Ideas for MEDİEVAL TOTAL WAR-2

There are some good ideas, but heres a few I would like to see implemented. These as such are not easy to add to the existing game.

1) Naval battles definately, and depending on the ships in question, some may fire projectiles, while others would need to get close in order for their crew to board and fight the other crew. Fast ships would have the advantage of movement around the battle.

2) Spies are mostly uncontrolled, but you can use the taverns and brothels to hire agents for specific missions. The agent would have an upfront cost, and then a small "maintenance fee". In exchange, you'd get reports and information about the target or region. In addition, some agents might act as double agents, so therefore the agent that you hired might've been hired by your enemy, and as a result could be giving you false information, while giving your enemies valuable information. That spy you just hired could likewise be an assassin. Assassins would have a small upfront fee, and if successful could demand a much larger followup fee. Non-payment might result in negative consequences.

3) Assassination attempts should have more than two outcomes. There should be atleast: 1) Target Killed, Assassin escaped. 2) Target Killed, Assassin killed in escape attempt, 3) Attempt Failed (or mission aborted) and assassin escaped, 4) Attempt Failed and assassin caught. Numbers 3 and 4 might be common if the chances of success are low, while 1 and 2 are more likely when the chances of success are greater.

4) Overland traderoutes. Overland traderoutes should act in one of two ways. Based on the existing trade elements.

a) You train Caravan units, and move them like you do normal agents. You require one in your home trading province, and then one in each province to form a chain to the chain's destination(s). Your caravan sells to each province that it reaches where your goods can be sold. You might have a chain going from Flanders, all the way to Constantinople, selling your goods in each territory along the route.

b) Your level of trading post determines the range from the province. The Trading Post sells goods just to the local population. A Merchant sells to the local population, and each bordering province. A Merchant Guild sells to each that the Merchant sells to, plus one additional ring from there, etc.

5. Retain the existing turnbased format for campaign map, but break each year down into two seasons. Each region is affected by one or both of the primary weather types. Winter and Summer. During winter season, troops can only move one province at a time to simulate the colder weather and more difficult conditions. While Summer season, troops can move up to two to three provinces at a time. Desert might be limited to two, while severe desert conditions might likewise be affected as per Winter conditions. Other regions might have Winter/Summer combinations. What this means is that one turn you can move your troops one province over, while the next year they can move further. What specific weather conditions exist would be determined primarily from where you're leaving and partially where you're heading and by which route. All this would be handled by the computer to calculate, so it's a matter of just picking up your unit and checking to see it's range. Enemy controlled provinces would therefore halt the movement of a unit (even if they were entitled to 3 province movement).

6. When your King dies without any Heirs that are of age, the game should calculate each year where there is the possibility that you have an underage heir, and advance the game a series of years. The game might resume with you in control of a recently reemerged faction which may have most or very few of it's original territory. It would depend on how long it took your underage heirs to come of age, and then rally the people. During the uncontrolled period you would be able to see the events during your absence.

7. During castle sieges, defenders should take a heavy morale hit once their general/king has died. This might result in flight, or surrender of the remaining troops, rather than it being down to the last man. Disciplined or Elite troops might stand longer, but others would collapse quickly if the castles walls were breached, and hordes of soldiers were flowing in.

8. Battering Rams. You should be able to train ram crews that can move up to the castle gates, and act as a movable melee siege weapon, rather than having troops run up to the gates to try to break them down. Battering Rams should be more effective than normal troops banging against the gate. Optionally some units can be outfitted with siege ladders, so instead of trying to bash their way through the fort walls, some of the men in the units can scale the walls and get in.

9. On Engage at Will, some units should be able to split up into two smaller groups. For instance, a unit of Royal Knights might split to chase two nearby units of archers. Currently it's one or the other, particularly if the two sets of archers move further apart (if they are close together the Knights may attack men from both units. Some units could even be specialized in temporarily being two smaller units when they need to be.

10. Grouped units of similar units are treated as a single unit of the specified type (you can at a later time ungroup them if necessary. Currently when you select say two units of spearmen and group them together, if you try to form a spearwall with a depth of 3 men, what will happen is that there will inevitably be a gap as you try to stretch them out to meet that depth of three men. You then manually have to move one of the spears together. Having 3 units of 100 spearmen should create a superunit of 300 men, and with few hassles, be able to create a single unbroken straightspear wall of 100 men wide at 3 men depth.

11. Movement of battle camera would need to be completly free tilt, meaning you could get a complete overhead view of the fighting if you so choose.


Regarding #5, I propose to retain the turnbased format, because it gives the game some extra gameplay depth. You have Real-time battles, and turn-based kingdom management. I like the combination of the two different game play types. You can play plenty of custom battles if that's all you wanted to do with MTW, but likewise you can autocalc all your battles if you weren't interested in the RTB. It is one of MTW's strengths.

This is all so far that I can think of.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sbroadbent

6. When your King dies without any Heirs that are of age, the game should calculate each year where there is the possibility that you have an underage heir, and advance the game a series of years. The game might resume with you in control of a recently reemerged faction which may have most or very few of it's original territory. It would depend on how long it took your underage heirs to come of age, and then rally the people. During the uncontrolled period you would be able to see the events during your absence.

---

or one of the ex-heirs can just resume the kingdom right away in a smaller scale, say as rebel. We can already pick sides when there's a civil war so why not be able to pick when the king doesn't have a successor? With that said, the only "game over" we have is in 1453.

As far as the turnbase on campaign, I just don't like the fact that our enemies know what provinces we're invading. I like challenges but it seems to me that the AI factions have the advantage whereas I always defend my province unprepared. Anyone notice this?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Weebeast

or one of the ex-heirs can just resume the kingdom right away in a smaller scale, say as rebel. We can already pick sides when there's a civil war so why not be able to pick when the king doesn't have a successor? With that said, the only "game over" we have is in 1453.

---

True, that's possible. Whatever makes the game go on.

Quote:

---

As far as the turnbase on campaign, I just don't like the fact that our enemies know what provinces we're invading. I like challenges but it seems to me that the AI factions have the advantage whereas I always defend my province unprepared. Anyone notice this?

---

Yeah, sometimes it seems that way, though if you know what sort of troops are at your borders, and what kind of defenses you have (and what sort of behavior the faction is running) you can guess what might occur. When I see a buildup occuring (which could be as a result of a buildup on my own), I tend to try to meet the rate of buildup.

I guess you need more spies. High valor spies can be very useful for telling you when attacks are coming. I don't have watchtowers and border forts in my game, so all I have to worry about are high valour assassins and spies of the opposing faction finding my hidden agents. On the downside of not having watchtowwers, it's not as easy to boost loyalty as upgrading to border forts give a total of 50 happiness, so rebellions and revolts can be much more common. It also makes it a necessity that you train a number of spies and assassins to protect the homeland provinces.

Up +

Here's an idea: Slow down the goofy unit speed, bring back the spear bonus, and make the combat more like it was in M:TW, only prettier.

I'm all for new features and pretty pictures, but the real-time battles are the core of this game. The "improvements" of combat in R:TW to make the battles more "exciting" are what caused more mutiny in the fan base than everything else put together.

Maybe multiple play settings would help: arcade (which they can drop as far as I'm concerned), normal (like R:TW), realistic (slower unit speeds, spear bonus like M:TW) and very realistic (better than M:TW, where a battle can last hours.)

P.S. No more goofy units like Eqyptian Chariots in Roman times.

A real-time, or more precisely "non-turnbased", campaign map would be nice. Leave the torches and knives, I´ve been playing Knights of Honor for a while which does have such a campaign map and it plays no more hectic than Rome or Medieval, actually more fluent. It would benefit a MP campaign even better than auto-calced battles, especially if the game doesn´t go to pause mode when a battle is fought.
Food supply is a must (including foraging, a feature even Lord of the Realm II, from the early 90´s, had) and the stamina/exhaustion of a unit in battle could be influenced by how long (and where) the army had been marching about without resting.
Perhaps some feature like the Family members could be adapted to the medieval system, posts like governors, generals, diplomats, spies etc. are performed by Nobles, which are basically similar to the Roman family members, with the difference that their number depends on the number of provinces the player controls. In MTW you could asssign titles to officers, but you had that many officers (because every unit had one) it became more work than playing. Perhaps another approach would suit that better, the provinces give titles and the titles open spaces for your staff, i.e. you can have only as many agents in the furthest sense of the word as you have provinces, perhaps a few "basic" open slots when a faction only has one province.
But, if MTW II is already announced then any kind of "wishlist" is no more than that, as the game design will most certainly be done already.

I actually like the way battles are in RTW. The one thing I didn't like about MTW (I'm not really that bothered by graphics) is that battles took so damn long. The worst was when the enemy had reinforcements. I would think "Oh no, not more of these bloody b***ards!" Combat should be over quickly because what we're after is strategy: moving the troops around, flanking and envelopping the enemy...The way soldiers will duck and parry in MTW2 mgiht remedy that a tiny bit, but that will get boring after a few weeks.
But please, please include Naval battles! We've been waiting for so long.

Quote:

---

tower that has no soldiers in it shouldn’t fire arrows. We should leave a unit in every city to defend the city so they can stand in the Towers and fire arrows to enemy. You know in Medieval-1 the towers and walls are firing arrows but there are no soldiers in them so who’s firing?-Ghosts(?)

---

The civilians/peasants and bishops are the ones who shoot arrows.

I know this is quite hard to implement but would be interesting do away with the rebels and instead create minor powers something like in imperial glory i'm not saying make new fully playable factions just give em something standard maybe a special unit here and there ,and make em modable so we can play them once you get the hang of the game one could use a challange playing luxemburg or serbia who knows. Leave the rebels in just as rebels .Also would bring some more stuff to diplomacy like protectorate or vassal states that arre not neceesarily factions but you have to protect em.:balloon2:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Doug-Thompson

Here's an idea: Slow down the goofy unit speed, bring back the spear bonus, and make the combat more like it was in M:TW, only prettier.

I'm all for new features and pretty pictures, but the real-time battles are the core of this game. The "improvements" of combat in R:TW to make the battles more "exciting" are what caused more mutiny in the fan base than everything else put together.

Maybe multiple play settings would help: arcade (which they can drop as far as I'm concerned), normal (like R:TW), realistic (slower unit speeds, spear bonus like M:TW) and very realistic (better than M:TW, where a battle can last hours.)

P.S. No more goofy units like Eqyptian Chariots in Roman times.

---

I agree completely. However, I think four game modes may be a bit too much to ask, as it requires four rounds of balancing. You know how long it took to get R:TW balanced. I think there should be an arcade mode (fast units, high kill speeds, lots of mayhem on the battlefield) and a realistic mode (slow units, slow kills speeds, balanced) and leave it at that. No doubt the community will mod the hell out of it once it has been released ~;) .

I would like to be able to give names to each of my units, or units that have had a distinguished career should get the option to name them, plus some sort of 'causes fear' or 'veteran unit' Trait.

Make the battles nitty gritty like in BI...the middle ages weren't all flashy and pretty colours...they were down and dirty, dark, a true period of upheaval, so why not reflect this in how the people fight, and how the game looks overall?

I think they're already looking to please you, SilverKnight. According to what's been released, they'll have plenty of flashy colors and heraldry, but over the course of a long, hard battle the soldiers will get progressively more dirty as they get soiled with blood and the mud of the battlefield.

Ajax

Lots of good ideas here. I like the reference to Crusader kings. Normally I don't like RTS games, but Paradox has made some good stuff.
1. Seasons. The problem with turn-based games is that movement is Waaaay to slow. The old region to region moves does NOT work. I see that playing Rome also. A boat taking a year and a half from Rome to Carthago? Should be instantly barring enemy action or bad weather.. Land units should also be able to move longer in 6 months. Here things such as weather, terrain, food and enemies should slow them down. With good infrastructure you should easily be able to ride from the south of France to Normandy in one turn, as long as you just cross friendly territory in supply, and with money to pay for food;)

2. Tactical. One thing that I've always thought were taken too little advantage of, is the pre-battle sequence. If the attacker has the option to wait 3 times before attacking, this should have further consequences than just changing the weather. If reinforcements are expected, they get at bigger chance of coming into play early in the battle the longer you wait.
The defender should be able to put up field fortifications if the attacker gives him time. These should be rudimentary breastworks, stake fences and anti-cav ditches. An attacking general that takes his time too often will risk getting 'vaccilator' vice. If he's successful, an 'organized' virtue could also come. A higher ranked defending general who is given time to organize, can get an 'counter-attack' event where he can choose to counter-attack with a morale bonus, and the erstwhile attacker is now defending with lowered morale.

just 2 thoughts.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Zajuts149

2. Tactical. One thing that I've always thought were taken too little advantage of, is the pre-battle sequence. If the attacker has the option to wait 3 times before attacking, this should have further consequences than just changing the weather. If reinforcements are expected, they get at bigger chance of coming into play early in the battle the longer you wait.
The defender should be able to put up field fortifications if the attacker gives him time. These should be rudimentary breastworks, stake fences and anti-cav ditches. An attacking general that takes his time too often will risk getting 'vaccilator' vice. If he's successful, an 'organized' virtue could also come. A higher ranked defending general who is given time to organize, can get an 'counter-attack' event where he can choose to counter-attack with a morale bonus, and the erstwhile attacker is now defending with lowered morale.

just 2 thoughts.

---

God dag, Zajuts! :bow:

That's a very cool idea. It could really help out a defender who's at a severe disadvantage, and could also force the attacker to not necessarily wait for the "ideal" weather conditions before joining battle. Such a feature would probably also help out the AI as well, particularly given they're the defender more often than not! Now if we could just get someone on the dev team to read this....

I like the physics idea. With the new physics card comming out, it would add a great amount of realism. I know a Sega is already implementing it in another game.

I liked the way the STW/MTW maps played on multiplayer. They played bigger, although they say RTW maps are larger, the old games made you play with more strategic moving. Rushing to help your partner, or having to back track in case you got rushed.


Cromwell

I actually like that the strategy part is turn based and WOULD NOT have bought this game if it had not been. Neither will I purchase Medieval 2 if it is not turn based. The shelves are inundated with RTS games. I am so bored with them. They are more challenging than turn based, but they are NOT more realistic.

I love the real time battles, yet I have already given my thoughts as to why using the pause button is MUCH more realistic than what happens if you don't, especially in a large battle. That is in the "Your most successful battle tactics" thread, where I was thanked for my "mighty rebuttal of those who treat the pause function with scorn and derision."

:horn: (King's to you matteus!)

Here it is for you fellas still trapped in the New Members area:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by The Darkhorn

Actually, the pause button is more realistic I think, especially when using high maintenance units (by which I mean must keep a close eye on them for them to behave according to how they're trained and most useful - such as HA). Two reasons I believe this and don't feel like a wuss when pausing. First off, I am playing a game on a computer. In reality, if I was a general, I might merely look this way and that to see different parts of the battlefield and give orders. Whereas on a computer, I've got to move the camera all over the place in a large battle, unrealistically wasting time, though you could make the arguement that can simlulate the time it takes to send orders. True, but orders for the most part in medieval warfare were issued before a battle in the form of the battle plan....this brings me to the 2nd reason. There are enough intagibles in a battle already to make it realistic. In reality, sometimes troops didn't follow their orders right. Well, they screw up movement enough anyway. Sometimes maybe the route wasn't the best one, or they get tangled with 2 men from an enemy unit and all fight there instead of marching to some far off point you want them to. They charge impetuously. Archery units (I hate this one and it happens a lot) while set on hold postion/hold formation/ fire at will still sometimes (often) let the enemy walk right up on them without firing a shot.....etc. Not using the pause button is making everything depend on me, which is unrealistic....it is like assuming that indiviual unit commanders have absolutely no initiative and no knowledge of the overall battle plan. Fact: to use HA effectively, they must be on HF/HP/FAW. However, often that means they will need to be micromanaged to maximize effectiveness and make sure they don't get charged by a bunch of turtles, which will happen if you don't tell them to move. Why assume that the unit commander is an embicile who won't move when he should, just because you're off dealing with something else?

---

I apply the same logic here. Real time strategy, while great for tactical situations with the moderation of having the pause button to do some managing to avoid some VERY unrealistic consequences of not doing so, runs into the same basic problem: WHAT IS GOING WHERE YOU ARE NOT LOOKING.

People, this game takes place over the course of several hundred years. Is it going to take several hundred years to play it? Of course not. So, you are at an unfair advantage when playing RTS. Say you are fooling with something in the steppes and look up and 2 years have passed. WTF is going on in your English lands? When playing RTS, especially with the tons of micromanagment people seem to be hoping for, things could get stagnant very quickly in parts of the screen you don't see. Or worse.....the Spanish are taking over the British Isles and you don't even know it. They marched right by your army and waved at them. The reality of it is.....in real life there was time to plan, to see what was going on, etc. Especially b/c communications where slow. If I have had to wait two weeks for a report on the movements of the French army, don't you think in reality I've had plenty of time to think how I may want to counter any of the multiple moves they may make based on the last intelligence I had from my agents? Instead they invade somewhere I don't expect, which could happen, but I have to react as if I didn't have at least 15 minutes to think about it!!! 'Cause if I take 15 minutes to think about it, they will have marched 70 miles (Boy they've been eating they're wheaties!). So, you slow it down. Hmmmm. You still can't be everywhere at once. The only way it could ever work is if there is lots of default crap done based on the type of men you have governing the provinces the king is not in or very near.....but then that defeats the whole purpose of playing a game...maybe we should just auto-calc the campaign. Wow! I finished my HRE campaign in 10 seconds. Just load...auto-calc....and see if you won! Sounds like a blast. At the very least pause. But then why not just have a turn based system that takes care of all that possibility you may want to PLAN something, and also, while you're off crusading Richard Plantagenet, your brother John, while he may want your throne, at least won't stand idly by while the Frogs invade. Turn based strategy, while it has it's flaws, is much more realistic than real time strategy. Years go by in this game, but not in real life. If I play for 30 years I need to be able to do what someone would have time to do in 30 years. The only way you can do that is with TBS.

I would really like to see naval actions more detailed than just a victory/defeat message. Wasnt there some tactical skill used to out smart larger ships with smaller faster ships...

You're probably not going to see more in-depth naval action. There's no mention of it in the IGN interview and if it were there it would be big news. They'll probably need a new engine to make that come out so don't expect it until the next game at the earliest.

And thank you Darkhorn. The turn-based strategic set-up was one of the things I loved when I first played M:TW. It allowed a realistic amount of time for planning while still keeping the action of the fighting in realtime. I think it's a great feature and I'd hate to see it changed.

Ajax

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by The Darkhorn

I actually like that the strategy part is turn based and WOULD NOT have bought this game if it had not been. Neither will I purchase Medieval 2 if it is not turn based. The shelves are inundated with RTS games. I am so bored with them. They are more challenging than turn based, but they are NOT more realistic.

I love the real time battles, yet I have already given my thoughts as to why using the pause button is MUCH more realistic than what happens if you don't, especially in a large battle. That is in the "Your most successful battle tactics" thread, where I was thanked for my "mighty rebuttal of those who treat the pause function with scorn and derision."

---

The only thing I see that is wrong with that Logic, is why couldn't the Strategic Map pause whilst you are in Combat?

Quote:

---

The civilians/peasants and bishops are the ones who shoot arrows.

---

LOL, that's nice. Civilians and peasants maybe, but bishops did shot arrows? The mere fact in itself is ridiculous, but if you think about it, there was only one bishop in one diocese and in the other hand devout clergyman were not usually that agressive, daredevil, "death-despised" type... ;)

I agree entirely with the previous opinion, that towers shouldn't shot arrows, if there isn't any soldier in they. It's illogical, because if we have cleaned the walls, we had to kill the unvisible civilians too, so dead people should not kill my alive soldiers! :)

And at last my brilliant idea: flags on the walls! In wartime they weren't usual, but in peace nice colourful flags often decorated the castles.

Id like to see the true size of constantinople represented accurately...Id even go so far as to say that the size of 'city' or whatever should be unreachable by any other civ unless they have a massive superiority over most of the other civs...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wakizashi

The only thing I see that is wrong with that Logic, is why couldn't the Strategic Map pause whilst you are in Combat?

---

It would I hope if they did RTS!!!! Still, that wasn't what I was talking about. You don't have to be fighting a battle to be doing something else. You can be queing things to build or train...or deciding on some mercs...trying to get your assassin to drop on the right guy in maelstrom of agents in the middle of the province!!!! You might be just new to the game and still trying to figure out how something works. You might be checking out an opposing stack to see if you want to invade. You might be checking a general's V&Vs. You might be looking through yours units for a good governor.........................................etc, etc, etc, etc, etc, etc, etc....ad finitum....anything that might distract you long enough for something bad to happen simply because an amount of game time went by much faster than real time.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by lancelot

Id like to see the true size of constantinople represented accurately...Id even go so far as to say that the size of 'city' or whatever should be unreachable by any other civ unless they have a massive superiority over most of the other civs...

---

Agreed, you should have the option to build such a city, but only if you are prepared to build something that takes say 20 turns and on which you will have to spend massive amounts of capital. And please put in the double walls of Constantinople, with a huge water filled moat in front of it!
And it would be good if they attached the port to the town, rather then have it on the other side of the bay, so that if a bunch of brigands wanders onto your road, your trade isn't cut off.
And young family members should also gain stars even if they don't command the army in which they are fighint, they could just be apprentices learning from their older relatives.

A fine thread. We have a new forum dedicated to Medi2, so we'll move this topic there. New members are able to post there also. So follow me to the new forum, please.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by The Darkhorn

It would I hope if they did RTS!!!! Still, that wasn't what I was talking about. You don't have to be fighting a battle to be doing something else. You can be queing things to build or train...or deciding on some mercs...trying to get your assassin to drop on the right guy in maelstrom of agents in the middle of the province!!!! You might be just new to the game and still trying to figure out how something works. You might be checking out an opposing stack to see if you want to invade. You might be checking a general's V&Vs. You might be looking through yours units for a good governor.........................................etc, etc, etc, etc, etc, etc, etc....ad finitum....anything that might distract you long enough for something bad to happen simply because an amount of game time went by much faster than real time.

---

Well, obviously, if you've played HoI/ HoI 2 you would be able to adjust how fast the flow of time went. From Very Slow 1/10th Normal Time, to Very Fast which would be 10x normal speed. This would give you ample time to do everything you ever wanted to do. If you wanted to see generals/army stats, the game would automatically pause and let you view them for however long you wanted. Also, when you adjust building queues and Unit Queues within a city, the game should also pause, as well as the Tax adjustment window, and the other government functions.

As far, as concerns about armies invading your territory while you are doing something else, at this time in history, an enemy would make a formal declaration of war against you before they moved on you, and your armies, it was rarely done any other way(Don't Let RTW Fool you into thinking enemies would just suddenly invade your territory without good cause and not warning you first), mainly because your enemies still had honor, or adhered to the rules of Chivalry (which Knights would have been loathe to attack an unprepared enemy).

As far as Agents go, I think they need a serious adjustment. You should be able to build assassins, that don't work like spies or diplomats, instead you should be able to click a rival agent or General, and there should be a button that says something along the lines of "Send an Assassin after him" in that way, you would never need to move an assassin piece, and they could do the work inflitrating enemy territory themselves, kill their target when they think they have the best opportunity to (if they aren't found out before then) and then return back into your service.

If I had the opportunity to change the entire interface of the TW game, I would make you LOVE this system.

http://www.totalwar.com/community/medieval2.htm

https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/forumdisplay.php?f=131

I'd Like to see different Population Classes like, Poor Peasant Class, Peasant classs, rich peasant class , and Noblty and base recruitment and income off the population values, you wouldnt want to train all Weak units off peasants then you got crappy army, if you train off the richer classes your economy drops... so you'd have to balance you'd basicly have to train units off the peasant class to have a good economy!

Unit types associated with population classes:

Poor Peasant- Weak units
Normal Middle Class Peasants- light and Medium Infantry
Rich Peasant Class- heavy infantry and calvary
Noblty- Elite units

Income Effects Based on Population classes.

Poor Peasant Classes- Decreases Income and increases Squalor More then other classes
Normal Middle Class- No effect on income , same squalor increasment
Rich peasant Class- Increases Income and less Squalor increasment then Normal class
Noblty - Normal Income, and less squalor.

Moats!!!!!

Need i say any more? It would be great to have to brave the gates which are the only way into a castle thanks to a moat....you could even have a siege weapon that works like the sappers in rtw and that fills a path across the moat....

Quote:

---

2)That spy you just hired could likewise be an assassin. Assassins would have a small upfront fee, and if successful could demand a much larger followup fee. Non-payment might result in negative consequences.

---

...Such as the person who hired him mysteriously dieing...

The guy who made this thread - some of your ideas are good, but most of them would just turn Medieval 2: Total War into Medievalish: Total Micro-management. I mean, come on, having resources? We're trying to get away from the AoE style of play.