Medieval II: Total War Official Thread

[The Spartan (Returns)]

if you could play the Aztecs, maybe you could fight the Tlaxcala and other rivalries. rather than the Aztecs being an emergent faction.

[streety]

I think the introduction of Mexico/Aztecs, whilst seeming like a good idea, will only be a disappointment if done realistically. After all, it was a complete mismatch technologically and militarily, with a couple of hundred Spanish slaughtering thousands of Aztecs. Whilst dramatic, this could soon get boring to play in terms of battle tactics. Playing as the Aztecs could be interesting, but holding off against the Spanish would get old real quick unless, like Spartan says, they can fight against other New World factions - after all, they're not likely to be able to conquer Europe by 1530.

How I wish CA would just introduce proper sea warfare into their system instead of just rehashing/expanding pretty much the same theme. Now that reaaly would be something to get excited about............

[Samurai Waki]

But looking at the modding aspect of the Aztecs it does introduce a new possibility for modders out there, and that is Jungle warfare will now be possible

[streety]

You're right of course, Wakizashi, the potential Mexico would give to modders could be a good benefit.

And it could be useful especially to later period mods (17th-19th centuries) - though again, the lack of real naval battles, and attacks on ports by ships and/or their landing parties etc, would severely limit the playability of any campaign that tried to emulate the wars between the European powers over the New World...... but I'm just moaning because I guess I like fighting with ships and I can't have them

[Alexanderofmacedon]

Probably already said before, but I think with the use of the Americas they should have that part of the map available only after a certain year, like the Marius reforms.

Good idea?

[Dooz]

Probably already said before, but I think with the use of the Americas they should have that part of the map available only after a certain year, like the Marius reforms.

Good idea?

I believe that's somewhat how it will be. You'll only be able to go to the Americas after achieving a certain level of technology, mostly naval I'd assume, which makes sense. There won't be a certain year because the game won't be using years.

[allfathersgodi]

My MTW2 Wishlist.

First off, it is good to be the king, but sometimes just for fun I'd like to be able to play as a mere General, Provincial Governor, a Unit Commander or perhaps a Mercenary.

Secondly, have a campaign option that scripts all the countries for historical accuracy, meaning the English never pushed so far East that they met the Byzantines in battle.

Thirdly, a better way of capturing a defended castle other then a frontal assault, a long drawn out siege or a spy. Perhaps under-mining the walls to bring them down and allow your troops a quick way in. Perhaps even night assaults?

Fourth, Naval Battles, I don't want to hear about them, I want to fight them.

Fifth, get rid of the entire having to have a line of ships. If you are English and you want to Invade Constantinople, how about building ships, embarking your invasion troops on said ships and sailing for the enemy...

If other kingdoms can re-emerge, why can't I?

I'd love for CA to do a Total War game set in the post-Medieval period, say from Christopher Colombus to Napoleon?

MP Campaign or a better AI. The Byzantines are facing a crap-load of Mongols to the East and to the West is my HRE Procinces. I wed two of my princess off to them in exchange for a pair of theres and we have been allied for 20 years. I am their biggest ally, and instead of asking for my help to defeat the Mongolians, they attack me!

Which brings me to another point, if I am allied with another country and they are getting hammered, why can't I send troops through their provinces to engage our mutual enemy? Example, the Spainiards were fighting the Alohamads in Cordoba, in Navarre I had over a thousand Hobilars, Archers, FMAAs, and Frydmen, why can't I march them through Castile and into Cordoba to help the Spanish against the Alohamads?

A mini-campaign as the Crusader States would be awesome!

I will now shut up...

[David]

My MTW2 Wishlist.

First off, it is good to be the king, but sometimes just for fun I'd like to be able to play as a mere General, Provincial Governor, a Unit Commander or perhaps a Mercenary.

Secondly, have a campaign option that scripts all the countries for historical accuracy, meaning the English never pushed so far East that they met the Byzantines in battle.

Thirdly, a better way of capturing a defended castle other then a frontal assault, a long drawn out siege or a spy. Perhaps under-mining the walls to bring them down and allow your troops a quick way in. Perhaps even night assaults?

Fourth, Naval Battles, I don't want to hear about them, I want to fight them.

Fifth, get rid of the entire having to have a line of ships. If you are English and you want to Invade Constantinople, how about building ships, embarking your invasion troops on said ships and sailing for the enemy...

1
I dont think TW is designed for that. Its called TOTAL war, but youre right thats not always good to be king.
2
Thats the fun part of the campaign. My best campaigns in MTW were when something like that happened, like the Almo's fighting HRE or so. If script the campaign like that every game would be the same.
3
They were in RTW BI so they might be M2TW
4
True, but i prefer good land battles first.
5
Again, with map like RTW, that'll probably be the case.

[allfathersgodi]

A few others, especially for Diplomacy. Back in the day it wasn't unheard of for kings to foster one another's children if they wanted to cement an alliance.

Why must I bribe an oppossing army to get them to switch sides? Shouldn't the spy be able to coerce the general by taking hostage his family? Or the Emissary appeal to said General's Ideology or Ego?

Religion, if I am King, why can't I change it?

Better AI... I am sick and tired of seeing the Byzantines getting their butts handed to them by the Mongols, the Turks and the Egyptians... And the Byzantines initiating a third front by attacking my HRE that is pushing south into the Balkans... They are fighting against Muslim Factions, a Pagan Faction, and instead of calling on support from fellow Christians (albeit from a different Sect) they initiate war?

[RedCoat]

I hope that they spend more time on the Eastern/Central European factions...and Austria, not any German state, should be the powerhouse of the HRE.

They need to be distinctive, yet historically accurate.

[Servius]

I believe CA is incorporating America into this game because they plan to have their next game be based mostly in America. Think of the colonial period. European armies fighting each other for colonies, fighting natives just cause, using a more strategically-interesting map (because of all the island hopping potential, different terrain, etc.). It would also be a good transition into firearms warfair, like Napoleon TW (I bet it's coming).

I don't mean to sound racist, but the native americans were a pushover. The Europeans came with huge ships, cannons, steel armor, guns... The native were still fighting mostly naked with stick and stone weapons, give me a break. I really think this whole Aztec thing is really intended to put a foothold idea in players' head, which will be the jumping-off point for the next TW game.

[The Blind King of Bohemia]

I think the introduction of Mexico/Aztecs, whilst seeming like a good idea, will only be a disappointment if done realistically. After all, it was a complete mismatch technologically and militarily, with a couple of hundred Spanish slaughtering thousands of Aztecs. Whilst dramatic, this could soon get boring to play in terms of battle tactics. Playing as the Aztecs could be interesting, but holding off against the Spanish would get old real quick unless, like Spartan says, they can fight against other New World factions - after all, they're not likely to be able to conquer Europe by 1530.

How I wish CA would just introduce proper sea warfare into their system instead of just rehashing/expanding pretty much the same theme. Now that reaaly would be something to get excited about............

The spanish were aided my thousands of Indian allies in their Aztec campaigns, it was only on the flat landscape of Otuma after the night of sadness that the Spanish professionalism and strong cavalry arm slaughtered the huge Aztec host.

[Furious Mental]

"Secondly, have a campaign option that scripts all the countries for historical accuracy, meaning the English never pushed so far East that they met the Byzantines in battle."

That would be lame. As was said above, this would just detract from the fun and unpredictability of the game.

[buujin]

If england could have pushed that for east, they would have.

[Hatchet]

I don't mean to sound racist, but the native americans were a pushover.

Not really, although the Spaniards did have cannons their guns were useless in forests and had very bad aim. Their armor was actually not strong enough to push back a rock and a sling shot, and since you could reload faster with a slingshot they were more deadlier than the guns.

Horses proved useless in tree crowded areas and in hand to hand combat the Aztecs had some superiority.

The main reason that the Spaniards won was the disease that they brought, which is what is consider Montezuma's revenge.

Today the Mexican water will poison any outsider who drinks it, yet back then the outsiders brought poison to the mexicans.

[allfathersgodi]

Disease did the Mexicans in.

Something else that I would really like to see, and I've already said it, a campaign set in the Crusader State Period.

Something else, the possibility of locked alliances in SP Campaigns...