Expansion Feature Wsihlist

we already have five levels of government based on popultion.

i want to see, after imperial palace, not necessarily another governmental stage, but the ability to build and upgrade villa's in the countryside (one villa in that settlement, upgrade to 2,3,4,5) based on the population of that region as a whole (not just the city)

this i'm basing on that in some cities during the first centuries AD had hundreds of thousands (or even more than a million) inhabitants.


and i want to see 2 expansion sets, one for Alexander the Great (and other events preceeding RTW), and the rise of the Roman Empire until the great Germanic invasions destroyed the Western Roman Empire...

Some people mentioned having a special layout for Rome; I'd like for all the cities to have a special layout, and I don't think it'd be that hard. It could be sort of "modular." Currently, all the buildings have a "slot" they go into at each level of city size. When the city size is upgraded, the slots change, and, for example, the barracks might get moved across the city (this is the real reason it takes years to upgrade city size - dismantling and moving buildings!).

I think city construction could be done "agglutinatively," ie, if you build a trader early on, it's near the center of the city, even after an upgrade, as are its derivatives, like forums or markets. Each building could have a preset arrangement of streets around it, which changed as the building was upgraded.

Thus, if your buildings were positioned in a city based on the order they were constructed, and each level of building "ordered" the city around it in a certain way, then each city you encounter in a game would be different.

Also, it'd be nice if there were a bit of interplay between different cultures in cities, since now, Coliseums and such don't even show up in occupied barbarian cities until you upgrade and they become Roman.

Really, though, I'd like city combat to be more unique. Perhaps town watch could have enhanced stats, or at least morale, in the city. I also like the idea some else mentioned of putting guys in buildings. Granted, all this would make city combat even more anachronistic, but hey...it'd be fun.

I whish buildings out of walls can be select as target in the strategic map.

So mines, farms, ports, ... could be burned by troops

Last two posts, very good ideas. Especially the one about how to make every city different.

-have a (round) pike-box for greek hoplites: essecpially spartans. it will be like an testudo, but round and pikes sticking out everywhere. it will make phalanxes stronger when isolated.
-create war drumms, like the drum of chaerona. it will be round 20k and have a moral impact all over the battle map: pos. on own, neg.on enemy. it will be extremely slow on campaign, about 0.7x artillery.
-let people get knocked of their horse/chariot fighting allong on foot. or make elephants rampage without anyone on top! horses running amok.
-make sarmatian horses armoured, not likecataphracts but a plate on the head and make it look mean.
-give generals/captains on foot a beautifull shield. the left arm is now just hanging there.
-change levy pikemen, or phalanx pikemen to :pezetairoi.
-give greek cities companoin cav. it's kinda weird that GREEK royal cav is not available for greeks.
-keep cretan archers as merc. but also give them to greeks with siege engineer.
-give a nice ( scripted) mini campaign of alexander. scripting all enemy army's and maybe, just maybe even give them tactics! ( sarcasm alert)( not trying to start new topic but hé)
it will be like an rpg or something.

Get basic unit interaction right. I see units of cavalry mashing themselves into enemy formations, all shoving each other forward in their eagerness to get to the front, and I wonder who the hell thought this makes any kind of damn sense at all. Who sat down, watched a tight packed formation of soldiers in a phalanx formation get shoved back into a thin crescent moon shape and thought 'bingo'. I want that person shot in the face, and replaced with someone who thinks that a deep, close formation should not be spread open so easily. Who thinks that, in fact, a stoic line of Roman Legionnaires braced for impact or a phalanx will only break up if they all start dying.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Khorak

Get basic unit interaction right. I see units of cavalry mashing themselves into enemy formations, all shoving each other forward in their eagerness to get to the front, and I wonder who the hell thought this makes any kind of damn sense at all. Who sat down, watched a tight packed formation of soldiers in a phalanx formation get shoved back into a thin crescent moon shape and thought 'bingo'. I want that person shot in the face, and replaced with someone who thinks that a deep, close formation should not be spread open so easily. Who thinks that, in fact, a stoic line of Roman Legionnaires braced for impact or a phalanx will only break up if they all start dying.

---

completely true. :bow:
but that will probably need big changes on the enige. not easily done for a quick patch.
but how do you propose to do it? didn't the romans brace? it seems logical they did, it's a natural reflex to put your shield and weapon in front of you.

maybe their should be a trampeling action, at least 10 men dying by the mass of the horse. but then again. horses shouldn't be able to beat a phalanx up front, wich they now sometimes do.

what also seems logical is a phalanx braceing for impact-> putting his spear in to the ground(but-pike) and aim it at the charge. but that will be a pretty much instant pike box and unbalance the game.

another suggestion: make barbarians auto. warcry during charge. it's micro managing each unit now, micromanaging somethign they would automatically do when charging.

Yes, I don't doubt they probably would need big changes in the engine. Which is a shame, as usual MTW was vastly superior in that regard. When men charged and hit an enemy they either killed him and kept charging into the next man or failed to kill him and stopped to do battle. You simply wouldn't have one unit mashing another unit back like RTW because it simply didn't work like that. A cavalry charge would murder the first line or two and then be stopped by the sheer number of men. In RTW this whole 'mass' thing they've got and the fact that you can push one man into the man behind him and on and on to move the whole unit, screws it all up mightily.

Hell, the whole point of the phalanx was that there was so many men behind it. You just couldn't push the front row back or break the formation because all the men behind aren't moving for anything.

so men should be able to get trampeled...
do you might happen to know how phalanxes react to flanking from the rear? it seems to me that a (short piked) hoplite would have the common sence, training and reaction time to stick hsi spear in the ground and brace for it..

about my pikebox, I realised that it is currently not possible to have to special moves.. so: make primaire fire phalanx, and sec. fire loose. so you click HOW you want to attack with the ALT-key.
but then moving without attacking will have flaws. so you could
a: make prim. and alt. walking
or b: make phalanxes auto. abort formation when told to run.
when all teh above can has been done the special ability will be pikebox. would be nix if it looked like an hedge-hog or something.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by aw89

4. Better AI

---

Better AI, and that's all I ask.

As long as the AI could do its best to keep formation not opening up gaps all over the line, skirmish before engagement, and the battle turns into phases... I would be a happy man.

Also on the campaign level, I would like to see more options and features:

1. A numerical indication of your favor with a particular nation.
2. More notable personalities for different factions.
3. A diplomatic option to have a faction stop attacking one of your allies. Where was Rome when Saguntum was under siege by Hannibal? Did they not first send envoys to Carthage?
4. A hegemon, which more than likely would be a human player, seems to be singled out by weak nations, forcing a player to their senseless elimination. As it seems the AI policies are extremely suicidal.

The potential for this game is great with its battle engine and awesome graphics. The level of sophistication of battle rules is realistic and yet the AI falls so short of expectations. The same could be said about the overall single player aspect of this game, it is too crude and limiting for the kind of costumers who were initially attracted by the depth of its battle engine. I’m sure they expect no less depth on the diplomatic and economic aspects of the game.

The idea is there.... but the pieces are far from being together even after the third series of its development.

Quote:

---

I want that person shot in the face, and replaced with someone who thinks that a deep, close formation should not be spread open so easily.

---

Shot in the face, thats the funniest thing ive read on this site ~D

let phalanxes but-pike their spear in ground when beiing charged

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jerby

let phalanxes but-pike their spear in ground when beiing charged

---

Yeah, that would be awesome if any spear unit could do that. For gameplay purposes you'd probably have to make it so that it takes a little time for them to setup in that way - similar to how it takes a little while for the phalanx to get formed, this would be similar but less time. Great idea!

Shouldn't this thread be stickied?

i think it would be cool if for an expansion they added more factions, more choices for the landscape on the custom battles, and more historical battels. As far as for the campain i would like it if you could start off with a bigger and stronger army so you can have good battles from the start. it would also be cool if you could caputre slaves and if they had small tribes and villages that you could plunder so u dont have to caputre towns and cities for $$ also it would be cool if you could like burn your enemies food supply and stuff like that.

Kraxis' wishlist:

1: Special walls for at the very least the Dacians, Gauls and Spanish, hopefully all barbs. Earthmound (actually layered dirt and wood) with a large wooded wall with a walkway. They had those and they were very resistant to rams.

2: Officers and musicians for all factions. If not in the units directly then at least just to make them moddable so we can get them.

3: More mercs and a bit more variety (for instance more barbarian mercs, maybe a swordunit to accompny the spear unit we have already). The merc system is fine though, so keep it. Cretans to be the strongest archers in the game and make them very sought after by the AI (it seems fitting that the strongest archers are mercs and thus available to all and none at the same time).

4: Regional capitals for advanced factions. Not as good as real capital but cuts 'Distance to capital' in half. 1 or 2 would be fine.

5: Prisoners!!! I want prisoners. Low morale troops should not fight to the death but rather surrender. Mid morale troops (early tech main troops such as warbands and hastati) checked for surrender every 5 seconds of 'fighting to the death'. High morale every 10 seconds, and very high never. Something along those lines.
Routers that are cut off from retreat surrender, otherwise (if run down from behind) only a portion surrender.
Prisoners can be sent to nearest governed settlement as slaves, be ransomed or killed (I'm looking forward to letting bandits become my slaves).

6: Glorious Achievements for all factions (even romans).

7: Campaign map replays. PLEASE! We need to brag!

8: Include the other small campaigns (other than the Sons of Mars) that we can find traces of in the various files. Want Alexander short campaign and possibly Phillip short campaign as well.

9: More slots for units and factions.

10: Kill speed slider... Too fast. Along with Run speed slider.

11: Size between Large and Huge (Huge is double Large) with 120 men in normal units. Modded that myself in Preference file and it works perfectly for me.

12: Civil Wars a la MTW.

13: Weaker archers and stronger javelins. Possibly toning down cavalry a bit with fewer men and much higher prices in terms of recruitment and upkeep.

14: When general gets special victorious trait (victor or local hero styled traits) a victory column or arch is errected for him with his name on it. Possibly mention where it is and a small movie?

15: Differentiated cavalry and human populations. Possibly even elite (but that might have a bad impact on certain factions). Both populations should be visible at all times. Certain provinces have more cavalry, others near nothing (Crete, Lakedaimonia or the Brittania quickly comes to mind).

16: Captains armed with a shield when on foot, or banner if in a unit without one such. Just a bigger one than a normal one.

17: More historical battles. Start out with the TC battles that didn't make it, but Zama, Pydna, Magnesia, Plataea, River Sabis (Ceasar's legions in the process of building camp are surprised by Nervii and two other Belgic tribes), Cunaxa and plenty more are good candiates as well.

18: More Horde units. The barbarians are awfully organized it seems. It works greatly with Warbands and Swordsmen in Horde, as are all the low level horse archers (in fact they seem more manageable this way).

19: Give the option of being able to hire bandits (wouldn't they just love to get a bag of money rather than having to fight you). Some units would of course not join you, such as Peasants and various militias. Chance to get units (they are after al bandits so you run the risk that some or all stick it to you and run with the money).

20: Infantry units add to larger ships fighting power.

The ability for horses and their riders to have seperate hit points. When infantry hack away at the horse, it dies but the rider shouldnt. He should fall of the horse and be shocked, but still be able to continue to fight. THe same applies to a horse charging in spears. First of, it would be cool if the horse would refuse to do something, if it wasn't trained properly, and the rider could be thrown of the horse. Second of all, if the horse did charge, the horse could die but the rider could survive. Sorry if this is unorganized, just a thought.

1) Have some faction like the Goths or the Vandals as a RTW version of the Mongol Horde.
2) Please please please allow battles in ports. It would be very cool to plunder and capture an enemies port. That way you could cut off their trade links, and get a lot of money from pillaging the port.

horse-rider seperation will screw it all up. it will be impossible to controll a unti wich is half inf, half cav.
and then, when the horse dies, the rider falls of, and mostly be trapped under teh horse, ( in 80% at least one leg). and then. heavy cav riders had very heavy armor and could barely get up if fallen. and most importantly: falling down in de middle of enemy lines will kill you.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jerby

horse-rider seperation will screw it all up. it will be impossible to controll a unti wich is half inf, half cav.
and then, when the horse dies, the rider falls of, and mostly be trapped under teh horse, ( in 80% at least one leg). and then. heavy cav riders had very heavy armor and could barely get up if fallen. and most importantly: falling down in de middle of enemy lines will kill you.

---

Indeed... Consider the problems of the cavalry unit actually winning the fight, and is then needed to fight in another place far away. Riders all run off to do the fighting but a few men on the ground are left behind. If the standarbearer happens to be one of them if would ruin the enemy pathing greatly as the enemy units would now try and attack those few guys very far from the actual unit (just like with the dogs but just much more frequent).
It would be lovely ifthe game somehow could climb this obstacle, but at the moment I would not want this. I would though like for some horses to survive their riders death. They could then run off the map scared and whinnying. Seems only fair as horses often survived. Also this would not demand a new unit only a figure running towards the nearest edge. It could possibly even ruin unit setups (bad news for phalanxes) and so on.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jerby

horse-rider seperation will screw it all up. it will be impossible to controll a unti wich is half inf, half cav.
and then, when the horse dies, the rider falls of, and mostly be trapped under teh horse, ( in 80% at least one leg). and then. heavy cav riders had very heavy armor and could barely get up if fallen. and most importantly: falling down in de middle of enemy lines will kill you.

---

The heavily plate armoured 'Frankish' knights would tend to get caught up in their strirrups and saddle or under their horse, they were perfectly mobile in their armour. Of course, usually your horse dies in the middle of the enemy so getting stuck in your general riding equipment for any amount of time is kind of fatal anyway.

Were ancient heavy cavalrymen in far heavier armour than they would normally be able to wear? I feel sorry for the bloody horses.....

Adittion to Kraxis' Wishlist .

21: Add more speeds to cavalry, possibly infantry too. It is sickening to see Greek Cavalry or Equites run down Numidian Cavalry or Horse Archers, it is even worse to see Cataphracts run as fast as all other heavy cavalry and generals. Because of the lack of differentiated speeds there is close to no reason why anybody should ever train the expensive upkeep unit of Companions when they have a unit that is more powerful, as fast, better armoured (not shot to pieces by archers and can survive heavy impacts with infantry), has AP and ha a much lower upkeep and is of course a rung down the ladder in the techtree.
At the least give us three speeds. Fast, heavy and cataphract speed. But please add another for medium cavalry so that we can create a unit that is light but not fast (early bad cavalry such as Equites and Greek Cavalry).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Colovion

Shouldn't this thread be stickied?

---

YES. Attention mods Nelson and Catiline! :charge:

CA has to see this or else, all these writings are pointless. :dizzy2:

1.ability to create a culture of your own over an amount of time (say fifty years)for example creating a triumvarum(3 faction leaders(sp))incorporate gods of other factions if you have enough of their temples in your empire and so on and so forth
2.units that come into your building que only after an amount of time (not like the romans replacing your former units but just being added to the que)oh and maybe a way to mod those units with an easy to use editor
3.civil wars like in mtw
(sorry for the bad english im belgian you see.....)

Quote:

---

.ability to create a culture of your own over an amount of time

---

In fact, i would like the ability to create your own faction. You could make a banner for it on some special program that comes with the game, and describe it all, and pick what sort of fraction it will be e.g if you want it to be a roman fraction, then you can make it so. Then, you could have the option of playing it in campaign. But obviously you would have to let another fraction be replaced.

Quote:

---

maybe a way to mod those units with an easy to use editor

---

Please no!!! If that was included, all the super noobs would start flooding mod sites with their own crappy crazy units!! They would prolly make rainbow cohorts!!! It would be awful!!!

so that's why nobody want to tell me where i can get a CAS editor, well than i won't show you the amazing skins and unit's i have for all of you so better tell it. Everybody deserve a chance and i definitly.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kraxis

Adittion to Kraxis' Wishlist .
At the least give us three speeds. Fast, heavy and cataphract speed. But please add another for medium cavalry so that we can create a unit that is light but not fast (early bad cavalry such as Equites and Greek Cavalry).

---

This is a good idea.

CAS editor, whats that? does that mean I can get rid of spartan helmets myself? :D :'D

please sticky

Quote:

---

i won't show you the amazing skins and unit's i have for all of you so better tell it. Everybody deserve a chance and i definitly.

---

Your skins prolly are amazing, but you're just part of the small 10-5% minority that can actually make decent skins. Most people either know how to make them, but go completely overboard and make something that looks like a horrid eyesore, or they haven't done it very well, haven't tested it and then put it up on a website, so some poor scum downloads it, installs it, only to find his game explodes from the utter stupidity.

Quote:

---

Shot in the face, thats the funniest thing ive read on this site

---

It's not the funniest thing i've read...anyone here remember the 'Roman Snowplows' topic? It went on about radioactive roads and roman mass extinction due to their lead piping. Or does anyone remember the topic in which Eric the Headhurler was made?

On my wishlist (after the Battle AI that includes some "I" and moves for the computer to reinforce his withdrawing armies) is birds.
The birds circling in MTW were useful (sometimes) and I see that CA has included the start for bird and deer skeletons. If they could include these so that we could see deer running from the advancing line and birds circling overhead and flying up as a unit disturbs them.

After that, naval battles would be great.

mfberg

naval battle would suck, is my guess.
all they did was shooting, entering and ramming. sounds nice, but boredom will be victorious. there is not as much variotion on see as on land

I would like to see
1. the ability to name and re-name your army and fort, has a history/ record of what has happen to that army eg involved in battle of ... in year... , honor gained etc...
2. ability to given more title of office to your general and also alowing mod of this, eg commander of northern army. just like in MTW.
3. solders gain experience not only from fight,but training as well. so if you can train your army in a fort, say over 1-2 years, for example - you can slowlly gain experience.

Quote:

---

1. the ability to name and re-name your army and fort,

---

Players should be able to start another city once the population hits a certain high cap.

That or at least lower the current inhuman population growth. :dizzy2:

Better yet, combine these two so it is fairly rare to found a new settlement.

soldiers should not be able to LOSE experience. hwo do you forget the tricks to save your life?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jerby

soldiers should not be able to LOSE experience. hwo do you forget the tricks to save your life?

---

They never do. Every man in the unit, or so I've been led to believe, maintains his own experience. The unit card simply shows an averaged level of experience across the whole unit. So if you take a half strong unit of veterans and retrain to give them a bunch of n00bs, the unit experience will of course show a lower level of unit wide experience.

they do. I had a good hastati of 4 and at the end of teh battle there was: experience gained -2. so they do. my general of 5 also lost

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jerby

they do. I had a good hastati of 4 and at the end of teh battle there was: experience gained -2. so they do. my general of 5 also lost

---

You mean that those guys didn't suffer losses?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jerby

they do. I had a good hastati of 4 and at the end of teh battle there was: experience gained -2. so they do. my general of 5 also lost

---

Did they have men die? If all the experienced men in a unit get binned of course unitwide experience is going to take a dive. I've had the same happen to Chosen Swordsmen.

Another addition to Kraxis' wishlist:

22: Please make a senate office of Dictator.
A way it could be impletemented: It should only be given as a price for a completed mission. As Dictator you get the ability to give missions to the other factions as well as a lot of Influence and Command. That way you can help or hamper the other factions.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kraxis

Another addition to Kraxis' wishlist:

22: Please make a senate office of Dictator.
A way it could be impletemented: It should only be given as a price for a completed mission. As Dictator you get the ability to give missions to the other factions as well as a lot of Influence and Command. That way you can help or hamper the other factions.

---

yes, also that can easily rub the other factions the wrong way and make them bind against you - but if you use it properly, you can use it to reform Rome as it was Historically....

/neverhappen

Hm.....dictator would be interesting.....you could either bring the romans to the ground in a civil war, or unite them and conquer the world.....

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Khorak

Did they have men die? If all the experienced men in a unit get binned of course unitwide experience is going to take a dive. I've had the same happen to Chosen Swordsmen.

---

no losses. they iddin't take part in the battle, no kills either

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kraxis

Another addition to Kraxis' wishlist:

22: Please make a senate office of Dictator.

---

I've missed the dictator office too. It should allow the appoinment of a Master of Horse as well. Taking Rome could trigger a dictatorship after which any remaining factions could become like protectorates.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Nelson

I've missed the dictator office too. It should allow the appoinment of a Master of Horse as well. Taking Rome could trigger a dictatorship after which any remaining factions could become like protectorates.

---

Hmm... Could be interesting. But it makes sense. It just seems strange that the other factions would cave in if you took Rome.

My idea is only just that. But the point was that the Dictator should be a very special and/or powerful office you only get seldomly (I think the game can't make out a critical situation, so no Dictators in critical times for Rome).
Naturally the Senate should perhaps view you with more suspicion if you give the Scipii the mission of taking Hyperboria or the Brutii the mission of making the Britons a protectorate. Those are nigh impossible. Even more if you demand the suicide of a leader.
I think the Senate should set the rewards, so that you can't give yourself a very easy mission that bags you a 'Rare unit you can't recruit' or something like that.

But in any case I would love an office of Dictator (could be cool if the dictator got the epithet of 'the Dictator').

Few suggestions:

First, can someone please summarize all the suggestions at the beginning of the thread? I know CA is reading this (capt. Fishpants already commented once), so I think it is worthwhile doing that.


Here are my suggestions:

Ability to train multiple units in a single turn, but only one unit per building type. In other words, you can build one missile, one infantry , one cavalry and one agent per settlement per turn (provided you have all the req. buildings). This will speed up the game and incentivize the player (and AI) to mix up their army.

Ability to export campaign battles as custom battles. Add a button to the battle declaration screen and allow player to export the battle as a custom one (this requires the added feature of starred commanders in custom battles).

Ability to save battle results in a log file, and more importantly, ability to import battle results into a campaign. This will allow some form of rudimentary multiplayer campaign as follows:
1. Export campaign battle as custom battle
2. Play out custom battle online with a friend
3. Import results of battle into campaign.

Logging of all campaign events (helps with writeups of campaigns): declaration of wars, major battles, etc.

Campaign map geographical labels (e.g River Tiber, Alp Mountains, Mount Etna ) that can be used to give names to battles.

bump

-give play again option, in custom battles, the swap-sides option
-make factions auto-declare war on each other when the áccept or we will attack'is ignored

Quote:

---

bump

---

Do not do that. If this topic sinks, someone will revive it with another post that is actually something of interest.

there's 5 pages of good stuff here

you really want that to get lost?

I wouldn't.

I'd like more conditionals for unit and building , specifically I'd like
to be able to test for
1. human or ai player(eg. build time of warband=2 turns if human otherwise build time = 1)
Other conditionals like

total faction treasury
town gross income

might also be considered to be added but I realize that these may interfer with the ai coding already extant. Nevertheless modders would have to experiment to get the right balance with these.

In no particular order of importance, and also not repeating a number of excellent ideas already covered here.

1: Land based naval combat. What I mean by this: An autocalc determines the number of ships that grapple successfully. Each pair of grappled ships is rendered on the battle map as a town square type area connected by a bridge (obviously different skins). If more grapple attempts succeed than defender ships exist, attach another attacker ship on the other side. Each faction gets a sailor unit that deploys on each ship. Transported troops are randomly distributed across ships. Battle proceeds normally until all town squares are captured, by one side or the other. If more than half of the winning unit of sailors survives, they capture the opposing ship and the crew is split evenly, otherwise the losing ship is sunk. If enough winning sailors are killed that the unit autodisbands, the winning ship sinks as well. Side with most ships (including captured ships) is the winner. This approach ignores ramming, wind effects, and a whole slew of other issues (unless they are included in the grapple autocalc), and so I think it might just be doable for an expansion.

2: Campaign menu option for simultaneous turns. This would require some shufffling of the order of code modules in the .exe, but I think it's also realistically possible for the exp. Units delay moves until the end of the turn, just like a unit with pre-existing orders does now. AI then calculates moves based on the current position of the unit, just like now. Then, once all the orders are issued, moves are processed, one faction at a time, one map square at a time. Two forces moving into each others' areas of control triggers a battle, winner stops, loser retreats as now. Agents halt in place.
Why do this? Now you have to predict an enemy army's plans and move to intercept them. You need to keep reserves in case you guess wrong. You can't cherry pick the terrain for your battles, you have to adapt to what the situation forces upon you. It adds a HUGE new level of depth, planning, challenge, and realism to the game. Making it a campaign option allows Wally Wristtwitcher to stay with the current system, while Harry Hardcore gets a vastly greater challenge, with no fundamental AI changes needed.

3. I'll probably do this myself via modding if the seige bug gets addressed, but: two versions of each troop type. Green units have recruit time 0, experience 0, and so you can train multiples in one turn. Normal units train as normal, but have experience 3 or 4. Rome did levy huge armies on short notice, but they weren't much good. Thus you can choose between quality and quantity. Devote the same time to rigorous training and washing out the poor candidates, or get everyone to the point that they can hold a sword and face towards the enemy two out of three times ~D

A few things.
1.Alllow faction civil wars etc... (option on and off) would be a bit more realistic and make the game more difficult and ppl not putting all their best stuff in one basket.

2.Another option: allow captured technologies, espically some of the more obvious like paved roads and higher lvl cities, come on it makes sense that the barbarians can't build it initially but does it make sense that they can't reproduce it many years after they capture it??

3. can hire, retrain mercs at cities in the proximity.

Actually, you'd be suprised how long it took the barbarians to rediscover things of the Romans after the fall of the Roman empire and stuff. So many things were lost, like the construction of buildings using concrete, that the level of civilisation in Europe dropped after the fall of the western Empire, resulting in the Dark Ages.

One good example would be Britain... Rome had a lot of luxuries like Baths, sewers for hygiene, piped water, yet even after the Middle Ages the condition in London was filthy for the most part, using unsanitary and probably contaminated wells, open sewers in the street, and on top of that, poor transport facilities (roads were mostly dirt tracks, if even that)

Sorry if this has been already mentioned, but personally I would like these features included:
1. ability to build/destroy settlements in any part of the province (accordingly to the size of a province)
2. historical campaigns (with specific tasks and goals)
3. bad effects of war on population
4. ability to take/ransom/enslave prisoners
5. 3d sea battles (it isn't an impossible wish I hope)
6. effects on army when marching long distances
7. civil wars
8. slower and more realistic battle and combat speeds/kills

I think this would make the game more historically accurate harder and more realistic.
I wish I wish I wish ~D

Oh damn I forgot to mention the most important feature ~D that no TW game had - better plan of management of your settlements, that is you don't have to go into every city you own, but there is like special window of all settlements.

Quote:

---

1. ability to build/destroy settlements in any part of the province (accordingly to the size of a province)

---

I wish!! It would be much nicer walking around the large open spaces of Africa or the Steppes and have the occasional town, rather than walking for miles and miles without anything. It would also mean if you needed to quickly retrain some units, you wouldn't have to walk halfway across the world.

Yet another addition to Kraxis' wishlist:
23: Make it possible to build over Imperial Palaces. It makes no sense that you can't do anything about an imperial palace of another culture in your city.

How could I forget...
24: Please bring back the F1 screen. Yes I know F1 is used as of now, but then make it F10 or some other command, but please bring it back we need to see the actual stats of the units in battle. Pausing and rightclicking doesn't hold the same effect.

bump

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Grand Duke Vytautas of the Lithuanians

Sorry if this has been already mentioned, but personally I would like these features included:
1. ability to build/destroy settlements in any part of the province (accordingly to the size of a province)
2. historical campaigns (with specific tasks and goals)
3. bad effects of war on population
4. ability to take/ransom/enslave prisoners
5. 3d sea battles (it isn't an impossible wish I hope)
6. effects on army when marching long distances
7. civil wars
8. slower and more realistic battle and combat speeds/kills

I think this would make the game more historically accurate harder and more realistic.
I wish I wish I wish ~D

---

Far from it. You might want to check out what Merlin is doing with that over at The SCC

bump

This thread is starting to look like a Christmas wish list, to Santa Claus.

We must all be good boys now.

Ssssstttttttttttttttiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiicccccccccccccccckkkkkkkkky!!!!

Yes, sticky this thread. Btw, another good addition would be this: on the custom battles menu, let us select the Wonders of the World as maps. Because if we can't do that, then there is a very small chance we ever get to fight around the wonderful wonders, like the pyramids.

I would like to see you be able to convert to christianity (the Romans atleast), which would be mean making the campaign set later. You would either play as early rome or late rome.

And why would you do so, looking from the Roman governer's point of view? ~;p

Your subjects get sloppy and weak. (GOVERNER's view) Your army gets disloyal (those stinking barbarians are Christians..so.....besides, I shouldn't kill a person.) Your loyalty rating drops (who says the Emperor is a deity? He's lying!) And much more...

Of course, it would work if this religion is a threat you need to stop. Or as barbarians to improve influence rating (favored by Romans) And..hooray! The Bishops are back! (and the assassins get more work to do ~D )

Bah, sticky it.

Someone PM Nelson or some other colloseum mod, and tell them to sticky this.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HailMightCaeser

I would like to see you be able to convert to christianity (the Romans atleast), which would be mean making the campaign set later. You would either play as early rome or late rome.

---

the game starts in 270 BC, so conferting will take you 400 turns. the marius reform is already too early. but conferting to christianity 350 years too soon is riduculus. i'm no expert, but that is too much. and it wouldn't realy effect gameplay that much.

Jerby, he's on about converting to christianty much much later in history, when it has taken a grip on so many people that it is now a threat to the roman empire and it's religions. And as for the Marian Reforms coming too early you're right there. They come too early, so you don't get a chance to use the wonderful Triarii.

I'm talking about converting in 312 AD, the actually date... Like I said you can play as early or late Rome.

well, in 312 AD, there aren't much 'factions' left. no more greeks, macedon, carthage, egypt, iberia. playing rome then isn't even a challenge, it's just mopping up.

look here http://www.phatnav.com/wiki/index.ph...e=Roman_Empire

what ( IMO) would be interessting is to be able to play rome right after the marius reform, so you can instanly wield cohorts. like is beiing done for RTR6.0

I hate the arrows on the minimap. They only show where the units are, not what their formation is or if they're getting slaughtered. To get a proper mini-map view you have to zoom in all the way, this is self defeating as once you get in that close you can't see your flanks on the minimap. It would be nice if they changed the arrows on the minimap to actual unit representations with individual pixels for men.

i think if you could manually play the naval battles that would be cool!
(sorry if this has already been suggested, i haven't read the whole forum)

Craterus, considering how a lot of people go on about wanting naval battles, you'd think it's already been mentioned. I think it's been mentioned at least twenty times in this thread.

Wishlist:
-Speeds for calvery
-Campaign replay, battle replay
-unlock the factions that are not unlocked when you beat the Imperial Campaign
-Add glorious achivment option
-Have civil war, and instead of making them several rebel provencies make them something like the swiss or the burgendiesnsssess.....(something) like in MTW, which can futher break down.
-If you have majority in the senate the option to send task to the other Roman Factions.
-Don't change archer strength and don't make riders seperate units, first I think the bow is well represented already, and the ladder, it could possibly mess the game up bad.
-Speed slider in battles
-early, highpoint, and late empire options to 576, and constatinople option running to 1086.
-and maybe you can do this but I can't reorganize my units inside the army, the little slots with units I try to move to around so the same units are grouped together but it won't happen, that would be nice.
-A pre-battle screen like in MTW
-Better ending cutsceens, you got me all exited after seeing the begining ones but man almost cried when all I got at the end was a guy walking down a hallway.
-a pony
-Maybe HAN: Total war, other side of the world....just a thought
-Greece: Total War, speaks for its self
-Egypt: Total War, " "

sorry Mikeus; there's loads of posts in this thread and i haven't read many!

good suggestions Coccum_Pugnus!