Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 30 of 81

Thread: Your own TW style game: What features would you like to see?

  1. #1
    Βασιλευς και Αυτοκρατωρ Αρχης Member Centurio Nixalsverdrus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Γερμανια Ελευθερα
    Posts
    2,321

    Default Your own TW style game: What features would you like to see?

    If you were to create your own TW style game, what features would be crucial for you? What do the hardcoded features of TW games lack, apart from functional diplomacy / AI intelligence?

    Personally, I'd add the following features:

    - founding settlements: the player can found settlements on his own and thus create new provinces. He can also destroy existing settlements thus eliminating the province, giving the soil to a neighbouring one

    - technological progress: by building appropiate building (schools, temples), the player can amass "progress points" like in Civilization. When a given amount of points is reached, your faction could benefit from new / better units and buildings

    - disloyalty: your nobles can revolt and form a faction to wipe you out (dunno if this is already implemented in M2TW). The bigger the empire, the more difficult to keep it together

  2. #2
    Member Member Antinous's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Sitting on a chair in front of a computer screen.
    Posts
    247

    Default Re: Your own TW style game: What features would you like to see?

    I would add the settlements like yo said.

    2.) You can take control of ship battles like on land.

    3.) Tons of new factions with special units.


    "Don't let the voice of the people be filled with anger"-Polybius

  3. #3
    JEBMMP Creator & AtB Maker Member jirisys's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    In the town where I was born.
    Posts
    1,388

    Default Re: Your own TW style game: What features would you like to see?

    Realistic army sizes.

    No more 20 stack max.

    Multiple settlements on a region.

    Ability to create settlements.

    Realistic management mechanics (not ETW style, but a more comprehensive system without betraying the RTW system).

    Realistic AI diplomacy.

    Realistic AI tactics.

    Unlimited factions.

    SDK kit.

    Unlimited units, buildings and whatnot.

    Better trait system, scripts and ancillaries.

    And that's just in the top of my head.

    ~Jirisys ()
    Last edited by jirisys; 08-04-2011 at 00:17.
    Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 
    Because we all need to compensate...

  4. #4

    Default Re: Your own TW style game: What features would you like to see?

    most importantly, the AI needs to keep account of losses and gains in real terms. If they lose their army, they should immediately sue for peace or at least step on the table, not send levies until their unnecessary death as a faction because they never ever accept peace. Except maybe for Rome with Hannibal and with Pyrrhus, most factions would be fighting for extra territorial gains or other reasons, not for the sake of their nation. losing their main force should at least stem them, humiliate them, end them as a powerful force outside of their region ala Athens invasion of Syrakuse

    In Alpha Centauri there's a real sense of politicking at all times, while in RTW it's literally total war, never ending, purposeless conflict for the sake of it. No manipulating 3rd parties to help you, no solidifying alliances, nothing, just war. with everyone.
    Last edited by fomalhaut; 08-01-2011 at 17:11.

  5. #5
    The Rhetorician Member Skullheadhq's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Antioch
    Posts
    2,267

    Default Re: Your own TW style game: What features would you like to see?

    Centurio! You're back! Didn't see you in some time!

    Anyway, here's my wishlist.

    Succession crises: Multiple sons/pretenders fighting for power after your ruler dies.
    Reputation system: If you conquer half the world, the rest will conspire against you to keep you down.
    Political (senate) system with factions: one needs to acquire a majority there for your decisions or face destabilization when monarchy when going against the council's will.
    Rebellious heirs: heirs could get impatient and start a civil war.
    Multiplayer battles: the ability to fight a battle with one army with more players, one commands the centre, two others flanks and another one the cav.
    Multiplayer campaign: self explaining

    And much more, but don't come to mind right now.
    "When the candles are out all women are fair."
    -Plutarch, Coniugia Praecepta 46

  6. #6

    Default Re: Your own TW style game: What features would you like to see?

    the true steeps without city´s if you had the nomadic trait all of your units would have 0 upkeep and all you had to do was to roam around putting troops on top of icons that meant catle or other important resources every autumm you would/could build forts to protect your troops for when winter arrives or loose 1/4 of your unprotected army and then spring arrives and you would restart attacking rebels or other steppes nomads use the resources gathered to recruit directly from the mercenary pool and keep at it until 1500 ac where gunpowder starts to cut you down

    if you got tired of that life of loosing family members due to them not reaching the forts in time and having no more money to build a new one you could steppe out of the steeps and attack someone to take over their city´s and start your road into becoming a setled people

    that would make playing a steppes faction very fun particulary setling forts all over to take control of grazzing grounds mines heards slaves furs traderoutes or extracting money from the setled people in the fringes of the steppes

    also the hability to create colonies (make them permanent stone forts) and later on to pick a capital city from all the permanent stone forts in your province (something like for every region there´s x permanent stone forts inside a formula that would depend on space available like province y as 1300 square km´s then it can have 6 permanent stone forts even tough it only has 2 psf´s at the start and 1 capital province wich could be destituted and be turned into 1 psf traded for another one)

    also the hability to use your army to ensure the loyalty of a few people without having to conquer them or destroy them would be nice athens didn´t had soldiers everywhere in it´s league it only had to flex it´s muscle or let 1 be destroyed/conquered by the spartans to put them all in check

    this last one combined with the hability to create colonies could make for an extremly interesting gameplay of total politiche control of the world from 1 single city state and it´s 250 colonies scatered all over the world

  7. #7
    COYATOYPIKC Senior Member Flatout Minigame Champion Arjos's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Prisoners upon this rock, flying without wings...
    Posts
    11,087

    Default Re: Your own TW style game: What features would you like to see?

    Pretty much a lot of what has been said, but I always wanted to see a proper feudal/tribal representation: the player being the main dynasty/tribe in power, sided with multiple sub-factions, all part of the same culture, but each behaving on its own; with the player focused on maintaning his position, while fighting off with foreigners aswell...

  8. #8
    Villiage Idiot Member antisocialmunky's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    ゞ( ゚Д゚)ゞ
    Posts
    5,974

    Default Re: Your own TW style game: What features would you like to see?

    An EB Mod.
    Fighting isn't about winning, it's about depriving your enemy of all options except to lose.



    "Hi, Billy Mays Here!" 1958-2009

  9. #9

    Default Re: Your own TW style game: What features would you like to see?

    generally a more realistic (and hideously complex XD ) damage system for weapon types and armor that also differs between wounded etc units.

    Also the ability to lend/sell units which in turn have different behavior: when the faction declares war/attacks the original faction it depends on unit type or a FMs traits, who was part of the "package" if they become regular troops, disband or rejoin their original faction.

    Generally I'd like to see the whole thing in realtime and seamless(similar to Hegemony) to among beeing epic also get over silliy long siege times and enable armies to come out of cities to meet attacking armies before they siege it, tho that would a) make multitasking too important and remove all the relaxation from the game^^*
    and b) make it Hegemony and not Total war :D

    *tho this could be minimized by moveing the scale to a REALISTIC level and thus make it very speed altering heavy. - you would fight a battle in normal speed or maybe 6X speed but you have to speed up a lot when "kingdom manageing" as otherwise it'd take a day to move your army from Corinth to Athens.
    but alas that would really take some serious mapping ;) and cost a lot of ram
    "Who fights can lose, who doesn't fight has already lost."
    - Pyrrhus of Epirus

    "Durch diese hohle Gasse muss er kommen..."
    - Leonidas of Sparta

    "People called Romanes they go the House"
    - Alaric the Visigoth

  10. #10

    Default Re: Your own TW style game: What features would you like to see?

    I wouldn't mind resorting to MTW or Shogun graphics for a super revamp in complexity.

  11. #11

    Default Re: Your own TW style game: What features would you like to see?

    The ability to upgrade an existing veteran unit to a different unit. For example, upgrading a 3 chevron hastati unit into a 1 chevron principes unit, at a cost. Alternatively, being able to upgrade a unit of veteran levy phalangitai into a proper, professional phalangitai unit.
    Inactive Account- Will not respond to private messages or mentions.

  12. #12
    Member Member TiberiusClaudiusMarcellus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    St. George, UT
    Posts
    15

    Default Re: Your own TW style game: What features would you like to see?

    Hey guys! Tiberius Claudius Marcellus here (used to play the BtSH PBM), but stopped coming around because of no internet at home and restrictions on the work's internet.

    Glad to be back, and anxiously awaiting EB 2. (An EB-style mod (Japanese) for S2:TW would be awesome!)

    OT: I'd like to see the ability to take over regions of provinces instead of the whole thing at once, say divide them up into 10 or so smaller areas representing real world geographic separations (mountain spines, the valleys), collections or individual historic small towns, and natural resources (mines, forests, ship yards/ports, etc).

    It would make the game extremely in-depth on the strat map. You zoom in and the world map with its general details fades into a detailed map of the province in question, divided up into its own little sub-regions. Imagine moving your army - and splitting it up into small groups - set out to hold a village blocking the main road while your main force circumnavigates and hits the main target or splits up further to take over / blockade resource areas or rural population centers.

    Each of these little sub-regions would have their own loyalties, their own bonuses, descriptions, and could allow more realistic and slower expansion to simulate the ebb and flow of populations/culture, the more realistic actions needed to invade, conquer, and subjugate/liberate a large area, and make the map look more realistic instead of huge chunks of the planet suddenly changing color in one turn. Perhaps have a timer/counter that tracks an adjusts loyalty in each sub-region based on its base value, how long it has been in control of a faction, how strong military forces are, etc. At some point the loyalty would permanently flip into the holder's favor, but before that, leaving it untended would prove disastrous.
    Last edited by TiberiusClaudiusMarcellus; 08-03-2011 at 04:59.

  13. #13

    Default Re: Your own TW style game: What features would you like to see?

    Actual incentive not to always conquest everything. IE- capturing and dominating culture of an entire region should be quite tough and require long investment of resources. Cheaper would be win a few battles and perhaps kill an Emperor and his Heir and acquire a client kingdom which pays tribute and initially (in the lifetime of the next leader) lends military aid. Continuing military help after the death of the first leader who made the deal with the winners would require reduction of the tribute or a full alliance that also gives help not just takes it. So a player might be faced with the choice to win a few battles and secure a peace for unknown length of time(new leader could die in a battle against other enemies or rebels in 1 turn or live 20 turns) or complete conquest of a region that forces to maintain strong garrisons or face uprising and no internal succession crises or similar for that captured region to actually adopt conquerors culture. Something like 200 turns though after 50 turns the captured region could get reduced garrisons and supply some of its own military manpower to help out the ruling power. If this system could vary by culture and ethnos even better. IE- if Greek culture had an overall score in the world depending how well it was doing that gave foreign cultures harder or easier time to convert its captured populations. So Syracuse might fall to Rome but if Macedon was expanding for Romans to convert Greeks in Syracuse could take full 200 turns modified by how well Roma culture was doing. If Epirus on the other hand conquered Syracuse then it might take only 100 turns as they both share Greek culture.

    I am not a fan of realtime (get enough of that in Paradox games)for campaign turns though I really do think the turns should be random. Sometimes your enemy moves first, twice in a row, sometimes you do. Would create many more 'surprise' attacks and missed reinforcements etc as actually happened quite often but is very hard to replicate in game.

    If the above system could also have succession crises when there is not a strong official Heir that client kingdoms break away or choose to support the nearest contender. If Capitol turned rebel and the various contenders had to either kill competing contenders, or take and hold Capitol for 10 turns or something but not complete break of the realm where half goes rebel and has to be re-taken. However client kingdoms and regions in the process of being converted to occupiers culture could break away or rise in rebellion that could be interesting. So as a player you might choose more often client kingdoms until you got a strong young Heir who should be able to keep the Kingdom stable for at least the first 50 turns when the chances of rebellion in occupied regions is highest.

    The final part would be robust diplomacy with AI gains favoring enemy of enemy is friend and goals based on strength of the strongest neighboring kingdom. If a bunch of small kingdoms are isolated and warring they might always vassalize if winning a war. A small kingdom in between a large neighbor and a slightly smaller neighbor might want to emulate the larger neighbor by growing through taking over the smaller.

    Of course periodically in rebel regions or in regions undergoing succession crises new factions from a list of historical factions might arise. Or if a culture has a very low world world score and its Emperor and Heir are killed some of its regions could erupt into a new faction and culture with a relatively high world score from being fresh on the scene.

    Larger and larger kingdoms would require either very high world culture score or very high authority of the king. So expanding doesn't get easier if you conquer similar cultures as the overall cultural score might actually relatively decline if other cultures are doing better. Also the largest kingdoms would need to exist with very high cultural score or face constant succession crises without both a strong king and heir.

    I am ok with small graphics and battle AI improvements(AI keep its damn general alive) from the level in Shogun 2. Better would be to make different terrains and troops types have more penalties or bonuses according to their tactical roles. Basic infantry spearmen as the generic 'everything' unit with small bonus vs cavalry in frontal charge in open terrain while cavalry in rough terrain get a larger penalty while spearmen have neither penalty nor bonus in that same rough terrain. Units fighting a foreign culture on the foreign land have a small morale penalty while defenders on their own soil get a morale bonus.
    Last edited by Ichon; 08-03-2011 at 06:22.

  14. #14
    master of the wierd people Member Ibrahim's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Who cares
    Posts
    6,192

    Default Re: Your own TW style game: What features would you like to see?

    what I want? well, a lot. most of these are more pipe dreams though, than what is objectively possible (I'm not a good programmer, so how possible all this is, I dunno). some of my ideas reflect my dark mindset; others, my desire to simulate warfare in the 1750's, and still others, just for realism's sake.

    General:
    Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 
    1-a more moddable engine. hardcodes need to be loosened, or eliminated alltogether (depending on the feature in question)
    2-more efficient programming, so that more can be done with less memory. (if possible-I'm not a computer programmer, so I don't know if it is possible). none of the trouble we have with Empire and Napoleon: total war (don't know about S2:TW).
    3-seemless transitions between strat and battle maps.
    4-beyond that, the general idea is sound. turn based strat, realtime battlemap. best I've seen yet IMHO.


    Campaign:
    Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 
    1-a higher province limit-or none if possible.
    2-more than one sea province-if possible.
    3-a threat assessment and tradeoff assessment script for the AI. Diplomacy shouldn't be suitable for idiots, but for real rulers-and players, who no doubt suffer the exacerbating effects of an unreasonable diplomacy. no one deserves to be forced to download a force diplomacy script (no, I am not saying the FD script for RTW mods is bad or unhelpful-the opposite in fact; nor should it be taken as a negative comment to FD script designers/modders); it should be part of the game from the get-go.
    4-be able to mod AI behavior even more than we can do nowadays. down to being able to remove the silly total war mentality of the AI, so that we don't have armies getting spammed all over the place. most culture IIRC were more into limited warfare, where a single, crushing defeat is enough.
    5-be able to commit incest. perverse, but many societies did it. also, be able to "choose" the bride (not just "princesses", but noblewomen, or even commoners).
    6-more nuanced government systematic-EB comes closest to what I want, as a default.
    7-a more nuanced topographic map: gray-scale sucks at accurately reflecting basic topography.
    8-generally more detailed TGA files for maps. M2TW is taking this to the correct direction, but not quite enough.
    9-let's take out loans! srsly, states have always taken out loans. why should a total war game be any different?
    10-more economy, in the sense of being able to mint coins and standards.
    11-the ability to indeed found cities, or better still, to also be able to change province boundaries, or create new ones from scratch.
    X-I had a bunch of other ideas, but they're not on my mind atm. when I think them up again, I'll edit here.


    battlemap:

    Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 
    1-be able to mod unit formations more flexibly than we can nowadays: it is not enough to dictate distances between man and man. how about if ranks are staggered? where can we place the officers (not every army put them on the right)? we can put say, 2 in front, 7 to the back, and maybe 3 to the right, for the lulz. what about if the unit is staggared? straight? do they cadence march? if so, how well? what is the amount of space present for each man (RTW, and M2TW, aren't that good about this part)? should it be envisioned as a square, or a circle? what is the rate of march? etc.
    2-more intuitive and flexible animations, and a looser skeleton system, with looser hardcodes. you never have an idea how much a pain it is to get models to do the 1757 manual of arms, when you have to attach the weapon directly to the hand-bone; equally saddening, is when you can't make only the front rank kneel. Empire total war kinda does that, but poorly (apparently, they never actually studied musket usage). all this is a pet peeve though
    3-more flexible missile system (projectiles). this one is more involved then it seems, though I don't want to make people spend 1 hour of their lives explaining all the problems with the system in both games.
    4-be able to use multiple special abilities, when and how I want, per unit. ETW kinda does that, but only for specific circumstances (e.g. I can only build trenches in sieges IIRC). If I want to build trenches in the middle of nowhere, I should be able to.
    5-a complete gravity engine: we can save space (conceivably) if we got rid of (or minimized) death animations, in favor of a SWAT-4 esque method, where bodies drop in a less rigid manner. this should free up space (I hope) for the next point:
    6-have wounded men shown on the battlefield: I want to see (and hear) men writhing from non-lethal, or slow killing injuries. sounds sickening, but it is meant to sicken people (and maybe the AI: perhaps emotions can be simulated?). war isn't a game, so why should a video game partly about it be any different in appearance? it is part of the "edutainment" idea. if I could add smell, I would.
    7-the effects of missiles should be graduated: merely hole making the person, going through, blowing off limbs/organs, and vaporizing the victim. and so on. this leads to another concept
    8-a more complete, rational physics engine. the gravity and missile effects should be parts of it.
    9-no arcade mode playing: I don't want to see people flying 20 feet up into the air cuz a berserker hit them. I doubt anyone on this planet was, or is as strong as Shao Kahn. (warning: graphic MK6 (deception) fatality)
    8-internal organs need modelling. I'll leave you to figure this one out. nothing too complex: brains, hear, lungs, guts, and liver.
    9-the right to design, or edit from a template of a design, of fortifications. and it shouldn't be a set hard coded list.
    10-get this: the ability to name regiments. it's a pet peeve of mine, even in Empire: total war. Hessians were not numbered in the British army, which didn't even use numbers until 1751.
    11-the ability (indeed, to confirm some people here), to refit units. what if I want to change uniforms? simplify them? even get rid of them?
    12-the ability to directly model in disease and desertion. as well as making supply of the army, and a real medical department.
    13-I wanna see people getting bogged down in Flanders mud (like Agincourt), or alternately, native Americans taking deliberate cover behind trees to pick off some scarlet clad loser who thought it was a good idea to wear a shiny silver gorget round his thoat. walking in the rain in a muddy area in RTW or M2TW doesn't lead to people getting stuck, possibly up to their knees.
    14-I want to be able to directly defend beeches, or stage amphibious landing on defended beeches-at least in concept.
    15-more nuanced sieges: parallels, pavises, more siege weapons, etc.
    16-the concept of not just temporary forts and watch towers, but castles, castrae, even great walls. all built separately from the system used in M2TW
    17-the concept of "frontlines", piquets, etc. as some here have said, we shouldn't just have to capture a city to get a province-though that should be the default.
    18-sappers. we need them. I wanna build my own bridge 'cross the Rhine
    19-better ambush interface. it is not enough to be able to hide till the last minute. I want to remain concealed when firing-assuming i have camouflage, or are inside hidden chambers with portholes for shooting.
    20-because I'm a sadist: make machine guns a genuine possibility.
    21-overall, I'd like simulation possible from prehistory to maybe 1916 (1945 if you really want to stretch it).
    I was once alive, but then a girl came and took out my ticker.

    my 4 year old modding project--nearing completion: http://www.twcenter.net/forums/showthread.php?t=219506 (if you wanna help, join me).

    tired of ridiculous trouble with walking animations? then you need my brand newmotion capture for the common man!

    "We have proven, beyond a shadow of a doubt, that if we put the belonging to, in the I don't know what, all gas lines will explode " -alBernameg

  15. #15
    Villiage Idiot Member antisocialmunky's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    ゞ( ゚Д゚)ゞ
    Posts
    5,974

    Default Re: Your own TW style game: What features would you like to see?

    I'm starting to wonder, can't you mod the source engine into an RTS engine?
    http://www.hl2wars.com/

    Might be fun to just import some EB models into it. I've seen crazier things done.
    Fighting isn't about winning, it's about depriving your enemy of all options except to lose.



    "Hi, Billy Mays Here!" 1958-2009

  16. #16

    Default Re: Your own TW style game: What features would you like to see?

    Quote Originally Posted by Sylon View Post
    The ability to upgrade an existing veteran unit to a different unit. For example, upgrading a 3 chevron hastati unit into a 1 chevron principes unit, at a cost. Alternatively, being able to upgrade a unit of veteran levy phalangitai into a proper, professional phalangitai unit.
    this simply can't be a true reflection of reality, the units are an abstraction of the roughly the same people of a social class. Levies being 'promoted' like that en masse is wholly unrealistic, a group of farmers don't simply become citizens, which is what a professional soldier would be.

  17. #17

    Default Re: Your own TW style game: What features would you like to see?

    Weren't many of the class divisions based on age though? Just like modern times it takes a decade or few to accumulate wealth and the lower tier warriors might still be 'citizen' and come from good families but not have the wealth or experience to be considered a phalangitai or principes? Although I am not sure if this works across all civilizations or would be worth the effort.

  18. #18
    EBII Mod Leader Member Foot's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Brighton, East Sussex, England (GMT)
    Posts
    10,736

    Default Re: Your own TW style game: What features would you like to see?

    Quote Originally Posted by Ichon View Post
    Weren't many of the class divisions based on age though? Just like modern times it takes a decade or few to accumulate wealth and the lower tier warriors might still be 'citizen' and come from good families but not have the wealth or experience to be considered a phalangitai or principes? Although I am not sure if this works across all civilizations or would be worth the effort.
    I think his point is that a Hastati unit in a game such as TW is not the same group of people fighting over a number of years, such that after a certain number of years they all progress to the rank of Principes because they have all reached that age. A unit in TW is just a body of men of a certain class, the individuals that make up that class will certainly change over time. Over time the individuals who make up that unit will change in small numbers. Perhaps in one week, a group of 5 or so reach an age where they are then reorganised into a Principes unit, while in that same week five new individuals replace them from some other unit.

    You are trying to represent minutiae as an important gameplay mechanic, and so it stops being historical and starts being gamey. Its important to maintain the correct perspective across the game to ensure that what you represent is relevant to your representation. Focusing on small things that aren't important to your chosen perspective is what TW do, and what I wish they wouldn't.

    Foot
    Last edited by Foot; 08-05-2011 at 14:43.
    EBII Mod Leader
    Hayasdan Faction Co-ordinator


  19. #19
    Βασιλευς και Αυτοκρατωρ Αρχης Member Centurio Nixalsverdrus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Γερμανια Ελευθερα
    Posts
    2,321

    Default Re: Your own TW style game: What features would you like to see?

    Great responses here.

    The ability to fight naval battles on the battle map is quite desireable, Antinous. Also a reputation system like Skullhead said, changing the attitude of foreign powers towards your empire according to your power and conduct, and perhaps on how serious you take the fullfillment of treaties.

    I wonder a bit though that nobody besides me thinks that technological progress would be a good idea. I can imagine, for example, when Greeks conquer Rome, they could easily adopt the 3rd tier roads and the bigges aqueducts.

    Some ppl mentioned they wanted TW in realtime. I don't think that's a good idea. Realtime strategy is just a pain in the ass imho, since you would have to constanty monitor what's going on without the time to really think about your next moves. It would bring TW even more to total war instead of politicking and strategic cunning. In reality, things are going so slow that you normally have far more time than in a game.

    To summarize it, I think TW games could benefit more from the Civilization series.

  20. #20
    Member Member TiberiusClaudiusMarcellus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    St. George, UT
    Posts
    15

    Default Re: Your own TW style game: What features would you like to see?

    Quote Originally Posted by Centurio Nixalsverdrus View Post
    To summarize it, I think TW games could benefit more from the Civilization series.
    Amen, Amen, Amen.

    I loved how your civ's culture could be checked on the map as an overlay and if your civ's was high and your neighbor's was not it could inspire revolts without you necessarily acting towards that effect. Imagine how that would make EB even more awesome and random. The great thing about it, too, would be that you couldn't just start spamming "culture" buildings; rather the combination of your military strength , city development, trade, and elapsed time would be the determining factors.

    And the effect would be near your cities / "high culture" areas. If you had some dumb little village on your border, it couldn't possibly exert influence into the neighboring rural areas, but could be susceptible to the large city that the neighboring empire has just down the road.

    Fun, fun stuff.

  21. #21
    master of the wierd people Member Ibrahim's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Who cares
    Posts
    6,192

    Default Re: Your own TW style game: What features would you like to see?

    @ Centurio: I largely agree with your assessment. however, I do feel the need to state a few things here, in response. a devil's advocate, so to speak.

    Quote Originally Posted by Centurio Nixalsverdrus View Post
    I wonder a bit though that nobody besides me thinks that technological progress would be a good idea. I can imagine, for example, when Greeks conquer Rome, they could easily adopt the 3rd tier roads and the bigges aqueducts.
    I see where you come from, but to me, the Civ series' technological progress system strikes me as busy work. If you can come up with a more hands-off system, I'd be eager to support it, but I don't see where it is possible. and for the record, I have the same opinion of E:TW and N:TW regarding technology.


    Quote Originally Posted by Centurio Nixalsverdrus View Post
    To summarize it, I think TW games could benefit more from the Civilization series.
    I agree, but to an extent. I do admire the Civ series deplomacy, and the way cities can be founded, and built up in all manner of ways. but as mentioned, I have reservations regarding the technological progress feature. Having played Civs I through III, they all come across as great games. but that last part always feels like busy work.

    I dunno, it's just a feeling I get regarding the technology thing.


    Quote Originally Posted by fomalhaut View Post
    this simply can't be a true reflection of reality, the units are an abstraction of the roughly the same people of a social class. Levies being 'promoted' like that en masse is wholly unrealistic, a group of farmers don't simply become citizens, which is what a professional soldier would be.
    true, but what about cases where the soldiers are simply re-equipped, so as to pretty much get "promoted"? like, for example, the so called "Marian reforms"? otherwise, I see your point.
    Last edited by Ibrahim; 08-06-2011 at 06:25.
    I was once alive, but then a girl came and took out my ticker.

    my 4 year old modding project--nearing completion: http://www.twcenter.net/forums/showthread.php?t=219506 (if you wanna help, join me).

    tired of ridiculous trouble with walking animations? then you need my brand newmotion capture for the common man!

    "We have proven, beyond a shadow of a doubt, that if we put the belonging to, in the I don't know what, all gas lines will explode " -alBernameg

  22. #22

    Default Re: Your own TW style game: What features would you like to see?

    Quote Originally Posted by Ichon View Post
    Weren't many of the class divisions based on age though? Just like modern times it takes a decade or few to accumulate wealth and the lower tier warriors might still be 'citizen' and come from good families but not have the wealth or experience to be considered a phalangitai or principes? Although I am not sure if this works across all civilizations or would be worth the effort.
    as Foot said, this could perhaps be done on an individual basis, but not per taxeis/cohort/unit and thus could not be reflected in the game engine meaningfully.

    I completely disagree, Civilization has gone done a path I cannot follow in recent iterations. If you want how diplomacy, culture, politick and warfare should feel on a macro level Alpha Centauri is the standard. Turn based then real time battles are the way to go though, real time? leave that to those games where you trade men for meat and swords turn buildings on fire by wacking them (Age of Empires or whatever)

  23. #23

    Default Re: Your own TW style game: What features would you like to see?

    The problem of promoted units mainly arises because a) many players don't train armies that give the entire spectrum of society (through financial problems or because they like to spam a certain unit) and b) most campaigns don't take a season or maybe two but several years due to the 4tpy which in turn makes it strange to run around with a unit of ... jugunthiz for 5 years as by that time they'd probably all be dugunthiz. With more tpy or realtime this "problem" would be somewhat removed as a campaign can end at harvest time.
    "Who fights can lose, who doesn't fight has already lost."
    - Pyrrhus of Epirus

    "Durch diese hohle Gasse muss er kommen..."
    - Leonidas of Sparta

    "People called Romanes they go the House"
    - Alaric the Visigoth

  24. #24
    Member Member I_damian's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    England
    Posts
    242

    Default Re: Your own TW style game: What features would you like to see?

    Obviously I would like an AI that is actually intelligent, or at least able to keep its army in formation and carry out simple manouvers, such as keeping spearmen in reserve to counter your cavalry, or using their cavalry to take out your cavalry rather than just using it to headbutt your front lines and die. But since games now are about shiny shiny and nothing more, I can't have that.

    SO! What I would like that I can think of off the top of my head: Unlimited factions so that every historical people can be represented in mods, and I would also like for there to be some recognition of human and AI behaviour. If I'm good and I don't attack my allies, the longer I don't attack them, the more loyal they should become, until a point is reached where nothing will make them declare war except me doing something really, really bad. Empire had this, kind of, but it was just a little box that said your allies trust you. In reality, if you shared a border, they were going to attack eventually, no matter how many gifts you have.

    Above everything else though, I would love for it to become more difficult to manage your faction as it grows bigger and in to an empire, as historically was. This has kind of been present in all the TW games so far, but for example in RTW, a settlement far away might rebel, but only that settlement, and they would throw out the troops and governor. What should happen, is the settlement should rebel WITH the governor and troops, declare independence, and other cities around it should join in to form a proper faction. This happened in MTW, why they took it out is just baffling.
    EBII has finally released. All hail the EBII team!

  25. #25
    master of the wierd people Member Ibrahim's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Who cares
    Posts
    6,192

    Default Re: Your own TW style game: What features would you like to see?

    Quote Originally Posted by Ca Putt View Post
    The problem of promoted units mainly arises because a) many players don't train armies that give the entire spectrum of society (through financial problems or because they like to spam a certain unit) and b) most campaigns don't take a season or maybe two but several years due to the 4tpy which in turn makes it strange to run around with a unit of ... jugunthiz for 5 years as by that time they'd probably all be dugunthiz. With more tpy or realtime this "problem" would be somewhat removed as a campaign can end at harvest time.
    or, you could just implement a mechanic that allows for individuals in the first unit to be transferred to the nearest Dugunthiz unit (or even create a new one), as soon as the unit gains a certain level of xp.

    so maybe:

    1 bronze chevron: 5 dugunthiz
    2: another 5
    3: another 5

    It's just another suggestion.

    and so on.
    I was once alive, but then a girl came and took out my ticker.

    my 4 year old modding project--nearing completion: http://www.twcenter.net/forums/showthread.php?t=219506 (if you wanna help, join me).

    tired of ridiculous trouble with walking animations? then you need my brand newmotion capture for the common man!

    "We have proven, beyond a shadow of a doubt, that if we put the belonging to, in the I don't know what, all gas lines will explode " -alBernameg

  26. #26
    Βασιλευς και Αυτοκρατωρ Αρχης Member Centurio Nixalsverdrus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Γερμανια Ελευθερα
    Posts
    2,321

    Default Re: Your own TW style game: What features would you like to see?

    What I so far forgot to mention:

    - decimation of your troops on campaign due to sickness, famine, and bad weather! In reality by far the biggest share of casualties was due to these factors.

    - blood and mutilation on the battlefield! But that's not a top priority I admit.
    Last edited by Centurio Nixalsverdrus; 08-07-2011 at 19:46.

  27. #27

    Default Re: Your own TW style game: What features would you like to see?

    I would like to see more realistic sieges that are actually fun to play. Not sure how to do this exactly.

    Two things for starters.

    1: Could we atleast make the battle field look like it is undersiege? Like the cities should be surrounded with camps, waggons, baggage, supplies, animals, servants etc.

    2: Dismountable Cavalry units. Chariots are effectivly useless during a siege. Casse bodyguards should automatically be dismounted into a Calawre or whatever.

  28. #28
    master of the wierd people Member Ibrahim's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Who cares
    Posts
    6,192

    Default Re: Your own TW style game: What features would you like to see?

    Quote Originally Posted by Centurio Nixalsverdrus View Post
    What I so far forgot to mention:

    - decimation of your troops on campaign due to sickness, famine, and bad weather! In reality by far the biggest share of casualties was due to these factors.

    - blood and mutilation on the battlefield! But that's not a top priority I admit.
    1-at least until WW1. maybe we could have diseases varying, so that say, in areas that are awampy we get Malaria and yellow fever? or along floodplains and in siege conditions, have severe outbreaks of Typhus or Typhoid? or, if we're in the right spot, bubonic plague or smallpox. these all have varying lethalities (from almost 100% for bubonic plague to ~33% for smallpox), and those who are affected by don't die tend to be unfit for combat for a while (or invalided home). that's why in my list, I stated the need for a medical department: if you could implement a script that creates regulations or similar on an army, that effects hygene, you could lower the death rate (or raise it?). then of course it's needed for the wounded: better the medical service, the higher the survival rate from a serious injury.

    2-it's not, but it adds feeling.
    Last edited by Ibrahim; 08-08-2011 at 07:00.
    I was once alive, but then a girl came and took out my ticker.

    my 4 year old modding project--nearing completion: http://www.twcenter.net/forums/showthread.php?t=219506 (if you wanna help, join me).

    tired of ridiculous trouble with walking animations? then you need my brand newmotion capture for the common man!

    "We have proven, beyond a shadow of a doubt, that if we put the belonging to, in the I don't know what, all gas lines will explode " -alBernameg

  29. #29

    Default Re: Your own TW style game: What features would you like to see?

    Personally, I would like to see a much more detailed game on the campaign map where issues such as supply, logistics, finances, army morale etc all played a much more important element. I want far more control about where are how I fight my battles, I dont want every fight to be about getting to a settlement and the rest of the map largely ignored. resources should be important, control of regions should be important, proper planning and development of reserves/supply lines etc should be important. For me also this would mean many more turns so that we can get more realistic movement rates into place. Perhaps even simultaenous turns. Probably this would also mean fewer battles as a percentage of game time. I would happily accept a smaller map if this were to be implemented properly.

    I would also add that as many, many battle in ancient times were fought at or very near rivers, that a wider range of strategic options became available to a commander around a river. For example building pontoons or boats, destroying bridges, shadowing an opponent on the otehr side of the river. etc.

    On the battle map I would like to see unit movement speed vastly reduced so that bad positioning actually means something. There would need to be a "speed up" button like in old MTW (which maxed at a seeming speed of light timescale) to make this viable. I would like to see units behave more realistically so that they would not reliably obey to the letter what their general told them every time and perhaps move out of the players control entirely if they moved too far from the commander. A delay in receiving orders would also be good.
    Last edited by Cambyses; 08-08-2011 at 19:36.

  30. #30
    Member Member Satyros's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Hellas
    Posts
    158

    Default Re: Your own TW style game: What features would you like to see?

    I say let the game be gamey .

    The simulationist approach would bog down the TW experience with irrelevant and uninteresting detail ( for most players ) .

    If the game is good "out of the box" , I guess the good modding folks would then give us the excellent , polished ( and niche ) TW experience . EB proves beyond doubt this point , even with the hard-coded severe limitations and handicaps of the RTW engine/game taken into account .

    But for a "gamey" TW game to be good , a good tactical and strategic AI is absolutely required .

    But I'm under the impression that nowadays the TW games are not even "mod-able" , are they ?

    Oh well ..

    Satyros
    Smell the battle in the wind, before you see us.Winterhorde of furyride, the wind will lead us.

Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO