You Were Right (For the most part) I am sorry

To all that posted against ROR, I am sorry, YOU Were Right!!!

While I still believe to give them a chance and wait to see how bad was ROR, you guys saw it earlier, and it took me almost 2 months to see. ROR Sucks and it is a waste of my money.

I feel cheated, feel like I pay twice for AOE 1… Keep in mind I have every DLC for AOE 2, and 3, in fact, I got 2 DLCs for A O E 3 that I have not even played yet…Plus I have all 4 games on my computer, ROR is the worst DLC, But I would not be a fool again


If it wasn’t for Costume Campaigns, I would stop playing this game, however, I am giving a second look back to Rise of Nations, maybe there I would not feel taken advantage of,

Once again

You Were Right about ROR, IT SUCKS.



Does anyone else feel cheated???

1 Like

Genuine question - what sucked about ROR?

Disclaimer: only bought it for Roman civ in aoe2 and have 0 idea on how other things are going.


I loved RoR. The mod support and all the assets it added were wonderful for Rome at War. I was never actually interested in the content itself, I just didn’t think highly of AoE1 before, and they didn’t actually change the game in the way it needed to be changed. As far as I’m concerned, they needed to “AoE2-ize” it for RoR to actually be fun.


Many people expected unique units for AoE1 civs (not me), or OG campaigns (yes me) or AoE2 Roman campaigns (yes me). FE was clear that none of those things was gonna be part of the game, though, so I don’t know why people feel cheated


I’m hoping to get better balance and a less punishing AI (it was fixed once before; they can fix it again), but other than that, I’m very interested in playing the mode when it’s a bit more polished.


It’s AoE1 but actually playable, and with 3 campaigns on the same quality level as AoE2. I am happy with my purchase.


If I loved AOE1 (actually I don’t even like it; stopped playing in the middle of a campaign many years ago and never even thought about getting back to it) maybe I would like this DLC. I mean, there are clear improvements, especially regarding those so called quality of life stuff.

But if you expected AOE2 with AOE1 civilizations (like I did) you will end up disappointed. I played the campaigns because I appreciate AOE2 storytelling and voiced dialogue, and I’m curious to play the campaigns they will bring from the original game but that’s all. The game in general is just too awakward compared to AOE2 (and 3) and not for my taste.


It feel more like a DLC for AOE1, not for 2.

I didn’t see too much difference.

The gates were nice, but paying for something so similar to the AOE1 made me feel cheated.

If it was DLC or an update for AOE1 it would be ok, but not for AOE2.

But I am glad tha other people like it, I just don’t see it.

IMO… if you already had AoE1 DE, RoR is a waste of money, total rip off

But since I never bought AoE 1 DE, I got basically the same game, a little cheaper, with a little better gameplay and support … and also you get a new civ for both AoE1 and AoE2


For me it was just an update or DLC foe AOE 1, not for 2, that is why I feel cheated.

Some improvements ok, but not enough to justify the sale.

I get better campaigns from the Mod lobby.

I don’t mind paying for something good or even decent as I have done in the past, but ROR did not mesure up for me.

This is my point, I have all 4 games with all the DLCs for 2 and 3, but the ROR seems to my like a gimmick to get some more player into AOE1…

1 Like

That is a good reason to like it. I don’t have Roma at War, but I am glad that something positive comes from there.

But as you also point out they did not change the game enough and that is my major issue. It was just a lightly modified AOE1, just an update.

Your costume map is 10 times better than ROR and is available for free. So if ROR was free I would have no issue, but paying for the same game twice seems to me wrong.


But why buy it? We all knew it wouldn’t have UU’'s or new campaigns.

Why buy it???

I was hoping for more…

We had too many opinions… over 100 discussions and over 3000 comments about it… I read them all and they contradict each other, even when made by the same people…how to decipher what was correct???

Maybe you and others knew, but I did not believe you, That is why the title of this discussion.

I just can not believe the Developers would make us pay twice for the same title. (With some minor changes ) I believe in the goodness of people… I was wrong this time.

It was in the official page. That Romans were gonna be only unranked (which they latter changed), that they were gonna add three campaigns for AoE1 and that there was not gonna be crossplay. I do remember reading here, in r/aoe2 and the official twitter that OG campaigns weren’t gonna be ported.


Yeah, I never expected them to thread the needle of satisfying even a plurality of players who wanted wildly different things from the project, which IMO made RoR very questionable relative to a traditional DLC. There’s a reason RoR has little more than half the positive ratings percentage of any previous DLC.

Wouldn’t quite put it that way, no, because I predicted the outcomes of RoR pretty much from the start - very little to offer for AoE2 players, but a Trojan Horse full of bugs whether you got it or not. I am resentful that the base game had to bear the costs in lost quality and content of this glorified mod, but it is what it is.

Interesting take. I might feel similarly if RoR offered any benefit to scenario design, but none of the RoR graphics are accessible on the Age2 side. As far as gameplay though, I agree - I played AoE1 back in the day (before 2), and the combat/balance/variety aspects of it are just so much worse than AoE2 that I don’t think I could ever get back into it, despite finding the time period very interesting. Overall I’m definitely in the camp of RoR needing to be much more like AoE2 to justify the port (perhaps with a “traditional” game mode for those who wanted the OG feel).

FE was mostly unclear about most of these things for far too long. Like the announcement of not including original campaigns was put out in a single tweet very close to release, so if you missed that, you were out of luck. If you were hyper-connected, like many of us are, via reddit, YT, this forum, and tracking official announcements, you would have had most of the info, but many more casual buyers did not (much of the relevant info was also not listed on the steam page). RoR was different enough from any previous DLC that there was an obvious need to set expectations clearly, early, and repeatedly.


Well, it did for me, I just grabbed them all and put them into R@W.


I did read several comments on that effect, I just was thinking that people were just being negative… of course, I was wrong. I believe in trying the DLC first before commenting, like in the previous ones where some negative comments were negative but they were ok, however, this time all of those comments were correct.

I just won’t make that mistake again, I will limit myself to the costume-made campaigns and continue working on my map.

I just paid 15.00 just to be able to add the Roman castle to my scenarios.