The Thing ROME 2 Got Right That Everyone Overlooks

Total War ROME 2's political system was revamped in its later years, and it had some great ideas.
⚔️Subscribe to the channel for more TOTAL WAR ROME 2 content: tinyurl.com/y3...
Please note this is an unofficial video and is not endorsed by SEGA or the Creative Assembly in any way. For more information on Total War, please visit www.totalwar.com.
#TotalWarRome2

[@MelkorGG]

That is a good thing about Rome 2, but sadly I hate the Civil Wars. It's just me re-conquering my land and feels like my past battles are now just been copy and pasted. If there was a way where you only have to kill the opposing generals, and then you inherit the land back, that would have fixed it. Also, with the Roman Faction, I wish I did not start as the head making all the decisions. It would be better if my chosen family started on-par with the other families. So you all compete equally within Rome, and some AI Senate holds it all together.

[@thomasmott3518]

It's why I preferred the 3 Roman families simultaneously that Rome 1 did, rather than your choice of starting family in Rome 2. It made it so you genuinely felt like a family rising through the ranks in the Senate. I wish for a campaign with a map of hundreds of provinces, but just set in Italy and perhaps Greece, Tunisia and Gaul, so you can use the extra areas as "campaigning grounds" to earn victories that result in Triumphs. The focus is not on Imperial expansion, but upon bringing glory to your specific family. The actual threat to you is not the Gauls, Greeks or Carthaginians, if anything you are more of a threat to them, but instead the real antagonists are the other Roman families or Italian peoples who you have to outsmart politically rather than militarily.

[@happycompy]

That's a great point about it feeling like a retread. Had they done what they did with Warhammer's Greenskins and Norscans, where killing the leader of the faction allows you to end the entire conflict and absorb their territory, then that would have made it less of a slog.

[@Yo_Soy_Andres_Cuetlachtli]

I prefer a united Rome rather than having it split between 4 factions, but I get the point you made here as well as in your videos. Then again I like the political mechanics in Rome 2 as you have to keep a balance between loyalty and party influence. In my recent GC as Egypt I used civil war to get rid of a party with somewhat negative traits and a few provinces under their control. I let my allies do the dirty job by retaking my territories so I could lose some imperium and the negative effects of it

[@sam3aann]

Hi MELKOR civil wars are really cool especially with DEI

[@slayer19978]

How do you prevent civil wars melkor

[@MagisterProcellas]

If they make Medieval 3, I think it would be interesting if armies were split up into the retinues of the various feudal lords of the realm. So you grant a lord control of a certain amount of land, and the land he controls determines what types of troops are available to be recruited to him in particular. These lords' retinues then operate as separate small armies on the campaign map, but can be merged together with other lords' retinues to form larger armies, from which they can be split off as needed. Of course, if one of these characters becomes disloyal and rebels, then his retinue and the land you've given him rebel with him. And if creating new feudal lords by giving out land is the only way to get new commanders beyond your faction leader and ruling family, then it could create a delicate, and realistic, balancing act.

[@65stang98]

i support this idea

[@65stang98]

@@dacedruss he started off by saying if they make medieval 3 my guy we werent talking abt rome. i agree that would be dumb ass hell considering rome was a superpower that fielded a mainly uniform army besides auxillaries. were talking abt medieval 3

[@jacksonbryers6837]

this is very similar to crusader kings 2 and 3 and works very well

[@MagisterProcellas]

@@jacksonbryers6837 My idea may have been somewhat inspired by CK's political systems. Just a bit...

[@mimmim13aiv]

@@MagisterProcellas Oh man, that is what i'm dreaming of. A true in depth feudal system for a Medieval total war game. And papal system. With todays technology and knowledge of CA, they could do something amazing. If they do not settle for average games they know will sell whatever happens. As historical fan, I did not have a episode since attila in 2015. I'm returning to Medieval 2 since 2 years, with it's amazing mod Stainless Steel and SSHIP. 3K is good, but I'm not that sold on the China romance on the long run. Bring me medieval or empire games ! Just good ones tho

[@kumi_ch2974]

There is a certain joy in exterminating a party who hates your decisions. The game also gets boring once you become a huge empire, civil wars spice things up a bit. It is just painful whenever the ai spawn with praetorians after rebelling.

[@charlesmiv3842]

It would be nice if the party you destroyed stayed dead, rather than just get replaced.

[@happycompy]

The Landowners Party is always a massive headache for me whenever I play Carthage in Hannibal at the Gates. I make it a point to exterminate them ASAP.

[@kumi_ch2974]

@@charlesmiv3842 yeah it sucks when the party that replaces them hates you even more.

[@dubravkocotic9422]

tbh it's entirely historically accurate to have the praetorians side with the enemy

[@CrèmeTropBrûlée]

TW are the games where rebels have always a better and more advanced regular army than the state they are rebelling against

[@pridefulobserver3807]

Ah, you see, total war shifted more to battles, while paradox has always been about the grand geopolitics. IF somehow we could have both in a game, that would be IT !! IT !!

[@happycompy]

Agreed. 3k was a step in the right direction imo.

[@mnk9073]

Give me total war battles and sieges in CK3 and the game would be *chef's kiss.

[@alejandrop.s.3942]

That's our hope and wish. At the moment, I still prefer Paradox games, although the battles and the hype of TW are almost unmatched.

[@maverick8697]

Well: kzbin.info/www/bejne/sH_dmIufj715pq8

[@talknight2]

You might be interested in Knights of Honor 2, which is coming out this year. Might be close to what you're looking for.

[@CoffeeFiend1]

Thrones of Britannia did utterly revolutionise how food was handled in total war though and is honestly it's biggest selling point. Conscripted spearmen and elite heavy infantry give or take with a little leeway require the same kinda volume of food and ultimately the size of the army is reliant on how much food can be provided. It meant if you could only afford to feed 1000 guys you could literally pick those 1000 from the cream of the crop, you can always afford more monetarily than you can feed. In Three Kingdoms you can circumvent this slightly by buying food whilst food no longer really being a common sense requirement anymore as a mechanic because CA is one step forward, one step back every other title.

[@rickysavage9557]

You're right. I wish thrones just had a few touch ups from CA. The time period is awesome. The politics between the petty kings could've been amazing.

[@CoffeeFiend1]

@@rickysavage9557 I've often thought the best historical game would be Rome 2's political system, with Thrones food system and Three Kingdoms diplomacy system. They create these titles with these new innovations but they never retain them, literally combine the systems that are the best in each of the games and it would be damn near perfect :'( Edit: Diplomacy, sorry wrote political twice lol.

[@garrettoliveto7483]

No. It copied something modders had been doing for a while. And im positive such a system was used in other strategy games. CA is lazy and frankly a garbage studio. High level people need to go.

[@CoffeeFiend1]

@@garrettoliveto7483 Save some straw for the other commenters, pumpkin.

[@garrettoliveto7483]

@@CoffeeFiend1 dont have a clue what that means! But ok! Enjoy bad games sheep.

[@halojoe21]

I've never been huge on the political systems in Rome2 and Atilla, mostly because I like to concentrate on the the empire building, map, armies, and generals. Politicians and family members in Rome2 and Atilla felt abstract. Like they only existed in the political menu for me to sent to a province to up the food harvest for a couple turns or something. It felt sort of like a step into a Paradox game, but without the depth or nuance of any systems behind it.

[@WillowGreenheart]

This 100%. I play paradox games for politics not battles. And total wars for battles and roleplay not politics.

[@RocketHarry865]

@@WillowGreenheart Thing is with empire building battles were more often than not decided by internal politics

[@marzbanofmerv2324]

@@WillowGreenheart if only we could have a game combining both, now that would be perfection.

[@JankerMLD]

​@@marzbanofmerv2324 paradox midgame. You spent an hour analysing and planning your turn, thab half an hour replaying it. CA midgame. You spend 2 hours fighting to win with minimal losses and get supplies which will come on day. Combine them and you get 4 hours per 1 turn, EU 4 sessions cry in the corner

[@j.lavigne1232]

Great vid. I agree that, despite its flaws, this system adds to the depth of the game. I really enjoy the dilemma of creating a new army and trying to figure out which political party the general should come from. I once had a civil war break out because two great generals from an opposing party died in battle with Rome. It was kinda awesome to see there were real consequences to my loss in that battle.

[@happycompy]

That sounds epic.

[@charlesmiv3842]

To be honest, I still don't even fully understand how the political system works in Rome II.

[@happycompy]

It's pretty opaque, and you combine that with Rome 2's atrocious UI. Took me a LONG time to feel like I understood 80% of it, and even now I almost never touch most of the political intrigue buttons on the bottom right of the characters screen. Republic of Play has a video on it from 2017. That might help you out a bit.

[@charlesmiv3842]

@@happycompy Ya, there’s like 40 little buttons down there lol.

[@kutzewalters5530]

It was pretty much just throw money at other families to prevent them from starting a civil war. And it felt completely disjointed from the game. Families were assigned to whatever provinces for no reason. It wasn't possible to make certain provinces more loyal to a certain family, even if you made that family's politician a governor or throwing a ceremony there.

[@charlesmiv3842]

@@kutzewalters5530 Ya, that's why I think Attila's political system is much better. It's less of a balancing act, and you can get away with accruing all of the influence for just your family.

[@leemanjay7276]

@@kutzewalters5530 you can get a loyalty edict if you own the entire province and it gives +10 loyalty to whatever party owns it.

[@jackstone112]

Not gonna lie for a very long time I hated the politics stuff in rome. But recently I grown to appreciate it!

[@LordBooty32]

You finally grew up

[@patrickleonard4187]

Rome 2 had the greatest evolution from launch to last update. Great game to play today that still suffers from a bad early rep. To mention a few things outside the awesome politics: Them naval/land hybrid battles and the way the battle maps actually kinda resemble the land: excellent.

[@happycompy]

Agreed.

[@franckvermont1926]

Total Wars in general should be much more deep and complex. Their historic players are in their 30's now. They want more political complexity

[@mimmim13aiv]

That's what I feel. But CA follow the current trends : simple and instantly rewarding game. And that will sell. We're not the market's targets anymore for them. and well, look CK3 for example. I like it, but there is absolutely no challenge. Everything from CK2 is dumbed down and not just from a UI perspective. That was a good call. It just feels empty when you look inside.

[@Thematic2177]

CA has basically 2 player bases: one which focuses on massive battles with pretty graphics (mainly Warhammer fans) and one which focuses on engaging+realistic campaign mechanics (mainly historical fans). If they make a game too complex, the first kind of players won't like it

[@franckvermont1926]

@@Thematic2177 They should keep Warhammers for arcade players and make historical games such as Rome or 3 kingdoms much more deep

[@Kvs-vf9nt]

Well true. I'm 32 and lime the historical titles like Rome total war, Rome 2 and Atilla a lot. I find Atilla hard to get into but I enjoy it as ERE. In Rome 2 I own a lot off dlc exept wrath off Sparta and rise off the republic. And my favourite campaign is still imperator Augustus as Antony's Rome. (I use 10mods but not groundbreaking ones) just to make it prettier and more historical. Same with Atilla I use 13 mods there.

[@lorddervish212quinterosara6]

I think a party system would fit a lot in some factions in Warhammer like the Empire, High Elves and the Dark Elf

[@hiddensalami4334]

Oh man I love the politics in Rome 2. Didnt at first but it grew on me. I used to start over if I would get a bunch of bad parties, but I actually enjoy the challenge of trying to keep your faction together. Often I'll do some political maneuvering to appease difficult parties until I'm in a position to knock them off. Unless of course our differences can be resolved with a little stabby stab stab, and a new party leader.

[@SplendidFactor]

Playing tall as Kong Rong felt so satisfying.

[@avalen5515]

First of all your videos are great. Second of all I had no idea Rome 2`s politics system was so deep. I`ve been playing a bit of Troy while waiting for mythic mode and I have to admit I've fallen in love with the resource system and I miss it when going back to Warhammer 2. It`s a great way to keep elite units feeling elite. I feel you on the three kingdoms front, I'm not sure I would expect much more than Three Kingdoms: Warhammer Edition for the next instalment

[@happycompy]

Yes!! The resource system is so good. Combined with the Administrative Burden mechanic and mythology, Troy could become an S tier Total War game imo. We shall see.

[@Snarfindorf]

Can you imagine if CA kept improving on their games and actually evolved as a company and game developer? But no, every new release has to have 5 pieces of content sliced off and a new stupid gimmick added to replace

[@happycompy]

I like to say "every time CA makes an announcement, the gods flip a coin." Heads you get Age of Charlemagne, and tails you get Thrones of Britannia. Heads you get Troy Mythos, and tails you get Three Kingdoms shot in the head unceremoniously. That said, CA Sofia is on fire imo. They revived Rome 2 & they've yet to put out a bad piece of content.

[@happycompy]

I agree though, losing (good) features from the old games sucks.

[@therexbellator]

What you're addressing is part and parcel of video game design as a whole and is a common complaint among gamers but it's a complaint that's borne out of a misunderstanding of how games development works. Making a video game is both iterative and collaborative. Designers, which vary from game to game even within the same company, try to bring new ideas to the fore, they want to try new systems or replace old ones; they're not simply taking the old game, slapping a new coat of paint on it and adding more things on it, that is a recipe for feature creep and problematic features where new systems don't work well with older ones. It's not that CA "slices off" content from their games (this is a cynical viewpoint), like many other strategy game devs, they create a base game that brings new features and later might re-add them due to popular demand while also adding others. You see this very commonly in Paradox games like CK2/3 and Stellaris. Sometimes they get it right and sometimes they get it wrong. It's not a perfect system but it works well enough.

[@happycompy]

@@therexbellator Woah, nuanced take? We don't do that here.

[@Whitestar19]

They really need to take the best aspects from Rome 1, Rome 2, and Rome Attila and apply them all to the next game.

[@happycompy]

Completely agreed.

[@nomooon]

And add recruitment pool from med 2

[@asholegoogle985]

Dude! Where have you been. You took the words right out of my mouth

[@leemanjay7276]

What frustrates me is the fact that it only applies to the player. There is no risk of Ai factions having civil wars. And it could have been so cool if we could incite them for rival factions and take sides or play them off against each other. Some people just want to watch the world burn...

[@happycompy]

Completely agree. Mechanics that only affect the player can be really lame. I remember being so disappointed that only the player could trigger realm divide in Shogun 2.

[@jasonargos110]

@@happycompy Like the mechanics in DEI! Only affects the player.

[@samwinstone1792]

Just had one of your videos pop into my recommended and I have watched about 5 in a row now. Great content dude

[@happycompy]

Thank you Sam! I'm glad you're enjoying them!

[@IssaGladiator]

I finally understand everything bout the political system in Rome 2

[@Maesterful]

I don't care what people say; I still think Rome 2 was the best of the franchise and still play it to this day.

[@ImaginaShip]

IS the best! You can say it.

[@gottwyCZ]

I've been playing it with Divide et Impera recently and I am having an absolute blast.

[@speedyknight5536]

The first total war game i played and the best and simplest is total war rome 2

[@Yo_Soy_Andres_Cuetlachtli]

@@speedyknight5536 it's the first and only one I've played and after 500+ hours I'm no yet tired of it

[@Rokiriko]

Don't be close minded, its simply not the best, a Rome Total War game with a joke of a testudo. Its still a good game, but not the best.

[@TheTerminatorGaming]

THE MAN IS BACK! Excellent video mate and 100% agree with all your points, especially about how CA has the means and experience to make a brilliant, new Total War that takes the best of all their previous work. For me the only area CA really needs to work on is late game. They’ve done a decent job narratively with the Warhammers, and to a limited extent Troy, but late game TW games are still a slog. If they could combine the best of previous titles and get really creative with late game mechanics, we’d have a whopper of a total war!

[@happycompy]

I agree. The late game is a slog in all of their games, and it's a problem. To be fair though, it's a problem endemic in the genre, & CA attempted to spice it up with several different mechanics, usually boiling down to a blob of stacks. I think it works great in Warhammer, but it sucks in Attila. Even Rome 2's political system is meant to be an end game threat of sorts, because theoretically, huge portions of your faction could defect and attack you with giga-tier stacks. It doesn't usually go down that way though in practice. Here's hoping they take the best of their work for the next game, as you said!

[@jasonargos110]

The late game does not work as the AI just stops and does NOTHING.

[@ilari90]

Play Divide et Impera, superior Rome 2 experience, come back after that. I haven't touched vanilla for reasons, it's quite carbage. But Divide et Impera makes it really nuanced and hard, takes time to learn the quirks. There's population types of foreigners - common men - middle class - elites for every faction that has to draw from their distinct pool of people, and elites are rare and if you recruit them a lot in one place, they won't replenish that much and so on, so you really need to have a versatile armies, and the battles are great

[@TheSirBrainbug]

The player has all these systems and limitations, the AI doesn't because it was never build to handle them. DEI is most fun to play with/against a friend because then these things actually matter.

[@joshkennedy1453]

Thrones is really worth checking out again as they actually improved it a lot in the later updates, it has some of the best battles in the series imo.

[@happycompy]

I'll keep that in mind the next time it's on sale. Thanks for letting me know.

[@bredalocos076]

Rome 2's system is cool in the beginning when you're still invested in your characters but it becomes a chore real quick. It becomes a real fucking mess late game when there are way too many characters.

[@Tsotsis1]

just like life.. You cant handle an empire easily anyway....

[@makky6239]

Imagine a medieval III with population, the political system of Rome 2 but with feudal lord's factions and the pope, and the diplomacy of three kingdoms, troy resources and empire commercial system

[@happycompy]

*heavy breathing intensifies*

[@galicanthemagus]

I started in Grand Strategy games with the Total War series, moved on to Paradox games, and now that I'm returning to to Total War a little bit, I must say the lack of meaningful diplomacy or politics is a bit of a bummer. I'm not saying PDX gets it perfect, but when I can end an entire country's war effort be a few carefully placed marriages and assassinations, it makes the system feel so much more alive and adaptive. It takes me out of a game when every single war turns into an all-or-nothing bloodbath with every rival faction I encounter, and it seems like I'm fighting an Ork WAAAAGH! as opposed to a civilization of individual humans with their own interests and needs.

[@MercytheMad]

@HappyCompyTW These videos get my history juices going! Every time I watch one of your videos I wanna play Rome II! Nice video. I like the way you did your CTAs too. Smooth and appropriate. Nice job!

[@happycompy]

Glad to hear they aren't obnoxious. It's tough to put them in naturally. Most of all though, I'm glad you enjoyed the video! Are you going to play Troy: Mythos?

[@MercytheMad]

@@happycompy I'm not sure. I was actually checking out the historical version after watching your video and wondering if that wold scratch my historical itch. Both the Mythical and the Historical are more intersting to me than the truth behind the myth version, but I find it hard to pull away from Warhammer.

[@ImaginaShip]

Damn, Troy is a beautiful looking game!

[@happycompy]

Yeah, easily the best looking title.

[@Cdre_Satori]

Well, despite it being the tedius minigame most of the time, it does spice role playing immensely. Do you want an empire with hereditary monarchy or rule of Caesar always adopting his augustus. But the system is ultimately, boring. You intermarry members with your own party, never allow other faction to have more than one member and you are golden. If that member decides he could run his own empire off on a ship to deep-sea you go. I had massive inballances when the loyalty jumped up and down by 30 points at times at random seemingly and which province enemy gets is totally out of your hands. In this I will praise Thrones of Britania because it did bring up interesting game mechanics - you assigning estates to your generals to raise their loyalty is much better mechanic than your best general deciding he doesn't want to inherit entire empire, he wants to be part of Jewish family and rule just a little part of the empire - because of high ambition. -.- Another great mechanic is troops recruitment in ToB, units don't just spawn out of thin air fully stacked and you can't just spam one unit. Also your unit cap is based on your food supply, as is your reinforcement. So you got to make a choice if you want food stocks for better replenishment and faster unit buildup or if you want more units. These are all great mechanics only if AI was also restricted by them and we would have solid foundation of medieval 3.

[@AndysTake]

Great video as usual, mate. Amazing the success you're having, keep it up!

[@happycompy]

Thanks, you too!

[@AndysTake]

@@happycompy Can I ask you what microphone and setup you're using? I think you sound really good, I find my S's to be a bit on the sharper side. Using a Blue Yeti with voicemeeter, myself.

[@happycompy]

@@AndysTake Thank you! I'm using a Blue Yeti as well. Recording into Mixcraft, and using the Neutron 9 plugin to compress, de-ess, and EQ. It's an ongoing struggle to get good sounding audio out of the Yeti, and I've considered buying a new mic to see if I can get some better results. FWIW I think your audio sounds good too. Very professional.

[@AndysTake]

@@happycompy damn, that sounds pretty complicated, but it shows (sounds lol). I’m gonna try to do some sound proofing of my room and see if it will change anything (something of a DIY) project. Also got an actual pop filter which I’ll put on top of the mic instead of just my filter which is in front it. Will see what helps :)

[@bitsou]

I wish you can customise your shield in total war games.

[@branwhite5141]

Agree totally I also miss the economic fine control we had in pre Rome 2 days. It added a richness and even more strategic decisions to make. A pity to toss these aside.

[@happycompy]

I miss population :( It was nice to see its return in 3K!

[@19Burgandy]

Finally someone that has a voice that doesn't make me want to cut my ears off.... good content 👌

[@Robert399]

The thing I miss most from Rome 2 and Shogun 2 is unit movement and collision - y'know, the sense that a unit is actually a unit, not an amorphous blob of goo.

[@happycompy]

Yeah, Rome 1 and Med 2 units are definitely "meatier" feeling, I agree.

[@spencersmith4373]

In my mind the perfect total war game would have the diversity of units and cultures of Rome 2, but the depth and setting of Attila (although i haven't played 3 kingdoms so maybe that one is even better).

[@happycompy]

I agree, that would be fantastic.

[@Manda-LORE]

I'm quite unoptimistic about getting a true historical title any time soon. They seem to be focusing on fantasy pretty hard core and even the pseudo-historical games as you stated are getting the fantasy treatment. All I want is a damn Victorian era total war, I've been wanting it since FOTS and the political party system you hypothesized could be an extremely interesting mechanic. You could even have it tie into social revolutions and anarchist bombings that give your nation something other than the enemy to deal with and keep the player on their toes managing their country's politics.

[@happycompy]

Completely agree. This is a hot take but I'd rather an Empire 2, Victoria, or WW1 Total War than another Medieval. FOTS gave us a BIG taste of what a full-fledged 19th century title could play like.

[@greyTigerGames]

Great video. Have not played Rome II but that system sounds like a great fit for future historical games.

[@R3GARnator]

The reworked Empire in Warhammer II and especially 3 model a Holy Roman Empire style politics.

[@happycompy]

It's something but it's not deep enough imo. I wish they kept the old office system when they added in the elector count mechanic.

[@CaesarSonOfMars]

This is rare, someone actually saying something good about Rome 2

[@happycompy]

It's my favorite TW game, although I'm the first to admit its massive flaws.

[@CaesarSonOfMars]

it's honestly mine too I just don't let anyone else know because I'll obviously get attacked, every games has pros and cons and I just happen to think Rome 2's pros far outweigh the cons

[@ragnarjelkala3363]

I love the politics and management aspects of the games. It makes the game feel more realistic to me. So I agree and applaud your opinion.

[@clausbohm9807]

If they added some mini movies scripts to the politic side to give someone some real emotional investment, that would do it more then just clicking around a menu screen and seeing the results! Same issue with Stellaris, love the game but it needs some movie scripts to help sell the ambiance that the music in Stellaris does so well to create.

[@distilledwater8871]

Idk, the political system in Rome 2 to me seemed like a ticking time bomb that you threw money at to extend the fuse and delay the inevitable. Perhaps if it was more like as MELKOR stated: where you started off on-par with the other families and would struggle with them for influence. Something like that would make the system more rewarding rather than tedious and uninteresting.

[@redcastlefan]

i dont think that the things people complain about rome 2 are fair. they just show those people lack imagination. They need the game to tell them a story and to show stuff like a family tree and lots of information to make the generals matter to you when thats not the games job. When youre a minmaxing do everything by the book just like how the community says is best kinda guy, no amount of game features can make the game feel immersive to you. i develop the story and world in my mind, and when i barely get a pyrrhic victory i dont need the game to tell me this general is cool. i know he is.

[@happycompy]

I'm not a min-maxer, nor am I spreadsheeter. Especially not in single player games. I play games like this to get "lost" in the story of the game. Total War scratches the "emergent storytelling" itch quite nicely, and political systems like this enhance the hell of out it. Is the system flawed? Absolutely. But I'd MUCH rather have it than not. AARs and "Narrative Campaigns" have been a thing since at least the 1st Rome Total War. It's for this same reason that I prefer Battlefield 1 to Battlefield 5, despite 5 have much better gunplay and movement gameplay (the core of any first person shooter). No disrespect to those who enjoy min maxing their games by the way, one of my best friends is like that. Edit: I think complaints towards Rome 2 are valid, it's just a matter of taste.

[@redcastlefan]

@@happycompy i dont hate on min maxers either, but i cant help but feel like they have a flawed understanding of fun and what the game experience should result in. After a while a minmaxer will eventually lose steam grinding settlement by settlement doin everything optimally and they usually keep starting campaigns all over. But to me the goal isnt always about world domination taking the whole map and having a utopia empire that has alien technology by the end. for example it could be to bring back alexanders empire to its glory as macedon. no more, no less. and when i do that i call it a day while watching what i accomplished no matter how i accomplished it.

[@sudeshnamukhopadhyay5214]

Rome 2's main problem has always been the battles. The battles are boring slugfests, badly balanced and just does not give the satisfaction that we get from Shogun 2, Medieval 2 and Rome 1(online)...also to some extent Total war Attila/Napoleon.

[@happycompy]

@@cal2127 Agreed

[@redcastlefan]

​@@sudeshnamukhopadhyay5214 if you use ranged,cav, general/unit abilities to their fullest extent youll have no slugfest issues. This is an odd thing to criticize rome 2 as if its the only culprit. all total war games have this issue. also, i think you mentioned something thats a problem within this community. most people dont determine how good a total war title is with its own merits and what things it does good or bad. instead they keep putting the titles on a scale vs a total war game that fit their playstyle or is just nostalgic to them and so no matter what the new title does it will never beat the scale. You cant expect all time periods to be portrayed the same and you sure as heck cant expect all total war titles to be made the same as that one title from 15 years ago. a greek phalanx or Macedonian pike line being attacked head-on tended to last a lot in real life too. with the disadvantage of being very slow and less tactical and being vulnerable from the sides. i wouldnt want each small battle to last hours , but you also cant expect the devs to ignore life completely.

[@GudeaTW]

Great video! While I have my issues with Rome 2, I do feel like it's a good game (especially now) with a lot of good ideas and mechanics.

[@happycompy]

I thought your retrospective review of Rome 2 was very fair and honest. I could make an in-depth video essay on the game's problems even today, but it's the only TW game I've put over 2k hours into! It definitely did a lot right.

[@awkwardsaxon9418]

6:19 "and it does those very well" (x)

[@happycompy]

Like 'em or hate 'em, the battles are why WH2 pulls the player numbers that it does. They're a ton of fun imo, especially when you turn your brain off and just enjoy the spectacle. Organ guns and Gyrobombers go brrrrrr.

[@luelee6168]

There aren't enough games out there revolving around courtly intrigue, is there? I mean ppl claim to dislike or even outright hate politics but when asked about dramas such as Game of Thrones, these same ppl absolutely love it. So there is clearly a market for this and for a franchise like Total War to just simply brush over it briefly is robbing itself of potential. And you don't need the level character design of Troy or 3Ktw either, the player can create their own through the consequences of their actions.

[@happycompy]

COMPLETELY agree. In an earlier version of the script for the video I actually mentioned game of thrones and HBO's Rome. I cut it for pacing.

[@DonetskiLetsplayshik]

I mean CK kinda occupies that niche

[@Figgy_Jub]

Roman History is my favorite, so this game has always been special to me.

[@happycompy]

Hell yeah!!

[@Sk0lzky]

Rome 2 and especially Attila had done a lot well. Pretty much all of those things were completely abandoned in next total wars, including the crucial graphics matching mechanics factor

[@DomMarmelo]

i played a lot of Attila and Rome2, the one thing i loved the most in rome2 was the cavalry charges comparing to attila , they felt so good.

[@jackback70]

i wish there were more ways civil wars could break out, i mean even on legendary difficulty its so easy to keep all parties loyal

[@edouardlorge4059]

Civil war in rome 2 was to easy to manage= give everything important to your family. You will never have one, or will be weak.

[@BigBroKuma]

Yeah I’d love this for Medieval 3

[@tweedilde8089]

Also good to mention Attila’s dept for empire building and management.

[@happycompy]

Yes, absolutely. 2nd only to 3k imo.

[@tudorbaloiu9585]

Oh man I miss the trait system from m2tw. I cannot get attached to any general in attila/r2, they end up almost the same when maxed out and they feel so bland. Regarding the politic system in Rome2, it is an important part of my campaigns. But, honestly, it's because I like to spice it up a little bit as a r2 campaign becomes boring really fast and there's not much to do besides playing with politics and the family tree. I can do entire campaigns without touching the politics tab and it wouldn't even matter, it doesn't affect the player almost at all. In Attila I like it a little bit better. I like the fact that you can appoint governors and offices. I always try to balance things between my family and the other nobles. But, just like in r2, I do it just to spice things up, as it can be easily ignored and you wouldn't be affected too much.

[@happycompy]

The governor/office system in Attila is good, although I hate that the offices are time-limited. Age of Charlemagne fixed that though.

[@colummccrudden101]

Lords of the Realm 2 does population and wars pretty well. You wana raise an army of 1000? You take it out of the immediate region and depending on how many, it reduces happiness. Ahead of its time

[@maximusdecimusmeridious3784]

Total war Troy should’ve used the Rome 2 engine. Would’ve been cool to see that uniform design with rome 2 graphics and battles

[@DarkCrusade]

Great video and I totally agree, politics gave more depth, immersion and made thing smore interesting

[@Detrimatey]

I refunded thrones after an hour too, but but it months later, put in a few hours learning, and now it’s my favorite next to Rome 2. You might wanna try again

[@happycompy]

Wow. What makes you love it so much?

[@Detrimatey]

@@happycompy tbh I think it just comes down to feeling really involved, once I got ahold of the food and levies systems and learned how to balance everything, I just thought that it was nice how many traits and (surface) personality the characters had. But admittedly my favorite part of these games are managing the family and their legacy. Also bombarding in fall of the samurai. They’re pretty equal

[@Gyrosmeister]

You forgot to mention that winning battles with generals from other parties increases their party loyalty, so it makes sense to have generals from all parties. So if you need a little bit of loyalty you can always send a general from a rival party to take over some meaningless village or to get rid of a 5 unit army that got cut off and is stuck in the middle of nowhere. Obviously this can have bad consequences. If that party decides to break away, they will have a high ranked general that (provided you gave him all the good skills) could be a big threat.

[@Maesterful]

Exactly, that's why I always hold onto power like a mad dictator and never give other parties an inch of prestige power or battle experience, so that when one eventually revolts I provoke a war and slaughter them. It makes other parties fear you like there's no tomorrow and feels great! 😂😱

[@happycompy]

I addressed the first bit at 4:00 (gaining loyalty via victory) and the downsides of stripping command at 5:12. You're right on strategy, though. That's exactly what I do too. I try to maintain a "controlled opposition." Give them just enough to be loyal, and nothing more. Parties with "thirst for power" I usually purge at the earliest opportunity though.

[@Gyrosmeister]

@@happycompy yeah thirst for power is easily the worst trait, if it's a leader trait it is worth it to simply kill the leader and then get a better one from the successor

[@JohnsonTheSecond]

As a NTW player, I don't fear rebellions because they'll be a pain in the ass and make me change stuff, I fear rebellions because they spawn veteran tier full stacks with custom uniformed heavy cavalry, artillery and elite and light infantry. Once I captured Normandy as Britain, then of course it rebelled, and the titan stack destroyed my army. Then it just remained rebel with the black flag, France didn't even dare retake it with their giant stacks at Paris. Where do they get all this kit and why can't I do that?!

[@victorromano6707]

Thrones of Britannia politics was pretty good, you should check out, just for curiosity.

[@happycompy]

You're right, I should. I've heard politics and sieges are done well in Thrones.

[@victorromano6707]

@@happycompy its not a great game, but The politics was amazing, in one of my campaigns, my own son started a civil war with me(cuz he got more influence than his father) and The final battle was a dad and son battle on a snowy forest. Pretty unique for any total War ive played (and i played all, except for shogun 1, just like you).

[@yourdadsotherfamily3530]

I liked it because if I had a family with a certain amount of power they got a certain % of the provinces I owned. I loved putting the family members I’m trying to build up on the front line then ship them back when they have traits toadies and talents leveled up for either military for my main family branch or civil for those who run the day to day back in the home provinces. I agree it’s a bit unbalanced and weird how they assign the provinces when they are inconveniently smack dab in the center of two opposing families provinces so if the other family revolted that province would fall first more than likely. But with good civic and nepotistic like management skills you can easily game the politics in your favor if you have any savvy in the game itself that is

[@leonst.7471]

I wish we could get a difficulty slider for political systems since it isn't the centrepiece of Total War games like we got for chaos invasions in Warhammer

[@happycompy]

I think this is a great idea.

[@Ltgaigley]

It's on Thrones but he didn't bother to even look into what that game did.

[@happycompy]

@@Ltgaigley You right, I returned the game after an hour. It just made me wanna play Attila. Lots of people of are recommending I give it another shot now, though, so I might the next time it's on sale.

[@DrumApe]

I wonder when we'll get something closer to a sim? For example in addition to everything stated in this video, you also have to manage resources like food and wealth distribution, technology research, work power (for building roads and buildings) and some kind of state apparatus. But, would a game like this even be playable?

[@happycompy]

I'd be interested in playing that, but it might be too different from the usual Total War formula for most people.

[@DrumApe]

@@happycompy Good point. Then it might be more about logistics - like management of recourses local to the battle like water, food and wood for siege equipment. Raid nearby villages or forage. It will force players into planning ahead and think twice about going through deserts with their armies.

[@sam3aann]

i love most aspects of Rome 2 I played 4300 hours till now :D:D

[@happycompy]

Holy COW.

[@AliciaDestiny]

Politics is always the first thing I focus on when starting any campaign in Rome 2. I always play on legendary difficulty so all the passive buffs you get from influence: peerless is super helpful. The best way I found out to deal with parties when you expect a secession any time soon is put their party leader on a boat by themselves and send them off in the middle of no where so when it actually happens... they're off attritioning in the deep seas lol. It kinda feels like cheating or you're exploiting the system but whatever; it's fun leading your nation like a Hellenic Hitler or something.

[@happycompy]

Hahahah I love your idea about the opposing party generals.

[@maevethefox5912]

Politics is the sort of feature I'd love to be able to turn on and off. I agree that it adds a really incredible level of depth to the game, and done well can be super strategic and immersive, and great to play occasionally. At the same time, most times I turn on a Total War title, I want a strategic wargame, not a civilization or dynasty simulator. Too often the politics in Rome 2 felt like they just got in the way of what I wanted to be doing. If I want that level of grand strategy I'll play a Paradox game. I will 100% agree with the population mechanics though, and light political interference. Like in Warhammer, you shouldn't be able to conquer a Dwarf hold with High Elves and suddenly be recruiting Elven units. Rome 1 and Medieval 2 really nailed the right balance in my book.

[@anthonyhampton2991]

My favorite thing about rome 2 is the variety in factions. I know warhammer has alot of variety but i just couldn't get into the lore. I love rome 2/atilla

[@anthonyhampton2991]

Yeah i have both warhammers. Dont get me wrong its good just not my cup of tea. I definetly see the appeal to it. I guess i just prefer the historical side of things. If they did a proper lotr total war game i would be all over that. I know there are mods for it thought never tried any.

[@nathanaelsallhageriksson1719]

I want to see a piké and shot tw, and this would fit so well into that. Think, english civil war, the deluge of poland etc.

[@colink563]

I thought Rome Total War actually got it the most right where you had three families competing with a central "Senate" holding Rome. Rather than 2 just having you select one of three families at the start and that's it. It also made alot more sense when the other two families would turn on you once your power grew too great. Attila 2 is just absolutely brutal with the constant rebellions and the population never being less rebellious or angry. I must have defeated the population of every city from Gallacia to Edessa three times over throughout my playthroughs and it did *nothing* to help public order till I finally had enough gold to purchase religion. Also the families never meant anything to me R2TW was just random it felt like and Attila I honestly never had a problem with army integrity or the genrals.

[@Ryan14000]

real talk though, what film is that playing in the background?

[@happycompy]

The Rome 2 Announcement Trailer

[@alexo167]

I mean if there's a high influence enemy party member you can always send him on an army of just him and scorts and send him to sure death.

[@DanishCamp]

Atilla is the one with features functioning best. Intention is good with Rome but if they don't work, people will just play Atilla instead.

[@makeromaniagreatagain9697]

When I play Rome 2, I simply only use characters from my party as generals, lol. Played 5 campaigns with 0 civil wars.

[@v44n7]

I love Rome 2 and is my fav TW game. If you role play it and use your imagination to think about plots the political system is quite good and fun. Even you can justify the civil wars. It can be exploited really easily tho, and reconquering everything can be a pain in the ass and feels unfair. But still is quite fun and I love it. I hope the next historical game has and improves it. Amazing video!

[@happycompy]

Thank you! I'm with you on the role playing.

[@barreiraludrio]

If Rome 2 is your favourite TW game, you don't like TW games

[@v44n7]

@@barreiraludrio what? Why? Lol

[@barreiraludrio]

@@v44n7 Rome 1 or Medieval 2 are infinitely better games than this. Here you have a video that sumarizes all problems with Rome 2 kzbin.info/www/bejne/eonOiJl7fqZ_rq8

[@v44n7]

@@barreiraludrio dude... that video is literally from 2013 when the game launched. It was patched to hell, also many DLC that are awesome. I didn't played Rome 1 and I am sure it was better probably at launch. But nowdays no doubt which game is better. Rome 2 has AMAZING mods that ARE INCREDIBLE probably the best of the entire series. You should try it yourself. Even the vanilla game is awesome, DLC are epic and mods are just incredible

[@alexanderabramov2719]

I don’t want to downplay that they tried hard and they were really onto something, but just like with everything with modern CA, balance and implementation fell short. Personally, I do just have my armies led by ruling faction generals and end up with max influence for the rest of the game, works on legendary. Why would I basically avoid a whole game layer? Opposing parties and their characters basically don’t differ from ruling party ones. The only distinctive thing they have is “Civil War? Yes/No”. And “No” is what you want. You can barely even create a story with it if you’re playing well, save for an occasional party leader assassination. I still wish every TW game had at least that to represent that you’re in control of a large group of people, not mind-controlled drones.

[@Realtimehammer]

I must say the political system in rome 2 is the easiest system to skewer into your favor heavily. So heavily that you hardly ever have to worry about it. Especially if you're playing a faction which only has one opposing party. You just promote one or two characters of a certain party and promote every character of your own. Adopt a few characters early, so you can then mass alot of influence for your party and expand quickly so you can convert to another system of government quickly. The best way to do this, is to kick out every general of one party you want to get rid off. Place your armies in their owned province, make sure their loyalty gets really low, they secceed but have no armies, you take their cities and they are gone and the other parties have a massive loyalty bonus now. Now you can reform your government and the loyalty penalty won't hurt you one bit. I've never done this on legendary, but on very hard this works very very well. I like Attila's system more, where you have to balance things and constantly tinker at the balance of power. A series of unfortunate events can leave you in an incredibly dicy situation. In Rome 2 this is hardly possible from the point when you have about 6 provinces and your food is spread. The main thing both systems lack is a proper reward when you balance things right.

[@happycompy]

Yeah, it has balancing issues for sure. I modded Attila's "balance is required" system into Rome 2 and I find it much better and more challenging.

[@futuristictraditionalist6596]

"different species in your empire" haha bold of u to assume i would allow that

[@7SFAmerica]

I have never played Shogun or Attila , however I do have Rome 2 and all of the Warhammer total war games and even tho I am a *Huge* warhammer geek , I can agree that Rome 2 is absolutely Peak total war.

[@edersonnico]

I kind of understands their decision to make 3 kingdoms more fantasy like. Their fantasy player base is easier to be pleased and less demanding. From the 4 games you mentioned: Rome 2, 3 Kingdoms, Warhammer and Troy. The 2 fantasy games were the less deep and still sold competively with the historical ones. Overall, producing a fantasy game is cheaper and generates a similar amount of income therefore more profitable. I dont think we will have a medieval 3 any time soon and instead total war will focus more in the fantasy fanbase with shallower games.

[@ulkem]

What made the senate not fun for me was that it didn't have a gameplay elemen. It was bunch of clicks and viola "problem has gone away for the near future".

[@happycompy]

Fair point.

[@16psyco]

I am not a udge fan of the political aspect in the Total War games but if we can disable it (or make it less impactfull) if the player want to (my case xD), am pretty open for it ^^

[@centralpark2168]

Glad i am familiar with the three kingdoms characters cus its the best historicalish total war game rn at least mechanically

[@MedjayofFaiyum]

KZbin didn't notify me of your video. I am disappointed. Rome II's family tree for me is strong, but not perfect. It adds the bare essentials that are needed, but now I often end up disliking parts of it. I think a ton of things could be improved tbh. However, for what its worth, its there, and imagine if Rome II had not had this ancestral update in the first place! Would have been a horror! I saw Melkor's comment, and one thing I do in Civil Wars. When Civil war is about to happen, I replace all my generals that aren't loyal to me with my own. So when civil war happens, I believe the cities don't defect, and they just start up with a garrison outside the city. Because my loyal general is from my family. I do wish Rome II's politics could have a uplift, some more dilemmas, some more political stuff taken from 3k and re-fitted into the Roman era.

[@happycompy]

I wish it'd have an uplift too. I think the best we can hope for is a revamp for a future title though. I believe they're done with Rome 2 for good this time.

[@lijunasuguerra6424]

Another thing about the whole politics and family tree is. When all the men in your Party is a General they cannot produce an offspring even if he has a wife. I played as Parthia and I was about to conquer the Asia when I noticed my Shah never produced an offspring and by the time I took him off the field he's too old to make one and then dide in just a few turns. I still have a Shah within my Dynasty but they all just die via "Natural Causes" so I assasinated the brother of my Shah and then Civil War begins and I only have 2 regions within ky control. I let out a sigh of disappointment and just restart.

[@happycompy]

Wow, that sounds really wacky. I thought the game just auto-generated a "distant relative" to become King/Queen when your faction leader died with no heirs?

[@wisecontragio172]

i think 3k politics is better tbh, characters are more fleshed out and in general you have more control, whereas the politics in rome 2 are added more to create difficult situations, rather than doing anything useful. And honeslty, for an already bloated campaign, the last thing i want is more tediousness- say a party splits of your empire, you have to pull forces from your frontlines to deal with it, leaving you exposed, and with garrisons needing replenishment after you just captured a city, you ll most likely lose cities on your frontlines, and after you defeat the civil war you ll be left in a precarious position, most likely with more rebelious parties just around the corner. But the worst part is the fact that after you defeat an enemy political party they get immediately replaced, so that the risk of civil war will always be there, which is just a braindead design decision on CA s part.

[@mcsmash4905]

just started playing rome 2 after leaving it sitting in my library for about a year , and i do like the political/party system its nice to do some juggling in between expanding and building stuff , dont really feel a need for any sort of mods at all when it comes to the game as a whole some things could be better (i guess) but its not something i cant live without (unlike a certain portion of the total war fanbase) , but when it comes to population mechanic it wasnt something i ever cared about at all , it was just another thing to deal with , yes it added to the immersion but not by that much in my case i never saw it as necesary it never affected my decisions either and it just hassled me with the squalor nonsense , the only thing it affected was the ai because they recruited 24/7 to the point of using up all their population , overall irrelevant outside of roleplay

[@happycompy]

Fair point about the population system. It really wasn't that important from a gameplay perspective. It was just something I personally liked for immersion purposes.

[@mcsmash4905]

@@happycompy i suspect that it was removed after rome 1 because the ai couldnt handle it and its a fair assumption to make with other features as well

[@marianng3950]

Did you say EMPIRE 2!? Is there any substance to this? Man I'd give anything for an Empire 2. Nice content, first vid i have watched but i'm gonna browse some others :)

[@happycompy]

Absolutely no substance to it, just wishful thinking on my part. I'd give anything for an Empire 2 as well!

[@marianng3950]

@@happycompy You almost made Christmas come early for me! lol. Keep up the great content man!

[@happycompy]

@@marianng3950 Hahaha sorry to disappoint you. Thank you!

[@Khaz8969]

if you could co-op as two different factions in rome, that could be fun.

[@dnash2131]

After playing the Ancient Empires mod for Attila, it made me realize how 2d the older titles were

[@taethegreat6607]

Can you make a tutorial on the politics system? I myself still have trouble with it

[@alejandrop.s.3942]

Prioritize your own family members as generals. Hire and adopt every single character of your faction from the politicians and other nobles tabs. If you desperately need a general or admiral from another family, choose the one whose ambition level is the lowest. Use the rival family members as diplomats; the faction has a +5 loyalty, and if the character gets killed you don't receive any penalty. Pay attention to every faction's bonuses and penalties concerning loyalty, although it shouldn't dictate or affect your general strategy. You can give them the free promotion, which is a nice +2. I would only give a rival character further promotions if he had nice skills to serve as a governor (such as -20% slave revolts); I'd give him the promotions, with the loyalty bonuses, and then entice him, that would be the ideal situation. There're few commands in the politics tab which are actually useful, study them, and make up your own strategy.

[@Trubripes]

What would the setting be through ? does historical TW players want more guns ? less guns ? no guns ? ships ? My vote is for a medieval 3 with a global map. Lots of rooms for deep political intrigue, lots of rooms for giant shootouts, too.

[@ElJocko7873]

Good effort with the video lad.

[@happycompy]

Thank you!

[@ONIscrooge]

I like the way crusader kings did it more. Which in my mind is sort of what they were trying here, just not as well.

[@BroughtToBear]

Coming back to Rome 2 the political system caught me off guard and honestly I wasn’t a huge fan, that said it would make a good building block. TW has had some fantastic mechanics introduced, only to be removed in later games rather than refined and developed as the series has progressed. Seeing Rome 2 politics, medieval 2 recruitment pools, three kingdoms courts, empires governments/theatres, not to mention the army experience system from Rome 2 now i think of it all together in a single title, would honestly be a serious contender for top total war I’d reckon.

[@audiusthegreatest6411]

They would need to pick another theme. I hope they do another medieval or antiquity.

[@BroughtToBear]

@@audiusthegreatest6411 Well Medieval 3 has been on peoples minds for quite some time, but I wouldn't be surprised if there's a wait for that one till after Warhammer 3 to ensure they aren't competing. We had Rome remastered and Troy, so likely be moving to a different area and period. Maybe a return to the teutonic orders, though I'd imagine that would be a Saga title rather than full release and to be honest, I'd personally love a Total War: Pike and Shot title.

[@happycompy]

@@BroughtToBear My personal wish is for Total War: WW1, Total War: Victoria, and Total War: Empire 2 in that order.

[@campo4108]

what film/tv show is the start of the vids footage from?

[@happycompy]

It's the total war Rome 2 announcement trailer

[@bitsou]

I downloaded a font mod for rome 2 in steam workshop but nothing has changed.

[@lewishorsman2219]

Would have been better if you could have met with party members etc across the map and a dialogue starts. You get 2 segments to the conversation and 3 choices of dialogue you respond with on each. Picking the wrong ones brings on headaches to your campaign. I’d prefer a diplomacy system whereby I actually have to learn diplomacy myself. The Carthagians hate the Romans but like the Sicilians? Okay now I have to navigate that minefield. The Assyrians hate the Egyptians but love Judea. Great now I have to be careful not to incite a new war. The Senate could have been you get to gain favour with a senator at the expense of another and so you have to know when and where to use that diplomacy. Do you provoke other senators in the hopes that the senator you gain favour with will advocate for certain trade rights/land ownership?