If you've had some time to spend with it, have had it. No fanboys or trashtalkers need apply.
-
We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.
Well I played with it for a few hours with Lustani (sp?).
The weird thing is that I got spammed with messages that lowered my stability so I left it at -3 until I became an Republic (great addition!)
Also some of the descriptions (laws, offices) are still based on Rome
while playing the Iberian Republic.
I don't understand how the Archon is being chosen in my Iberian Republic, It's sometimes one of the 3 senators who are heirs, but sometimes not.
Both Civic and Merc. Factions had 35+ votes if not more and rarely did I get a Archon from their Faction.
The moment I raised my stability I got attacked by hordes of barbarians ending my Republic
My 10 unit army was owned by a horde of 13 and 2 events that created 6 more barbarians
(I didn't get that event once when my stability was -3 but twice when my stability was positive )
Overall it's a lot better than Rome 1.3 Vanilla. I love the possibility that you can grant Traits. The role-playing abilty just got a lot better.
The weird thing is that I got spammed with messages that lowered my stability so I left it at -3 until I became an Republic (great addition!)
Also some of the descriptions (laws, offices) are still based on Rome
while playing the Iberian Republic.
I don't understand how the Archon is being chosen in my Iberian Republic, It's sometimes one of the 3 senators who are heirs, but sometimes not.
Both Civic and Merc. Factions had 35+ votes if not more and rarely did I get a Archon from their Faction.
The moment I raised my stability I got attacked by hordes of barbarians ending my Republic
My 10 unit army was owned by a horde of 13 and 2 events that created 6 more barbarians
(I didn't get that event once when my stability was -3 but twice when my stability was positive
)Overall it's a lot better than Rome 1.3 Vanilla. I love the possibility that you can grant Traits. The role-playing abilty just got a lot better.
I spent about half an hours as the Eburones, cheating (I always cheat to see how everything works.) and aside from the clan chiefs complaining constantly because they have unemployed family (or is it their family is underrepresented?), for -1 stability, I thought it was a great improvements, from where 1.3 where Rome would intervene if you started a war in Gaul. The game is actually goading me to expand faster than I would like "Conquer This minor! Now this one! Now this one!" I also liked the missions, and how there are missions which are the same but with different rewards: One mission to conquer actually resulted me loosing all my "infamy" which, I think is badboy? I like the regional Guvs, but it took me a bit to figure it out. Like you'll have one Governor for all of Brittania now, France is divided into about four regions, etc. etc.
Also with the more volatility of the situation, You don't tend to "ignore" loyalty so much. Normally, unless I'm at war, playing as a tribe, I choose "Adapt or Perish", but with the increased power of Guvs, It makes you stop and think ' OKay, I can't afford to annoy this guy any more, He's threatening to take out everything I just won in that war, so I'll choose this option the next couple times to give me some breathing room'.
I don't think this will turn out to be a IN sized improvement, when we look back on it, but it definitely makes the game more fun.
Also with the more volatility of the situation, You don't tend to "ignore" loyalty so much. Normally, unless I'm at war, playing as a tribe, I choose "Adapt or Perish", but with the increased power of Guvs, It makes you stop and think ' OKay, I can't afford to annoy this guy any more, He's threatening to take out everything I just won in that war, so I'll choose this option the next couple times to give me some breathing room'.
I don't think this will turn out to be a IN sized improvement, when we look back on it, but it definitely makes the game more fun.
Hmm, let's see...
1. Foreign characters coming to your lands is great, but I think some of the things could have been made clearer. For example, if a foreign country is annexed, you tend to get flooded with characters seeking asylum. It'd be a nice touch if there was a filter on the character screen that seperated these from the masses of your own country's characters. As a side question: do these characters go off and re-join their home country if it's re-created?
2. While historical accuracy is pretty much out the window with a republic's public offices, I like how the player really needs to keep up-to-date with how his characters are evolving and how to try and shape their careers. A little suggestion here: there are events that fire to encourage the player to change office holders, but they are often detrimental (either have a rather average character hold that office for another two years or increase the number of pesky Populist senators), so having a window pop-up (which can be turned off if need be, as usual with pop-up windows) telling you that you can change one or more offices would be quite helpful.
3. You don't need a CB to declare war on someone your senate hates. Nice.
4. The AI finally uses the Guarantee Independence feature. Never seen it use that before.
5. A little bit disappointed with the continued lack of diplomatic options, but considering the scale of additions for a $10 expansion I'm not too fussed.
6. Pirates are cool, I'm sure we can all agree on that. Would it be possible to have a feature similar to IN (I don't recall if it was in EU3 or NA) where you can affect the frequency of pirate appearances by patrolling ships?
7. In a similar vein, a couple of other EU3 features would fit perfectly: detaching siege forces, for example.
8. Trade is easier to get between countries. Nice.
9. Regional government is a great idea, IMHO it works exactly as it should. Previously, governors were really faceless since there were so many of them in larger countries. Now, you pay more attention to who they are, and civil wars tend to be in larger areas because of it rather than isolated provinces.
I don't know, that's about it for now. I'm sure I'll find something to rant about (good or bad) sooner or later
1. Foreign characters coming to your lands is great, but I think some of the things could have been made clearer. For example, if a foreign country is annexed, you tend to get flooded with characters seeking asylum. It'd be a nice touch if there was a filter on the character screen that seperated these from the masses of your own country's characters. As a side question: do these characters go off and re-join their home country if it's re-created?
2. While historical accuracy is pretty much out the window with a republic's public offices, I like how the player really needs to keep up-to-date with how his characters are evolving and how to try and shape their careers. A little suggestion here: there are events that fire to encourage the player to change office holders, but they are often detrimental (either have a rather average character hold that office for another two years or increase the number of pesky Populist senators), so having a window pop-up (which can be turned off if need be, as usual with pop-up windows) telling you that you can change one or more offices would be quite helpful.
3. You don't need a CB to declare war on someone your senate hates. Nice.
4. The AI finally uses the Guarantee Independence feature. Never seen it use that before.
5. A little bit disappointed with the continued lack of diplomatic options, but considering the scale of additions for a $10 expansion I'm not too fussed.
6. Pirates are cool, I'm sure we can all agree on that. Would it be possible to have a feature similar to IN (I don't recall if it was in EU3 or NA) where you can affect the frequency of pirate appearances by patrolling ships?
7. In a similar vein, a couple of other EU3 features would fit perfectly: detaching siege forces, for example.
8. Trade is easier to get between countries. Nice.
9. Regional government is a great idea, IMHO it works exactly as it should. Previously, governors were really faceless since there were so many of them in larger countries. Now, you pay more attention to who they are, and civil wars tend to be in larger areas because of it rather than isolated provinces.
I don't know, that's about it for now. I'm sure I'll find something to rant about (good or bad) sooner or later
Verenti said:
But it does sound like most of the major improvements was done to the republics and monarchies, and thus you wont feel it as much playing the Eburones.
Just a guess as I havent purchased the thing yet.
Bertouch said:
For me simply having the interface cleaned up and both faster and easier to access made the game upgrade worthwile--really 12 bucks for a substantial coat of spit and polish is more than fair to me.
saturdayknight said:
Speaking of the interface, is there no way to see your relationship score with an AI nation from clicking on one of their provinces ala EU3? Maybe I'm missing it.
It seems in Rome you have to open the diplomacy screen and find them in the nation list. I can't remember, but presume it was the same way in vanilla Rome. It just seems like a step backwards from EU3..
saturdayknight said:
Total agreement, that and character improvement makes the game so much better for me. I also like that some governors will cause revolts, furthermore, after playing around with rome for a couple of hours, I really enjoyed the historical missions, and how the senate works!
I agree. Remembering the time before the release of Rome 1.0, what I expected was more character interaction than was ultimately delivered. Now, VV is proving to be just what I had expected Rome to be and even a bit more. Some money well-spent, I say.
To bad so many people have given up on Rome by now, at least some of us had faith. I really did hate the lack of depth of vanilla Rome, and 1.0 was a mess, the proper teching didn't even work if I remember right. Furthermore, lots of other problems reared their ugly heads, but the real thing we should all remember is, that 'Rome wasn't built in a day'.
Let's not go fanboy on this, okay, guys? It's not about having "faith." It's about giving detailed reviews of VV, noting if you feel it adds significantly to a flawed but interesting experience.
Same thing goes to those who hate VV. Let's keep the rah-rahing and the acid throwing out of this single thread. Thank you.
Same thing goes to those who hate VV. Let's keep the rah-rahing and the acid throwing out of this single thread. Thank you.
Any chance we could get some new screenshots from anyone? College has kept me busy over the last couple of weeks, hoping to get it by the end of the week possibly for Friday night however.
As a moderator, you'll probably lampoon me as biased, but I thought it'd be fun to share my reactions to VV, anyway.
First thing, my main gripe with vanilla Rome was the periods of time where I felt I had nothing much to do. I got bored, to be concise.
In VV I feel there's just a lot more to do. In EU3 I love clicking provinces just to check what's up, and I do that in VV, too, but more so with characters. That's intriguing to me.
I'd like to see relations listed in the province views between countries, as someone else mentioned in another thread. I'm glad that trade is easier, too. I feel like there's some hope to make money now!
First thing, my main gripe with vanilla Rome was the periods of time where I felt I had nothing much to do. I got bored, to be concise.
In VV I feel there's just a lot more to do. In EU3 I love clicking provinces just to check what's up, and I do that in VV, too, but more so with characters. That's intriguing to me.
I'd like to see relations listed in the province views between countries, as someone else mentioned in another thread. I'm glad that trade is easier, too. I feel like there's some hope to make money now!
It's not really fanboyism - the only thing is that all weaknesses in VV are weaknesses that Rome had as well. Some AI issues, AI troops predicting your moves and evading your troops, illogical combat resolution and so on. But that's not really a flaw in VV, but in Rome itself.
VV is a package of improvements which do not worsen the game in any way.
VV is a package of improvements which do not worsen the game in any way.
monsterfurby said:
Good point. It's hard to lambaste VV, when it's essentially a significant improvement over Rome in myriad ways.
the_hdk said:any requests?
I would love to see some screenies to do with the Political Party system please
.
I personally think that VV by itself is quite a solid expansion becuse it has made internal politics more complex and interesting, there are simply more things to take in account and characters have really a lot of importance now.
The addition of laws is another feature which makes internal affairs interesting.
I also like missions because there are less moments when i'm staring my monitor waiting for something to do.
The game still suffer though from the shallowness of Rome.All these different civilizations use the same units so there is no difference between a Numidian Cavalry and Equites or Legionaries and Pictish Warrior.
While the economic model is a lot better than in EU3 it still remains too much arcade at least for my taste.
In general i would rate VV 8/10 and Rome from 6/10 it was before to 7/10 with VV
The addition of laws is another feature which makes internal affairs interesting.
I also like missions because there are less moments when i'm staring my monitor waiting for something to do.
The game still suffer though from the shallowness of Rome.All these different civilizations use the same units so there is no difference between a Numidian Cavalry and Equites or Legionaries and Pictish Warrior.
While the economic model is a lot better than in EU3 it still remains too much arcade at least for my taste.
In general i would rate VV 8/10 and Rome from 6/10 it was before to 7/10 with VV
EDIT: ^^ Yep, needs more cultural differences between the states. They all seem to be divided into 3 government categories, with no differences within the categories. The Spartan government does not resemble anything like the historical Sparta. Where is the dual monarchy? Where are the rest of the institutions? Seriously, please fix this. But I still love this expansion because it makes Rome worth playing; two thumbs up for VV.
Wow, just played for 2 hours as Sparta, and I have to say that I love it. Infinitely better than the original; I went from the beginning until 502 UAC and never felt bored (which is saying something, considering that at my height I only controlled Sparta, Crete and Rhodes).
The only bad thing that happened was that I had 5 heirs die in a row within two years. It was all due to "natural causes," even though some of them were in their 20s. The sixth heir apparent was the former heir of the Cretan crown, whom I had conquered maybe 5 years before. Half the government was green and said they supported this heir, and half was red and still said they supported this heir.
I got terribly confused. I lost track of all the politics, and had to defeat a civil war. A second civil war broke out maybe a year later, taking my entire fleet with it. I just quit and reloaded to a time when my heirs were still alive, because it was just getting a tad ridiculous.
Now my government wants me to liberate the Argolis. We really do need a new map, because I'd like to see Argos separate from Athens. So long as the Macedonians control the region, I can understand them being incorporated into one territory (one of the keys to Greece), but as soon as I destroy the northerners, I'd want that to end. I guess this is a slippery slope, though, because then people will want megara, corinth, sicyon, etc.
Wow, just played for 2 hours as Sparta, and I have to say that I love it. Infinitely better than the original; I went from the beginning until 502 UAC and never felt bored (which is saying something, considering that at my height I only controlled Sparta, Crete and Rhodes).
The only bad thing that happened was that I had 5 heirs die in a row within two years. It was all due to "natural causes," even though some of them were in their 20s. The sixth heir apparent was the former heir of the Cretan crown, whom I had conquered maybe 5 years before. Half the government was green and said they supported this heir, and half was red and still said they supported this heir.
I got terribly confused. I lost track of all the politics, and had to defeat a civil war. A second civil war broke out maybe a year later, taking my entire fleet with it. I just quit and reloaded to a time when my heirs were still alive, because it was just getting a tad ridiculous.
Now my government wants me to liberate the Argolis. We really do need a new map, because I'd like to see Argos separate from Athens. So long as the Macedonians control the region, I can understand them being incorporated into one territory (one of the keys to Greece), but as soon as I destroy the northerners, I'd want that to end. I guess this is a slippery slope, though, because then people will want megara, corinth, sicyon, etc.
Last edited: