suggestions for a more intreasting campaign

[Augustus Germanicus]

I actually do this as my game plan for whenever I play as Sicily. I never could figure out the even semi-historical basis for the short game goals of taking down Venice and Milan so I instead migrate against the Byzantines and into the Levant. A Latin Empire in the Balkans and/or a Crusader Kingdom in Antioch, Edessa, Acre, and Jerusalem fuels my need for historical plausability while placing me at the center of most of the special events (crusades, jihads, mongols, ect.) that make the campaign more than just a set up for the battle engine. Plenty of action just trying to defend your boarders, and eventually Venice and Milan will come after you anyway, as they're 2 of the few factions the AI can actually be counted on to survive and thrive with, and (in my experience) the most backstabbing.

Beyond that, I never change settlement types to put me even with the AI as far as income potential, and recently I've been trying new ways to play factions, such as playing the HRE without an early blitz into Northern Italy. The hard part for this one (for me at least) is convincing Venice/Milan not to break their alliances and attack me within the first 10-20 turns. Why these "small but wealthy" "city-states" are, in 95% of my games, the most powerful, most aggressive AI controlled factions out there while France and the HRE face (again, 95+% of the time the AI controls them) nothing but defeats and economic failure is beyond me, but that's a rant, and I'm going to stop now.

I'm also now getting into a game as the Byzantines - Retake only the East Roman Empire's original former territory - which not only faces invasions from the North and West but also leaves a sizeable amount of land in the East and even South under hostile control - and hold it against all comers. Man I wish I had some gunpowder, it's a lot harder than in BI.

For me campaign changes and add-ons are the thing I'm most excited about in the upcoming expansion. I just hope we get some new diplomatic toys, special events, and victory options to play with, not just some new skinned units to kill.

Here's praying for something cool for the Orthodox factions to do, since Crusades/Jihads/Diplomacy are all pretty much out the window.

[Rhedd]

This may not be as much a campaign thing as a battle thing, but I've played one-and-a-half campaigns now using the "General View" camera for everything but defending siege battles. (With limited minimap usage, too.)

The effect on both the difficulty and immersion is staggering! I love it.

It forces you to think about where and when to deploy on the campaign map, because a thick forest or view-blocking hill can spell your doom.

It forces you to use more appropriate historical medieval tactics, since initial troop positioning and grouping becomes far more important when the battle itself is going to be a fight to maintain situational awareness in the confusion.

It's just so much more realistic than the superhuman, hive-mind-like coordination of your army caused by the more traditional RTS birds-eye perspective of control.

That, and it's so fantastic to be marching your army through dense evening fog, towards the suspected enemy position, and see faint torchlight in the distance. Is it an unexpected farmstead, or the enemy vanguard? Only one way to find out...

[Ars Moriendi]

It's just so much more realistic than the superhuman, hive-mind-like coordination of your army caused by the more traditional RTS birds-eye perspective of control.

The superhuman hive-mind-like coordination is there to compensate for the subhuman, no-mind-like stupidity of your units - it's not like you can count on them to do the right thing when not supervised...

I'll have to admit, though, that general camera is great for immersion and could do wonders for those complaining about the game being too easy : I tried it and liked the feeling ; couldn't get on with it because I got my ass kicked regularly by weaker armies, it became too difficult for me...

[Didz]

Well I decided to write a blog based on one of my campaigns and was quite surprised at how much impact it had my enjoyment of the game. the discipline of having to write down your plans and strategies and of course justify your actions and decisions seems to bring the game alive.

[sapi]

This may not be as much a campaign thing as a battle thing, but I've played one-and-a-half campaigns now using the "General View" camera for everything but defending siege battles. (With limited minimap usage, too.)

The effect on both the difficulty and immersion is staggering! I love it.

It forces you to think about where and when to deploy on the campaign map, because a thick forest or view-blocking hill can spell your doom.

It forces you to use more appropriate historical medieval tactics, since initial troop positioning and grouping becomes far more important when the battle itself is going to be a fight to maintain situational awareness in the confusion.

It's just so much more realistic than the superhuman, hive-mind-like coordination of your army caused by the more traditional RTS birds-eye perspective of control.

That, and it's so fantastic to be marching your army through dense evening fog, towards the suspected enemy position, and see faint torchlight in the distance. Is it an unexpected farmstead, or the enemy vanguard? Only one way to find out...

I keep hearing great things about that camera mode; I'll have to try it

How exactly does it limit your view?

[TevashSzat]

What would be awesome is if the loyalty part of the game was expanded further. You could have an extremely large kingdom, around 30 provinces have portions of it secede from the kingdom due to a low authority king. You could employ the same system from RTW Barbarian invasion where the more battles your general wins, the more confident and egotistical he becomes and the higher chance that he will want to start his own kingdom and steal some of your territories