Ur Wish list for a ADD-ON-PACK

[FasT]

k post them here what u would like to be added to make MTW better!
The DEv's areant sayin there gunna be one...(ADD ON PACK)that is
But post a few idea's maybe they can be convinced if demand is great enuf and ideas r acceptable for them to do so......
Lets really make this game Awesome!Balanced,Fun!For Both MP/SP.......

Sensible ideas plzs.....Maybe CA will take note and release there is a great demand for such..

It also can be used to improve xistin game also....

------------------
http://homepage.ntlworld.com/markuk/TEST/FasTsig.gif
Wolves (http://wolves.tiscaliweb.nl/)

[Rnold]

#1: diplomacy, diplomacy, DIPLOMACY!!! http://www.totalwar.org/ubb/biggrin.gif

[MonkeyMan]

siege engines
moats
battles @ sea
map extended east
loads more v&v
elephants

loads more units, particularly in late period for others than HRE and Turks

Larger timeline both back in time and forward.

and i'll probs. think of more later.

[Rosacrux]

#1 Diplomacy more of it and also more efficient - make relatively peaceful play an option, not an oddity.

#2 Sortable lists

#3 more strategic options

#4 a new game map (bigger and/or more detailed - ie. more provinces)

#5 Seasonal turns

#6 stacked movement of the strategic agents

#7 Beef up a bit the cavalry, give heavy cav some kind of fear effect/bonus, bigger cav units etc.

#8 Well... that's all I can think of now.

[chunkynut]

Well the timescale ends just before the colonial ages so ...... maybe that.

But for that the rebel americas (red indians) would be well rebel and mostly boring without some major DIPLOMACY!! http://www.totalwar.org/ubb/smile.gif

must have more diplomatic options in this great war game! http://www.totalwar.org/ubb/smile.gif

[The Yogi]

Diplomacy!

Completely different sets of AI for World Conquest and Glory Goal SP play.

Glory Goal AI should strive to recreate Middle Age behaviour, ie the Turks could still be ravenous expansionists, but most others should mainly defend/reconquer what they have or follow some historical amibition (Spanish reconquista, 100 years war etc).

Generals swappable between units!

[This message has been edited by The Yogi (edited 10-29-2002).]

[MonkeyMan]

automation of units -

assasins - kill enemies in my regions only.

Spy - do your own thing in my lands and tell me whats happening

Princess - go marry into faction without me having to find an emissary/king.

military -
go to here as fast as possible
go here retrain and stay
go here retrain and come back
find damaged units and merge yourself to them

Crusades -

Crusade to here (by land/sea)and fight your own battles
Crusade here "" "" and give me the option to fight the battles.

etc. etc.

Retrain a unit of x into y or allow generals to swap units.

[falaffel]

Units on the walls.

Further improve the tactical ai ( which imho is already good ).

Further improve the strategic ai.

The strength of the ai makes or breaks a game.

[FasT]

Units on walls and in tower would be great!IMO
Keep um comin.......
Im sure the DeV's will drop by....

[Heinrich VI]

1. Diplomacy!
2. overview screens (look at civ2)
porovince overview:
units/buildings currently in production
trade overview (a better one)
army overview (a better one!)
3. improve the ai so they dont need their "magical" extra turn.

[MonkeyMan]

A complete family tree, showing each king and his heirs and links to foreign royals, for the current and previous generations

(even a starting one for historical accuracy)

Option to keep captured nobles prisoner in your castles rather than have the ai ransom or kill them. Then the ability to use them as bargaining tools in diplomacy or even trade them between allies or do POW exchanges. "I'll raise you one french 5 star heir for that captured HRE princess to join my hareem and be my bitch slave and i'll have Joan of Arc while i'm at it" http://www.totalwar.org/ubb/smile.gif

[MonkeyMan]

And the option to send spys on daring rescue attempts or move them between castle prisons, in a - come on i dare you to send an army to take back whats yours.

Then of course to option to rescue them for your allies and release them to improve relations in general.

[Duke of Cornwall]

The idea of 'reserves'.

You pay for and create a unit normally, but then have the option to 'mothball' them.

While mothballed their support costs are halved but you cannot relocate them or use them in combat.

To re-activiate, you must pay an activation cost (and perhaps wait one year ?).

Such an feature would allow for a more realistic Expand, Stabilise and Develop strategy where some troops could be mothballed during the stabilisation or development periods.


[This message has been edited by Duke of Cornwall (edited 10-29-2002).]

[Cousin Zoidfarb]

Factions:

1. Lithuania
2. Bohemia
3. The Balkan states (I made it up but I doubt the devs would include a separate Serbia, Bulgaria, Moldavia etc.)
4. The Timurids they would arrive like the Golden Horde except they should have a very high level general.
5. The Holy Orders (Templars, Hospitalers, etc);would be nice if they were their own faction and would send troops if you were allied to them and called a crusade. It would also allow you to have conflicts with them as what was seen historically.

Units:

1. Field obstacles ie caltrops, abatis, stakes, the unsung heroes of the Hundred Years war, as they protected the longbows from the knights' charge.
2. Lithuanian cavalry; most were unarmoured and threw their lances so should be like jinetes.
3. Russian/Slav heavy cavalry; before they were subhjects of the golden horde they fought mostly with the lance.
4. Elephants; Timur had them at Ankara in Turkey in 1402.
5. Cossacks; maybe anachronistic but were infantry arquebusers at their start.
6. War Wagons

Better diplomacy.
Heraldry for title-bearers.
Get rid of princesses or make them have some impact.
Make cavalry stronger.
Make spears mostly defensive units.

I think Total War III should be a medieval setting again. The devs should concentrate on diplomacy this time around.


[This message has been edited by Beavis (edited 10-29-2002).]

[AgentBif]

My biggest wishes for an expansion are:

1) anti-carpal features:

Mult-column sort lists for units: command rating, accumen, number of men, valor, unit type. Allow multi-column sort (ie: sort first by accumen, then sort by command rating).

Ability to flag units with one or more categories. Ability to list all units that match a certain category (maybe even boolean logic for selecting lists of units). For example: I'd like to mark all my units with more than 4 accumen so I don't lose track of them. Another example: I'd like to be able to mark units with a name so that I know that they are intended for use in a certain army or region or intended for garrison in a certain province. Allow multiple categories per unit.

Provinces: total income, farm income, trade income, number of men, number of units, loyalty, tax rate.

2) Complete the manual. Detailed unit list. Detailed building list (with benefits, including specific title benefits). Explain specific affects of all the general's stats. List of vices and virtues and what triggers them. Website would be fine.

3) Make trade useful when playing war style game on the strategic map. Perhaps allow reduced income from trade network with own provinces. There are balance issues here, but it would be fun if trade were a relevant investment, even if you are planning on becoming the big power that everyone hates.

4) Make cavalry relevant. In reality, knights were the primary attack force, infantry and archers were supporting arms for the knights. Make knights so cost effective per man that it becomes a viable choice to use them as your primary straight-in attack force. This would likely best be done by a combination of reduced cost, improved stats, and better morale impact on enemies.

If the game were to match reality, people who want to try a cavalry approach should be fielding 20-40% knights in the early and high periods... Even more. That's 5-10 units of chivalrics, for example.

5) Fix the order-of-battle screen (F1). It seems inconsistent. Provide an explanation for what this screen actually reports. Clearly indicate the impacts of your general, enemy general, and external factors (outnumbered, etc).

6) Option to disable vices. Option to disable virtues. Perhaps an option to adjust probabilities of gaining vices and virtues.

7) Long file names! Why in the world do you restrict the user to such short names for save files? It's my disk space, allow my to use it up however I want!

8) Scale bar to adjust fatigue impact.

9) Scale bar to adjust missile unit ammo.

Those are the major things I can think of off the top of my head... Hope you guys are reading this thread CA!

bif

[Ckrisz]

Playable Mongols.

[sassbarman]

more balanced ai armies no more 8 ballistas that i can sit and laugh at with my 3 units of calvary. have ai utilize better units that it can produce other than urban mil. and peasants. nothing worse than rolling into novograd provinces 200 years into the game with heavy infantry and staring back across the battle field at you is a horde of woodsmen- boring! still a great game.

[muffinman14]

make artillery a little bit more effective especially balistas. Siege towers and motts. Flaming arrows. moveable artillery. Crossing alied territory without attacking it. Sea battles that u control. Bigger battles where allies play more of a key role and fight side by side more often.

[spiffy_scimitar]

Exploding chickens.

[Richard the Slayer]

Quote Originally posted by spiffy_scimitar:
Exploding chickens.[/QUOTE]

yea the exploding chickens are long overdue.

[Richard the Slayer]

Quote Originally posted by muffinman14:
make artillery a little bit more effective especially balistas. Siege towers and motts. Flaming arrows. moveable artillery. Crossing alied territory without attacking it. Sea battles that u control. Bigger battles where allies play more of a key role and fight side by side more often.[/QUOTE]

Yea, especially if you want to start recreating famous battles on a 1:1 scale. Unfortunately multiplayer battles in MTW are basically 8 or so countries meeting in one area with all their units and for some odd reason forming teams of 4 each and then on top of that fighting for no apparent reason. The sad thing is is that the game has no much potential so that players could all be on the same side (and country, egyptians fighting alongside french, thats odd) and line up together and organize a tactical battle. Unfortunately for all the potential MTW has CA seems content with turning into another AOK fantasy Medieval wargame.

[LittleGrizzly]

maybe its all a bit too early to discuss patch ect.

[Boondock Saint]

Without reading any of the above replies I would really love to see the issues in the PATCH resolved ... wouldnt that be one hell of an expansion?

Actually .. all i care about is the whole not being able to upgrade royal knights ....

------------------
Dont blame me for my son stan he saw the damn cartoon and now he's off to join the clan! BLAME CANADA BLAME CANADA!

It seems everythings gone wrong since Canada came along!

.com ref #123321003

Johnny human torch, a bag full of oily rags and a lighter.

[Dionysus9]

I havent seen a single suggestion so far that I don't wholeheartedly embrace. They are all good suggestions and would make the game better (bugs aside, is that possible? yeah, I guess so)

In my mind the next big improvement should be battlefield obstacles (stakes, burms, etc.). Very important in warfare from 5000 BC to Vietnam.

I play Multiplayer almost exclusively, so most of my wishlist items are for Multi (I only list stuff that not in the patch and hasnt been mentioned above)--

A) Somthing to make it easier to recognize the direction any given unit is facing. Perhaps a faint arrow pointing in the facing direction.

B) Better control over grouped units on the move (should be able to cancel a move order and have the unit retain its original formation instead of "freezing" in a jumble). Also should be able to spin (re-face)a group in the midst of a movement order.

C)MONKS, NAGINATA, AND NODACHI!!!!!

D)Variable unit sizes, where cost depends on number of men selected. You could still have a maximum of 100 men per unit, but if you want to have a unit consisting of a single V4 royal knight, you should be able to.

E) Better MP stability

F) a "Save Game" feature for MP games

G) An option within MP games that allows both sides to "call it a day" and encamp in their present positions to restore fatigued troops. The screen would go dark and you'd get new weather with the same troops (in same positions) with no fatigue. Many times I see attackers and defenders staring at the screen for 15 minutes while their troops rest--this is lame. Otherwise a time slider that can be adjusted by mutual agreement.

H) Multiplayer diplomacy! The ability to offer a draw or to negotiate a cease-fire based on the exchange of prisoners/etc.

G) A "top view" option so you can look down from 180 degrees overhead. This would be a 2D view, but would work great for moving units around -- esp. on flat map.

H) The ability to "bend" units into curved lines instead of always having them in boxes.

I) More complex orders for units. For ex., for Hashis-- "Sit hidden until enemy passes, then shoot them in the back". Stuff like that. For Cavalry "attack ranged units until infantry or cav responds, then fall back to previous position" (I.e. complex skirmishing instructions). For infantry "attempt to flank left", etc.

J) The ability to assign a unit to "guard" another unit. I.e. "follow the general and attack any units that attempt to engage him".


Gah! I got a ton more.... but that is somethings for them to work on...

[EGr]

1.) All those economy releated buildings that are in the Descriptions file.

2.) More provinces and a bigger map.

------------------
http://ww-underground.com/staff/upload/Elite%20Guard/elitesig.gif

[Hakonarson]

1/ field fortifications and movement/battle effects for linear obstacles like hedges & walls,

2/ add swamps and rocky ground as terrain on battle maps.

3/ better stacking of items in provinces so it's easier to pick up & drop units

4/ stacking of strategic agents!!! (jeez I hate having to make the same trip 6 times to move a bunch of spies/assassins/bishops/ etc around!!)

5/ "click to pick, click to drop" for units so you don't have to drag a unit across the strategic map - to save my mouse button finger!! (ie you click a unit to pick it, then drop it with another click over a province rateh than having to actually hold the mouse button down do drag and drop it)

[Hakonarson]

and...

6/ disease effects for beseigers

[Lord Romulous]

agree with most of what above people have said. I think they should also consider the following

1. improve function of castles.
a. for fortificatons castle and above you do not lose your city upgrades ie spearmen guild, armourer etc. until after the castle falls. farms and ports should be destroyed as currently stands.

b. significant attrition to invading forces if they chosse to seige the castle (rather than assaulting)the defenders should not lose so many forces if any during protracted seige.

c. improve castle defence ai. eg seige towers should target mags, trebs and cannons first. increase attackers losses to arrow,gun,balista fire. walls should continue to fire until atleast 60% of attackers are beyond the given wall after this they should fire at 40% of usual ROF.

d. make the victory conditions for winning a castle battle if you are the attacker
i. breach all walls of fortification and smash down door of keep (put a door in the keep)
ii. kill all defenders or rout them off map.
the way it is at the moment the castle can still have unbreached walls but you win anyway cause you have killed off enemy unit.

2. strat map.
a. make it so you can see hover the pointer over a unit and a tool tip comes up giving its name and current movement order and destiantion if any.

b. you can make certain units temporarly dispapeer from strat map to minmise clutter.

c. make strat agents stackable. (option though cause some might not like this)

d. fix the v &v so it makes proper sence. eg no good runner on the first withdraw and you should be able to lose the bad vice if you win or dont withdraw a certain number of times.

Manual
please give us a comprehensive manual. i dont mind paying extra for the game. having so many features unexplained is really frustrating.

Battle map.
a.have music run for the entire battle.

b.make replays rewindable.

c. allow us a ground view of the battle. right now the lowest setting is slightly above heads of combatants.

d. improve the difficulty or skill of 4-6 star ai generals.

e. if under arrow fire the ai should sometimes make a decision to charge with all units (accept perhaps reserves etc). ie at the moment you can just have the ai charge one unit at a time and i massacre them.

Diplomacy
more intelligent ai dip. (although it is quite good already IMO)

Custom, historical battles etc.
allow the battle to end like in sp campaign ie no early victorys cause enemy is routing.

PLEAE NOTE > while i am all for extra factions and units it should not be at the expense of the other and imho much more important suggustions listed here.
To often you find x packs just add a bunch of units and countries but fail to actual improve the game. i dont want the same mtw as i have now with a few extra units or factions. that = boring and i wont buy the x pack. esp considering i can get new units and factions for free by downloading one of the excellent free mods being devloped by the comumunity.

phew..... there is more but thats enough for one session. id love sea battles but understand that would take about 6 months to do so maybe for next TW.

thanks CA for making a great game as is. and for making a game that also has huge potential for a x pack.


[This message has been edited by Lord Romulous (edited 10-30-2002).]

[Richard the Slayer]

Quote Originally posted by Hakonarson:
and...

6/ disease effects for beseigers[/QUOTE]

I hear that.

[Spino]

Good heavens... yet ANOTHER expansion pack thread! And yet whenever one pops up I always feel compelled to add my two cents in the hopes that the devs will take my suggestions to heart... http://www.totalwar.org/ubb/wink.gif

1) Dark Ages time frame. Begin sometime between 600-700AD (marking the decline of the mighty Byzantine empire and the rise of the Umayyad Caliphate and the Franks). A period of almost uninterrupted warfare that constantly changed the political geography of Europe and the Middle East. Bloody good fun...

2) Vastly improved Strategic and Tactical AI. This goes without saying as the strength and longevity of this game is dependent on the challenges provided by the AI. Strategically speaking the AI fights too many two, three and four front wars and fails to build up its provinces properly. Tactically speaking I'd like to see the AI better manage its formations and commit to decisive action more frequently.

3) Lists, lists, lists! Lots of detailed, sortable lists for armies, agents, generals, etc.

4) Empire overview screens for each aspect of your faction (nod to Heinrich VI)

5) Improved political model. As far as GA campaigns go the current political system is far too crude and caters more toward the Domination style of play. Maybe something along the lines of the Civilization series. It would be nice to have some sort of disposition meter or value for each faction to give you a better idea of how they value their relationship with you.

6) The ability to cycle out artillery units for fresh reinforcements. This is especially critical during castle assaults when the attacker may need as many men on the field as possible.

7) More logical V&V bonuses/penalties. This has been covered in exhaustive detail in other threads.

8) The ability to send armies into allied territory (other than to relieve sieges). With an improved political model this would make much more sense. About a month ago I posted an idea that borrows from the crusade/jihad concept. It's called an Expeditionary Force and would place severe restrictions on armies that travel through allied territories in order to prevent backstabbing.

9) More playable factions. While a Dark Ages expansion would bring with it a number of newer 'older' factions (Umayyads, Bulgars, Lombards, Visigoths, Franks, Avars, Saxons, etc.) I would still like to be able to play the Hungarians, Sicilians and Mongols in the current game.

10) Additional campaign games with varying goals. Maybe some variations on the current Domination and Glorious Achievement campaigns?

11)"click to pick, click to drop" for units so you don't have to drag a unit across the strategic map - to save my mouse button finger!! (ie you click a unit to pick it, then drop it with another click over a province rateh than having to actually hold the mouse button down do drag and drop it) (good call Hakonarson!)

12) Better agent control. Yes/No option to limit your Assassins to the province they currently occupy (or to friendly provinces) when given a target to kill. It stinks losing a high valor assassin because his target decided to go on a world tour.

13) Replays should start AFTER the Setup phase is over. There's nothing duller than having to fast forward through several minutes of pre-battle drudgery in order to relive old glory... http://www.totalwar.org/ubb/wink.gif

14) Tons of new battlefield maps or a random map generator for tactical battles. I realize there are hundreds of premade maps (373 to be precise) for the tactical battles (with 182 of those devoted to castle assaults which are far less common) but it is more than a bit disappointing see the same map pop up several times in the same campaign. If a map generator is not feasible then please devote most of the new maps to field battles and NOT castle assaults.

15) Field fortifications and obstacles. These are great suggestions that I wholeheartedly agree with.

16) Siege engines? Battering rams? Siege Towers?

[Lord Cobol]

1: Option to surrender a castle under siege. Garrison marches to nearest province, and no buildings are trashed (assuming that they postpone destroying buildings until the castle falls like everyone else is requesting.

2: Make ALL factions playable. Maybe make some rebels into separate factions too.

3: Have the unit tabs line up left-to-right in the same order as the units line up on the screen. If you drag a bunch of units into a line, don't have them waste time marching diagonally to reverse their positions.

4: Include more scenarios in the box. Make some smaller (fewer provinces on the map).

5: Option to either disable Crusades, or stop them from recruiting while they travel (hint: I care more about playability than historical accuracy).

6: Make it easier to move bunches of agents across the map. Either let us stack them or let us control-click them.

7: Let us tell assassins not to follow the target outside our borders. Or, don't have the targets run so far so often.

8: Make alliances more effective, like MANY others have requested.

9, 10, 11, etc: More factions, new cultures, like Iran, Khwarezm / Turkestan, India, China, Mongolia, Vietnam, Japan, etc. Ok with me if they do a few at a time and keep collecting money from me for the next 3 or 4 years.

[Lord Cobol]

Forgot to mention, of course India & China mean elephants & new religions.

[AgentBif]

Quote Originally posted by spiffy_scimitar:
Exploding chickens.[/QUOTE]

Oooh yeah, and cowtapults too!

I fart in your general direction!

moooOOOOOOOOO!!!

Run away! Run Away!

-*splat*-

bif

[Ktonos]

[A] Diplomacy
1. Ability to bribe an ally (or be paid) to wage war against another faction.
2. Ability to move armies through allied territory if permission is given. Expeditionary armies can attack the ally, but if they are not in an allied territory near one of yours, they will take random losses before the battle,depending on the zeal of the territory, each turn.
3. Ability to bribe an enemy to make peace,or a neutral to get allied to you.
4. Ability to bribe other factions using either florins,provinces,units or captured nobles.
5. Ability to select if the captured nobles are ransomed back,holded hostages or executed.

[AgentBif]

Quote Originally posted by Spino:
11)"click to pick, click to drop" for units so you don't have to drag a unit across the strategic map - to save my mouse button finger!! (ie you click a unit to pick it, then drop it with another click over a province rateh than having to actually hold the mouse button down do drag and drop it)[/QUOTE]

YES. Another anti-carpal feature.

I strongly endorse this suggestion!

bif

[Duke of Cornwall]

Two more that have yet to be mentioned...

1. Being able to select your initial 16 units before a battle AND the ability to choose which unit comes on as a reinforcement.

2. The ability to drag & drop unit tiles in the preview area. This would allow you to sort units within an army as you want (no more *wierd* sorting).

[Razorman400]

I like all the ideas people have posted so far. These are a few things I think would be interesting.

1.) Tribute - I think it would be great to give money to another faction, keep them happy, or help them as trading partners to fight off other factions. Also if you are a very powerful faction, you could demand tribute instead of destroying their nation. Maybe they could become a vassel state, which is only partially under your control. The Golden Horde mainly consisted of vassel states as well.

2.) Have mutliple armies of the same faction on the battlefield instead of only 16 units and reinforcements. Since it would be to hard to control more then 16 units, have the other 16 be one of your AI controlled generals. Then also have basic orders which you can give them such as charge hill, hold bridge, attack left flank, etc. This would also be for the AI factions as well, making battles between two nations reach up to 10,000 soldiers instead of numerous small battles.

3.) Possibly some kind of speed ratio for armies in campaign mode. Having an army consisting mostly of cavalry move faster then a infantry based army. This could maybe work by allowing fast armies to move two providences or being able to outrun slower armies trying to retreat. This might make things to complicated but I hate it taking an entire year to make only one move.

[Ktonos]

[A] Diplomacy
1. Ability to bribe an ally (or be paid) to wage war against another faction.
2. Ability to move armies through allied territory if permission is given. Expeditionary armies can attack the ally, but if they are not in an allied territory near one of yours, they will take random losses before the battle,depending on the zeal of the territory, each turn.
3. Ability to bribe an enemy to make peace,or a neutral to get allied to you.
4. Ability to bribe other factions using either florins,provinces,units or captured nobles.
5. Ability to select if the captured nobles are ransomed back,holded hostages or executed.
[B] Strategic Map Aspects
1. Pope must excommunicate the aggressor not the weaker.
2. Create an equal of Crusades an Jihad for the Orthodox. "Hierapostoli" (Sacred Mission), a peacefule "crusade" with strategic agents which will "civilize" the rebel territories.
3. Each general/heir should have his own religion (Holy Symbols on Piety ability depend on character religion). Always they should believe in the Religion of the faction but there should be exceptions. These characters for example could be used to govern captured provinces of their religion.
4. Kings "Influence" should decrease whenever he brake an alliance.
[C] Tactical Aspects
1. Small boost of Heavy Cavalry charge.
2. Remove/reduce bonus vs cavalry from a few spear units.
3. The graphics of the dead in the battlefield should come with some blood.
4. (Maybe it is too much, but it would add much to the atmosphere) Verbals from your servant (you know "The enemy general is running like a wipped dog") in the language of the faction you control.

[Ktonos]

PS.

Strategic Aspects:

1. Harder to keep loyal the people. It shouldnt be that easy to have very high taxes and 200% loyality with 1 or 2 units on it.

2. More severe random events. Maybe Plague should make the province not to produce income at all(instead of the half penalty)

3. Coinage and currency could be named differently when you control a different faction. Eg for the Byzantines instead of florins there could be Bezantinia,Statires or Iperpyron. For the Germans Doukates(?) etc.

[Michael the Great]

Improve the damned charges going all the way through out the other side,heavy cav should have a much harder charge on units who can't properly defend against them(like archers!!!).
And include swamps,who slow units down,and reduce the charge from cav.

------------------
Io,Mihai-Voda,din mila lui Dumnezeu,domn al Tarii Romanesti,Tarii Ardealului si a toata tara Moldovei.

[FasT]

As the DEV's can see there is a great demand for one...So lets make it so..
Plzs pass this info onto ur boSS! http://www.totalwar.org/ubb/biggrin.gif

[Rnold]

stacking up agents, did someone say that?

[Swoosh So]

A quick patch to fix the bugs in the addon pack http://www.totalwar.org/ubb/smile.gif

[Cousin Zoidfarb]

Add the option to conscript captured soldiers, instead of just being able to ransom.

[TheViking]

A Fantasy TotalWar is a must

------------------
There I see my father.
There I see my mother, my sisters and brothers.
There I see my line of ancestors back to the beginning.
They call on me and ask me to take my place with them in the halls of Valhalla where the brave may live forever.

[Richard the Slayer]

There already a fantasy total war out, its called WARCRAFT 3.

[Kroney]

am i the only one who thinks feudal knights should a step nearer the bottom of the tech tree?

[TheViking]

Quote Originally posted by Richard the Slayer:
There already a fantasy total war out, its called WARCRAFT 3.[/QUOTE]

How can u even compare the TW series with the WarCraft series. The WC games is 2D (with that I mean u cant use hills forest or stuff like that) and rush game theres no tactic at all plus the WC series sux so damn much.

I want to play a good fantasy game with the TW engine.

And there have bn made so many other medivel games and they made MTW anyway. So why shouldnt there b a Fantasy TW.

Another example:
There is already many strategic games and they keep making them.
There is already many sport games and they keep making them.
and so on and so on. Do u get the picture Richard.

------------------
There I see my father.
There I see my mother, my sisters and brothers.
There I see my line of ancestors back to the beginning.
They call on me and ask me to take my place with them in the halls of Valhalla where the brave may live forever.

[This message has been edited by TheViking (edited 10-31-2002).]

[Richard the Slayer]

Quote Originally posted by TheViking:
How can u even compare the TW series with the WarCraft series. The WC games is 2D (with that I mean u cant use hills forest or stuff like that) and rush game theres no tactic at all plus the WC series sux so damn much.

I want to play a good fantasy game with the TW engine.

And there have bn made so many other medivel games and they made MTW anyway. So why shouldnt there b a Fantasy TW.

Another example:
There is already many strategic games and they keep making them.
There is already many sport games and they keep making them.
and so on and so on. Do u get the picture Richard.

[/QUOTE]

Point is, is that fantasy stuff is limited to warcraft, most fantasy players dont use alot of extensive strategy. strategy games are synonmous with historical themes. asking developers to make a complicates strategy game based on fantasy or made up things tries their creativity since they cant base pure fiction on any kind of strategy concept. No offence, but personally I view a fantasy total war as a disgrace to the total war historical strategy theme probably as CA does as well. If fantasy is what your into, go for it. But dont expect too many dense strategy games on the subject.

[smoothdragon]

They should bring back the throne room and the advisor. I missed the mini-map in the throne room that would lay out who owns what provinces, instead of the current situation where we can only see who owns neighboring provinces and not distant ones. Having a diplomacy system a la Civilization III would add another layer to the strategic game to make it more "Machevillian", i.e. joint invasions, bribes to invade common enemies, requesting military help for offense/defense for pay, offering provinces in exchange for diplomatic favors, etc. It would definitely spice up the SP experience.

[Richard the Slayer]

Quote Originally posted by smoothdragon:
They should bring back the throne room and the advisor. I missed the mini-map in the throne room that would lay out who owns what provinces, instead of the current situation where we can only see who owns neighboring provinces and not distant ones. Having a diplomacy system a la Civilization III would add another layer to the strategic game to make it more "Machevillian", i.e. joint invasions, bribes to invade common enemies, requesting military help for offense/defense for pay, offering provinces in exchange for diplomatic favors, etc. It would definitely spice up the SP experience. [/QUOTE]

I think this is one of the successes of MTW over Shogun. Do you think a Medieval King would be able to see 2000 miles away a province and all thats in it? I think it adds a nice level of mystery over Civilization. In Civilization I thought it was a little cheesy in that you could see everything (to a point). The information you get in the game is just right. You have to assume that such and such country is here and such and such country is there, as opposed to pinpoint precision.

[smoothdragon]

As ruler of a large empire, you should have some semblance of who owns what provinces even 1000 miles away. The throne mini-map didn't give you a breakdown province by province and what units were in them, but just the entire map that is colored by regions owned by individual clans. That is perfectly reasonable, as even the Chinese of the Sung dynasty had a similar "colored region" map of Europe. This should be especially true given that nations with diplomatic relations would "exchange" territory maps to facilitate trade and knowledge.

[Richard the Slayer]

Quote Originally posted by smoothdragon:
As ruler of a large empire, you should have some semblance of who owns what provinces even 1000 miles away. The throne mini-map didn't give you a breakdown province by province and what units were in them, but just the entire map that is colored by regions owned by individual clans. That is perfectly reasonable, as even the Chinese of the Sung dynasty had a similar "colored region" map of Europe. This should be especially true given that nations with diplomatic relations would "exchange" territory maps to facilitate trade and knowledge. [/QUOTE]

I assume they had satelites under NASA. Yes they exchanged maps, but if you recall those incredibly deformed maps of north america as late as 1500 you'll notice their horribly inaccurate - and yet this game takes place 50 - 400 years earlier. Sure, the chinese had colored maps, but these were assumptions (and possibly correct assumptions) of where GENERALLY speaking a territory was. The information your given in MTW is actually slightly too much, for the map is a TWENTIETH century view of europe, not an 13th century map. Anyhow, its not too difficult to assume where all the nations are if you have a general idea of where countries were in europe (france, germany, even far off egypt). The nice thing about diplomats and spies is they provide you with valauable information about territories. Trading maps means one guy is trading his map which shows where the world ends and where the great sea monsters are for the other guys horribly inaccurate map. dont mean to put you down or anything, but i do know where your coming from. personally i love the "fog of war".

[TheViking]

Quote Originally posted by Richard the Slayer:
Point is, is that fantasy stuff is limited to warcraft[/QUOTE]

why do u think that. I played very many games in Fantasy genre maybe 100 different games and only 2 of them was in the WC series. So its NOT limited to WC. And why should it be harder to make a unit Orcs then it is to make a unit of Spearmen. Its only stats and pics. 1 thing they could leave out is the flying creatures. Or only let them hover (or whatever its called) above the ground. shouldnt b that difficult when they can make flying projectiles.

BTW the topic goes like this:Ur Wish list for a ADD-ON-PACK. And my wish is Fantasy TW for an add-on-pack or a new game.
------------------
There I see my father.
There I see my mother, my sisters and brothers.
There I see my line of ancestors back to the beginning.
They call on me and ask me to take my place with them in the halls of Valhalla where the brave may live forever.

[This message has been edited by TheViking (edited 10-31-2002).]

[This message has been edited by TheViking (edited 10-31-2002).]

[MonkeyMan]

Quote Originally posted by Kroney:
am i the only one who thinks feudal knights should a step nearer the bottom of the tech tree? [/QUOTE]

do it yourself

[Kroney]

Quote Originally posted by MonkeyMan:
do it yourself[/QUOTE]

yeah nice one

[theforce]

Well l want many things from the new patch http://www.totalwar.org/ubb/biggrin.gif

1. Castle siege more complicated. Each castle must require a minimum number of men to be biesieged. If not food and men could enter the town to relief the men inside. With bigger number of men outside of the town the chanced of such thing would be reduced.
Also the attacker could block more troops and food from coming in the town by securing the nearby provinces.
2. Attacker should have a more penatly when attacking a city that has an outbreak of plague. Spies could send false information to the attacker to reduce the morale of the attacker.
3. Better audio support. Fix the sound problems with Creative cards.
4. Moats and men on walls. More siege engines and protective measures like the film The Messanger. There were some mean machines in that film. There were balls rolling down from within the walls crushing the line of men in the moat below.
Some sort of spiky ball rolling on top of the walls rushing every head that came up http://www.totalwar.org/ubb/biggrin.gif
In my opinion getting castles should become more difficult.
5. Cavalry more effective against foot units.
Also there should be a morale penalty. It should be constant morale penelty but there should also be a suprise attack penalty that would be greater when the distance when the infantry sees the charge is smaller.

------------------
I cannot return l presume so l will keep my name among those who are dead by bows!
http://www.dedicatedgaming.com/~angelsofdarkness

[smoothdragon]

Quote Trading maps means one guy is trading his map which shows where the world ends and where the great sea monsters are for the other guys horribly inaccurate map. dont mean to put you down or anything, but i do know where your coming from. personally i love the "fog of war".[/QUOTE]

Fair point. I just like knowing who owns what regions and thus be able to gauge the strength of that nation. I guess I'll just have to put some elbow grease into it and send out spies in every province. Would be nice though to trade maps like in Civ III http://www.totalwar.org/ubb/smile.gif.

[MonkeyMan]

Quote Originally posted by Kroney:
yeah nice one[/QUOTE]

No really i didn't mean to be nasty, expand on your idea, how would you make them lower in the tech tree? What do you think should be the requirements for them. You can change your early.txt to make the buildings required avaliable in each capital at the beginning of the game or change crusader
_units to reduce the tech of the buildings needed (to for example the same as royal knights or hobliers)

Why is this something you can't already mod?

If you don't know how, search a few posts or i'll tell you myself.

[FasT]

ill also add this what AMP!............added in another thread!

MULTIPLAYER CHANGES.....by AMP

Here are some of my ideas for a 2nd patch, add-on or next total war.
A. Multiplayer interface

1. Have two rooms 1 for chat and another that shows games. The chat room should have two columns, 1 for friends and clan members 2nd for others.

2. Need sub-rooms for tournaments and such. Also need a room for replays where players can veiw a replay of a battle.
A player puts up a replay for all to see and those that don't have it, it transfers to them. It then shows up on the screen and
everyone has pencil they can use to show tatics. Host has control of it being able to fast forward, slow and pause etc..

3. Change color and use up the whole screen.

4. Allow players to see who is in a game before joining it.

5. Be able to view the currant stats of a game.

6. Be able to join a game and observe

7. Games won't move on the gamelist.

B. Hosting&Created Games

1. Allow the creation of 12player battles, free for alls, and any sort of teams 1v2v2, 2v2v2, 3v3v3 etc...
When having more then 2 teams per battle all players are considered attackers with a time limit.You could encourage players
to attack one another by adding points on the map to capture. These points give florins, allowing you to by reinfocements during the game.

2. Players are allowed to buy reinfocements. Host can set limit on how many or have this option turned off.

3. Allow allies to see what each other is picking, share florins, and share faction units.

4. Allow host to set a timer for picking units and deploying during battle.

5. Players can start picking units as soon as they join a game.

6. Players can customize there own color.

C. Battles

1. Take off option to target allies when battling, makes it easier to target enemy units battling allied units.
When a player attacks an ally he becomes enemy to just that player not all allies.

2. You can replace a unit with a reinforcement without having to wait for the unit to leave the battlefield.
Once the unit is replaced you lose control of that unit.

3. Dragging lines with units should be fixed, they turn sideways when moving just a short distance.
STW and we/mi didn't have this problem.

4. Units should get into formation faster. When a unit has stopped, I will see sometimes a few men from the unit just walking to get in formation.
When units are grouped they will march fast to stay in formation and fatigue fast. We need a marching speed option for these things.

5. Make it easier controling units and making formations in trees. Need an option to take away trees by pressing a key.
It's still a pain dragging lines in trees and being able to see in them. Units in trees should give you a small view
by having the trees fade out around them.

6. Allow units to stay mixed on one another or slow down the movement time when they get mixed.

7. Allow allies to share control of units and take control over dropped allied units.

8. Before the host quits a game it gives warning all players will drop or allow another player take control of game.

9. Players can change game speed. Host can accept or decline a request made by a player for a speed change.

10. The green/red bar that shows kill/losses, now shows it in numbers.

11. At the end of a game players get a scored base on kill/ratio and generals taken/killed. When game is over everyone gets ranked for 1st to last.
example: player name/kills /losses /generals kill or captured/ men deployed/honor score

12. Can right click on a unit during game or picking units to veiw its stats.

13. You can compare match ups between units during battles. Be able to click on one of your units and hold mouse over enemy unit showing chance to win.

14. The ability to send signals to allies on the map or radar to help with tatics.

D. Units

1. Spears would be better at a unit size of 80. Peasants should be the only 100 unit size unit.

2. Change the cost of units so that they are all useful in multiplayer games.

3. Units should fatigue slower and regain faster when standing.

4. Fix gaps between units when dragging lines, sometimes have to drag line twice before units are close.

5. Units don't keep there formation when dragging a new line. I get messy formations and have to sometimes set each units formation.
STW and we,mi didn't have this problem.

6. Need a force march/attack option for units, so they don't stop. Units that touch routing units or a few enemy troops start to attack them.
Need a key that forces a unit to stay with it's order.

7. Need an attack area option for units. Allow a unit to attack all units in a small givin area. Atleast allow this option for the smaller
unit size and expensive units.

8. Missile units have an ammo bar, have an option to show the rounds left in numbers.

E. Artillery

1. The ability to attack ground with artillery. This is would be useful for timing the bounces into units just right.

2. Artillery crew can take control of an unoccupied cannon if crew was killed. Can take ammo from artillery that has me destroyed if the same.
Can train artillery crew to use all seige weapons you have, in case crew from one gets killed.

3. You can veiw the range of an artillery by pressing a key. It then shows the distance it can fire in all directions, by a colored circle.

F. Wish list

1. Allow the Campaign to be played by seasons and play like Lord of the Realms. What i mean by playing like Lord of the Realms is armies move the same
same way in LOTR and take over provinces/structers the same way.

2. A multiplayer campaign

3. Provide own servers

4. Focus another Total War all on multi no single player

5. Allow some battles to be played non-stop. A game can be played untill your time limit is up or army routed.
Once a player has been routed another player can join the game. Have it set by rounds and at end of each round it shows who is winning.
Once all rounds are up say like 10 it gives final stats of all players that played and then starts all over again.

Well thats about it,anyways I hope you enjoyed reading my ideas. I look forward to questions and comments you may have.

Your online buddy, AMP

Thnxs AMP....... http://www.totalwar.org/ubb/biggrin.gif

[Stefan the Berserker]

I want to have Assigns!

I would like an menu in wich I can enter my name and implant a pic. This menu should produce a King-Unit with my name and personal data. Then this King-Unit should be avarible for skirmish and multiplay...

This way I'm byself in the game and my own MTW-General! Of course: This Assign improves Multiplay, because you can see what kind of charackter your counterpart is... Dread, Piety, Influence...

[AMPage]

Here is something you multiplayer fans might like. During troop selection your are given a peasant, which you can equip with weapons, armor,
a horse, change unit size, increase endurance, increase valor, and raise moral. Lets say you equip the peasant with a sword, the unit size changes
to 60 and becomes a swordsmen. From that point you can change its stats anyway you like. You can increase the unit size for an extra cost or
decrease to gain florins back. You can increase valor to 3max, which of course increases attack, defense, and moral. You can increase its
endurance, which causes the unit to fatigue slower. You can increase armor, which default will be 0, it adds protection from missiles and increases
defense. Each armor upgrade will cause the unit to fatigue faster and slow movement down. You can increase moral 3 times, each increase adds
+2 to moral. You will also be able to increase the units skill with the weapon by a total of 6. The skill is 3 for attack and 3 for defense, both
seperate upgrades with each skill increase. When you are done equipping the peasant you hit train unit and then its added to your 16 slots.

Each faction will have special weapons and be able to train special units. Lets say you are the danes and equip the peasant with a sword and
shield, you can train an ordinary swordsmen or a viking unit for an extra cost. If you equip a unit with a special weapon, it then of course is
already a special unit. Some factions may have special units where you can equip the peasant with a few weapons. This might include equipping
a peasant with 2 swords or equpping a peasant with a horse, s.sword, s.shield, s.bow, and a long lance.

Well, thats about it, I thought it might be a nice change in multiplayer troop selection. I think we all could use something a little different.
It problay would take to long picking troops, but i thought it would be cool to have more control over you selection.

[FasT]

Kool idea AMP..but wont it start to get a little complex...?

[Richard the Slayer]

Quote Originally posted by theforce:
Well l want many things from the new patch http://www.totalwar.org/ubb/biggrin.gif

1. Castle siege more complicated. Each castle must require a minimum number of men to be biesieged. If not food and men could enter the town to relief the men inside. With bigger number of men outside of the town the chanced of such thing would be reduced.
Also the attacker could block more troops and food from coming in the town by securing the nearby provinces.
2. Attacker should have a more penatly when attacking a city that has an outbreak of plague. Spies could send false information to the attacker to reduce the morale of the attacker.
3. Better audio support. Fix the sound problems with Creative cards.
4. Moats and men on walls. More siege engines and protective measures like the film The Messanger. There were some mean machines in that film. There were balls rolling down from within the walls crushing the line of men in the moat below.
Some sort of spiky ball rolling on top of the walls rushing every head that came up http://www.totalwar.org/ubb/biggrin.gif
In my opinion getting castles should become more difficult.
5. Cavalry more effective against foot units.
Also there should be a morale penalty. It should be constant morale penelty but there should also be a suprise attack penalty that would be greater when the distance when the infantry sees the charge is smaller.

[/QUOTE]

This man knows what hes talking about. If CA has to implement any changes, this is what really counts to improve the game, not every elses nit picky details, challenging sieges and better unit balances are the entire keys for game improvement.

[MizuKokami]

more commands for troops..such as giveing them objectives, or protecting specific units. imagine haveing a command to split up and surround an enemy unit?

[Kraellin]

amp,

you and i shld get together and work this out...

"ok. i like the idea of the more intensified faction wars, but why not make it a bit more inclusive and simply make the expansion pack the Medieval: Total War Construction Set? being one of those that follows along in the mod's forum, i see guys doing this and that mod and begging for scraps of information on how to do this or that and mod this and that, and testing this and that ad infinitum.
CA has opened up the files in a BIG way. some of you may not even know that you can edit the campaign map. yup. you can completely change it, land, water, land bridges, the whole ball of wax. it's a bit of work, but it's possible. now, what if we had a FULL blown editor that would do this, along with several example maps of say, england, france, germany, spain and so on, in which you could divide up a single country into much smaller units. then add in a full blown unit editor for altering english whatever units from scottish whatever units and so on. put in options for seasonal game play, or even monthly game play and there ya go.

this would even allow for fantasy regions/countries and just setting up completely new games and completely new factions. by using a single country and breaking up the thing into very small counties, or whatever, you wouldnt own, necessarily, entire provinces. you might just own several counties within that province. things like roads might actually show up on such a scaled map, thus giving 'travel routes' where armies wouldnt just 'jump' simultaneously to each other's adjoining counties, but rather meet on the roads. maps could actually be done for each county, instead of a few for each province.

so, let's not just limit it to asking for a few countries like this. let's get the editor that allows us to do them all, or even the make-believe. this is much more appealing to me.

an editor for the campaign map, an editor for the tactical maps (which we already have), a faction editor, and a unit editor...i think that would cover it, at least for single player.

for mp, ah, the mp boys are gonna cry on this one. but, i've come to realize that what the mp game is, is really already a mini-construction set. there are no provinces to base armies on, no incomes, no continuous conquests or anything else. each game is, here's your money, build your army from scratch. so, why not do this up exactly that way? you buy your basic men, with or without valor. you buy your basic training for your men. you buy them armor, if wanted, and weapons, and there you go, instant quaker army. it's a construction set. stick a faction/color label on them and off you go. you're the king; command your armories and smithies and stable masters to do it however you say it shld be done. but then, allow for these armies sets to be saved and loaded for each game, as long as they conform to the florin limits, then they work.

some of you keep arguing for 'historical accuracy' yet rail against options which would give you more accuracy. yes, the Almohads might not have the equivalent of swiss pikes and yes, it might not be a 'pure' game. so what? you can still make armies that ARE 'pure'. it's just a construction set. make it however you want it. and could we please get away from this 4 unit overcharge and the weird costs of upgrades? a sword is a sword. it takes X amount to manufacture. this manufacturing cost is NOT dependent on the unit that is going to use it! it's NOT! same with armor! when did chain mail become more expensive because it's being used by knights as opposed to peasants? that one still bugs me :)

so, what you get is that every basic man you buy is first off an untrained peasant. you want to find brave peasants, so you pay a little more. now you train them, you get peasants who are now no longer peasants. they are trained soldiers, trained in whatever, but they are no longer peasants. then you pay for equipment, armor, weapons, horses, etc. you could even add in armor for the horses as an item you buy, or for faster horses, or horses with more stamina.

now, all that sounds a bit complex for setting up a nice, fast, mp game, but, you also have pre-sets. that's what we're using now, pre-sets. the units are already made and ready to buy 'off the shelf'. that's fine. that's workable, for the most part. you could even do a mix and match with pre-sets and customs. you also allow for customs to be loaded from disk. you could even streamline this some more. allow for the making of custom units offline and saved to disk and loaded in for an mp or even an sp game.

think big, guys. think options. this is the way to go.

K."

that's from that other thread about new ideas: http://www.totalwar.org/ubb/Forum7/HTML/003185.html

you also got me thinking about this some more and your idea about modding any stats. this could get more complex, as Fast points out, but still, it could be interesting. we know what most of the stats are and have access to them and following along in the vein of a 'construction set' multiplayer, what if you could indeed do it my way, or your way, and had the additional ability to add specific stat raises to specific units. you could 'train' your men in any given stat for X amount of florins. thus, you could have a sword unit that was more defensive or more offensive to your liking. and the same with any unit. you want faster horses for this cav unit? adjust the horse speed at X amount of money per stat raise. it just simulates paying for better horses.

the main problem with this isnt the complexity to building an army; that's easy, relatively. you just allow for saving of these built units and importing and exporting them into the mp game. the hard part is the balancing. that would be the more difficult task.

the other thing i'd like to see in all games, mp and sp, is more speed control in the tactical game. the slider currently can ONLY make a game run faster. why not extend the slider the same amount in the other direction for slowing it down. all the way left would then be 'Pause'.

K.


------------------
http://home.domaindlx.com/takiyama/kraellin/icons-1.gif

[todaswarriors]

I think the mention of troops on top of the castle walls is a good idea.I would like to see how they would fall when a wall is destroyed by cannon fire. http://www.totalwar.org/ubb/biggrin.gif
Also more buildings in side the castles so there's more fires.....more fire means that units to close should catch fire (enemy or ally or own) which is missing from the game..
The bigger the battle,the more blood should splat !!! on the floor/walls.
The little mpeg films that you got with shoggy are totally missing...uh..!!! this was a big disappointment for me..
At least an mpeg film of sea battles would help ???

[AMPage]

Fast,

You're right, it may be complex at 1st for people new to the game, but it shouldn't take long to get the hang of it. If you have what Kraellin
said, pre-set units and being able to save custom units. The pre-set units are for new players and those who don't want to be bothered with custom
units. The saving of custom units offline and online will allow faster troop selection. The only problem with that may be that florin cost isn't
always the same. Solution to that would be if a custom is less then the givin amount of florins you will still be able to load the custom with
the extra florins. If a custom cost more it will be down graded until the cost is equal. And of course if you have units that aren't allowed by era
or they are restricted by host, they won't be loaded, only the ones allowed will be loaded. This is all really simple stuff, it just may seem complex
at 1st.

Kraellin excellent idea,

A construction set would be an awesome thing to play around with. An editor for the campaign map would be great, because right now i don't really
like the colors and much rather have it go by months then years. Being able to create a faction, picking your favorite colors,banners, and even
making your own units for that faction, is just a great idea. Hopefully we will have something like this in the near future, cause the things you
can do with this are unlimited.

Here are some extras...

A new way of playing campaign map

To start off it's like playing "lords of the Realm" campaign style. The way of moving armies isn't by dropping them on another province, but by
moving them on the campaign map a short distance each turn. Each army has movement points and you fight on open land by coming in contact with an enemy
army. The terrain you fight on is based on where the armies meet. Lets say the armies meet on a road connecting two towns(like what kraellin said
in his post) the battle will take place on rather flat terrain with a dirt road. Lets say the meet on a bridge , you will have a river seperating the
two with a bridge or bridges to be crossed. This is the same for all terrain types mountains, coasts, forests, desert, village battles, castle
battles..etc. The campaign map won't show boarders-provinces, it's all conected, free for your armies to move anywhere on the map, There will be
a mini-map showing control of nearby cities and towns.

Now the way to take over control structures and populated areas is simply by moving your army on top of it. If enemy army is defending it, you
will battle outside the village, mine, castle, guard tower, port or whatever it may be. If you win, it is yours to do whatever with destroy, occupy,
leave untouched..etc. Lets say you've taken over a castle and choose to claim the city for yourself, you will have to leave a garrisan to keep the
people loyal to you. You may choose to not even tax the people to keep them from rebelling or even give them goods. Maybe you decide to destroy the
city and kill the people. If you decide to do this you may have an uprising against your army and people will flee to another location. Every village,
town, and city has a population number, so depending on the number of people it may not be a good idea to burn them out of there homes. If your
army isn't big enough you may have the entire city rebelling against your army along with any mercenary staying within the area. when people have
been burned out of there homes it will show on the map a couple of peasants with a wagon leaving the area. They run away to the nearest settlement or
or start there own settlement far away. You may be able to harras them with cavalry only, since there movement speed with be higher then troops on
foot. They may gain protection from nearby mercenary or enemy units. If the people retreated to a settlement or settled down close by to one,
the villages, towns, and cities within the area will start to form there on ronin army against your army. If the populated areas are owned by you,
then the people may join your settlement or if they settle close by, the loyalty of you people will drop. You may decide to just plunder settlement
for goods such as food for your troops and money. Any settlement may fight back depending on its size. You may also be able to force a small nearby
settlement to join one of yours. Each settlement has a number of people which may increase or decrease for many reasons, plagues, high taxes, new
ruler, settlements joining together..etc. Each settlement will get classed as a village, town, and city depending on the number. The turns would
be played by months and at the end of every year the population of each settlement increases.

Reasources are trade able goods, food, and florins collected from your settlements. Every settlement you own gives you food and florins, but not always
trade able goods. Every settlement provides there own food and the extra surplus food will be use to sell or for your army staying at the settlement.
The number of farms a settlement has is dependent on its location. If a settlement is in the mountians it may only produce enough food for themselves
having no farmable land at all. You may sell the surplus food or store it for your troops. You can buy food from the settlement, but only a certain
amount depending on the size of the settlement and number of fields. Any settlement you own will always supply your troops with surplus food. Any
netural settlement or allied one you will have to buy, unless your ally gives it to you for free. If you don't have enough florins, you may choose
to plunder the netural settlement at your own risk. Trade able goods are used for increasing your food supply and florins. You must setup trade routes
with your settlements, allied ones, or netural ones. Once this is done, it will show a peasant with a wagon going back and forth from the settlements.
You won't get your goods until the peasant has made its trip back. This is the same with merchant ships using ports. So your reasourses food and florins
are stored in your settlements, you aren't just given one lump sum at the end of each to spend anywhere. In one of your settlements, if you want to
train a unit or construct a building, that settlement must have enough florins. You can always transfer supplies from settlement to settlement as
needed. So food is collected from your farms and florins from the people at the end of each year, which is put into that settlements supply house.
Goods which you get from trade come every 6months. If you are trading goods from a settlement thats only a 2 month trip, the peasant waits 6months untill
heading back.

Let me talk a litte more about armies. Each army has its own movement speed and supply. An army will have a movement of lets say 20 spaces per turn.
When using roads to travel you will get no penalty on movement, but marching in forests and hills, things like that you get a -3 to movement. Other
things that can slow an armies movement speed down are units with armor and seige weapons, which can the army up to a -5 on movement. You can hide
your armies alone mountain ranges and in forests allowing for saftey or ambuses. When two armies or more battle the map they battle on will depend
where there armies are on the campaign map. There will be a random map generator for this, when battling in mountains for example you will get a map
generated with huge hills. Troops can't battle by themselves without a king, prince, or general. This will stop players from forming dozens of small
armies. Troops trained in a settlement can be ordered to join a king, prince, or general anywhere on the map, but can't be ordered to anything else.
They are also prune to enemy attacks and bribery. To get a general by searching a settlement and training one at a high cost. If you find a general
by searching for one you can buy him at a lower cost then training a new one. The advantage for searching for one isn't just the cost, but sometimes
he has good stats. When you train a new general his stats are all equal and change depending on how you use him. You are only allowed so many generals
and that depends on how many settlements you own and the size of them. The general unit is a 20 man unit, him with his 19 bodyguards, either foot
troops or cavalry if you have a horse breeder. A general dosn't just keep his troops intact, but keeps them loyal. If your general dies in combat
you troops can still be order to battle for sometime, but they slowly will become disloyal. Disloyal armies can rebel and come ronin or be bribed.
You must assign them a new leader. You can also have cavalry arimes, which will have a higer movement speed of about 35 spaces per turn. The entire
must be all cavalry or the unit will retain the speed of the slowest unit in the army. An army that runs out of food will slowly lose units, either
by death or the become ronin, you must resupply them, or end up with just the leader left.

To train a unit you must higher some peasants from a settlement, equip them with whatever you like, then train them. You make your weapons, armor,
and horses by constructing a weapons smith, armorer and horse breeder. You then can buy whatever you like, but only a certain amount can be made each
month( turn ). You can also sell weapons, armor, and horses to your settlements, netural, and allied ones.

Ok, i'll stop there. That is just some of the basics, I could go on forever. If you were to combine MTW buildings, factions and stuff with that type
of campaign i think it would rule, but anyway thats just my opion.

Some other things on my mind...

Ranking system

I didn't like the ranking system for stw and mi-we much. Players being able to host there own settings for there own system of playing isn't all
that great. You get to many rigged games and drops. This is just my idea of a ranking system , another dream. You would play on servers hosting
games all the time and not by people setting up there own system. You join a game that is played non-stop until you get knocked out. You have your
solo games 1v1 , team games 2v2,3v3 etc, and clan battles. It works like this you join a game, everyone selects there army and deploys. You never get
a loading sign of other players because you pick you troops in game while waiting for your turn to play. You will join a game, it then loads the
battle being played. You will then be able to pick your army while in observer mode,while waiting for your turn. When your up, you have a timer for
picking units if you hadn't yet done so and a timer for deploying. If you hadn't finish picking/deploying, the game starts anyway.It will based on
rounds. Rounds end when the timer runs out, or only 1 team is left. At the end of the round, everyone gets ranks for that round. All the players
that lost, that game do not go into the next round, unless there are sort players waiting to play. If the waiting list if full and you lose, you
have to get back to the end of the line or join another server. Now you can get ranked on many things, most kills in one round, most rounds lasted
without getting knocked out, most generals taken/killed in the rounds the player lasted, and ranked on the wins vs the rank of your oppenents. This
would work for clan battles, team battles, free for all battles, and solo battles.

Round battle maps

I get this idea from one of my old favorite games "Populous the Beginning". Having battle maps all the way round, no red zones and no edge camping.
Defenders would pick there deployment zones anywhere on the map they like and attackers 2nd. Once the defenders picked the attackers see the defenders
deployment zone on the map, but can't pick there deployment zone close to the defender. The attackers deployment zone has to be some distance from the
defenders. Once both have picked there deployment zones, they then being deploying. The attackers and defenders can't see each others troops, until
both sides have deployed. To rout troops off the map they must be chased or running away a certain distance, then they vanish. It may say kind of
weird, but it elimate the red zone and edge camping, allowing the whole map to be use everywhere. Reinforcements will be played the same way. To
bring in a reinforcement you place a marker, some distance away from your troops and the enemy and call them in. The unit will then appear at the
marker. This will also slove the problem of having no choice to deploy close to the redzone.Units routing into the redzone a little bit or never
getting a chance to rally, since the redzone is so close. That will be a big plus to aviod. Also you should be able to set rally points on the map.
Once a unit is able to rally it dose and never waits for you to hit the rally button. It then marches to the marker you have placed. It's annoying
having the rally option blink off and on, when your trying to rally a unit.

Graphics

I like STW sprites better then MTW. I have compared the two by using both my pcs. Being in battle screen with STW on 1pc and MTW on my 2nd pc. It
problay is just me, but i think STW units look much better. I was just wondering how many people agree and dissagree. The sprites in STW after i got
a better pc , really kept me into the game and kept me playing it more. Some people say graphics don't matter it's all gameplay, i think it's both.

Well thats about it for now, I know I'm way to picky. These are mostly new total war ideas then of an add-don, but oh well here ya go anyway. I
just can't help myself.

Your online Buddy, AMP

[Silencer]

* Be able to "dig in", when on the defence.
(stakes, pits etc)

* make besieging more costly, and more costly the longer it takes.

* make the castles longer to hold out .

*Pushable siege engines. (catapult, canon etc)

*Ram

*Make the ai more agressive when assaulting a castle in stead of waiting it out. (3d battle). I find those the most fun battles.


[This message has been edited by Silencer (edited 11-04-2002).]

[Galestrum]

Diplomacy, Diplomacy, Diplomacy oh yes and diplomacy. try looking at the other games with great diplomacy and add it to this game

A vastly, and immensely improved strategic and tactical AI.

No more building peasants and urban militia ad infinitum when MAA, sergeants and knights are available

No more developing the sinai as if it were a major economic center

More factions and faction diplomacy

Tribute, Real Alliances, Client states and vassalization of minor states or even provinces within another faction.

More rebellions and treachery from within, from nobles and less from peasants

Less garbage armies, otherwise title this Total War : Peasant Wars and ill get the clue to not buy it

Actually have the GA stuff enhanced and more important to the game. Have the game be more than a "conquer the world and there can be only one attitude"

The series is titled total war, but we shouldnt make the mistake that all wars were merely won on the battlefield. Dipomacy, Economy, and espionage were as important, IF NOT more important to the rise and fall of nations.

Many of the great empires were destroyed from within not from without

[Willard]

More 2 cents....

1. Better/more aggressive battle AI, not the stand in front and walk around crap the AI does now.
2. Stronger cav units.
3. Increase killing power of longbows...there supposed to be a war winner???
4. More factions---I want Scotland http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif and others would be great. Simple to do, just enable them in coding for minors, etc.
5. Editor to modify provines, armies etc to make different scenarios.
6. Add on pack---Total War- Empire taking place from 750 BC to 500 AD (or there abouts). Playable factions----Gauls, Romans, Greeks, Phoenecians, Carthaginians, Egyptians, Persians, Vandals, etc, etc..... Use same map as MTW, tweak the unit sprites and values, change names and titles, starting terroritories and faction names. Slightly different battlefield tactics----which can be improved by tech, etc.