General Sun's Tent Editorial Next Issue "What I like to see in the Next Game"
There has been much talk over Medieval Total War 2 and how to it would be a disappointment to many. For myself, MTW2 doesn’t sound like anything to get excited about, the gameplay looks to be (superficially) identical to RTW in its current form. Many people have said, and probably rightly, that MTW2 would accomplish only what mods for RTW has accomplished.
What I’ve not seen are concrete ideas on how to take Total War to the next step. From the very beginning of the series (Shogun) to the upcoming MTW2, Total War has stayed the same gameplay wise except for one point; that is the move from a RISK style map to a civilization style map. For the next part of the series, the games that will come after MTW2, I have definite hopes for some real revolutions in gameplay.
Ultimately, the goal of the series is to make the games as real of a war simulator as possible, while keeping it fun. Quickly, here are the ideas that would be of real benefit to the series while keeping it from being too “hard-core”.
1. The move to a Real-Time Campaign Map.
I say this because war is real time, life is real time. The way that the game currently works with turns does not accurately represent campaign map maneuvers, the pursuit of fleeing armies, traps and ambuscades and campaign map pincers that Napoleon was so fond of. I say that it is impossible to carry out a historical campaign in a turn-based map, Hannibals’ movements in South Italy cannot be accurately reflected, nor Napoleon’s campaigns (which was all about this type of maneuver), nor Alexander’s even relatively simple campaign because even that was about evading larger armies until the terrain for battle was suitable.
What is more; many ideas which I list below cannot be done on a turn-based map, and I consider the move to real time a basic necessity.
The question of course is how this should be implemented. Star Wars Empires at War had implemented such a map and it was greeted with mixed feelings. Some simple interface changes would make their map much superior.
A. Firstly, the pause button should very prominent. SWEAW had the pause button hidden in a corner small box. The pause button should be this huge thing at the center of the interface bar because frankly, in a real time map, that is the most important button.
B. More auto-pauses should be implemented. Pause when a building is complete, pause when an army reached its destination, pause after battles. Having more pauses and notifications would let the player keep on top of the situation without the clunky mess that EAW put us in.
C. Slower default speed. In EAW the default speed was very fast and there was no option to slow it down. With these simple edits, a real time system would probably work very well, opening up another ballpark of gameplay.
2. Attrition
Every army experiences Attrition losses while campaigning away from home. Some causes are: Illness, desertion, guerilla attacks, stragglers, and more.
How it should work is very simple. Whenever an army is in enemy territory, it should steadily lose men at some reasonable and balanced rate. When a province is captured from an enemy, attrition is lowered, but not gone. There should be a clear supply line coming from the nearest friendly territory, a supply line that can be cut off by the enemy to further the attrition.
Each army should have a supply store, higher levels means less troop loss, lower levels means high troop loss and lower quality troops when on the battlefield. The store is kept up by the supply line or by living off the land. But the latter option depends on the wealth of the land and the former option depends on the faction treasury.
The player should not be able to retrain troops in newly captured territories, in fact, captured territories should not be able to train any troops or build any buildings nor contribute to costs until either the enemy faction is wiped out or peace is made.
Attrition however, should end after a designated time.
Attrition should also be dependent on season. Obviously winter means more attrition losses. Imagine the campaign of Napoleon in Russia without attrition, there is no question that he would’ve won.
3. Waypoint System
I’m not talking of the current “all rally here” button, but a system where the player can plot the future move of troops on several steps. That is, all go here, then here, then here, and set the armies moving without further micromanagement. This is probably just as useful in the battlemap as in the campaign map.
4. Some real campaign map Terra-Formation.
The history of China would not be the same without the Great Wall; World War I was fought by lines of infantry in trenches; in Denmark, the Hapsburgs were repelled using floods. More options such as this should be given to the player. Right away I can think of three options.
A. Ability to build walls. Each section of the wall would have to be put under siege individually. The gameplay implications of this are obvious.
B. Ability to burn/chop down forests. Forests are places for enemies to hide in, a good source of wood, and chopping them down should give more “living space.” Helps with squalor perhaps…
C. Trenches contingent on guns.
5. Making the country-side worthwhile.
Currently the country side is just a piece of land that the army stands on to fight. It shouldn’t be. There should be the option to pillage the countryside without having to take the city. Even if the city isn’t taken, the countryside is still a conquest. Having an army in sit for a long time in the countryside should move borders even without having taken the city.
Especially in the middle ages, most of the population is rural, and the effects of conquering rural areas should be reflected in province population and province wealth.
6. Making the army the centerpiece of the empire.
In war and campaign, the army is the centerpiece of an empire. The destruction of an army is the destruction of the empire, the loss of the war. The loss of cities is not nearly so significant. While RTW does reflect that pretty well, here are a few propositions to make it even better.
A. Abandon city option; if an enemy army is close to the city, there should an option make everyone leave. This will cause population to scatter to remaining cities; the effectiveness of the option should be contingent on population happiness.
B. Destroying an enemy army should give a big boost to home happiness as well as income in terms of wealth. (This comes in the form of captured equipment and booty).
C. Likewise the loss of an army should be very detrimental to happiness.
7. Reduce city management.
The way that cities are currently managed by the player is boring and frankly not very conducive to gameplay. The current way that cities are managed is no-brainer. It doesn’t add anything to the gameplay and detracts from the military aspects of it. So here’s what I propose.
A. No more buildings. An emperor or a general should not have to concern himself with the building of markets, roads or anything of that sort. Instead replace it with “focuses”. Economic focus raises trade, tax income, cultural focus raises population, happiness, and so on.
B. Eliminate the build this building to get this military unit. That is just such a ludicrous gamey implementation that raises micro-management. This is Total War, not SimCity. Instead, if an unit can be built in one city, it can be built in all. However, cities with lower “military focus” will build lower quality versions of that unit.
C. Ability to invest cash to further a focus. Throw a lumpsum of cash to improve happiness, or trade, or the military. The specifics should be left to the governor in charge.
8. Give us more creative maps.
Right now, the battle maps are just fields with hills or mountains or strange houses/monuments. There should really be more interesting maps. The bridge maps are really terrible, just one bland bridge in the middle of a field. Having lakes, marshes, plateaus would all be very nice. I want to fight in villages, through used army camps, etc. Not just the old plains or hills.
Also, why limit the cities to just having a few streets? It would be much better to open it up and allow the armies to roam and take backstreets.
9. Better lighting.
There’s just something off with the lights and the way that it’s reflected on units etc… The torches at night don’t look all that great either. That’s just my personal opinion…
10. Slow down battle-speed
Battles are currently way too fast. A Principe on hitting a legionary cohort breaks in three seconds, never mind that reinforcements are coming on the flanks. But this argument has been done twenty times already, I’m just throwing my opinion out there…
Originally posted here:
http://www.twcenter.net/forums/showthread.php?t=63734
Reply With Quote
Originally Posted by General_Sun
Bad idea given AI limitations.
Bookmarks