TW Rome2 new family tree and character options

[Eldoran]

Honestly, they are doing many things right that paradox does wrong in their games, like meaningful buildings or not having magic buttons

When you build a city in Attila you really need to look for food, sanitation, public order, unit unlocks, etc.. When you build a province in EU4 you decide whether you want a fort there and then spam money buildings. I:R goes further in the wrong direction, by having only 4 buildings. More buildings, less slots like in total war makes for meaningful choices.

Magic buttons are cancer. If you manage to let your public order go down to -100 a province will revolt, there's no magic harsh treatment button that increases public order

Same for religion. I:R should just drop the idea of the magic button to convert pops and simply steal the religion system from Attila.

I also like the choice that comes with tech trees rather than linear tech paths

Paradox makes good games that are a lot of fun, but their obsession with "magic mana from the sky" really hurts them.

The strategy part of tw games isnt even in the same league as pds games. If you ever played a tw game with autoresolve battle you will soon notice that the game besides the battles is....well it left much to desire. And i cant see myself playing all tw together for 1000h let alone a single one of them

 

[Guedes]

Most tw titles only just really shine on the "map strategy layer" as GS games with mods. Which, the really good ones, adds lots of features that are similar/straight-up copy from pdx GS tittles.

 

[Eldoran]

Most tw titles only just really shine on the "map strategy layer" as GS games with mods. Which, the really good ones, adds lots of features that are similar/straight-up copy from pdx GS tittles.

Well with mods maybe but look at meiou pds can totally stand its ground here. But pds games are even vanilla good strategy games. Ca games are not (i specifically mean the strategy part, tactical they are a lot of fun)

 

[BobbyDylan]

Current TW games are more GS than PDX. Funny and sad at the same time.

Lol, whut? I think you need to go back and replay a TW game if you think so. Enjoy entering a war without a CB and the war only has 2 outcomes (total victory or total defeat), your allies are almost useless, and the diplomacy screen may as well only contain "declare war" and "propose trade agreement" buttons.

 

[Samitte]

Lol, whut? I think you need to go back and replay a TW game if you think so. Enjoy entering a war without a CB and the war only has 2 outcomes (total victory or total defeat), your allies are almost useless, and the diplomacy screen may as well only contain "declair war" and "propose trade agreement" buttons.

And don't forget the extreme amount of cheating the TW AI has to do. The equivalent would be an OPM in EUIV being able to challenge the Ottomans with a similar sized army and larger economy.

 

[Guedes]

Well with mods maybe but look at meiou pds can totally stand its ground here. But pds games are even vanilla good strategy games. Ca games are not (i specifically mean the strategy part, tactical they are a lot of fun)

Well, yeah, thats what i said pretty much.

 

[Eldoran]

Well, yeah, thats what i said pretty much.

Sorry totally misread what you wrote...guess we agree then ^^

 

[frags]

The reason CA introduced this new update with family tree is to support new DLCs they have planned for the game. Paradox would never release updates for DL... oh... wait...

 

[Black Turtle]

The reason CA introduced this new update with family tree is to support new DLCs they have planned for the game. Paradox would never release updates for DL... oh... wait...

Even Paradox's least substantial DLCs like Rule Britannia add more content than a CA campaign pack. Literally all they are are a bunch of reskins and renamed units on a new map. The family tree is also a feature every Total War game has had since forever. Imagine if Paradox took out family trees from CK2 and then added it back in five years later in a "free" patch accompanied by a paid expansion. CA is so full of shit idk where to even begin.

 

[frags]

Even Paradox's least substantial DLCs like Rule Britannia add more content than a CA campaign pack. Literally all they are are a bunch of reskins and renamed units on a new map. The family tree is also a feature every Total War game has had since forever. Imagine if Paradox took out family trees from CK2 and then added it back in five years later in a "free" patch accompanied by a paid expansion. CA is so full of shit idk where to even begin.

I agree man. Medieval Total War was the last one that had family trees IIRC? I don't remember them past Medieval.

 

[BobbyDylan]

I agree man. Medieval Total War was the last one that had family trees IIRC? I don't remember them past Medieval.

Rome 1 had Family trees, and it came out after Medieval IIRC.

 

[Thrake]

Even Paradox's least substantial DLCs like Rule Britannia add more content than a CA campaign pack. Literally all they are are a bunch of reskins and renamed units on a new map. The family tree is also a feature every Total War game has had since forever. Imagine if Paradox took out family trees from CK2 and then added it back in five years later in a "free" patch accompanied by a paid expansion. CA is so full of shit idk where to even begin.

What did Rule Britannia exactly add? Innovativeness that looks like something that nobody is satisfied with? Naval doctrines which are yet another modifier for useless fleets? Anglicanism (lol)? Or "free" mission trees which are just a way to bring in extra content to immersion packs?

 

[Will Steel]

I never get the hate for Total War games in these forums. Aside from the usual trolls "hurdurdur DAE Total War shuksh XD" posts, they are as fun as Paradox games in a different way personally.

It's all about depth on campaign VS depth on field battles.

I agree man. Medieval Total War was the last one that had family trees IIRC? I don't remember them past Medieval.

Total War Attila was the last large Total War game to support family trees (if you discount the side-game Total War Britannia released this year, also featuring full family trees). Also, Shogun 2. And now Rome 2.

And RTW and Medieval 2 which actually created this feature close to how it is known today.

Also, Empire had a family tree feature too, but it was hidden behind the UI and required a mod to see...but it was there (it handled succession crisis and wars and such). It was also rigged to be historical for most nations, so for example King William III or Emperor Alamgir would die precisely near their historical death dates...and would also be succeeded by Anne or Shah Alam I instead of randomly generated monarch for example.

Unlike your claim, Medieval Total War didn't actually have a family tree. After first two rulers all you had was randomly generated sons and daughters each generation, of which either your eldest (as Christian) or your most capable (as Muslim) male son would become heir. Shogun 1 Total War, the very first TW game, also worked the same way. Much like EU3/EU4, but with actually more than one heir.

 

[alvaro]

I never get the hate for Total War games in these forums. Aside from the usual trolls "hurdurdur DAE Total War shuksh XD" posts, they are as fun as Paradox games in a different way personally.

It's all about depth on campaign VS depth on field battles.

I can speak just for myself and the problem is the feeling that I get in every single TW game I start that "it doesnt matter", if you have a couple of armies nothing matters, you can do anything that you want because regardless of what the game punishes you for, at the end you and your 2 armies are above good and evil. I understand this might be satisfying for some people but in my case it is just not believable, not real, and not real is not fun for me.

 

[cipherblaze]

CA can only go so far, and I might seem rude, but TW: Rome II is basically a dead game. You basically just make reskins or better interfaces, and that's it. Besides they have done family trees long ago, but I don't think those things mattered a bit. Can you get anything beside a buff for battles from those domestic features in TWs? Think twice. I don't think TWs are terrible games, but in terms of strategy, not tactics, CA will never produce something equalivant to PDS titles, or it won't be a TW.

 

[ElGranCapitan]

Lol, whut? I think you need to go back and replay a TW game if you think so. Enjoy entering a war without a CB and the war only has 2 outcomes (total victory or total defeat), your allies are almost useless, and the diplomacy screen may as well only contain "declare war" and "propose trade agreement" buttons.

War in Total war isn't too different from war in EU4 if you overlook the superficial. War in Total war can result in total victory or total defeat or stagnate at some point and end with a peace treaty. War in Eu4 can result in total occupation (=victory/defeat) or stagnate at some point. The difference is just that in EU4 expansion is artificially limited because occupation has to be confirmed via peace treaty and warscore. That's a different design choice and neither is better or worse, they are different games trying to be different and that's fine. But apart from the CB war in EU4 is as much a total war as it is in Total war.

Even Paradox's least substantial DLCs like Rule Britannia add more content than a CA campaign pack. Literally all they are are a bunch of reskins and renamed units on a new map. The family tree is also a feature every Total War game has had since forever. Imagine if Paradox took out family trees from CK2 and then added it back in five years later in a "free" patch accompanied by a paid expansion. CA is so full of shit idk where to even begin.

You are being pretty unfair here. When Dark Elves have medium range armor piercing archers and High Elves have high range non armor piercing archers that's just a "reskin and rename" for you, but Anglicanism vs Protestantism is new content?

From a game development perspective it's also not true. Art takes much longer to implement than minor coding features

And don't forget the extreme amount of cheating the TW AI has to do. The equivalent would be an OPM in EUIV being able to challenge the Ottomans with a similar sized army and larger economy.

Mostly because real time AI is much harder to implement though, any and every hard real time AI cheats a lot. Compare stuff that is compareable, like how the AI builds buildings. Total war AI and EU4 AI are equally bad in that regard

I can speak just for myself and the problem is the feeling that I get in every single TW game I start that "it doesnt matter", if you have a couple of armies nothing matters, you can do anything that you want because regardless of what the game punishes you for, at the end you and your 2 armies are above good and evil. I understand this might be satisfying for some people but in my case it is just not believable, not real, and not real is not fun for me.

I feel the same way about EU4 tbh, once you get to 300 dev nothing matters.


To sum it up, my position is not that Total war games are better than Paradox games, they are different and both enjoyable. However I feel that the Total war series is improving while Paradox games are going in the opposite direction. When I compare Attila to Rome I see much more depth, when I compare Imperator to CK2 I see much more mana

 

[frags]

I never get the hate for Total War games in these forums. Aside from the usual trolls "hurdurdur DAE Total War shuksh XD" posts, they are as fun as Paradox games in a different way personally.

It's all about depth on campaign VS depth on field battles.



Total War Attila was the last large Total War game to support family trees (if you discount the side-game Total War Britannia released this year, also featuring full family trees). Also, Shogun 2. And now Rome 2.

And RTW and Medieval 2 which actually created this feature close to how it is known today.

Also, Empire had a family tree feature too, but it was hidden behind the UI and required a mod to see...but it was there (it handled succession crisis and wars and such). It was also rigged to be historical for most nations, so for example King William III or Emperor Alamgir would die precisely near their historical death dates...and would also be succeeded by Anne or Shah Alam I instead of randomly generated monarch for example.

Unlike your claim, Medieval Total War didn't actually have a family tree. After first two rulers all you had was randomly generated sons and daughters each generation, of which either your eldest (as Christian) or your most capable (as Muslim) male son would become heir. Shogun 1 Total War, the very first TW game, also worked the same way. Much like EU3/EU4, but with actually more than one heir.

Oh I can't recall. I guess it's been a while I've played any Total War game. Must have been thinking about Medieval 2 then.

 

[alvaro]

CA can only go so far, and I might seem rude, but TW: Rome II is basically a dead game. You basically just make reskins or better interfaces, and that's it. Besides they have done family trees long ago, but I don't think those things mattered a bit. Can you get anything beside a buff for battles from those domestic features in TWs? Think twice. I don't think TWs are terrible games, but in terms of strategy, not tactics, CA will never produce something equalivant to PDS titles, or it won't be a TW.

to be fair the new patch has much more about character management than family tree. there is quite a collection of optional actions that force you to interact with other politcal factions.
and grancapitan may have a point too in the sense that CA is going in the right direction (they have a long way to go though )
still my proof of value is about how many hours i spend in pds games and ca games. they are not even close. that doesnt mean that pds always take the right decision but the good part is that they take many more decisions to improve games.
all in all, i am not sure I:R is going to be what i had in mind (not necessarily a bad thing )

 

[novapaddy]

I played TW Rome (all versions) for the battles. Everything else was just something I had to try to get past, so I could get to the next battle. Obviously others in this thread prefer other parts of the game over battles.

I have recently read all the dev diaries for this upcoming game. I notice one glaring issue that no-one has raised in any thread. I ask, "Will the AI work as well as in Darkest Hour?".

The AI in HoiIV was poor. Paradox make good games but they really fall down on AI. So for players like me who prefer "war" to "economy" paradox games disappoint.

Will we again see much trumpeted Twitch episodes of the designated Paradox player showing the gameplay of Imperator Rome where he is manually moving every unit to hide the glaring issue that the AI is poor.

For me, making a new game should be an opportunity to develop the quality and depth of the "game engine". It should not be just changing the graphics and timeline and pushing out the same old stuff repackaged.

 

[Denkt]

I can speak just for myself and the problem is the feeling that I get in every single TW game I start that "it doesnt matter", if you have a couple of armies nothing matters, you can do anything that you want because regardless of what the game punishes you for, at the end you and your 2 armies are above good and evil. I understand this might be satisfying for some people but in my case it is just not believable, not real, and not real is not fun for me.

Paradox games have the same issue that the challenge disappear as you get too powerful.