Richie wants patch ideas polite replies only as maybe only 1 shot at

[hach]

E-Mailed Richie/The Shogun today

I was asking him about patches for WE/MI'particuarly the concern over morale.

This was the reply i got.

---------------------------------------------Hach how ya doing

We want well structured feed back from every one on the forums and any thing
that is a major problem or bone of contention will be looked in to. I have
been told that there will be at least one patch so we would want to get a
lot of feed back to make sure it's bang on. The game is not out in Europe
yet and has only been out in the states for just over a week so we still
have a long way to go before we can get enough info to see how every one
feels.

Richie

---------------------------------------------

So we will get at least 1 patch'but not until
the europeans also have the Expansion pack to and Beta test it.

So i want to make this the official whats to be patched thread.

But no rants and raves please as if as Richie says we may only get 1 shot at a patch(though not definite)then i want it to be right.
So if you've got a beef about 1.13 on STW' or if you've not received a prize from Creative then please post elsewhere.

I have not seen the game yet'so my full ideas for patching will not be posted until then'but so far

1)Morale! Most hate the new format'so either the original format'or at least some sort or middle option or way to adjust it.

2)Mongol vs Mongol

3)AI doing port2port attacks

4)Autoroute bug


Hach

P.S Last week i was also a ranter and raver'but you will notice if you send a polite message to Richie'you will get a reply same day.(Well i do)



------------------
The greatest thrill in life is not to Kill' but to let live!

[Vanya]

Given what I've seen here, add option to toggle on/off the random reinforcement entry feature. ON -- does what WEMI does now. OFF -- does what the original STW did, with reinforcements comming from just your back end of the map.

[Asakura Lord]

how do we contact Richie for these ideas for the patch?

[DarthGuru]

morale is probably the biggest problem it seems. Somewhere inbetween what it is now, and what the old STW setting were at is ideal. Another thing that bothered me was the split servers. Although I'm doubtful theyll change it, this is something I'd like for them to consider.

[hach]

His mail address is available at the .com site.

You would be better adding your ideas though to this thread'rather than everyone sending him idea's piecemeal and in dribs and drabs.

Going by his reply no patch action will be even started till the Europeans have maybe had a few weeks to get to grips.

Hach

[DragonCat]

I don't agree that "MOST" people are unhappy with the morale as it is now online. I would amend that to "SOME". We also need hard data on this. Sometimes online you may be playing with someone who has turned morale OFF! (Although I don't think this is the case with most of the people who are unhappy with morale). Personally, I am fine with morale as it is, but would not object to a slight adjustment downwards.

Mongol vs. Mongol- MUST have

Option to have varying amounts of Koku for defender and attacker to help balance maps would be VERY nice.

------------------
DragonCat
"On the prowl . . . ."

[[Won-Ton] Atlus]

i agree with darth, because i dislike the morale of the old game. too much running, and i rather enjoy the new morale, but some dont, so i'd say put it between the two. (hopefully closer to the newer one).

[monkeydan]

I think (and I know others think this as well) that the patch should also include a feature to allow for differing amounts of koku for attackers and defenders in MP.

Of course, I'd also like to see J vs. J and M vs. M in MP as well...

[ishikawa2]

RE: Reinforcements
In my opinion, the current WE reinforcement scheme is badly flawed. For me, it has often resulted in rather tedious "end-game mop-up" and it detracts from the enjoyment of the game.

Suggested correction (presumably VERY easy): Appearance of reinforcements should be limited to the player's original "half" of the battlefield.

NOTE: If a river is positioned in such a way that the "back half" of the battlefield actually includes a small bit of territory on "my" side of the river, **I** would accept that occasionally enemy reinforcements could arrive on "my" side. (I gather that many players might disagree with me on this.) In any case, I would think that the probability of this event would be rather low, with reinforcement entry points pretty much evenly distributed around the total available perimeter.

A somewhat related issue: Currently, if a player occupies the center of the enemy's back edge during a battle, all routing troops enemy will unrealistically rout directly TOWARDS him. I think this is a problem. I suggest that routing troops might prefer to move in that general direction, but they should not rout directly towards enemy units and should instead look for clear paths to the edge of the battlefield, either (1)anywhere on the back edge; or (2)anywhere in the "back half"; or (3)wherever they came from. I recognize that this might prove to be a harder fix than simply limiting their point of entry, and I don't have a clear preference for 1,2, or 3 above.

[Alastair]

I think we'd better keep on what we all agree on. We all agree (AFAIK) that there should be Mongol vs Mongol, that the F1 and rout bugs should be fixed, that there should be adjustable koku, that there should either be reinforcements restricted to your side of the map/river, and that the morale should be decreased, but not all the way down to STW levels.

[This message has been edited by Alastair (edited 08-22-2001).]

[hach]

Sounds pretty good to me Alistair.

Do we all agree or is it just me that the AI also should do port2port invasions??

When i am playing SP campaign i cheat on the Harvest/province loyalty by making my Taxes very low for 3 of the seasons and for Autumn i make it punitive.So for 3/4 of the year my population are happy and only pissed off with me for 1/4.This prevents rebellion and also gives me max koku every year.Obviously this is totally crap'but i only do this because the game allows me to do so and would be quite happy for this to be altered in some way.Maybe if you do a punitive tax the province remembers you were a bastard for 1 to 2 years and then start to trust you again providing you don't hit them with punitive soon again.

Hach

------------------
The greatest thrill in life is not to Kill' but to let live!

[hach]

P.S Thanx guys for keeping this civilish.

Hach

[monkeydan]

I agree with P2P invasions - just another level of interest added to the strategic aspects (and I wouldn't feel so bad about stabbing the enemy in the back! :P)

[Erado San]

I definitely would like port to port. Would make more tense strategy.

[The_battlefield_geisha]

I agree with everything so far but I wouldnt want the morale reduced by too much.

Also, minor point, kensai definitely are not showing their proper honor on the strat screen (unit honor never exceeds 1). The only time you see their *real* honor is on the battle screen.

Computer port attacks would be fantastic. Even just small harrassing forces to keep your forces split. Maybe they could give x number of computer shinobi a "hunt for ports" directive. Depending on available forces they could then either launch a regular full attack or just send one unit to capture and destroy all the facilities in the port province. Doesnt *seem* like it would involve much coding for this.

[hach]

Hi Erado

I was thinking about you and the last question time.

Would you be willing to run another question time regarding this thread subject.

You are respected universally by ourselves and the makers of the game and would be able to present it to Creative/EA in a better format.

Hach

[monkeydan]

I agree with the battlefield geisha (and with DragonCat) that the morale only needs a slight adjustment if anything.

[hach]

What about my Harvest cheat?
Am i cheating?

Hach

[monkeydan]

hach,

I dunno if I would call it cheating, but I do think that even peasants would be able to figure out your scam http://www.totalwar.org/ubb/smile.gif Including some kind of morale penalty would make it more realistic, but I also don't think it should be a priority for the patch.

[Gothmog]

I sort of disagree on the port2port invasion thing.

The idea that you can transport troops instantly (or in one turn) between two of your provinces regardless of the distance is odd to begin with, but I suppose it's neccessory otherwise the troop manuval will be too tedious.

But INVADING another territory as if you can simply ship 5000+ troops and dump them in the rival province and deploy them nice and easy on the battlefield? No, not fair. That's why I don't use port invasion myself.

Not to mention that building ports used to be valid way to raise koku output if you have poor farmland; now it's just an invitation to trouble.

if someone really wants the port2port invasion feature, I suggest that the battle be treated diffrently and the attackers should receive some penalty (maybe get into a scenario similar to castle assault). Here are some random thoughts:

1) A dock can be added to the province map (like a bridge that the attackers have to cross)

2) attackers have very little place to manuval, and are subject to missle fire

3) attackers can't arrive all at once.

Also, disable the auto-retreat. So that if you invade with a large army consist of crappy units, the AI won't be scared away too easily.

[Jason-Alaska]

MultiPlayer Campaign! Please.

[The_battlefield_geisha]

My only point with the AI port to port invasion is to make the campaign more difficult. Once I build my "great wall" of units and start moving east or west, its ridiculous that i have dozens of empty provinces and ports and the computer cant even land a unit of ashigaru.

"Raiders" would be nice at least, the computer sending one unit of yari or something via sea to unoccupied port districts to burn down all the buildings.

[This message has been edited by The_battlefield_geisha (edited 08-22-2001).]

[Kraellin]

first off, remember, this is a patch, not another xpack :) so, i wouldnt expect a lot of 'new' stuff, just fixes and maybe a tweak or two.

timers in multi games need to be reported in the same way that seasons are now reported. you can see if the host has set a timer and for how long BEFORE you join the game.

i wouldnt touch morale or anything else that has now been made available to us to mod. we can mod honor stats ourselves, and thus morale, but if they do tweak it downwards, make it a small tweak.

port to port attacks: i posted about this in another thread on the matter in an old stw thread and 'teleporting' troops for ai or player side is just too weird. you need sea sections that have to be moved across to be more realistic, ala univeralis europa....with ship fights, so this isnt likely gonna happen in a patch...maybe in crusaders, but not likely here. still, i'd love to see it.

fix the F1 key.

any of the wish list mods stated in the mods forum for the map editor.

revision of how drops and disco's work in comp games. since it is now possible to cheat as a host and force a player to drop in a comp game and thus rob honor, this MUST be fixed or revised how drops work. Target/Richie, if you want details of how this works, email me at starfire@apex.net because i wont post it here. suffice it to say we can make it work every time in a comp game.

mongol vs mongol in multi games...absolutely!

differing koku amounts in multi games. yes.

a revision or option to ALL game styles in multi to allow FFA (free for all) and a subsequent appropriate scoring system for such.

reinforcements: apparently some dont like the new way, but i would remind folks of how the old way worked and that it was supremely easy to camp at the spawn site and annihilate all reinforcements before they got 10 feet, so let's not go back to that! also bear in mind that with the new game styles, particularly king of the hill, that this is a VERY GOOD way to do reinforcements and keeps everyone on their toes! also, there is nothing particularly illogical about how the reinforcement system currently works, except maybe for one thing. if you had an invader into your territory, troops from all over would rally to the afflicted territory to supress this threat, so they might well come in from every conceivable location, with one exception...the invader came from somewhere and likely he had to cut a path to get there, so, i'd ONLY modify the reinforcements to NOT have them come in from the invader's/attacker's side, but DO allow them to come in from the other three sides. and even then, this would get a bit weird in king of the hill games but could still work and would eliminate spawn camping.

yes, fix any remaining autoroute bug.

paths of routing units, yes, this has always seemed silly to me. if yer running from a battle, why in the world would you run into a waiting enemy that you can see? man, i'm gonna head for the nearest trees, bushy swamp, distant enemy free location i can find.

i think it was zen_blade who also mentioned that the enemy ai always 'sees' hidden units, even at a distance where they shldnt. this needs to be fixed.

the harvest tax cheat thing....well, quit cheating! ;)

we also need an a notifier in the multi foyer to show when a player has altered stats. currently, you can join a game where someone has altered stats and you have no way of knowing it and likewise, you can join a game with altered stats and no one knows this either. since they have made the stat files available to us this would be a nice way of alerting folks that this isnt a standard game and we all know that some yo-yo is going to try and abuse this.

oh yes, one last thing that others have asked for and i concur, a mixed units mode option in multi, for playing both japanese and mongol units all within the same army...just a wide open 'what if' sort of army option. i dont even care if it's a lopsided, unbalanced, weirdo-mode bug fest. gimme :) (we'll alter the stats to suit :)

K.

p.s. if ya do all that, including the editor mods and port to port per sectional sea areas and ship fights, i'd be happy to throw ya another $20. and if you also add in the multiplayer campaign, done up right, i'd kick in another $20 on top of that :)

------------------
I'm sorry, but i never apologize.

[This message has been edited by Kraellin (edited 08-22-2001).]

[Gimmedc]

a option for unlimited time on the map with a family , might be impossible but just a suggestion a lot of people like to build huge armies and take their time constructing a huge legacy but as i have learned this doesnt work well ran out of time

[hach]

Forgot the most annoying thing in SP mode.
enemy who seems to be able to read your mind and though you could invade 5 different provinces just happens to reinforce the one you have moved your troops in to.

The SP campaign should be like the board game diplomacy and all units move on the strategic map simoultaneously(can't spell it'but at the same time).

Hach

------------------
The greatest thrill in life is not to Kill' but to let live!

[Hosakawa Tito]

Hach the AI already does port to port invasions,it's happened to me once,and I know it did because my attacker had no provinces that abutted Aki.I seem to be in the minority about random reinforcements,I like it.I haven't played multiplayer so I don't know about this morale thing.In single player there doesn't seem to be any problem with morale that I have noticed.Definitely fix mongol vs mongol,and the split server.I believe most of the complaints are with the multiplayer part of the game.

------------------
Diplomacy is the art of telling someone to go to hell so that they look forward to making the trip.

[Zen Blade]

well, first off...

I want to say bravo to Hach.

Second, I will be posting a long (hopefully well-thought out) post this evening when I get back home about my impressions of the new game after having it for a week and a half.

So, I will be brief here.

1. MORALE.... either the original way, or much closer to the original. Ashigaru (guns and spears) should not be able to fight till the last man. Monks and yari spearman... maybe.

2. There is a definite heir bug. Duplicates exist.

3. General's "rank"... there is an occasional error.... a general might have won 37 battles, lost 4... but his rank will be "1". This shows up on the strategy map.... but I don't know about the actual battles.

4. potential error in SP battles with more than 2 players....--has to do with who gets win/loss and when battle should stop...

5. SCENARIO/CAMPAIGN editor/modifier... This sounds complex... but really isn't... just something that would allow name changes in the text and maybe in the dialogue (not voice though)... Like... being able to name our special Taishos BEFORE game starts.

6. RONIN REVOLTING ARMIES RETREAT AND DISAPPEAR. This has happened several times... A ronin army revolts in province "A" successfully. A ronin army then revolts in province "B" or "C", which are adjacent to province "A". However, those armies choose to retreat to a neighboring province (says so in a dialogue box). BUT, they completely disappear. This seems like a bug...

more later....

-Zen Blade

------------------
Zen Blade Asai
Red Devil
Last of the RSG
Clan Tenki Council-Unity, Retired
SHS Core Member

[Lord Aeon]

I would like to see a way to adjust or at least see unit discipline stats. I suspect that this little stat might be one source of the "morale controversy" we've all been dealing with.

I'll organize my thoughts on this for the next FotD post. http://www.totalwar.org/ubb/smile.gif

------------------
"You have offended my family, and you have offended a Shaolin temple."

[Vanya]

Me thinks differing koku in MP is a bomb waiting to go off! I can see it already: honor-mongers set up a game with attacker getting 10000 koku and defender getting 1000 on Shinano in Mongol era, with them playing the Mongol attacker. Gee... I wonder who will win that one. This will elevate 'newbie-hunting' to new levels!

So, should they do this, what is an acceptable variance in koku? I'd content anything greater than 10% is ludicrous. And I'm sure there are plenty of whiners out there that would say this would 'even the playing field'... but, then they play on flat maps only. Do you really expect somebody to accept a 25% koku cut to defend GREEN? Wake up and smell the coffee! Ain't gonna happen (unless an idiot is playing...)!

[celtiberoijontychi]

Port to port invasions taking 1 turn is not "teleporting". Actually, 1 turn equals three months. That should be enough time for any ship. After all, Columbus only took 1 month to cross the atlantic ocean. Of ourse it would be better if there was a chance for some ships getting sunk by storms, etc., but it's not realistic to expect this from a patch.

A good idea wich wouldn't need much effort to implement it would be to have port invasions fought in a coastal map like the mongols, what do you think?

[Dunhill]

I'm still waiting for Target to reply to my wish upon a star, thinking that was my path to "he who must be obeyed" (AKA RIchard?), but I think the patch would be easy enough.

Seems like the simple list is:

1. All unit availabilty in "Theoretical" era
2. Koku adjustments for ATT/DEF
3. Fix reinforcements to "logical" locations
4. Fix f1
5. Adjust morale, or make it adjustible? (sliding scale?)
6. Rout bug? (It does seem to be a bug on certian maps, but I like it as a feature elsewhere)

I think that would make quite a few of us happy, and it shouldn't take much alteration to the game itself, except for the koku allocation which might require a change in the hosting screen and the Theretical era, which would require an additional couple of graphics I guess.

Sound good?

[Dunhill]

Vanya,

I'm not sure many people would front up to a competitive 10,000 vs 1000 koku fight on green, but I might if given the proper terrain. I think you'd be surprised what you could do with a good hill and plenty of arrows and spears.

I'd leave the koku adjustment wide open, and not restrict it too much, but it may have repercussions for honour status, would you give me more points for defending with much less koku, yet having such an advantage with terrain?

Just a thought.

[Dark Phoenix]

Well Kraelin I dont think many people will mod there unit stats. After I have been playing a while he morale is just a little to high for the units and needs to be dropped down a bit.

Mongol vs Mongol has to be included.

An idea for having change stats could it be easy for it to come up as version mismatch?

An idea for the reinforcements coming in would it be possible to half the map for one player and allies and the other half for the other players?

------------------
DoragonPhoenix of the Clan Doragon (http://clandragon2.homestead.com/Dragon01.html)

"DP is correct" - Shiro

[Algesan]

1. Reinforcements - this needs some kind of tweaking, right now it is exploitable.

2. Rout bug

3. Differing koku for attacker/defender. Vanya, the thing is that it will make bridge maps more viable and a defensive minded player can set up a 7.5K vs 5K game, camp on a hill/mapedge and if the attacker loses with a 50% advantage he will get laughed at. Mongols in the mix are already making some of the "dishonorable" defensive tactics more viable, this will make them more so.

4. Slow reinforcements for human player in SP. We shouldn't have to wait over half the clock for a replacement unit. I personally have never seen a reinforcement arrive for me on either offense or defense.

5. "Fantasy" era where anything goes. Guns vs. MHC, Guns and MHC, Yari and Javelins, whatever.

6. Kensai honor in SP. I've only had one used in battle. Started at H0, gained 5! honor in battle, display afterwards on strategic map as H1. Committed him into some test battles I was running and he appeared as H3 on the battlefield. Gained more honor in the fights (max 2) but still was H1 on strategic map.

[This message has been edited by Algesan (edited 08-23-2001).]

[sassbarman]

Hi guys, only my second post just a quick suggestion on port2port invasion I like it but how about some news rules governing its success. e.g. making port invasions less likely to succeed in the winter months having the fleet lost at sea in typhoon {all men are lost}, or half of the fleet-half yours or the computers force.Conversely greater success in months with better weather.This could just help in making sense out of the port invasios in putting in a risk factor in attempting it for the human player and the A.I. Is this too difficult for a patch? Anyways just a suggestion.

[KukriKhan]

It's still too early to be definitive (good thing we wait for Europe first), but: I ditto Kraellin, esp the p.s.

And one (little) thing for newbies (like me):

In SP, custom, after picking allies, then getting YOUR butt kicked because of some ignorant move, but the allies are still functional, you get "please wait until this conflict is resolved".

Sure you can Esc, but a newbie wants to watch, to learn how the AI solves the conflict, to give me hints on what works and what's dumb. Make the "please wait" message go away, so you can see. Maybe with a timer, or a confirm button(s) "OK, let me watch" and "No, escape now".

Having the "please wait" message on the screen persistently, while being able to "fly" over the entire battlefield watching how your allies (and enemy, for that matter) solve their tactical situations, is a little demoralizing to the student (constantly reminding him he screwed up), and a visual distraction.

It's a little thing, I know. And certainly needless to the seasoned veterans of the.Org. But it might keep newbies playing longer, rather than thinking: "I sux at this" (or worse: "This game sux"), then shelving the game prematurely, and bad-mouthing it to his m8s.

[BSM_Skkzarg]

Well, you guys have given most of the issues a fair shake. Here is my list - and remember we each have different views. These are listed in order of importance in my opinion.

#1. Reinforcements - Need to be limited to the respective side's "half" of the battlefield.
#2. Multiplayer setup - this is actually 2 issues.... One allow different amounts of koku for each player. Also - allow units to be "customized" for the number of men in it.... So one could create a "damaged" unit for recreating historical battles in Multiplayer. This would also help the community greatly if #4 doesn't happen!
#3. Checksum for data files in MP to ensure no "MOD's" are being used without you knowing!
#4. Campaign Game - This is not likely to happen, but one can dream....
#5. Add in true TCP/IP gaming without forcing EAPlay usage. Connection issues abound....
#6. Fantasy MultiPlayer - Allow units from both sides - or mongol vs mongol, etc games to occur.
#7. Fix the rout into the enemy bug.(Revisit issue #1 and this will be done automatically)
#8. AI attacking Owari bug.
#9. Please allow OPTIONS to be true OPTIONS regardless of difficulty level. (I admit it - I just want to get 1500+ kill battle without a single man lost just once.....time and limited ammo keep it from happening LOL)

A few side notes.

P2P invasions do happen - although rarely. It has happened to me 2x.

F1 - not sure this is a bug - rather correct info being interpreted wrong. If someone could clarify for us that would likely help.

Last note - Morale - after really working the game for all I could, I am finding that morale really IS fairly accurate - if a unit is well covered on its flanks and rear, has lots of friendlies around and is engaged in combat - they will keep fighting for a long time. On the other hand - you still see the "chain reaction rout" and units that are exposed weakened realistically. I don't feel it needs fixing.... If it does - its mod-able so lets not ask the developers to fix what they gave us the ability to do.

------------------
BSM_Skkzarg
"A mind is a terrible thing to taste."

[This message has been edited by BSM_Skkzarg (edited 08-23-2001).]

[hach]

I have the Shogun boardgame and when doing a naval invasion you suffered a penalty of your opponent getting a pre emptive roll of the dice and in some cases decimating your attacking force a la Saving Private Ryan.

So how about some sort of penalty for amphibous landings??Concrete bunkers and heavy machine guns and mortars??

Ok just kidding'but i like the idea of the computer randomly calculating how crappy the weathers been or if a typhoon hits and perhaps you could lose a large part or even some percentage of your army??

Remember it happened to the Mongols in real life!


Hach

------------------
The greatest thrill in life is not to Kill' but to let live!

[Erado San]

Hi Hach.

Great thread really. No, I won't be doing a Question Time on this one, as there is enough information already in this thread and some others on the boards.

I think the next subject for Question Time will be related to Crusaders, but I am waiting until more information on that will be revealed.

[hach]

Thanx Erado

Ok maybe not a question time'but rather than just getting Richie or Target to just read the threads would you maybe collate the answers in to some sort of format or advise me on doing this.

I don't think it will be for a few weeks anyway as it appears that Creative want the Europeans to play the game for a while to voice their bug opinions too.

Hach

[The Shogun]

Great tread guys keep it going. As I said to Hatch we will need to get plenty of feed back and the game is still to be released in all territories. But it's very interesting and useful to get so much feed back so early on.

------------------
The Shogun
Bringinng wisdom in an unwise world

[hach]

OK i have collated all replies onto this post.Some i agree with'some i don't even know what they are'and i am just posting the info and not saying these are my own personal opinions.This is just a first draft as in the next few weeks when us Euro's get the game i am sure there will be more.Please please feel free to add more which i will add to draft 2.
The more bugs we can find'then if Creative only do make 1 patch for the new game then the better chance of getting as many of them fixed in this 1 patch.

By the way can someone explain this F1 bug to me?

1) Morale.Still the biggest issue to some(though not all Dragoncat).I think most are not completely happy with the old STW morale especially mass routes of entire armies when just a couple of units start to route'but happier with it'than the new morale.So an adjustment be made somewhere in between the old and new games.Or a wat to alter the discipline stats.


2) Random reinforcement.Unhappy with the ways that enemy reinforcements appear randomly on the map and I think people are saying they can also appear behind the lines on bridge battles.I understand this kind of reinforcing makes sense in King of the Hill battles'but perhaps be removed from the campaigns.Possibly some sort of toggle to turn on/off.

3) Port2Port invasions.More AI invasions via ports or at least raids'or some sort of penalty being made against the invader.Also Shinobi using ports more for causing rebellions etc.Also would make hoardes harder to make as players would have to meave large occuping armies to provide rear security or prevent invasion.

4) Tax Cheat.The cheat of making your taxes very low until autumn and then making it punitive for that 1 season reaping maximum koku'then instantly lowering it again to very low without affecting population loyalty too badly.The population needs to have longer memories and resentment of this increased tax or rather than annual tax a quarterly tax.

5) Mind Reading AI.The AI responds exactly to your moves on the strategy board reinforcing the provinces you are attacking.All moves should be simultaneous'or at least we get the same courtesy as the AI and respond to it's moves.

6) Autoroute bug.

7) Mongol vs Mongol in MP and Custom Battle and even totally mixed units.

8) Varying amounts of Koku depending on if Attacker or Defender'Terrain or Bridge Battles etc etc.This would also have an on/off toggle.

9) Enemy troops should not route through the opposing force'but avoid the enemy where possible.

10) F1 Bug

11) Kensai showing incorrect Honour on the Strategy Map.

12) Multiplayer Campaign (well someone asked for it)

13) In MP before entering battle you should be able to see if a timer is in effect and also of the differing Koku amounts is entered in the new patch if this is in effect also.

14) Investigation of drops and disconnects in MP and how some Hosts are forcing this.

15) Enemy AI being able to see hidden units even at a distance.

16) A way to detect if someone has altered their stats in MP.

17) Duplicate Heirs

18) Generals Rank Error.Sorry I need this one elaborated.

19) Way to modify Taisho names at start of campaigns(personalise)

20) Revolting armies dissappearing.

21) Slow reinforcement of human player in SP

22) Getting a "Please wait till conflict resolved" message in custom battle after personally being beaten'but your AI ally is still fighting.

23) A way to edit unit numbers in CB/MP to simulate battle damged units.

24) TCP/IP connection

25) AI attacking Owari bug

26) AI ally taking a province invaded by you'comes to your aid'but keeps the province.

Hach

P.S sorry if you think i missed any.

[hach]

Allo Richie

Thanx for popping in.
Just missed my first collation.

By the way have you seen the size of the Morale thread?

Hach

[Erado San]

Hach, you're doing a great job on collating them, so I won't even try http://www.totalwar.org/ubb/biggrin.gif

There are other people also busy collecting all sorts of patch ideas together.

[Yomama]

I wish to support a modification of the way the reinforcements are handled. IMO, I would sacrifice 'realism' for 'gameplay'. Leave the reinforcements as originally done.
One suggesstion already made, A game option toggle, i.e. "Scattered Reinforcements" versus "Unified Reinforcements" would be ideal for EVERYONE but might strain the development cycle.
This is my only real gripe... I love this game!

[BSM_Skkzarg]

Shogun, Hach and the rest of the community -

I have already posted my concerns once - but another has popped up. I have a serious concern over the concealment gamble - you never know if the concealment icon on your unit is correct or if some of the remaining men are visible. After testing this - I learned that CA was dead on, and I appreciate them clarifying for us. However, if a unit is shown as concealed - it should be fully concealed, otherwise no icon should show. This needs to be addressed IMHO.
Thoughts?

------------------
BSM_Skkzarg
"A mind is a terrible thing to taste."

[Jackson]

I’m really surprised I haven’t seen anyone mention the fact that we can’t determine which of our units are primary attackers and which are reinforcements. (Does that make sense?)

In the original game, when attacking a bridge province, I would put my Taisho in a 16 unit stack consisting of archers and slow foot soldiers. In another stack I would have my cavalry and leftover monks. That way, when my archers ran out of arrows I would withdraw them, and bring on the cavalry and maybe some more archers.

What happens now is, it doesn’t matter what stack your Taisho is in. He gets the most expensive units assigned to him, and the rest are reinforcements. That means that my YS get left behind for the initial bridge attack. That is so wrong.

Another problem that has been mentioned is how long it takes for the human player’s reinforcements to arrive. Mine never make it to the dance.

[hach]

How about a preferred reinforcement option?
You invade a province with several thousand guys'and of course lots of your guys rout and die'but what somes over the hill to bring back your confidence?Yari Ashigaru!!!!
What comes next??Musketeers and it's pissing down!!!

This would be useful especially in Bridge battles or one where you hold the high ground and would prefer archers to reinforce you?

The defender would maybe prefer archers and Naginata to come on asap and the attacker No dachis.

Anyway just an idea!

Hach

[A Nerd]

1)Casualties retain clan colors
2)smaller kensei
3)More Mongol Campaign options
ex. fantasy 1530, etc. more Japanese Clans involved, mongol japanese alliances...perhaps too involved or completelay useless but all i could think of...

[whyidie]

Quote Originally posted by Jackson:
I?m really surprised I haven?t seen anyone mention the fact that we can?t determine which of our units are primary attackers and which are reinforcements. (Does that make sense?)

In the original game, when attacking a bridge province, I would put my Taisho in a 16 unit stack consisting of archers and slow foot soldiers. In another stack I would have my cavalry and leftover monks. That way, when my archers ran out of arrows I would withdraw them, and bring on the cavalry and maybe some more archers.

What happens now is, it doesn?t matter what stack your Taisho is in. He gets the most expensive units assigned to him, and the rest are reinforcements. That means that my YS get left behind for the initial bridge attack. That is so wrong.

Another problem that has been mentioned is how long it takes for the human player?s reinforcements to arrive. Mine never make it to the dance.[/QUOTE]

Echo.

[TakeshidaSo]

I think the Morale structure of STW operated perfectly. Most ancient battles had few casualties up until the time the army routed. Even at Sekigahara two-thirds of the defeated army survived. Possibly it was similar to STW in that the greater portion of losses occured during the pursuit. The pursuit part of STW battles is just as critical as the skirmishing, and the initial melee. STW has the realistic feel of ancient warfare, for both the SP and MP games. It doesnt matter if the tactical battles are online or in one of the SP options; MI shouldnt replace the realistic morale system of STW with a more user-friendly one, just to make it more popular. I think the learning curve needed for morale has been replaced with a need only to become familiar with the units, and how to match them up. The need to understand morale, and use it to your advantage, seems to be removed in favor of a more simplified version of war. Maybe less realism will make the game more desirable, and make it more like a lot of other games I can think of, but I dont have to like it. There is always talk of how "I was winning up until something unexplainable happened", so let me ask; if you were winning why didnt the enemy rout instead of you? Many comments about "why are my men running", were heard. I tend to think its because you let the enemy rout a portion of your army, and the rest were close enough to be effected by it, and possibly other negative factors. Thats why it is critical to improve your understanding of morale modifiers. Many players use low honor troops in high koku games, and this wouldnt have happened if they routed too easily. Do you really want a game thats not realistic, just so its easier for you to do unrealistic things. It is unrealistic for armies to suffer such a large percentage of their losses prior to a general rout. What is the Morale, or Fatigue, setting for? Why did most online people play below 10,000 koku per player if they really wanted this kind of simulation? Why remove that flexibility from the game structure? Most everyone played some games with high koku, or Morale and Fatigue settings off, and they are fun games. They just werent the commonly played games. Didnt STW's system allow for more flexibility, and more realistic options? Maybe you want to use settings in a different way than others do, but how can you defend the fact that the lower end morale options are raised, when the higher end options were never that popular before?

In WRG miniature rules, you could assign detached units to attempt to come on the map from the Left, and Right edges on the enemy's half of the map, or from either players Rear edge. They came in within a range of turns, with units attempting to arrive from the enemy's rear edge taking longer. Cavalry arrived sooner than lightly armored infantry, and those troops sooner than heavily armored infantry. This "Indirect Approach" was rarely employed, because of the dangers to reducing the strength of the main body. I think "cycling reinforcements" already indicates that CA had the plan to use reinforcements in a logical, and strategically controlled way. I support that effort, and I hope they will complete the task, and so do they by the sound of it. I suggest adding the possibility of detaching forces from the main body to the reinforcement plans, and allowing for these "secondary" forces to enter the map within certain areas that were predetermined by the player. Using secondary forces in a planned way allows for a strategic envelopment. This integrates the strategic and tactical parts of the game. The current random approach is just a stopgap measure anyway. If its easier to program secondary units to enter from a map area that is determined before the battle, so much the better. If all units in the army are chosen as main, or secondary, forces before the battle, then control over which units deploy at the start is also allowed. This feature has been requested by many people, but is just a part of this planned reinforcements approach.

Again, the problem with having this wonderful system for strategically employing units into the tactical battlefield, is the fact that, routing units dont behave in a way that really attempts to preserve themselves. The AI makes tactical decisions, reinforcements decide if its safe to arrive, and units are constantly determining range from friends and enemies for a number of factors. Routers already have a set of directional instructions. A routing unit should try and move outside a certain distance from enemy units(the FIRST), before it follows its current instructions(the THEN). If the routing unit can't do the FIRST, it should proceed to the THEN, and it already knows how to do that. The routing unit already deals with being surrounded. How does the AI choose between 2 equally attractive decisions that it makes now? With the planning thats being done for "cycling" reinforcements, and the current random reinforcements approach, routing troops are going to be ridiculously slaughtered in far greater numbers than they always have been.

The programming that attempts to keep the Mongols and Japs from fighting themselves is obviously buggy. The bug is seen in online and custom games. Mongols and Japs of this period do fight each other in SP games, because Mongol armies can be bribed, and there are ronin provinces at the start of the campaign, so they should also be able to do it in MP games. Since they have to fix this anyway, it seems logical that they provide the color options to Mongols and Hojos too.

Even if STW isnt compatible with MI, the servers should be combined. There are two time-periods in MI that arent compatible anyway. We all use the same forums, we should all meet at the same EA gameplay site. We dont want them to say STW will be unecessary, because they didnt just add new units, we will end up with a different game. WE doesnt allow people to install STW, so it doesnt "include the award-winning Shogun:Total War", it replaces it, without the option of playing the original game. Is allowing WE owners to install STW an option? Someone mentioned that the competitive games database is causing a problem here, but how important is it to maintain that? Especially if it causes any problems with accomplishing what is much more important. The competitive games database causes many behavioral problems, and divided the STW community to a certain extent. It's "nice", but with these two problems and maybe another with combining the servers, is it a necessary and essential part of the game? It certainly wouldnt keep people who dont play online from buying the game, maybe they would play online without it.

It seems like they made the WM weaker only by making the ND stronger. The problem I have with units are several. YS has 1 pt. less armor, and this weakens it's ability to protect the skirmish line. SA have 1 pt. less defense, this weakens its ability to be the dominant skirmisher. The loss in value of these two units makes their replacements
emesis more valuable. The muskets value is increased because of this, as well as, being able to fire in rain. Unprotected SA are even easier to drive off than before. The value of YA is increased because of this, but arent available against the Mongols. The ND increase also makes them more powerful against YS, just when YS are being weakened. The only problem with monks, if it was a problem, was that they were the most cost effective melee unit. Any number cruncher is gonna realize that, and apply it. They had the weakness of low armor. But you couldnt increase other units to match them in a cost effective way. The introduction of BN, JNC, MHC, Armor, and Weapons, might have solved this problem. My attention has been drawn to what overall effect the adjustments to YS and SA has made. We should test and decide whether or not we think these changes should remain. In general, it seems to me that weakening these two units (the main opponents to the Mongols in the SP campaign), and then compensating for the Japanese weakness in confronting the Mongols in the SP campaign, by raising the morale overall, was possibly an error.




[This message has been edited by TakeshidaSo (edited 08-26-2001).]

[Kraellin]

ok folks,

let's keep this simple here. it's just a survey thread, not a didactical why this way is better than that...a simple 'i like morale this way or i like reinforcements this way or this bug needs fixing' is all that's needed and wanted here. we can argue about which is better elsewhere :) i mean, keep it reasonable, at least. a few lines to each item. otherwise it's just another arguement thread and not a survey that richie or CA is likely to read all the way through :)

K.


------------------
I'm sorry, but i never apologize.

[Shiro]

Great list, hach. I'm sorry I'm coming a little late to the party, but what can you do?

I don't know if this has been mentioned, but it's been tossed around a bit on these forums. Sometimes units like emissaries will appear on one of your provinces in your colors, but still be a enemy unit.

This is not really a bug, but when you pick up generals the ammount of honor they have disappears and that makes it hard to remember what your doing sometimes. http://www.totalwar.org/ubb/smile.gif

[This message has been edited by Shiro (edited 08-24-2001).]

[TakeshidaSo]

"Ritchie wants patch ideas...only 1 shot at this!" was interpreted for you Kraelin? Where did you see that? I misinterpreted it, I guess. I had to figure out what it meant all by myself. If, on the other hand, you took it upon yourself to interpret that "ideas" meant just a list, like of your favorite foods; then I respectfully disagree. A list of my favorite foods doesnt contain a single recipe. No one ever says "tell me ideas of your favorite foods". I appreciate you attempting to keep anyone else from making the same error I did, by providing the reasons behind my opinions. As for me, your too late.

LOL, and for the second longest post in this thread, yours on the 22nd, your also too late.

[This message has been edited by TakeshidaSo (edited 08-25-2001).]

[Lord Aeon]

Well, just my 2 cents on the port-2-port invasions:

I happen to like the idea... thing is, the CPU doesn't use it very much, and doesn't defend against it very well. If you're keeping a port and have NO UNITS there to defend the province and no counterspying to prevent enemy intelligence, well... then i think it might be easier than you think to land an invasion force...

That said, it would be cool to me if post invasions would take place on beach maps (when the enemy has units to defend), similar to the MI beach maps.

I mean, people have said that it would be unrealistic to expect invasion forces to safely land... but likie i said, if your castle there isn't garrisoned and you have no troops there to defend, who's gonna be there to stop that invasion force? Ashgaru rabble?

Anyway, i like this feature of the game, and i want it to stay because it keeps me (and the CPU) honest.

------------------
"You have offended my family, and you have offended a Shaolin temple."

[Algesan]

MP issue I just had. When a human player drops in a multiarmy battle, the AI should pick up the slack and start running the troops. It may be stupid and incompetent, but it is better than having your ally suddenly freeze and leave you hanging in the wind.

[Koga No Goshi]

I want there to be port invasions, but the thing I want to get rid of is the AI knowing where you put your armies before you hit turn. I've tried to use port invasions but the AI simply moves armies wherever I try to invade by port, even if it's way behind his frontier in undefended areas, because it "knew" i moved an army there. Kinda ruins it.



------------------
Koga no Goshi

"Hokusai"
Now as a spirit
I shall roam
the summer fields.

[qwertyuiop]

Quote Originally posted by Algesan:
MP issue I just had. When a human player drops in a multiarmy battle, the AI should pick up the slack and start running the troops. It may be stupid and incompetent, but it is better than having your ally suddenly freeze and leave you hanging in the wind.[/QUOTE]

That happened today in a 3 vs 3 game I played with koga today. The funny thing is that the player who dropped actually ended up beating us by not moving at all after all our troops were severly weakend from the prior battling http://www.totalwar.org/ubb/smile.gif

[KyodaiFunky]

Ok, heres what I would like to see in the patch,

1)central lobby for stw and mi
2)more realistic morale
3)mongol v mongol
4)reinforcements coming on the players side of the map

Thanks

KyodaiFunky

[NagaoKagetora]

1/ Fix the morale in multiplayer (peasant units fighting to the last man is just not realistic)
2/ Re-unite the community!!! (link the two online lobbys)
3/ Mongol versus Mongol in online play

KenchiKagetora

[MagyarKhans Cham]

Take, u are one of my Khans favourite writers, cant u go to our patch forum and spend some nice scentenses in teh Readme topic. ur needed...

[hach]

I have yet to receive reinforcements in battle and to me this is the major flaw in the game.

YOU NEED REINFORCEMENTS.

How am i expected to do a man's job with a boys army.


Hach

[KumaRatta Yamamoto]

Jackson , there is a way to choose your first 16 units, read this thread : http://www.totalwar.org/ubb/Forum1/HTML/001980.html

So this should not be on Hach's list.

Furthermore, when ally and i both attack the same province, the ally does not automatically get the province. I am not sure about what the rule is, but the last game that i played, I GOT THE PROVINCE (i was attacking with a h6 taisho and oda with an h3 taisho).

[Jon]

I believe that in the patch we should be able to turn off the little flags on the back of men, because they take on the same colour as my forces on my monitor, this makes identification difficult. Also, the periodic crashes are an annoyance, so the patch needs to stabilise the game.

[clink]

Okay, here goes....
-Back to original moral settings.
-Reinforcements arrive like before...not all over the map.
-Tone down the Mongals, too powerfull.
-Cut Kensai off at the knees, too tall. If possible whole new different design.
-Can't seem to hide, AI boogy man can sniff ya out every where.
-Clan colors on the dead guys.
-Missle units to have option to go into melle mode before waiting for the lawn darts ta run out. same for ninja units.

Sorry, I know it looks like my wifes Christmas wish list, but do what you can.

Thanks...

Oh yea, the dust effects was a nice touch, next time hows bout a cloud of flys hangen around units. I likes my boyz goin in ta battle smellen real bad, option of course.

[clink]

Man, how could I forget one of my major pet peves.
-Ability of the attacker to set up army in prefered position just like the defender before begin battle.

[Jackson]

Quote Originally posted by KumaRatta Yamamoto:
Jackson , there is a way to choose your first 16 units, read this thread : http://www.totalwar.org/ubb/Forum1/HTML/001980.html

So this should not be on Hach's list.

[/QUOTE]

Thanks Kuma. I was hoping some one would point me in the right direction. Needless to say, I still haven't RTFM. http://www.totalwar.org/ubb/smile.gif

[omine-san]

OK here is my bit :

1. Option scale for length-of-day timing rather than just yes-or-no. In my experience, no time limit is not really an option as the game crashes at about 150% of the normal time limit.

2. Ordering of first 16 units, and reinforcements, both in offense and defense.

3. Too slow reinforcements – suggestion : adding a final withdrawl command that cannot be undone; once given, the reinforcement unit starts marching in. This final withdrawl command can be given to routing units too, in which case they cannot recover from routing, and reinforcement unit starts marching in.

I believe these 3 modifications would make reinforcements a real factor and enable planning of larger scale, longer battles, maybe even adding a measure of complexity.

4. The maps are too small for my liking, big manouvers are not really an option. How about just making the scale of the maps bigger in all 3 dimensions, keeping their current terrain ? together with adjusting fatigue times and length of day.

5. Maybe it’s just me, but I never received a shinobi message that was correct – they were all deceptions. Too bad, this could be a nice feature. Maybe base veracity chance around 80%, with adjustments according to intelligence forces total power ratio (friendly shinobi + ninja + emissaries + relevant border structures vs. enemy shinobi + ninja + relevant border structures, with honor thrown into the equation).

6. When the window pops up asking me if I want to go ahead with the attack, or do I want to defend the province, I often can’t exactly remember my units there, and any information I had on the enemy’s units, if any. However at this stage I cannot click on the strategic map to view this info. So I suggest enabling this viewing.


Most of Hach’s collation seems good to me, except I never played MP so I don’t know about it. The points I would emphasize :


5. Random reinforcements – should be from the player’s half of the perimeter.

6. Port to port attacks – only if defender has significan advantage similar to bridge (dock) defense. The lack of this feature doesn’t seem too bad to me. Just cancelling this option to both player and AI is ok too.

7. AI mind reading – playing safe, you would assume your opponent does know what you will do. Denying the AI this ability would allow calculated risks, or desperation measures. Maybe subject this to intelligence forces of both sides.


That’s it for now. Many thanks to CA – Great game indeed. I felt like it was written especially for me. Big pat on the back.

Eitan.

[KumaRatta Yamamoto]

CLINK, i feel like Santa claus. I will grant you one wish. So you want Missile units to have option to go into melee mode before waiting for the lawn darts to run out? Same for ninja units?

While in battle , select your missile unit, press down "ALT" (keep it pressed down), click on the enemy unit that you wish to attack in melee mode, and voilà! Your unit will pull out their Katana or use the big end of their guns and attack in melee mode.

Merry Christmas!

[clink]

Oh thank you santa.
By the way, what was that I felt sitting on your lap. http://www.totalwar.org/ubb/eek.gif

[Leon]

They need to fix it so that when we're attacking a province, we can arrange our army however we want it instead of having to use one of those crap pre-set formations!

[clink]

Quote Originally posted by Leon:
They need to fix it so that when we're attacking a province, we can arrange our army however we want it instead of having to use one of those crap pre-set formations![/QUOTE]
----------------------------------------------
YES ! Leon. Any commander sending his army out on the field with out a proper recce before battle should be spanked.

---------------------------------------------

'Eat your weakest man'

[Leon]

Couldn't agree more! I just don't understand why something this obvious barely ever gets mentioned!

[Tangent]

Well, I have been playing this game for a long time now and here are my wishes.

1) Morale. Adjust the morale to the original levels or close to them. Warfare is all about morale and morale is what distinguishes Shogun from most so-called tactical games. Since morale no longer shows up as the decisive factor when using the default honor settings (honor level 2), new members of the community will not appreciate the uniqueness of Shogun's combat system. The morale in WE/MI is broken in both the SP and MP versions of the game. Players who still want troops that will fight to the death can buy high honor troops or turn off morale altogether, as they can do on the STW server.

2)Multiplayer strategic game. Of course, I want this. The official notification of a planned MP strategic game patch for WE/MI was the strongest influence in my decision to purchase 4 copies of WE/MI. I second most of what has been said on this issue.

3) Unite the online communities. Every player of STW will then see other games that they can't join and they will be tempted to buy WE/MI. The division of the communities is simply bad marketing from EA/CA's perspective.

4) Fix the direction of routing troops. Troops do not flee into their enemies when they panic. They should attempt to disengage from the nearest hostile troops unti they can get to a safe distance and then they should attempt to run off their original side of the map.

5) Reinforcements.

a) Reinforcements should arrive on the side of the map reflecting the direction from which the reinforcing troops entered the province on the strategic map. The exception to this is where there is a river; in such cases the entry point should be the direction of entry on the strategic map, as above, but adjusted to ensure that reinforcements arrive on the correct side of the river based on the location of the adjacent strategic province. Reinforcements that started the strategic turn in the province arrive on the map side behind the army's original deployment location. This is both more realistic and it will create a useful interaction between the strategic map movement and tactical battles.

For future reference in Crusader, I would like to see the deployment zones also adjusted to reflect how the forces entered the area on the strategic map.

b) If the reinforcement entry point is within a threshold distance of an enemy unit, the reinforcement arrives a minimum distance away from the original reinforcement entry point and the enemy unit or at the next unthreatened reinforcement entry point. If a reinforcment has to arrive at a different entry point than its original entry point, there is a time delay in the reinforcement's arrival to to reflect the extra time spent marching off map to get to the new entry point. This is common practice in board wargames.

6) There is a problem with rebellions not producing powerful enough armies in occupied provinces, thereby turning rebellious provinces into training grounds for the occupying troops. There should be more variation in the size of rebellious forces.

7) Allow Mongol units on both sides in the tactical MP game.

8) Have the AI take over the play of the forces of a player who drops or escapes; hitting the escape key results in the escaping player's army routing under the AI. As the alternative, players who drop should result in the two player game being a draw and players who escape by expressly hitting the escape key should lose. In a multiplayer game, if a player escapes after one or more players has dropped, the battle is a draw and the escaping players are not penalized. Many drops are the result of connection losses and are not the fault of the player.

9) Allow both sides to adjust their tactical deployments in the SP game, not just the defender.

10) Allow full pursuits in the SP game if an army completely routs, rather than ending the scenario. Pursuits are a critical part of battles.

11) I share the concern that YS and YA have had their defenses lowered. I recommend restoring the original levels.

12) Allow mods in MP play based upon the settings of the host's computer, provided that the lobby shows a specific indication that the hosted game is using mods. This warning should show up in the MP LAN lobby as well.

As a final suggestion, I would like to see CA/EA carefully follow how Taldren is doing with their policy of releasing the Dynaverse server of the Star Fleet Command series to the customer community to determine if that policy makes sense for the Total War series. Depending on that business assessment, EA/CA should look at the possibilty of either releasing the server themselves, or at least allowing players to set-up cross internet play without going through the STW/WE server. Should EA ever elect to drop the servers from the EA site, I very strongly hope that they will release the server program to the community rather than killing the online game altogether.

-Tangent

[ShadowBlood]

Well here is my ideas, although some may've been repeated countless times by others.

- Morale System Reviewed ( MaghyarKhan's proposal of "Available Options with multi systems" seems just fine )

- Mongol vs Mongol ( after all, although united under one Khan, internicide between clans often happened )

- Japanese vs Japanese is a must too

- Plz review all coding for GUNbearers, mainly:
* Lines of sight ( they fire through hills, and other troops )
* Availability in damp/wet weather.

- Mongol Heavy cavalry should lose momentum after initial charging ( this is a real life feature for is quite easy for ANY footman to unhorse a knight and waste him after cavalry block is entagled ). They just keep hitting as if they are charging.

- Why not make daylight changes ? Should work just nicely with timelimit and would for sure add to the stress of battle( this probably could be tested for Crusaders and it should only take a change in Ambience Light ).

- Why do rivers don't get frozen during winter ? At least in the northern countries?
Would make winters a very nice season for campaigns somehow i think.

- Direct Connection to play. ( think STW is the only game that doesn't have it )

- Online Campaign ( Lords of the Realm has the perfect example and how old is it !?!? I still play it by the way)

- Rivers should have fords...

- Can't remember a lot of them right now, BUT
please check some technical features, mainly compatibility with graphic boards and WIN2000.


Give No Mercy
Take None

[KumaRatta Yamamoto]

Tangent: I have to disagree with this "There is a problem with rebellions not producing powerful enough armies in occupied provinces, thereby turning rebellious provinces into training grounds for the occupying troops. There should be more variation in the size of rebellious forces."

-Small Peasant rebellions should be easy pickings for a army of samurai.

-If you leave your shinobi group in the province after the first revolt, there is a good chance that the second peasant revolt will be bigger in numbers (the more shinobi=the better the chance).

-If you leave your shinobi group in a province held a long time or originally by one clan, after 2 or 3 seasons of peasant revolts, you well get a "loyalist" revolt (Even bringing back clans from the dead).

-If you play a bit with religion a buddhist revolt (a lot of monks) or a christian revolt (a lot of guns) adds some nasty power to revolts.

[MagyarKhans Cham]

good posts guys, now we have to lure Target in here

[ShadowBlood]

Another two i've remembered:

- New reinforcement system is a great idea, thus transforming the battles into something more than a bull fight head-on, but i still think that areas of reinforcement entry should be chosen by generals.
* Or, alternatively, the entry points be fixed.

- I always found strange cav didn't get bogged in rice pads and such similar terrain.
I think this would give lots of work, making modifiers for each terrai type ( eg. loose rubble in a hill slope is almost impossible to climb, as u keep sliding down ), but think this one out as a test for Crusaders.

- I'll post more later, must work now.

-----------------
Attention EA:

U know Shogun is one of the least pirated game ever ?! Wonder Why ? Thanks.
Please do hear our pleads. We're just helping you to improve.
-----------------

Give No Mercy
Take None

[omine-san]

The rate of posting in this thread is dwindling, and now it’s mainly guys who have given it some thought. We better start making priorities as CA is not likely to create a new ex-pack out of this, just a patch. So let’s see if we can converge on what is essential and what is potentially interesting and nice-to have.

1. Reinforcements : I believe this is the most important point, also the most consensual. As it is, the player hardly gets to make effective use of them. They come without order of need at the specific moment of battle, from unexpected points, they come too slowly and only after the last soldier of the withdrawing/routing unit disappears. This and the need to chase enemy reinforcements all over the map are major obstacles, especially in time-limit attack battles. So :

A. A pop-up window allowing setting of order of arrival of reinforcement units, active before and during battle, both in attack and defense.

B. A non-returnable withdraw command to withdrawing/routing units. Immediately as it given, the reinforcement unit starts marching in. That way, a player can’t have more than 16 active units on the field, and reinforcements arrive faster.

C. Reinforcements from the player’s (or AI’s) back side of his half of the map, better yet – keep it one entry point as it was in STW. The issue of camping on the entry point : not so bad, as it allows a good 16-unit army to defend successfully against a lower quality horde, and even attack a horde, although attacking is tougher. I like that, myself. But to prevent this, it is enough to allow entry all along the back side of the player’s half court, instead of one point. Allowing totally random entry points, I believe most agree, is bad.

D. Modifiable length of day, rather than yes-or-no clock. Even with the above changes, about 10 units max will typically join the party with any effect, before it’s over. Allow longer, more complex battles. This nullifies the set changes between the seasons, but I believe the added playability is worth it. Simple to affect too. Note, quite a few players complained about crashes when there is no time limit at all. Time limit is a good thing, just enable extensions for large longer battles.

2. Morale : is No. 2 on the list only because there was much debate on this. Opinions vary; the complaints are about MP and custom, not SP; and it is modable even now. When a standard Troopstats.txt file is agreed upon, MP problems will be solved. So there seems to be no great need for CA work in this. Maybe just issue a standard optional troopstats file. Autorout bug, if exists – fix, definitely.

3. I haven’t played MP, but there seems to be a wide agreement on Mongol Vs. Mongol, all units available ‘era’, adjustable Koku in MP, and wishing for MP campaign.

4. Routing directions – hmm, we could say that they are in panic and just trying to go home the shortest way, but that’s a bit far out http://www.totalwar.org/ubb/smile.gif Yup, better make them steer away from enemy forces.

Now, the nice to have’s :

5. Port to port invasions – disallow, unless it is made to be very advantageous to the defender like bridge attacks or castle assaults. Otherwise, simply no one in his/her/its right mind would build ports – the added mobility is much less than then the added vulnerability, and the revenue on the investment is not too great to begin with. As it is, it’s not too bad as the AI (almost) doesn’t do it and the player can choose not to. Strategic units can move p2p, no problem.

6. Directions of initial deployment and reinforcements according to the directions on the strategic map. This way, for example, if you surround a river province from both sides you get to deploy troops on both sides. Makes sense.

7. AI mindreading : not too bad, but there is room for creativity here. Dropping this ability would allow more risk taking in invasions. Also, finding out the AI’s plans on a tactical, specific level – which army goes where – could be assigned to the existing information agents : emissaries, shinobi, ninja, border structures; and the same with countering this. So we can have intelligence struggles that effect decisions in every move. Option: setting a penalty to the currently free ‘call off the attack’, for example - taking a loss, or morale drop for the participating units for the next season. It seems to me a little too risk-free now.

8. Shinobi messages about large scale movements (Lord X is mobilizing…) – apparently they are always deceptions, which mean they do not deceive anyone. A base 80%-90% veracity rate per one shinobi in the province is recommended. Could be influenced by intel struggles as above.

Disappearing ronin, duplicate heir, kensai honor, F1 bug ( what is it ?) and several other things – well, remember a lady is entitled to some personal quirks; adds to the magic http://www.totalwar.org/ubb/smile.gif as long as it doesn’t really spoil the fun.

Corrections and disagreements welcome !




[This message has been edited by omine-san (edited 09-01-2001).]

[johnmcd]

I'd like the numbers of buildings you can pillage for cash in a turn limited. I suppose it is reasonable to make them all burnable, but to get koku out of destroying a building should involve a bit of work for the attacker. At the momment taking someones only unit producing province at the start not only secures enough koku to rebuild whatever army you lost but also does the attacked force irreversible damage.

I think this unbalances the game unduly.

[Nagano Toma]

Here is my list:

1)Morale Options: Low Medium High (buttons or a slider) Players can then chose what kind of game they want: Fanatical Samurai of myths who fight to the death or real human beings who run when things get too tough. But make it an option like unit size etc. And make it obvious in MP what level of morale the host chose so players can quickly find the morale level they like playing at

2)Reinforcements: I have heard it said you only get reinforcements after ALL your units leave the field. I don't know if this is true because I have never gotten any reinforcements! Reinforcement should enter as soon as the unit it is replacing leaves the field.

3)Bigger revolts, and make the AI's strategic units more aggressive. AI should try to start more revolts

4)Tax rate: you should only be able to change it once a year (Autumn?) and it stays in effect the whole year

[The_battlefield_geisha]

The only thing I want is one extra difficulty level with everything ramped up.

--unlimited AI daiymos

--larger rebellions

--port to port invasions used heavily by AI

--AI more likely to ally against you as game progresses.

All of this in the interest of difficulty, not realism.

[GrandSwordsman]

I have noticed several bugs with MI but one that sticks out in my mind was a map I had made with the map editer, I had 2 inlets of water on each side forcing the battle to take place in the middle.
When I tried this map for the first time on custom battle I picked some ninjas to test the map, when I went to send them to the other side of the map they ran in the opposite direction to the edge of the map trying to run out of the map.
I do not know if it was because I had a inlet of water on each side, a bug with the ninjas, the map editer itself or a once off. But it would be good if EA looked into this as it would be good to have fully working maps.

[This message has been edited by GrandSwordsman (edited 09-02-2001).]

[Murmandamus]

One for the bottom of the list.

Target mentioned some undocumented keys for zooming in/out on the strategy map (1 and 3 on the keypad) but the zoom state isn't saved. It always returns to the default when you go to another screen and come back to the strategy map.

[Otokomi Innue]

Please see http://www.totalwar.org/ubb/Forum1/HTML/002081.html for ideas about reinforcements. I want your feed back there. Richie wants structure. Go here for the reinforcements questionaire.

[jodmeister]

Map Editor.............

How about a larger bridge that you can rotate

It is really annoying having to make the river fit the bridge and not the other way round..................

Fight the JOD!

[CeltiberoSkullXIII]

OLD MORALE BACK!!!

MONGOL UNITS LIKE JAPANESE UNITS (FAIR PLAY)

POSSIBILITIES TO PLAY MONG vs MONG !!!

NAGINATA TEXTURE BACK!!!

Kensai normal big!




------------------
"It's better to let the enemy alive as to kill it ... To TORTURE it!" http://gifanimados.ya.com/terror/calaveras_banderas/flag_wht_blkbns_clr.gif