A bit worried about PoW.

[Dragon20]

After reading some previews I noticed they don't say anything about prisoners of war. In medieval time making prisoners and ransoming was very important. Now I hope I missed something because I start to get a bit worried.

Making enemy generals and kings prisoner and then ransom them was one of my favorite things to do in MTW1, what do you people think about it?

[King Noob the Stupid]

I also hope they'll put it in again, if not the game will really miss something...

[Templar Knight]

I hope they add dungeons so you can hold prisoners for longer and torture them

[King Noob the Stupid]

Yeah, the should put in animations of Kings whose heirs don't want to pay being tortured to death, in some of my MTW campaigns 5 kings died in my dungeon during the rule of a single king of mine

[Hambut_bulge]

I hope they add dungeons so you can hold prisoners for longer and torture them

That's a good idea. Not the torture bit, but the idea that you could hold an important prisoner indefinitely. Should work wonders for causing instability in the 'guests' home country if they happen to be the King!

[Leet Eriksson]

Indeed, i hope you have the ability to end the captured prisoners life too, especially if he was an heirless king.

[Scoundrel]

It would not be worthy sequel without taking prisoners.

...Well, at least it would be better with them.

[Rodion Romanovich]

I agree. Prisoners for ransom or killing is a necessary element of MTW2. I'd like to choose between "ransom all", "ransom nobles" or "kill all" after fighting a battle...

[Dooz]

I'm almost positive I read somewhere about the game, either a game site or official site, that mentioned prisoners and ransoms. Can't remember where exactly to post link, but I'm sure it will come up.

[Perplexed]

I hope they add dungeons so you can hold prisoners for longer and torture them

How nice.

[Kraxis]

I'm almost positive I read somewhere about the game, either a game site or official site, that mentioned prisoners and ransoms. Can't remember where exactly to post link, but I'm sure it will come up.

Yup! Read that too...

When somebody was excited about this 'new' feature in another thread he was told rather fast that in fact it was on old feature of MTW.

[Dragon20]

Ah thanks, that is good news.

And lol about torture. But it would be nice if you could torture that stupid king you finally crushed. Who refused to become your vassal for 20 years, and even made the pope excommunicate you.

But I don't think that would be in the game, I won't miss it either.

[A.Saturnus]

Let's not forget enslavement as an option for the Muslim general.

[Templar Knight]

Whats wrong with a bit of torture? It could be used to get info about your rivals

[Doug-Thompson]

I play Muslims. Forget the dungeon. Let's have a harem.

[King Henry V]

You must have had many "Perveted" kings, Doug...
Maybe after a paticularly long spell in prison the enemy king could come round to your way of thinking, à la King David II of Scots?

[The_Doctor]

I hope they add dungeons so you can hold prisoners for longer and torture them

I wonder if you can build one in Cuba.

[King Henry V]

Treat your enemy King to a lovely holiday in the sun, by the sea...behind 20 foot walls and packs of hungry dogs...ah, luxury.

[boastj]

What’s a harem is it more evil than a dungeon torture chamber

[Doug-Thompson]

What’s a harem is it more evil than a dungeon torture chamber

A harem is a women's "dormatory" where the Sultan can go and make love with any, or as many, of the women he has kept there. It's a very practical way of improving the odds that the Sultan can produce a male heir.

No other men are allowed — not even enemy kings — unless they're eunuchs. This is to ensure that any children produced are the Sultan's.

And no, I did not intend to take prisoner kings there, but that should be allowed as a game option for players who are so inclined.

I suppose a torture chamber could render the enemy kings into eunuchs. They you could see them in the harem.

Anyway, if the harem option is provided, MTW 2 will become the first in the series with an AO rating.

[Zain]

Yeah, the should put in animations of Kings whose heirs don't want to pay being tortured to death, in some of my MTW campaigns 5 kings died in my dungeon during the rule of a single king of mine

There are no Dungeon's in MTW, are there? If so, let me know how, cuz I haven't...

-ZainDustin

[King Noob the Stupid]

Well there's a picture of something like a dungeon on top of the message that tells you that your enemy didn't pay for the soldiers you caught, and AFAIR in the text it reads that "you don't need to worry abpout the prisoners any more" and after this if you had caught a king another message popped up telling you that the poor guy had been caught and killed and that is hear would now lead $enemy_faction.

[Zain]

Well there's a picture of something like a dungeon on top of the message that tells you that your enemy didn't pay for the soldiers you caught, and AFAIR in the text it reads that "you don't need to worry abpout the prisoners any more" and after this if you had caught a king another message popped up telling you that the poor guy had been caught and killed and that is hear would now lead $enemy_faction.

Oooohhh.... Okay. Yeah, I've done that. I was imagining something like an actual building you could look up and see who was in there or something. Thanks!

-ZainDustin

[sapi]

Great! They're back! It is so much better to capture troops than to just kill them while they were running....

Maybe a breakout could be avaliable - because in mtw the troops just disappeared; maybe in #2 each unit can only take a certain number and have to escort them back to the general, and if the unit is killed the enemies are free!

^^might be a bit complex...

[Trajanus]

I think that will be a little too complex.

I'm just glad they put the feature back in because I really missed it in RTW.

Hopefully they can update and improve it slightly aswell to make things a little more exciting with slavery etc.

Also for the ransoming of troops/ nobles/ royals back to factions I would like to make it more diplomatic than an event and actually set a price not just find out that your general has ransomed the enemy King back for x amaount of florins.

[Zatoichi]

I suppose a torture chamber could render the enemy kings into eunuchs. They you could see them in the harem.

Now that's what I call torture!

Ahem.

Anyway, I think that an added layer of complexity to the MTW model wouldn't be such a bad thing. Slavery and prisoner exchanges spring to mind.

Also, I'd like to see a return to the way that routing troops behave in MTW - they could still fight back, and you could lose troops to them unlike in RTW where their self-preservation instincts were reduced somewhat. This makes taking prisoners a slightly more expensive affair if you factor in troop retraining.

[Trajanus]

Definately. Running away is one thing and if you are set on running away you got for it. But this doesn't mean that if some guy is chasing you you don't fight him if he catches up an attacks you.

Routing units that cross paths with attacking units should still put up some resistance not just get caught or killed.

[Martok]

Routing units that cross paths with attacking units should still put up some resistance not just get caught or killed.

I disagree. If I'm fleeing a battle and are being run down by a bunch of mounted soldiers, I just don't see myself suddenly deciding to turn and fight them. I think during that time period, you realize that speed is probably your best (and often only) real option for survival.

The only exception I could understand would be royals. If a king and/or prince were fleeing the field, I admit I could see their surviving royal knights possibly trying to put up a desperate rearguard action so that their prince/king could get away safely and thus avoid capture. Aside from this, however, I don't think routing units should be able to do any damage to "chasers", as they would be too busy concentrating on simply fleeing for their lives (and rightly so!).

[Trajanus]

By crossing paths I don't mean chasing.

If routing units are running forwards and run into the flank of enemy units I think they should at least as a "pasing act of anger" take a swing at them as they run past.

However I do agree that when being chased down from behind that they should offer no resistance.

[Kraxis]

A little resistance would be nice, if only to make certain that routers aren't butchered as easily as they are in RTW.
But I would prefer for them to have a defensive capability. Meaning they might not kill much/anything but they aren't targetpractice either. In MTW the routers were pretty much screwed, but they at least had a chance, while in RTW any router is basically dead.

Realistic or not, that is something we can discuss until the world freezes over once more, but in terms of gameplay I think it would increase quite a lot. You would be forced to chase the enemy off the map or risk him rallying. Now you chase for a few seconds then the enemy is depleted enough to never rally.