Venisse: Hegemony Rome – The Rise Of Caeasar

I’ve been waiting for Hegemony Rome for a long time. Longbow’s previous Hegemony game has endured long in the memory, even if I haven’t played it for years now. Boasting an enormous map with seamless zooming from a broad imperial view to the details of the battlefield, it’s the kind of RTS that I can get behind. The grand scale means that decisions rarely have to be made quickly and you won’t need the world’s fastest fingers to succeed – expect to plan around seasons rather than split seconds. When battle is joined, however, the pace and your pulse may quicken if you’re a map-happy sort of person like myself.

The game is out now, following a stint in Early Access, and contains four campaigns based on Caesar’s Commentarii de Bello Gallico. There’s also a sandbox mode, with more than a dozen playable factions, taking place on a map over a million square kilometers in size. That’s bigger than all the GTA games put together but smaller than any game set in space.

I haven’t played at all yet and am glad I resisted Early Access temptations. Time to get stuck in.


  1. BTAxis says:

    The supply system is more sophisticated this time around, but less fun in my opinion. There’s always one optimal way to configure your network, and once you’ve hooked it up there’s no real reason to think about it ever again (unless the enemy breaks it).

  2. Gap Gen says:

    I think you mean Caeaeaeaeaeasar.

    • hewhosayszonk says:

      Haiaiail Caeaeaeasar!

      • Gap Gen says:

        Caeaeaeaeaeasar is dead! Long live Augustusustugustugs!

        • TWChristine says:

          At first I thought you guys might’ve been singing that AC/DC song, but remembering that’s not how it goes, I have no idea what you guys are doing. Which isn’t exactly new, so..

          • Gap Gen says:

            That would be an awesome (and difficult to pronounce) song. Also check the post title.

  3. Firkragg says:

    In the final sandbox mode (if it isn’t in already), will the factions fight each other for control over cities? The lack of this was the only thing I missed from Hegemony: Philip of Macedon.

    • Cheese says:

      I’m pretty sure I saw the developers say that the AI would actually try to capture cities and be more active than in the previous one.

  4. rustybroomhandle says:

    Heeere she comes now with her hegemony…

  5. SanguineAngel says:

    I’ll take it

  6. DrollRemark says:

    That’s a launch trailer? It tells me, as someone unfamiliar with the game, almost nothing about what it actually does.

  7. JB says:

    This is good timing, I’ve just been getting back into Hegemony. Nice one, Longbow!

  8. Hunchback says:

    I played a bit of it, really briefly, but i found 1 thing quite … odd, or dunno what to call it – Units take quite some space on the map, they are kinda as large as a 1/2 of a city or so, and yet they are treated as 1 unit in combat. However, the map has a lot of spaces that are quite narrow and you can’t even fit 1 unit/legion, let alone your army made of at least 5-6 units (as suggested by the tutorial). So they kinda bog down and take forever to get through some spots.
    This might be designed specifically to be like that, but i wonder where/when can you actually use tactical unit placement, like you would in a Total War game? Cause in my brief experience, units would mostly rush into melee and quite fast at that, leaving very little space for tactical placement, flanking and whatnot. Maybe this is just not a feature of this game, since the combat happens on the same pas as everything else?

    Other than that, the game looks great, i wish i had more time to spend with it. There’s SO many things coming out right now, that it’s crazy. And tomorrow one of my most favourite games ever gets it’s 5th installment, which i simply can’t miss and i believe i’ll dump most of my game time in the future weeks into it.

    • farrier says:

      I’ve played the first game, and using pause can help you make it tactical. It is a little too fast, relatively, once units come together if you’re trying to issue orders to them in real-time. But pausing and then using the formation dragging abilities, it worked fairly well. You can establish a line and then flank with faster troops and cavalry, draw them into pockets, and so on. I also had a lot more success if, when I saw the enemy advancing, I just picked my terrain and stood my ground — gave me a bit more time to get organized, and is more realistic.

      You really have to treat it as being scaled, that each unit represents something much larger, so when you clash 5v5 units in a space that’s actually dozens of square kilometers, that’s actually a fair abstract representation of battles at that time.

      I much prefer the combat and even strategy of Total War games, but the overall package of the Hegemony games (or at least Gold) is pretty solid if you want something a little different. Moving armies in real-time makes the game feel more organic to me, even with the abstraction of many things.

      • Hunchback says:

        One thing that i REALLY dislike in all the TW games is the army movement on the strategy map – IMO it’s WAAAY too “fast”, as in, they cover really way too much ground in 1 turn. I know that turns are sometimes whole seasons, but it makes the whole game play … badly. You can sometimes have your castles invaded in two turns, out of nowhere cause armies come out of the fog of war and go through your territory so fast that you can’t react and plan. So what all that does for me is ruin the whole thing with moving your army and positioning it over the map. What i usually do is, sadly, build the stack of doom and lunch it vs the enemy, hoping the AI will go for my army instead of around it and capping my cities. It usually works, but it’s really not satisfactory.
        I hope future TW games would make it so that the army movement is slower, and you have more time to prepare, try to influence where a battle will happen etc, instead of fighting at cities 90% of the time.

        • SillyWizard says:

          Yes, nobody should have to deal with unexpected enemy forces in a strategy game….

          • Zenicetus says:

            It’s not about unexpected enemy forces. It’s about the ratio of siege battles vs. open field battles in the game.

        • Zenicetus says:

          I know what you mean. It’s far from the only problem with TW games, but it’s annoying that CA keeps saying they know people want more open-field battles and fewer sieges, and yet they keep coming up with these designs that make open field battles less likely. It’s too easy to leapfrog from city to city.

          In the current Rome 2 game, it’s mostly a result of the way they decided to go with 1 turn per year, but even with that design they could have slowed the army movement. There may be some mods now that address this. I haven’t kept up too well with the mod scene.

  9. deadfolk says:

    Edit: Reply fail.