Is EU:ROME still worth playing?

[magitsu]

In truth we are comparing modded older TWs to more recent vanilla TWs.
But that's one of the biggest problem with the series. They've been clamping down on the moddability since R1/M2 up to a point that it's nonexistent past Napoleon.

Imo Empire has best map / strategic play. Napoleon best battles. S2 is the most coherent complete package. R1 and M2 are modder extraordinaires, probably also could be described as most fun.

Some things where annoyance has been building up for years is for example that the engine lost sense of unit/formation weights after R1. Basically only EB1 (maybe RS) does it right. In every other iteration formations don't behave acceptably - they've devolved into fights between multiple individuals, not something where you can feel the weight of e.g. phalanxes going head to head. For example the breaking of organization of a phalanx should be the clinching point, not successive deaths of individual soldiers.

 

[Thrake]

I'm under the impression people don't really remember how grindy the first TW games were (less so Shogun and Medieval), because they were in their teens when they played them, so they had all the free time and endurance in the world.

Oh yeah... The never ending slaughter of peasant armies once you defeated the real armies past the first few battles... Did they really fixed that in Rome 2? I almot thought it was a feature of TW serie by now (didn't play it though I have it in my library... I should download it at some point I guess)

Either way, Rome 1 was fun but it was definately overrated IMO.

 

[Jango40]

Sometimes I wonder why they bother releasing games like Rome, Sengoku or March of the Eagles when they support them only for a few patches and then leave them. They can't gain popularity when the devs show absolutely no support.

 

[Will Steel]

Even with rose tinted eyes, I do remember how ridiculous bridge battles could be in vanilla RTW. You just run to Greece, grab a few phalangite mercenaries, and when the bridge battle begins you just have to put those phalangites on one end of the bridge in formation, and laugh as the enemy commits suicide by marching into your pike walls.

Sometimes I wonder why they bother releasing games like Rome, Sengoku or March of the Eagles when they support them only for a few patches and then leave them. They can't gain popularity when the devs show absolutely no support.

Actually, those are pretty half-arsed games with enormous potential but the devs were either too lazy, or worked in a half-hearted way. The result is games like EU:Rome or Sengoku which could've been developed much more, but devs just decided to abandon them.

 

[TheAtreides84]

Oh yeah... The never ending slaughter of peasant armies once you defeated the real armies past the first few battles... Did they really fixed that in Rome 2?

Somewhat. The one province minors still bring on much above their weight (fixed in mods), but it's less grindy by far.

In truth we are comparing modded older TWs to more recent vanilla TWs.
But that's one of the biggest problem with the series. They've been clamping down on the moddability since R1/M2 up to a point that it's nonexistent past Napoleon.

Yep, that's mostly true. But while total conversions are gone, there are still little mods to fix the flaws in the vanilla game.

 

[magitsu]

Sometimes I wonder why they bother releasing games like Rome, Sengoku or March of the Eagles when they support them only for a few patches and then leave them. They can't gain popularity when the devs show absolutely no support.

Well, Sengoku prototyped many of the things that were turned into a virtual goldmine with CK2 release, which proved to be the best launch ever for PDS.

MotE was a sidestep for something lighter I guess.

Rome is so old that I would disregard any logic related to today's PI. The company and its ambitions have grown immensely from those times. For example they've had two million+ copies 3rd party published games. That's completely new. Not to mention EU3 being one of the things that came after Rome and really brought PI to new people, being also their first Steam (sales) success.

My boldest estimate is that V2 is the kind of project that might not be made today. V1 launch was quite terrible and V2 was launched with the bet that Fred would get his head shaven if it actually turned profit. The community and most importantly Johan was the reason why II was made. http://www.gamasutra.com/view/news/...Victoria_2s_HeadShaving_Profitability_Bet.php It did better than expected, even received two expansions. Today that kind of initial setting might not be enticing enough to try again.
I guess they still have quite a bit of leeway. Augustus probably isn't essential, but HoI4 can't fail. Which explains the pushing back. Their own standard and public expectation have risen dramatically as of late.

Quite a large part of their reasoning comes from what the most trusted developers want to make. V3 probably is interesting because of the new challenges it tried to solve and obviously fully couldn't. Now there's probably been enough time that they've gotten a new perspective on things. How to do it right. But it's commercial potential has already been tested twice, so it needs to inspire CK1->CK2 feelings when the decision is made, otherwise it could be seen as having less commercial potential than completely new efforts.

Some companies of this size and reputation are all about business. PI still seems to do things surprisingly largely based on whatever they see as interesting challenges / fun.

 

[Will Steel]

I always thought of EU-Rome and then Sengoku as 'testing areas' for CK2, considering they both have character-based gameplay and CK2 itself was built on Sengoku, when it was in development.

 

[Mudcrab]

I've taken to playing EU:Rome as an history lesson as I delve into the life and times of Mithradates, eastern hero or "terrorist" depending on your viewpoint. Absolutely decided to now make a Mithradates mod in my free time armed only with the magnificent "Poison King" biography by A. Mayor. Hopefully in this way, it'll give legs to this great game for a few more months when I finish it. EU:R is not bargain basement material just yet.

 

[DKM]

Absolutely decided to now make a Mithradates mod

Are you planning on releasing it when you're finished?

 

[Mudcrab]

Are you planning on releasing it when you're finished?

Of course. Should be a fun journey -the focus will be on the Poison King and his associates. The idea is for a conversion rather than a tweak mod. Cheers, DKM.

 

[Hector of Troy]

I loved a lot of the concepts around loyalty, ambition, popularity and civil wars, those need to be in more PDS games.

I also love those concepts. Those are the elements that will make EU:ROME sometimes more fulfilling than CK2 and EU4. There is still challenge even after your empire develops considerably. EU:ROME is also less dependent on events. There is more fun and important micromanagement to be done.

About the TW series, what I can say is that it hasn't been introduced up to now any campaign features that will make the series interesting. TW games are still all about raising armies and attacking the next target. In Rome 2, I was happy there would be a political system - or so I thought. Until patch 16 (the latest official one), the political system was still broken and meaningless. It seemed to be a simple system, but something that would make you care about generals, marriages, political parties - and that could potentially lead to civil wars, if not taken care of. As I said, it seemed to be a simple but fun political system, and yet CA failed to make it barely functional. The complete lack of interesting campaign features is what makes me never get too excited about any TW game.