Rome: Total War (PC)

• Average user rating: 3.5 stars out of 8 reviews
• My rating: 0 stars

• Sort by: Most helpful Highest rating Lowest rating Most recent

• 10 stars

  Best Strategty Game since StarCraft

  by SPARTAN VI on August 3, 2005

  Pros: Extremely massive battles, very tactical, well blended real-time/turn-based strategy, the ultimate strategy gamer's delight

  Cons: Requires a patch to be played in its full potential.

  Summary: Somewhat ironic that the previous "spartan" that rated this game hated it, whereas I can't get enough of it. Then again, after several patch releases, I'm sure his ...

  Read more

  Summary: Somewhat ironic that the previous "spartan" that rated this game hated it, whereas I can't get enough of it. Then again, after several patch releases, I'm sure his complaints are out-dated.
  
  Rome:TW is absolutely phenomenal. Massive battles tallying troops in the hundreds, even thousands. At first, the AI was a bit dodgey, but after updating, friendly fire casualties has greatly decreased, the AI properly utilizes siege engines, AI troops stagger formation or for a line when engaging missile/onagers, AI tactically skirmish before engaging, etc. There has been a slew of fixes, but even before I updated, I had tons of fun and didn't run into any errors.
  
  I'm very excited to see what CA comes up with next.

  Show less

  1 out of 1 users found this user opinion helpful.

• 9 stars

  Amazing game

  by rgobio on November 21, 2007

  Pros: Endless play, excellent variety, different every time, great graphics, very realistic, easy to learn

  Cons: Cannot play all factions

  Summary: This is truly and amazing game. I bought it years ago and it is still my favourite. It is still challenging and fun to play and I don't think ...

  Read more

  Summary: This is truly and amazing game. I bought it years ago and it is still my favourite. It is still challenging and fun to play and I don't think I have played the same game twice.
  The realism is as accurate as it can get, especially considering the time it was released.
  It is also very easy to learn without having to read the manual for hours and the availiability of cheat codes enables one to surpass an obstacle without frustration.
  Cannot wait for Total War; ROME 2

  Show less

• 9 stars

  A new unique strategy game that makes all other war strategy games boring.

  by review_monster on December 18, 2006

  Pros: Excellent Gameplay and Camera Settings. Music and Sound are amazing. Unique factions with lots of units. Fun and challenging campaign map.

  Cons: Multiplayer is somewhat laggy and slow.

  Summary: A new unique strategy game that makes all other war strategy games boring with its excellent gameplay and camera settings, amazing music and sound, unique factions and lots of units.

  Summary: A new unique strategy game that makes all other war strategy games boring with its excellent gameplay and camera settings, amazing music and sound, unique factions and lots of units.

• 9 stars

  Easily One Of My Favorite War Strategy Games

  by bhartman33 on October 16, 2006

  Pros: Beautiful Graphics, Fairly Intuitive Gameplay

  Cons: A Few Bugs and Gameplay Problems

  Summary: This is, as I said, one of my favorite -- if not my favorite -- war strategy games. There are lots of units, the battles are intense and the graphics ...

  Read more

  Summary: This is, as I said, one of my favorite -- if not my favorite -- war strategy games. There are lots of units, the battles are intense and the graphics are astounding -- especially for the modest hardware requirements.
  
  Rome: Total War is fairly intuitive, but very complex. If you manage your own settlements, you'll have to figure out the whole economic structure (trade, roads, housing, etc.). It can get very involved, but basically, what you want is to keep your citizens happy, keep squalor down, and keep taxes as moderate as possible (so as to avoid a revolt).
  
  The best part of the game, though, is battles: You send your troops off to battle, and you control them one squad at a time, or all together. (You can't control individual soldiers, but when you're dealing with hundreds of soldiers at a time, that's not surprising.) You attack your enemies, and you can zoom in to see individual soldiers killing their opponents (albeit bloodlessly, unless you mod it). It's really spectacular to see battles on such a grand scale, rendered so beautifully and smoothly.
  
  Now, there are a few quirks:
  
  1) The AI can make your troops do stupid things (i.e., walking headlong into rivers when they can't fit over a bridge, rather than reforming to cross it).
  
  2) The Senate is ridiculous, and in my opinion, the game relies too heavily on it. Some of the missions the Senate sends you on aren't even close to reasonable, and if you refuse to do them, your standing with the Senate suffers, which impedes your progress in the game.
  
  The Barbarian Invasion expansion pack takes care of the Senate problem, but it's not quite accurate to call that an "expansion pack", either, because it makes your original games unplayable. It would be great to play the original game with the neutered Senate.

  Show less

• 8 stars

  Wars, killing, romans etc

  by bullseye bunse on April 25, 2006

  Pros: Clampingly addictive, 2 great aspects of play

  Cons: slightly unpolished and unpredictable

  Summary: I first saw this game at a friends house and somehow managed to watch my friend play this game for nearly 3 hours without getting bored. Within two weeks i ...

  Read more

  Summary: I first saw this game at a friends house and somehow managed to watch my friend play this game for nearly 3 hours without getting bored. Within two weeks i owned it myself and its great. The imperial campaign is hugely addictive and very tactical, wandering whether to tell the senate to get stuffed or not is also a quandry. Battles are great fubn to begin with but can get tiresome quickly, especially as the graphics re a bit sketchy and a few other errore (tiny bolt throwers cant get though demolished gate/wall sections what???)
  
  However overall this game is quality and fully deserves an 8/10. However this is not perfect and can be improved but well worth the £17.99 i paid for the gold edition

  Show less

• 10 stars

  Very tactical very good

  by bnbader on October 6, 2005

  Pros: bvggfgz\gfae

  Cons: gsadesg\easg

  Summary: great tactical game

  Summary: great tactical game

• 1 stars

  The Real Deal Behind the Idea that was Rome....

  by .spartan on April 15, 2005

  Pros: Concept, Graphics and Potential

  Cons: Game Play, Functionality and Support

  Summary: There are literally hundreds of errors in this game. Many of the true fans of the series, which spans about six years, have fixed a plethora of them for the ...

  Read more

  Summary: There are literally hundreds of errors in this game. Many of the true fans of the series, which spans about six years, have fixed a plethora of them for the company for free and yet others we can't unless we break the law.
  
  Further nearly all the modification projects being developed by fans have had to be developed with tools created by US when this game was promised to be the most mod friendly produced!!! One could also argue that they purposely made the game harder to mod to prevent the development fan projects.
  
  Additionally the official website support is a gargantuan world class failure of the first order. Joseph Stalin could not have asked for a better forum. You voice a concern about something and you get kick banned - what kind of support is that?? They must think we are all 10 and 11 year olds.
  
  The title was unfinished when it was put on the shelves in time for the Xmas rush last year - plain and simple.
  
  Then to add insult to injury the company put out a joke of a patch. Then the second patch which was well over two (2) months in the making due to its "extensive heavy testing" introduced yet new bugs!
  
  When we, the loyal fan community tried to get things fixed and even fix many issues for them for free the official response was to have our intelligence insulted as well as be ignored, placated, and suppressed in the official support forums and lastly to be IP blocked for legitimate reasonable posts.
  
  So I say, shame on the CA and shame on the truly uninformed people who post a 5 star rating for this game.
  (Note: My apologies to the person who drafted it I forgot your name. PM and I will add it to the byline. )
  
  A short list of community verified issues and bugs:
  
  A. BATTLEMAP
  
  (1) Tactical AI:
  * Suicidal generals: persistent reports of generals charging entire enemy armies without support.
  * Tactical AI still fails to take adequate measures in avoiding missile fire.
  * AI-controlled infantry sometimes maneuver like cavalry units when engaged; repeatedly charging/disengaging and running in circular paths through loose formations. If a feature, implemented poorly with units that have poor charge attributes.
  * AI-controlled units guarding the town centre sometimes fail to turn and face approaching enemy units.
  * AI siege attackers: AI-controlled reinforcements continue to pursue enemy units that have retreated behind city walls; AI siege armies do not always retreat after their siege equipment is lost.
  * AI-controlled units sometimes remain idle while being issued repeated movement orders; "move" or "move out" orders can be heard in an almost continuous loop. Occurs most commonly with AI formations preparing to attack over bridges.
  
  (2) Unit movement/path-finding:
  * Generally poor unit navigation in cities and around bridges: individual soldiers often break formation and become lost in streets/alleyways; soldiers still run into the water and drown during bridge maneuvers; bugged path-finding around Egyptian arches.
  * Scenery interaction: units often become stuck in narrow passages, between rocks/trees, in siege towers, and amongst massed formations; rare reports of soldiers walking through walls and closed gates; soldiers in siege towers and on ladders occasionally fall through solid wood.
  * "Ford" river crossings are sometimes impassable.
  
  (3) Unit functionality:
  * Horse-archers: reports from some players that bow-armed cavalry fail to fire on the run when skirmish mode is engaged. Possibly related to bugged animation cycles; units go through the motions of firing arrows but arrows are not (or rarely) released. Cantabrian circle still functions fully. Javelin-armed cavalry are unaffected.
  * Various problems associated with the use of multiple selected (ungrouped) units: aberrant maneuvers provoked on move command to several selected units; ignoring attack orders; incorrect processing of attack orders given to multiple unit selections comprising a mix of ammo-depleted and range-capable missile units (all engage in melee, despite the cursor highlight suggesting that ranged attack is available for some units).
  * Various problems associated with the use of grouped units: unselected units comply with commands issued to other units in the same group; grouped cavalry does not run at the speed of the slowest unit, but at that of the quickest (eg. grouped cataphractoi and horse-archers will run at horse-archer speed).
  * Phalanx mode: soldiers sometimes do not hold formation adequately in phalanx formation, when ordered to attack, soldiers shuffle around and break formation; phalanxes have trouble attacking uphill, even on gentle inclines.
  * Canine unit (wardog/warhound) "formations" cannot be selected or attacked, even when their handlers are defeated or routed off the battlefield.
  * Javelin infantry may become stuck and refuse further orders when ordered to launch missiles or change formation.
  * Hiding in long grass is possible on snowy maps and in places where no long grass is visible.
  * Bridge routs: occasional recurrences besides documented changes in v1.2.
  * AI-controlled reinforcements are sometimes inappropriately flagged "not yet arrived on battlefield" and cannot be selected/attacked.
  * Disappearing ladders: on rare occasions, siege ladders do not appear on the battle map if constructed in preparation for a siege assault.
  * Fighting on city walls: soldiers deployed on walls sometimes shuffle around and fall to their death on pressing "start battle"; units deployed on walls "fight to the death" even if their adversary is on the ground below; units "fighting to the death" sometimes do not fight back when engaged in melee.
  
  (4) Interface/graphics:
  * Minimal UI: cut-scenes reset map and card visibility settings if they were originally toggled off; upper edge of screen blocked from cursor interaction when buttons are toggled off; message tiles often obscure the left-most unit card when toggling cards off and on with active messages; sluggish/unreliable response to time control hotkeys when MUI is active.
  * Coastal tiles: frequent reports of large grey angular coastline tiles in the distance when fighting in coastal regions, relating to the presence of coastal structures such as ports/cities.
  * Victory screen: rare reports of victory screen failing to appear after all enemy units are defeated/routed.
  
  
  B. CAMPAIGN MAP
  
  (1) Strategic AI:
  * Unit construction: occasional reports of AI favoring mass construction of low quality troops early on in campaign games.
  * Naval units: rare reports of the AI conducting single-turn blockades frequently and indiscriminately.
  * AI incongruity on reload: reports that reloading a saved game "resets" AI priorities/flags provoking inconsistencies in diplomatic behavior and strategic planning.
  
  (2) Diplomacy:
  * Illogical AI behavior: requesting ceasefire with considerable concessions, only to attack next turn; refusing "unfair" diplomatic offers only to accept less advantageous agreements immediately afterwards.
  * Labile diplomacy: occasional reports of AI factions frequently signing and breaking treaties.
  * Protectorates: multiple problems related to protectorate system and status of ex-protectorates.
  
  (3) Characters:
  * Generals get checked twice for trait awards in manual battles.
  * "Scarred" trait: over rapid trait progression with repeated battles (GeneralHPLostRatioinBattle works in one way for manual battles, and differently for autocalc; manual battles without engagement always trigger battle1/battle1r).
  * Senate offices: ex-office trait is not registered following reappointment to a previously held office ((office)again triggers giving twice as needed).
  * Coward trait: is not given if the general avoids combat in battle (GeneralFoughtinCombat always returns true, causing trigger battle4 to never go off; trigger needs revision as if it worked properly the coward trait could by gained simply if the enemy retreats).
  * Rare reports of spies acquiring traits specific to generals.
  * Isolated reports of family members who die in battle described to have "died peacefully" if they weren't generals during the final battle.
  * Transferred retainers are sometimes not immediately deleted from the retinue of the donating character (corrected by closing and reopening the character description).
  * Character portraits: continue to age after death; portrait images can sometimes be replaced by inappropriate/non-portrait pictures.
  * Disappearing characters: issuing a move/attack command to selected units within a stack, then stopping them prior to reaching their intended destination (by pressing backspace) makes the general in the original stack disappear; losing the commanding general out of two (or more?) family members in a battle may lead to disappearance of the surviving character(s). In either situation the description for the disappeared character states "died peacefully".
  
  (4) Economics:
  * Paved roads sometimes do not provide the correct land trade bonuses.
  * Colossus wonder does not provide the correct naval trade bonus that its description states
  * Financial reports continue to calculate diplomatic tribute from ex-protectorates or when active protectorates are bankrupt and cannot provide the required diplomatic tribute (in either case no actual tribute is received for the turn).
  
  (5) Land/naval warfare:
  * Multiple-army sieges: only the attacking stack is represented in battlemap/autocalc during attacks on a settlement besieged by several stacks.
  * Naval warfare: battle outcome summaries do not correctly register the number of ships sunk in a naval engagement.
  * Elephants killed in battle by their riders are resurrected on returning to the campaign map.
  * A distorted coast-line battle map is loaded when fighting on the road east of the port of Sidon (the depressed terrain one grid south of the small hill).
  * Naval/land units sometimes become stuck at certain points in the map and cannot be selected (eg. fleets at the port of Corinth).
  * Lost siege supplies: if an attempt is made to relieve a besieged AI army prior to its supply time limit, it is sometimes incorrectly flagged to be at the extent of its supply and will "fight to the death" as reinforcements in the subsequent battle. This also means that the siege succeeds automatically if the relieving army is defeated before the reinforcements arrive.
  * Diplomats/spies/assassins are capable of blockading retreating armies.
  * Gates of Syracuse: isolated reports of permanent damage refractory to repairs/upgrades if opened by a spy during a siege.
  * If a rival faction enters a protectorate agreement under the player, any player-led sieges of that faction's settlements will be deactivated but the besieging armies will be unable to leave.
  * Rare reports of entire stacks teleporting to distant parts of the map when disembarking from a fleet.
  
  (6) Unit statistics/properties:
  * Praetorian Cohorts are available prior to Marius reforms.
  * Pharaoh's Guard flagged as carrying shields contrary to unit models.
  * Egyptian Desert Axemen have high armor attributes contrary to unit models.
  * Long-Shield Cavalry are not listed in the unit building files for Spain and Numidia.
  * Seleucid Cataphract Elephants construction requirements should also include "resource elephants".
  * Typing error in "descr_mercenaries.txt" variables for "unit merc horse archers" under "pool Armenia".
  * Bedouin Archers flagged as carrying shields contrary to unit models.
  * Illyrian Mercenaries have no bonus against chariots and elephants.
  * Thracian Armored General has the same statistics as the unarmored form.
  * Thracian Phalanx Pikemen are no longer recruitable after a specific barracks level.
  * Gallic Naked Fanatics can be recruited at a farming shrine.
  * Silver Shield Legionaries can be trained prior to Marius event.
  * Sarmatian Mercenaries do not suffer the "mount" penalty when facing elephants/camels.
  * Rebel Archer Warbands have blue Chosen Swordsman as unit commander.
  * Spain has blue generals.
  * Royal Pikemen use spears (and should use spears) but their name indicates otherwise.
  * Inconsistent mass values for certain units: Bastarnae Mercenaries, Bull Warriors, Silver Shield Legionaries and several other infantry units are assigned a mass value of "1" in contrast to comparable units (Bastarnae, Spartan warriors and various legionary units all have "1.3" in mass).
  
  (7) Interface/graphics:
  * Dysfunctional construction menu scroll-bar.
  * Game transit: reloading screen disappears for a few seconds when loading/exiting a battle; when playing in 16-bit mode, campaign map occasionally resets colors incorrectly when returning from battlemap.
  * Movement range highlights: some players report loss of the green terrain highlight indicators for unit movement after patching to 1.2.
  * Snowy winter bug: some players report experiencing the snowy winter effect in all regions (including equatorial zones).
  * Settlement details window: if the building/unit information screen (on the right side) is closed while the settlement details summary is open, the latter resets automatically to a "default" settlement.
  
  
  Note: I have given it a one (1) only to counter balance the near perfect rating. All political issues aside, my personal opinion is this is really a seven (7) game and when fixed an eight (8) easy. If you toss in some real customer support and a multiplayer campaign then a nine (9). For a 10 score there would have to be a FULL set of dev tools for the modification community.
  -Spartan

  Show less

  2 out of 6 users found this user opinion helpful.

• 1 stars

  What's Under The Bonnet...

  by carousel--2008 on April 15, 2005

  Pros: 30 minutes of fun, months of campaigning

  Cons: too many to name in 10 words

  Summary: Don't be fooled here guys. It may promise the world but what it delivers is a little bit of antartica - awesome to look at but you don't ...

  Read more

  Summary: Don't be fooled here guys. It may promise the world but what it delivers is a little bit of antartica - awesome to look at but you don't wanna hang around for long. I was pleased with this game for a long time then 2 things happened a) I joined the .com forum and found out that the admins and customer support are about as friendly as Mr T. on an aeroplane and b) this game is held together by chewing gum and sticky tape. Not only to get a 'somewhat' functioning game will you have to download two patches the moment you install but you'll also need to wait and see if if CA decide to patch up the bugs that the two patches create! Currently it isnt looking good, they've got their fingers in their ears and are shouting 'nananananana'. I'm not affiliated with this site in any way but head over to total war center to find out whats really going on lately.
  
  Get your fingers out your ears CA!

  Show less

  1 out of 5 users found this user opinion helpful.

See pricing