Does Creative Assembly Visit Here?

[Ironfist]

I love this game. I have just finished the complete campaign on expert level. I only ever play as the English but really enjoy it.

There are some suggestions however that I would like to make to Creative Assembly for the next game. Feel free to flame or add your thoughts too.

Battles

They should add more to the story line and feel of 'being in history' by perhaps adopting the following;

1. prebattle.
A quick overview. ie Sire, the enemy has 2054 troops and spies report that they include a number of Byzantine infantry and Naptha throwers.

Our forces number 1200 but include 500 archers armed to gold level. The mens moral is good and we have Generals Fitzgerald and Wellwater with us on the field.

2. post battle
Again we should get more than the statistics screen. How about a comment on the battle such as;
Sire a great victory, the bards are already writing songs and this day will be long remembered. We have killed more than 50% of the enemy including the enemy Generals Rathmore and Killmari. We have only to capture the enemy fortress/stronghold/citadel to conquer the territory
or
Sire, this defeat is a disaster, we have lost more than 50% of our men and our remaining forces have fled. We must retreat now to territory.

Battle History
It would be neat if every 50 or a hundred years the game listed your greatest victories and defeats and gave you an update on how you are viewed by your people.

That way one of the victory conditions could be to become the greatest General in Europe.

Lastly PLEASE, PLEASE can the developers make the next game also in Europe but expand on the English / French / German theme around the 100 years war.

There is a ton of scope for expanding the game in Western Europe. The whole middle east thing is a bore (for me) only very slightly improved by the ability to carry our crusades.

Your thoughts?

[KukriKhan]

The developers DO visit here Ironfist, solving problems and getting feedback. Your ideas are welcome...as are you.

Welcome to theOrg. http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/wave.gif

[Gregoshi]

I like those ideas Ironfist. However, I wonder how many players would listen to it a few times and then just click continue to skip it later. As long as there is useful information presented it might have lasting value, and your suggestion does have useful information.

We discussed it in another thread, but I'd also like to see a historical timeline of your game: births/deaths/crownings of kings, alliances, wars, faction eliminations, etc.

All that being said, CA could probably fill a filing cabinet with all the suggestions players have. http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/dizzy.gif

[Dark Angel]

I like the idea of pre-battle information. when a turn starts with multiple battles it is somtimes hard to remember how well defended enemy provinces were. Also depending on how good your spies are it would be helpful when selecting your forces from available reinforcements. ie they have mostly archers so pick a large vcavalry force etc.

Could also be interesting where spies get information wrong

Best wishes

[Lehesu]

I play SP a lot and my biggest problem is the lack of unit coverage in skirmish. A few units, such as highlanders and Almughavars are left out and the Varangian Guard is unplayable in Late. Not to mention the Mongols The real fun in custom is creating your own battles and it isn't really all that fun when you can't create battles such as Highlanders v. Mongols or other unit match ups. It would also be interesting if you could give units negative valor and save money, just to recreate a battle that has an idiot for a general. http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/dizzy.gif

[Ironfist]

Hi, I thought about players just clicking to get rid of the pre-battle data. At the beginning I took command of every battle but by half way thru my second 'start-to-finish' campaign I was only commanding the major ones where I needed to take charge to ensure victory.

I would like to see less battles but more larger ones. After playing 3 campaigns all the way thru my largest ever battle was 6000 v 6000 and it was very, very good. re-inforcements kept coming and coming and I had to really concentrate for the hour or so it took to win.

I'd also like to see more detail on the terrain, ie bogs, marsh, fog, mist, mud, etc For example when it rains I dont see a notable slow down in a cavalry charge.

So I'd like it if you needed at least say a 1000 men to make a battle (of std strength) or 500 men at gold strength. That would reduce the number of battles and 'force' more concentration on building up resources, etc.

I would also like to see seasons instead of years and have the effects of the seasons. ie a bad winter could mean starvation. There was a game like that a few years back where you fought to gain control of England and like MTW you had resources and then real time battles but I cannot for the life of me remember what it was called.

Overall I'd like to see the scale of the strategic game reduced and given more detail but the scale of the battles enlarged and given more detail.

Just my 4c....(actually 4p since I am English)

[GilJaysmith]

Mornin',

Ideas noted, thank you. Pre-battle screen in particular seems worthwhile.

Gil ~ CA

[Dark Angel]

Greetings GilJaysmith

Its a great game thanks.

How about in the pre-battle having some choice for the defender as to type of battle field to defend (within confinds of allowable terrain for province) or alowing the attacker to choose the season for the attach as well as the date for weather.

Sorry but you programmers are going to be kept very busy by us players suggesting improvements (however impossible or unplayable they are)

I would like to see some individuality for the generals and troops ie beards and mostaches http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/joker.gif different coloured horses http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/joker.gif

Sorry

I expect others can come up with even more rediculous mods (only joking&#33http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/wink.gif

Best wishes

[Ironfist]

GilJaysmith, I cant tell you how great it is when one of the programmers turns up at a message board and shows that he has taken an interest. Its really appreciated - thank you.

If you could chose your battle ground or season that would also be very cool indeed. But I sense we are asking a little too much...

[Qilue]

Since there seems to a receptive audience for suggestions. http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/smile.gif

1. Crusades and Jihads. Give them a fixed lifespan (say 16 years). In one campaign, the french had this one crusade (bound for Anitoch) wandering around europe for about 80years and he had long since taken that province using his regular armies.

1a. AI factions being subject to the same movement restrictions with crusades and jihads as the human player.

1b. No retreat allowed for crusades and jihads. They are supposed to be fanatical yet they run away if there's even a slight chance of losing.

1c. Chapter house changed to a unique building and only 1 crusade/jihad marker allowed per faction.

2. Damage/destruction of buildings when invading. An option to turn this off? I marched into an unguarded province with 20 royal knights thinking they wouldn't do too much damage. 8 buildings were destroyed and 6 were damaged.

3. Diplomacy. Yes I know there's been a lot of harping on this, but my suggestion is different. Rulers sulking when they start a war and then lose badly. They then refuse all ceasefire requests with the only option being to wipe them out. Is there any way to change this behavior?

4. Pope. He should be subject to excommunication or some other form of penality (removal of excommunication powers?) if he invades a catholic province.

5. Modifying some of the coordinates of castles and origin point so armies and agent don't all pile together.

6. Change the colour of German territory on the mini-map so it can be distinguished from unknown territory.

That's all I can think of right now.

[Brother Derfel]

Quote[/b] (Qilue @ Dec. 01 2002,09:54)]1. Crusades and Jihads. Give them a fixed lifespan (say 16 years). In one campaign, the french had this one crusade (bound for Anitoch) wandering around europe for about 80years and he had long since taken that province using his regular armies.
Was this before the Mod?
Cos my experience is that if you take a Crusade province with your regular armie then the crusade is broken up and no longer exists. I fail to see how the that one could have stayed going http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/confused.gif

[Qilue]

I'm not using any mods apart from the patch. It may have just been a random glitch with that one, but the suggestion stands, 80years is a wee bit long for a crusade.

2a. Except in those cases where it's a unique building already owned or a culture specific building (such as mosques and churches).

[Dark Angel]

I also noticed on the minimap playing England that units were the same colour as Polish who I was fighting. Any way of always having own as one colour and enemy another allies another etc

Thanks and Best wishes

[Balrog]

Some of my ideas/suggestions =-)

- Generals and other units shouldn't live forever. They should have a life span like the king. When they die however their stats CAN increase the stats of an upcoming general up to the maximum of the dead general to show that he trained his subordinate to replace him. The same would be true for other units emissaries, bishops, princess etc. But in the case of an assassin there would be no replacement as he works alone. Princesses, although become retired at a certain age could also die from natural causes.

- Keep track of all married woman in game and their names on their husbands character screen so it is possible to see, in cases of adultery, exactly who is being betrayed. This would also effect the mens loyalty in times where the affair is uncovered. This does not necessarily mean that in cases of adultery it is always with another general's wife.

- More vices and virtues and tie them in more with the game play. It seems this has already been done to a good degree but I want more of this =-)

- Make it possible to make an entourage of spy units: a princess, a couple of assassins and a spy should be more able to survive and work together than they would be if left to their own. This would work like an army; you would stack them on top of each other and move them around as one unit. This would also mean that they could be caught as a group.

- Failed spy/assassination missions should have political feedback. A country should declare war on you. (if they were able to trace it back to you, and you should be able to do the same.)

- Better diplomacy game. (take straight from Civilization 3) rights of passage, shared line of sight, alliance, trade embargo, resource trades, special unit and weapons purchases, monetary gifts etc. All accessible from your throne room but only with an emissary tasked on the other king. Deals made in this way would depend on the difference of influence between both kings and their acumen ratings as to who comes away with the better deal. Multiple dealings like this could raise leaders influence and acumen skills as well.

- I also like the seasons based turn system. Simply shortening a turn to a season but keeping all build times the same would be a nice addition and allow for all seasons during battles. Snow would slow down troops tremendously. Another point worth making but is definitely obvious is the fact that it doesn't snow in some parts of the world. (i.e. the desert) The only problem would be with unit movement from turn to turn. (See next idea)

- Unit movement should be based on distance (per season, and in winter where it snows would severely slow down the units) The movement rate of an army should also be limited to the slowest unit that is stacked with it. (This also ties in with the next idea) This should also apply to naval units. When moving a unit a special highlight would show how far the unit could move this season. Once the unit is clicked and held in hand a green circle would show the limit of how far it could move this season. The circle could be extended depending on the mode of travel such as over trade routes.

- Divide provinces into counties. (or relevant term for the civilization) This would effectively mean more lands to build on, and conquer but would be more fun and realistic IMO. Each county would have its own mayor and would otherwise act as a province does now. One county would be the county seat and act as the governor for the entire province.

- the option to attack at night or during a full moon. Or some other way to do a sneak attack.

- A way to look at your province's battle map when not in a battle, and have it show all buildings and military up to date. It could be like an RTS view of your province with people running around farming and living their lives. Higher population would have more housing and roads. Each unit on the game board would be represented in the real time view. (Princess, emissary etc.) You should also be able to do this with other's provinces that you would normally be allowed to view their building panel (i.e. you have an emissary, spy, princess, assassin there) Also on a side note: A way to place the buildings on the battle map as they are built for strategy or just plan aesthetics. (My wife would love this part of the game if you could do this.)

- Add a compass to the battle map. (someone else has requested this, I just think its a good idea)

- Placing units on the north end of a province (read: county) before an attack would actually place your units on the north end of the battle map. So with this in mind it is possible to place 4 armies at the 4 points of the map to surround the enemy. Do you see the potential for extreme strategy here? =-) At first it would seem overly easy to surround an enemy but with the movement system suggested above this would be more difficult in application.

- Province population stat added to the info screen. I dont know if this is already built in to the game but population increases over time, faster with higher happiness, decreases with war, disease, and inquisition. Tax income would be based on the entire population. Also any bandits, separatists, fanatics, or rebels that form in your province would be deducted from the total population of the county and conversely limited by the total population of the county. Crusades also have a similar effect on the general population as people leave to fight. People will be drawn to your counties if they have churches, universities, inn, brothel (&#33http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/wink.gif, resources, goods and a king, governor, or mayor worth following.

- Population is happier with more goods imported. Land locked provinces share these goods across boundaries and lands that are connected via trade routes are the same way. For example if province A, B and C are all the same nation. C is connected via a port and a valid trade route. All 3 provinces share their resources with one another and benefit from a higher level of happiness. A year later province D becomes a foreign ally (with a trade agreement) and is connected via port and shipping lines so their resources become available as well as A, B and C's goods to them. Food could be considered a resource in this way and shared accordingly.

- Population is limited by the state of the farms in the county. Not enough food in the county and people will leave/die. Consider this scenario: Your province is invaded and they destroy all buildings including your 80% enhanced farm. Then they leave. It is possible more people will die from the lack of food than died defending the province. Each farm enhancement can increase your population limit by the same % as it increases your income. So if you lose your farms you can lose up to that % of your population. Food is harvested in fall and planted in summer so anything that happens during those seasons would effect the harvest. the following winter. This also means that any improvements to your farms wont take effect until the next summer. In which case you reap the benefit of the food the following fall.

- Increase the map size (expansion pack?) include Japan.. heck include the whole world At least the whole of Europe, Asia and surrounding islands which would of course include new factions: Japan China, Mongolia etc.

- Add a new campaign mode (Fantasy Campaign) where everything is randomized. This should be made available as an option to any new campaign (see Kahn mode below). The game would generate new factions, religions, provinces, counties, oceans, and stats for them all. It would also randomize any historical events like the signing of the magna carta. It would automatically assign a number of provinces to you or not (a setting for the game). This would not just be a mode played on the existing geography as it is it would be a fictional earth and a new challenge each time you played The same would be done for battlefields although once a battlefield is viewed or generated it would remain that way for the county throughout the duration of the campaign. The game board map itself would be changed to make new lands and oceans.

- Mini campaign mode (Kahn mode&#33http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/wink.gif where the ruler is you (you type your name in, select a few stats, a picture, a la RPG) and try to accomplish everything you can in your short life span. Your character is generated by a points system. you have a set amount of points (you can increase the points by adding vices to your character list.) to create your character with and purchase stat increases (influence, piety, dread and acumen) or virtues with. Score points are gained for military conquest, economic development, and religious accomplishments. Points are deducted for vices, added for virtues. (those that you selected at the beginning of the game dont count.) Score is also added for various other factors like population, % happy, % converted to your religion, buildings constructed, buildings destroyed, etc. When you die (hopefully of natural causes) a score is totaled against the other world leaders and the winner is the one with the highest score. At this point there would be an option to turn into regular campaign mode if you have an heir.

- Ability to add multiple titles to units, and the ability to add titles to royalty. The ability to add titles to non military units like bishops. The ability to offer monetary awards to units. The ability to simply drag a title from one unit to another instead of needing an emissary.

- All units, not just the military ones, should have stats vices and virtues. So an inquisitor could go after the priest or emissary with a perversion. Or how dramatic would it be for an inquisitor to try an innocent general with the inquisitor himself having a vice.

- In stead of assassins and spies simply being caught and executed you should get more info on the event and in certain circumstances certain actions to take before the event. If your spys are good enough they may be able to uncover other spys or assassins to which you may offer a bribe to switch sides. If the enemy does they are still under the control of the AI (or player) but now all actions are shown to you and you are given the final ok on whether or not to complete the deed. This might play out as follows: a spy with valor 5 is moved to a province. a year later he detects a 0 level spy with the mission of stirring up discontent. (The amount of info available is dependant on the difference in valor between the two units.) You would get a pop up window stating that your spy named discovered another spy from attempting to stir up discontent in the province . What would you have us do with him? Then you would get several options (which again would depend on the valor difference. Higher difference in your favor means you have more options to deal with the incident): 1) Kill the spy/ Declare War on his country, 2) Kill the spy, 3) Attempt to bribe him to change sides, 4) follow him. 5) Kidnap him for a ransom. (see below also) This could also happen after the spy or assassin had completed their mission.

- New spy/assassin missions: kidnapping and blackmail. Kidnapping is self explanatory and would be considered an act of war. Blackmail would work on those who have secret vices.

- Does the king ever factor into a provinces loyalty and income calculations? If not he should be accounted for in some way. IMO it should work as follows. For any given king his dread and acumen factor into the calculations of all counties surrounding his presence (in conjunction with the governors of those provinces) limited by his influence. (higher influence means further distance) This should also be the same for any governors that are away on campaigns. If the unit is too far away his acumen and dread values are no longer considered when calculating the loyalty and income of a population. (Can you say Robin Hood)
Also when the king is at the border of another kingdom certain things should happen: Depending on his stats he should cause people to come to the province he is in/or he should drive them away (people just like to be around him/they are afraid of him.) If the king is particularly liked and the current king is particularly disliked and or far away. The province near him may pledge loyalty to his kingdom.

- Multiplayer campaign modes. (both in standard and mini-campaign modes) I know it would be tough to wait your turn while a battle is being waged between the AI and your buddy but I would wait. Grab another beer Get your economy in order. (make sure you have the ability to click on provinces get information etc while it isn't your turn you just cant move any units.) Hey what about the ability to watch the battle (maybe only if you have a unit there?) What about play by email? Perhaps a 2 minute = 1 season time limit? (or a configurable value) and time ticks away even while you are in combat. (Maybe slower while there is a battle: 5 minute = 1 season which is also configurable) The ability to go back to the main map during a battle would be a good idea as well. A problem that I foresee with this system is being in multiple battles at the same time.. eek no solution on this one.

- More information on the state of the economy, units etc. Also info on foreign lands that your princesses have married into. (like you would get if they were standing on the land. They should also have a chance, albeit a small one, of deducing plans of their husband/kingdom. They would be like a mini-spy.

[Gregoshi]

http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/eek.gif http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/dizzy.gif

Wow Balrog There is a lot to digest in there. Thanks for that 7 course dinner of ideas to chew on. Speaking of dinner, I must now depart. Later. http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/wave.gif

[Balrog]

bump http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif

[Gregoshi]

Generals: agree they should not live forever. The training a replacement general I'm not too crazy about. A moron under a bad general is still a moron under a great general. If anything, maybe a chance at adding a command star or (rarely) two.

Wives: I'm not sure I see the benefit of this? What would it add to the game? I'd think loyalty would only be affected if it was a king or prince.

V&V: agreed. Hopefully the new expansion pack will add a bunch more.

To be continued...barocca is bugging me to play a game or two.

[Gregoshi]

Commentary, part 2...

Grouping spies: Hmmm, in the old forum I had made some comments on this idea, but I couldn't find them. I recall the gist of it was that careful evaluation of such a change on game play. Imagine trying to find that V5 assassin in a stack of 12 assassins, all who's unit icons look the same. With out adding valour stars to the unit icon display, this could be a real pain.

Failed assassinations: I agree. There should be some potential consequences when trying to kill the enemy.

Better diplomacy: Yes. Maybe expanded diplomacy is a better description. I like the idea of trade wars and weapons purchases. These could provide some reasons for starting a war. I'd also like to see more cooperation between allies such as armies allowed to move through an ally's provinces, this also provides opportunity for treachery on both sides.

Seasons: when this issue came up before, I did a quick survey of about 20 medieval battles. Only 2-3 were fought between October and February. Winter campaigns in the north just weren't a major factor, so elimination of winter from the game doesn't hurt it from a historical stand point. Winter is still in the game but rather rare. For me the game is quite long enough - I have yet to finish a campaign. The thought of quadupling the number of turns does not appeal much to me. Though I did like the seasonal turns in STW, I'm not certain about seasons in MTW.

Movement: a nice idea on the surface, but without changing other things about the game design, I see problems. In the one province per turn/year system, you know when you are threatened by a potential attack because an enemy army in on your border. If you change that, now an enemy army 2 or more provinces away could attack you unknowingly if you don't have spies about. How do you work out strategic movement to be able to react when a spy reports a large army approaching your border? You couldn't under the current design.

Dividing Provinces: more is not necessarily better. The strat map gets crowded enough as it is. More provinces/counties means more potential for rebellion, more troops for garrison duty, more spies, etc.

Attack at night/surprise attack: that would be a neat addition to the game. Perhaps spies (a new type of assignment) working in conjuction with the army could provide a chance at a surprise attack. Night attacks would be cool but it should also severly restrict your view and make distinguishing your units from the enemy much harder.

RTS view of provinces: I'm not sure what benefit this would be to game play.

Compass: okay.

Unit placement on battlemap based on strat map: very interesting idea. It sounds like middle tier game level between the strat map and battle map, a kind of operation maneuvering between attacker and defender to determine the battlefield. Do the defenders keep the good position in the hills to get a hilly battlemap? Or do they come down to fight on a flat map in order to prevent the attacker from destroying the facilities in the town?

Population: this is one I'd really, really like to see. To add to your list of effects - the ability to produce units for your army would also be impacted. Some wars would end simply because each side has bleed too much to raise anymore units. I'd also like to see population segregated as far as units you could produce, i.e. a population will be more able to provide peasant troops than it would royal knights. I think this would make the peasant and other lower end units more prevalent and at the same time make the high tech/high quality units much more precious as they would not be as easily replaced as in the current game. Imagine the dilemma in a battle going badly - do I risk my knights in this battle? Or just withdraw them now for another day?

Okay, bed time I think I might be half way...maybe. http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/eek.gif More to come when I have the energy. http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/tongue.gif

[Balrog]

some more ideas additions, retractions and clarifications

- Spy grouping: I agree it would be difficult to search for that 5 star killer without adding valor stars on the mini-map so I add that to my requests. (add stars for assassins on the mini-map and the individual avatars just as they are done for the military) But on the other side it would be more effiecient to move units in this mannor. (everyone has surely spent 20 minutes moving all their spies, emmisaries, etc into a foreign province. Dont forget my orginal reason for requesting this so that they could work together as a whole. (or get caught as a whole). They would benefit from each other and would increase the success of any given mission.

- Seasons: after I originally posted this request I went back and did my homework. Realisticly battles did not occur during the deep of winter for the reasons which are obvious. SO I think that CA did a good job in allowing battles to occur as they do.

- Movement: From Gregoshi: a nice idea on the surface, but without changing other things about the game design, I see problems. In the one province per turn/year system, you know when you are threatened by a potential attack because an enemy army in on your border. If you change that, now an enemy army 2 or more provinces away could attack you unknowingly if you don't have spies about.

Exactly as it stands now a strong navy can pretty much do this same thing to you on coastal cities and the computer AI has done this very thing to me. Any provinces you dont have units/spys in you dont see the movement anyway so IMO this is realistic and fair. Besides a good defense is the best offense. (Never leave your provinces open)

- From Gregoshi: Generals: agree they should not live forever. The training a replacement general I'm not too crazy about. A moron under a bad general is still a moron under a great general. If anything, maybe a chance at adding a command star or (rarely) two.

Also agree here but if you look at the wording of my request I only mention it as a possibility to increase the stats of the relacement. So in practice once the general dies his replacement is generated (I would guess in the same way that the entire unit would be generated) and there is only a chance that any (or any combination) of stats may be increased by a higher general.

- Again from Gregoshi (*smile*): Wives: I'm not sure I see the benefit of this? What would it add to the game? I'd think loyalty would only be affected if it was a king or prince.

I would like to expand on this idea a bit. I agree with what Gregoshi is saying here about loyalty (in cases of adultry) in retrospect this idea is definitly one of the weeker ones in terms of gameplay. Just like the idea for its depth of realism. =-)

[chilliwilli]

Yeah I like how CA maintains contact and good relations with the community unlike some other companies.

[el_slapper]

Aging generals was ready int the code, has been flamed by CA. Too much micromanagement. And I follow them.

Same thing for multiple levels : hell to programm, hell to manage.

Other than that, the agent stack sounds cool to my ears.

[Muneyoshi]

Lehesu, Varangian Guards arent there for Late because they werent used anymore

Balrog, a MP campaign was attempted for MI, but obviously wasnt there. Reason being, we do not know, we assume it was because it was too hard to work out

[Lehesu]

My thoughts were that if Varangian guard was gone in the late age, shouldnt the byzantines get an elite infantry, if nothing else for the balancing? If you go into custom in the late and look at byzantine infantry, its a sad sight. http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/mecry.gif

[chilliwilli]

Well the whole turnbased thing could be a problem. 1 turn could take the whole day in MTW. Civ 3: Play the world overcame this by making MP semi-realtime. I don't know if MTW could do the same thing though since its a different kind of game.

[GilJaysmith]

Quote[/b] (chilliwilli @ Dec. 15 2002,14:47)]Well the whole turnbased thing could be a problem. 1 turn could take the whole day in MTW. Civ 3: Play the world overcame this by making MP semi-realtime. I don't know if MTW could do the same thing though since its a different kind of game.
Apparently that's how we were going to do it for Shogun (I wasn't here at the time).

Too many problems and too much else to do meant it got dropped.

Echoes of it remain in the Medieval source files, but all are quietly escorted from the final game code by guards bearing names like #ifdef JNET.

Gil ~ CA

[_Martyr_]

I really want population, it would add so much to this great game.

Right of pasage is a great idea, and the expansion of the diplomatic sides to the game should be considered. Steal some ideas from Civ3.

More factions, such as Irish, scots, porteuges etc...

Change the aim of the game from conquering Europe by yourself, to just killing off enemy factions with your allies. How about a choice to topple a weak hostile ruler and replace him with a friendly one who will trade...
This would generally make the game more realistic, as the notion of one nation ruling all of europe is questionable... http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/rolleyes.gif

I think a lot of the other ideas would really complicate the game to a rediculious level.

[Zauba'a]

Here's stuff I'd like to see...

-Heavier Muslim units

-Special Jihad units for muslim jihads (like Teutons for Catholic Crusades).

-Do something with the arquebusiers and handgunners to actually make them worth building.

-As mentioned before, more options for assassins like kidnapping and convincing someone accept a treaty or something else.

[Gregoshi]

Commentary on Balrog's suggested changes/improvements, part 3:

Increase map size: Are you talking about regionalized versions of MTW? For example, STW with all the features of MTW. Or are you talking about conquer the world? Either one is asking for quiet a lot.

Fantasy (random) campaign mode: I like. An interesting idea to shake things up. The old Commodore 64 game The Seven Cities of Gold did something similar to the indian populations in the new world. The Aztec, Mayan and Inca civilizations changed locations from one game to the next. You might run into the Aztecs in the northeast North America. Gold and other things moved around too.

Mini campaign (Kahn) mode: Another very good idea. An additional area for evaluating victory is historical impact. A real life example of what I mean is accomplishments of the Roman empire compared to the Mongol empire. Roman put its stamp on everything they conquered and influenced many things long after it crumbled. Compare to the Mongols who conquered a lot but left behind virtually nothing.

Expanding title use/function: At first glance, I didn't think much of these ideas. However, they do seem to have merit upon reflection. Multiple titles per unit could effect V&Vs and lead to civil war/power struggles. I don't like the drag and drop for changing titles. Emissaries need more to do to make them a useful unit to produce.

Non-military units with V&Vs: Good idea. This could spice up the game a bit. Hehehe, an inquisitor taking down another inquisitor.

Assassins/Spies more to do: very, very cool idea. More variety to make the game more interesting.

New spy/assassin missions, kidnapping and blackmail: Another excellent idea.

King factor into provinces loyalty and income: I'm not too crazy about this if only because there are other great ideas above I'd much rather see in the game. On the positive side, it does give the king more importance and his placement more critical.

Multiplayer campaign modes: The big one. Certainly a toughy. Realtime strategic mode doesn't cut it for me - the fastest clicker does the best. Email based for the strategic and then arrange online tactical battles might work. However, the biggest bug-a-boo for MP campaigning, IMHO, is too many battles to fight/arrange. To get around this, they must be limited. I see two ways. First, attackers need a certain critical mass (ex: 1000 men) before they can attack. Defenders need a critical mass figure in order for an online battle to take place, otherwise the attacker get the province. This eliminates all the small battles. Second, battle losses have a larger effect on the army through desertions. For example, a 5000 man army attacks and loses. They had 500 loses via kills and another 1000-3000 via desertion, most likely peasants, etc. Campaigns must be planned for and armies built instead of 5000 attack/500 losses, next turn 4500 attack/500 losses, next turn 4000 attack... The upshot is each battle has great risk and great significance. Currently, in SP, large armies clash and it turns into a World War I style war of attrition rather than a classic Agincourt.

More info on economy, units & married princesses: I'm not sure what else you'd want to know. Examples? The princesses continuing to be mini-spies is a nice idea.

http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/eek.gif http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/eek.gif http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/eek.gif http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/eek.gif http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/eek.gif

Whew That about covers it That was an epic post Balrog with some really good ideas. Maybe, just maybe I'll have the energy to comment on your comments of my comments. http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/joker.gif

[Balrog]

more stuff =-)
Wow Gregoshi thanks for the friendly input

When I originaly requested some of my ideas I didnt have a full understanding of the game mechanics (still learning now) but the following 2 ideas/requests seem to already be in the game:

1) the king effecting the entire kindgom with his attributes

2) multiple titles for generals. (although you cant give governership to more than one province you can grant multiple other titles.)