Wishlist for Rome 2 (and beyond)

[truth1337]

- heavier impact of terrain to cavalry efficiency, and make the graphics so it is clear what areas are bad for cavalry, e.g. muddy fields. Please make weather impact muddiness etc also.

- make a small minigame of the preparations leading up to battle, where the struggle with vanguard harassment, placing yourself in a good defensive position, putting your camp in a protected area compared to the battlefield, and things like that are taken into account. During this minigame, horse archer factions could also inflict harassing casualties to force the opponent to engage earlier, even if not under ideal circumstances.

- make battles more realistic in terms of letting more than 90% of the enemy army get away in most battles. Make it possible to retreat from a battle without getting the entire stack to disappear from the campaign map, so that both humans and AI can choose to disengage from battles they were forced into with bad conditions, thus making it more common to have few armies that stay alive longer, rather than massproducing stacks that either get annihilated or annihilates the opponent - so that battles actually matter more. This would give us the ability to have tough sequences of battles in which e.g. an archery strong faction retreat through the help of a sacrificed rearguard over and over again, while inflicting just as much casualties as they take, only that they are continuously giving up ground to do so. This would allow powering down the godlike unrealistic over-effectiveness of steppe factions but still allow them to perform well due to their ability to harass in many battles then disengage.

[quadalpha]

- make a small minigame of the preparations leading up to battle, where the struggle with vanguard harassment, placing yourself in a good defensive position, putting your camp in a protected area compared to the battlefield, and things like that are taken into account. During this minigame, horse archer factions could also inflict harassing casualties to force the opponent to engage earlier, even if not under ideal circumstances.

Yes, just go a bit further and you'd have my operational level idea!

[edyzmedieval]

- heroes (Hannibal, Pyrrhus...)
- wonders (and more than just 7!)
- no Realm Divide
- supply routes
- expandable defences (I don't want just walls, I want to build barbicans, towers, gates...)

[Seabourch]

For me?

I want the so-called Barbarians to not be underpowered, watching my Gauls fall so easily to Roman troops is frustrating. Keep the three factions thing but for accuracy's sake, use the names of prominent political families at the start date. Bring back the ability to choose your time period, loved that one.

[Noncommunist]

What about something that more easily facilitated civil wars? Perhaps something similar to the mechanism of the revolution from Empire where if a general begins to revolt, you could choose to play him or the existing emperor and fight it out from there.

[jaspritsingh]

Upto E:TW amd N:TW if I make some one my protectorate, some other faction gobbles them up without me getting involved. If I am the protector of a region I should atleast be given a choice to intervene ?? Hope to see that in R2.

[Praetorian Commander]

In the campaign I would like regions to be divided into towns and villages with unique units of those factions and that Rome has to conquer tribe by tribe until it all finally becomes a Roman province.

Something that occurs to me for the multiplayer is that factions be divided into tribes for barbarians, villages for other factions and city-states for the Greeks, and in the multiplayer, these villages or tribes can choose all units that are contained in this faction so that battles against Rome would be more balanced, but in the campaign to be tribes and divided peoples so the difficulty would be, in addition to battles with each of the people, to keep the province and at the same time expand the territory, in addition to politics and trade.

When playing with the other factions, you would selecte a state, people or tribe and would seek to unite the entire faction to then go after the conquest of their neighbors or to challenge Rome, and will be able to make alliances or commercial agreements with tribes or peoples of other factions.

The battles should maintain the same dynamics that in Rome 1, which made the multiplayer so variable and replayable.


En la campaña me gustaria que las regiones esten divididas en pueblos y aldeas con unidades unicas de esas facciones y que con roma haya que ir conquistando tribu por tribu hasta que finalmente se convierta en provincia romana.
Algo que se me ocurre para el multiplayer es que las facciones esten divididas en tribus en el caso de las facciones barbaras, pueblos en otras facciones y estados en el caso de los griegos y que en el multiplayer en estos pueblos o tribus se puedan elegir todas las unidades que contiene su faccion y en la batalla con roma seria mas nivelada, pero en la campaña al estar las tribus y pueblos divididos la dificultad estaria ademas de las batallas con cada uno de los pueblos en mantener la provincia y al mismo tiempo expander el territorio, ademas de la politica y el comercio.
Cuando se juega con las otras facciones se elegiria un estado, pueblo o tribu y se trataria de unir a toda la faccion para despues lanzarse a la conquista de sus vecinos o de desafiar a roma, pudiendo hacer alianzas o acuerdos comerciales con tribus o pueblos de otras facciones.
Que las batallas mantengan la misma dinamica que en el roma 1, lo que hace tan variable y rejugable el multiplayer.

[a completely inoffensive name]

The ability to play on weak/old computers with lower end graphics. I don't think my two year old computer can handle this game on any setting.

[jaspritsingh]

Lame but can we have personal standards for Top Generals that also show in the campaign map ???

[Vuk]

Please make it where you can 'raid' an enemy army or town by attacking it, inflicting losses on them, and then retreating without it counting as a loss on your score. A tactical retreat or a raid is not a loss. It is a victory that does not result in the route of an enemy army.

[Arjos]

I would also like to see a "surprise attack" option: I don't mean an ambush, where you have to passively wait for the enemy to march in your area of attack, but actively attacking the enemy camp (since we now have pre-battle cutscenes etc), if specific conditions are met (say general has X ability, there's rain, fog or night). Resulting in an attack on an army that has to yet deploy properly or even get out of the tents etc...

[Tuuvi]

Please make it where you can 'raid' an enemy army or town by attacking it, inflicting losses on them, and then retreating without it counting as a loss on your score. A tactical retreat or a raid is not a loss. It is a victory that does not result in the route of an enemy army.

I second this. It would be a really great feature for horse archer factions especially.

[Seon]

I second that option for a surprise attack.

[Myth]

I second this. It would be a really great feature for horse archer factions especially.

True! Especially for mobile HA/javelin armies it's better to deplete your missiles, clear 40% of the enemy and then retreat than facing them at full force.

[ReluctantSamurai]

it's better to deplete your missiles, clear 40% of the enemy and then retreat than facing them at full force.

That's something I already can do with any horse-archer faction even without a surprise attack feature. If raiding is a feature put into the game, some serious unit balancing, and accounting for the bad weather, nighttime, etc. by lowering the kill possibilities is in order...otherwise there will be no army the AI can build that could stand up to such a tactic in the hands of a skilled horse-archer player.

I would prefer raiding tactics to lower troop morale for an upcoming battle (or last a set # of turns depending on the severity of the raid) irrespective of any modifiers that an enemy general might confer on his troops.

My 2denarii

And to answer a previous post about such tactics NOT counting as a defeat, I would think a simple counting algorithm that calculates losses in terms of both numbers and value for the troops involved would solve that. If I throw in four or five hundred men on a night raid and lose only 10% of my force while inflicting a much higher % of losses on a larger force, then it won't count as a loss if the proper parameters are in place.

[Tuuvi]

That's something I already can do with any horse-archer faction even without a surprise attack feature. If raiding is a feature put into the game, some serious unit balancing, and accounting for the bad weather, nighttime, etc. by lowering the kill possibilities is in order...otherwise there will be no army the AI can build that could stand up to such a tactic in the hands of a skilled horse-archer player.

I would prefer raiding tactics to lower troop morale for an upcoming battle (or last a set # of turns depending on the severity of the raid) irrespective of any modifiers that an enemy general might confer on his troops.

My 2denarii

And to answer a previous post about such tactics NOT counting as a defeat, I would think a simple counting algorithm that calculates losses in terms of both numbers and value for the troops involved would solve that. If I throw in four or five hundred men on a night raid and lose only 10% of my force while inflicting a much higher % of losses on a larger force, then it won't count as a loss if the proper parameters are in place.

Yea I used to do it all the time with the Saka in EB. But since the battle is considered a loss, you're forced to retreat afterwards and lose all your movement points. That can put you in a tight spot, especially if you're near a settlement.

I don't think a raiding feature would be too hard to balance actually. In EB the horse archer factions are piss poor and archer units don't do a lot of damage against armored units. Because of this attacking and retreating tactics can only get you so far before you need to start recruiting armored infantry of your own. If CA decided to implement a raiding feature, all they would need to do is make sure that ranged units are properly balanced.

[Ordinator]

Reserve forces you could keep in town that would be like 1/2 or 1/4 upkeep price of normal unit so you don't have to have huge garrison present at all times in city that is close to enemy that is just sitting there wasting upkeep money.

[jaspritsingh]

Trade as a means of war ...

Spam so much of a particular resource so that an enemy bulk of whose income comes from that resource loses out due to drop in prices.

Tariffs - put taxes on goods from nations you dont like. make them lose money. set AI to treat this as a casus beli

[Red_Devil]

My biggest wish is for the AI to be up to the challenge. less repetitive tactics: in other TW games, once you've played ten battles, you know all about how the AI will react to any type of attacks... and the use of navies on the battle map still has to be improved i guess. (haven't played shogun 2 except at a friends invitation...)

[ReluctantSamurai]

in other TW games, once you've played ten battles, you know all about how the AI will react to any type of attacks...

That wasn't necessarily the case with the original Shogun and from what I've seen, STW2, as well. The AI would adapt to your tactics. If you were defending, the AI would try to flank you on either side after you repulsed the first frontal assault; if you were attacking, the AI would set up defense at several different places. It would also try to outmatch your units...so if you were cavalry-heavy, it would try lots of spears, etc....

[Kocmoc]

I want to see finally, after many years of waiting a real good MP part of the game.

A simple game, without tons of features and all those stupid things, which makes newcomer cry.
A longlasting game…

Its already said, many times, about many years. There is no need to repeat it once again.
The focus of the MP, which was promised was exactly where? Does CA mean the peak in the first few days/weeks….

[GFX707]

1) Improved AI that can size its enemies up and make rational decisions, that knows when it's losing, that has some kind of sense of self-preservation and isn't just pointlessly rabid and suicidal. Less AI building fleets of crappy ships in the early game and not disbanding them. Less AI using futile guerilla war tactics running around with scores of 3 unit stacks (which is also annoying), when I'm taking their cities with full stacks. AI that won't, as a one province nation with half a stack of militia, suicidally declare war on the player's superpower that owns 3/4 of the world (just because they don't like me and we share a border, or just because the game sees I'm not currently at war) and subsequently put up no fight or challenge whatsoever but totally refuse peace, forcing you to crush them.
2) Improved diplomacy (that the AI knows how to use when it's losing), AI nations that will ask for peace when they are getting totally destroyed instead of doing what others have called the "Black Knight" act and refusing to accept peace on realistic terms even when you're sieging their capital with 4 stacks.
3) Battle speed more like STW and MTW to get rid of clickfest gameplay. Battles where I can actually have enough time to zoom in on the action and watch what's going on and enjoy the pretty graphics close up, rather than making a plan, deploying my army, engaging the enemy, and freaking out clicking the mouse like a lunatic as enemy infantry are walking all over the place at 15mph (watching the battle unfold as a bunch of tiny sprites because I don't have time to zoom in unless I pause it) trying to send 1 unit around the back to attack my general while the enemy AI's battleplan overall seems completely nonexistant other than "send 1 unit flanking teams in vain attempt to attack general so the player has to click every 500 milliseconds and spin the camera round going back and forth catching all the annoying drips, until all enemy AI units rout and the player is left thinking "well that was over quickly" and player heartbeat may now drop below 120. The AI's idiotic fetish for attacking my general being fixed would also remove lame player exploits like just sitting there in a square and waiting for the AI forces to run away because it can't understand that you can't flank a square to sneak 1 unit hit squads after my general.
4) Less sieges, more battles, less 3 unit enemy stacks running around the map, more full stacks, fewer, bigger battles that actually mean something (like STW and MTW)
5) A game that only ships when it's actually ready.
6) More effort on the campaign game in general.

[Gengis]

Better AI and more focus on diplomacy/trade/assasinations etc... We all know the battles are gonna be awesome, but to make the game more immersive a good AI is needed to have the feeling you are playing against a competent opponent, not a mindless bot.

[Ursus]

My wish list (sorry for my bad english) :

1 - non military units -

1a - slaves/prisoners units which player can:
- sell, buy, give them to faction as gift (part of diplomacy)
- take from conquered army/city as prisoners of war, when you defet army you can chose how many execute and who will live as prisoner/slave
- make them build for us so costs of buildings will be less,
- make them work in a mines for income,
- make them in to a gladiators and they will entertain people of Rome,
- make them free (rise citys population and make them disapear,disband)
- trade them for generals imprisoned by enemy if they are their faction people.
- if they rebell they will try to come back to their homeland

1b - civils units which will be some % of population and they can :
- act as disturbing device on the batlefield (city,setlement) for unit, for exemple: not allowing soldiers movment or slowing them down,
- act as potencialy recruits for immedietely ready but por defenders (militia )
- act as prisoners in case of defet,
- be trained as a auxilia
- be visible representation on batlefield of victims of war,

1c - suply units - representation of all those cooks, helpers,ingeneers,musicians,monks,medics etc, and we can give them accent on some tasks:
- carry extra ammo (arrows, bulets, javelins, stones )
- carry extra horses (more stamina on batlefileld for cavalary)
- more medicaments, food, ( will last longer when siege occurs )
- music on batllefield,horners, warcry, etc ( morale boost )
- for a tactical matter on batlefield if this unit die all extras will be lost as well ( which will be some fun to search them exept general )
and when under siege this will be first unit to kill making sieges more fun ( as balistas can run out of ammo, archers and not make it to the inner city etc)

2 - Diplomacy gifts -

- jevelery, special rare items and artefacts of era,vases, (have some influence on AI decisions) and they give some extra mood tho the game itself
all authentics visuals with some info, where founded ,to which nation has belonged,
- body of defeted generals (AI decisions influence) - to let them burry their legend, warriors, (same as Troy case )

3- Generals

- less generals, less numbers of armies, less battles, but more significant

- would be nice to see how the hero is buried and all the honors to him - maybe a short movie or a picture -grafics- painting- to add some extra taste
maybe some option for burials - on the field, normal ,honored, as king (diffrent costs - each give diffrent efects ,experience +,-/morale/maybe disband some units)
as to serv under his command give them an some view and some memory,spiryt, for future.
more real and it's nice to see consequences of defet as a something which can have more complex losses.

4 - Enviros

- winter - army can cross some rivers as are frozen, same as lakes, can flank on some battlemaps thru this advantage- or some units can drown when ice break.
- spring - army can not cross come points of rivers due to river stroks which are normally crossable during the summer
- summer - heat can kill on deserts
- mountain passes -not crossable some of them in winter or crossable with some losses, on battlemaps easy to defent, with realisticly terrains, etc You know :)
- don't make so many repetitive boring briges as in previous games -
- some real places on the batlefields - with an architecture, an charakteristic places and buildings visible.
- some buildings on the battlefield accesible, or can be burned to not make them advantage -You know -
- can i burn this fields of gold ( sure You can ) give them losses on harvest (on strategy map) give them not crossable area (on battlefield)

5 - EB mod great direction.
- names,voices, etc, learn search,

[Nelson]

I would like the siege sorties to occur just outside the city as they did before Shogun2. I know people want more field battles but fighting close to the town makes a lot more sense during a siege.

Roman musicians would be great to see and hear. They used trumpet calls extensively.

[adembroski]

The more modding support the better, surely.

My biggest request: Barbarian Invasion II. I find the migration period to be fascinating, and the last BI introduced some really interesting mechanics. Easily my favorite TW campaign to date.

[phred]

I'd like to see a nice variety in battle maps.
I found Shogun 2 maps too generic - they often were flat maps with trees and hills put on top, but without any nice terrain contour.
To me they were like playing on top of a table, and I never felt as if I was on the campaign map.

I'm currently replaying RTW, and I'm really liking the different battle maps. In some ways you feel as though you've zoomed down onto the campaign map.

And also keep all the great stuff they did in Shogun2 and FOTS - skill trees for agents and generals, those nifty move forward, wheel right/left buttons, research tree, etc...
and I'm hoping for a good civil war mechanic for Rome (and Carthage too? Carthage is split into 3 "factions" - I wonder if they'll have a civil war mechanic)

[theubermax]

I am hoping for realistic supply lines, as to be able to properly implement a fabian strategy, easier naval micro (the naval micro fro large fleets was a pain) possibly by adding AI that think for themselves where you give them an objective, they try and achieve it, of course being able to override their orders.