What we would like to see in ETW.....

[Daithi MacGuillaCathair]

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)

[locked_thread]

edit

[Daithi MacGuillaCathair]

- Bigger, more decisive battles. Fewer useless skirmishes.

- Introduce simple logistical considerations on the strategic map. Ex: armies in hostile territory would need access to forage or supply trains, or begin starving.

.

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.

[Shifty_GMH]

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

[locked_thread]

edit

[Zoring]

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.

[Freedom Onanist]

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.

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.

[Daithi MacGuillaCathair]

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.

[locked_thread]

edit

[Freedom Onanist]

I've attempted to brainstorm a simple logistic system...

- Armies draw forage automatically, leading to indirect competition for food.

- Each soldier and horse strips a tiny amount of forage from a nearby farm (5 square radius? 10?). Large stacks of men and horses can rapidly deplete the countryside. Richer farmlands provide more forage per turn and recover faster.

- As farmlands are depleted, they provide less food/income to the regional capital, and are depicted darker on the campaign map (green->yellow->brown->gray->black). Thus a fully depleted farmland would provide nothing to the capital. This is similar to "devastation" in existing TW games.

- If a port is within an army's foraging radius, forage can be redirected through that port.

- If all local supplies are exhausted, forage is automatically redirected to any unblockaded port within forage range. This will transfer farm depletion to other controlled provinces that are not themselves blockaded. If troops cannot obtain supplies locally or through a port, they are considered "unsupplied". If a stack contains a mix of supplied and unsupplied troops, the stack as a whole is assigned a supply%.

- 100% supplied armies operate at 100% mobility and combat strength. Armies below 100% move proportionately slower on the campaign map, and fight under a handicap, ie reduced morale / attack / defence / speed. Thus an army at 80% supply moves at 80% speed and fights at 80% effectiveness in battles. Armies below 25% supply are also considered to be starving, and lose troops each turn.

- Besieged troops cannot forage. They are considered "in supply" until they consume the city/fort's food stockpiles. If the city has an attached port, they can trace supply unless the port is blockaded.


Why a logistic system? Because historical military campaigns make no sense when viewed outside a logistical context. Why did they build navies? Why did Napoleon split his armies into separate columns? Why were generals forced to attack strong positions instead of waiting it out?
1) Standing armies cost food, not just cash.
2) Large armies eat alot, impacting population growth and economy wherever they go.
2) Moving an army into foreign territory lets your troops dine at enemy expense.
3) The size of a standing garrison is limited by local forage.
4) To march a vast army into enemy lands you probably have to control nearby ports.
5) You'll normally want to divide large armies into separate columns for better foraging.
6) Large armies must keep moving or eventually starve, unless supplied through a nearby port.

What about the situation where a concerted effort was made not forage? Wellington put a lot of effort into creating a semi efficient supply train. Part of the reason was to avoid (as much as possible) pillaging the allied Spanish and Portuguese contrysides, and avoid local antagonisms. When he got into France he experienced none of the problems with the local population the French had in Iberia becasue he paid(ish) for what he took.

I do like your ideas though. You could add an option to use scorched earth tactics as well, like the russians in front of Napoleon, or Wellington in Portugal. An enemy has to move on even faster. Or you could have resource raiding, where you rob and devastate an opponent's resources.

The only problem is that in game terms logistics might get pretty tedious with the expanded map. I took out the supply side of things from the Stainless Steel mod in M2TW, good, but not for me.

[anders]

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.

the board game "empires in arms"( fantastic napoleon era game if you have the time) handles supply routes by forcing you to be able to pull an uncontested ( ie not broken by enemy units) straight line between the supplied force and a depot, it doesnt cause to mant skirmishes, but makes cossaks and freikorps very valuable.

[Colonel-Commissar Gaunt]

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)

oh, yes, pretty please!

[sassbarman]

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!

[Zoring]

Like 'view a city' mode but your soldiers are assembled in the city and you can march them around and such :P

[sassbarman]

Like 'view a city' mode but your soldiers are assembled in the city and you can march them around and such :P

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.

[Prodigal]

2 things

1. The ability to access building, unit windows, even if you have selected or seen an event screen that you've now closed. Its fo annoying & has been in since Rome

2. The ability to move (drag n drop) troops around in your army so you can more readily see the troop types you have

[Defender]

Apart from (most of) the things mentioned above, I would like them to (re-)add the View Settlement option.

Only this time with a more "detailed" city life. I.E. actually seeing people practice at the barracks, people loading and unloading ships. The usual activity.

I loved the view settlement option in Rome (mainly for the purpose of showing of to my friends ;))