Medieval II Total War and EB2: suggestions for the team.

As the team will be moving on to EB2, I thought: let us, fans, review Medieval II Total War from an future EB2 player's perspective. I know it's a bit early, but given that the team appreciates suggestions, and that the sooner it knows what may be desired the better - as they can take everything into account from the start.

That means, if you have noticed something of which you think it offers a (great) possibility for EB2 (regardless of hardcoded limits, as those haven't yet been figured out), then post it! If you have any suggestions for EB2 that can't be included in RTW, and hope they're possible with M2TW, then post them!

For a start: in M2TW there is a whole religions based part of the game. If religion could be converted into 'sympathy', you could have rhetors instead of priests. That means you could actually portray a populations sympathy/hatred for their conquerors, far off protectors, allies and such. Heresy could be replaced with independency, and Paganism could be replaced with 'Doesn't give a crap'. That means part of the population feels committed to your cause, part of it doesn't feel committed to any cause, part of it favours other factions, part of it would rather be independent.

In this system Government buildings could make the people feel either more or less attracted to your rule: type 4 increases the whish for independency, while type 1 and 2 enlarge the amount of people that favours your rule. Your rhetors could then 'preach' your rule to the population of both your own and foreign settlements, just like with religion. As a bonus you can now alter the outcome of wars by actively preaching in foreign lands to ensure public unrest there, and commitment to your cause as well. On a side note, heretics, or in this case 'rebellious' people could now enter your lands an start spreading the desire for independency. Your 'rhetors' could try to get rid of him, but should they fail they may face serious punishment. (if your agent tried to sue the suspect and failed, then the other party might sue your agent - as a result your agent may have to disappear/ or can even get killed) This to reflect the way M2TW deals with denouncing heretics and witches in an EB way.

This system renders the rhetor hanger on useless, and as a result he should be edited out of the current EB retinues system.

Hum... I am not too sure about the 4th Paragraph, sounds a lil' made up. I don't know that much detailed history of demographics, philosophies, and religions during EB's time frame, but ONLY if this stuff really happened then OK. IF not exaclty then modify it.

THere is one thing I would like to point out, Medieval 2 has a lot of interesting stuff specially the whole religion and spreading religion type of deal. But I must warn just because Mediaval 2 has a feature it doesn't mean EB should implement it in a similar size and scope. If it didn't happned then it didn't.

Now, in my view, EB's time frame has issues that vary accross fations. For barbarians probably keeping triebes (settlements) from wanting to be independent would be a major consern. The same for KH, & Seleunids in forntier settlements. Rome would have need to worry about Generals shifting loyalties & wanting to be a "Ceasar", as well as major Slave rebellions (Spartacus anyone???). Also, as you conquer those geographical regions you come accross those problems too.

I think a major thing would be having agents that once u conquered a settlement where u can only build Gov't 3 or 4, later (much later) u can build Gov't 2.

Thats what "I think" could be implemented. BUt then again, I don't know if it would really had happened that way with all factions. (since different cultures had diffrenent gov'ing styles that other cultures didn't like one bit)

Ahh, it could be great, when in Rome, faction leader dies and if faction heir has poor stats - then there is a chance that some of the generals with armies outside settlements would rebel.

We need to weight in what we might loose too, like the ability to choose the heir...............................................what are you looking at? Really, I like being able to do that.:embarassed: :sweatdrop:

Then there's also the names of the characters, can we actually get family names to pass on to future generations? I had a game with Egypt once where I only allowed the direct descendants of Ptolemy to become Pharaoh :egypt: . A distant cousin did rise to throne once but the rightful heir managed to secure the loyalty of the Army and send the impostor to work as a slave in the Navy, which got him killed after successive storms at sea and brave outnumbered battles with pirates, oh what a pitiful accident. :clown: So it would be also sad to loose the family names.

Hopefully the first will be dealt with in a patch (pray, cross you fingers) and the second will be moddable.

How about Settlements and Guild Houses? Castles weren't really that popular and wide-spread in this age were they? The entire recruitment system has to be changed to give the best troops to the city MICs. Sure, you may have big forts here and there, but if we can't mod the structure of the castles or the buildings, things are going to look really, really silly. Just imagining the map full of Citadels is sickening. :skull: Perhaps Castles will have to be abandoned altogether.

The Guild Houses with military units as bonuses would be piece of cake to work with I guess, or not, depends on how they can be modded. Just give the Ptolemaics the possibility of being offered a "Galatian Immigration" Guild House that builds a Galatian unit and so on.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wardo

We need to weight in what we might loose too, like the ability to choose the heir...............................................what are you looking at? Really, I like being able to do that.:embarassed: :sweatdrop:

Then there's also the names of the characters, can we actually get family names to pass on to future generations? I had a game with Egypt once where I only allowed the direct descendants of Ptolemy to become Pharaoh :egypt: . A distant cousin did rise to throne once but the rightful heir managed to secure the loyalty of the Army and send the impostor to work as a slave in the Navy, which got him killed after successive storms at sea and brave outnumbered battles with pirates, oh what a pitiful accident. :clown: So it would be also sad to loose the family names.

Hopefully the first will be dealt with in a patch (pray, cross you fingers) and the second will be moddable.

How about Settlements and Guild Houses? Castles weren't really that popular and wide-spread in this age were they? The entire recruitment system has to be changed to give the best troops to the city MICs. Sure, you may have big forts here and there, but if we can't mod the structure of the castles or the buildings, things are going to look really, really silly. Just imagining the map full of Citadels is sickening. :skull: Perhaps Castles will have to be abandoned altogether.

The Guild Houses with military units as bonuses would be piece of cake to work with I guess, or not, depends on how they can be modded. Just give the Ptolemaics the possibility of being offered a "Galatian Immigration" Guild House that builds a Galatian unit and so on.

---

Or see if we can use the castle/city system to represent governments.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Krusader

Or see if we can use the castle/city system to represent governments.

---

'Allied Government/city' = Castle

'Directly controlled Government/city' = City

Or vice versa? ;)

I was thinking, how will EB2 manage to insert chariots and war elephants in MTW2? The only elephants I can see are mounted with cannons, mounting them with men and making it work can give a hell lot of trouble...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Corinthian Hoplite

I was thinking, how will EB2 manage to insert chariots and war elephants in MTW2? The only elephants I can see are mounted with cannons, mounting them with men and making it work can give a hell lot of trouble...

---

Test Timurids in custom battle. There is a war elephant unit with crew with muskets.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Krusader

Test Timurids in custom battle. There is a war elephant unit with crew with muskets.

---

I don't have M2TW. How will chariots work? Any idea?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Chuffy

'Allied Government/city' = Castle

'Directly controlled Government/city' = City

Or vice versa? ;)

---

It will be interesting to get hold of the EDB files. If Castles and Cities are completely modable, they will be able to do some interesting things. Firstly, it would be good to get rid of the Castle/City names, and change to something to delineate between a homeland city and a vassal city.

The advantages of a homeland city type are obvious; happiness, law, moral bonuses, more advanced building types etc. Also, the recruitment of good quality militia units, these being the core of most early armies, as opposed to elite units which come from higher level barracks, not 'castles.'

Vassal cities would resemble the current Castles of MTW2 in that they would have limited economies, but without the elite unit capability. It would be good to be able to control the taxation levels, and have some level of economic advancement.

Here is the tricky part. When a city is first captured, it should automatically be converted to a 'Vassal' type city through scripting, along with the destruction of the majority of buildings. If this is possible, then the faction specific barracks would no longer be necessary, since every time a city changes hand the barracks are destroyed. Or, if this handicaps the AI to much, it could only happen when the player takes a city. Or, the consequences are different for the AI and player, with the player loosing most buildings and the city becoming 'Vassel', and the AI just loosing the military buildings and the city becoming Homeland or Vassal depending on how far from the capital it is.

Of note, does the current MTW2 AI ever change a city to a castle or vice versa? This would effect things as well, if the AI is smart enough to do this.

I doubt this would be able to be modded into EB2 but here goes. In MTW in order to create trade routes you had to have a line of ships across all the sea provinces to another port city. This was a great idea as it makes the use of ships to create revenue and makes trade harder to create, but with a powerful navy, you would become the wealthiest nation.

So if it were possible to create sea provinces in MTWII where if your boat occupied the province (by being inside the province) then trade routes would be able to be made through the province to other ports. Of course if an enemy were to enter that sea province and destroy your ships, then you would lose it and the trade route would be cut, meaning to regain the trade route(s) then you would have to retake that area of sea.

This concept would give a point to naval battles and building a navy, which usually would be profitless. A person with a powerful navy would maintain powerful trade routes, but decisive and rewarding naval battles would take place for the capture of these sea provinces, linking and breaking trade routes together.

Example:
20 sea provinces between Jerusalem and Rome, occupy the 20 sea provinces with ships, which are protecting the trade routes and the trade route is established.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dumbass

I doubt this would be able to be modded into EB2 but here goes. In MTW in order to create trade routes you had to have a line of ships across all the sea provinces to another port city. This was a great idea as it makes the use of ships to create revenue and makes trade harder to create, but with a powerful navy, you would become the wealthiest nation.

---

Not going to happen, this is quite obviously hardcoded.

Foot

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by a_b_danner

Of note, does the current MTW2 AI ever change a city to a castle or vice versa? This would effect things as well, if the AI is smart enough to do this.

---

Yep. I seen a CITADEL when I conquer Sicily.

Just want to inject my own thoughts here-

I have played M2TW for a few weeks (on and off), and it actually isn't bad. It isn't the most historical game, but there is nothing that would hamper a serious overhaul of the game to make it historically accurate to the Medieval period.

The battles are quite harried, but the actual AI action is not so bad; it certainly acts with a lot more cohesion than it did in RTW.

That being said, there is no way that EB will work for M2TW. It has too many time-specific features to be worth the effort.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dumbass

I doubt this would be able to be modded into EB2 but here goes. In MTW in order to create trade routes you had to have a line of ships across all the sea provinces to another port city. This was a great idea as it makes the use of ships to create revenue and makes trade harder to create, but with a powerful navy, you would become the wealthiest nation.

---

A navy is useful to protect your ports and block the enemy's, this isn't perfect, but certainly adds some use to ships...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Zorba

Just want to inject my own thoughts here-

I have played M2TW for a few weeks (on and off), and it actually isn't bad. It isn't the most historical game, but there is nothing that would hamper a serious overhaul of the game to make it historically accurate to the Medieval period.

The battles are quite harried, but the actual AI action is not so bad; it certainly acts with a lot more cohesion than it did in RTW.

That being said, there is no way that EB will work for M2TW. It has too many time-specific features to be worth the effort.

---

Actually, I think it will be well worth the effort.

BUT, u are right that MTW2 has many time specific features, and others are too far streched. So, I think that for EB2 the Devlp. team shouldn't break its head trying to incorporate everysingle feature of MTW2.
-A few of the features I see as unnessesary for EB are:
--Religios agents (priests, excomunators, and the like)
--Merchants.
--The whole deal of extending the map for the Americas.

Those are the ones I can think off.

Merchants would be of great use. Trade was a big issue, and there were monopolies on various types of goods and what not. Religion can also be used, because it was also an issue (pagans did not all get along; I think the British druids would attest to that if Romans, also pagans at the time, hadn't slaughtered them), though it might be changed to something more relevant.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Anthony

Merchants would be of great use. Trade was a big issue, and there were monopolies on various types of goods and what not. Religion can also be used, because it was also an issue (pagans did not all get along; I think the British druids would attest to that if Romans, also pagans at the time, hadn't slaughtered them), though it might be changed to something more relevant.

---

Religion yes. But not to the exent of M2TW. It is simply streching Religion too far. Yes Crusades and Jihads did take place but NOT that often, Inquisitors didn't go creazy killing ur generals & priests since 1090 when the game begins. Just to name a few streches....

Now merchants.... In and then u get an income from that merchant being on that resource.M2TW u put a merchant next to a resource Thats how it works, u can put more, ur merchant get expirience, etc.....BUT if we look at the TON of resources in EB (get the Resources patch, or just wait for .8) and that would be just too much micromanagment, cluttering, and not at all useful. (This merchant thing is borrowed from Rise Of Nations, a horribly unhistorical and just plain lame game in my opinion). Besides controlling provinces in resorce rich areas and Trade Rights make a LOT more sence.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Anthony

Religion can also be used, because it was also an issue (pagans did not all get along; I think the British druids would attest to that if Romans, also pagans at the time, hadn't slaughtered them), though it might be changed to something more relevant.

---

I've been under the impression that the druids were eliminated not because of any religious conflict, but because they held great political influence among the Celts and were therefore a political threat to Rome's rule. Many Romans themselves were inclined to worship gods outside of their traditional pantheon.

Now what religions would there be for EB2? Would the Roamns follow the same religion as the greeks (Their religion was almost identical) or their own? Would there be different pagan religions or just all blended into one, like in Baba.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dumbass

Now what religions would there be for EB2? Would the Roamns follow the same religion as the greeks (Their religion was almost identical) or their own? Would there be different pagan religions or just all blended into one, like in Baba.

---

Definetly not regarding pagan religions.

For the Celts, religion was very important and as I recall it was heresy to introduce other gods into their pantheon. Any ruler would have to follow the "laws of the gods" and it seems the celts were more rigourous in seeing that it was really done too.
For the Greeks & Romans, they would probably identify other gods as their own, while other religions again I'm unsure off, but one reason the Ptolemies managed to survive for around 300 years was because they worshipped and built temples to the Egyptian deities.

As for how we will use the religions, we don't know yet and discussions will probably begin in more earnest when we know if MTW2 can be modded so that it will be worth the effort to mod EB2.

We hope religions & jihads can be used to represent migrations, but I'm betting it can be difficult.

As for castles and such: you can't alter the tax rate, so it makes most sense to have them in regions with type 3 or 4 government buildings (to reflect both the fact that this region has to be able to defend itself on it's own and that the far off 'protector' imposes minimal 'government'/ law there). I'd suggest you keep their basic use the same as in M2TW, that is that of a 'military settlement'. So don't make castles a government type building, leave them as a different type of 'governors house' as they already are.

On the merchants topic: from what I have experienced, they're simply meant to be used abroad. You don't make much money having them standing on your own resources, they're far more profitable somewhere far away. Now point is that they're ideal agents to manipulate relations with and treasuries of other factions, since whatever they do it's not an act of war, but neither is it very pleasing to other factions. Since their use has been limitted to making money and 'eliminating' other merchants only, it's a bit of a mystery how they can be fitted alongside EB's resource system.

Still, it's not all that ahistorical: looking at China in EB's timeframe for example, we can see a state that was forged by a king and his prime minister (named Li Se) (who was the protege of an extraordinary wealthy merchant named Liu Pu-Wei). And remember that particular king involved gave China it's name.

Perhaps, those merchants can simply replace the various merchant hangers on in RTW?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Krusader

Definetly not regarding pagan religions.

For the Celts, religion was very important and as I recall it was heresy to introduce other gods into their pantheon. Any ruler would have to follow the "laws of the gods" and it seems the celts were more rigourous in seeing that it was really done too.
For the Greeks & Romans, they would probably identify other gods as their own, while other religions again I'm unsure off, but one reason the Ptolemies managed to survive for around 300 years was because they worshipped and built temples to the Egyptian deities.

As for how we will use the religions, we don't know yet and discussions will probably begin in more earnest when we know if MTW2 can be modded so that it will be worth the effort to mod EB2.

We hope religions & jihads can be used to represent migrations, but I'm betting it can be difficult.

---

Celts did allow a few foreign gods. Well, one really, of note, and that was Hercules, because, as the Greek myth of his heritage and such went, they were related to him. So, that's kind of a special case.

Of druids, their 'political' abilities lay solely in their religion. Celts were religiously inclined to listen to them. They had to. Because their religion was part of the political process, it gave them political power, but it was wholely derived from their religion. Also, mind that Celts in Greece had a prediliction toward temple robbing, but never did that to their own temples. It's a clear favoritism of their own religion. But religion is also more than the gods worshipped, it's also practices, which varied widely, and were made illegal at times, which did anger people greatly.

In M2TW you can have buildings make up part of your walls. Thus, perhaps, if the EB team can get it's hands on some skilled 3D modellers, there's a chance that it can actually realise realistic walls for the Khartadastim.

But Copperhaired Berserker, Sicily/Palermo starts as a castle! I have never seen the AI convert between city and castles.

The religion aspects of M2TW might be usable to show population's loyalty to culture/state?

A peoples religion was often either controled by, or exemplified by the state leaders of that day and age. Empire leaders were often, also somewhat chief priest and Gods appeaser.

So, wouldn't the "religion" as used in M2TW be a good marker for a population's general attitude toward cultural loyalty and "national" identity?

(Not sure what to use in place of "state" and "nation" since those are more modern concepts, if I understand such things properly)

If the answer is yes, then the "priest" unit can be used as a representative sent by the controling authority (Chief, Emperor, Senate, Council, whatever) to investigate local problems or settle civil disputes or address local concerns that are negatively affecting local feelings.
The heretics and witches could be used as agents provocaturs or rabble rousers that need to be put down.

Change the population requirements so that Huge Cities are actually huge cities.
Population Requirement
Village -> Town 2,500
Town -> Large Town 8,000
Large Town -> City 20,000
City -> Large City 50,0000
Large City -> Huge City 120,000.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Grimmy

The religion aspects of M2TW might be usable to show population's loyalty to culture/state?

A peoples religion was often either controled by, or exemplified by the state leaders of that day and age. Empire leaders were often, also somewhat chief priest and Gods appeaser.

So, wouldn't the "religion" as used in M2TW be a good marker for a population's general attitude toward cultural loyalty and "national" identity?

(Not sure what to use in place of "state" and "nation" since those are more modern concepts, if I understand such things properly)

If the answer is yes, then the "priest" unit can be used as a representative sent by the controling authority (Chief, Emperor, Senate, Council, whatever) to investigate local problems or settle civil disputes or address local concerns that are negatively affecting local feelings.
The heretics and witches could be used as agents provocaturs or rabble rousers that need to be put down.

---

Yep, that's what post 1 is about. ~;) Although, you have quite a different approach to 'priests' - nice.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by A living god

Change the population requirements so that Huge Cities are actually huge cities.
Population Requirement
Village -> Town 2,500
Town -> Large Town 8,000
Large Town -> City 20,000
City -> Large City 50,0000
Large City -> Huge City 120,000.

---

You would have problems with publicorder.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Savage_German

You would have problems with publicorder.

---

you change that too, as well as squalors effect of poulation growth