Re: What we would like to see in ETW.....
Will it be against total war mechanics to have a build your own fort or city and delimit your own province option? Could also allow provinces to be eaten away from the edges through creating military outposts and trenches that are not destroyed by your enemy. Or is that a bit too civilisation?
Re: What we would like to see in ETW.....
I'd like to see:
-A complete refurbish on the field construction system, so instead of just watchtowers and forts, we should have simple wall boundaries, maybe to defend a mountain pass, rather than having the forts in RTW and M2 that in real life could easily be sidestepped. I'd love to see garrison-able watchtowers, beacons that would serve a similar purpose, and gates to let certain characters (like diplomats) and factions through!
-Fully customizable city layouts. Ive played castle strike, which is nowhere near as good as Total war games, but it lets you customize the castle (though not very well). It would be fantastic to be able to create custom layouts, save them, and use them in the campaign, then add a wide range of defences (like towers and ring walls), that can be build via a separate construction queue to the regular one.
-Placing settlements anywhere (or numerous ones in a region, the main being its 'capital'), such as merging into ports or on top of hills, would be an added bonus
-Highly improved choreography for battles, so that the soldiers are truly brutal and merciless, slashing anywhere they want and spraying blood as opposed to slashing or blocking every 5 seconds in slow motion, as it appears in M2TW
-In battles, soldiers should be able to SWITCH WEAPONS!!! It would be great to see an archer get a net out and throw it over horse in a cavalry charge, then wrench the spear out of the dislodged rider's hand and stab him with it. It'd also make elephants a bit easier to kill. And after the battle, a warrior might acquire a high-quality rifle from the body of an enemy, and use it thereafter.
-Cooler still would be soldiers in a unit actually using co-ordinated moves and working together to bring down the enemy. Fights should be much quicker and crueller, with people using all the skills and weapons they've got. If you ever get to see 300, when they're fighting the immortals, you'll see what i mean.
-An interesting concept would be to customize the units themselves, based on armour. So would give them armour as you would in a custom battle, but in the campaign only some levels would be accessible, and would require an armoury to use heavier armour. So when recruiting a unit, the armour value would affect the cost. The same goes for weapons.
-I'd like to see negotiation - on the battlefield. To see a diplomat, or a general come with a party of guards to discuss matters before the battle, or play out the traditional method of bringing up the most powerful soldier from each army and having them fight, the winner getting to settle diplomatic agreements on his general's terms. (That's shown in troy)
-Generals really should appear on the battlefield as the do in their portraits. Then you can tell which is your faction leader!
-On the campaign map, there should be patrols along trade routes, and if some caravans are looted, this should affect the income.
-Sieges still have a long way to go, with garrison-able towers (and combat within), deadly gatehouses and more sturdy battering rams. As i said before, customizing the city's defence would add an extra depth to sieges, because if you found a certain section vulnerable in one siege, you could add towers to it for the next. And buildings should certainly be fully-destructible when the attackers breach the walls, whether it be by artillery fire or - regular fire.
-To really make it interesting, why not add townspeople and helpless citizens who can run around screaming in despair when a tower collapses? Then we can be told when something's destroyed in a way other than a video talking about THE WALLS OF JERICHO!!!
I'm sure there are more, i just can't remember them...
Re: What we would like to see in ETW.....
god white dont we just ask them to build us a working holodeck so we can re-entact our wildest fantasys (cause some of them posted here are pretty out there)
Re: What we would like to see in ETW.....
edit
Last edited by locked_thread; 07-18-2008 at 02:32.
Re: What we would like to see in ETW.....
Do the two of these not conflict, supply trains and foraging would naturaly lead to more skirmishs, trying to raid opponents supply train, farm lands,etc.Originally Posted by CyanCentaur
Re: What we would like to see in ETW.....
IMO......
-Ability to bombard city/fort from sea and/or land without launching an assault
-Better pathfinding
-Improved diplomacy. Including, but not limited to: AI that actually keeps alliances. Huge penalties/consequences for ai and player that break alliances without just cause. Formation of lasting and meaningful coalitions. Ability to perform multiple diplomacy per diplomat per turn (ie rtw). AI that will actively seek or readily agree to accept cease-fire/client kingdom instead of being killed off. A "get off my land" option.
-Named units that also mention where recruited. ie Legio I Italia, Legio II Spanish, etc.. Records kept for each named unit. ie. # of battles fought, total casualties, regions fought in, etc....
-Everything on a battle map is destroyable.
-An option to select 4tpy or Xtpy at startup so those of us that want to play 4tpy and have a long and slower game can and those that want a faster game can pick the Xtpy.
-Default show year and not turns. Could make it an option to select as well.
-Realistic troop movements. No more of this takes a year to move a province or two.
-Show a family members ability to govern too.
-Titles. BBB for MTW2 is a good example. Titles given to those that govern a city for at least a turn. When that character dies it goes to the next character that governs there for a turn.
-Ability to select an heir if desired...otherwise default to eldest son. If no son or no son of age then perhaps we could have a queen that could rule in son's name till he is of age or line of succession passes to eldest daughter if there is no son at all. Succession must stay in particular family branch by default unless player is forced/chooses to change that.
-How about another option to select if fantasy units are to be included in campaign or not? Would mean an increase in amount of unit slots available, but would satisfy those of us that want only historical units and those that want the flaming pigs or war dog type units.
-Family names are past down....even if only as a trait.
-Better logistical system for armies. Generals can gain a "understanding of logistics" from a academy or through successful campaigning. Without trait you get a "rationing," "belts tightened," "starving" type of trait for commanding general with comparable desertion rates per trait. See EB for example.
-Recruitable governors and generals that aren't part of your family tree. Each should have decent ability in their respective field upon recruitment. Recruited governors should have 0 movement ability. Loyalty of recruited generals should be good at start but can get lower if not actively used. Both should be able to be disbanded at will. Maybe to occasionally pop up again as a rebel general.
-Different governments able to be built with different game effects with the ability to change government types if desired. ie Homeland (limited to specific regions), merchant colony, military colony, allied colony, etc... See EB for example.
Anyway, that is my
EB Mini-Mods currently used in my Romani Campaign:
Spoils of Victory for EB 1.1
Force Diplomacy Minimod for EB
MTW2 currently in use:
BBB Titles Mod for MTW2
Re: What we would like to see in ETW.....
edit
Last edited by locked_thread; 07-18-2008 at 02:32.
Re: What we would like to see in ETW.....
I would also love to see small towns, villages, ports and all being represented on the Strategic map, as garrisonable, so that you can occupy a rural town and use its buildings as a strategic defense on the battlemap.
Ports should also act as cities in there own right not just an extension of cities.
Re: What we would like to see in ETW.....
But also it would represent some historical fact. French armies of the later part of the game were renowned for their ability to live off the land. Probably because their logistics were rubbish, but anyway, it was a positive for as long as they were still moving but once they stopped living off the land becasme ravaging the land and turned the inhabitants against them. A good example of this would be Spain and Portugal where they were never going to win a popularity contest but stripping an already poor land of resources lost them many of the friends they had made. Wellington was able to impede the French armiy in Portugal by a policyu of scorched earth. The French came, saw his army in their entrenchments and had to leave becasue of a lack of supplies. Whereas Wellington's army didn't have these problems in Spain and virtually none in France because he insisted on paying(ish) for supplies and had somewhat efficient Quatermaster's system.
Last edited by Freedom Onanist; 10-11-2007 at 09:31.
Cheers,
The Freedom Onanist
Re: What we would like to see in ETW.....
i know its historical accurate to have baggage trains and living of the land etc. i was just pointing out that your request for the inclusion of this feature is some what opposed to your wish for less skirmishes. as the raids and counter raids would be conducted on a small scale.
Re: What we would like to see in ETW.....
oh, yes, pretty please!god white dont we just ask them to build us a working holodeck so we can re-entact our wildest fantasys (cause some of them posted here are pretty out there)
Re: What we would like to see in ETW.....
Something small and easy to implament how about the ability to see your armies that you have so lovingly and meticulously created and assembled viewable on the battle map.
As you form your army stack and send them off to some distant battlefield have the cityview option like in rome to see them on the march.
Nothing like the sound of thousands of marching boots, creaking cannon wheels and fluttering flags to get the blood pumping Eh!
Re: What we would like to see in ETW.....
Like 'view a city' mode but your soldiers are assembled in the city and you can march them around and such :P
Re: What we would like to see in ETW.....
Not in a city per say but anywhere you have a stack moving. just click on it and you enter the battle map where you can see your army marching in column formation. It could be sorta similiar to the city view button in rome where you could look but not touch. You often see what I mean in the promotional cutscenes for Rome And Med 2 of armies on the march, long columns of men stretching from horizon to horizon. I always find those scenes rather riveting.
Last edited by sassbarman; 10-25-2007 at 10:38.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks