle out that way. The real Philip of Macedon would not have approved.
Early access on Steam seems like such a double-edged sword for the devs. Is it worth getting more cash up front to help fund further development, at the possible cost of alienating players who come to the overhasty decision that "this game is way too buggy and will never be good". I guess Longbow decided the answer was "Yes."
My sense is that most players won't accept (on some semi-conscious level) that the game is unfinished, because of the psychology of "Well, I paid for it, didn't I?" It's like willingly buying a house that's half finished, and then feeling pissed off that there's no roof or bathrooms. Not logical, but an understandable reaction.
Quote from: Nefaro on February 13, 2014, 11:08:43 AM
Are the maps a bit more "open" now?
Not so far. In fact, most of my major combat has taken place within the confines of tight mountain passes located in the Alps. The narrow space combined with poor AI pathing issues has made maneuver damn near impossible, which is why most of the battles I've experienced involving more than one or two units has been just mobs duking it out.
Appears Hegemony Rome is no longer "Early Access" as of today, after (what looks to be) another substantial patch -- game's now officially released, it would appear
Has anyone been playing? It sounds like it still has a fair amount of kinks to be worked out - ?
Quote from: sandman2575 on May 15, 2014, 02:05:44 PM
Appears Hegemony Rome is no longer "Early Access" as of today, after (what looks to be) another substantial patch -- game's now officially released, it would appear
Has anyone been playing? It sounds like it still has a fair amount of kinks to be worked out - ?
I definitely want to get into it but rather backed up at this point. I'll get to it sometime soon-ish.
Officially released you say?
Yeah, they're calling it feature-complete and ready for prime time, although they are continuing to work on the A.I. and formations, Longbow considers it cooked. There will still be patches and updates, but not as frequently as before.
I bought it on sale a couple of months ago, but held off on spending any real time with it. I'll probably dive in over the weekend.
Quote from: tgb on May 15, 2014, 09:41:58 PM
Yeah, they're calling it feature-complete and ready for prime time, although they are continuing to work on the A.I. and formations, Longbow considers it cooked. There will still be patches and updates, but not as frequently as before.
I bought it on sale a couple of months ago, but held off on spending any real time with it. I'll probably dive in over the weekend.
So it' pretty much in Beta now..
Quote from: Nefaro on May 15, 2014, 10:32:27 PM
Quote from: tgb on May 15, 2014, 09:41:58 PM
Yeah, they're calling it feature-complete and ready for prime time, although they are continuing to work on the A.I. and formations, Longbow considers it cooked. There will still be patches and updates, but not as frequently as before.
I bought it on sale a couple of months ago, but held off on spending any real time with it. I'll probably dive in over the weekend.
So it' pretty much in Beta now..
If you're going to look at it that way, you might as well say that all games are in perpetual Beta until abandoned by the developer.
Quote from: tgb on May 16, 2014, 02:31:47 AM
Quote from: Nefaro on May 15, 2014, 10:32:27 PM
Quote from: tgb on May 15, 2014, 09:41:58 PM
Yeah, they're calling it feature-complete and ready for prime time, although they are continuing to work on the A.I. and formations, Longbow considers it cooked. There will still be patches and updates, but not as frequently as before.
I bought it on sale a couple of months ago, but held off on spending any real time with it. I'll probably dive in over the weekend.
So it' pretty much in Beta now..
If you're going to look at it that way, you might as well say that all games are in perpetual Beta until abandoned by the developer.
That's kinda the situation with them, isn't it?
I just think about that for Hegemony since it was just now proclaimed to be feature complete. Which is usually where a Beta starts in order to crush all the bugs left. Although that term has been used rather loosely lately with all the early access stuff.
They may not term it that way, but that's how I will think about it for awhile based on such a statement. Either way, I have the patience to wait awhile until it's been patched some more. I hope they addressed some Cons of the first one. It's a good game but I want to see a couple facets more refined.
Anyone got impressions? How does it compare to the Greek titles?
Quote from: Gusington on May 16, 2014, 08:27:24 AM
Anyone got impressions? How does it compare to the Greek titles?
I've only played a little of the Caesar campaign, so far, and it's a bit more polished in terms of cutscenes, etc, but pretty much plays like the Ancient Greek one, for good and bad. The biggest disappointment to me is that the diplomatic system hasn't changed any - getting truces and alliances is still a matter of spending gold and that's it. In addition to the story campaign there are 4 different sandbox modes - one using the entire map of Gaul where you can play as any tribe in the game, and 3 more where the map and available tribes are specific to smaller parts of the map - the Alps, Western Gaul, and Brittania.
Your feelings on this is going to depend on how much you liked PoM, because this is largely more of the same.
^Thanks tgb. I enjoyed PoM but didn't all-out love it. I was hoping the Roman game would be more of an evolution...
Dammit. I had hoped that they would improve the Diplo model. The constant bribery was just too simplistic for my taste. I could've sworn they said that they were going to improve it. :'(
Quote from: Gusington on May 16, 2014, 09:16:40 AM
^Thanks tgb. I enjoyed PoM but didn't all-out love it. I was hoping the Roman game would be more of an evolution...
+1 "Largely more of the same" is disappointing to hear. The original Hegemony was a pretty brilliant achievement, esp. for a small indy developer, but I did find it frustrating how the game seemed inevitably to devolve into raider-party Whack-A-Mole.
^Yeah that's why I ultimately stopped playing, the raiding got annoying.
I'm surprised its more of the same...especially considering how long this was in development.
Me too, surprised and sad. Somebody hold me.
However it is still set in the Roman era which I did more than the Greek era. I'll still get it on sale.