Expansion Feature Wsihlist

[Red Harvest]

Recruit representative armies, not units I've explained my thoughts on this before. The tech tree would allow the player/AI to build larger and/or more complex and upgraded armies, but the basic elements would be historical. Right now there is no reason to build lower end units once you get the higher end units. And you can build whole armies from elites. But the most interesting part of the campaign is fought early on, with the lowest level units and that makes for a rather bland experience.

More Meaningful Naval Strategy Port upgrade level would allow port defense and require more ships to blockade. Total port level would also determine how many boats could be in the water. Invasion force size would be limited by the number of ships available. Elephant units might require 3 ships per unit, cavalry/camels/chariots 2, infantry 1, family members 1.

Campaigns from different periods A very early campaign at the time of Alexander and the Samnite Wars (with higher resolution Italy map). A later, 3rd Punic War/Marius campaign. A slightly earlier Pyrrhus time period Campaign.

[master of the puppets]

able to build REAL authentic roman forts. moats, stone walls, stakes, towers. oh and that you can customize defenses pick and position towers, walls, stakes, gates. that would be cool

[Quietus]

Got to admit, I was about to uninstall RTW (haven't played it really in ~4 months). Installing patch 1.2 was a mere formality and fairness. Then I'm suckered in once again . Skirmishes are now better, especially those Velites (fast becoming my favorite unit. NO, they are my favorite unit ).

here's my wishlist just on top of my head (I'll be repeating some that's already been mentioned):

1) 3d Naval Warfare - This a no-duh. Imperial Glory has one. Why can't the current king of strategy games, Creative Assembly, have one?

2) Kill-rate, unit speed slider - Epic games mean longer battles! I have units routing so easily. I don't mind chain rout at all, but this is obscene, it happens within seconds of impact. Also, these guys run like sprinters (they carry gear too, mind you).

3) Restored Rock-Paper-Scissor scheme - Cavalry penetrates or skirt all the way through my screening units. I can't defend my General from Cavalry pushes without nonstop pauses.

4) Bigger battle maps - Whatever happened to the 4x-MTW maps?

5) More provinces - There are lots of space there.

6) More units - How about more than 20 unit slots?

7) Weather - Where are the snowstorms, lightning, and heavy, blinding rain? Perhaps include the Day & Night cycle in campaign battles.

8) City Pathfinding - Fix the city pathfinding. Units go crazy inside the city.I tell my cavalry to enter the gate and move right and they go straight to the phalanx's dirty, pointy fingers. Same thing happens with other units. I tell them to drive straight behind the enemy with full force and they do the beauty pageant walk

9) Eric Hurley, the Headhurler as the official mascot (hehe).

[Sam Adams]

"peasants with varios farm tools

barbarians are a mottled group (not all wearing the same cloths and same weapons some with axes, some swords, spears ect)"

hell yes. I agree with that one.

accurately similuating naval conflict would require a vast addition to the RTW engine... it would be nice but I think this is pushing it.

I would like to see some blood, personally.

and it would be simple to have napoleonic total war based on this engine, just need to change the art stats and names.

[HarunTaiwan]

2) Kill-rate, unit speed slider - Epic games mean longer battles! I have units routing so easily. I don't mind chain rout at all, but this is obscene, it happens within seconds of impact. Also, these guys run like sprinters (they carry gear too, mind you).

1) SPEED is too fast once battle is joined to maneuver anything.

I hate waiting 5 minutes for them to march towards me and then be frantic for 20 seconds trying to adjust to the final charge.

[_Aetius_]

If battles lasted as short as they do on RTW in reality, then wars would have lasted about 20 minutes Lol

[Colovion]

If battles lasted as short as they do on RTW in reality, then wars would have lasted about 20 minutes Lol

nah, they'd have to get there first

so in RTW ...

that would be like 25 minutes

[Quietus]

If battles lasted as short as they do on RTW in reality, then wars would have lasted about 20 minutes Lol

Ah, the British obsession with Benny Hill . I suppose they speed up the music as well to fit the fast units, so it will be Benny Hill-ish. :::cues Benny Hill music:::

[Rosacrux redux]

I just wish for an Alexander expansion... or even better, for a Persian Wars expansion... does this sound too much?

[nokem]

Ah, the British obsession with Benny Hill . I suppose they speed up the music as well to fit the fast units, so it will be Benny Hill-ish. :::cues Benny Hill music:::

Actually Benny Hill was never as popular in the UK as it proved to be in continental Europe. Especially Germany for some reason.

Whaddya mean "off topic"?

[Colovion]

Individual Moral Status

I know this is something that would be really hard to impliment. Essentially it would be made so that each soldier has a moral of their very own, ikmpacted by their experience/kills and other influences such as the General etc.. If one unit gets impaled by a pike right next to him, that has an impact; more on green troops and less on seasoned veterans. This would be a great idea because when one side of a unit gets crushed, usually the entire unit puts down their swords and stops fighting; with this feature it would make it possible for small pockets of soldiers to hold out longer and make that "heroic last stand" or something. I've had it where there was a unit of 120 men charging at me and my cavalry and hastati charge at that unit, kill about 20 of the enemy and suddenly the other hundred don't want to fight anymore and get ground up like so many coffee beans. It would be awesome to have a battle going on and see a couple guys running away slowly off the back of the army, get your General to come around and blow his horn and get those men back into the battle. At the moment it's as if the average man in the unit wants to run then the rest of them dont' get a say - they're just all going to die because once they start running away they're gone.

[LestaT]

Besides the changes from pre-Maroius to Marius units, (Hastati upgrade to ELeg Cohort) I would like to see barbarians faction can use siege engines. I mean it's okay they're stuck to pre-historic roads and equipments but when they sacks Rome don't they have atleast can use the onagers and catapults if the factory still standing ? Or they just rape, pillage and burn ?

[Claudius Maniacus Sextus]

1)BETTER AI!!!!!!
2)Morale MUST be fixed,i had 1 GenBOdyGuards rout an 54 ScythiaHA,it just SUCKS,and when 1000 gauls attacks 300 greeks fight till death not charge then they rout!
3)Rome MUST be an SPECIAL city,and diffrent from other.
4)Upgrade unit


3)if another guy tell's me that it is possibile with: u can mod that........please SHUT uP!

[Darius]

Only way I'd ever go first person to fight is if I was sure the AI wouldn't promptly charge my archers and catapault crews at the enemy pikemen leading to a chain route and me being the only guy left on the field.

People fighting after being dismounted would be a good idea but would lead to certain complications. I mean if one guy got dismounted but the others didnt, you'd end up with a unit of horsemen...and some dude running far behind yelling "come on guys wait up, this isnt funny! IM TELLIN MOM!"

Units with assorted weapons would be ok as long as they all still had the same attack value. Otherwise it would get crazy with some guys getting a spear and getting a bonus vs cav and another guy getting an axe and gettin an AP bonus...they'd be hard to counter seeing as they have no real uniformity.

Something that wasnt mentioned was bringing back CIVIL WARS! I don't mean this retarded three family thing for just the Romans. I'm talking about like in MTW where if you screwed up royally or some Inbred lunatic took the throne you'd get a bunch of seriously unhappy people who decide to go their own way.

Also I'd like to see bandits and such appear in a more intelligent way. It should take a certain level of low public order obviously, but also depend largely on the wealth of the province. This is something that the Scythians and Numidians would really need, they have these huge, desolate lands that get bandits poppin up all over the place. This shouldn't happen, why, because they're poor. You don't see homeless people getting mugged too often do you?

In regards to siege battles, other than the obviously needed fix for the path finding ( I swear my men seem to eat lead paint chips for snacks ) is to get the citizens more involved. If they are being besieged by an enemy, they most likely want to join in the defense as nobody enjoys seeing their homes looted, their wives and daughters raped, and their neighbors killed. Make a certain percentage of these people rise up as militia that exist only for this battle.

Only other thing I can think of is to have them either eliminate the unit/faction limit for modders or at least make it a lot larger. Throw in a bunch of new units, let us bring in more than 20 units, and all that good stuff.

[Khorak]

Campaigns from different periods A very early campaign at the time of Alexander and the Samnite Wars (with higher resolution Italy map). A later, 3rd Punic War/Marius campaign. A slightly earlier Pyrrhus time period Campaign.

This I'd like. Maybe a really early campaign starting from the foundation of Rome itself (no three factions, just SPQR) for example, so I could indulge more with differing starting positions and situations. As it is, pretty much every game is the exactly the same expansion then show down with Rome.

At least three different campaigns I think, an early one like you describe (but obviously still just on the same world map), a middle one like we already have, and a late one with a vast Roman juggernaught. The last one would be a real challenge as a barbarian, having to pussyfoot around Rome until you're powerful enough to start chipping away at them.

The middle one would still be the most varied (being the only one with the four Roman factions), I'd just like to play as a single Roman faction from the very beginning as Rome itself.

[_Aetius_]

Romulus Augustulus was the last Emperor of the Western Roman Empire, even though he was a puppet emperor. he died 476 AD

He was deposed in 476 he died later, the point were most consider the end of the Roman emperors is Heraclius (sp?) but all emperors called themselves roman so it doesnt matter if the west existed or not, the roman empire existed aslong as there was an emperor there to rule it and in 1453 that ended.

I think personally the Holy roman empire was simply a joke lol

[Nelson]

I'd like to see musicians with the commander units. The trumpeters and what not. In fact, I would prefer a lot more signalling then we have now.

[Wishazu]

if my city has just come under siege i would like the choice to either A) march out and deploy in front of the city to try and see off the enemy army before the actual siege begins. B) sit tight and hope for reinforcemenst(thats actually what happens now) or C) abandon the city alltogether if you have no possibility of sending any assisstance.

[_Aetius_]

1, I think they need to improve how individual men fight, if you zoom in you see the men kind of pushing into each other and everynow and then someone randomly swings his sword and kills somebody but in battles swords are being flung far more frequenly than that.

2, Also use of shields to, i want to see men pushing behind there shields or blocking attacks abit more.

3, Id like to see when for example a general wins a great battle or a great campaign that you can dedicate an arch or column to him in a city (a triumph)of your choice etc i think thatd be pretty cool, it could cost say 10000 denarii so its a rare thing and not overused and it could improve public order and morale of garrison troops stationed in the city or something like that.

4, They absolutely have to improve the stats of troops, units of 80 men seem to flee more often than not when only 1/4 of the men have died battles are needlessly short.

5, Armies need to start further apart I think, give more chance for tactics and so on, itd give the terrain a much bigger part to play, currently its massively under used.

6, improve AI in sieges, im sick of enemy armies besieging my cities when i know they cant possibly win, but they are strong enough that if i sallied id take heavy hits, but because the auto is so innaccurate im forced to personally take command of sieges were the outcome is a forgone conclusion thus wasting my time.

7, use cities more realistically, I think taking the central plaza is abit silly really, i mean dont some cities have citadels at the heart of the city? or some other form of hard fortification to resist this? cities that supposedly hold 25000 people seem abit tiny, buildings could be possible to occupy, making sieges more realistic will add to there duration and improve steady fighting in the streets instead of just sitting the centre for 3 minutes.

[Red Harvest]

Adding to my list:

Ability to handle more complex unit types Right now you only get one type of soldier per unit--even elephants and chariots use this, and merely put the crewman in a different animation as mahout or charioteer. In addition you get an officer. But some historical units were filled out by soldiers with various roles: infantry shield bearers combined with archers or spearmen or javelinmen; chariots with shield bearers, charioteer, and one or two archers or spearmen; Assyrian horses and Arab camels riders with one controlling the horse/camel, and the other using a bow.

Separating mounts and men Allow dismounting or loss of the mount. Also loss of the rider with mount continuing on. Many camel riders actually dismounted to fight. And British chariot types did the same.

[caesar44]

1, I think they need to improve how individual men fight, if you zoom in you see the men kind of pushing into each other and everynow and then someone randomly swings his sword and kills somebody but in battles swords are being flung far more frequenly than that.

2, Also use of shields to, i want to see men pushing behind there shields or blocking attacks abit more.

3, Id like to see when for example a general wins a great battle or a great campaign that you can dedicate an arch or column to him in a city (a triumph)of your choice etc i think thatd be pretty cool, it could cost say 10000 denarii so its a rare thing and not overused and it could improve public order and morale of garrison troops stationed in the city or something like that.

4, They absolutely have to improve the stats of troops, units of 80 men seem to flee more often than not when only 1/4 of the men have died battles are needlessly short.

5, Armies need to start further apart I think, give more chance for tactics and so on, itd give the terrain a much bigger part to play, currently its massively under used.

6, improve AI in sieges, im sick of enemy armies besieging my cities when i know they cant possibly win, but they are strong enough that if i sallied id take heavy hits, but because the auto is so innaccurate im forced to personally take command of sieges were the outcome is a forgone conclusion thus wasting my time.

7, use cities more realistically, I think taking the central plaza is abit silly really, i mean dont some cities have citadels at the heart of the city? or some other form of hard fortification to resist this? cities that supposedly hold 25000 people seem abit tiny, buildings could be possible to occupy, making sieges more realistic will add to there duration and improve steady fighting in the streets instead of just sitting the centre for 3 minutes.

loved the idea of triomphs

[Nelson]

It would be nice if line-of-sight could be handled better. As it is missile units fire at targets they cannot see, ignoring walls, buildings and hill crests like they have x-ray vision. I expect this would make for a more complex shooting algorithm that would go beyond a simple range check. Hence not a likely improvement. But hey, this is a wish list, right?

[Temujin]

Recruit representative armies, not units

Ditto. This is at the at the top of my list. It would be nice if this also enforced some sort of army coherency, requiring a general to actually move an army. You would need to have an option to promote a captain to a general (without adopting him, mind) but with a limit on the number of non-family generals (say 1 pr. army barracks + 1 for the capital).

Also, give the player some measure of control over army reforms. Say, whenever you get a family member elected as consul, or have a particularly nice string of victories, you could try to change the "standard" army and re-equip your troops, with the senate's approval of course. A reform along the lines of "yeah, all ownagers, all the time, baby!" should of course have a smaller chance of being approved than a less radical proposal. Yes, I know this is hard to implement, but I think the game should have more politics in general. It's frustrating to see your family members rise in the senatorial ranks, without getting to use their newfound powers for anything.

Also, it should be possible to raise a full army in 6 months, within the usual constraints of man-power and funds. The romans did it, so why can't we?

Of course, such an army would be completely green and much less effective than veterans. I think the whole experience system needs re-jigging too. As it is, troop type is much more important than experience, and this didn't seem to be the case historically. Veterans should be more flexible in between the different roles, cf. the carthaginians re-arming their more experienced troops in legionary style and the macedonians using the argyraspids for more than simply better phalangites.

Also, give armies the ability to march along roads in friendly territory, and between friendly ports, without using movement points. It is unrealistic that it takes several years to shift your forces from one theater to another.
You could separate such "instant" marches into a separate movement phase, taking place after normal movement, to prevent players from invading enemy lands with an army from across the empire. Forcing "instant" marches to stop at borders would give the enemy some time to prepare against hostile build-up of forces, if they paid attention to their borders. Alternatively, you could allow armies to "teleport" between forts, cities and ports in friendly territory, as long as you could draw an uninterrupted line between the two, and let a "teleport" cost 100% movement points.

Finally, draw a line between field armies and garrisons. Historically, armies didn't hang around long in cities, as the generals didn't trust the soldiers to keep their hands off the civilians and their goods. Instead, they manned forts out in the sticks, where the battles were actually fought. Garrisons should be a city upgrade, like walls and other defensive structures.

All these changes to armies only apply to roman factions and others who actually had standing armies. It would be nice to see a levy system in place for the barbarian factions. Each warlord could have a small number of "chosen" units as a sort of retinue. You could then choose to levy more troops by choosing that warlord, paying a raising fee and clicking a button. What you get when you click that button depends on the v&v's of the warlord and the upgrades in the province he's in. Take your chance!
Such levied armies would probably disintegrate again on defeat (or complete success!) but particularly charismatic and powerful warlords would be able to maintain their armies for longer before they had to click the "levy" button again, and their retinue would of course increase in size with victory and success.

Just a few suggestions. Sorry about the length.

[afrit]

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.