Welcome to Rome: Total War Heaven
Downloads Home
Best Files
Review Guidelines
Main site
Code of Conduct

Advanced Search
Battle Videos
New Releases
New Reviews
New Comments

Submit File
Browse Categories
New Files

Downloads Home » Battle Videos » Brave stand against 2 lamers...

Download File Post Review Post Comment

Brave stand against 2 lamers...

Author File Description
File Details
Number of Players: 4
Player 1's Name: Ryan-H
Player 2's Name: Forgot
Player 3's Name: Forgot
Player 4's Name: HG_Foxhound
# of Denarii: 50000
The 2 selucids attacked my allie soon as the game started, I chose not to risk sending all my cav as it would be futile. He was beat without difficulty.

Then they both turned to me, I was prepared, and stood well against them both, but eventually thier ellephants would cause my army to route.

Watch this, its fun!
AuthorComments & Reviews   ( All | Comments Only | Reviews Only )
First off, a disclaimer - this game is one of the best 2v2 games I've ever watched, showcases excellent lessons of what to do and what not to do in a team game. Had this game been posted by the winners, I would have given it a 5, no hesitations. But the abysmal performance of the player posting it, and far more importantly, his lack of grace at taking a defeat that was completely legitimate, forced me to give this rating.

Rating: 2
Think you that this is a close game? No, it wasn't close. Rome: Total War said this was a crushing defeat, and it was. It was over the moment the two Roman players decided not to deploy together.

One of the Seleucid players had all cavalry. Had this been a normal 1v1 game, I would have agreed that he was a lamer, but this was a 2v2, and his ally had all infantry and archers. That means they had teamwork. They had both chosen the Seleucids, and to avoid confusion, they had agreed on which player plays which units. I am always impressed when people plan their games with their teammate in the army selection stage, and I was impressed with these two.

The same, unfortunately, cannot be said for FoxHound and his ally. YOU HAVE VIOLATED THE FIRST RULE OF A 2V2 GAME - DEPLOY TOGETHER. Perhaps your opponent was an asshole and did not deploy to the edge when you asked me to - but the fact remains that, you, being unburdened with onagers, could have tried to deploy near your ally. You could have reached him earlier than your enemies. Rushing can be a potent tactic even in team games, but a rush has much less of a chance if the defenders are deployed together and prepared. I've seen your post in the forums, and you accused them for being lamers because they rushed and ganged up on your ally. You accused them of being n00bs. I say that they are both better than you are, that they had shown tactical brilliance which you lacked. Your defeat was your own fault, and no one elses. Everyone in the game had done better than you; though your ally had a lower kill count than you, he was facing two fresh armies; you were facing two wounded foes with a fresh army.

You said you could not risk sending your cav. But had you deployed near your ally, you would be sending your entire army, not just your cav. That is an action which is NEVER futile.

You think you had done well? You think you were just nearly defeated? I call this AN ABYSSMAL PERFORMANCE. I would have been EXTREMELY surprised had the Seleucid players lost, and EXTREMELY angry at the injustice.

I didn't give it a 1 because, for all your faults, it made a good watch, and an excellent lesson in how to carry out a team game and a rush.

Additional Comments:
First rule of team games: DEPLOY TOGETHER. I've lost EVERY single team game in which my ally didn't deploy with me. You are the perfect example of what I call a stupid ally. No matter how good you may be in 1v1, you are totally incompetent in 2v2.

Feel free to contact me by Messenger if you dispute this review.

- Firefox@The RTWH Review Team

[Edited on 05/09/05 @ 10:16 AM]

echowinds Holy, that's a great review. Kudos to you.
File Author
I prefer 1 v 1's becuase u cant be a burden, or your ally can't be a burden on you. So I dont care, that was just 1 of my bad games. I have played and won lots of 2 v 2's with style. ( for the record)

If I had another chance to play that knowing that they would rush, well I would know what to do and we would win.
Rookierookie If you prefer 1v1, then by all means play those, don't be a burden to your ally.

And please don't give me the stuff about "knowing that they will..." - you are NOT supposed to know exactly your opponents' tactics beforehand; it's part of the skill guessing.
Rating: 1

This game was amazing. But not amazing as in "Wow! That was a great stand against two good players!" but amazing as in "Wow, that sucked bigtime. He didn't even send help to his ally at all!" amazing.

First mistake: You didn't deploy together. By his deploying 'language', if you will (moving his cavalry to your border), I guess you didn't accept but rather just stood there. The only deployment changes you made from the computer was moving your archers slightly forward.

Second mistake: You let your ally get trampled. By the time you actually sent some help, over half his units were routing and elephants were breaking up the rest. Not only that, but you only sent four cavalry units, as if they'd do anything.

Halfway there, you at least managed to realise it was a lost cause and retreated them.

Third mistake: When your enemies were lining up to attack, you sent out 3 Praetorian Cavalry at 3 Militia Cavalry. First off, that's overkill. Secondly, you didn't take advantage of your projected units by slamming them into the enemy, who had no cavalry nearby to support and didn't attempt to move to block you in case you flanked him. After you had hit the pikemen you could just retreat without harm.

Fourth mistake: In the archer duel, you focused on his archers while he focused on your Urban Cohorts. I honestly don't know why you did that when you could have annhialated the pikemen (when you could have before, too) fairly quickly, thereby severly weakening your infantry-archers enemy.

As well as that, you didn't put your Urbans into Testudo while he was firing at you. I fail to see the slightest bit of logic in this decision, if you knew there was such thing as testudo at all.

Additional Comments:

This was a game which can only be described as crap... or worse. It wasn't even entertaining, they quickly and efficiently destroyed your ally, chasing him from the field, then decimated several Urban Cohorts in the archer 'duel'. They proceeded to slam into you with excellent co-ordination, the only amusing bit in the game. You routed a few weakened units, yet for some reason, kept four cavalry units chasing archers instead of flanking.

Listen, and listen well: if you can't play 2 v 2 games with any competance, don't play at all.

Post Review Post Comment

HGDL v0.8.0

Forum Username:


Create a new account
Forgot password?
Favorites: [Who?]0
Size:92.29 KB