What do yall want?

[Subedei]

Extremely moddable, because the base game will not be good enough on its own.

Yeah, the people from the Steppes know how to bring it to the point! Modding possibillieties should be gooood!

[VikingHorde]

What I want? Era's like in MTW1, so that we don't have gothic knights too early . More factions than 21, say maybe 30 or so (or making the game modable so we kan add more factions like in MTW1).

[jean_s]

It would be very cool to have the possibility to get in the commander's skin an fight like in an RPG :D ...

That's for sure after you finished to give the orders for attack or defense.

Or, like some people do, to have a fight at the beggining between commanders which could decide the battles ...or not ... :)

But that's possibly to happen in another installment. At least I hope...

[Ludens]

However, CA's reply is always: It would take around a millenium to finish a game... Therefore I propose a SMALL multiplayer campaign; something like the size of the VI campaign compared to the MTW campaign. It would be very nice if players could choose from variety of campaign maps such as England, France, Spain, Anatolia / Greece. Or better even, scenario's such as the 100 year's war ( long game) or the reconquista (even a longer game I suppose...).

Smaller campaigns might be a good idea independent of an MP game. Though they were scrapped for R:TW, I would still have like to play a smaller, more focused scenario like Ceasar in Gaul. However, for this to reach its full potential, the diplomatic and economic systems become more advanced.

[Ulair]

I dunno, you go away from the Org for a couple of weeks and they come along and announce MTW-2 behind your back

What can I say? Way to be cool. And what should it have? ajaxfetish has it neatly:

The gameplay M:TW had.
The graphics R:TW had (and that the screenies promise!).
The AI and diplomacy model that both games should have had.

And one from me:
- a rational naval combat system. Doesn't have to be detailed, just has to produce reasonable results...

Crikey, I bet I'll need a new PC. Well, the kids can do without shoes for a wee while, surely...


Ulair

[Satyr]

I want a speed slider on both halves of the game. I like watching troops and agents move on the strategic map, but not too slow or so fast you can't see where they are going like in RTW. Just give me control and I will find a speed my old brain and eyes can handle.

I want a GREAT AI! This has to be the dominant aspect of the game. The graphics are good enough, now make the AI that they can be proud of. The AI in MTW was the best ever produced, make sure MTW2 is even better.

Much better diplomacy. Look to CIV4 for how to do it.

Realistic battlefield behavior. The way cavalry wheeled around before charging in MTW was beautiful, it sucked in RTW, some work here would be great. Same goes for watching an infantry line getting hit, collapsing, breaking and routing. It was great in MTW but sucked in RTW. I would like to see that kind of detail again.

And I want to see a reasonable patch policy. That means "as many patches as it takes"!

[boastj]

Lots of settlements per province then you could pillage villages and draw the enemy out.

[Templar Knight]

I remember in Lords of the Realm you could burn villages and fields, it would be a nice addition. It could be used to draw your enemy out, force him to sue for peace or just lower relations for the badness of it :)

[VikingHorde]

I just thought of something, I also want this game on DVD. Having 3+ CD-roms is not cool, specially with most people having a DVD drive in their computer. I know a lot of cool games on DVD and it makes the install more easy'er.

[Justiciar]

*takes a deep breath*

More mod-friendly.

Custom castles/city building would be great fun, but isn't really in line with the general theme of Total War.

More villages/towns/cities per province.

Less predictable campaigns.

More factions. Lots more. I'm talking bucket loads.

Slower battles.

Slower campaigns (4 seasons works wonders imho).

Female characters to do more than bear children, add traits, and make alliances.

Civil wars that allow you to choose a side.

More individuality for characters. I want my heir to be a drooling and incompetent whoremongerer ffs!

MTW style automatic inherritance (as opposed to choosing the best family member in RTW).

More realism.. I don't want to wait three years for a good mod to do this for me.

Generals to look more individual on the battle field.

RTW style campaign movement; as opposed to dropping stacks on a province.

Random events to make my campaign more interesting; "Your king is caught naked with his squire!", "Your heir fell on a scythe!", "Your illegitimate brother has declared himself the true king!", "Mercenaries in your pay have turned rogue and captured city X", "Your queen commited scuicide" etc.

A more involved economy.

[hrvojej]

First and foremost, a good AI. Second, a good AI. Etc....

Also more depth on all levels, especially diplomacy. Which wouldn't be possible to have without a good AI behind enemy factions, of course. Ever since STW I was dreaming about a game which would involve a complex diplomatic and economic model, while at the same time also sport challeging hands-on battles, so maybe this time around I'll be in luck.

I hope that the current state of the graphics, as evident from the screenshots, will be deemed sufficient to sell the game to casual players, so that more time ahead can be spent on the development of deep and challenging gameplay.

[pyradyn]

I also want the ability to just sack a settlement insted of having to take it over. Like Hordes in BI but with all armies. Like when i got to war with a nation i dont want to expand into. I dont want to just pick off a few feild armies i want to devistate their econemy and show them that im stronger they can keep the left over. This could also grant what most wars were fought for MONEY, not land money you sack plunder have a jolly time and go home with a full pocket and belly. This would add more Intrests into wars and make it more realistic. Plus if your in debt go steal it from some one else then they are in debt and you are out. Only problem would be the AI's use of this and when they sack and when they occupy. This way you can fight the nations army go in destroy the army and pull out with out leaving the HUGE garrisons. But insted of the prevoius owner losing the city like BI they keep but the horrors of being sack still there.
Dono I have just always wanted to War with the country not take them over. Being the bully of the world :P that way you can get to close to the end of the game before beating it half way through

Satyr reminded me what ever happend to taking the routing enemies hostage and either slaughtering the mass to make yourself feel good and scare the crap out of your enemy or making a buck or two randsoming them back

[boastj]

I agree with Justiciar, suicidal queens
O and pillaging of defeated armies

[Leet Eriksson]

All i ask for is bite-sized mini campaigns for that 30 minute fix.

There is alot to go with, i mean, the hussite rebellion, the crusades, Timurs rampage, byzantinium... etc they can all be reduced to a smaller map, with a few factions and you are set.

[Nelson]

Moats and draw bridges

Tricky maybe, but there has to be a way. Field fortifications would be neat too.

[boastj]

Temporary fortifications like spikes in the ground that last only 10 turns for if you are in immediate danger of being attacked

[City walls]

Be able to deploy troops outside the settlement before the siege begins

[Ironside]

A great AI, ofcourse. Most important thing ever.

MTW speed on the battles and MTW importance of terrain.

Better balance between auto-calc and a played battle, being "forced" to play all battles in RTW, due to horrendious losses isn't fun.

And a very important thing considering that the camp-map will probably be based on the RTW map. The abillity to have epic battles, instead of that wave after wave style that happens in RTW.
Although the comp should be better that MTW to handle the reinforcements (well 10000 vs 10000 at the same time is probably too much to handle, so to get epic battles reinforments is needed). I can accept AI handled allied armies, as long as he isn't incompetent and most importly, doesn't suecide the general.

Realistic units, and if you need to have other units for balance, make them sencible. Some fun units is ok, but not as extreme as RTW.

If having random rebel stacks, make them fewer but stronger and more dangerous. True rebellions instead of a small annoyance. Linked to province loyalty to.

Better balance between city growth and loyalty. Having to occationally exterminate your own cities doesn't feel right.

Vassalage or simular for defeated enemies. But although some sencible tendencies to rebel should be there.

More in a province than just a city. AKA towns and castles placed around there, preferbly by you.

Reappearing factions has to come back.

Good modability, doing light mods by yourself or playing mods is keeping the interest up quite a bit and improves the game.

I'm sure that it's more, but I think I've covered most stuff I want in there.

[Nobunaga]

Well I want the following:

1-Slower Battles
2-Well Balanced Units
3-Bring back the hold formation/engage at will button
4-The old control system, it will be nice the game had an option in which it switches between the MTW/STW control system and the RTW control system.
5-Realistic units

[Meneldil]

Already been mentioned, but

MTW-like battles (much slower and harder than RTW)
A working diplomacy system (I was so happy when I discovered what was planned for RTW, but so disappointed when I tested it in game)
A much harder campaign map, where you can't play with the darnest smallest faction and conquer half of europe in 10 years. Something like EU II would actually be awesome.

[hrvojej]

Two more things which would be really nice to have IMHO:


1. Different starting periods (as in MTW). The campaign is often most interesting at its start, and to be able to have a fairly advanced army from the get-go would alleviate the problem that everything is over by the time you are able to build some more interesting units. It would also give the AI a better fighting chance, as it could start with more developed armies.

2. The ability to mod morale modifiers. So instead of just upping the general morale for the units (for those of us who are inclined to do so) which may fix some things but breaks the other, you could finely tune the situation on the battlefield to avoid too frequent chain routs and the associated anticlimactic battles.

In short, more options for everything (coupled with a good AI, of course)...

Cheers,

[boastj]

pilliging!!

[Baeksen]

1) Improvement of the campaign AI so that it will be capable of composing an army in a reasonable way. Meaning that you would have to fight armies composed of a range of different unit types that complement each other and no longer fight armies completely missing a type of units, like ranged units.

2) No more incompetent rebel factions that do not put up resistance or ally and therefore turns the first years of a campaign into an expansion race, where the game doesn't really start until all nearby rebel provinces are occupied by a faction.

3) A town guard that can be summoned to protect a city under siege, but not leave the city. This would make siege battles more exciting, as you would be able to man the walls properly. This town guard size and quality could be dependent on factors such as city size, buildings in the city, culture and loyalty towards the faction leader and the local feudal lord.

And many other things mentioned in this thread, but most of all I wish that MTW2 is not just eye candy, but a strategy game worth playing.

And last, perhaps the ability to customize your king and commanders with personal banners.

[boastj]

The ability to move several stacks at the same time on the campaign map by clicking and dragging (I was just playing as the Huns in BI and it was getting annoying moving them individually)

[boastj]

Unique buildings like the tower of London, Vatican and Notre darm (French cathedral in paris)

[Kraxis]

I want a return of green replacements!!!

Yes I mean troops you get nothing but the bonusses gained in that particular settlement.
Didn't they already do that? No!

In Rome if you retrain a three golden chevron unit of a single man, you will get replacements of equal ability for the cost of what totally green troops are worth (in fact tested a very similar instance). This makes it far too easy to get superb troops. I want to be forced to merge my experienced troops, I want to feel a certain amount of 'love' for my Valour 2 troops which I will have very few of.

[Satyr]

We need to be able to rally any troops on the battlefield. In reality the king/general would never fight anyway so tying rallying to a general makes no sense. Besides, there are subordinates! This ability is part of what made MTW so good. Remember all those long battles where you could finally rally a few of your routing troops, bring them together in the woods and then counter attack? That was bliss! To be able to turn the tides of war at the last moment was seriously missing in Rome. How many battles have I sat in terror that my troops would break yet again before his? I want this back!!!!!

And please CA, make the AI smart enough to use the same bloody tactics that any 8th grader would. Without a good AI you might as well not even bother. Having moved on to play CIV 4 lately, it is amazing what a good AI adds to the game. And which game was 'Game of the Year' last year? A strategy game! If Firaxis can do it so can CA.



PS. Ditch the stupid family system.

[CrownOfSwords]

Alright ive been thinking about this a lot to how in the Total war game system how it would be possible to really accurately depict battle. Also I didn't read all the posts before this so im sorry if I say something someone has already said. Battles for the most part back then were basically a countries full strength or just about thrown against each other, in RTW you must recruit units etc which is completely unrealistic. A lord or a king would call down through the feudal system to raise an army, at this point immediately an army would be raised, the proffesionalism would be accounted for by how many nobles/fighting men are within the army and how many peasants. Now at this point of time in real warfare there would be no peasant units afield, even the poorest unit would have scraps of armor and weapons. I hope for a system where at any given time an army can be raised out of the male citizens of a city, and possibly there can be some sort of system to reflect the social classes amount of nobles amount of middle class and amount of peasants and the units created would reflect this. I think bare population should be exchanged for men/women population and then men of "fighting age" say 16?-40? would be able to put to arms, and women of the same age could be of "breeding" age and the amount of these women could reflect population growth. Perhaps these units could be sort of like horde units and can be returned and settled back into the population maybe even be considered veteran citizens of some sort, and only the most proffesional soldiers would remain in garrison such as knights. So in essense the recruitment system can be kept yet hordes can be raised easily, this would create MUCH larger battles that would be more significant. Also I said no peasant units? Perhaps when a city is being assaulted some sort of men at arms can be formed by the remaining men of age population or percantage of them due to loyalty of the settlement. I know this is a lot to swallow, but a better population system could really help the realism of the game.

Apart from that complicatedness :P id like to see crusades again, improvements to seige battles, HOPEFULLY A WORTHWHILE AI! I decided the problem with the AI in RTW is they try to run their infantry around all the time and they dont stay together supporting their flanks, I find myself waiting at the back of the map letting their troops tire out for easy pickings. Nonetheless I am very excited about the new game I can always replay the medieval age! PS sorry for any grammar or spelling errors -CoS

[Weebeast]

I don't know how people would respond to this but I got bunch of positive replies a while ago. I'd love to continue playing even if my king dies without a heir. Just because a line dies doesn't mean everything becomes non-existing. Let one hi-rank general lead the population to carry on as if it was a civil war and let me play it.

I know this is not a very important thing to put into the game but why not go big?

[Martok]

I don't know how people would respond to this but I got bunch of positive replies a while ago. I'd love to continue playing even if my king dies without a heir. Just because a line dies doesn't mean everything becomes non-existing. Let one hi-rank general lead the population to carry on as if it was a civil war and let me play it.

I know this is not a very important thing to put into the game but why not go big?

I like this idea a lot, Weebeast. There's only thing I would add: When such an event happens (where a general takes over should the first royal line die out), your kingdom/empire should automatically fall into civil war. That way you still suffer a penalty (although hopefully not a fatal one); plus it would be fairly historically accurate as well.