Also a great thing about rome 2 is that there are so many diffrent faction and culture to pick from, which makes the overall battle expirience much better.
The variety of nations that can form without previously existing in the campaign is dope too, just conquering Italy minding my own business and all of a sudden land from france to Poland is United under the “German confederation” 😭
@@gagameal1632 rome 2 engine is great for its time, like amazingly well optimized comparatively to other titles. what we need is a new historical title with warhammer levels of optimization and combat oriented improvements
I'm a HUGE Warhammer fan...and even I'm wanting to know when the heck we're getting another good historical game. I loved Shogun 2 and Rome 2 just as much as Warhammer.
I disagree about recruiting new units mid battle. I love that in Rome 2 you have to think carefully about your army composition and what you bring is all you get. Its also much more realistic than mustering and training new units in the heat of a battle. The exception could be mobs of plebs that you could recruits from the countryside you're invading/defending. In other words, cannon fodder tier units
I do agree. However, I do wish the capture points that most cities have would play a bigger part in siege battles. I think it would be cool if the units celebrate once they fully capture one of them or something like that
You aren’t training/mustering units mid battle, it represents getting reinforcements. Default land battles are fine, but especially for a siege, not including unit rotation or the prospect of relief armies is much less realistic.
What made rome 2 even more immersive is the variety of soldiers within a unit. each faction has 3 faction colors, so tunics, pants, shields, can differ more. Different skins, beards, hair, swords, belts, etc. In my opinion, the soldiers in Troy or even Attila look much too similar.
You made a lot of good points. Rome II is a classic. I think Total War could try some different periods though. The age of renaissance has the classic "pike and shot", when knights were beginning to become fragile but guns were not invincible either. Another theme similar to that could be 19th century China and the surrounding factions like Mongolian, Russia, Middle East, India, Japan, and European colonizers clashing against one another. Those can be a very diverse range of factions in terms of military units.
renaissance/30 years war is what I want most precisely because it has the best of both worlds, classic sword and spear fighting but also early guns and cannons. it has untapped potential
Agree with everything but restoring hp or recruiting new troops may be so OP. I think restoring fatigue or addin morale would be more balanced and resalistic.
Yeah true but thats why attackers Should have Much larger forces and defenders got to try everthing to survive. In all the Total war games defenders got an advantage but it Should be other way arround
all you've said, I want all you said. Maybe a new Empire or Medieval game would be cool, but a part of me just wants a Troy with Rome 2 battle mechanics
4:00 You kinda messed up with the Health as Warhammer and Rome 2 still uses the same health system, Warhammer just show the total health as there's spells that can reduce the health of all models, while in Rome 2 the models with low health would be the bloodied ones.
it works a little bit different, units still have individual hp, but the way the recieve damage is different which makes it much less enjoyable i wonder if you ever noticed
@@FightMeTotalWar I'm guessing it's the Weapon Strength and Armor Rolls? In Rome 2 Each Weapons are quite unique, both Melee and Ranged, like Swords having high Base Damage but low AP, while Spears have low Base Damage and average AP, or Bows having High Base Damage but low AP, while Javelins having low base damage but high AP. In Warhammer Swords and Spears are basically the same, while Bows and Crossbows are no different and Guns are just Armor Piercing Crossbows. In Rome 2 Armor Rolls are between 1 to the unit's armor, so a 35 Armor Hoplite would roll 1 to 35 when damaged, while in Warhammer armor roll are between 50% to 100%, so a 40 Armor Spearmen would roll 20 to 40 when damaged, considering swords have 21 Base and 7 AP in Warhammer, making those Swords only able to deal 7 or 8 Damage to a Moderately armored infantry.
Shogun 2 Fots's Naval bombardment in land battles was a huge improvement for me, so If CA is going to make a Victorian game I want these mechanic so much
I think that melee animation is a good point, but I think a total war game set in the pike and shot era will be the most interesting one. Tons of empire and napoleon mechanics can be reused like formations and dues, and a relatively good mix of melee and ranged units will make the gameplay a little more diverse than the line infantry spam in Shogun2 Empire. Most importantly, total war games have already exploited the potential of Antiquity and middle ages to a good extent, the player base needs something like 16th - 17th century that is groundbreaking for the title and still full of contents like these two periods. Eighteenth and nineteenth century are just too plain to make a game based on it when compared to the early modern era. Although they claimed that they would not release any era-spanning titles in the near future, still they need to know that is what total war should be. Fantasy titles like Warhammer and Troy will not make you feel like an actual imperator.
@@FightMeTotalWar Just let’s hope that ca will take the advice and don’t make another “Trojan” or “WH3” mistake in the next title. Say, things like Rome 2 and Shogun2 are the great hits we were looking for.
@@FightMeTotalWar I imagine once we can get better computers en masse (thanks COVID) they will knock it out of the park w a modern/WW2/Vietnam setting. I think their first 40k game is secretly on the way... Nothing beats getting ambushed by good news
capture point thing is interesting BUT it would be a bit OP to restore individual unit models to full HP. Instead morale is something that already super impactful a morale debuff to defenders on a battle wide scale would likely be enough to make capture points way more important and help to fix the issues with keep camping which destroys the playability of 60% of the maps in rome 2.
@@FightMeTotalWar It would make it too OP to charge in units take minimal losses and cycle them out for heals. would add in a supply chain effect that would only hinder the actual gameplay imo.
Yeah, true indeed, but maybe you can compensate that with much larger attackers funds, bc in history defenders were always very out numbered, and they had to win with all odds against them, but they had the advantage of the city, so maybe? Bc those are always the best sieges think of helm deep, and minastirith and the battles that the defenders won even tho all odss against them.
While I don't see it coming until 2024. I do have my highs up for Rome 3. The devs should really take their time and deliver a true succesor for rome 2. By this time they should have learned from their mistakes and I'm sure the game will be amazing. Edit: Medieval 3 would be dope as well
entity HP is still a thing in warhammer though? The total HP pool is still divided over all the units. Why you sometimes take huge damage without losing a unit is because of AOE abilities plus the fact that the unit card HP actually represent the overall HP of the unit not only the amount of entities like in Rome 2. In Rome 2 the unit card shows no damage until you lose models (your elephants can take 300 damage each but your card shows full hp since none died. However in warhammer the unit card shows overall HP. now if you have infantry unit (100 models) with 8000 HP (80 per entity) and you cast a spell doing 50 damage to ALL units. in warhammer this shows on your unit card as having lost more than 60% of the HP but not a single model is dead. However if this would be able to happen in Rome 2 the unit card would simply show full health since it only displays unit number not total health of the unit. It is not so much that they changed entity HP it's just that Rome 2 does not reflect entity HP on the unit card. If all units with 65 HP each have only 1 HP left, but none died, your Unit card would simply show 100% "HP". It's more a flaw of the Rome 2 unit card than anything else.
Damn bud, AMAZING video! Loved all of your points and ideas, I hope that someone from CA sees this video and some or maybe all of your points are implemented in the next historical title. Thanks for the channel shout at the beginning also! Onward and upward!!
I would love if in historical titles the unit cards were drawn in the respective era's art style. I actually don't know if that's the case for Rome, but alongside ToB and Shogun 2 it has the best unit cards in the series, and that's my fav thing in the whole game. I don't fancy 3d unit cards and Rome's 2d cards are very easy to read. You know the type of unit and its tier by the card alone whereas in other titles/mods how good a unit is can be harder to instantly understand and recognising units itself is harder. Tldr; I like the more artistic unit cards because they're pretty, and make it easy to know what and how strong a unit is
What I really hope for next historical title from CA is to create more realistic approach in battle similar to Medieval 2 and get rid of province as it allows us to focus which region to be expansive compared to other region
Not on board with the recruiting units at capture points, offensively at least. I love the idea of medic tents or a way to "retreat" units back to recover in some way, I just think that the battle would have to move way slower and take more time for it for it to be realistic. Even an hour time limit isnt enough for that to be realistic unfortunately :(
Fr I want realistic armor back. When I got troy I booted it up and I was thinking the units looked worse than Rome 2 (the only other total war game I've played)
First announce it. The historical fanbase, or what's left, is eager to hear a new announcement but with nothing right now its back to mods or rome ii or whatever game is being played. Without an announcement speculation at this point as I've done is a bit pointless - because without a firm leak or confirmation it is becoming meh. Second, they should also look at Attila and TOB which had many great features that can be added onto the next historical total war. Third, there's a lot of good things to take from Rome II sure.
I think I might be late to the party on this, but each entity in the unit accounts for a percentage of the total HP pool, and each unit's HP is tracked individually so that some entities may be more damaged than others. Am I wrong? I don't think it just deletes random entities as the unit takes damage.
Did you see Rome II on launch? They've polished that turd to the point it's half decent, but it's still a massive step down from Shogun 2 and the original Rome. If Empire was the beginning of the decline, Rome 2 was what convinced them to stay on that path. Something as basic as the bows not feeling punchy at all any more shouldn't take over 10 years and billions of dollars to fix, let alone pathfinding, formations, the whole thing turning into 'who has the biggest numbers', almost completely removing siege mechanics, etc.
if there is ever a Rome 3 total war, I would like them to do a few things: - Fix hoplite units so that they work like in Rome 1 - Increase Pike unit size to 200 men (150 in large scale), and give them a "pike push" ability. - Give all Greek peltast units korpis weapon (same as picked peltast) so they can be used in melee because they have too low ammo and can't do anything after that. - Bring back the population system like in Rome 1 for campaign. - All mid tier spear units (except thureos) have 3 javelin volleys like royal peltast. - All elite spear units (except hoplites) have 5 javelin volleys like thureos spears. - Give Spartan a mid tier shock cav units called perioikoi lancer.
Another issue is Naval garrisons. When my number of Army reached maximum till next imperium, I thought I could use navy since a military port can reach any other port for me to train naval units for garrisons so that I can use it for port defence battles But I keep getting bugs when it comes to disembarking denying my numerical advantage. So instead deploy before disembark, I want devs to disembark instantly during deployment phase like dismounting cavalry
time period, no single entity heroes, no magic, no over complicated faction mechanics, if Rome 2 had med2 or rome1 sieges where defenders retreated back to town centre for last stand, it would've been even better, also wish they gave bigger roster to other factions than rome
I disagree on alot of these points -Rome 2 is far from a balanced game Units in this game are straight useless if they are not a sword unit and dont have javelins(hp is also a factor but it will be explained later) For example out is the units of boii and arveni share out of their almost of 15 units only 7 are viable in battles (celtic warriors,chosen sword/sword followers,oathsworn,heavy horse, leavy freeman and celtic slingers) •The others being underperforming because they are a spear by default,dont have javelins/weak to javelins, they are a low tier units(with follows the question:Do they have javelins?). They are not a shock cavalry or a medium cavalry up -About the hp pool Sadly rome 2 brought it first,units are show to have a hp of 55 to 70 just that it doesnt show like newer games where it is just the the sum of all models in on big hp -combat animations Some im fine because of people that like to get immerse but this game on its early stages showed on how long the fights where(just didnt need to be 100% animations,it could be something close to med 2),and for mp,players dont care at all if there is combat animations because they are focused on winning -formations •formations in this game are almost useless(shield,screen,defensive testudo,testudo,shield wall to a extent,wedge/diamond formation and the list goes on) people would rather stay in thin lines against cavalry and missiles than to use a formation that are made to counter missile fire Hoplite and pike wall are the only ok formations to use but still have their problems. Headhunt is useful in a 1v1 or when you bring second win(d) but one like rapid advance is useless and makes units around it worse. This game is a broken mess for the majority of part, both in mp and sp, it hsd is moments and you can have fun in it, but only if you pour thousands of hours and having to cope with a ton of problems this game has(specially on sp) and the meta you have to follow with army comps,you cant use a spear based army with cavalry and archer support because you will get trounced by a mid player that has some grasp on the meta, the fact that bringing triarri a elite unit for the polybian roman army is considered to make your army comp build worse it already tells by itself, even rome 1 had this problem but i atleast know that even the most elite inf will lose to even a light cav and light inf combo and not just take both sides because they have high stats
One thing I want changed was in Rome 2 some maps had some stupid victory points. Like instead of the cool looking hill in the city they put in some random spot
Yeah but its for balancing because if u put in a lot of the cooler spots it would make it nearly impossible for the attackers, so I understand why they have done that.
Hello, I will give you a little insight, last project I worked on was shogun 2, right now Asians own majority of shares and they decide everything about next game, I think they got majority of shares while rome 2 was under development, that's why quality of products dropped, they have different team and different management who truly don't understand what total war was all about, I think you will never see another top notch total war game because this people think like npc's
I loved Rome II but one of the things it bungled was the recruiting. Bring back the ability for any settlement to recruit units but add the ability for a general to recruit outside of a settlement, with the stipulation that province or duchy or whatever can only recruit based on its population size, which dictates how quickly you can recruit. This was done by the divide et empera mod I believe and is much more realistic. Not being able to split units off from an army was really annoying and unrealistic. Let the players manage their own garrison units. It adds difficulty but also allows someone to make tactical plays when conquering an area say by leaving a large garrison behind in a settlement or province and continuing the war with a smaller army.
I don't want to see domination just do what the community did just now in wh3 make land battle with a capture point in the centre of the map and if you hold it for long enough you win. One thing they could improve is give us more than 20 units we had that limit since forever and it would make player skill way more important if there were 40 units to control and it would make a lot of rules less necessary since it would be easier to fit counter units in your army and if performance would be not good enough they could reduce the amount of men in a unit which wh3 massively increased.
Great video . I am not so familiar with total war youtubers can you please suggest me some channels to learn and get some experience 😄i am really suck at medieval 2 online idk why . i start so good but at end lose. my infantry knights can't even break opponent spearman . also can't play shogun 2 avatar conquest looks like matchmaking not working creative assembly really has no support :( they send people to Sega support and then Sega support says go CA game developer is creative assembly its really annoying
what makes rome 2 the best total war game for me is just the time period rome period is just soo perfect, i think if they going to make rome 3 it will explode. and for god sake i want a more realistic historical total war game no a mythdology bs with bunch of giants or 1 guy that destroy and entire army the reason why i fall in love with total war games are the realistic historical gameplay (maybe not accurate but thats fine) it really hooked me which is why rome 2 is just too perfect than later titles (ofc if we ignore rome 2 disaster launch and such) i never played warhammer total war is just tooo fantasy for me and i bought total war troy just because it has a historical campaign if it didnt i would not even look at it total war rome 3 waiting room here cya in 10 years i'll come back to this video when it happens
you didnt know it and still dont know it - because it is obviously false. knowledge is justified true belief, and you cant know things that are false, which it is. divide 8096 by 32 and you get the number of hp each soldier has. play the game and you can easily see that what he said is false. just a shitty clickbait video. completely worthless. ive made videos about how this works that have like 200k views and people are still getting this wrong.
I will come back soon with a more detailed response, but ye units in warhammer have individual hp, but it works different and less good, just lets say look at magic missles of pink horrors, when it hits a unit it has a promiximity effect, which is vage and much less enjoyable which will give you the feeling like its just a hp pool which goes down with the damage, which make individual soldiers last much longer which makes it goofy and unenjoyable, dont know if you ever experienced this but anyway
I would like to add that Total War historical titles should have the ability to inherit functions and features of each other as a legacy: 1. Region trading in 3K and older titles, subterfuge schemes and operations like 3K's faction council, tributes per turn... In addition, there should be more diplomatic options. The one I adamantly suggest is the annexation via vassals, client states, satraps. The annexation can also work via religion and cultures. I've heard something about Romans doing so. 2. Another feature that I would advocate is more cities, settlements and regions individually ( like Rome 1, Medieval 2, Shogun 2 ) or with the current provincial system. The new provinces as well as their respective cities should be added with each campaign DLC. I've noticed that in Caesar in Gaul, Rise of the Republic and Wrath of Sparta, there is so much more regions and cities that should've been in the Grand Campaign. Back in Rome 1 and Medieval 2, I kept seeing lots of spacious regions and only 1 settlement included.
I can't agree with you on the matter of general's abilities. It shouldn't affect reload time, melee combat or anything like that than morale. That's because 1 it's unhistorical, 2. it's unrealistic to improve other statistics, 3. makes general too important on battlefield on the matter of fighting particular place. It should depend as always on unit stats compared to the place where you place them against the enemy. So it is still just a historical game if we really desire one.
So here are the things they could do: Medieval 3, Empire 2, Three Kingdom 2 (as they foreshadowed), Alexander Total war, Greek cities, Assyria/Babylon/Sumer/Ancient Egypt, WW1 (Fall of the samurai was promising)
Unit health has worked the same and has been the single worst addition to the series, why would you ever consider keeping it without adding features like tactical retreats or even being able to see the entity health like in Arena?
Also, do you really believe this is the case when single entities one shot other entities when their health gets barely affected or how gunners are able to kill squishy targets when archers just decrease their health gradually? Random video in case you really need video evidence: th-cam.com/video/Wwg4v4SqwM4/w-d-xo.html EDIT: you can also watch any videos showing damage over time spells like flock of doom where no entities die but there's a lot of damage done. Video example again: th-cam.com/video/8OHQSL18gGk/w-d-xo.html This is literally the same as in Rome 2 except that you can see the entire unit's health.
I will come back soon with a more detailed response, but ye units in warhammer have individual hp, but it works different and less good, just lets say look at magic missles of pink horrors, when it hits a unit it has a promiximity effect, which is vage and much less enjoyable which will give you the feeling like its just a hp pool which goes down with the damage, which make individual soldiers last much longer which makes it goofy and unenjoyable, dont know if you ever experienced this but anyway
@@FightMeTotalWar Well same concept with Rome 2, take shock cav who can just kill one guy when the unit is pretty much full health but then start killing 20-30 models on a single heavy inf unit after a couple charges. Similarly, missiles vs testudo which is just a 20-25 missile block added to the unit, which results in the unit suddenly dropping in numbers despite using a defensive formation. It's no different to Warhammer/Troy/3K/Attila/Thrones just that Rome 2 doesn't have that health bar above units that started to become a thing since Attila not Warhammer.
Dude, your ideas about "new fetures"... just NO. It will rune the hole siege. What they realy need to do is make a towns and Castle/walls more realistic in terms of advantage for the defendors. In WH defenders, often, have less advantege position than attackers. It is the stupidest thing i ever saw.
30 years war era with pike and shot mixed units is what I want. recruit a unit like the spanish tercios or dutch and swedish equivalents that contains both pike units as well as rifles standing on the flanks. when cav charges hit a button that puts the pike into a hollow square and rifles hide in the center. squares are immobile and the rifles stop firing or is limited.
I want a Rome game with diplomacy from 3K, battles and ballance from Rome 2 with improved sieges and some units behavor from 3k, and heros/buildings mechanics from WH.
Rome 2 is great but i miss the option of being able to make armies on the fly. If they made it where you can only have a limited amount of generals but they give your armies bonuses and stuff then i think that would be an improvement.
I don’t think that the hp pool works like you said in the video. In warhammer it just show the total hp (single man hp multiplied by number of entities) while Rome tells you the individual hp of each single man, but they work the same in battle. Warhammer just gives you a more quick and detailed look on damage taken, I never noticed anything strange about how the entities die
Capture point idea with extra units being bought? Nah thanks... this doesn't fit into the fact, that you have to plan out what army you ll be using to make the siege in the first place
Agreed with title: look at Rome 2 and make opposite or WONT SUCCEED. Its have some numbers because there is no real competitors in those niche. Thats all.
@@FightMeTotalWar Because battles became less cool and attractive and new rome 2 system with hp killed many cool features that was present in Rome 1/Medieval 2. And all other games after Rome 2 was on same engine as Rome 2. And it plays and looks bad. Some games like TW Warhammer had hype because of setting and universe. But if we take a look on same game but with historical setting *Troy* its looks and plays awful. P.S. CA could make much better game. And Rome 2 was dissapoinment when it was released and stays that wait till these days. At least for me. After Rome 2, I almost skipped playing Total War Games. Tried Warhammer/Troy but its category B- games. I played Total War: Arena, it had good potential, but it was flushed away and moved into wrong direction. And overal battles on engine that present in Rome 2 and after is just boring as hell.
a Victoria total war game encompassing not only Europe and the Americas but Africa and south,east, and Central Asia would be epic. I just really want to have dreadnought battles and do a colonization speed run as Britain 🇬🇧 Or conquer all of South America as Brazil 🇧🇷
You make me want to buy the game ! Never played it, first total war that I played was Attila, then bought shogun 2 , Warhammer 1 and 2 and loved more the Attila for its imersion. Thanks for the vídeo! Rome II or the better edition?
@@FightMeTotalWar thanks ahah I Was almost sure they did a enchanted One ahah sorry! Gonna wait and try to play it! Gonna check thé Price Now though to make sure its cheaper eheh
fight me u are an amazing content creator .... as well as being a great player .... u are amazing at informing the masses of what is really good and bad about the game .... i really hope the developers of rome take notice as people like u and joe onit .. ellington and other back seat generals and apollo .... the game wouldnt have half the player base if it wasnt for u guys ... i hope to see u on the battlefield soon ...................... Medusa
Thanks medusa for the kind words!❤️ I will keep doing my best, making the best videos I can! And think so to that we TH-camrs have a great impact on the game! See you soon in the twl?!?!
For me it’s less about adding features to rome 2 but fixing them i think they need to rework how matched combat works entirely, I mean 4 guys will stand around one guy in rome 2 for 20 seconds at times, or just really long periods of time. Animations are too slow and uncommon, soldiers should attack way more and quicker. Shields should be raised and used more in uniformity to actually simulate a phalanx. the combat is just so robotic at times with teleporting units etc; you can also see the exact point a unit locks on to another to initiate a combat animation, really unimmersive. I think they could solve this by using similar medieval 2 mechanics with much more density of units, staying in formation, raising shields, smoother animation, and perhaps having physics of heavy infantry putting more pressure on light infantry footing so that line battles are more dynamic, like in real life. tight formations, animations with less movement, less bumper car-like movement, and better shield use would go a long way i think in making battles feel less robotic; more fluid and real
I think the next Rome Total War should be in the early Middle Ages and include most of Eurasia, with a focus on the Near East. Basically, the game starts with the Ummayad Caliphate and Eastern Rome as the two main powers. If the game has high budget, it would be nice to also have all of China and the Far East included, and possibly all of Eurasia and North and Central Africa. In general, I think that you should sacrifice graphics for massive scale. The game should play a lot like Attila, but with Shogun 2 combat system, Rome 1 graphics (so as to play with massive map sizes and unit sizes with realistic scale cities and armies), and customizable units where you choose how long to train them, what to equip them with, and so on. The game should also force you to care about internal politics more, and it should likewise make civil wars feel more "real", with the conditions of winning a civil war depend on who challenges you and how much the locals in the rebel provinces actually give a shit. There should also be real public order and food ramifications for having large armies, and past a certain point you must either rely on conscription or use militias that can still grow food when they are not outside their towns. Likewise there should be cultural abilities that correspond to the economy and the mobilization of armies. I think industry and economy should matter a ton in this game, down to the detail where you run out of chain mail if you mobilize too fast, and people get pissed off if you take too many conscripts, especially if you send them to die in a mountain pass or something.
There are few things i dislike about Rome 2. Firstly the map sizes dont increase with the amount of players unlike in medieval 2 for example. I also dislike how armies work in campaigns since you can spam out armies and if you lose 1 army it just takes 2 turns to build another one
I would love if they could just make Medieval 3. Doesn’t need to be anything too revolutionary. Honestly just make the map huge and include all of the dlc factions from older games but then make the city building and army building the same as Medieval 2. the customization and building in that game is awesome. all they need is somewhat better graphics on par with attila or rome 2 and a larger map. takes very little work and would sell out like no ones business
How about a free for all mode. Like maybe 4 factions duke it out on a land battle, and they have no teammates. That could be an interesting idea, even though its not really historically realistic for a free for all. I still think CA should do it tho.
Buying units mid siege storm is as realistic as the magic bs Chinese general. Historicaly the wounded would be straight fucked, some would be evacuated to the rear if hit by arrow, but the guy cut up while storming would basically check out and wait to be slain or bleed to death.
Great video but One thing. Rome Is not a balance game. There are some faction which are clearly Better than other. Especially in Land battles where barbarian faction dominate if you dont make some rules about the melee inf spam.
@@rory6860 ya i know but i mean if a guy spam like 14 legio with 3 syrian archers you are done. Is nearly impossible to win againts this type.of army if the enemy has at least two hand. For this reason you have to make a rule set for avoid this things. (Sorry if my english Is bad)
Something you definitely missed and really hard missed is the voice acting man. I click on a unit in old total war games I get chills and gose bumps. Hearing "HASTATI!" When you pick a group or when a unit is in combat 😘👌. Definitely the new voice acting is pron tier! Especially 3 kingdoms! Make the voice acting dependant of the situation the unit is in.
What do YOU think should happen to the NEXT TOTAL WAR.....?
Get a better Launch thats is:)
FAX
Unit cap limits similar 2 Warhammer and mec units. Basically a built in balancing limit like 124
Yeah good one Gorm!
When you coming back man?! Miss your streams....
@@FightMeTotalWar :/ at some point having a had time finding a desk and my computers still in a common area right now so cant stream
Also a great thing about rome 2 is that there are so many diffrent faction and culture to pick from, which makes the overall battle expirience much better.
Yeah indeed!
The variety of nations that can form without previously existing in the campaign is dope too, just conquering Italy minding my own business and all of a sudden land from france to Poland is United under the “German confederation” 😭
Yeah but only with Mods. Rome 2 need new Combat Animations and better Engine. I hate the Laggy Blood, Smoke, Dust etc..
@@gagameal1632 rome 2 engine is great for its time, like amazingly well optimized comparatively to other titles. what we need is a new historical title with warhammer levels of optimization and combat oriented improvements
WH have more
I can’t believe we’ve gotten THREE Warhammer games since Rome 2 came out. We need Rome 3 or Medieval 3!
And Empire II 🤭
I need shogun 3
I'm a HUGE Warhammer fan...and even I'm wanting to know when the heck we're getting another good historical game. I loved Shogun 2 and Rome 2 just as much as Warhammer.
Considering the contract was for 3 games and they each made a shit load of money and pushed the mechanics and gameplay to the max.... I'm not
Hopefully by a different dev team
I disagree about recruiting new units mid battle. I love that in Rome 2 you have to think carefully about your army composition and what you bring is all you get. Its also much more realistic than mustering and training new units in the heat of a battle. The exception could be mobs of plebs that you could recruits from the countryside you're invading/defending. In other words, cannon fodder tier units
Yeah i Understand your point historically its not Good but it could be fun dont know
Just make it a game mode
I do agree. However, I do wish the capture points that most cities have would play a bigger part in siege battles. I think it would be cool if the units celebrate once they fully capture one of them or something like that
You aren’t training/mustering units mid battle, it represents getting reinforcements. Default land battles are fine, but especially for a siege, not including unit rotation or the prospect of relief armies is much less realistic.
What made rome 2 even more immersive is the variety of soldiers within a unit. each faction has 3 faction colors, so tunics, pants, shields, can differ more. Different skins, beards, hair, swords, belts, etc. In my opinion, the soldiers in Troy or even Attila look much too similar.
Finally someone showing love to Rome 2. The best total war game. So many Iconic campaigns.
🤝
You made a lot of good points. Rome II is a classic.
I think Total War could try some different periods though. The age of renaissance has the classic "pike and shot", when knights were beginning to become fragile but guns were not invincible either. Another theme similar to that could be 19th century China and the surrounding factions like Mongolian, Russia, Middle East, India, Japan, and European colonizers clashing against one another. Those can be a very diverse range of factions in terms of military units.
renaissance/30 years war is what I want most precisely because it has the best of both worlds, classic sword and spear fighting but also early guns and cannons. it has untapped potential
Agree with everything but restoring hp or recruiting new troops may be so OP. I think restoring fatigue or addin morale would be more balanced and resalistic.
Yeah true but thats why attackers Should have Much larger forces and defenders got to try everthing to survive.
In all the Total war games defenders got an advantage but it Should be other way arround
Yeah it doesnt make sense that an attacking army would be allowed to recruit in an enemy settlement
all you've said, I want all you said. Maybe a new Empire or Medieval game would be cool, but a part of me just wants a Troy with Rome 2 battle mechanics
Agree.
Except with the buying units mid battle thing. That' too arcady for me :D
Understandable
4:00
You kinda messed up with the Health as Warhammer and Rome 2 still uses the same health system, Warhammer just show the total health as there's spells that can reduce the health of all models, while in Rome 2 the models with low health would be the bloodied ones.
it works a little bit different, units still have individual hp, but the way the recieve damage is different which makes it much less enjoyable i wonder if you ever noticed
@@FightMeTotalWar I'm guessing it's the Weapon Strength and Armor Rolls?
In Rome 2 Each Weapons are quite unique, both Melee and Ranged, like Swords having high Base Damage but low AP, while Spears have low Base Damage and average AP, or Bows having High Base Damage but low AP, while Javelins having low base damage but high AP.
In Warhammer Swords and Spears are basically the same, while Bows and Crossbows are no different and Guns are just Armor Piercing Crossbows.
In Rome 2 Armor Rolls are between 1 to the unit's armor, so a 35 Armor Hoplite would roll 1 to 35 when damaged, while in Warhammer armor roll are between 50% to 100%, so a 40 Armor Spearmen would roll 20 to 40 when damaged, considering swords have 21 Base and 7 AP in Warhammer, making those Swords only able to deal 7 or 8 Damage to a Moderately armored infantry.
Shogun 2 Fots's Naval bombardment in land battles was a huge improvement for me, so If CA is going to make a Victorian game I want these mechanic so much
Same bro
I think that melee animation is a good point, but I think a total war game set in the pike and shot era will be the most interesting one. Tons of empire and napoleon mechanics can be reused like formations and dues, and a relatively good mix of melee and ranged units will make the gameplay a little more diverse than the line infantry spam in Shogun2 Empire. Most importantly, total war games have already exploited the potential of Antiquity and middle ages to a good extent, the player base needs something like 16th - 17th century that is groundbreaking for the title and still full of contents like these two periods. Eighteenth and nineteenth century are just too plain to make a game based on it when compared to the early modern era. Although they claimed that they would not release any era-spanning titles in the near future, still they need to know that is what total war should be. Fantasy titles like Warhammer and Troy will not make you feel like an actual imperator.
True i have to agree ye
@@FightMeTotalWar Just let’s hope that ca will take the advice and don’t make another “Trojan” or “WH3” mistake in the next title. Say, things like Rome 2 and Shogun2 are the great hits we were looking for.
@@FightMeTotalWar I imagine once we can get better computers en masse (thanks COVID) they will knock it out of the park w a modern/WW2/Vietnam setting. I think their first 40k game is secretly on the way... Nothing beats getting ambushed by good news
You are wrong about the hp pools in warhammer the models still all have individal hp. They changed it in WH2 if i remember correctly.
capture point thing is interesting BUT it would be a bit OP to restore individual unit models to full HP. Instead morale is something that already super impactful a morale debuff to defenders on a battle wide scale would likely be enough to make capture points way more important and help to fix the issues with keep camping which destroys the playability of 60% of the maps in rome 2.
yeah true, but its more like you can heal one unit at a time and it will take some time, i dont know...
@@FightMeTotalWar It would make it too OP to charge in units take minimal losses and cycle them out for heals. would add in a supply chain effect that would only hinder the actual gameplay imo.
Yeah, true indeed, but maybe you can compensate that with much larger attackers funds, bc in history defenders were always very out numbered, and they had to win with all odds against them, but they had the advantage of the city, so maybe?
Bc those are always the best sieges think of helm deep, and minastirith and the battles that the defenders won even tho all odss against them.
@@FightMeTotalWar They tried this with thrones and attackers having overwhelming odds in their favor simply meant no competitive scene could develop.
but there you had no advantage with capture points or other usefull equipment
While I don't see it coming until 2024. I do have my highs up for Rome 3. The devs should really take their time and deliver a true succesor for rome 2. By this time they should have learned from their mistakes and I'm sure the game will be amazing.
Edit: Medieval 3 would be dope as well
yeah right it must be
entity HP is still a thing in warhammer though? The total HP pool is still divided over all the units. Why you sometimes take huge damage without losing a unit is because of AOE abilities plus the fact that the unit card HP actually represent the overall HP of the unit not only the amount of entities like in Rome 2. In Rome 2 the unit card shows no damage until you lose models (your elephants can take 300 damage each but your card shows full hp since none died. However in warhammer the unit card shows overall HP. now if you have infantry unit (100 models) with 8000 HP (80 per entity) and you cast a spell doing 50 damage to ALL units. in warhammer this shows on your unit card as having lost more than 60% of the HP but not a single model is dead. However if this would be able to happen in Rome 2 the unit card would simply show full health since it only displays unit number not total health of the unit. It is not so much that they changed entity HP it's just that Rome 2 does not reflect entity HP on the unit card. If all units with 65 HP each have only 1 HP left, but none died, your Unit card would simply show 100% "HP". It's more a flaw of the Rome 2 unit card than anything else.
Damn bud, AMAZING video! Loved all of your points and ideas, I hope that someone from CA sees this video and some or maybe all of your points are implemented in the next historical title. Thanks for the channel shout at the beginning also! Onward and upward!!
Thanks Bro! Ye lets hope someone will see this and make an impact....
I would love if in historical titles the unit cards were drawn in the respective era's art style. I actually don't know if that's the case for Rome, but alongside ToB and Shogun 2 it has the best unit cards in the series, and that's my fav thing in the whole game. I don't fancy 3d unit cards and Rome's 2d cards are very easy to read. You know the type of unit and its tier by the card alone whereas in other titles/mods how good a unit is can be harder to instantly understand and recognising units itself is harder.
Tldr; I like the more artistic unit cards because they're pretty, and make it easy to know what and how strong a unit is
Like your idea with the medical tent, have a cart with additional ammo for range units
Indeed also Good one
What I really hope for next historical title from CA is to create more realistic approach in battle similar to Medieval 2 and get rid of province as it allows us to focus which region to be expansive compared to other region
Not on board with the recruiting units at capture points, offensively at least. I love the idea of medic tents or a way to "retreat" units back to recover in some way, I just think that the battle would have to move way slower and take more time for it for it to be realistic. Even an hour time limit isnt enough for that to be realistic unfortunately :(
Ye understandable
Do capture points do anything currently in Rome 2? Because I always just ignore them
Not really, only if you stand in them
Fr I want realistic armor back. When I got troy I booted it up and I was thinking the units looked worse than Rome 2 (the only other total war game I've played)
Bless you FightMe! Thank you for your high tier content. Praise be!
Thank you emperor🫡
Great video mate, Im looking for all those things you mentioned in the next Total War title!
First announce it. The historical fanbase, or what's left, is eager to hear a new announcement but with nothing right now its back to mods or rome ii or whatever game is being played.
Without an announcement speculation at this point as I've done is a bit pointless - because without a firm leak or confirmation it is becoming meh.
Second, they should also look at Attila and TOB which had many great features that can be added onto the next historical total war.
Third, there's a lot of good things to take from Rome II sure.
🍻
I think I might be late to the party on this, but each entity in the unit accounts for a percentage of the total HP pool, and each unit's HP is tracked individually so that some entities may be more damaged than others. Am I wrong? I don't think it just deletes random entities as the unit takes damage.
Kind of disagree with the most balanced total war. Would argue that shogun 2 has the most balanced multiplayer but that’s my opinion
I hope they will listen to atleast 70% of what you just said in this vid
YEss
Did you see Rome II on launch? They've polished that turd to the point it's half decent, but it's still a massive step down from Shogun 2 and the original Rome. If Empire was the beginning of the decline, Rome 2 was what convinced them to stay on that path. Something as basic as the bows not feeling punchy at all any more shouldn't take over 10 years and billions of dollars to fix, let alone pathfinding, formations, the whole thing turning into 'who has the biggest numbers', almost completely removing siege mechanics, etc.
I love rome 1 500times more than rome 2 but rome 2 has far better sieges than rome 1
if there is ever a Rome 3 total war, I would like them to do a few things:
- Fix hoplite units so that they work like in Rome 1
- Increase Pike unit size to 200 men (150 in large scale), and give them a "pike push" ability.
- Give all Greek peltast units korpis weapon (same as picked peltast) so they can be used in melee because they have too low ammo and can't do anything after that.
- Bring back the population system like in Rome 1 for campaign.
- All mid tier spear units (except thureos) have 3 javelin volleys like royal peltast.
- All elite spear units (except hoplites) have 5 javelin volleys like thureos spears.
- Give Spartan a mid tier shock cav units called perioikoi lancer.
Trying to find other people who make these remarks but cant find a lot of them probably cause they afraid of CA to lose partnership
dont man, but i thought this would be only a positive thing to post also for them to have feed back
Homie spitting facts
This is their last chance.
Yeh…:(
Another issue is Naval garrisons.
When my number of Army reached maximum till next imperium, I thought I could use navy since a military port can reach any other port for me to train naval units for garrisons so that I can use it for port defence battles
But I keep getting bugs when it comes to disembarking denying my numerical advantage.
So instead deploy before disembark, I want devs to disembark instantly during deployment phase like dismounting cavalry
time period, no single entity heroes, no magic, no over complicated faction mechanics, if Rome 2 had med2 or rome1 sieges where defenders retreated back to town centre for last stand, it would've been even better, also wish they gave bigger roster to other factions than rome
I disagree on alot of these points
-Rome 2 is far from a balanced game
Units in this game are straight useless if they are not a sword unit and dont have javelins(hp is also a factor but it will be explained later)
For example out is the units of boii and arveni share out of their almost of 15 units only 7 are viable in battles (celtic warriors,chosen sword/sword followers,oathsworn,heavy horse, leavy freeman and celtic slingers)
•The others being underperforming because they are a spear by default,dont have javelins/weak to javelins, they are a low tier units(with follows the question:Do they have javelins?). They are not a shock cavalry or a medium cavalry up
-About the hp pool
Sadly rome 2 brought it first,units are show to have a hp of 55 to 70 just that it doesnt show like newer games where it is just the the sum of all models in on big hp
-combat animations
Some im fine because of people that like to get immerse but this game on its early stages showed on how long the fights where(just didnt need to be 100% animations,it could be something close to med 2),and for mp,players dont care at all if there is combat animations because they are focused on winning
-formations
•formations in this game are almost useless(shield,screen,defensive testudo,testudo,shield wall to a extent,wedge/diamond formation and the list goes on) people would rather stay in thin lines against cavalry and missiles than to use a formation that are made to counter missile fire
Hoplite and pike wall are the only ok formations to use but still have their problems. Headhunt is useful in a 1v1 or when you bring second win(d) but one like rapid advance is useless and makes units around it worse.
This game is a broken mess for the majority of part, both in mp and sp, it hsd is moments and you can have fun in it, but only if you pour thousands of hours and having to cope with a ton of problems this game has(specially on sp) and the meta you have to follow with army comps,you cant use a spear based army with cavalry and archer support because you will get trounced by a mid player that has some grasp on the meta, the fact that bringing triarri a elite unit for the polybian roman army is considered to make your army comp build worse it already tells by itself, even rome 1 had this problem but i atleast know that even the most elite inf will lose to even a light cav and light inf combo and not just take both sides because they have high stats
I will react on this soon hahah
Spears are indeed a lot weaker than swords but thats doesnt make the game unballanced
Testudo does work
Shield schreen also but not as effective as Hoplite wall
Bombat animations are fine as long as they are kept short
One thing I want changed was in Rome 2 some maps had some stupid victory points. Like instead of the cool looking hill in the city they put in some random spot
Have you seen the map for Carthage? Its literally all just decoration
Yeah but its for balancing because if u put in a lot of the cooler spots it would make it nearly impossible for the attackers, so I understand why they have done that.
Attila was so much better than Rome 2.
Hello, I will give you a little insight, last project I worked on was shogun 2, right now Asians own majority of shares and they decide everything about next game, I think they got majority of shares while rome 2 was under development, that's why quality of products dropped, they have different team and different management who truly don't understand what total war was all about, I think you will never see another top notch total war game because this people think like npc's
Oh Thanks for the insight! Did not know that :(
Do you still work for CA?
We think in same ways! 100 % agree!
Thanks for video!
🔥👊
Bro that last idea would work awesome, I'd play non stop.
ye right!!!
I loved Rome II but one of the things it bungled was the recruiting. Bring back the ability for any settlement to recruit units but add the ability for a general to recruit outside of a settlement, with the stipulation that province or duchy or whatever can only recruit based on its population size, which dictates how quickly you can recruit. This was done by the divide et empera mod I believe and is much more realistic. Not being able to split units off from an army was really annoying and unrealistic. Let the players manage their own garrison units. It adds difficulty but also allows someone to make tactical plays when conquering an area say by leaving a large garrison behind in a settlement or province and continuing the war with a smaller army.
I love rome but it just lets me play for about 30 saves, then wont start again. Looked up a few different ways to fix but shiz doesnt work on mine
wow thats really unfortunate, sry for ya :(
I wish they didnt f up wh 3 at least the campaign
ye man feel you there
I don't want to see domination just do what the community did just now in wh3 make land battle with a capture point in the centre of the map and if you hold it for long enough you win. One thing they could improve is give us more than 20 units we had that limit since forever and it would make player skill way more important if there were 40 units to control and it would make a lot of rules less necessary since it would be easier to fit counter units in your army and if performance would be not good enough they could reduce the amount of men in a unit which wh3 massively increased.
Total War should make the big step and go for the realistic battles. 10 Legions in one army 50.000 man on each side
FightMe are there any differences between any faction seige units?
What do you mean?
@@FightMeTotalWar if there is a difference between Greek Balista, Gallic Balist, Roman Balista
Agreed 100%! Very good content from a great player!
🤝❤️
Great video . I am not so familiar with total war youtubers can you please suggest me some channels to learn and get some experience 😄i am really suck at medieval 2 online idk why . i start so good but at end lose. my infantry knights can't even break opponent spearman . also can't play shogun 2 avatar conquest looks like matchmaking not working creative assembly really has no support :( they send people to Sega support and then Sega support says go CA game developer is creative assembly its really annoying
Yeah… so for streamers: marketable skills and curved bubbels on twitch
On TH-cam: Joe onnit, Ellington, Apollo, terminator, Total war battles
what makes rome 2 the best total war game for me is just the time period rome period is just soo perfect, i think if they going to make rome 3 it will explode.
and for god sake i want a more realistic historical total war game no a mythdology bs with bunch of giants or 1 guy that destroy and entire army
the reason why i fall in love with total war games are the realistic historical gameplay (maybe not accurate but thats fine) it really hooked me which is why rome 2 is just too perfect than later titles (ofc if we ignore rome 2 disaster launch and such)
i never played warhammer total war is just tooo fantasy for me
and i bought total war troy just because it has a historical campaign if it didnt i would not even look at it
total war rome 3 waiting room here cya in 10 years i'll come back to this video when it happens
Allright 🤝
I want to play rome now after this films
Good.
Great explination, I honestly dont think they will upp their engine tho😢
I hope they will..
4:00 I didnt know that.Thats why I hate playing new Total war games.I think the last good total war game was Shogun 2 , but Rome 2 is also OK
you didnt know it and still dont know it - because it is obviously false. knowledge is justified true belief, and you cant know things that are false, which it is.
divide 8096 by 32 and you get the number of hp each soldier has. play the game and you can easily see that what he said is false. just a shitty clickbait video. completely worthless.
ive made videos about how this works that have like 200k views and people are still getting this wrong.
Yeah indeed shogun 2 was amazing but Rome 2 is the thing right now
It's because it's false....in Warhammer each entity in a unit has it's own hp.
I will come back soon with a more detailed response, but ye units in warhammer have individual hp, but it works different and less good, just lets say look at magic missles of pink horrors, when it hits a unit it has a promiximity effect, which is vage and much less enjoyable which will give you the feeling like its just a hp pool which goes down with the damage, which make individual soldiers last much longer which makes it goofy and unenjoyable, dont know if you ever experienced this but anyway
and Why the f*** are you calling it click bait, whats your problem
I would like to add that Total War historical titles should have the ability to inherit functions and features of each other as a legacy:
1. Region trading in 3K and older titles, subterfuge schemes and operations like 3K's faction council, tributes per turn... In addition, there should be more diplomatic options. The one I adamantly suggest is the annexation via vassals, client states, satraps. The annexation can also work via religion and cultures. I've heard something about Romans doing so.
2. Another feature that I would advocate is more cities, settlements and regions individually ( like Rome 1, Medieval 2, Shogun 2 ) or with the current provincial system. The new provinces as well as their respective cities should be added with each campaign DLC. I've noticed that in Caesar in Gaul, Rise of the Republic and Wrath of Sparta, there is so much more regions and cities that should've been in the Grand Campaign. Back in Rome 1 and Medieval 2, I kept seeing lots of spacious regions and only 1 settlement included.
I can't agree with you on the matter of general's abilities. It shouldn't affect reload time, melee combat or anything like that than morale. That's because 1 it's unhistorical, 2. it's unrealistic to improve other statistics, 3. makes general too important on battlefield on the matter of fighting particular place. It should depend as always on unit stats compared to the place where you place them against the enemy. So it is still just a historical game if we really desire one.
So here are the things they could do: Medieval 3, Empire 2, Three Kingdom 2 (as they foreshadowed), Alexander Total war, Greek cities, Assyria/Babylon/Sumer/Ancient Egypt, WW1 (Fall of the samurai was promising)
Unit health has worked the same and has been the single worst addition to the series, why would you ever consider keeping it without adding features like tactical retreats or even being able to see the entity health like in Arena?
It hasnt tho its truely different
@@FightMeTotalWar How do you know? Does Attila suddenly have the "Warhammer health pools" just because they have a bar above their heads?
Also, do you really believe this is the case when single entities one shot other entities when their health gets barely affected or how gunners are able to kill squishy targets when archers just decrease their health gradually? Random video in case you really need video evidence: th-cam.com/video/Wwg4v4SqwM4/w-d-xo.html
EDIT: you can also watch any videos showing damage over time spells like flock of doom where no entities die but there's a lot of damage done. Video example again: th-cam.com/video/8OHQSL18gGk/w-d-xo.html
This is literally the same as in Rome 2 except that you can see the entire unit's health.
I will come back soon with a more detailed response, but ye units in warhammer have individual hp, but it works different and less good, just lets say look at magic missles of pink horrors, when it hits a unit it has a promiximity effect, which is vage and much less enjoyable which will give you the feeling like its just a hp pool which goes down with the damage, which make individual soldiers last much longer which makes it goofy and unenjoyable, dont know if you ever experienced this but anyway
@@FightMeTotalWar Well same concept with Rome 2, take shock cav who can just kill one guy when the unit is pretty much full health but then start killing 20-30 models on a single heavy inf unit after a couple charges. Similarly, missiles vs testudo which is just a 20-25 missile block added to the unit, which results in the unit suddenly dropping in numbers despite using a defensive formation. It's no different to Warhammer/Troy/3K/Attila/Thrones just that Rome 2 doesn't have that health bar above units that started to become a thing since Attila not Warhammer.
Dude, your ideas about "new fetures"... just NO. It will rune the hole siege. What they realy need to do is make a towns and Castle/walls more realistic in terms of advantage for the defendors. In WH defenders, often, have less advantege position than attackers. It is the stupidest thing i ever saw.
30 years war era with pike and shot mixed units is what I want. recruit a unit like the spanish tercios or dutch and swedish equivalents that contains both pike units as well as rifles standing on the flanks. when cav charges hit a button that puts the pike into a hollow square and rifles hide in the center. squares are immobile and the rifles stop firing or is limited.
I want a Rome game with diplomacy from 3K, battles and ballance from Rome 2 with improved sieges and some units behavor from 3k, and heros/buildings mechanics from WH.
👊
@@FightMeTotalWar ??? 🤔
Maybe some units that hold the shields on their right arm
Nope
Rome 2 is great but i miss the option of being able to make armies on the fly. If they made it where you can only have a limited amount of generals but they give your armies bonuses and stuff then i think that would be an improvement.
true
We need this to reach CA
Hope so!
I don’t think that the hp pool works like you said in the video. In warhammer it just show the total hp (single man hp multiplied by number of entities) while Rome tells you the individual hp of each single man, but they work the same in battle. Warhammer just gives you a more quick and detailed look on damage taken, I never noticed anything strange about how the entities die
hmm interesting
Capture point idea with extra units being bought? Nah thanks... this doesn't fit into the fact, that you have to plan out what army you ll be using to make the siege in the first place
My only disagreement is that I really want a new NAPOLEON game, but that's just me lol.
Yeah I can see that become a nice game! I just really want a medieval or rome 3 :)
Agreed with title: look at Rome 2 and make opposite or WONT SUCCEED.
Its have some numbers because there is no real competitors in those niche. Thats all.
Give atleast a reason
@@FightMeTotalWar Because battles became less cool and attractive and new rome 2 system with hp killed many cool features that was present in Rome 1/Medieval 2. And all other games after Rome 2 was on same engine as Rome 2. And it plays and looks bad. Some games like TW Warhammer had hype because of setting and universe. But if we take a look on same game but with historical setting *Troy* its looks and plays awful.
P.S. CA could make much better game. And Rome 2 was dissapoinment when it was released and stays that wait till these days. At least for me. After Rome 2, I almost skipped playing Total War Games. Tried Warhammer/Troy but its category B- games.
I played Total War: Arena, it had good potential, but it was flushed away and moved into wrong direction.
And overal battles on engine that present in Rome 2 and after is just boring as hell.
Wish they’d make a modern total war with tanks, planes, troops etc.
It seems they dont care about the game's quality on purpose, good ideia about the "medic tent" on the victory point
a Victoria total war game encompassing not only Europe and the Americas but Africa and south,east, and Central Asia would be epic. I just really want to have dreadnought battles and do a colonization speed run as Britain 🇬🇧
Or conquer all of South America as Brazil 🇧🇷
Thats also a Good one! Just give us anything Good😂
Or a total war arena mode in im the next total war😊
Yeah that would be cool indeed, Should have put that in the video honestly
You make me want to buy the game ! Never played it, first total war that I played was Attila, then bought shogun 2 , Warhammer 1 and 2 and loved more the Attila for its imersion.
Thanks for the vídeo! Rome II or the better edition?
Wait for Black friday!!! Huge discount
@@FightMeTotalWar which One I buy romeII or Rome II remake?
rome 2 remake?
just buy rome 2 haha
@@FightMeTotalWar thanks ahah I Was almost sure they did a enchanted One ahah sorry! Gonna wait and try to play it!
Gonna check thé Price Now though to make sure its cheaper eheh
Also, Malta need to be a playable faction as it’s own territory
Ye….
I kinda hate that they stopped using match combat animation in warhammer. Also single entity generals is superior.
fight me u are an amazing content creator .... as well as being a great player .... u are amazing at informing the masses of what is really good and bad about the game .... i really hope the developers of rome take notice as people like u and joe onit .. ellington and other back seat generals and apollo .... the game wouldnt have half the player base if it wasnt for u guys ... i hope to see u on the battlefield soon ...................... Medusa
Thanks medusa for the kind words!❤️
I will keep doing my best, making the best videos I can! And think so to that we TH-camrs have a great impact on the game! See you soon in the twl?!?!
For me it’s less about adding features to rome 2 but fixing them i think they need to rework how matched combat works entirely, I mean 4 guys will stand around one guy in rome 2 for 20 seconds at times, or just really long periods of time. Animations are too slow and uncommon, soldiers should attack way more and quicker. Shields should be raised and used more in uniformity to actually simulate a phalanx. the combat is just so robotic at times with teleporting units etc; you can also see the exact point a unit locks on to another to initiate a combat animation, really unimmersive. I think they could solve this by using similar medieval 2 mechanics with much more density of units, staying in formation, raising shields, smoother animation, and perhaps having physics of heavy infantry putting more pressure on light infantry footing so that line battles are more dynamic, like in real life. tight formations, animations with less movement, less bumper car-like movement, and better shield use would go a long way i think in making battles feel less robotic; more fluid and real
I think the next Rome Total War should be in the early Middle Ages and include most of Eurasia, with a focus on the Near East. Basically, the game starts with the Ummayad Caliphate and Eastern Rome as the two main powers. If the game has high budget, it would be nice to also have all of China and the Far East included, and possibly all of Eurasia and North and Central Africa. In general, I think that you should sacrifice graphics for massive scale.
The game should play a lot like Attila, but with Shogun 2 combat system, Rome 1 graphics (so as to play with massive map sizes and unit sizes with realistic scale cities and armies), and customizable units where you choose how long to train them, what to equip them with, and so on. The game should also force you to care about internal politics more, and it should likewise make civil wars feel more "real", with the conditions of winning a civil war depend on who challenges you and how much the locals in the rebel provinces actually give a shit. There should also be real public order and food ramifications for having large armies, and past a certain point you must either rely on conscription or use militias that can still grow food when they are not outside their towns. Likewise there should be cultural abilities that correspond to the economy and the mobilization of armies. I think industry and economy should matter a ton in this game, down to the detail where you run out of chain mail if you mobilize too fast, and people get pissed off if you take too many conscripts, especially if you send them to die in a mountain pass or something.
great video
Thanks bro❤️
Three kingdoms has option for none op though.
Absolutely spot on !
Great to hear that man!
There are few things i dislike about Rome 2. Firstly the map sizes dont increase with the amount of players unlike in medieval 2 for example. I also dislike how armies work in campaigns since you can spam out armies and if you lose 1 army it just takes 2 turns to build another one
i wish they update the campaign coop to be the same as warhammer III
I would love if they could just make Medieval 3. Doesn’t need to be anything too revolutionary. Honestly just make the map huge and include all of the dlc factions from older games but then make the city building and army building the same as Medieval 2. the customization and building in that game is awesome. all they need is somewhat better graphics on par with attila or rome 2 and a larger map. takes very little work and would sell out like no ones business
How about a free for all mode. Like maybe 4 factions duke it out on a land battle, and they have no teammates. That could be an interesting idea, even though its not really historically realistic for a free for all. I still think CA should do it tho.
yeah free for all war in ROme 1 but they removed it for rome 2 :(
I wouldn't mind getting a early bronze world map game. One that includes Europe warer cultures.
Buying units mid siege storm is as realistic as the magic bs Chinese general. Historicaly the wounded would be straight fucked, some would be evacuated to the rear if hit by arrow, but the guy cut up while storming would basically check out and wait to be slain or bleed to death.
Basically we want Rome 3 or medieval 2
nice vid i hope they make a new medieval in Rome 2 style
🤞
I don't like that you put so much emphasis on multiplayer. I personally am only interested in single player, as I'm sure are many many others.
First step is to write a new engine that is actually good.
I want a rome 2 with better forts (wood and stone) and tower-maps and maybe 40 unit armys!
Agree 100%
Great video but One thing. Rome Is not a balance game. There are some faction which are clearly Better than other. Especially in Land battles where barbarian faction dominate if you dont make some rules about the melee inf spam.
They are beatable tho, but not really with greek factions
@@rory6860 ya i know but i mean if a guy spam like 14 legio with 3 syrian archers you are done. Is nearly impossible to win againts this type.of army if the enemy has at least two hand. For this reason you have to make a rule set for avoid this things. (Sorry if my english Is bad)
Something you definitely missed and really hard missed is the voice acting man. I click on a unit in old total war games I get chills and gose bumps. Hearing "HASTATI!" When you pick a group or when a unit is in combat 😘👌. Definitely the new voice acting is pron tier! Especially 3 kingdoms! Make the voice acting dependant of the situation the unit is in.
Thats true! good note!
Warhammer 40k Total War would be awesome.
I just realised its an active chanel
yes indeed
Rome 2 is still shit tho, Shogun and medieval 2 is where its at
med 2 to old, and no one plays shogum :(
more cultures and less packs is something aswell