>>2362184
It’s the only mediterranean-wide Bronze Age game that isn’t a mod or some totally low budget shit so you have no choice but to play it if you like the era.

>>2362184
>Pros
Environments look pretty
It's your only choice if you are looking for modern Late Bronze Age games and it likely will stay that way for a while
Resource-based economy is kinda neat but you'll be spamming trade agreements a lot
Lots of customization
>Cons
Rome 2 fork so battles, animations and physics suck major ass
Got rushed out the door and is full of disjoined, half-baked minigames like the court or legacy systems
Chariot archers suck ass, foot archers and two-handed axemen are OP and trivialize the game
Faction distribution makes no fucking sense (Seti, Merneptah and Tausret are separate factions, as one example among many)

>>2363576
They really could have done everything associated with the Royal Court better. That one screen feels incredibly disassociated with everything going on the campaign map. You can be called pharaoh or wanax or whatever but have functionally 0 sway over anyone associated with that, so it's no different from any other TW blobbing strategy when you're playing as a kingdom instead of a family competing for a royal title

If they added some complexity with that aspect, it would be a near perfect TW game. I'll still play it occasionally because I really like the bronze age setting, but they really dropped the ball there. On the positive side, I definitely think the resources is a step in the right direction

>>2363576
>>2363905
trying to make the same system simultaneously represent
>the Egyptian and Hittite royal courts
>the jockeying for prestige and authority between Ashur and Babylon
>the fucking Trojan War
was extremely silly

>>2363914
Even when it was just Egypt and Hatti in the original game it still made no sense, they put no thought into it at all. Typical of CA's average "mechanics", they have nothing to do with the actual game and only serve to take up the player's time.

>>2362198
What's wrong with chariots of war or spartan? Hell, legion.

>>2362184
There's definitely something missing with unit progression. Basically, every faction has weaker versions of every unit type they have stronger versions of, this means that you never unlock more unit types so you'll be using the same army on turn 10 as you will on turn 100 besides having higher stats.

>>2363905
It's slightly better than Rome2/Attila era system where you forgot embezzle button existed most of the time and sometimes had to spend some points to get someone married.
On the other hand it's not that much better and you are forced to interact with it more.

>>2363988
If the game was an actual full scale antiquity game maybe we'd get to see some actual progression but that's impossible when the game takes place over the span of twenty years or so.
I stand by the notion that a late bronze age to bronze age collapse to iron age game would have been the best thing they could have done with the setting. You get tech advancements, new unit types, a bigger map and sweeping changes in tactics to keep things interesting.

>>2364027
>as you advance up the tech tree, units get more and more expensive in terms of bronze
>if the world spends too long in Crisis random events can happen that convert bronze producing settlements into a different resource
>if the world enters Collapse it goes from random chance to a guarantee that bronze production will grind to a halt
>when that happens you have to ration whatever bronze you have left and then either switch to low tier units that only consume food, or tech up to be able to produce iron units, which are overall not as good as bronze units but vastly cheaper to produce
would have been so kino

>>2364027
>>2364050
that would have been cool, Attilla-esque design to the game where you have to SOMETIMES sacrifice X for Y as the game goes on.