Rome 2 : Total War

CaptainRAVE · 27 Sep 2013 at 13:27

Lt_Red said:
You need to quickly disband your remote armies and raise new forces at the location of their spawn. Hire mercs to stave off the first few attacks and start rebuilding your armies there. Don't move them back or by the time they get there your land will be gone.

And if you are near water catch them with your fleets. You will lose ground, i lost half my empire, but it is quick to get back.

Spils · 27 Sep 2013 at 15:01

Pookie Bear said:
As for patch 3, it has mad a significant difference to me - and I currently game on a laptop. The campaign map is smooth as silk and I haven't had any slowdown in battle since - lovely

No your lying pookie and so is silent and so am I, Jono who in the know of everything CA has spoken. Hes also posted some meaningless graph. to prove it. :rolleyes:

Not had chance to really play back-end of the week. Cant wait to have a few hours on it the weekend.

Boycey0211 · 27 Sep 2013 at 15:39

CTF points are doing my head in now, can't concentrate on a defence because they just walk two units in and get the point!!!!!!!!!!

Any way to disable them yet??

Jono8 · 27 Sep 2013 at 17:02

Spils said:
No your lying pookie and so is silent and so am I, Jono who in the know of everything CA has spoken. Hes also posted some meaningless graph. to prove it.

Not had chance to really play back-end of the week. Cant wait to have a few hours on it the weekend.

How are proper benchmarks meaningless?

I would rather take the word of my own experience, the majority of people on the official forums, and proper benchmarks from tech/gaming webesites who have tested the game properly and published the results, over a few people claiming the game runs perfectly at extreme settings and over 30fps.

I don't know, maybe some people just have low standards when it comes to framerates and graphics : /

Doraku · 27 Sep 2013 at 17:13

Jono8 said:
How are proper benchmarks meaningless?

I would rather take the word of my own experience, the majority of people on the official forums, and proper benchmarks from tech/gaming webesites who have tested the game properly and published the results, over a few people claiming the game runs perfectly at extreme settings and over 30fps.

I don't know, maybe some people just have low standards when it comes to framerates and graphics : /

My game runs very smoothly at extreme settings but sometimes it BSOD's.

DutchSchaeffer · 27 Sep 2013 at 19:53

Just logged into Steam and my Rome 2 is updating, any news on what it is?

I had already opted in for patch3beta and the update on the 25th.

EDIT - I see on the official forums there was another update to patch3beta today (27th).

-----------------------------------------

Hi all,

Further fixes to Patch 3 means that we have updated the available BETA. Instructions on how to download this updated BETA can be found here.

If testing over the weekend reveals no further issues, Patch 3 will go live early next week.

Meanwhile, Patch 4 is completing internal testing and will arrive into beta soon afterwards.

The list of fixes brought with by the latest hotfix for patch 3 BETA:

• Players and AI were unable to siege a city with a port, with a land army while the port was blockaded by a navy in an earlier Patch 3 BETA build. This is now fixed.
• Fix for a crash while loading into ambush battles from the Campaign map, where the player had AI reinforcements (reinforcements are no longer aloud in ambush battles). This crash was introduced in an earlier Patch 3 BETA build, and is now fixed.
• Fix for a pathfinding crash in battles, which was introduced in an earlier Patch 3 BETA build.

Thank you for your understanding.

Regards,

Matthias

Pookie Bear · 28 Sep 2013 at 08:15

Spils said:
No your lying pookie and so is silent and so am I, Jono who in the know of everything CA has spoken. Hes also posted some meaningless graph. to prove it.

You got me, Spils. I lied and the game is a horrible, horrible mess. I can't even move my cursor.

I would like to apologise to anyone whose performance on Patch 2 is not the same as mine on Patch 3 - after all, you would expect everyone's anecdotal evidence to be exactly the same - that's how it works, right?

Therefore, I would like to revise my previous position (which was that the game runs smoothly on my laptop, on medium, patch 3) and confirm that the game runs like a one-legged dog, on low, at a resolution of 320x200 with only 48 soldiers on the screen.

CaptainRAVE · 28 Sep 2013 at 11:35

Jono8 · 28 Sep 2013 at 11:57

I am sorry, where in the patch 3 change log notes was there acknowledgment that they have improved battle map framerates for high end configurations?

I also wonder whether those berating me for having the audacity to question your remarks that the game is running smoothly have the unlimited vram option checked.....

Campaign map lags, yes they have been fixed. Large battles are still a joke, as per the benchmarks i have posted, and the overwhelming consensus on the official support forums.

Spils · 28 Sep 2013 at 14:32

Jono8 said:
How are proper benchmarks meaningless?

I would rather take the word of my own experience, the majority of people on the official forums, and proper benchmarks from tech/gaming webesites who have tested the game properly and published the results, over a few people claiming the game runs perfectly at extreme settings and over 30fps.

I don't know, maybe some people just have low standards when it comes to framerates and graphics : /

Seeing as you spend so much time on here try taking the actual time to read what people are saying. I didn't mention extreme anywhere I listed my settings and they was supplied to me by my very good friend who happens to be a CA dev(so in answer to your question I no a lot more than you about this game and its dev process). So my settings have been hand picked to meet my computer specs.

Those benchmarks are worthless, there not on the current last two builds.

I have been playing the game with the settings supplied perfectly in every situation I said. Large scale battles do chug a little but are still more than playable.(AGAIN IM NOT ON EXTREME nor have I said anywhere I am, None of you will run this at 60fps on extreme.)

Did two very large battles last night more than 20vs20 stacks in my Rome campaign and yes the figures i quoted are the figures I'm getting.

lol at taking the word off anyone on the official forums, a bunch of whining spoilt brats.

BriT · 28 Sep 2013 at 15:00

Suffering from big slow downs on the battle map, especially if its a big battle.

Jono8 · 28 Sep 2013 at 17:06

Spils said:
Seeing as you spend so much time on here try taking the actual time to read what people are saying. I didn't mention extreme anywhere I listed my settings and they was supplied to me by my very good friend who happens to be a CA dev(so in answer to your question I no a lot more than you about this game and its dev process). So my settings have been hand picked to meet my computer specs.

Those benchmarks are worthless, there not on the current last two builds.

I have been playing the game with the settings supplied perfectly in every situation I said. Large scale battles do chug a little but are still more than playable.(AGAIN IM NOT ON EXTREME nor have I said anywhere I am, None of you will run this at 60fps on extreme.)

Did two very large battles last night more than 20vs20 stacks in my Rome campaign and yes the figures i quoted are the figures I'm getting.

lol at taking the word off anyone on the official forums, a bunch of whining spoilt brats.

Ay?

You said, and i quote "@stock res 1920x1200 I use the settings above high-very high and ultra. I get average 45fps plus on campaign map. With 30-60fps in battle"

I then posted a graph of Very high quality settings at 1080p....

Patch 3 did not address battle map performanc issues.

you are not getting 30fps as your minimum framerate in a large 20 vs 20 siege. You would be hard pressed to have that as your average framerate unless you never zoom in and look at the skybox a lot.

oh and everyone who is posting about this issue on the offical forum is a whining spoilt brat are they?..ha. Why should i take your word over the words of 100's of people on the official forum and also on twcenter?

Mr Krugga · 28 Sep 2013 at 18:16

Hey guys, what are we arguing about this time around? I'd like to join in if possible.

Pookie Bear · 28 Sep 2013 at 19:57

Mr Krugga said:
Hey guys, what are we arguing about this time around? I'd like to join in if possible.

I think I can sum it up for you:

Jono8 hates the fact Rome 2 runs like crap. Some people are satisfied with its performance, but he thinks they're lying, because satisfaction isn't subjective. Spils knows someone who works for CA and he's grumpy anyway. The two of them are arguing about patches and settings and how many tiny characters can appear on a screen in a video game.

I'm just trying to be really sarcastic but there might be a point somewhere in my ramblings.

We have space for a teenage whiner, a socially-awkward LARP-er and a keyboard warrior.

physichull · 28 Sep 2013 at 20:58

I think a lot of you would care less about frame rates if you actually just stopped recording them and therefore ending your relentless obsession!

I have a much lower spec than the majority of specs I see in people signatures and this game runs fine (i7 [email protected], 6950 2GB).

I found that the second patch does hugely reduce turn times though, that's one massive improvement.

Jono8 · 28 Sep 2013 at 22:22

Pookie Bear said:
I think I can sum it up for you:

Jono8 hates the fact Rome 2 runs like crap. Some people are satisfied with its performance, but he thinks they're lying, because satisfaction isn't subjective. Spils knows someone who works for CA and he's grumpy anyway. The two of them are arguing about patches and settings and how many tiny characters can appear on a screen in a video game.

I'm just trying to be really sarcastic but there might be a point somewhere in my ramblings.

We have space for a teenage whiner, a socially-awkward LARP-er and a keyboard warrior.

I don't think they are lying, i know they are lying

Im not saying it is intentionally lying. The phrase "Never ascribe to malice that which is adequately explained by incompetence. " comes to mind.

Anyway, the game is awful. A shallow, soulless shell of previous Total War games.

They got rid of one of the main parts of a Total War game that gave you that immersion, that feeling that you are guiding/leading a faction....yes, the family tree. In a game where they intended for the players to be able to build their own story and get connected to the characters, family members e.t.c they have for some reason removed the family tree...? Also, due to the fact that a generals age is tied to the game years, and there is only 1 turn per year compared with Rome 1's 2 turns per year, your generals die quickly and just get replaced instantly by another forgettable randomer.

This means you don't get attached to any of your generals, you dont build a story, ad you cant see the potential heirs to your leadership.

The GUI is baron and boring and filled with numbers. It completely lacks any sort of immersion or artistry.

The battles are filled with stupid design decisions: Pillum only thrown when charging, capture the flag points in open field battles (though they are fixing this and have removed them from forced march battles), men with torches that can burn down metal gates rendering siege engines pointless, no loose formation option, guard mode on by default.

The game looks and runs like horse manure. They fixed up Shogun 2 with pretty good performance, MSAA, tesselation, HDR, SLI/XFIRE, then they seamingly lost or threw away all of that code and started from scratch : /

The game is in no way finished. There are only 4 historical battles yet many more are listed in the games inner code (but with no AI code set for them...), the encylopedia points to things that arent in the game, preview videos and interviews talk about things that arent in the game e.t.c

I am one of the biggest Total War fans there is and I desperately want to like this game. I have bought and enjoyed every game and expansion since i first started playing Total War with Medieval 1.

Unfortunately, CA have made an absolute mess of Rome 2. It is rushed and filled with utterly dreadful design flaws. They have gutted their masterpiece of a franchise and filled it with dross. To put it frankly, It doesnt feel like a Total War game anymore.

Richeh · 29 Sep 2013 at 02:09

My game has run pretty well since patch 2. It still gets very jerky in massive battles with 6-8k+ troops on screen but thats to be expected. I run on a mixture of Very high with a few settings raised like Anistrophic but shadows on low as they seem to be the biggest FPS killer for me.

The single player part of the game I am really enjoying, started an Iceni campaign using the Radious Total War mod and its very enjoyable on very hard for campaign and battles. Have played over 200 turns now and the only thing that I think is an issue at least using the mod is the amount of armies is raised quite a bit, for instance I now have 16 out of 18 armies but as I am spread so far its fairly reasonable. However, after not really bothering much with my tribal diplomacy, marriage, assinations etc as it didnt seem to do anything, about turn 200 London (or whatever the old name is) rebelled and out of this one city popped 12 full 20 stack armies who proceeded to take back every city on the island in about 2 turns as I had left it fairly undefended aside from one full stack army which even 2000 men cant do that well against over 1000

Obviously a few tweaks needed as that one city somehow spawned full armies all in the space of one turn which although its civil war made it a 15 turn battle just to get armies back onto the island to retake it.

meths · 29 Sep 2013 at 12:36

Pookie Bear said:
I think I can sum it up for you:

Jono8 hates the fact Rome 2 runs like crap. Some people are satisfied with its performance, but he thinks they're lying, because satisfaction isn't subjective. Spils knows someone who works for CA and he's grumpy anyway. The two of them are arguing about patches and settings and how many tiny characters can appear on a screen in a video game.

I'm just trying to be really sarcastic but there might be a point somewhere in my ramblings.

We have space for a teenage whiner, a socially-awkward LARP-er and a keyboard warrior.

Ha ha! Spot on. Couldn't have summed it up any better.

Omaeka · 29 Sep 2013 at 13:11

Jono does have a good point. I think a ton of people who bought the game (myself included) are less than happy with it's current state and have decided to just ignore the game for several months to see if it gets fixed.

Fair play to those who are playing it now and thoroughly enjoying it, that's a good thing, but people who are used to the series tend to see the flaws much more strongly than those who aren't, and they aren't happy with the state the game is in.

Probably shouldn't accuse people of being wrong when it comes to performance though. It's all subjective, some people will not want to play below 30fps whereas others are completely fine with it. I would like to know what rig the guy has who claims to never drop below 30fps regardless of how many units are on screen though. SLI Titans can't do that.

Spils · 29 Sep 2013 at 13:53

Pookie Bear said:
I think I can sum it up for you:

Jono8 hates the fact Rome 2 runs like crap. Some people are satisfied with its performance, but he thinks they're lying, because satisfaction isn't subjective. Spils knows someone who works for CA and he's grumpy anyway. The two of them are arguing about patches and settings and how many tiny characters can appear on a screen in a video game.

I'm just trying to be really sarcastic but there might be a point somewhere in my ramblings.

We have space for a teenage whiner, a socially-awkward LARP-er and a keyboard warrior.

Lol, Pookie summed it up brilliant.

I do see why people hate pc gamers so much. specially in situations like this, the nerd read and see's what he wants then exploded when it doesn't agree with his pretty graphs and statements. I'll get back to enjoying my game, you lot can argue like "plebs"