ROME TOTAL WAR 2 MODS

The way the battles feel is very different than the modern games. Reasons you might like Rome remastered more:

ROME TOTAL WAR 2 MODS

There is no guarantee that Rome remastered will be compatible with all the awesome mods developed for the original Rome.Дlc campaigns that offer a very different campaign than the main one with different maps and faction mechanics. Rome 2 since it's an old game by now has a plethora of mods that can change almost every aspect of the game (not the map though). Also they allow you to do naval landings, port assaults and combined battles all of which add to the variety of the experiences you are gonna have. I find them fun and far more enjoyable than the abomination that was Shogun 2's (not fots). I don't know why people like to hate on Rome 2's naval battles. In original Rome every faction that it isn't greek or roman has essentially the same roster. Of course factions that belong to the same culture group have a lot of similar units but there are big enough differences between culture groups. Factions are properly represented as they were at that time period, while the original Rome (and the remaster ofc) took some liberties like grouping the greek city states and the gallic tribes in one faction. Rome remastered is aimed more towards people who are nostalgic of the original Rome.ДЇar more historically accurate. But if you want a more sophisticated game and paying a lot more for it isn't a problem somehow, go for 2. I would never recommend the original rome, since it had terrible UI and camera controls, but the Remaster seems like a good bet if you want to pay less and have a lighter experience. 2 is a immensely more complex and dense game, and it feels like it too and it's up to you to decide if this kind of more realistic simulation is good or bad. But 1 is absolutely worth a play if you can grab it eventually. To me, Rome 2 is the way to go if you don't have the nostalgia faction going for it. The map is small, campaigns are shorter and easier and it has a lot of mechanics that can only be seen as subjectively better or worse depending on the player. Rome 1 is freaking amazing, but its very simplistic in its design and can be seen as a more leisure/fun experience when compared to 2. At its release it was pretty bad for several reasons, but now, after years of patching and dlcs it actively became one of the best historical total wars. Rome 2 is the more serious game, and the first total war to embrace a more 'paradox' feeling regarding the campaign. Probably because Rome is essentially operating as multiple factions allied together so they donвЂ™t conflict with each other. This dynamic also helps Rome grow similar to its historical growth when you play as a different faction. Once you have the power and fame, you trigger a civil war to eliminate the other families and senate to take control of the empire. You pick one family and work their objectives and develop their regions. There are 4 Roman factions, three families that fight on different fronts to expand the empire (one goes to Gaul, other to Greece, last into Carthage) and the fourth is the Senate (not playable). The thing I do prefer in the original is how you play the Rome campaign. Other comments will mention the specific changes. (HavenвЂ™t played it in years so I donвЂ™t know how itвЂ™s evolved).

Almost felt like a lot of systems just didnвЂ™t click from idea overload. I thought it would build on Shogun 2 (which was just building on the earlier titles), but it added so much in a bruteforced approach lol. But for myself in particular, I found Rome 2 over complicated a lot of things.

Rome total war 2