View Full Version : Post-patch wishlist
Kraxis pointed out (and i agree) that the older wishlist was going over the same ground over and over again without achieving much except to express disappointment in CA for not making change x.
A wishlist, however, is a great idea and as such shall be reincarnated in this form. Post up any changes you want made, but don't bash CA or other members. Remember that you are posting your opinion, not the scripture.
Discussion and debate is fine, flaming is not.
Have fun ;)
Hosakawa Tito
12-19-2006, 02:33
I'd like to see my agents list organized by groups, merchants, spies, priests, diplomats, assassins, instead of the hodgepodge list it is now. As you train more agents it becomes quite tedious to find and use them with such a disorganized listing.
On that topic, i'd also like to see a feature which says 'agents near me' - you click on the map, and all agents within a 3 or 4 province radius are listed by order of proximity.
Also, and i'm sure this has been said before, but it annoys me enough that i'm tempted to include it in the buglist, grouped units should not attack the closest enemy when given an attack order, they should attack the one i tell them to!
Sarmatian
12-19-2006, 03:43
I'd like to see my agents list organized by groups, merchants, spies, priests, diplomats, assassins, instead of the hodgepodge list it is now. As you train more agents it becomes quite tedious to find and use them with such a disorganized listing.
Agreed, I would just add that option to sort them by age, skill, how much money they are making (for merchants) and similar stuff... And a number of them (you have 23 spies)
Mounting/dismounting units :balloon2:
Faenaris
12-19-2006, 21:05
A total check-up of the upgrade models. Some units (like Byzantine lancers) have upgrades that look alike. Another unit is the Dvor Cavalry. There are others, but for the next few weeks, I don't have the time to do some serious searching and documenting. I do know that Byzantium and Russia could use some tweaking in that regard.
pevergreen
12-20-2006, 04:15
Mounting/dismounting units :balloon2:
He shoots, He Scores!
and tone down the naval invasions, Portugal doesnt need to invade England when being hammered by Moors, Spain and France.
I want the _ex lines made workable.
That would make armour much more effective (padded will give 4 points then), and more in line with the units that have inherent armour.
I want a tougher campaign AI :(
Winning on turn 58 just doesn't seem right :embarassed:
http://users.on.net/~purdsa/temp/m2s.jpg (http://users.on.net/~purdsa/temp/m2.jpg)
Fixes:
- Fix towers using wrong ammo
- Re-Introduce movement points indicator. Right now you just can't see any increased range on units, and it's timeconsuming to check your agents' movement points.
- Fix reinforcements not arriving for command because one or two men/horses still off-map
- Fix the errors being reported to system.log.txt;
There are lines and lines of trigger errors. Overall much of the game mechanics seem to not work as intended.
Tons of content files seem to be missing. Maybe a flawed install-routine/copy protection issue?
Suggestions:
- Bring in the much-demanded 3D city view
- Show what type of towers are on the wall
- Bring in a "action available" indicator for agents (diplomats/spies/assasins) so it's easier to see if they have a free action or not (on top of above-mentioned movement point indicator).
- Make retinues mostly transferrable, not rarely. It used to be a great new feature being able to tweak commanders to my specific needs in Rome that I am now totally missing in M2. It seems odd one assassin can't transfer his "famous blade" or "prototype pistols" to another for instance. IMO cities only corrupt generals.
- Let the player pick the prince.
Wrap-up
The first update made things a lot better. Thanks for that. But there still is much to be done.
1. Boiling Oil?...........is that not in game any more? Cos my patch v1.1 doesn't have it.
2. Why can the enemy, walk up to my gate, and the gate opens magically for them????
They have no one in the castle, gate is not destoryed. I have a complete unit in the gate house, and it's not even been attacked.
Again, unit cohesion....
PS: I'm back Kraxis, well i never left, just to busy to mod, or be involved in a large way. :laugh4:
@fenir
1. It's never been in m2tw - it was far too overpowered in rtw
2. They have a spy in the settlement
@chrisky
All your fixes are in the buglist already, but thanks for bringing them up again.
Then a 'welcome back' is in order I suppose.~:wave:
I would like spears to be more resistant to cavalry charges, at least head on. And I would like that most units would not get trampled from the front by light cavalry.
My wish is that they fix the frekin game :thumbsdown:
Elmar Bijlsma
12-20-2006, 19:14
An Amen on the mount/dismount during setup.
Also, I'd really like the AI to have better garrisons and using it's full allowance of free militia garrison units in particular.
And my pet peeve, the generals speech to be played during setup. I hate waiting several minutes doing nothing yet I really wish to hear the hilarious speeches.
OMGLAZERS
12-20-2006, 21:17
I want a tougher campaign AI :(
Winning on turn 58 just doesn't seem right :embarassed:
http://users.on.net/~purdsa/temp/m2s.jpg (http://users.on.net/~purdsa/temp/m2.jpg)
Grab Shaba Wangy's simple mod to the AI and diplomacy.
http://www.twcenter.net/forums/showthread.php?t=72471
It's turn 45 (VH/VH) as the English, and i've barely got out of England. The Scottish built up and grabbed Dublin and Iverness, and shelled in and resisted me for a long time.
One of the key features of the mod is that the AI's are smart enough to realize that, hey, lets not attack other Catholic factions first. Lets attack rebel factions!
Within a few turns, every single rebel reigon will be grabbed up unless it's so strong it can resist for that much longer (But they usually don't)
OMGLAZERS
12-20-2006, 21:21
{double post, sorry. Please delete.}
OMGLAZERS
12-20-2006, 21:27
I think one problem that wasn't addressed much post-patch is the much more aggressive AI, and the total lack of actual borders.
Discussed in my thread here:
https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showthread.php?t=75549
Simply: The AI is now more aggressive, and will attack more often. However, often it just lands stacks where and when it likes, without attacking. There is no way to get them off your lands without attacking. The player is required to obtain a military access in order to move it's troops onto other faction's lands, and those factions have no reprocussion to moving troops onto his lands.
Everyone agrees that a diplomatic option is in order. Warnings and threatened penalties are definitely called for. Also, the ability of factions to attack trespassing troops and not be deemed the aggressor AFTER diplomatic options are used by the Pope is also important.
The AI has a habit of leaving two stacks outside an Allied city for no good reason untill it just happens to decide to attack and the player must spend gobs and gobs of money to make sure if an attack occurs, it is defenseable while the other factions wear down on the other fronts.
It's not game breaking that this happens but it's probably my biggest complaint.
fuzzilogik
12-20-2006, 23:52
Can we get an AI pursuit mode? At the end of a battle it would be nice to have the AI clean up as many prisoners as possible on 3x speed. Unfortunately, if you put groups on AI during the pursuit phase they all stop and regroup before moving. I envision a pursuit mode where all allied units would just charge the closest enemy and keep charging until the end of the battle.
OMGLAZERS
12-21-2006, 00:29
My wish is that they fix the frekin game :thumbsdown:
How very...
...
Productive.
My wish list is for either the next patch or sometimes it's just for the series in general.
---------
Those pikemen could be made a bit more like the phalanx units from RTW. How I used them in RTW was pretty nice, but using them in M2TW plain sucks, as you know they change arms instead of making infantry kebab. Just reuse the old phalanx, because it worked.
Repost: to organize unit cards on the campaign map by dragging and dropping to facilitate viewing of armies' varieties and strengths.
Repost: optimization of engine.
Option to auto-recruit spies in settlements if existing one dies.
Option to auto-recruit priests.
Less heretics and witches. At some point they aren't a nice gameplay element at all nor a challenge: they are just a nuisance hindering enjoyable gameplay.... unless you're a masochist who enjoys pain and suffering playing this game. Or just get rid of heretics and witches totally.
Obvious: improve diplomacy, or otherwise in the expansion.
To crush enemy/neutral/allied agents with army units or kick them out with army units.
To engage in diplomacy using family members.
More settlements/regions on map (otherwise in expansion) though I've seen a mod about this, which looks very interesting and promising.
Unless you have the higher assassin buildings, assassins are still underpowered. With +1 subterfuge I couldn't clean up a rebel captain. Below 60% ain't nothing.
When an assassin has a chance of 95% he should always succeed. He should even succeed at sabotaging an assassins building when at 95%. If you mean to make it harder to sabotage an assassins building because it has assassins and spies in it (or it's connected, whatever), lessen the showed chance, don't show 95% like with all the other buildings that will ALWAYS go down anyway.
Include 100% for assassins, like with spies.
When your spy infiltrates a settlement, show its vital information directly on the campaign map like you'd see with your own settlements. This saves time and effort: it lets you know you have a spy in there, and you don't have to open the settlement to see information (unless detailed information is what you want).
Optimization of the engine.
More factions.
Optimization of the engine.
Give assassins greater view radius. Or better yet make one unit: a combination of a spy and assassin, so no need for two different ones.
When a spy infiltrates a settlement, give the option to 'Spy' or to 'Cause Unrest' (or both obviously). Sometimes you don't want them to cause unrest.
Option to choose your battle time limit.
AI in battle sometimes leaves a small number of forces standing in a corner, even if the rest has already routed. They don't stand a chance anyway, so the battle should be over. I saw one man standing in a corner. Had to look for him. It's only annoying.... unless you like getting annoyed playing games. I thought they were supposed to bring a person joy.
Optimization of engine.
Pike use optimization: instead of "spear wall" have them set to their most effective mode from the start. When selected and you click once, they move slowly, double-click they move fast. But there doesn't have to be a special option: only takes time and micromanagement. When engaging the enemy they automatically lower their pikes and move slower. This way you can close in on them without having to use special option.
They should automatically switch to other weapons if they got closed in on.
All long weapons should have bonus against cavalry.
Repost: "Get Off My Land".
New gameplay element of spies/assassins: they should be able to kidnap an enemy family member (or other valuable character) and you could then demand ransom money or some other "diplomatic" demand. This allows for beautiful dirty play, hah hah! And a powerful bargaining chip.
Of course this spy/assassin mission would have the typical chance of success shown in percentage.
Fix the movement of cavalry. When pursuing routing units they don't always cut them down, but just stay behind them and let them run, or they just suddenly stop moving.
Infantry charge still isn't fixed, or sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn't.
Same with cavalry charge. The rear horsemen just stay behind.
Wow... took some time to put this in.
Nice ideas, bijo.
On another note, can we stop the spam? ww2's post wasn't useful but replying to it doesn't help anything.
Further to Bijo's idea,
Bijo, perhaps if we had the ability not to kidnap, but to assign units in a battle to capture nobles to ranson back?
This would be fitting with titiles, nobles would be titiled, and troops would capture to ranson back.
Sapi, ok i have another for you, why does the game go from map to battle, and there is no deployment available?
fenir
fenir, if they have a spy in the settlement you don't get a chance to deploy your troops.
It's one of the advantages that they get for doing so ;)
I don't mind the trading, religion and diplomacy of the game. It needs some changes, but not important enough for me to bring out. I'm pretty happy with the world map but when it comes to real time battles, a lot needs to be corrected.
My wishes:
Cavalry and routing units - before patch it was better on the field and no cutting down within walls. CA guys seem to fix the problem within walls, the cavalry indeed kills the routing units nicely, but have them charging with lances against men that are running away and are scattered is just useless. Let them use their lances on men that still fight back and use their swords on routing units. And ofcourse, I'd like to see more effective chopping on those runaways. I mean, how hard can it be to strike a man in the back. My point is that the routing units should be cut down much faster without cavalry running all around them and just looking cool.
Castles - IMHO should be much harder to get. The cities could stay as they are, but castles... I would like to see more defences, stronger walls, boiling oil etc. The besieging of a fortified castle should not be a picnic. And it is a picnic right now.
Units on walls - I like the fact that peasants are slaughtering knights on walls, cause it is logical that the knight who has all this armor on him is quite tired when he reaches the top of the ladder and it's easyer for a peasant to push him down with his pitchfork anyway. But the archers on walls. They are just way too soft, firing in the air insted a direct shot downwards and are killing of just too few of attackers, even when they are standing still. Archers on walls should get some bonus and be able to shoot accurately, even when the enemy is almost under the wall. The second row should behave as it is right now, but the first one should have a clear sight on enemy no matter how close it is.
Pike units - again not so much improvement where it should be. I would really like to see a pikewall that is a pikewall not guys with broomsticks trying to scare the horses. A direct attack on them should cause atleast 50% damage for the cavalry unit stupid enough to charge them. Their casualties in the first hit however should be not greater than 15%.
Overpowered peasants - I'd like to see that fixed aswell. They are not a cannon fodder they should be. I've red lot's of comments where peasents are slaping proffessional military around on one-on-one brawls, it should not be so. Peasents must be the lower lifeform in this game, superior only to cockroaches running around castles kitchen.
Steinfeld
12-21-2006, 18:04
Grouping of unit-cards on the strategy map:
It would be nice to be able to sort the unit cards in bigger armies either automatically or preferably by hand (drag & drop).
Currently you have to do this by separating and rejoining the army which costs movement points and is quite tedious.
fuzzilogik
12-21-2006, 18:27
"To engage in diplomacy using family members." Second that Bijo. It is so strange that my king can't negotiate with another king.
Thanks, sapi. I even got some more, so brace yourselves.
fenir, I like the idea, but I think in a way it's already there with the current system. If you "assign" a unit and "kill" the enemy general when he routs he's captured and you can demand ransom, let him go, or execute him. Unless you mean to use an agent somehow in battle to capture/kidnap the family member? Maybe I'm not totally getting you.
But I was more talking about every valuable character: family members (generals, princesses, heck even their young children!), but also skillful diplomats, skillful merchants, and priests/imams with high piety.
Sometimes the enemy faction wouldn't pay the ransom because it'd want to get rid of their character, hah hah.
----
Continuation from list:
================
To build watchtowers with every army (unit). Why is a general the only one to build them, or to receive order for the building to be constructed? I imagine messengers/scouts on horses traveling back and forth to deliver messages. Certainly, if we think like this, an army captain can receive the message to build a watchtower. This would take away the annoyance of needing a general around if he's not there.
Optimization of engine.
Taken from the post about the cantabranian circle: option to have missile cavalry encircle and shoot an enemy unit.
Princesses can perform.... "certain services" to enemy/neutral/allied family members to "convince" them of their diplomatic intentions and proposals. If such services are given to diplomats, they will move Heaven and Earth, mountains, oceans, to convince their leader to accept.
The receiving enemy/ally/neutral can also lie and use the princess, and then not hold on to the agreement. Or maybe this shouldn't be.
Assassins (or the new "spy assassin") can not only kidnap, sabotage, spy, and cause unrest, but assassinate children of the enemy/neutral/allied royal family. They can even persuade these children of the family with propaganda to join your family and they will grow to be a worthy general or princess.
To add to that: when an enemy spy does this to one of your grownup family members, you can order them to 'pretend to betray you' to infiltrate their faction and play back information.
Like: you can then see their whole map information and every movement.
Archer units do not fire consistently, though they should. The difference between them firing arrows is too great: they should approximately be at the same time, or a minor difference to ensure better effect (or at least the feeling of it).
When a single man is hit by an arrow (especially if not armored), he should just die. I even saw a man get hit by an arrow in the head (didn't have a helmet) and he just lived on. If they get hit by armor-piercing arrows they should always die.
Make the cavalry charge just like in RTW. Way I played it I remember it always worked fine. Even from a reasonable close distance they would charge. Screw the so-called "realism" if it's bugging the enjoyment of gameplay.
Somebody made a small mod, but I don't remember who. The Russians have two heavy infantry units mainly used: Dismounted Boyar Sons and another one. Both units cost the same and have the same basic stats. Boyar Sons on their horses use missiles (javelins), so he gave the Dism. Boyar Sons javelins to actually make a difference.
This should be a standard in the patch.
Catholic priests can not only get rid of heretics and witches, but also imams (and maybe the Orthodox preachers too, but they are a branch of Christianity).
The Orthodox ones should not only get rid of heretics and witches, but also imams.
Imams should not only get rid of heretics and witches, but also the Orthodox and Catholics.
Optimization of engine.
Somehow fix the annoying clashing missions. I don't know, but I know it looks more like giving the player opposing missions on purpose just so "you give him a nice gameplay experience" or something like that. Well, it feels phony.
Repost: when using Shift+# the selected units don't always move/position correctly.
Optimization of engine.
Repost: more titles.
Fix overall unit movement: sometimes a person gets stuck against a tree, or a rock.
Repost: more detailed video options for campaign map, and better pop-up descriptions for options, what they exactly do, for all those people who don't know.
Fix shadows: how can shadows take SO MUCH performance, even if it is "properly" auto-detected by M2TW?
Include video option: simple shadows like in RTW. They looked good enough, and were FAST. Though some eye candy don't hurt anybody.
Who's even going to pay special attention to graphics like these, and soldiers faces, when there's a bigger more important picture to handle? (Not that I disagree with those who do, but you get my point.) Those individual faces still look alike, by the way.
The 2D graphics of distant units look terrible. The coloring should be at least the same as their 3D versions. This makes switching from 3D to 2D, and vice versa, smoother and more pleasant to the eye, as you mask better.
When ending a battle the voice of the one who's talking should continue to go when going into the loading screen. It's all a matter of fine-tuning and smoothing out those rough edges.
Fix the pre-battle speeches: with the Germans especially I've noticed repeating sentences or parts of them. Sound like someone handling the audio forgot to edit some takes.
Sometimes the army cheers aren't fine-tuned to the speeches, like timing.
Change speeches for Italian factions: to have a Spanish/Iberian sound to an Italian general just sucks.
The Mongols should not be Islamic, but pagan.
Optimization of engine.
Optimization of engine.
Optimization of engine.
Option to choose entirely different religion for your faction in-game.
Example: if you're first Catholic, and change to Islamic, you will have better ties with Islamic factions, and worse ones with Catholics.
Example: if you change to pagan, you will be able to recruit heretics and witches to annoy other factions. Maybe even able to ally with pagan rebel settlements and fund their armies to fight your enemies.
If an AI faction is more and more bothered by a certain religion, it can also choose to adapt to it (making it its dominant religion), or face lots of unrest.
In my freshly started campaign as the boring English faction, I engaged a family member and a spear unit with totally overwhelming power. In patch 1.1 I didn't or hardly notice passive A.I., but here it is with pictures. And also the stupidity of pursuing cavalry, as they don't cut their enemies down like they should.
It's to support what people are saying about passivity and the failed pursuits of routers.
https://img135.imageshack.us/img135/9582/01closeinbr2.th.jpg (https://img135.imageshack.us/my.php?image=01closeinbr2.jpg)
This is where I'm closing in after I've wasted their passive (suicidal) spear unit waiting there.
https://img258.imageshack.us/img258/8669/02closeinmissilegj9.th.jpg (https://img258.imageshack.us/my.php?image=02closeinmissilegj9.jpg)
In here you see how I'm STILL closing in on the general unit, as my archers and crossbowmen still rain death upon them.
https://img304.imageshack.us/img304/8323/03pursuitgeneralqq8.th.jpg (https://img304.imageshack.us/my.php?image=03pursuitgeneralqq8.jpg)
Strangely enough, even though I totally closed in on the git, he and a few men managed to escape from my clutches. I had fast moving light cavalry: they should be quick to run the rest of them down, including the general - ESPECIALLY THE GENERAL.
https://img304.imageshack.us/img304/3586/04fleegeneralfailedpurszl9.th.jpg (https://img304.imageshack.us/my.php?image=04fleegeneralfailedpurszl9.jpg)
As you can see, the schmuck managed to get away from my wrath. How so? Well, let's just say my light cavalry likes to stand around looking cool once in a while, instead of finishing off their enemies when they get close.
Frustrating? Annoying? Bothersome? Irritating? No, not at all: how could one even think that by reading the above? Actually, I find it quite nice to miss my opportunity at killing an enemy's family member, weakening their strength. It's the best element of the whole game. Maybe he had a pagan magician, or some other force, protecting him... making my men turn away as soon as they near him.
Army units should be simply more effective at what they're trained to do: killing.
repost: 3D City view
wish: princesses! I'm playing my third campaign as HRE and have yet to find a princess, even though denying marriage to all my generals and having 16+ aged unmarried women in the family tree. I only get to use a princess in the very beginning as I start HRE with one...
wish: Ability to set reinforcement sequence. When I'm reinforced by two heeavy infantry and 1 peasants and have one slot free to reinforce, I don't want the peasants to come in.
wish: fix the known bugs that should be easily fixed in a 1.1.1 patch BEFORE FEBRUARY (CAs announced circa ETA of patch 1.2) so people get stuff out of the game that the manual promises. I'm specifically thinking about stuff like the defense towers and the wrong city models being used. Should be easily fixed as it's just improper referencing.
PROMETHEUS
12-25-2006, 04:11
I WANT a Battle map stuff importer Exporter !!!
Disable crusading armies to reinforce non-crusading, same-faction armies when fighting another catholic faction. If a crusader isn't allowed to attack another catholic faction, they should not be allowed to join the fight either.
Stop the AI charging their general when there's under 5 men in his unit (because then he dies in the charge).
Put a limit on how many militia the AI can use in its armies to try to get some real ones emerging.
Get rid of passive campaign AI!!!!!!!! - I just came across the spanish and the portugese in my hre campaign (i've got all of germany, france, poland and most of italy, so i'm a fair way in, probably about 50 or 60 turns) and they haven't done anything. I could take zaragosa and valencia from the rebels. Not good :(
Agreed, I would just add that option to sort them by age, skill, how much money they are making (for merchants) and similar stuff... And a number of them (you have 23 spies)
And sort by movement points left.
Little Legioner
12-28-2006, 08:17
View settlement in battlemap. That's all i want.:smash:
brokguitar
12-28-2006, 12:17
show symbols for units in city under the income, pop growth, build/recruit bar.
p(or a cross)for priest
s(or a eye)for spy
m(or $) for merchant
g(or feather pen) for governer
make it so if you cross into someone land and do not leave by third turn it constitutes war.
Exept when miltary agreement or a crusade is made. (this should include allys, and maybe not papal states)
Make priests stackable WITHOUT a army! Cardinals should be able to lead a group of priests like a general. I dont think acting as a general would be cool but maybe it would??.(like the pope does)
Have agent button that allows you to go through agents on map that have moves left.
Orda Khan
12-30-2006, 12:09
Deleted
PureMassacre
12-31-2006, 02:15
Sapping: Why is there no option to sap a castles defenses?
Moats: Castles near water sources should have the option to construct moats. Moats would obviously prevent attacks from getting to the walls, and would make it more difficult to sap (maybe have a chance that the mine will collapse, fill with water and drown those inside). Attackers could have the chance to construct barges/rafts/bridges to cross the moat. A drawbridge would allow the defenders to cross the moat.
Gatehouses: Need to be more elaborate, there would often be two portcullises to the main entrance. The one closest to the inside would be closed first and then the one furthest away. This was used to trap the enemy and often, burning wood or hot oil would be poured onto them from the roof. Also, archers could shoot arrows at the trapped enemies. There were often arrow holes in the sides of the walls for archers and crossbowman to eliminate the besieging army
Dismounted Cavalry: Option to dismount cavalry during deployment.
Aztecs should be capable of building units and buildings... anywhere. I gave them Sofia as a gift, and they weren't able to do anything with it. No Coyote Priests against the Mongols... for all their wealth.
Mount/Dismount! There are features here other people haven't mentioned yet. YES, you could still allow the making of Dismounted units, as a price break when you only need the infantry abilities. Like MTW, some units might just be more useful as dismounted even and would thus be usually used dismounted. But the new strategic map gives a great reason for mount/dismount: while some units might almost always be used as infantry, and even be terrible on their horses, the fact they have horses means they can move on the strategic map much faster. "Dragoon" type units that fight on foot but move on horse are possible with the current system, and would be nice to have.
Moats would be nice, but then again, most castles were near good sources of water. In fact it was pretty fundamental on choosing sites. Making moats though could be appropriately expensive too: after all, it involves reinforcing the foundations of the castle against erosion. I agree with most suggestions to make sieges much tougher. To balance though, the siege time should be increased to allow the attacker more time to accomplish things. (Also though, in most sieges with many moats the water would have been diverted upstream by the attacker.)
Cavalry charges need to be easier to set up. Pikes need to be better at halting them.
"Stealth" units like Sherwood Foresters, when part of a garrison defending a siege, should be deployable outside the city in some cases. While more theatrical, it would symbolize sneaking a team out at night or whatnot to ambush at "just the right moment". Also from a player standpoint, it could make a fun unpredictable element to some siege battles
Armies interacting with strategic pieces. There should be caveats here though. Diplomatic repercussions should be much harsher when using an army to do this kind of thing. "Escort to the border" should have little consequences. "Execute" should have severe consequences, greater than getting caught using an assassin (being so heavy handed), and should seriously hurt your reputation. These penalties should be even worse when used on clergy... while you should be able to kill off priests with your armies because they are obvious and public figures, doing so more than a couple times should make you a diplomatic pariah. Doing so against a catholic priest as a catholic faction should almost guarantee excommunication.
Priests of different faiths should be able to attack each other, WITH prerequisites. The attacking priest should require a certain percentage of the population to be of his own faith first, and the odds should be low. A success would mean he rallied local believers into action against the target. This should also have a small but very short lived spike in unrest in the local public when it happens. (Inciting your own people to riot, even against competing faiths, is playing with fire after all!) This is diplomatically clean though, after all, it's not the national leader's fault a handful of hotheads took it upon themselves to do those unfortunate things...
National leaders are kings. Princesses are their daughters. The "certain favors" idea is out of character. You don't send your daughter to do those things. At least I hope to GOD you sick piece of work! :furious3:
LOL. Anyway. On that thought though, it could be made so when spies and assassins are recruited, there is a coinflip on whether the resulting agent is male or female; each would have similar basic abilities, but slightly divergent special tricks. Like wooing heirs, etc. That might be for a later game though. (Also historically pretty accurate; jobs as spies and assassins have usually been open to both genders throughout history.)
National leaders are kings. Princesses are their daughters. The "certain favors" idea is out of character. You don't send your daughter to do those things. At least I hope to GOD you sick piece of work!
There's no need for name-calling. I was just throwing something in. Don't like it? Then attack the words, not the person.
Sending a princess to another faction's family member to establish an alliance by marriage is not so bad then? Sure, send her away to a far land then, marrying somebody she doesn't know, a man who will control her. A marriage based on pure pragmatical basis. Yes: it is truly great, hm, those kings and princesses.
I want Glorious Achievement back. Please? And that damn road in Corinth to stop magically going over the sea!
Hi,
Just don´t now if it is a wish list for post-patch of for next game. Sorry for the english.
Battles
I really like it. I think it is were TW had less major changes from Shogun to Medieval 2 (engine and system, not with graphics) because it was great and it is still great.
Infos - But I would like some more visual informations. Like, if my cavalry is going to charge with lances, some info at the unit card or the flag would be nice.
Ambush - And i still miss some way to really make a trap on the battle with the disposition of my forces (Not the ambush on Campaign map), but some way to prepare my units before the battle (Ok, I am waiting on this hill for 2 game years, I know the terrain, so I want to place some units at the far hill to ambush the invading army from the north).
Sige Battles - When a siege army is attacked from another side, the army insade the castle does not need to leave the castle, they already appear outside. It is not right. If a army is coming to releive the sige army, they have to pass the attacking, and if the castle garrison want to fight they need to leave, giving the atacking a chance to counter-attack whrn they are leaving.
More Units - I would like to increase the max number of unist, not only the size of units.
Campaign
Here is were I think the game need major changes. The change from board-map to real-map was a great idea, but it took out some good features and bring some bad ones.
LOS - The line of sight, the red space where your army could attack is too small. With the board-map, all units at the region battle. Now we have only really small battles. And what is worts, no more Alliance battles (France attack England, but the Holy Roman Empire send his troops to help). The map is too big and the LOS too small.
If the LOS is a little bigger it could be great. Like Army of 200 units 1 square LOS, 500 units 2 squares, 1000 3 squares. So we could have more units fighting, and more allies fighting.
And the positing of your troops will be much more importante too. Because, if you move a satck of many troops to your borders, and fortify, the enemy would have to fight you to pass. The fort will be very important.
Agents
The ideia of agents, with traits and ages is great, but the gameplay is not. We have 10 prients, 10 spys, 10 assassins... and 90% doing nothing, just watching TV. Too much micromanagement for nothing. It would br nice if when a agent die i receive the msg and an option to recruit a new one.
But the agents could be more useful doing missions (like Rebellion, old game). Ok, I recruit a priest, now I have to give a mission to him: exterminate all heretics. So he is going to move all over the map chasing heretics, and when he destroy one I receive a msg asking if I want to continue the mission or stop it. Spys could be send to look for the leader of one faction, or looking for the major armys of the enemy, so I could track then down. But if he is discover... Princess could infiltrate enemy courts and find which general is more open to bribe.
Priest: Hunt heretics, expand your religion, stop unrest, debate religion (destroyng other priest of another religion).
Spy/Assasin: Look for emperor, look for enemy agents, look for enemy armies, counter-spyonage, unrest city, took information from the enemy (the prince maid discover and tell his lover the enemy is goin to attack france in 3 turns
Princess: Marry a general, infiltrate court (giving gossips, which general is easy to buy, which general is moving to south with his army)
Diplomatic
I know the game is Total War, but it would be great to win withount destroying every faction near you. It would be good to have long alliances, and win with then.
Using Diplomacy - It would be nice to really use diplomacy in war. Like to spread rumors about yous enemys (using princess or spys). Turn one allie against the other, using mercenaries... Or make long alliances against one evil (and the computer doing the same thing). France and Spain make a pct to defend against the inaving Holy Roman, that destroy Milan.
Alliances and Enemys - What about using the diplomacy for war. Ask for your long friend to send a army to help defend the borders againts the unfriendly neighbour. So, you could have some Spanish army defending France, their great friend for 100 turns, agains the might Holy Roman Empire. No more armys moving without a goal in your territory.
Ask for help - Another great think is if you could or the computer ask for help agaisnta and invader. The Russian prince ask for all catholic nation to send army to fight the Mongol at Novorog in 10 turns, when they are going to arrive. Is is historic and a we have a major battle, with many European Powers. If you send a lot of troops the pope will love you.
Crusader Army - Allies joing to fight a crusade, as it happens in real crusade. The major Force, ask their allies to send armies to fight with then against the enemy. So the allies force join, or just move linked to the crusader army.
New Ruler - A major chance of relations with new rulers. A pacifist ruler trying to make peace and a arrogant one attacking their neighbours.
Rebels
Rebels could be annoying and boring, because they just sit there. But if they could be more active and more RPG. Like a uncle rebels aginst the current empirer after he lost a great battle to muslins, and declare independence. The rebel invade a region and build armys to conquer the country. No mre 100 armys at the borders and 10 at the capital.
I thinks thats is... Too much.
Fabiano
IvarrWolfsong
01-01-2007, 23:51
Battles
- Charging - (fix) I actually LIKE the new charge system. The main tweak I would make is a "carry through" if you are using wedge formation. You should continue on through the enemy unit after wrecking it's formation.
- Pursuit - (fix) Make cavalry stay in semi-formation when pursuing, and just cut down the fleeing enemies. Aside from spread out in HUGE miscombobulated messes, cavalry likes to run up to the slowest fat guy in the routing unit and poke in the back and then stop... Let them get on with the butchery!
- Pikes - (fix) Make pikemen stay in formation and act a little more like phalanxes ala RTW. Make them more reluctant to use that sword and let them poke more. Currently, they are nearly useless and a Dismounted Knights are a much better option (more on this later).
- Dismounting Units - (common request) MOST mounted units should be able to dismount in the deployment phase. Units that don't have a current dismounted version shouldn't (CA did a pretty good job with chosing units there). Most Knights should NOT be able to dismount (more on this later).
- Castle Defenses - (wild wish:laugh4: ) Castles need more defensive options. Make them "buildings" like balista towers. Gatehouses, moats, oil, wall mounted or courtyard mounted Trebs, etc should make Castles feel more like bastions of defense that shatter resistance like a rocky shore smashes waves. Right now, as far as a siege is concerned they are just cities with an off center layout.
Campaign
- Diplomacy - (fix/common request) Make it more interesting and a little more reasonable. I won't list all the nonsense and bizzare happenings of the Diplomacy engine. There are already about 100 threads addressing the lack of rhyme of reason for the AI's actions.
- Ransom - (wild wish:laugh4: ) One of the key diplomatic and economic tools of the middle ages was to capture some VIP and force a ransom out of his people. I want to do that! You should be able able to hold enemy family members for ransom from turn to turn, instead of execting them if the AI doesn't have the coin. Create a "Dungeon" tab in the faction management window. It would list who you held in your tower, what faction they were from, and the suggested ransom. Using your diplomat, you could offer to ransom them, trade them for your own captured VIPs, or return them for any other diplomatic reason. If he has high Chivalry+Piety perhaps the Pope could get involved and order his return.
Units
-Effective Against Armor - (Fix) Greatly reduce the number of units that have this ability. Light javelins and early hand axes should not be slaughtering heavily armored knights and men at arms. These weapons were not made for defeating armor. Maces/Hammers, some polearms, two handed axes, guns, longbows, higher end foot xbowmen and elite javelins should be the only ones with this attribute.
- KNIGHTS - (wild wish:laugh4: ) This is the later I was referring to:yes: . Knights should not be the rank and file infantry for most factions!! Knights (as a whole and dismounted especially) should be few and far between. They should be the elite, top of the line jet fighters of their day. They should be just as reluctant to give up their horse to slog among the peasants as a fighter pilot should be to give up his F18 and grab an M16. It is nonsense for every army to be 75% knights prancing about like brave Sir Robin ( and even he had coconuts :clown: ). Of course there should be exceptions such as in sieges. What brave knight wants to hang back on his horse when he could storm the walls and be thr first to raise his standard?
So how do we do this? First make them expensive as heck to maintain. At least double their upkeep... 500-900 per turn. Second, make them less available. No more than one per turn per castle would be about right.
Third, we need to replace Knights as the normal everyday infantryman. Replace them with a slew of new units based around the "Seargent Swordsmen" type of concept... a medium infantry that is cheaper to recruit and cheaper to maintain, but with less defense and armor. Mix them up for flavor... Falchion Swordsmen, Morning Star Seargents, etc. Denmark and Russia both already have this kind of medium infrantry so those units could be used as the basis. As the periods move along, they would be replaced with the econo-knights: Men at Arms, an heavily armored footman. These changes would make the standard army more of a mixed melee/spear type that is more realistic. It would also put the importance and power of the Knight back in perspective.
- Allow baileys to fire arrows. In castles you have the bailey, where no unit is allowed to go so these large defensive structures do nothing. This might be ok in most castles as they're centralized and out of the way .. BUT in some castles the bailey sits on a outside wall, usually on a outcrop (aren't these castles devine! :), very close to where the enemy can be. i actually thought if I moved a unit close to the bailey, the flags would appear and it start shooting ... and yes, on one small section of the bailey a flag appeared but not the lot. Please allow the whole Bailey to be active when one unit is near.
- When a settlement is under siege and there are less than 4 units defending then the GAME automatically creates 3-4 units of CITIZEN archers / javelinmen. These units then vanish after the siege. I'm sick and tired of easily taking undefended settlements.
- Add a button on the strategic map so the player can zoom in and SEE WHAT THE TERRAIN IS LIKE WHERE HIS ARMY IS STANDING ... I'm sick and tired of thinking i'm defending a hill on the strategic map only to find out i'm in a gully when the battle starts!
R
Razor1952
01-02-2007, 03:25
Using battlefield structures.
At present there are many wonderful looking houses/small castles/buildings on the battlemap, however it is impossible to put say a group of archers on the walls on this structure, or say retreat to the doorway of this building (thereby negating flanking).
Enabling these structures would open up new stategic options on the battlefield.
(Imagine the nasty surprise when those pesky rebels are holed up in an impressive mini-castle and you had thought , "Ill just run these guys through with my lances")
pike master
01-02-2007, 08:49
i give a third vote for improved pike cohesion. and make sure they fight in the right direction would help too.
on a lighter note i believe that the peasants need maybe 2 more defence skill to bring it up to 5 and allow them to upgrade to advanced plate and upgrade their weapons from pitchforks to shotguns.:D
Wish: when having different groups in battle, when selecting them all (still separately grouped) and then selecting an army setup (Shift + #), they should remain separately grouped AND follow the selected army setup, and NOT move like idiots. One word: WYSIWYG :P
Wish: when having a couple units grouped, left-clicking one unit will only select this unit, but Ctrl-clicking a group's unit will select the whole group (like in Shogun).
When left-clicking a unit, and then Ctrl-clicking another will select these two only (and any others you add like that).
Matter of fact, an overall go-back to Shogun's battle control regarding grouping and army setups (of course in the proper contexts) would be great.
edit, more:
-for the series in general: the sprites look UGLY. They should be better looking and versatile, as if almost animating in 3D while still being mere sprites (...exaggerated). But still: make more sprites for different angles and such. Only when the set Unit Detail level is gone into (longer distance on higher levels, or just zoomed in enough), should the units go 3D.
-to recruit/train generals.
-Man of the Hour: when you get this, you should have the option to choose whether you adopt him or just promote him to general. I don't need new family members as I keep the original line intact, but I do need more generals to lead the armies.
Maybe I'm reiterating some previous posts on this thread but the top priority fixes should be , dynasytic succession, titles, diplomacy and all around return to the Medieval 1 and Rome game mechanics.
-There should be human control over dynastic succession. Or at the very least, the AI should have the sense to make the thrones pass father to son. In my game, there is no cohesive formula that heirs are chosen. My king will be a young man with young sons, but then the first son comes of age and the title of prince is not transfered onto him. The AI just doesnt allow someone to lose their faction heir status even if a beter claimant comes of age. If this were real, there would be civil war over birthright claims.
-Titles should be made available for both provincial titles (Duke of Wherever) and court tiles like "Earl of the Stables".
-Factions should be more open to the idea of becoming a vassal when they are facing extinction.
-Castles should be able to build more units at a time. Max of 3 just doesnt cut it.
-Power blocs should form. Allied countries should help each other and be able to form coalition type offenses or defenses. There is no point in allying with anyone because they turn so easily against the human and other AI players.
-The factions in the game should start behaving like real states! Countires should have several things in place before attacking anyone.
1) Something to gain!
2) AI should invade with higher stacks, no more half-ass invasion then retreat
3) Personality of AI kings should translate to their actions
4) A chance of winning!
Dear CA,
First and foremost I must stress the importance of fixing the dynastic succession problem. Its my least favorite thing about this game, if you dont fix anything else, fix that!
IvarrWolfSong is on to something here, personally I wish that sergeant spearmen and the like would be buffed to take up the role of frontline fighters, and no more of this sword beats spears RPS nonsense. It seems that this is the direction CA was going anyway, since apart from dismounted knights few factions get anything other than spearmen as their line infantry. Buff pikes, buff spears, buff halberds and remove dismounted knights altogether. Knights should be allowed to dismount before battle, but the resulting units of foot knights should be smaller than normal (ie a unit of 40 feudal knights becomes a unit of 40 dismounted knights, not 60 dismounted knights like right now) as a curb on their superior individual prowess.
supadodo
01-04-2007, 09:47
1.Fix stupid castle cannon tower bug and cannon before gpowder invented on balista tower for huge city.
2.Enemy cavalry should flank properly. Now they just charge headfirst into infantry on the flank, not the infantry's flank.
3.Make armor upgrades more worth it rather than just giving a +1 def bonus. Like make units with plate armor upgrade harder to kill. Also have more units capable of receiving more than one upgrade particularly for eastern factions.
4. Fix some missile units not skirmishing properly. Sometimes missile units with the ability on don't run away when enemy approach them.
5. Fix wooden stakes so that they can be placed on battlefield roads but not when bridge is nearby.
6. For Turks, English and probably a few other factions, either allow the Armour Factory building to upgrade units or remove it altogether. Its just a major money waster rite now and sore sight for those who like to see empty build menus.
7.Fix crusading armies so that when a new unit joins in a turn after the army join s the crusade, that new unit also gets the crusade sign. Right now any unsigned unit in a crusade causes the crusade to cancel when that crusading army captures the target.
Now that I think about it, I second (or "third?") the thing about medium infantry or buffed up spearmen. I actually use lots of spearmen in my armies as main infantry (the ones with about 7att. and 14def. and bonus against cavalry) and that's fine in general. I agree knights should be limited.
Btw, a question/observation: should swords really beat spears? When I think about it, a sword is handled more swiftly so it could beat a spearman with agility, but the longer spear keeps the sword enemy at a distance. Of course this is seen from a one-on-one theory, and makes sense to me.
When I think of it as two units engaging each other, it'd look like a draw to me.
Wishes:
-Burning men (running around). I present to you a picture that says it all, but in-game it doesn't do it at all. If it's too difficult or time-consuming to include, then at least make them drop down burning as if they were hit by fire arrows.
https://img479.imageshack.us/img479/7369/0043burnsiegelm5.th.jpg (https://img479.imageshack.us/my.php?image=0043burnsiegelm5.jpg)
They just came rushing out as if nothing's going on. Nobody in that tower should get out unburned (or get out at all). Make them die in the tower. When it fell it was nice, though, but they weren't burning. WYSIWYG.
-About my previous wish regarding watchtowers:
Having every army (without general) able to build them is alright, but even better to put Border Watchtowers in the building options of the region/settlement.
pike master
01-06-2007, 19:00
what about the memory leak problem with diplomacy merchants treaties upgrading troops etc etc. i think they are all connected somehow.also in retraining units you should be able to use all the slots on unit build page and not just the ones available for training new troops.
and i agree with chrisky on some of that too about the manual being in synch with the game because it does say in the manual that a pike unit can do a schiltrom as well as spearmen. and im sure they will give boiling oil hopefully in the second patch. i remember it took the first patch in mtw 1 before you had boiling oil.
I've seen absolutely no evidence of a memory leak in m2tw (in my experience it uses very little ram, compared with other games) so i'd like to see what you've got...
i have to agree to the dismounted option - its rediculous to produce knights like this ... in my view it could either be
- an option in the campaign map to switch them from mounted to dismounted
- even an option on the battle map on which the horses run off like a retreat for the remainder of the battle - kind of a one time thing dismount during battles to keep things from getting complicated or unreal
pike master
01-07-2007, 07:23
@sapi
im not talking about when im playing the game im talking about after i save the game and turn my computer off. when i play the next time sometimes things will be different just like what a lot of people have been complaining about. even battle replays arnt showing exactly what happened like mtw and rome did.
i suppose memory leak to some people and to others are to different issues but the one im talking about is when a game is saved and when you come back your merchants arnt making the same amount of money they were before you was saved or when you had units redy to be upgraded in your unit slots they havnt been upgraded but you spent the money so if you keep retraining them you are just waisting your money.
what i am talking about would not involve random access memory.
A memory leak is when a program does not correctly reassign memory that it has used (and thus the system runs out of memory and crashes).
It has nothing to do with what you have described, which are software bugs.
Battlemap unit mesh importer/exporter.
pike master
01-07-2007, 21:18
im kinda leaning more to defence bonus for spearmen now. the reason being is that napoleon only used infantry squares with bayonets and they held horses at bay. and the schiltrom formation spear units look like their spears are about 8 to 10 ft so i guess maybe they should have a defence bonus against cavalry.
Additional wishes:
-To recruit in besieged settlement
-For archers to better pick their targets while on Fire At Will (firing at a routing unit of a few men is stupid compared to firing at more important targets)
-More events
pike master
01-10-2007, 20:41
dont know if it has been noticed yet or not but there is a night attack bug problem.
when attacking some units and the page comes up showing all the armies involved and you have the option to attack at night and check it sometimes the ai changes its mind about fighting the battle and withdraws and if it does this it leads to a ctd.
Templar Knight
01-13-2007, 15:14
Everything that made Medieval 1 so good, atmospheric and deep.
Individual unit commanders. Instead of just 'Captain John' or 'Captain Louis' bring back MTW system. Every unit raised would have a captain, like 'Sir John Scrope'. In the post battle screen every unit would be listed alongside the name of their individual unit commanders with their casualties and captured men.
The ability to kill your own agents and family members.
Titles, of course
Realistic gameplay. Conquering Europe would have been impossible and is not fun. I prefer to build up a small empire and consolidate. This would be made better if civil wars were brought back, plus glorious achievements.
IrishArmenian
01-15-2007, 01:01
Roger II for Sicily. Despite being the third king of Sicily, he is left out of the Sicillian royal family. This raises eyebrows, not to mention questions.
I also echo Templar.
Lord_hazard
01-16-2007, 17:18
The first update made things a lot better. Thanks for that. But there still is much to be done.
Amen
Cousin Zoidfarb
01-21-2007, 20:11
make it easier to obtain vassals when the faction is about to be destroyed
pike master
01-23-2007, 05:35
swiss faction as well as swiss halberdiers mercenaries.
completed america with aztec cities instead of muslim
create a unit models with at least original factions colors
give forlorn hope 2 hit points
reduce artillery in ai armies
Germanicus32
01-24-2007, 10:11
Here's my take on what I'd like to see in future versions. Some are bugs and some are "wants":
1) Fix issue where you ask several ungrouped units to go to a place and they run off in several different directions (especially cav)
2) Fix split routing unit bug (part of routing unit remains on battle map a long time after the rest of the unit has left and it does not appear on the radar map). Locating and killing these units can take longer than the actual battle.
3) Stop AI sieging with smaller/weaker armies than the defending garrison
4) Make a Citadel look different on the camp map than a Fortress
5) Stop AI allowing me to easily flank it every time and destroy its artillery or attack its general with my cav
6) Stop AI attacking my cities when my main army is standing right next to it
7) Stop AI making loads of holes in my city walls and having tonnes of access, yet still bringing up siege towers!
8) Make the AI aggressively try to secure the plaza and not sending single units up piecemeal to get destroyed by the defenders
9) Fix both AI and player unit pathfinding issues on city walls and when units get split when using siege towers/ladders
10) AI units sometimes with backs to my army when defending plaza
11) My merchants can *never* defeat the AI ones.
12) Fix Russian accent/replies for Danish units on camp map
13) Make naval invasions more likely to actually attack after landing (kudos for making landings more common! :-)
14) AI diplomacy still heavily flawed, even on hard. Countered with even more generous terms than my original offer after turning it down!
15) Fix horses getting stuck on trees and artillery units
16) Ranged units fire way too slow - longbowmen for example should be able to fire several volleys a minute
17) Units don't tire easily enough - can run heavy armoured cav all round the map without hardly breaking a sweat
18) Stop mini-map on campaign map always zooming out to max when you return to the camp map from the battle map or load a saved game
19) Early era units wearing 14th century plate armour. Captains of Viking Raider units do too. Looks totally off.
20) Spearmen not charging units with spears *down*
21) Rebels should not appear as wealthy armoured knights on the campaign map
22) Strange morale - units too quick to rout but then regroup too quickly. Seems unbalanced. Clash of lines only usually lasts a few seconds.
23) Some units, e.g. ballista, seem to have too high morale - stick around while the rest of the army flees
24) Stop princesses and other non-military charas blocking armies at choke points - totally unrealistic
25) AI still spamming too many assassins around my cities who stand around and do little most of the time
26) Fix AI army composition - AI making unbalanced armies of mainly archers and artillery!
27) Stop AI sending its archers well ahead of the rest its army to just get slaughtered by my cav
28) Stop general's voice being heard, even after he is killed
29) Only the first men in a unit fight (can also affect mixed groups of archers firing). Rest stand around.
30) When in a large group of units, a unit is said to be fighting even when it is at the back of the group nowhere near the AI unit! (Problem inherited from Rome).
31) Fix issue when cav chasing down routers cav unit cohesion goes to hell and they run around in all directions
32) Fix issue where in the FOW diplomatic status of AI cities not updated
33) AI already had open gate but still knocked multiple holes in my wall and randomly catapulted the gatehouse.
34) Sicilian assassin says "nein" (German)
35) Fix problem where AI army stands next to my sieging army for 7 turns and does nothing
36) Too easy to make money at the moment even on hard or above
37) Cav gets stuck on steep cliffs
38) If you are a Catholic faction, Pope should reward you (or your standing rise with him) for taking Jerusalem even if not on a Crusade, provided it is held by the infidel (non-Catholic faction).
39) Too easy at present to quickly assemble elite armies
40) Bridge fighting - units cannot properly do fighting animations so killing done by charging and shoving
41) Issue where - especially on/in movement chokepoints like bridges or gatehouses or when chasing routers - unit speed goes into hyperdrive and they all move at 200 mph and there's total chaos. It makes battle tactics and unit management very tricky.
42) Provide a "get off my land in X turns" diplomacy option
43) Make it possible to request military help or money from your allies and send the same to them. Specific units and sums of money can be specified.
44) Allow "ally requests military assistance on the *battle* map" invite to be sent to/from AI.
45) Stop missile units reforming each time a member gets killed. They should be able to hold formation and handle the gaps which open up. Would make them alot more efficient.
46) Fix non-merging of stack units on campaign map bug when pressing M
47) AI can't handle two AI armies present in a siege if only one has siege equipment - even if the first army breaks through the walls, the second army, if round the other side of your city, will not take advantage of the breaches
48) Shield bug
49) 2-handed unit bug
50) The towers that fire gunpowder ammo before gunpowder is in the game.
51) Greater movement and dynamism of rebel armies - rebels not just standing around for turn after turn.
52) Fix AI letting you siege it for full amount of turns before it sallies, thereby incurring a huge disadvantage for itself.
53) Fix rebels appearing in provinces with high loyalty.
54) Fix rebel armies including units that are not even possible yet via the tech tree for the player.
55) Fix ammo spent but firing icon still on missile unit cards bug
56) Fix islands not being the correct faction colours on the campaign mini-map
57) Fix cav responsiveness and unit cohesion - seems to be worse in 1.1
58) Fix buggy Pope and diplomacy!! Examples:
Playing Scotland on H/VH.
I attacked a Russian province and captured it. Relations are said to be "terrible". Yet because I have been giving them 1000 florins as a gift every few turns, they were still allied to me! Can one have "terrible" relations and yet be allied?
England attacks me from the south, and even though I have a higher Pope rating then them - they are almost at the bottom of the scale - the Pope threatens to excommunicate *me* if I DEFEND my land against their sudden attack! WTF??? Is the Pope bugged or what??
Playing Denmark on H/VH.
Kept giving the Papal States 1000 florins *each turn*. Relations said to be "perfect", and I was right at the top of the Pope-o-meter. I'd also been giving the HRE 1000 florins *every turn*. I was allied and relations said to be "outstanding" or "perfect". Then, suddenly, out of the freaking blue, the HRE attacks me and suddenly I go from being "what can we do for you noble ally?" to "state your business wretched fiend!". Even though I'm the Pope's pet - and incidentally the current Pope was also DANISH - the Papal States apparently punishes or sanctions the HRE for their unprovoked attack in no way at all! So I grovel to the HRE for peace, giving them all kinds of concessions and offerings, and suddenly, in the space of one turn, I'm back from being a "wretched fiend" to a "noble ally" again. Then a few turns later they attack me and do the same again!
59) Give Orthodox factions different buildings to Catholics and Orthodox generals have scale armour.
Cheers, Germanicus32
Drunkin General
01-26-2007, 14:05
Fast Travel
The game has too much micromanagment involved with moving units/agents/generals to far off places. So since the move character command is available how about implementing a fast travel system. The only problem I see is if the player wants to exploit the system & its probably best not to give it to the AI since it dosen't mind micromanaging. It could be limited to only say 3units in redeploy at any one time & say 3 agents at any one time. Units/agents have to have full movment points before entering the redeploy/fast travel pool & it takes 1 turn to move them to any province in your empire. The destination city has to have a direct land connection to the departure province. Straits and Islands included???????? The player can of course be charged a fee for using the service:dizzy2:
Germanicus32
01-28-2007, 20:41
To add to/revise my list just above (where's the edit feature on this forum?):
55) Fix ammo spent but firing icon remains on missile unit card bug - also occurs on other unit types to say they are still fighting when they are not (especially occurs after they have routed an enemy unit)
60) Fix issue of Crusader/jihadi armies reaching their targets and then just standing around, not attacking
Germanicus32
01-28-2007, 22:40
61) Fix the Pope threatening your excommunication if you defend your lands from a Catholic attacker. Also, if you have a high rating with the Pope, and the attacker a low one, he should be excommunicated on the spot.
@Germanicus
Firstly, you'll be able to edit once you get promoted to member in a few weeks time (it's flood protection) so don't worry about that.
After skimming through your list (a lot of which is in the buglist, stickied at the top of the forum) i've got a few comments.
#60 - The best way to do this would be to have crusade/jihad armies act as allies in a siege, so that they could all besiege the target at once, imo.
#61 - Attacking an enemy force in your territory usually does not result in mission failure and therefore excommunication.
@the alliances/terrible relations issue, you'll find that if you send a diplomat to them offering anything but a gift, they're usually break the alliance asap :(
Germanicus32
01-29-2007, 10:16
Thanks Sapi for your feedback, hopefully the modders can improve matters there.
Here's a couple more to add to the list:
62) Fix issue where due to terrain-based movement constraints on the campaign map, even neutral or allied AI armies can (accidentally?) displace your merchants off their resources.
63) Stop AI building ships in landlocked watercourses, such as the inland seas/lakes right near Jerusalem and Novgorod (and deploying untouchable, concealed armies in them).
Cheers, Germanicus32
Armenia_Byzantium
01-29-2007, 15:05
more funny general speeches
The Spartan (Returns)
01-31-2007, 00:04
when cavalry charges into spearmen let them die! even if they charge into a schiltrom they will win!
Dead_Like_Me
02-03-2007, 16:27
after playing the game for a while already i wanted to organize a list of all the things that should be added / fix in the next patch. so he is the list , feel free to add i will refresh the list with. after giving a good list of things to be fix i hope that a dev will by a small chance will check it up.
Single player :
* there is long and short campaign game , adding a historical campaign will maybe get to less freedom of play but it should be nice , to see all the other factions at least go like in real history and you could chose whether you want to follow the missions that will come all the time to cause you to go like history ( by offering money and units of course :D) or you could just ignore
them but still other factions will play as in history.
* more costume battles / historical battles should be nice.
* i have enjoyed much of the beautiful graphics and the landscapes of the game but i do wish to see more in the landscapes such as bushes signs in roads / roads should be more realistic and more farms and structures in the landscapes. also i really like the maps that you have trees / higher ground / other natural appearance around the roads so it would look like as if men
redesigned the place to make the road and by that giving ambushes the join of attacking from high. more narrow paths and so on to landscapes to make the game nicer. also i noticed you don't see the landscapes as you saw them in the old games, if you fight near the sea you wont always see it if you fight near a city you wont see it, you wont see ships when fighting near seas and you will not see cliffs in this game , i think you should work on that details.
* castles and cities in deferent places should enjoy better strategic places.
* inquisitors shouldn't be able to kill a cardinal with piety 9-10.
* i don't see much reason of giving nobles the piety, they barely get it and most of them get pagan magician , i know that chivalry and dread are including both influence and management but i think that it should be more visual the advantages and disadvantages of both.
* factions non catholic should have something that will unite them for good or bad. for example if a Muslim factions that join jihad on a Christian state catholic and orthodox should cause worse relations with any catholic faction. also after jihad is called crusade cool time should be reduced. orthodox should have something also in common.
* faction leader and faction hair should be able to make diplomacy which should increase their authority. also you should be able to change faction hair. faction leader should be give you influence on relations with other factions , if he is good they will more respect you.
multiplayer/lan :
* I didn't played much on the multiplayer so i don't have much to complain. though i know from others that playing the multiplayer will give you a hell of lagging issues also getting into a game is a problematic thing since people gave up on playing multi.
* give back the Add AI in multiplayer/lan many people like to play just with a friend against computer and player against other players.
* leader games should be better organized.
Hot seat/ campaign mutliplayer :
as you probably know the game has inside of it a HT/CMP which is great but its yet to be open for the general public because of this people barely know of it and there for it didn't got reputation as it should have got. in the next patch i hope we will see it in the game options so you wont need to mod files for it.
now here is some issues that i found during games with friends.
* during AI turns if you are attacked you have the option to "watch battle" rather then play it. also after "Watching" the battle when back to the campaign map you the game will stuck and wont continue the turn sequence.
* during AI turns if AI have address one of the players and then another/the same AI attacks other player the game will cause the battle settings get massed up and also if you go to battle you will probably control the enemy army and not yours :D
* relations of players in hot seat should be able to modified them selfs although their actions should be effecting as well.
* massages in start of turn not always appear , this should be fix.
General :
* an option should be added to single player + multiplayer that allows the player to see the campaign map to chose a region and specific place in that region and to place the armies that play in the placement he wishes to. that should be be added and not replace the custom battles.
*diplomacy in the campaign map should be more complicated , adding more features to the the diplomacy screen , also relations with other states including papal states should be more complicated by adding to each one the reasons why you have such relation with each.
a page like the relations with the pope but to each country should add where you can see in visual the relations. also alliance should be more precious but not impossible to get some times computers even at losing will not accept some offers. if you are strong and your reputation is good among the states you should be more respected. also , in the start almost all the factions start with neutral state while it makes it easy to negotiate with them this should be change for example : relations between scots and england
relations between turks and the BE. also computers should more care about excommunication and getting bad reputation. bad reputation should cause other computers to whom they wish to be allies. when you are at war with a faction you should be able to get alliances with the factions that ally with your enemy. if the faction you are at war with have bad reputation it should be easier to get the computer to your side while if the other way around it would be harder.
features that should be added to the diplomacy screen :
- get out of my lands :P
- attack other faction should be improved to - if the faction is your ally , this will cause
war declaration.
- if the faction enemy and they accept
it will cause a them to betray.
- if they are neutral it will be as in enemy.
- a option to ask for help - to your cities and which city.
- to your armies and which army.
- to your ships and which ships(escort ships can be nice as well).
- to your sieging armies and which.
only in alliance.
- millitery access is to much hard to get , and the main reason to get it so you wont get relations worst there for it should be maybe divided to one that allow you to travel with your armies through the land but getting to close to the city would be seen as a bad habit and the second one will give you full millitery access. betrial should be more deadly weapon in diplomacy causing a good to factions to betray each other would make a better game.
- computers should be more reasonable with the prices they ask as when you ask and not depending on your wealth to much ( for example if you are rich they will ask 3/4 of your money for cease fire when they have 5 cities and you will have 35).
* when a faction should be more hated by the pope and other people if to they get to much caught with their assassin and spies. counter spy doest count.
* princess rule should be better , computer don't know to use them there for its never worthy if it will be fix i would maybe start looking for brides and brooms and not always except offers from the computer.
more explained easy ways to get a princess gain charm.
*pope missions of cease hostileness should comply to both faction they dealing with. its annoying you cant attack an enemy that sieges you because you don't want to get excommunicate.
* soldiers that get of a ship often get "stuck" on the place of their landing this can be caused by ending of a crusade / cease fire and there for no longer needed there. in case its because of a crusade that they couldn't join on they should try at least to take other cities of the Muslim faction they came to attack . in case of a Christian faction they should go back or keep attacking depending on their status with this faction.
* papal states shouldn't be aggressive to factions that have more then two crosses.
* i have noticed that some times computer factions attack you then come to ask for cease fire that way you can take money from them as it is very generous usually , but then they siege you again just to go and ask cease fire and pay more.
* you should be able to free vassal factions from other factions by diplomacy with them or their masters , or by force to take them as your vassal or to make then attack with you the empire that make them vassals from the first place.
* replays should be as it was played , and just recording your movements.
Rhyfelwyr
02-04-2007, 23:44
It would be nice if petty Rebel armies could be represented in a similar way to "Corruption" or "Devastation", by reducing income gained in a province. This would represent the little bands of brigands attacking trade carts etc. As they are just now, these Rebel armies require too much micromanagement for a game of such a scale, and are just annoying. So no more petty Brigand armies.
To compensate for the above, more large scale uprisings would make the game more interesting and challenging. Point is that if there is going to be a rebellion, make it one worth bothering with. It would be interesting to see maybe half-stack Rebel armies led by a proper General in regions such as Scotland and Wales.
In General, Rebel armies should consist mostly of peasants, militia units etc. Knights should only appear in loyalist rebellions, where the people of a province unite under the banner of their previous rulers.
Also, bring back Civil wars. They were so interesting, really made the game a challenge.
Plus, Generals should have slightly lower Loyalty ratings in General, and be more likely to Rebel if put in powerful positions.
Finally, a diplomatic screen should appear when to armies meet, to either agree on a ceasefire (if characters with appropriate authority are in armies), or to demand one to disband, or offer opposing General to join your faction (if Rebel general only), otherwise need cash bribe to do this.
Wish #1 :
When a city rebels it becomes a new faction. For example Trebizond city rebels and it appears as a new faction with whatever the major religion in the region is. It should be called Republic of Trebizond or kingdom or whatever names they have in the eastern part.
At start of your campaign instead of grey rebels there should be more factions on map : for example all regions like Metz, Dijon, Marseille, Toulouse, Bordeaux and Rennes should have a specific faction (Dijon rebels are considered as burgund rebels so the Dijon region should be ruled by the kingdom of Burgundy or something like that and this kingdom would share technologies and buildings with the French and and they can also have few specific units or buildings etc.). They should develop independently and you could do more marriage alliances and expanding your empire with diplomats. You could make them vassals instead of being a region of your empire.
You can give to one of your general a region and make him ruler of a new ''faction'' that will be your vassal and reduce micro management. The loyalty of the general will tell you if this new faction will cease being your vassal.
Wish #2 :
Making units should be region specific. For example if Trebizond is one of my regions I can train some famous Trebizond archers there and only there. Or in Dongola I can train Sudanese warriors, elephants in Baghdad, vikings in Arhus. This should be only a bonus apart the faction specific units like venetian heavy infantry that can be trained in any region Venice has captured.
Dead_Like_Me
02-08-2007, 23:43
Multiplayer Campaign and how could it work perfect online :
Well first the CA must learn from the creators of civ in all the aspects of how Multiplayer runs.
General :
First of all Internet / Lan lobbies will get new options :
* list of games now could be categorized for - all
campaign
custom
quick / ladder
*also game lobby should include a mini massanger for each player that when
he is offline and if given a massage he will see it when he reconnects.
( this must be when the one who massaged it is online as well )
custom games should be as i said in the last post divided to two details in
post 75#.
when choosing campaign map for example the player could join :
* fresh games.
* started games.
when looking on the campaign MP servers to the player there will be this info visible : game speed , started game or not , ping , map* , players max , players in game , which turn is the game in , hosts name , game's name
and whether the host can kick and if there is option to play battles.
**one of the things that I wish that CA will offer support in is in custom mapping. giving players the option of map editor to historical battles , custom battles and campaign map will help much to keep the mp community.
CA should know that and learn from relic and so on...
also when I meant map here I meant whether its a custom Campaign map or the normal campaign map. I guess if CA will offer tools we will see more maps like Sicily that was Created for old RTW. and with campaign map on Multiplayer we will see a lot of sharing maps :)**
Hosts will have this options when starting the game this options will only be done before the campaign starts and most of them couldn't be changed :
* Allow players to lock their faction ( those who played Civ 4 know this one )
All passwords will be visible to game creator and he could remove them if he
Don't the player would come back ( the purpose of locking factions is to
block from other factions replace you and you want to leave the game for a
while but come back later to continue.
* game speed - also known as time limit per turn. though this game cant be
played as fast as Civ 4 the game still needs to allow time limits per turn
this option should be like in civ 4 when in more advanced turns the time
limit will grow. ( special minimized system should be made that when your
turn starts you will get alerts ) players should be able to put them selfs
on AFK which will give them a small plus time to their turn.
* Hosts can kick or cant needs to be ticked before game.
* which map the host choose
* when starting the game the host can start with a full hand of players or
with just a few and give the AI to control the other factions.
the host should choose if he wishes to lock AI which means only factions
that started as humans will be able to replaced by humans. or that all
factions that started in the game as AI could be replaced as humans as well
the host can chose to play a campaign with less factions in that case all
that faction's starting cities will be rebel cities.
* allow battles or not its host decision.
* AI difficulty level.
* papal elections and and excommunications crusades and jihads all those
should be the players chose if to put them or not ( in case there would be
a similar voting system to orthodox and Muslim factions that this might be
changed )
* unit size.
* Shot / long campaign.
Campaign duration
- After starting a game there would be an option to save it both to players
and host this is to enable players to resume games in other times.
when re-hosting a game by one of the players but without the host
the hosts name will appear near the games name ( or something like that )
- When players leave game they will be auto replaced by AI.
other players outside a game can pre-join game by doing so when one
leaves the game and a faction clears the the pre-joiner will get a notice.
and if his game is minimized then he will be given an alert as well.
- A player that wishes to make a stop and lock his faction for this
could see a log of events that happened to his faction while he was gone
such as battles diplomacy and so on...
players could access their log at any time.
- Diplomacy between players will be accessed at the moment the diplomat
scroll appears not like the hot seat system.
- guilds page should be added.
Battles
-While a battle is occur between 2 or more players the game will give this options :
* save the game.
* play battle / watch battle for those who don't play in it.
* autosolve.
* retreat.
* change unit size*.
if the battle includes ally players they will get a massage for their own army.
for playing the battle / autoresolve all ally players should press the the option.
* for big battles to prevent massive lags *
- If players except battle in the battle window if some one have two or more
large armies and he can control only one he can have the option to chat and
allow other player in the campaign to lead his army instead of AI.
( replacing players will only play the battle and cant retreat before battle ).
- When a battle is played the other players will get two special options :
* Watch the battle.
* Special minimized option which will give then alert sounds when the battles
is over.
Aftermath
- When a faction is destroyed the player will be given the option to lock his
place so he could rejoin the game even if it is full to just spec it.
- A map video should be added like in Civ :D that will show the turn just in the
map.
- Winner gets rank :) like in ladder ( i wish ).
P.S
when bribing an army with or without a noble there should be at least two options , one is the already exists bribe and the other one should be before battle for example the army accept the bribe and when an ally/or his factions army/city near him is attacked the army will not fight / join the battle as an ally to the enemy who bribed him that way nobles with loyalty will be more
effective in game.
Philbert
02-09-2007, 09:42
When managing my cities and castles, I often build something in one settlement, and then move my governor to the next to be able to build there. When I do so, the settlement detail sheet should also switch to the new settlement, instead of still showing the old one as it does now. This is very confusing: the new city is selected, but the scroll still shows the details of the previous one.
Make it possible for high ranking priests (or only cardinals) to do something about inquisitors.
btw, does CA check up on this forum to read these suggestions?
I only played this game for a little bit and didn't play through the prolog forst (I know, stupid stupid stupid of me.) but I do have a few grips not mentioned.
I miss my old Billmen. I started my first campaign as British because the Billmen were the Uberunit of MTW1 for me. I even had a post that I wrote that a Billmen unit with one point of valor could win against the JHI. In this game, Billmen aren't that good against horses and they rout probably too quickly.
Second, could their be less pirates. I agree that they should have them because in the last MTW game, you could spam ships across the map and have more money than god, but does my ships have to ACTUALLY be attacked almost every turn if I am just around Denmark and England.
Generals, why can't I just promote someone to a general spot WITHOUT WINNING A LOT OF BATTLES WITH HIM FIRST. OR, could I not have to camp a general in EVERY CITY OR CASTLE, the first MTW game you didn't have to and now you do? Okay, I found the autobuild switch and turned it off but same thing.
Now that we got part of America in the TW games, why not add the rest of it and only put two or three indian factions in.
I will probably have a few others but thats it for right now.
btw, does CA check up on this forum to read these suggestions?
Yes it does.
Dead_Like_Me
02-11-2007, 19:57
LoL , I do wish they do , I wish CA was more like lionhead or Relic.
they are much better among the community which is good for a company.
Hm, if they are reading all of this, I wonder how much they'll listen, and how long they'll take to fix everything...M2TW Ver 1.9999999999999...:laugh4:
Don't know if its a bug...
When withdrawing cavalry from a charge, the unit suddenly goes sideways or turns back into the melee.
SultanSaladin
02-16-2007, 02:53
i first posted this in wrong thread .. oopsi .. but we all make mistakes :P
Originally Posted by SultanSaladin
well ..
1. i think that priests with high piety should have a possibility to convert the heretics to your priests ...
2. there should be a possibility for diplomats to ask your ally to "honor the alliance" when you want them to attack your enemy .. if ally refuses there reputation goes down but when they agree it goes up .. that way these alliances would be more impostant in the game ...
3. you should be abel to see your vassels armys and agents as they were your own ..
so .. these are my wishes ;)
Hundreds of new models. I mean we don't have clone units anymore but we have whole nations of soldiers that look the same :( really disappointing. Most the time the only thing that changes is the colors.
Please change ribault engine or give another one which will aim after each shot, because now it can shoot 100 ammo into one point. I'm telling this in relation to making a machine gun, ya.
Make a way to use engines in another units, not only those which are predefined in a game (e.g. i cant destroy walls with unit that uses engine from bombard, and bombard crew).
And especially devs, send your working dir to us, we will do many good things with it :)
SultanSaladin
02-21-2007, 17:03
wish ..
assassins should have option to poison the food or something like that ..
that way you could target enemys strongest units before any battle ..
also i wish that diseases would start killing men in the armys that have been fighting a lot and haven't been in forts/castles/citys for a certain amount of turns .. that way these stupid AI's armys that are just standing still on some important mountain passes or something like that and not moving anywhere for 10-15 turns or even longer will start losing men
it also makes harder for you to conquer the world :P
Vlad Tzepes
02-21-2007, 17:15
wish... Ability to change in-game language, like on any DVD movie (yes, I'm ze guy with ze French version of MTWII ~D)
@Vlad
That option isn't in because it'd drastically increase the space needed for installation, i believe.
Thorn Is
02-22-2007, 16:02
I dont know if this has been mentioned but this is two things I would really like to see
1) the ability to change faction heirs
you know give the heirship to my second son rather then my first, even at the face of civil war
2) a little more complicated The ability to assasinate my own generals, like MTW I
Someone ever think about a "Leave this territory" diplomatic option?
I think it could be very usefull in some cases! (allies or neutrals that stand at ur door per turns without doing anything)!
I don´t know if have time, but it´d be good in the next pacth!!:balloon2:
SultanSaladin
02-23-2007, 05:02
what if your generals get excommed personaly but not the entire faction .. if pope says to end hostilities with certain faction you are war at but you still attack them with one of your generals they will be excommed ..
it would take down there chiv and piety and leave a mark even after they will be reconciled what should be possible too
but if heirs or faction leaders attack your faction will be excommed ..
The Moonlit Knight
02-24-2007, 05:17
Not sure if this has been suggested before, but expanding on Famous Battles would be nice. I'm not certain whether they actually do anything beyond giving you a little marker. Things I'd like to see:
* Morale bonus if the winning faction of the famous battle fights on the spot of said battle.
* Or, alternately, morale penalty if the losing faction were to fight in the same situation.
* More detail; maybe a listing of Famous Battles your faction has acquired, with the full details of the battle saved (casualties suffered and inflicted in individual units, length of battle, etcetera).
* I'd find it pretty cool if it automatically saved a recording of Famous Battles, actually.
* Or better yet, save the Famous Battles as Historic Battles with statistics of how the original battle went down. Or, if not Historic, then add a new section for Famous Battles.
Not at all knowledgeable of the effort involved in any of this, or whether some of it is even possible; but, I think it'd be interesting to see.
Anh... a replay button for the famous battles will nice too!
And in gods name, why do u guys rip of the "view city" options that was so nice in R:TW??
verity_blues
02-25-2007, 18:30
I'd like to see my agents list organized by groups, merchants, spies, priests, diplomats, assassins, instead of the hodgepodge list it is now. As you train more agents it becomes quite tedious to find and use them with such a disorganized listing.
This is a very good idea!!!
Along with it I think the family tree list should have the shields of all factions, so you can know their heraldy (would be extremely helpful with marrying your princess's).
verity_blues
02-25-2007, 18:48
also you should be able to change faction hair.
I never thought of that one, changing my factions hair!
Just kidding there, you know. But I know what you meant was "heir," but that wouldn't be historicaly accurate. Except for maybe the Byzantines.
I never thought of that one, changing my factions hair!
Just kidding there, you know. But I know what you meant was "heir," but that wouldn't be historicaly accurate. Except for maybe the Byzantines.
I think changing a faction's hair would be a wonderful idea!
And FWIW, that's not correct that it's not historically accurate, there were a number of instances for a good deal of the factions represented where the oldest male didn't inherit. Poland was like that. The HRE was like that. England had several instances where the oldest male didn't inherit and it wasn't due to death, I think France did as well. Papal States if you want to get technical as well. :grin: There's more but I don't recall them off the top of my head.
As I've said in the past, I'm all for this feature. Failing that and they refuse to give it to us, at least give us the ability to assassinate our own faction characters (both would be better!). The "sending on a one way trip" of the unwanted generals is very lame imo.
Cheers!
Thorn Is
02-27-2007, 16:11
I think it would be great if it was possible
Changing the heir could also result in the posibility of the former heirs loyalty plunging and resulting in a civil war
I know this has been said b4..but i'll say it again. A harder AI, I'm currently playing Russia on VH/VH post-patch..and it still not challenging enuf. Id won the game basically at turn 100. now its just mopping up. but the game is still absolutely fantastic nonetheless.
Oh and if theres like a 'total surrender' variable...abit like 'vassal', but more when the defeated faction with their cities, monies, generals etc.. gets integrated into ur own faction.. (probably be just be the last city with a peasant) it would be neat a neat kink into the game and change the strategical dynamics of ur game somewhat. :2thumbsup:
I'd like to see my agents list organized by groups, merchants, spies, priests, diplomats, assassins, instead of the hodgepodge list it is now. As you train more agents it becomes quite tedious to find and use them with such a disorganized listing.
Many people have commented that this would be a good idea... so I wanted to take the time to point out that the agent list is sortable by agent type (sorry if this info has gotten out already and I'm rehashing it). Just click once on the gray-ish "status" word that heads one of the columns on the agent roster page, and voilla, the agents form up nicely by agent type. This works similarly for all those gray text entries that head columns in the army list, settlement list, and agent list. You can sort armies by size for instance, settlements by population, income, and presence of a governor, and of course agents by "status" which ends up being type, just to name a few.
Agents
The ideia of agents, with traits and ages is great, but the gameplay is not. We have 10 prients, 10 spys, 10 assassins... and 90% doing nothing, just watching TV. Too much micromanagement for nothing. It would br nice if when a agent die i receive the msg and an option to recruit a new one.
But the agents could be more useful doing missions (like Rebellion, old game). Ok, I recruit a priest, now I have to give a mission to him: exterminate all heretics. So he is going to move all over the map chasing heretics, and when he destroy one I receive a msg asking if I want to continue the mission or stop it. Spys could be send to look for the leader of one faction, or looking for the major armys of the enemy, so I could track then down. But if he is discover... Princess could infiltrate enemy courts and find which general is more open to bribe.
Fast Travel
The game has too much micromanagment involved with moving units/agents/generals to far off places. So since the move character command is available how about implementing a fast travel system. The only problem I see is if the player wants to exploit the system & its probably best not to give it to the AI since it dosen't mind micromanaging. It could be limited to only say 3units in redeploy at any one time & say 3 agents at any one time. Units/agents have to have full movment points before entering the redeploy/fast travel pool & it takes 1 turn to move them to any province in your empire. The destination city has to have a direct land connection to the departure province. Straits and Islands included???????? The player can of course be charged a fee for using the service:dizzy2:
I agree with both observations, and like both the ideas presented here: they're trying to ease the intense micromanagement currently required by the strategy pieces on the campaign map, which I think is the only way they can retain their usefulness late into a campaign.
Rather than than try to speed up transportation or give agents general missions though, I propose a different take: a "mission manager" of some sort. The basic idea would be that you could assign your agents to missions (a destination, and an action to perform once he gets there) at which point the game would automate the process of getting the man there and having him perform the action. That way, if the agent's trip is interrupted by an enemy army, the AI would just adjust his path if possible or else begin moving him again when the path is clear, without bothering the human player about the agent being stopped in his travels (when you have to try to figure out again where it was he was going). It would also make it easy to track which agents are doing something and which are idle, which could be used to display an icon in the roster screen to show an agent is active - this would be quite valuable for making sure you've assigned your agents something to do. Guarding a settlement could be a mission then, further giving us a way to distinguish those spies just resting in a settlement from those that we have purposely put there to be defensive.
Probably the best way to go about this would be to make other factions' units/settlements/agents display buttons for various agent missions you can perform against them in the details scroll they currently pop up, in addition to the usual information already there. Once a mission is set, you'd get a pop-up to select an agent or agents to perform it - and here much useful information could be given like the distance in turns that each agent is from the target, their skill levels, success chances, etc. Also another great chance for automation here: a button to simply dispatch the closest idle agent of the correct type to do the mission, and perhaps a second to dispatch the best qualified agent to do the job. You could still hand pick them yourself, but the quick options would save TONS of agent managing time. The other awesome benefit of this idea is that you wouldn't have to click an agent and then scroll like crazy to find the desired target for his mission - you'd do it in the opposite order, picking the target and mission type, then the agent from a list, and all the movement would be automatically taken care of.
I realize an idea like this is a bit of a tall order for a game update and so may be better considered as a feature for the next TW installment, but I wanted to stress the points I feel would be key to making agents really usable in longer games in the hopes that some form of help can make it into an update:
1. Agents should be fire and forget. -- Once I tell an agent where to go and what to do, he should go there and do that even if he must wait a bit for other traffic to get out of the way. Even this small bit of automation would save players tremendous time and frustration from having to constantly replot the trips of their agents due to high volumes of traffic on the map.
2. We need some method of telling at a glance which agents are busy and which are idle. -- Currently I have to look at each agent in turn to see what if anything he is doing, and scroll around for something to assign him to if he is idle. As the campaign advances this becomes an overbearing burden, to the point of making the agents useless b/c they take 15+ minutes to manage for one turn.
3. It could be indispensable to have options to put a given agent, groups of agents, or even whole agent types/all agents under AI control. -- It could be managed and indicated like automated settlements are, giving the player the option to only control those agents he/she really wants to. This would be an easy way to make sure agents retain their usefulness, yet let the player adjust the amount of micromanagement they require. There simply is a point where no one wants to manage every agent they have either b/c of their numbers or the repetition of doing it, and it would be great to be able to put some of them on autopilot and know they would do reasonable and useful things without any human intervention.
TotalWarVet
03-08-2007, 18:30
This is my first time here, so just a few thoughts.
1) Why are the Caribbean Islands and Mexico at the same latitude as the English channel? Seems otherworldly to me.
2) Why is it that the English faction cannot train crossbowmen of any type nor infantry based gunpowder units? Can only purchase limited nonupgradable mercenary verisons of each. This is historically inaccurate and a real pain. CA should review and remedy this asap.
3) Naval unit movement:
a) A ship travelling at 5 knots for 6 months would cover over well over 1800 miles. But CA models it closer to 200 miles. Same problem in earlier MTW and RTW.
b) Why does it take 5 years to cross the Atlantic? Columbus did it in under 6 months.
4) Desertion of units onboard ship during a Crusade. This is really unreal. What do they do, jump into the ocean?
5) Technology freeze? When playing into the 16th century, European technology does not seem to advance beyond that of the early 14th century. English and other European naval units are frozen at the "carack" stage and this histric anomaly allows Spain to gain sea superiority via the "grande" carrack. What about the "race" galleons the English produce in the middle 1500's (i.e. Mary Rose). Wheelock technology is also never introduced (Arquebusiers cannot shoot in rain using matchlocks). CA needs to revist this.
6) Knight Upgrades: Maybe these should be classified as bugs. I find these really bothersome.
a) Whenever I recruit a knight at a citadel with a jousting/tourney field I never get the expected upgrade. Also, when retraining a knight at such a citadel the experience upgrade doesn't take the first time. You end up paying twice for the same upgrade.
b) Specialty experience upgrades of both the local and global variety (St. Johns Capter House/Headquarters) function haphazardly at best. Most of time they just don't happen.
7) Selection of Faction Heir Issue. The AI chooses a faction heir very arbitrarily and most often to the players detrement. The player should minimally be able to choose among a list of faction members. Or even better open it up to all faction members like RTW.
Thanks for giving us a place to discuss our concerns.
TotalWarVet
03-08-2007, 22:04
I would also like to add my yearning to have what we had in the original MTW vis-a-vis our assassin/special character functionality, glorious wonders, et al. I also agree that a mission option beyond what we had in the original MTW for priests, diplomats and assassins, princesses is a great idea. In MTW we had diplomats trying to get a foreign bride to marry, a princess looking to marry, an assassin set to do the dirty deed. And the characters would happily go off and automatically do just that. The idea would work the same in MTW2 vis-a-vis assassins if the concept of regional watchtowers/border forts were reintroduced. Remember how much more difficult it was if your assassin's target went to a province with border forts (I lost quite a few good ones that way).
I too miss the ability to view a city as we did in RTW. I would tweak it somewhat though. In RTW you could only view a city if you owned it (at least that was what I experienced). You should be able to view a city you own or one which you have successfully infiltrated. That would be more like the real thing. Great if you are planning a siege with an optoin to conquer to know the fastest way to the town square.
I defintely agree that sapping is a major part of the siege experience that is sorely lacking in MTW2, especially since historically, it was used quite extensively. Maybe a special sappers unit, not too cheap like peseants, not too expensive like dismounted knights or a special skills upgrade to an existing unit type. The unit should require some sort of special training at minimum and skill upgrading should be available (gunpowder era: gunsmith teaches them about use of low level charges to help dig the tunnel faster and then plant demolition charges under the walls).
Glad to be able to share.
One that I haven't seen mentioned:
I want to be able to enter and use the 'fortified manors' that show up on some of the battle maps. They're somewhat rare, but they are very interesting. They are square structures with several towers and ramparts on the the walls, surrounding a square courtyard with a well and a single entrance that has no gate. If units could enter this building and climb and man the walls, it would make for an interesting defensive position for some battles. Since there's no gate on the entryway, no siege equipment would be needed to take it (slaughter everyone in the gate area and then climb the stairs), so no real way to exploit it. Based on their size, I doubt they could hold more than 2 to 3 units, so not too unfair to the person who has to attack.
It would be fun to have a small fortified position like that as a strongpoint in a defensive line.
Razor1952
03-13-2007, 06:12
One that I haven't seen mentioned:
I want to be able to enter and use the 'fortified manors' that show up on some of the battle maps. They're somewhat rare, but they are very interesting. They are square structures with several towers and ramparts on the the walls, surrounding a square courtyard with a well and a single entrance that has no gate. If units could enter this building and climb and man the walls, it would make for an interesting defensive position for some battles. Since there's no gate on the entryway, no siege equipment would be needed to take it (slaughter everyone in the gate area and then climb the stairs), so no real way to exploit it. Based on their size, I doubt they could hold more than 2 to 3 units, so not too unfair to the person who has to attack.
It would be fun to have a small fortified position like that as a strongpoint in a defensive line.
Absolutely one of my wishes as well, imagine those darn rebels you thought you'd just roll over with your Medieval tanks(knights) only to find that they had stationed themselves in one of these Manors and required some footguys to root them out.
bbrass10
03-13-2007, 12:55
There's a serious bug that I haven't seen anyone mention yet, and it seems so obvious to me that I'm surprised that CA missed it both before the product release and before the first patch; speaking as a programmer, I don't think it would be difficult to correct the problem. Here's the bug:
If you do a load game, and there are units queued for upgrades, they will not receive any experience upgrades (die to guilds or whatever.) This means that after pressing "end turn", it will see that they have not been fully upgraded, and you can add them to the queue again -- spending money on them a second time for an upgrade you've already purchased, and also losing one turn of usage with those units.
The only way around this problem is to remove all units from all queues that are due experience upgrades after a load game, and then add them back to the queues before pressing "end turn". If you accidentally forget to perform this procedure after a load game, and wish to return to the a previous game turn to get the experience upgrades that you've already paid for, there's a good chance that different random events could change the entire course of the game when pressing "end year," which is extremely frustrating.
Another bug that I've encountered occurs frequently when using the battle simulator. I prefer to draw my own formations for a group, rather than using the limited selection of formations provided by the game. In previous versions of Total War, the battle simulator would remember the formation that was in effect at the time a group was created and attempt to hold that formation. In M2TW, as soon as a group starts moving, the battle simulator loses track of the initial formation and will not allow you to specify that formation at the destination on the map (with green arrows, etc.). At times, this makes battles unplayable for me.
Here is my wish list for enhancements:
1. Player-selected elimination or reduction of spawned threats (heretics, rebels, etc.) These are not only historically unrealistic but they do not add to the entertainment value of the game whatsoever. They have little or nothing to do with strategy, but they are and endless stream of repeated annoyances that puts a short halt to the real flow of the game until they can be dealt with.
2. Smarter campaign AI.
3. Less suicidal combat AI.
mate, are you sure that that's the cause of that bug?
If so, it's getting added to the buglist :laugh4:
I also wish we could specify the depth of a line of units. Currently, when you group units and drag them into a line, the computer gives them all the same frontage, no matter how large the unit is. That means that depleted units end up as thin lines when placed in formation with full units. I would like the option to specificy, for example, that the formation never go below 4 ranks deep. So, when drawing out the line the frontage of the depleted units stops expanding when it would reduce them below 4 ranks, while the larger unit continue to get longer until they reach the preset depth. As it is now, in order to achieve my desired formation, I have to manually draw each unit's formation.
I had actually speculated the same thing as bbrass10 about the upgrades, Sapi, though I haven't tested it empirically. It does seem like it always happens when I've just loaded the game to start playing again though, and doesn't happen after I'm continuing to play. I have also taken to flushing my retraining queues when I load now (and actually saving the game at the very beginning of a turn before anything gets in the queue), and it's been a while since I had a unit come out with the wrong experience. All signs point to some vital bit of information failing to be recorded in the saved games, but I'm not really in a mood to actually make sure right now.
I would like there to be an option where u can build a custom formation and to make your man stay in formation even while moving.
Example: Take 4 spearman groups and spread them into a square which each one of the spearman groups faces out of the square and to make them be able to move like so. I can put a picture
adembroski
03-16-2007, 04:50
- KNIGHTS - (wild wish:laugh4: ) This is the later I was referring to:yes: . Knights should not be the rank and file infantry for most factions!! Knights (as a whole and dismounted especially) should be few and far between. They should be the elite, top of the line jet fighters of their day. They should be just as reluctant to give up their horse to slog among the peasants as a fighter pilot should be to give up his F18 and grab an M16. It is nonsense for every army to be 75% knights prancing about like brave Sir Robin ( and even he had coconuts :clown: ). Of course there should be exceptions such as in sieges. What brave knight wants to hang back on his horse when he could storm the walls and be thr first to raise his standard?
The trouble with this is it's extremely unrealistic. You are drawning on a TON of misconceptions about knights in this post.
Anyways, my personal wish... Engineer units.
Eliminate land bridges, allow engineer units be capable of figuring a way across (pontoon bridge would be expensive, but semi-permanent and capable of moving large numbers of troops over very small sea spans, such as the bosphorus, or just making a ferry... which would move one stack over.
They would also do the building... forts and watch towers. I don't like the idea of losing management control just because I can't see the Irish Sea from York.
Omanes Alexandrapolites
03-19-2007, 08:14
Hi guys,
Sorry about this, it was going to go into Randarkmaan's thread (https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showthread.php?p=1469804), yet it was closed, so I hope you don't mind me placing it here. Sorry.
Great Idea's Randarkmaan! I agree with all of them especially the risk style map one, but I don't agree with fancy graphics - my PC cannot handle them.
I believe that one of the solutions to the dispute over the risk style map could be to have a selection box of which type you desire to play with on the starting screen.
May I also you request that you add:
Category A:
The Ability to Assassinate your Own Generals, yet expand upon this great idea! Always have the risk of being found out, the general losing loyalty over it, or going off and rebelling in revenge if he is that sort of person.
Every faction leader is the only family member who has influence. This effects loyalty of his men, loyalty of his provinces and the chances of diplomatic relations going well. Diplomats also have influence which also effects the way they discuss relations.
Hidden traits from M:TW - you can no longer look at a general and see his real side.
Category B:
A much more complex diplomacy system with many more options enabling you to recommend that factions assault or defend a certain region, give troops to other factions and set missions for your protectorates.
Category C:
A better strategic map experience. I confess, I generally dislike the battle map and always auto-resolve as, due to my strategic un-intelligence I have no capacity to actually beat up the foes. So what I would like to see would be a complex build tree like in M:TW including border-forts and other such complex features.
Also I would like to see your government idea expanded upon to the point of which you have the option of imposing one once you capture a new city and it decides what development will be like. For example, if Celts attacked Sparta, they could choose either to keep the people living there and just oppress them (provides a Spartan tech-tree with many Spartan units), keep the Spartans living there yet bring in many Celts too (provides a balanced tech tree) or just wipe out the Spartans and bring in loads of Celts (provides a Celtic tech-tree).
Also, this idea is stolen from a thread way back which I found, jobs, occupations and classes. There would be a certain amount of people in a settlement who do a job relating to the time period and each of these jobs is divided into classes. Of course there could also be nasty un-employment in all of this which provides a happiness negative and can cause many riots. The jobs are divided into classes which determines which troops can be trained (upper class troops are taken from the upper class - nobody in the upper class, no upper class troops). The jobs all provide certain bonuses and penalties. Having lots of farmers can provide lots of farming income, having lots of builders reduces build time, yet increases building cost, having lots of traders increases trade income.
I would also like to see some sort of desirability rating similar to that of Ceasar IV which effects how willing people from all classes are to come and join your new settlement. If the place is mostly farmers then the upper-class wont want to live there, if the place is wealthy with fountains and other such amenities then everybody will want to come, if the place has many jobs then the middle and lower classes would be flocking to the city. Also, in this factor, the amount of good housing you have for them effects their happiness in their new environment - so if one knew they were about to have a population boom - it would be time to build more houses!
So what do you guys think of my, very stupid, ideas. All feedback welcome, thanks, cheers!
Tristrem
03-19-2007, 20:40
Ok one of the major issues for me is the fact that I can park my army pretty much anywhere in enemy territory without any major consequences. And what is even better, the AI does it back to me too. What annoys me is the fact that there is no incentive to kick a foreign army off your territory. It is quite easy to just ignore them, and eventually they will wander away.
Well to combat this issue I looked to the original MTW for guidance. My idea is simple, when a foreign army is on an territory, that providence loses all of it's income, just like in MTW. You are not forced to fight it, but it will cost you dearly if you don't. This will make it so it is like the providence is under seige. Your settlement is left alone, but it will generate in income. This make the player, and the AI fight more field battles, make military access a viable option, and add some more flavor to the game.
Thankfully, this feature is in the game, (devestation), but needs to be increased so it has some bite to it. Maybe this is moddable, I don't know :juggle2: ?
Anyone else think this is a good idea?
_Tristan_
03-20-2007, 15:40
[ - Ransom - (wild wish:laugh4: ) One of the key diplomatic and economic tools of the middle ages was to capture some VIP and force a ransom out of his people. I want to do that! You should be able able to hold enemy family members for ransom from turn to turn, instead of execting them if the AI doesn't have the coin. Create a "Dungeon" tab in the faction management window. It would list who you held in your tower, what faction they were from, and the suggested ransom. Using your diplomat, you could offer to ransom them, trade them for your own captured VIPs, or return them for any other diplomatic reason. If he has high Chivalry+Piety perhaps the Pope could get involved and order his return.
Great idea... I think it would lead to whole new areas of diplomacy... Trying to get back your captured 8 star general or your beautiful princess in order to marry her to the newly available heir to the neighbouring kingdom...
Nevertheless, it's more an expansion kit issue than a mere patch-relevant issue...
bbrass10
03-22-2007, 08:02
Yes, I'm certain of the load game issue disabling all experience upgrades. I deal with it constantly and sometimes I am forced to re-fight battles because I'm unwilling to spend up to thousands of florin to get the upgrades that I've already paid for.
Dual monitor Support
I don't have 2 monitors at present but have a graphics card with 2 outputs so its do-able.
I notice that Supreme Commander (you want a game with bugs?) has dual monitor support.
Might be useful for hot-seat games?
I'd use it in single-player - campaign map - 1 monitor to show map, the other show windowed boxes with: diplomacy; events (esp plagues and who's affected); missions; also a notepad where i can make a note of things to do (very useful if you only play for a hour or two at a time but want to continuity in a campaign.)
On battle maps it would be so useful to have 2 views of settlement /castle esp if you are being attacked by 2 armies.
(Maybe not for M2:TW but the next TW game or the next expansion?)
More trouble than it's worth, imo
I haven't had a chance to try the dual monitor support in supcom, but it lags enough as it is that adding a second monitor would be awful
Once the computing power is in place it'd make sense though
nikolai1962
03-26-2007, 03:27
Abilty to mod how much inividual AI factions value an indivual region.
Either a simple thing like they value regions where they are the faction creator more than others or preferably something more detailed. A line in descr_regions for each region like:
france 1200, england 1000, default 400 (for Caen maybe)
russia 400, byzantines 400, default 1200 (for jerusalem)
this value then being usable in the AI profile code.
something like
min_entry region_value=800
I have some simple wishes to add.
When you have a tab open, using the mouse scroller will scroll you through the list. WYSIWYG. (I haven't seen anything of it. If there is, show me.)
When you marry off your princess she shouldn't disappear as an agent. She should still be able to operate as usual.
detroitmechworks
03-26-2007, 22:25
Ok, My wishes are pretty out there, but I'd like to see them.
1- I'd like to see religion affecting your unit creation in a settlement. For example, if I'm sitting in Jerusalem with the vast majority of the population muslim, I'd like to see Muslim units available to my faction, even If I'm a christian. (If you think it's unbalancing, consider that it would be considered "Fratrenizing" by the pope, and might give you a cross hit per unit trained.)
2. In the same vein, I'd like to see certain units NOT available if there isn't enough of a cultural/religious influence. MUch as I love Highlanders, it doesn't make sense to be training them in ACRE with a 95% muslim religion percentage... Maybe 1 unit, but not the full three.
3. I admit that it would involve some major balancing, but the army lists should be reworked to include units that you will get if you have certain percentages of belief. Of course there are pros/cons to that. (For example, I'd love to see some old RTW units put into play if you have a high enough percentage of Pagans...)
4. Less Diplomat Spam.
5. This one is BEYOND out there, but I'd like to see it. As a fan of Boadicea and Joan D'arc, I'd love it if RARELY, a princess unit became a general. (One way might be if the princess is attached to an army and the commander is killed, she might take over. Of course this eliminates her for the "Marriage" role, but adds some nice flavor.)
6. The ability to speed up a damn Inquistor on a witch hunt. As it is now, I see em CRAWL towards my general. It's bad enough having them as uber as they are without the "Death March."
The thing I'd most like to see is a Video Option for 'Fast Shadows'.
My RTW runs nice and fast with high shadows switched on, whereas M2TW's shadows cause a huge loss of FPS. (Presumably because they cast themselves properly on other objects including the object casting the shadow.)
With Shadows switched off, M2TW runs about the same speed as RTW. If I could have RTW's shadow renderer in M2TW that would be ideal.
kublikhan3
04-06-2007, 08:20
Make declaring war a more costly endeavor. As it is I have nearly a dozen factions at war with me, many I am not even bordering. War should have some major drawbacks associated with it, to make the AI(and human player) think twice about declaring it.
Make factions getting stomped grovel at your feet, not make ridiculous demands of gold for peace.
Have an option to turn off animations on the campaign map. I can only watch those diplomats try to bribe my cities so many times a turn before I want to strangle someone. And god forbid a half dozen generals die in a battle, I will be here until tomorrow watching them fall over on the campaign map.
vBulletin® v3.7.1, Copyright ©2000-2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.