This or Aggressors: Ancient Rome ?

[SmiteMeister]

Besides the obvious differences in one game using tiles civ 4 style with individual units, and the other using regions with armies?

[Testudo]

get both, both are real good games!

[zakblood]

must agree on that, was on the alpha and beta of both, and both developers are really good, so will carry on with a passion supporting the games for many years to come

[Templer]

It becomes a little bit much 'Rome' now...

[n0kn0k]

Aggressors: Ancient Rome for sure, the developer is brilliant, but I'm a bit biased as an Aggressors veteran. Easy to learn, hard to master. I've tried a few of Ageod's games over the years, mainly their Roman ones, but they just aren't my cup of tea. You get thrown in the deep. I gave Field of Glory Empires a shot as a Rome fan, watched the tutorials, but it was more of the same so I refunded under 2 hours. I wish them the best though, because I like the integrated part with FoG2.

[FlashXAron ☕ (Alex)]

Have all three Rome games ...

The Paradox game is the worst ...

So I prefer this one , because that I could play the battles and I like the building system with over 400 different items ...

but still missing here a lot to do, but hope that we will get add ons that we could do more (research, senate, diplomacy, trade) ...

as this game is new , it is logic that I like it more.

Not sure about the MP part , as I only play such games with my brother, but he refused to buy this , after he hated the last two Rome games , which has been released.

[gwgardner]

I also playtested both games. You can't go wrong with either or both. They are completely different in play, so BOTH is the best bet.

[Crispin]

Yeah definitely both.

[dbemont]

Up until now, Aggressors was my favorite historical game, of any time period. It has a few things with the UI that strike me as unwieldy, but the gameplay is outstanding, and, in effect, two games in one since you can play either the historical map or a random map.

My first impression of Empires is extremely positive.

However, a good question to ask yourself, if you are going to pick one or the other: How do you feel about the rather ahistorical portrayal in pretty much all such games, that you always want to expand, and that becoming a blob gradually transforms you into an invincible force? Historically, almost all expansion led to serious internal problems, in the not so long run. But up until now, game developers have assumed, I think, that fun = military conquests, and what comes later would not be fun.

This game, expansion for many factions is vastly less of a problem than keeping it all together following the expansion. Aggressors is more in the tradition of larger is better. So the choice is up to you.

[Thurgret]

Totally different games - I have Aggressors over on GOG and admittedly struggled to get into it, though I can certainly see the appeal. This one takes a slightly more historical approach and I find it a bit more intuitive, consequently.

[Crispin]

My first game with the Gothones, I ran wild and conquered everything around me. Then after my second leader died it was civil war. And I constantly struggled with decadence and loyalty. Still fun but definitely not the way to go next time.

[Vasquez]

Both

[jnpoint]

If you have FoG 2 I would say this game. Right now I like this the most, but I have also played Agressors Ancient Rome a lot, because that is also a good game. So it's quite hard to give any advice, but FoG Empires with FoG 2 is the best choice if you ask me.

[BroJo]

If you like Civ, you will love Aggressors. Unfortunately, I can't think of a game to compare Empire to. It's so unique.

[SmiteMeister]

Thank you for your many good answers. This is not the easiest choice since i feel both games are itching the very same scratch. dammit! :D Maybe the choice comes down to which of the games that does what they are trying to do best?

[BATTLEMODE]

Both. This is a grand strategy game, and Aggressors is Civ-style 4x that blows it's inspiration out of the water. And I feel a bit sad even describing it as a Civ-clone because that just doesn't do it justice at all, it's far superior in it's depth of game mechanics and it's AI is great as well, very rare for a 4x game.