Welcome

Please register for Total War Access to use the forums. If you're an existing user, your forum details will be merged with Total War Access if you register with the same email or username. For more information please read our FAQ’s here.

Categories

Community feature requests...

2456731

Comments

  • AzradalAzradal Junior Member Registered Users Posts: 8
    edited June 2011
    I feel Shogun 2 is already a very strong foundation that CA can further build upon (technical issues aside). I've spent over 170 hours now and I know what I'd like to see. While a another scenario may sound good to others I just see this being the same thing just with new "skins" so to speak. I think others don't really know what they are asking for in that regard. The total war games are so "open" so to speak that a specific scenario for the map of Japan wouldn't really be as fun as others think....

    But anyway... What I would like to see is everything expanded. I would like to see customization of your clan in campaign. Keeping the mon and the clan yoroi (armor) the same is totally fine. More variety in the unit weapon sizes and such would also be a nice touch. I would just like the ability to customize sons and generals and even possibly soldier yoroi. Customizing the colors of our units in the campaign should be possible. Perhaps more abilities for generals in the campaign or family specific traits that normal generals don't get access to.

    I would truly appreciate more diversity in castles as the current ones honestly are just the same. I can just select the castle in the campaign map and I know what I'll be facing. Please provide several different setups for each "level" so to speak. Even changing the landscapes for the capitals would be fantastic. This would mean at least ~8 maps that would need to be redone.

    I would also like to see a bit more work in the diplomatic negotiations. The ability to give provinces or ask vassals not to war with another ally would be greatly appreciated. Allow us to get hostages from other clans easier and prevent us from being able to war with that clan.

    Overall again CA I'd like to state that you have a fantastic foundation. Just build upon it and provide more depth and further customization.
  • KurkistanKurkistan Senior Member Registered Users Posts: 293
    edited June 2011
    Sorry for adding another wall of text for you to read, but I feel compelled to resurrect my very old naval invasion improvement.

    If you follow my links from this post onward, you will see a large amount of discussion about improving the ability of an invaded country to defend its shores against amphibious assaults.

    I believe that it would be beneficial for both gameplay and realism purposes for a faction to need local naval superiority before succeeding in landing thousands of men on their enemy's shores. Therefore, there ought to be some way for fleets to express their presence in along a large part of the coastline (larger than just their Zone of Control) such that they can act to deter naval invasions by inferior forces.

    Note: Looking at the original thread in Yuku, I realize that the pure mechanics of my original formulation have already been executed besides tying the fate of the army to that of its fleet for the turn after transport. In TW:S2, both fleets and armies already lose all of their movement points when landing on the coast. The only change needed from this would be to make the defeat of the fleet entail the destruction of the army for that turn.
  • JokerJoker Senior Member Registered Users Posts: 644
    edited June 2011
    One additional feature I'd like to see added is the opportunity to have multiple turn sieges/battles. The trigger for this could be fi having taken a certain part of a castle or having captured a tower/building/etc... where you then get the option to end this turn. When you then return during the next turn, you find your men in an encampment where you have had the chance to recuperate the wounded and can start the next level of siege/battle. It could then be a trigger of getting reinforcements or not which could turn the siege/battle your way or not !
    My top five of next Total War installments:
    1) TW: Rome II
    2) TW: China
    3) TW: Lord of the Rings
    4) TW: Victorian
    5) TW: Star Wars
    [PORTABLE-ID]joker[/PORTABLE-ID]
  • YabguNizamPashaYabguNizamPasha Member Registered Users Posts: 65
    edited June 2011
    1- We are working for total war community in Turkey since 2006. So we want Turkish language support. Seriously.

    2- CA passed Suleiman the Magnificent... I guess Suleiman: Total War seems not fantastic ;)

    Assassins-Creed-Revelations_2011_05-26-11_006.jpg_600.jpg

    assassins-creed-revelations.jpg

    3- This will be personal :) my best total war game is Medieva: Total War. If you use chess style (like m1) for next product i will be very happy.
  • HAWKHAWK Junior Member Registered Users Posts: 1
    edited June 2011
    I realy like the rpg elements of the units in the avatar multyplayer! For the next TW projekt I want even more rpg elements for example when you are with your army in a city with the right buildings you can train your units in specific talents like defence or something like this. If there is a smith you can make special weapons for your army, but this will cost you money and time. At first your unit cant handle this new weapon good but after time the unit will have a advantage with these weapons. The same at armor.

    The next thing are the talents and attributes. Like the general the units have to have this system too. The next thing is that the units need a passiv rpg system. If the unit killed for example in a battle many kavallerie units, this unit will gain a bigger advantage versus this units. Another example is this: The unit was hidding and surprised another unit and killed it. In the next battle this unit can hide better.

    The units need a loyalty. If you waste a unit always to keep for example arrows away of your better units, they will maybe fight someday in a battle against you.

    If your army is in a city and there is building like a bordel or a pub the moral and loyalty will increas for a time.

    If the supplies are low you can decide which unit will get more then others.

    Over all you see there are a lot of things you can do at rpg system.:cool:


    The next big things are the historical battles. we need a lot more of these and there have to be if possible more solving ways.


    If only one Thing out of this post comes in the next TW I will be happy:)

    Sorry for my bad english.
  • ElendstouristElendstourist Junior Member Registered Users Posts: 1
    edited June 2011
    Hm, probably most won't like this idea.

    But I'd really like to see an objective based team-battle mode for ~8 players.

    It would focus on completing a certain objective rather than just eliminating the hostile forces.

    Keep armies small so that the teams have to work together.

    Make it different from siege battles.

    Thanks.
  • Hokaido_SamuraiHokaido_Samurai Member Registered Users Posts: 82
    edited June 2011
    I would like to see more diplomatic actions, particularly military ones so you can request for them to move an army to a certain place or attack a certain town.

    I liked the idea of having more control on castle layout and more controlled upgrades like fortified gatehouse or fire arrow towers

    Finally I would like to see a bigger more diverse map. While it sound's good just to focus really hard on one culture(Shogun 2), in truth its much more exiting to have a wide variety spanning many cultures(Empire)

    P.s. return of view town from Rome
  • GSCGSC Senior Member Registered Users Posts: 1,687
    edited June 2011
    We need 2 go deeper in Politics. Similar like in Victoria II.




    Post edited, this thread is for ideas not discussion,
    Shire
  • dge1dge1 Moderator Arkansas, USARegistered Users, Moderators, Knights Posts: 22,381
    edited June 2011
    My personal thoughts are (some have been mentioned or noted already)
    1. Return to actual city/castle/fort maps when attacking or defending a city/castle/fort. The generic fort introduced in Empire makes for tedious game play after the third or fourth rendition. (Even with the inability to repair walls adding some challenges.) I will often avoid building walls around cities (if I have a decent army at hand to defend) just to be able to use/plan defense using buildings and available terrain. Cannons can be a problem, it is true, but I should also not lose all the building defenders if a building is knocked down. A pile of rubble is an excellent defense point, whatever the era.
    2. Battle maps terrain taken from the Campaign map terrain - circa Rome/Med 2.
    3. Ability to do multiple lines of research at a time, somewhat like Empire. Have scholars or teachers or someone that you can assign a line of research to do. Maybe multiple lines of research in a school/college/university. As you upgrade you can do another line of study/research.
    4. Ability to construct defensive encampments/forts on the campaign map - circa Rome/Empire - which would take several turns (if continue having four seasons per year - please) to be gone or unusable.
    5. Ability to construct roads and bridges between points you select. Maybe require having to have someone with a surveyor/engineer ability in the region, trained in a University.
    6. Start your own faction/estate/realm/country. A type of campaign that requires you to start out as some minor lord on an estate and scheme or fight your way to becoming King or Emperor. Fit it into the main game once you have gained a certain amount of power or prestige.
    7. Ability to use naval ports and bases belonging to your Allies to rest, recoup and refit.
    8. Ability to personally command in battle the support/reinforcing units provided by your Allies.
    9. Ability to decline any reinforcements if you so desire. Some or all.
    10. Ability to retreat in the direction you wish if attacked and you have not engaged in battle yet.
    11. Diplomacy. :) What can I say that hasn't been griped about already? Doesn't have to be realistic, as this is a game, but it should be credible - if that makes sense.
    12. Spies, Harlots, Thieves and Horse Traders. We need more desp.icable ancillary characters!
    13. Lastly (finally!) the ability to recruit and keep units based on loyalty or patriotism. Some people will fight for something more than money. Would probability need some kind of character requirement from the faction/estate/region/national leader but I should not always have to recruit using money if I am am getting attacked by an outside force.
    Thanks,

    Doug
    "The two most common things in the universe are Hydrogen and Stupidity." - Harlan Ellison
    "The right to be heard does not automatically include the right to be taken seriously." - Hubert H. Humphrey
    "Never argue with an idiot. They will only bring you down to their level and beat you with experience.” - George Carlin/Mark Twain
    “Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it.”–George Santayana, The Life of Reason, 1905.

  • SystemSystem Posts: 7,168
    edited June 2011
    I guess this idea would really only work with a Roman based game but anyway I'll still put it forward, I would like to see a more in depth political system somehow blended into the game where your generals as well as increasing in skill would also rise in political rank too so they would slowly become Tribunes, Praetors have the option to become Senators if they wish and so forth, maybe even try to become Emperor.

    I'd also like to see elections brought into the game where you have keep the people on your side, I know we had this in ETW but now they would be much more important because when you go to war with the other factions you need to consult the plebs with a referendum first and if they don't want to go to war against that faction then either you can't war against them full stop or if you do then you suffer from a major drop in popularity which could even lead to rebellions and civil war.





    I would also like to see a Mythological Total War, I think there is so much potential in this idea what with not only mythological units marching into battle alongside regular troops but also the way that the very Gods themselves can be used to influence the mechanics of the game. You could have it where in order to gain mythological units you have to build certain temples then once you have one you have to keep that god/goddess happy by tributing an amount of your food/resources to them, if you stop because your faction runs into economic difficulties then you can't recruit those units anymore or maybe the God will become angry and those units will even turn on your own men during a battle or something.

    I guess if you wanted to experiment with the idea before committing to a full on Mythological game you could bring out a Mythological expansion pack for a Rome/Egypt/Greek Total War if you do one in the future, just to see if it works or not.



    P.S. a return to Rome's reinforcement system please where every army present can enter the battle rather than only one army from each faction at a time.
  • ranknfileranknfile Senior Member Registered Users Posts: 7,427
    edited June 2011
    Thanks for asking. First two things: the games DO get better with each release; secondly there have been many good points already brought up in this post. I like to see a simulation of a time period be just that - a simulation which ACCURATELY depicts the era. Don't really care if this means "imbalances" that makes things "unfair" for multiplayer - just recreate it as it was - including having ONLY those units that actually existed (and limits on scarce units). I too would like to see recruitment limited in captured foreign lands (no Scottish pikemen recruited in Egypt for example). Diplomacy - as with everything else - should be as realistic as possible.
    Maybe this is just my belief but I do not want a computer game that is "fair" or "balanced' or "epic" - just recreate an era as it was. That makes for the most interesting and immersive games IMHO.
    "Whoever desires is always poor" - Claudian
  • Geitz666Geitz666 Junior Member Registered Users Posts: 24
    edited June 2011
    OVERALL:
    - More unique factions (I know Japanese clans are similar and European warfare in the 18th century was the same from Portugal to Russia) with more unique buildings and units. In cases of excessive similarity, unique buildings can be used to make each faction more unique (for example, each clan could have had its flagship prestige temple or something like that). Also, mercenaries are a nice addon. In Shogun 2 we could have had the option to recruit ronin as mercenaries.
    - Give us the option to change our capital! This is a simple but awesome option, as it adds realism and customization.

    CAMPAIGN:
    - More unique cities. Madrid and Paris; Edo and Fukuoka, shouldn't really look like they're the same. Factions should get more special buildings or even "prestige models" for its capitals (like Kyoto) and such. For example, in a future hypothetical Empire/Napoleon 2 you could get an option to "expand walls" so Paris looks post-Haussmann in the campaign map and such.
    - Keep dilemmas and consequences, please! Seriously, IMO they're one of the best addition ever to a Total War campaign. Not only are they campaign differentiator elements, but really fun to both expect and decide dilemmas, and to enjoy (or suffer) consequences. If it's possible, add more dilemmas and more consequences.

    BATTLES:
    - Please, please, please, return to the Rome/Med II siege system. ETW and NTW felt really bad when you were attacking London and there only were a bunch of houses on grass... However, Shogun 2 has advanced a lot, sieges are now like they should be, BUT I still feel that cities (castles in this case) are too small in the battlefield and should contain way more buildings.
    - Prisoners of war.

    And well... that's it I think :P IMO Shogun 2 is a huge improvement over previous titles, it's difficult to polish it further haha.
  • Dionysius the MightyDionysius the Mighty Senior Member Registered Users Posts: 3,194
    edited June 2011
    For those people complaining of towns and cities in Empire/Napoleon being tiny villages, or forts with two buildings, please remember that you are besieging a fort (or village if there's no fort) on the outskirts of the city, not the city itself. You only have to look around the edge of the battle map to see the city itself stretching off into the distance!

    That said, there's a lot of ideas here that I like, I believe I've even submitted similar ideas myself in the past! Especially the revolutionary battles taking place within a city map, improvements to Protectorates, naval landing parties and the return of City View.

    A couple of things I'd like to see regarding diplomacy, firstly, a Protectorate faction should be limited in what they can do diplomatically. They should not be able to declare war on the other allies and Protectorates of their controlling faction. If they are at war with any of these factions when they become a Protectorate, they should immediately make peace with them.

    The other thing I would like to see is some diplomatic options, either when creating a Protectorate, or when taking an enemy's capital. Doing either of these should bring up a negotiation window where you can try and force some terms. There could be three options, 'leave their government alone' (in which case the faction remains as is, but won't like you as much and may betray you), 'install a new government' (in which case the faction's government type is changed to match your own, you get a diplomatic bonus with them, but the Protectorate faction suffers slightly increased unrest), and finally 'convert faction' (whereby the faction's government changes to match yours, and their state religion does the same, so you get a larger diplomatic bonus, but the faction suffers from much greater unrest). You would get these options only when creating a Protectorate, or when taking an enemy capital. I feel this would work especially well for a Total War Victoria title, as it would allow players to impose their will on the world map without having to completely wipe out powerful factions like France, or Russia. The idea comes from when Napoleon was defeated and exiled to Elba, the allies imposed a new government on France based around the Bourbon King Louis XVIII, but this proved unpopular with the people and when Napoleon returned they were ready to revolt against the King and return L'Empereur to his throne.

    The other idea I had recently was for a new form of battle where instead of winning by destroying the enemy army you could win by controlling a majority of key points on the battlefield, be they buildings or important terrain features. Once one side has the majority of these features a countdown beings, and the other side has to push them out or lose the battle. Think Waterloo, with the battles raging around the farmhouses. I feel this could help the AI somewhat, as it would give it a more defined set of objectives. I can only presume this, but I would think it is easier to program an AI to 'take and hold' than it is to program one to 'destroy or rout the enemy'.

    Apart from these, I'd love to see some official mod tools for Warscape, and especially Napoleon Total War's long awaited unit editor.
    [PORTABLE-ID]dionysiusthemighty[/PORTABLE-ID]

    "Every position must be held to the last man: there must be no retirement. With our backs to the wall and believing in the justice of our cause each one of us must fight on to the end." ~ Field Marshal Haig, order to British troops, 1918

    Please view the Total War Forum: Terms and Conditions
  • NorthAmericanHippocampusNorthAmericanHippocampus Member Registered Users Posts: 31
    edited June 2011
    1. A large map with regions in the East Indies, Africa, India, and maybe even the far east.
    2. Unique units for all factions. No more Empire clones. I loved the unique line infantry of Napoleon.
    3. Faction intro movies as in rome/medieval ii.
    4. Revolutionary battles inside cities.
    5. More in depth diplomacy.
    6. Lasting smoke from gunpowder weapons. Modders have one great things with this.
    7. A MP/single player battle uniform editor.
    8. Dinosaurs, of course.

    Edit: And please let us have two of our own nations armys on the battlefield at once. The simple reinforcement controls for medieval ii kingdoms was great.
    Edit: And the create your own faction thing others have talked about sounds awesome
    That's about it. Take your, time make it great, and keep up the good work CA!
    All that begins must end.
  • Half_Life_ExpertHalf_Life_Expert Senior Member Oak Park, CA , USARegistered Users Posts: 4,686
    edited June 2011
    CraigTW wrote: »
    Hi guys,

    As you know we've always listened to our community. Whether it be from the inclusion of naval battles, or in expanding the multiplayer functionality of our games - we've always taken community feedback seriously at the highest level.

    So I'm asking you what you'd most like to see in future Total War games or expansions. What features would you like that you feel are missing from the game?

    Please don't use this thread to complain about bugs (please use the support sections of the forum for that) - but feel free to be as specific as you like about features you're interested in.

    Be imaginative, be honest and you never know, they might end up in an expansion or in the next major incarnation of Total War!

    Craig

    Regardless of the setting of the next TW, there are only two things i want:

    1: return of POWs being taken in battle (last TW to have it was M2TW is i'm not mistaken)
    2: A Real Atrittion system, as in one that exists year-round, and is caused by moving too far ahead. Basically this calls for a supply train to trail an army in enemy territory, that can be raided and is also affected by geography and weather.
    "we have officially entered into pre-whinning about our games."- Cogre

    I will always respect differing opinions on here, so long as they are presented maturely and in a civil manner

    "No Battleplan ever survives contact with the enemy"- Helmuth Von Moltke the Elder

    The WWI Thread: https://forums.totalwar.com/discussion/30914/why-a-world-war-i-themed-total-war/p1

    I'm skipping TW: Warhammer
  • AelitaAelita Senior Member Registered Users Posts: 130
    edited June 2011
    I would like to see 3 things
    -large scope (etw or larger)
    -ability to choose the government type of factions you liberate
    - when two nations request allies assistance all the nations on one side go to war with all the nations on the other
    "Caution, Sir! I am eternally tired of hearing that word caution. It is nothing but the word of cowardice!" -John Brown
  • Half_Life_ExpertHalf_Life_Expert Senior Member Oak Park, CA , USARegistered Users Posts: 4,686
    edited June 2011
    I just thought of another idea for a future TW title, It would be a "Fantasy" Total War in a sense.

    A stand-alone, Battle only TW that includes units from all previous TW games.

    A fun what if? game that allows players to have troops from all of history do battle with troops that they never would have faced.

    Spartan Hoplites vs English Longbowmen; Samurai vs Romans; Hannibal vs Henry V; Napoleon vs Fredrick the Great,

    Just imagine all the epic battles we could fight that never could happen!
    "we have officially entered into pre-whinning about our games."- Cogre

    I will always respect differing opinions on here, so long as they are presented maturely and in a civil manner

    "No Battleplan ever survives contact with the enemy"- Helmuth Von Moltke the Elder

    The WWI Thread: https://forums.totalwar.com/discussion/30914/why-a-world-war-i-themed-total-war/p1

    I'm skipping TW: Warhammer
  • AlexandroAlexandro Senior Member Zu Lai Temple againRegistered Users Posts: 1,416
    edited June 2011
    - Multiple research levels (as said Dge1)
    - A improved trading system with more items allowing you to build vast commercial empires(victory condition:control all wine producing provinces).
    - some freedom in the construction of cities (buildings gain in productivity depending on where they are built, example: a certain level of development of the province/city you could have only one lumbermill, but depending on where the player to position itself on the map-close to forests-, their productivity would be differentiated) and improvements in the provinces.
    - Campaign cooperative with the most players (not just two) and whenever a player leaves the AI takes place automatically.
    - Return of dirty clothes (as in Medieval 2)
    - More and more animations for each unit in the combat map.
    - Mp battles against Ai for 3v3, 2v2,....
    - Despite the game being a "Total War" that there would also other conditions for victory, armies could be just a form of "intimidation".
    - Maintenance avatar conquest campaign with improvements.
    - Return of some agents in the campaign map, merchants, etc ...
    - More RPG levels.
    - Fully touchscreen capabilities, zoom, grouping, rotate and improve 3d (battlemap).
    -I would also like RPG elements have a wider scope on who(scientists,scholars) can develop new technologies, then an agent with the trait "brilliant mind" could accelerate the development of new technologies, or even be the only ones capable of developing some them.
  • Valkyria BloodlineValkyria Bloodline Senior Member Registered Users Posts: 215
    edited June 2011
    MP

    - Veteran unit skill point redistribution ability.
    - When choosing a horse for the general, show the general on the horse.

    SP & MP

    - Sea battle Features
    I. Sinking or flooding of the ship
    II. Ramming feature
    III. Explosion
    IV. Break off or split off part of a ship if the ship is smaller in size.
    V. Veteran Ships
    VI. Drifting

    - Cannon bune
    I. Ship can explode due to fire arrows, gun fire or another cannon bune
    II. Ship is easily vulnerable to being caught on fire
    III. Friendly fire and morale penalties if cannon shot hitting a friendly ship or flying through.

    - Large or Medium ships
    I. New ramming feature
    > Allows the ship to ram into another ship causing a ship to start flooding and start sinking
    > Causes morale penalties
    > Two of the same size ship in a head on collision will cause both ships to stick to each other with 50% chance for both to start sinking.

    Siege tower bunes
    I. Reduce speed but increase the speed when the skill is activated
    II. Limit the amount one field to 2 in MP

    New Legendary unit (all require one retainer to field, can only use one of the units, not all 3)

    - Naban Trade Ship (Can only field one)
    - Black ship (Possible, have not thought of the idea yet)
    - Fire rocket ship (Possible, dunno)

    Retainers for MP for ship battles

    - All ships have increase speeds
    - "X" ship have increase morale
    - Increases "X" reload speed
    - Increases "X" accuracy
    - Increases "X" gun powder or fire arrows chances to ignite an enemy ship with 20% increase to all ships prices
    - Increases "X" number of men
    - Increases "X" armor points
    - Decreases "X" cool down for skills
    - Increases "X" turning speed

    Legendary Retainers

    - Greatly reduces the number of men on board the enemies ship (Thanks to our ninja).
    - Reinforce wood - Greatly reduce the damage from Gun fire

    (Ideas later to be added ---- Retainers
    )

    General skill traits (To be continued)

    Weather

    - High waves - Causes slower turning speed, decrease accuracy, decrease speeds, causes drifting
    - High currents - Causes slower speeds and can cause ships to drift back further
    - Rain - Usual (same affect as on land)
    - Fog - Usual (same affect as on land)
    - Night - to be continued

    Veteran ships idea

    - Increase speed
    - Morale
    - Increase Number of men
    - Increase turning speed
    - Armor points
    - NO NO NO RELOAD SPEED OR ACCURACY UPGRADES

    (To be continued)


    Miscellaneous

    - Get the close hand look, just click on a unit and further control the unit, like user control fight.

    - to be continued
  • RumpullpusRumpullpus Senior Member Registered Users Posts: 1,216
    edited June 2011
    -DS-empire wrote: »
    1.Blood as in medieval 2 total war etc, I know u guys are relluctant to do so with the new titles, but u've putten it in in your older titles and every year you guys release a new one people suggest .. put blood in. An option to toggle blood on & off could be nice here. Like mw2 did with the airport scene so u can bypass it for kids.
    It just feels so much immersive if u have blood, atm your soldiers looks like plastic puppets.. 1000 death people but not a single drupple blood, while in the loading screen u have a picture of an horse with arrow in & blood... lol :D

    2. More living city's, if you get sieged in sh2 or etw, ntw the castle was just walls with 2 buildings =), make it more believable that actually people live there as in rome total war for instance if u defend your castle u can see buildings there that u made.. super!

    3.More diversity in the units armors/ and units overall, I love the time when u played rome u had like romans, barbarians and each had their own different units etc. The last 3 total war games have much less diversity :)

    4. Multiplayer Campaing was ace, keep it in for next titles !! But make an other system wich can solve all the desync issues.

    THIS^^

    i want to see the large detailed castles again not the generic (plains, mountain, coast..) maps. its ok for MP but SP deserves alot more detail.

    the blood too. i know CA doesnt want to do it for whatever reason but thats what i want to see. it doesnt have to be like dragon age over the top blood bath, just a little red paint here and there will do (maybe some on the ground and in rivers).

    and i actually would like to see better performance graphics wise. the warscape engine is a good looking engine and you guys should stick with it for a while and get it working really well. and i would hate to see another ETW just because we got to have better looking graphics.

    ofcourse theres always the AI that can be worked on but hell, you guys have pulled off a mircale on the AI already and if it gets much tougher im gonna have to start wishing for cheats :p
  • YurtleYurtle Senior Member Registered Users Posts: 154
    edited June 2011
    I'd like to see what would happen if some AI were put into the units under your own command to give them some autonomy and a little bit of their own initiative, for some examples;

    *Archers that automatically choose the best target rather than the first target and update that priority as the battle goes on AND stops shooting when their target clashes with friendlies.

    *Spearmen that automatically form a spearwall when they see a charge coming.

    *Your own cavalry countercharging when the enemy horse are going to smash into their flank and they're just standing there.

    *Selected units forming into a sensible cohesive group when given general move orders rather than all just making a straight line to where you say.

    *Unengaged units altering their facing when a clear and obvious threat is approaching from another direction.

    And other little things like that. Stuff that's dead obvious and that any player in their right mind would command their units to do if they had a moment to consider.

    Yes I understand this sort of thing will take some of the control away from the player but as the Total War series moves forward and the AI continues to improve I think some of that control needs to be delegated to keep the game flowing.
    The more the enemy AI improves the more the player has to do and in Shogun 2 it's gotten to the point where you pretty much need to pause to issue commands to stay on top. I hate pausing, I'll take losses before I'll stop a fight to keep things in order.
    I think it might give the gameplay a new feel, one where you're more a general commanding rather than a gamer micromanaging.
  • naishonaisho Senior Member USARegistered Users Posts: 3,425
    edited June 2011
    1.Create pools of populations which either feed reinforcements or create new units. Unlimited military populations in Empire and Napoleon are not exactly fun, challenging, or interesting. Instead create pools of veterans/civilians/nobles which feed the military which stops players recruiting unlimited best or middle quality troops. Which also rewards players who play smart in battle by allowing larger quantities of these troops and removes strange limitations.

    2. More varied victory conditions along the lines of
    - Historical Victory (At the end of the period what they historically held)
    - Ambition Victory (During the period what that faction wanted to achieve)
    - Total Victory (the standard TW conquest)

    3. More realistic troop numbers for both battles and campaigns. (I understand in the past both graphical limitations and processor limitations prevented the such numbers in the game)

    4. Armies that can protect regions instead of cities only, it is not fun having only 2 or 3 full stacks to protect 20 or more cities.

    5.(very important) internal faction politics that keeps in check players ability to declare war at will and in some cases prevent subversive actions against enemies. Aka if there is trade between the player and an AI the merchants could send assassins/revolt/start a revolution/or just prevent the diplomatic ability of declaring war as they have a vested interest in money from the trade. No leader in history has ever been allowed unbridled power, and it is not fun when the players and AI have it either.

    6. More realistic command structures on the campaign maps.
    1---/\__/\
    1=(O-"-O)=/\
    1--- / | | \--/ -|
    1---| \-/ \-_ /
    1--( Neko )

    Naisho the Neko

    "You have raised assorted issues under what might be termed a “I-don’t-like-it because-I-say-it’s-not-historical” banner. This isn't quite the same as "justified", I'm sorry to say." -MikeB
  • leeho730leeho730 Junior Member Registered Users Posts: 14
    edited June 2011
    1. Expansion: Japan Invasion of Korea (Bunroku no Eki). This is as close to Medieval total war experience TW:S2 can provide., with each major faction having unique army and navy units.
    2. Medieval 3
    3. Rome 2
    4. Empire 2 with enhanced graphic and diplomacy mechanics
    5. More accurate simulation of Feudalism; I believe in Feudalistic nations, war occured in similar fashion to Crusade; the king would declare war and each lord would provide armed forces based on contract and wealth, in return for political independence. Like Vassal, but without diplomacy and the forces must join King's army etc.
    6. More realistic simulation of command structure in battlefield. I mean, units act like they are capabble of having radio communication with the player. Command rank should correspond to 1) improved morale bonus 2) increase sphere of "influence." Generals should only be able to instantly command those units within the area of general's influence, those units outside the area should repond more slowly, depending on the rank of the general. For example, for ranki 1 general, it would take 30 seconds to command units outside the area of influence, whereas rank 6 generals can command all units pretty much instantly across the whole battlefield.
  • NinjaBananaNinjaBanana Member Registered Users Posts: 60
    edited June 2011
    - Korean Expansion for Shogun 2.
    - A China based Total War
    - I really like that there are way fewer units in Shogun 2 than in Rome and Medieval 2. Keep it like this :)
    - Make alliances more important
    - I want the old reinforcement system back. I don't want my starting units to die/rout before my reinforcements enter the battle, I want them to enter the battle 5-10 minutes after the battle has started, and then fight alongside me.

    Just my 2 cents for now
    EDIT: I agree with Naisho, more victory conditions, not just conquest
    There is no dark side if the moon really. As a matter of fact it's all dark.
    Pink Floyd
  • SchepelSchepel Senior Member Registered Users Posts: 1,548
    edited June 2011
    I'd like to see internal diplomacy and land ownership for family members. The latter would open up all kinds of interesting possibilities, from believable revolts to specific interaction between provinces and certain family members.

    I would also appreciate the inclusion of a feature where each province has a pool with resources, ranging from man power to building materials. You shouldn't be able to build just about anything in doublequick time on an island. Same goes for heavy recruitment. How would you recruit a great army in a sleepy backwater? You don't. It shouldn't be impossible, but it should take more time.

    Units get recruited with experience, probably resembling training. This doesn't make too much sense. I would like to see a feature where you get to train your soldiers after recruitment. This could either be a slider which allows training for garrisoned units in a city with training facilities or targeted training, much like you recruit units. Units which don't do anything but gambling and whoring should also lose combat efficiency over time.

    Mixed units or units with multiple applications would also be great. In MTWII we had Russian units which were a mix of melee and archery. I'd like them back. Samurai were trained in all weapon styles.

    Last but not least, open up the game for modding.
  • LastManStandingLastManStanding Junior Member Registered Users Posts: 5
    edited June 2011
    Please can you consider:
    1) Making the historical battles more like time commanders series, where you choose deployment etc.
    2) Think about presenting the historical battles in a time commanders type way (that doesn't infringe copyright!)
    3) Some castles/cities should have moats
    4) Generals who have 7 or more stars should have smarter AI, so play against very differentely from the norm
    5) Please update attrition for future Rome games - Hannibal lost half his army crossing the alps!
    6) Make it possible to keep an ally to the endgame, they don't always attack
    Many thanks!
  • ranknfileranknfile Senior Member Registered Users Posts: 7,427
    edited June 2011
    A few more ideas:
    - Although the game has one build structures or develop techs that improve the quality of one's troops, in reality some factions troop quality should DECREASE (Napoleon's France for example) over time.
    - Being able to mod would be a nice feature (more important to me than multiplayer)
    - I enjoyed The Pennisular Campaign expansion and would welcome similar "mini-campaigns" for Shogun 2 and future releases
    - Rome 2 .... please?
    "Whoever desires is always poor" - Claudian
  • Nigrinus1981Nigrinus1981 Member Registered Users Posts: 149
    edited June 2011
    Well, there are a few features i can think of.
    First of all, I would like to see the campaign map relate to the battle map again. It will make you pick your battlefield well.
    Also if you torched an enemy building it should be represented in the battle map…like in the videos of Shogun 2 where whole villages were burning. I mean….this is total war!!

    Would love to see that wars have a purpose. I mean, not just you are a neighbor to someone means he has to declare war on you sooner or later. A goal for each war would be best, like if the AI wants to take a certain region, and it accomplished this, it can offer you peace. Now the aggressor doesn’t stop until you are completely annihilated.

    What I think about Units/Armies: I think there should be a population you recruit from, like in Rome Total War. I keep wondering where this trillions of soldiers come from that Bavaria keeps recruiting (Empire and Napoleon) If you are a small state, you cant do world politics with a small army but with allies.

    Diplomacy should be more realistic

    And a wonderful thing relating to battles…there should be a deployment phase on a tactical map like the one you see when loading a battle. You see the topographic right now and the deployment zones. Lets say you could drag your deployment zone to a position that suits you the best. The General with the higher Rank ( Stars ) should deploy first. If there are equal leaders in the armies, the defender should drag and drop where he wants his deployment zone. This way you can simulate good maneuvering by the generals and using the terrain advantages.

    Cool would be if there are key positions on battle maps too like refill ammo and this stuff. Might keep landbattles more interesting.

    Yeah and give the rivers names on the campaign map.
  • VlaitorVlaitor Senior Member Registered Users Posts: 172
    edited June 2011
    -More diverse unit appearance.
    -Limit all units maximum to 6 to limit Spam.
    -More units overall ex:Bamboo stick peasants, Matchlocks cav, Dual sword samurai, Squad of generals(gives bonus in a radius, much like the general itself but less effective) and others..
    -Make the lvl 1 castle to a 70% defender fund because it's extremely difficult.
    -Duel possible before battle.
    Swift as the Wind
    Silent as a Forest
    Fierce as Fire
    Immovable as a Mountain.
  • The.DukeThe.Duke Junior Member Registered Users Posts: 7
    edited June 2011
    Hi, I have some ideas and wishes.

    1. The avatar gains experience after every victory and defeat, so eventually you will get ten stars even if you lose 90% of the games. The bad thing with this is that the number of stars not really indicates how good the player is (like it did in Empire and Napoleon) and with the match battles when you play someone with equal amount of stars you don't really play a person that is at the same level as you. I think that your avatar should lose xp after battles it loses but not lose skill points. So only the elite few get ten stars.

    2. Blood.

    3. Actual City battles like in rome and medieval ii.

    4. The close combats should be more realistic. Like one soldier holding an enemy while the other stabs him. So if you make a rome 2 the roman soldiers should fight "roman" and the barbaric barbaric etc etc.

    5. Fleets should not be able to float around in the midatlantic for years and smaller ships should not be able to move thousands of soldiers. I also think that ships should have to stop at islands when traveling longer distances. So you should be able to dock your ship at other than your own ports.

    6 The games I want are: Total war Rome 2 and Total war Renaissance whre you start in 1492 and discover the WHOLE world.

    Thanks and sorry for bad english
Sign In or Register to comment.