Rome II - How psyched are you?

[Realitycrash]

Damnit, it's the only game I genuinely care about in the foreseeable year (exception maybe given to Wasteland II and Shadowrun, but I don't hold as high hopes about those).
So, how psyched are you?
What are you expecting out of it?
Which factions will be added/removed from the last game?
Do you think they will keep as many different units as last time, or go more Shogun 2 about it?
Tech-tree and Exp for Generals?
Will it be better than the predecessor?

 

[The Scythian]

Better. Japan was not enough. I have imperial ambitions.

 

[BrotherRool]

It'll definitely be better because the controls and everything have gotten better since Rome. Just the diplomacy system by itself would make Rome 10x better (you can't have any political strategy in the original Rome, everyone just attacked you pretty randomly, alliance or not). And I hope they keep stuff like the generals and tech tree etc.

...but I still don't like the feel of battles since the animation got fancy. It feels less like a weight of people and more like a bunch of unconnected one on ones. I don't know if it's how the game engine actually worked, but in the original Rome when you had 3 guys surrounding some poor dude, it felt like they were all attacking, even if they weren't actually. With the new animation system, it's clearly one guy attacking with the other 2 being polite and holding off. Which ruins the feel of enveloping people. It makes all the tactical position seems less worth while (or rather, artificial, because the morale bonuses are still important)

It makes having them in units and cohesive seem silly. If they were all separated out, it would just make the outcome faster, rather than change it. Before it felt like they were supporting each other and stopping two people from ganging up on their friend on the left.

It's not a big thing though, better units/control/strategy all outweigh it considerably

 

[Soviet Heavy]

Cautiously optimistic. The biggest problem that Total War has had since Empire has been the animations. Alone, they aren't bad, but in practice, it means that ten soldiers can hold off an entire army because every fight becomes a one on one. And if you have the better warrior, they will always win every fight.

With Roman Warfare based around linebreaker units holding in massive shield walls, that could be a recipe for disaster.

What I am pumped for is the revamped city warfare. Holding a majority of the city through strategic points is a brilliant solution for camping on the Walls or at the city square that plagued Rome and Medieval 2.

 

[goose4291]

I'm trying to not get too worked up about it, particularly after Colonial Marines.

 

[Glasgow]

They will improve the AI significantly, which would make for a pretty excellent experience on the world map. I wonder what the changes in the battle map will be.

 

[SckizoBoy]

carthage WILL burn !

*sigh* Then I must play Scipio Nasica Corculum... Carthage should not burn! Vindictive twat! =P

I'm with [user]Soviet Heavy[/user] on this, I'm cautiously optimistic. Granted, I'm really looking forward to it, and I definitely will get it, along with many a prayer that it's as enjoyable as R:TW. This time it should be less anachronistic... hopefully.

Granted, I'm in it more for the historicity than anything else, so it should be good, judging from the pre-beta footage I've seen.

 

[PhiMed]

I should've known, but I thought for a second when i saw the title of this thread that HBO was bringing back the series. Now I'm sad.

 

[Jandau]

...but I still don't like the feel of battles since the animation got fancy. It feels less like a weight of people and more like a bunch of unconnected one on ones. I don't know if it's how the game engine actually worked, but in the original Rome when you had 3 guys surrounding some poor dude, it felt like they were all attacking, even if they weren't actually. With the new animation system, it's clearly one guy attacking with the other 2 being polite and holding off. Which ruins the feel of enveloping people. It makes all the tactical position seems less worth while (or rather, artificial, because the morale bonuses are still important)

I remember reading about this. The devs are aware of this problem and I think they are fixing it for Rome 2. Screw animations, open battles aren't fair and they never were...

 

[SkySonata]

Crazy about it.
Shogun wasn't that awesome.

Rome has always been way more appealing. And I would like to play Macedonians.

 

[Bat Vader]

I am pretty psyched for it. It looks like it will be a good game. I like how player can zoom in on individual soldiers too. I just know I am going to get depressed when a soldier I have been watching fight well an entire battle gets killed by a stray arrow or taken down by a better fighter.

 

[wakenbake]

I'm beside myself with anticipation.
I can't wait to once again 'cry "HAVOC" and let slip the dogs of war!'
Can anyone confirm that the wardogs will be making a comeback? Please??

 

[Shilefin]

I'm excited like hell. I can't wait to spend another 200 hours on an another Total War game.

And for anyone interested:
http://wiki.totalwar.com/w/Factions

All the factions in the game. They're being released every now and then.

 

[Blunderboy]

I AM ALL THE PSYCHED!

 

[BathorysGraveland2]

Well the original Rome is the only Total War game besides the first Medieval I have enjoyed. I didn't like Medieval II due to its infuriating battle mechanics and the time periods of Empire and Shogun do not interest me. So, I'm looking forward to Rome II because it would be nice to play a more polished Total War game for a change. However, I'm still concerned about how the battle mechanics will be like. They could very easily break the game for me. We'll see.

Also, FUCK the entire notion of DLC factions. God damn it, DLC is rearing its ugly head everywhere.

EDIT: If I do get it and like it, though, I shall definitely play the Arverni first. I will pick up the sword that great Vercingetorix laid down and I shall make Rome suffer a thousand Gergovia's!

 

[BENZOOKA]

I like the idea of Total War games, but never really got into them, despite trying. The gameplay isn't how I'd like it to be. This one promises to have the most potential yet, and the era and setting is perhaps the most intriguing of them all, so I'm cautiously optimistic. Might have a go at it at some point, if the basic battle gameplay is improved and there's plenty of other strategizing, managing and diplomacy.

 

[Albino Boo]

carthage WILL burn !

*sigh* Then I must play Scipio Nasica Corculum... Carthage should not burn! Vindictive twat! =P

I'm with [user]Soviet Heavy[/user] on this, I'm cautiously optimistic. Granted, I'm really looking forward to it, and I definitely will get it, along with many a prayer that it's as enjoyable as R:TW. This time it should be less anachronistic... hopefully.

Granted, I'm in it more for the historicity than anything else, so it should be good, judging from the pre-beta footage I've seen.

The only thing I can say to that is Carthago delenda est, you lily livered fool. I shall stand as tribune and pass laws removing you from command.