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...

12526283031

Comments

  • HalonHalon Senior Member Registered Users Posts: 118
    edited July 2014
    I would like to see changes to the way R2:TW handles politics and diplomacy. Currently inter house politics just feels like an occasional annoyance that does nothing but harm the entire empires bank balance, usually at the most inconvenient moment. I would rather the currency of inter house politics be Gravitas and the results of this kind of politicking could result in losses/gains in things like popularity, corruption, recruitment, foreign diplomacy, trade, characters etc. I feel there needs to be a clear distinction between the fortune of the house and the fortune of the empire. The way it works currently does seem appropriate for nations run by Emperors and Kings though, for who the wealth of the nation is the wealth of the ruler.

    In general I believe that diplomacy needs polishing, this has been stated by many people and seems to have often been the case throughout the history of the series. What usually seems to be lacking is options. The fewer diplomatic options and tools we have the more often we can only resort to the sword (which of course is fun but sometimes it's nice to be able to use our brains to outwit our enemies). Examples of the options I would like to see are 'Trade Territory', 'Annex Client State' (giving you the chance to absorb a weak client state without having to butcher a valued ally), 'Denounce' (publicly criticise a faction and hopefully gain approval from it's rivals), 'Threaten', 'Garrison Client State' (ability to recruit and station troops in a client states cities to 'defend' them, a good first step towards annexation.)

    Battles in general but sieges in particular could benefit from a mixture of objectives. Sieges should be a series of multi-turn/multi-battle events with the defenders trying to do things like defend resupply convoys (naval and land based), fighting retreats from isolated bastions and conducting night raids on enemy outposts. Whilst the attackers are trying to capture sections of the city, reduce bastions, stop blockade runners and any potential break outs. Naturally not every siege needs to be like this, but attacking Carthage, Rome, Alexandria etc would be much more interesting if they were longer drawn out affairs. Other ways of varying sieges and ordinary battles would be more access to field defences and more varied objectives. Having camps, baggage trains, routes of retreat, road/mountain passes on the field as objectives to be defended or captured (depending on their position and relation to the campaign map) which in turn lead to real consequences after the battle. For example failure to secure a route of retreat could result in greater losses if you're routed or ransacking the enemies baggage train could boost morale/treasury. Of course the generals traits, tactics, army traditions and the factions warfare style could determine what sort of objectives were on offer.

    Additionally, I'd love to see Empire 2:TW next... jus' sayin' ;)
    More diplomacy options please.
  • vinh44vinh44 Junior Member Registered Users Posts: 19
    edited August 2014
    1) Allow the production of unlimited armies; some people like to have super huge battles against enemy AI.
    2) Built in cheat mode to allow the enhancement of unlimited money. Not only do I want a super huge army but I also want to finance my enemies too (specifically talking about the AI of the campaign map).
    3) Allow the construction of all buildings without restriction. I want to build as many buildings as I can either in a minor settlement or a provincial capital.
    4) Buildings should not have squalor (public unhappiness). It seems currently military buildings, city centre, military
    siege equipment building, training fields, muster field, and many more have public disorder if built. Seriously, who
    thought of this? A very bad and uninteresting idea.
    5) Please add in more unit variety. Please make the unit feel exotic (distinct) from other factions. Create units with cool looking body armor THAT IS DISTINCT FROM OTHER FACTIONS. A Hoplite from Carthage looks exactly the same from the Hoplite of Athens.
    6) Have the option to trade settlements or give settlements (as a gift) to any factions be it enemy or foe. Also have the ability to give money to friends or foes without needing a peace treaty.
  • mrose1506mrose1506 Member Registered Users Posts: 38
    edited August 2014
    Let us rename units as well as armies.
    Let us customize the looks of our generals like on avatar mode.
    Let us create our own custom factions.
    Leave all of the features already in the game in the game.Ex army stances weather attrition.
  • chrissher7chrissher7 Junior Member Registered Users Posts: 2,038
    edited August 2014
    You should be able to not declare war before you attack enemies it should automatically trigger when you attack someone neutral or allied like in rome 1 and medieval 2 (It gives you a warning but no diplomatic screens and a message comes down the side that war has been declared once you attack) so there is a greater element of surprise. Also put shogun and medieval 1 on steam and fix them for windows 8
  • ArturIDDQDArturIDDQD Member Registered Users Posts: 36
    edited August 2014
    1) Diplomatic opportunity to demand to give the city
    2) Year should be changed one time in four seasons (or give us opportunity to configure this option)
    3) Let us change the name of units and generals like names armies
    4) AI must build strong and havy units
  • super_newbie_prosuper_newbie_pro Senior Member Registered Users Posts: 366
    edited August 2014
    I just replay Rome 2 after many months off, and it's very fun to play. Very good job CA.

    However, for me it lacks many points for the game becomes very very interesting like i would a Rome 2 (with futurs patch / DLC ?) :
    - More diplomatic options ; Can ask / negotiate territory with all factions
    - Able to give a city an ally when he lost all his and that there is a sinking ship or an army remains, and save him
    - Have family tree and manage appointments / promotions / corruption as a true CAESAR!
    - Have a clearer more comprehensive political system, as in the proposal of our friend Tullius Cicero here http://www.twcenter.net/forums/showt...Concepts%29%29 / http://forums.totalwar.com/showthrea...gn-Concepts%29
    - add the forts on the campaign map, you can give up or recover, as in Rome 1 and have possibility to build an impressiv wall of forts on our frontiers

    and for modding to increase possibility of the game :

    - Have a modding tool to be able to fully recreate the map of europe with the scale of our choice, to make, if we want, bigger 3x size map like some crazy mods on Rome Total War 1, and the possibility to have more construction by cities / possibility to create a new wide variety of buildings to increase the "SIM CITY" appearance in the game.

    To have more suggestion, the actually Rome 2 which we add all the functions mentioned here (Many of the points mentioned in these topics have been added / fixed since their post) :
    - Campaign ==> http://tinyurl.com/nuxbr9k
    - Graphics / animations ==> http://tinyurl.com/pcv73nj
    - Audio ==> http://tinyurl.com/omnklxa
    - GAMEPLAY ==> http://tinyurl.com/n9bhqmc
    - Battles ==> http://tinyurl.com/ov9422g
    RTW 1 fan - betrayed, disillusioned, disgusted with Rome 2. For me, a Real Rome 2 (and finish) is Rome 1 + graphics/IA/Diplomacy of Rome 2, or the actually Rome 2 which we add all the functions mentioned here :
    - Campaign ==> http://tinyurl.com/nuxbr9k
    - Graphics / animations ==> http://tinyurl.com/pcv73nj
    - Audio ==> http://tinyurl.com/omnklxa
    - GAMEPLAY ==> http://tinyurl.com/n9bhqmc
    - Battles ==> http://tinyurl.com/ov9422g
  • Princeps SenatusPrinceps Senatus Junior Member Registered Users Posts: 14
    edited August 2014
    Just make political system (senate) as in Rome TW.
  • SkidvarSkidvar Junior Member Registered Users Posts: 28
    edited August 2014
    A small request. To make war a bit more personal the names of the faction leaders could be implemented in the diplomacy screen. I find myself always checking the armies and comparing the images... There is room for it:
    2014-08-23_00004.jpg
  • DiamantRush12DiamantRush12 Junior Member Registered Users Posts: 2
    edited September 2014
    Not sure if this will be read, but it is worth a shot.

    I have played every total war game so far, and I must admit that I have enjoyed every single one of them. I think that CA has always created good games in this serie.

    Anyway, these are the things I would love to see.

    For in both Shogun 2 and Rome 2:
    -The possibilty to negotiate territorial consessions, or trades. I have always thought that was the best way humiliate another faction. Mayor territorial losses without battle. This would also be a perfect thing in co-op, but most notably in
    head-to-head campaigns. That way you could wage war against each other, and really negotiate with each other for a peace treaty.

    Just for Rome 2 in the Emperor edition:
    -Add the "Bonus vs infantry" again for Sword wielding Units. This is purely a balancing request, because I know that it will probably be modded again

    , but it is just much more convenient if you guys do it in their place.
    I think that removing that little bonus really messed up the balancing.
    "Spear beats Horse, Sword beats Spear and Horse beats Sword." Is no longer if you remove that bonus, since most of even the earliest spear-wielding units have better armour and melee defence than their sword-wielding counterparts.
    And since they are cheaper to recruit than most Swordsmen, and that renders Swordsmen useless, since they can not beat the spearman, as they would in real life.

    For Rome 2:
    -Add fan-favorite Byzantium.
    I am sure tons of people, just like me, always moved their capital to Byzantium at one point.
    I know that it would conflict with Antheia and Nicomedia, and I know that this point can't be done.
    But a man can dream right?

    For every Total War out now, and to come out in the future.
    -Changing capitals.
    I think this one is the most clear.
    It just adds a little bit of immersion, but it is so important.
    For example, I am Parthia in Rome 2.
    I start with the minor settlement Nisa and then I capture the enterity of the East.



    In real life the Parthians changed their capital multiple times.
    Why do I have to stick with Nisa trough the entire game, while I have captured cities like Alexandria, Nicomedia, and
    Antioch?! Nisa, a city wich has maybe 4000 inhabitants, is capital of the greatest empire in the world. Hell, even
    Aramavir would be a better choice than Nisa.

    For Rome 2:
    A family tree. Said 'nough.

    or Rome 2:
    Manual money edit in diplomacy instead of the "a 10th of your income" way.

    May Fortuna smile upon you and may you release more epic games.
    With my opinion, I would also like to tell you guys that I love your games.
  • super_newbie_prosuper_newbie_pro Senior Member Registered Users Posts: 366
    edited September 2014
    Just make political system (senate) as in Rome TW.
    and childrens in the same city that fathers when they have 16 years old like in Rome 1, + possibility to promote a guy to Governor etc... And increase the scall of the europa campaign map like Caesar in gaul !

    EDIT ; and ships able to unload on... harbor !! Not only on beach... its stupid to have harbors and cant unload our ships with them... lol

    + skins of our family members evolve with age
    + possibility to have governor like in Rome 1 for each city
    + skins of our chief in battle (in the animation on the bottom left corner) evolve with the healt of the unit like in doom ==> BQnFhS1CcAEKxVQ.jpg
    RTW 1 fan - betrayed, disillusioned, disgusted with Rome 2. For me, a Real Rome 2 (and finish) is Rome 1 + graphics/IA/Diplomacy of Rome 2, or the actually Rome 2 which we add all the functions mentioned here :
    - Campaign ==> http://tinyurl.com/nuxbr9k
    - Graphics / animations ==> http://tinyurl.com/pcv73nj
    - Audio ==> http://tinyurl.com/omnklxa
    - GAMEPLAY ==> http://tinyurl.com/n9bhqmc
    - Battles ==> http://tinyurl.com/ov9422g
  • DangerGirl50DangerGirl50 Senior Member Hessen, GermanyRegistered Users Posts: 231
    edited September 2014
    Number one would certainly have to be more diplomatic options and more actual focus on diplomacy as a whole. I was a big fan of the way Rome was split up into Families in the original Rome Total War but mods have easily taken care of that. I'd like to be able to set how many turns per year I can play on just before I start my campaign. It would be nice not having to worry about needing a mod like that for just one simple thing that could be and should be check able.

    Next would have to be more events, in both the term of variety and actual event occurrence rate. Small things like that give Rome an actual RPG feel ontop of its Strategic core and I like that quite a bit. Makes you actually feel like your in charge of things and also gives you things to worry about and consider when your not actually at war.

    Then finally, the Senate. The Senate simply needs to make a return. Probably one of the best features in original Rome was the Senate. At least until a civil war erupts where (if you win) you are given the option to transform into an empire where they are no longer needed. Or you can easily just keep the Status Quo and end up getting max out on senate influence.

    Of course the Senate Influence levels and what not can come with bonuses and negatives for a more complex experience.
  • ArturIDDQDArturIDDQD Member Registered Users Posts: 36
    edited September 2014
    Look at the screenshot.
    I was ambushed and i think in this case, question sign must be on the flag of enemy army too.
    q.jpg
    q.jpg 52.1K
  • XallZallXallZall Senior Member Registered Users Posts: 108
    edited September 2014
    Hello CA, here is a feature I'd really love to see in ANY upcoming Total war game.

    When playing cooperative multiplayer, BOTH players should be able to...
    1. Play together as the same nation.
    2. Play both in the same turn.

    This was a feature in Civilization, where both players could do everything in the same turn then when one player ends the turn, he then must still wait for the other to end, then the AI would do its move.

    This really speeds things up in the sense that you dont have to wait for the other player and you can still check politics towns and armies even when you have to wait for the other player to finish.

    CPU: AMD FX-8350 Octa-Core @ Stock 4Ghz
    GPU: Sapphire ATI Radeon VAPOR-X HD 7970 3GB DDR5
    RAM: Corsair Dominator GT 8GB (2x4GB) DDR3 2133 MHz
    MOBO: Asus Crosshair V Formula Z Mainboard Sockel AM3+
    PSU: Corsair HX 750 Watt
    CASING: NXZT Switch 810
    HARD DRIVES: 2x Corsair Neutron 120 GB in Raid 0 mode, 1x 250 HDD Drive, 1x 3 Terrabyte Western Digital Internal Drive and 1x External 1 TB LG HDD.
  • OweinOwein Junior Member Registered Users Posts: 7
    edited September 2014
    I would be happy if you would make medieval 3. My request is to improve the dipolmat and politic systems in your games. It doesn't need as good as the crusader kings 2's, but to improve these systems would make your games much better.
  • FuriousFurious Junior Member Registered Users Posts: 2
    edited September 2014
    I've given up on ever seeing a new Total War game similar to the first Medieval Total War. I'd love to see it redone and re-released on Steam though, if possible.
  • foestusfoestus Junior Member Registered Users Posts: 3
    edited September 2014
    Hi guys,

    One of the things that i'd like to see the most is a defensive tree for cities allowing players to build defenses around the city to allow variety and enhance difficulty.
  • HartassenHartassen Junior Member Registered Users Posts: 159
    edited September 2014
    1. Allow us the option to select which allies we would like to call into a war.

    2. Allow the sale of provinces in multiplayer games to the other human player or in single player towards client states/satrapys.

    3. Fix the custom battles to actually include all the units of a faction roster. Many rosters display general units that aren't available in campaign, or general units as well as regular units that are available in campaign aren't shown.

    4. Allow us the option to pay in intervals of 100, I agree that it was too much to have 1 gold as an interval in previous games, but please allow us an interval of 100. It would help a lot when demanding and offering money for various agreements.

    5. Add more variety to faction rosters. I think vanilla lacks unit variety, mods like radious and divida et imperia has too much unit variety. Try to strike a balance. Baktria should have indokush units, rome should have their own archers (late) but still have some. Greek nations should have access to cretan/rhodian slingers at high level skirmisher camp.

    7. Allow us to change the generals bodyguard without actually replacing the general, it's time consuming and annoying. Let it take 1 turn but dont' make us replace a general, wait one turn, then re-hire him again.

    8. Display the movement speed of units. If I'm fighting nomad tribes with mass horse archers I want to know which one of my cavalry is fastest to catch them, 5% increase in cavalry movement speed doesn't tell me a lot when I don't even know the base speed of the units.

    9. Show which units like hastati, thureos spears, thorax swordsmen and royal peltasts have javelins to throw in the unit info. Some of them you can find out by reading unit bio, some give zero hint.

    10. Bring back the settlement building of shogun 2 with farms and roads for every province and slots upgrade with castles/main settlement.

    11. Bring back the system of ROTS where walls were given upon upgrading the main settlement.

    12. Never use the warscape engine for a melee game again. 100 red guys vs 50 blue guys should be just that. Not 50 red vs 50 blue and 50 red in reserve. This totally kills the entire melee part of the game. Now flanking has virtually no value besides morale hit. Multiple units tied up in a cluster has no value at all either.
    This forum looks bad and is hard to navigate. Difficult to keep track of your posts and replies and you can't change your email.

    Would be better if you straight copied a good forum.
  • axel00zaxel00z Junior Member Registered Users Posts: 5
    edited September 2014
    Hi,
    The new total war has to bring back the family tree.
    New engine that stops units from "sliding" around on the ground.
    No more "killmoves" that makes combat unrealistic.
    A more immersive campaign map. Stop with the fancy graphics, bring back a rome total war style map.
    Thanks for making great games(BUT THEY NEED MORE TESTING!!!!!!!)
  • HmkmsHmkms Junior Member Registered Users Posts: 10
    edited September 2014
    Family members not only for your faction leaders but each listed character have to had it's family,that are will automatically removed or disappeared once the character or stateman is dead or killed in a battle or assassinated and the red of the family has no influence power to the other families. Once a character is grown up now will have a family members start with marriage or wife and continue their future. That only for you house.
    Also please please CA make in the upcoming patches the senatorial system of election and office.
  • DarKtwDarKtw Tech Moderator Tech Moderators Posts: 639
    edited September 2014
    I like to think playing the Huns might revolve around a "starvation meter" that requires raiding to feed your army (raiding penalties are removed for this faction, obviously), where each sector has a limited supply of food limiting how many rounds you can turtle. If you receive your resources this way rather than requiring captured territory.
  • OlmizOlmiz Senior Member Registered Users Posts: 127
    edited September 2014
    Guys from CA, there is some issue with official site. I mean this part of old spears :)
    _bb3cd5fa6ee48a0badd6732431a8cd2f.jpeg
    Can you fix it?
    Ceterum censeo Carthaginem et esse delendam.
  • marten48marten48 Junior Member Registered Users Posts: 21
    edited September 2014
    Two requests.
    - an auto level-up option for agents. This simple change would reduce the tediousness of the late game significantly. Once you reach the late game stage and have nine or more agents it becomes a chore to have to choose the upgrades at the beginning of the turn. I'd happily delegate this task to the computer so I don't have to worry about it.

    - Either a Campaign DLC or expansion on the Greco-Persian and Peloponnesian wars. Both deserve an in-depth Total War treatment, IMO. They're historically important, and even have some pop culture appeal (a Thermopylae historical battle, perhaps?).
  • AlexandroAlexandro Senior Member Zu Lai Temple againRegistered Users Posts: 1,416
    edited September 2014
    Two desires.
    - The icons that indicate strategic points in the cities could be exchanged for animated flags with colors that represent who controls them. Current icons though useful, are "aliens" objects to those who use this game as a simulator of war. Perhaps applying a transparency filter least?

    - Also, every time a player would create a group (ctrl + g) was associated with this group one advisor (centurion/captain/other ....), what the point of that? When my camera is away from the battle, these advisors indicate how that particular battle group (ordering, encouraging or requesting troops to general/comander: "need help here!", "we are being decimated",....the general/comander (if not in combat) could approach that group and use all his power (special abilities) within its range.Best advisors receive upgrades (promotions) and could be sent to a pool of potential generals (or politician/scholars with boost for research military tree).The number that advisors should be limited, their available quantity in battle connected to the gravitas of the general, to prevent UI pollution. As this would be a feature, maybe a little arcade, there should be the option to disable it.
    When the camera is close I can feel the heat of what is happening there (screaming,voice act) , but far, this camera looks like a divine look, gives the player time to think and plan, and I want to be bothered while present in that battle.
  • CountOfUSACountOfUSA Senior Member Registered Users Posts: 910
    edited September 2014
    Massive multiplayer campaign.
    four people to a team; all playable factions. 5 minutes per turn which expands with the size of empire. First tournament is mostly online, final tournament is at a big arena with cool prizes. Everyone can join and make teams.
    Team Western Empire. (Get rid of that bloat!)
    Fredrin wrote: »
    Nice! Who needs a palantir when you have an official wiki eh?
  • AlexandroAlexandro Senior Member Zu Lai Temple againRegistered Users Posts: 1,416
    edited September 2014
    and more:
    Change a little Cultural victory:
    Military control wasnt necessary for this objetive, only dominant culture over X regions. You have already given us a historical scope (geographic location,unique units and buildings) then let us write our destiny.
    The construction of advanced structures, temples or/and others, also present in this kind of victory should be linked with available resources, their pre-set amount at the beginning (marble, stone, gold, silver, expert craftsmen ...), in this case, position these resources behind enemy lines and you will have total war.
  • master130686master130686 Member Registered Users Posts: 64
    edited October 2014
    Please make ALL kills count.

    I'd like to know how many men were killed by my defenses (towers, town-artillery, traps...) - or by the defender's defenses, if I'm the attacker. And make secondary kills (e.g. when I destroy a wall and the man/men on it fall down and die) count and visible as well - for the attacking artillery (if more than one attack at the same time... split).

    And the Attila-announcement mentioned "complete settlement destruction". I hope that means the "loss" of the entire region as well (and in case of a province capital, that the province gets a new one out of the remaining settlements and/or the remaining settlements either create new province (or stay "the old one, just without the old capital-region), rebel and/or fuse with a neighbouring province).

    And if a region (and I mean THE region that had the destroyed town) is left "capital-less", please either make the region ownerless (which can be claimed later be either rebuilding the old capital or "founding" a new "capital" (not neccessarily at the same place as the old) or have the surrounding regions "grow into" the old/former region.

    But that's all just hopes based upon my interpretation of the "complete settlement destruction"-statement. I'm afraid it won't come to this. But if I'm right, you might as well consider my "dynamic expansion"-feature for Attila (or at least the next TW after that, because that already included a "complete settlement destruction" (http://forums.totalwar.com/showthread.php/605-an-idea-for-a-future-TW-game-dynamic-expansion?highlight=dynamic+expansion).

    The following is a redo of this idea (as I can't post it in the original thread, based on the Rome II-game mechanics).

    =========================================================================

    The best eras would be earlier ones, or at least with a decent amount of "unclaimed" territory (like some of North and most of South America in ETW or like rebel regions in other TW games). But the whole concept also works in "known areas" (like e.g. the "unclaimed"/rebel ones between France and the Holy Roman Empire in MTWII.

    You can still add (and charge us for) new factions in the "empty" territories later on

    My idea is to let go of the static regions and turn to an "influence-based" (and therefore more realistic) claim of territories.

    1) general things
    1.1) region capitals create an amount of "area points" (depending on their cultural and military buildings and their levels as well as the factions technological level and researched technologies) that create an "area of influence"
    1.2) province capitals create a larger amount of "area points" than the others
    1.3) this area grows when:
    1.3.1) the capital is upgraded
    1.3.2) special characters (e.g. a static governor - more later) are present
    1.3.3) buildings (excluding 1.3.1) with a respective bonus are build
    1.3.4) other game factors also have an effect of the area-growth-rate (e.g. slaves, culture, religion...)
    1.4) the "area points" create an area of influence which:
    1.4.1) increases with 1.3 and is consumed by the terrain (e.g. swamps consume a higher amount than plains, but a lower than mountains) - orders to e.g. dry out swamps (and therefor decrease the comsumption in that part) can be given (similar to the current province-decrees, but on a regional basis and only for a limited time)
    1.4.2) it "spreads" as a cirlce or square by default (in "territorial similar" regions)
    1.4.3) it's shape (the "real spread") is influenced by the terrain (mountains, swamps, waters...)
    1.4.4) once you've researched a certain tech (in the mid-techlvl-are (currently I'd say late lvl II)) or a combination of techs, you could decide to focus the "spread" in a certain direction (towards enemies - or at least away from your own, neighbouring regions) - e.g. to focus your spread on "contested areas", to strengthen your influence there
    1.5) there's a maximum of towns (and therefor regions) per province (this limit can be increased by e.g. techs, buildings, empire-lvl

    2) other/special things
    2.0) if forts like in Rome and Medieval II are available again:
    2.1) forts can be upgraded to towns
    2.2) towns can be founded (not via upgrade as in 2.1 but directly), upgraded, downgraded, abandoned and made capital of a province (if you lost the old one - e.g. via "complete settlement destruction" or if you simply want your province capital at a strategically better place)
    2.2.1) the first town (founded directly or an upgrade of a fort) in an unclaimed territory becomes a province capital
    2.2.2) towns can only be founded in own or neutral areas (not within the enemies territory)
    2.2.3) towns can only be founded within a maximum distance (it could be 10-20 % less than twice the maximum area of influence of a maximum-level-capital - so that the territories will eventually cross) - including "gained" territories from forts
    2.2.4) abandonded towns either become rebels, new factions, are "deserted" (with no population until someone claims them - (re)claiming is only possible if it's in an unclaimed or own area) or are "burned down" (with no remains left)
    2.3) province capitals can be downgraded to region capitals
    2.4) if a province capital is downgraded without a replacement in the same turn:
    2.4.1) the region capital with the largest area of influence (of the (former) province) becomes province capital OR
    2.4.2 all regions of the former province joins existing, neighbouring provinces, if they aren't already at their maximum of regions
    2.4.3 is no neighbouring province available (for one reason or another) the "remaining" (one to all of the regions of the previous province) regions "stay" the "former" province with new borders and a capital if "created" by 2.4.1
    2.5) if the areas of influence of two or more own or not-at-war faction's regions cross:
    2.5.1) the region's area with the lower area points "looses" territory to higher area points areas - the "lost" area is NOT compensated by an expansion elsewhere but can be (at least partly) regained by upgranding
    2.5.2) if the areas have the same amount, the "common border" is in the middle of the crossed area(s)
    2.6) if the areas of influence of two or more warring faction's regions cross:
    2.6.1) more or less like 2.5.1/2 but the crossed area(s) become "contested territories"
    2.6.2) when a peace treaty is signed:
    2.6.2.1) one side can demand or offer these "contested territories"
    2.6.2.2) "contested territories" can also be "offered/demanded" as a (sort of) "neutral zone" that no side can enter without declaring war
    2.6.2.3) if they are not offered or demanded in any way, the areas are creates as in 2.5
    2.7) towns also have a working radius, that decides what main kind of town (Manufactory, Gunsmith, School, Market, Stables...) it will be
    2.7.1) the kind also depends on near ressources (including seas - which would become a port-town á la Massilia, Carthage...)



    Ok, now some explanations and details (the numbers/amounts are just first ideas and mostly depend on the map size, standard unit range and time period of the game):


    Area Points and Area of Influence
    The amount of area points of a level1 town/... is to create an area of influence 3/5 of the maximum range of the unit with the largest range (usually cavalry). Each level increases the area points about 20 % (e.g.: if the first level "generates" 100, the second level does 120, the third 144 and so on). Level1 forts only generate points for 1/6, and each fort-upgrade increases the area points about 10 %, and level1 capitals for 5/4 of this maximum range.


    I thought the area of influence could spread like this:
    It spreads evenly in all directions (unless triggered otherwise like in 1.4.4)
    1 area point is consumed per "distance unit" - I don't know what/how this will be.
    Additionally to this, each area type consumes a different amount of points.
    The "outer border" is reached, once all area points of "one direction" are consumed
    The "spread" continues after new area points are "available" (via upgrade, special building or character...)
    If the "spread" is stopped by anything (the end of the map or natural borders like water) in one or more directions, the remaining points are NOT transferred to the other direction(s) - only exception: ports. Ports spread standardly only away from water, so the points from the "water direction" are transferred to the other directions.


    Special characters and buildings
    They increase the minimum range of the level1 by X % (e.g.: if the increase is 10 %, the first level generates 110, the second level 132, the third 158.4 and so on).


    The "static governor"
    This could be generals that are "assigned" as governor, which would reduce its maintenance cost and sensitivity for "bad traits". But the assignment would cost a certain amount of money (not too expensive, but also not too cheap). And using a general has other effects too: The region's/province's moral increases, the number and/or quality of garrisoned units increases and the tax rate increases lightly. But if you "reassign", the former governor will loose loyality, the region's/province's moral will decrease for X turns. If the region was close to rioting, the moral will increase for Y turns. The income (especially if the governor had a bonus) will decrease (stronger than it would be by just "loosing" the bonus). The region's/province's population growth will also decrease.
    This could as well be a "recruitable character" (like an agent). This character could be quiete expensive to recruit (and/or maybe also limited per faction) and it will cost maintainance (about the same, but slightly less than a general). Or you recruit an "ordinary" general and assign him (for additional money (to convince him) and at least one turn time).


    The maximum number of towns/...
    Each province capital creates X region points (which also increase per level) and each new region consumes one point. If you have no unclaimed territories but still at least one region point, you can found a new town (and therefor region) in your own territory -


    Forts
    Forts can be upgraded up to level3. If a fort existed (not restarting after every upgrade) for X years, with at least X units present (the minimum increases per level) all the time, it can be upgraded to town and become capital of a new region. Then you can decide if you want that region to form a new province or join an existing one (if available).


    How provinces are created
    When you found a town in unclaimed territory with no connection to your closest region, it can stay a "region" for a maximum of X turns (depending on techlvl and/or empire-lvl). During that turns you have time to found at least one more town within a certain max-distance or the first/only region will become a province and the town it's capital. If you found at least one other town "close enough", you can then decide which region-capital should become province-capital.

    Because you can found new towns only within a certain distance from existing ones, this gives you the opportunity to decide (more or less) where you want your capital to be.


    Founding towns in own territory

    In the following, I will always refer to the picture1. It is just an example of a "territorial similar" region with "circle spreading areas". The outer borders of this "whole region" would be the green line.
    Condisdering the other territories as neutral: The northern region was founded before the port-region and is now "connecting" with the south-"capital"/province.

    If the southern province has at least one region point left, you can decide to join or...
    Do you want the port-region to become its own province or not (and/or found another town nearby if you don't want the port as capital)? If you decide it to become its own province, you can decide which province the northern region should join or if it is to "start" a province of its own as well.

    A town (and therefor region) that is founded in your own territory, AND its own area of influence is completely within the area of influence of the province-capital (e.g. the south-western town) still forms its own region, but remains the original size. Area points generated by upgrades... are added to the existing points of the capital/province (creating a small enclave within the province-capital's region) and its growth - and it strenghtens the area (yet this would primarily only be available if there are no unclaimed territories nearby).

    A town/region that is founded in your own territory, and at least partly exceeds the province capital's area of influence (e.g. the north-eastern town), strengthens the area where the areas of influence cross and extends the area in the rest. In this case the northern town would extend the capital's area into "arkhangelsk". If " arkhangelsk " were unclaimed, the territory would be instantly claimed. If " arkhangelsk " were already be claimed by another faction, the area would be claimed as described in 2.5.1/2.


    Founding towns in neutral territory
    A town that is founded in neutral territory, and its own area of influence crosses at least partly an existing region's area (e.g. the northern region and later the port-region), extendends the province's area of influence and strengthens the crossed area (if you decide to join the province (see above). If the capital's area is already on its limit (1.5), at least one new town will be a province capital of it's own and "claim the territory" (including some of the "other" capital's) as described in 2.5.1.


    differences between region- and province-capitals
    When a region-capital becomes a province-capital it will gain all the "abilities" (e.g. more and other building slots) of a province-capital.

    Province-capitals generate area points faster and more of them - which results in provinces growing faster and bigger than regions. And only Province-capitals generate region-points (but the speed and the maximum increases with the tech- and empire-lvl).


    Conquering settlements
    When you successfully attacked a settlement, you can decide what to do. You can sack or raid the town or "completely destroy the settlement" or you can conquer it.


    Crossing of areas of influence of two (or more) factions's towns/ports/...
    In the following, I will always refer to the picture2. It is just an example of a "territorial similar" region with "circle spreading areas".

    As you can see, the green region's "standard" area of influence would be the green "circles" and the blue region's "standard" area of influence would be the blue "circles".
    If these were non-warring faction's regions, the dark green areas are the areas the green town "still owns" after it "met" the blue towns area and the dark blue areas are the areas the blue town "still owns" after it.
    These are "created" in the following: The rings represent the amount of influence points in the area (it should not be that easy - each "squarepixel" on the map will have its own "amount"). If two (or more) rings/amounts meet, the amounts will be compared and the higher amount claims the area/pixel. If the amounts are equal, the area will be equally divided or become contested.

    If these were warring faction's towns, the dark green and dark blue areas were contestes territories.

    Towns working radius
    Each town has a working radius that decides which kind of town it will be. If you built it close to a road, it may be a financial. If it's close to a mine (depending on the mine - e.g. copper or iron) it may be an industrial center. The same goes with other (more or less) natural ressources (horses, wood...).

    But you don't have to "choose" this. You can also force another kind of town, but this will be expensive and not very effective (e.g. lower taxes).

    And the closer a town is to the ressource, the more effective it will be.


    In order to move your armies faster (or at all - e.g. past a huge river), they get additional "abilities". In addition to building forts, they can also build roads and bridges - both can be temporal or permanent. Permanent versions cost more and take longer, but stay on the map (but bridges can be destroyed by other armies or events (floods, earthquakes).





    The biggest problem with this idea might be the names, as they all need names. One way could be to name them after "real" towns/regions/provinces/areas that were there where the "game town" was founded (or close to it). Another way could be to name the town/area after the founder (including his history), his family and/or the leader (like Alexandria, Virginia...).

    So, this is it, I'm done for now.
  • CharlyFiftyOneCharlyFiftyOne Junior Member Registered Users Posts: 24
    edited October 2014
    plz ... I beg
    Could change, remove, or enter an option on / off for the transparency of units?
    plz ...
    've not played since the patch came out 14
  • kilenkilen Senior Member Registered Users Posts: 145
    edited October 2014
    Answer to 1st topic question:

    A new TW tittle based on China from -300 to +1500 after JC :) (y)

    From 7 fighting kingdoms before Qin prevailed
    To end of mongolian dynasty in XV century...

    With xp u get with Rome2 &Shogun2 about graphic environment, its a big project but possible...

    And if possible integrate that tittle based on China in a global context,
    I mean it should be great if that game could include other part of the world

    Like links on campaign map & playable roman empire or egyptian empire for classic age
    And indian factions for middle age period with Moghol in India (1of heirs of Khan dynasties empire in Eurasia)
    Etc...

    Its a massive subject so if its too much: only China history with close neighbour zones
    Like mongolia japan korea & south east asia (empire of siam etc)

    Or even create later an add on for south east asia, it should be close
    Of what u did in last TWs for a new context...

    Hope u will like the idea :)
    ++
    "...et n'oubliez jamais que fougue n'est pas force." (never forget mettle isnt strengh)
    C-M de TALLEYRAND (1754-1838)

    "At war, victory is only ability to create a better political situation..."
    "The worse ennemy of a good battleplan is the idea of a perfect plan." (from ETW)
    Karl von CLAUZEWITZ (1780-1831)

    "Je me suis, dans le sang, avancé si loin que retourner me serait aussi pénible que poursuivre..."
    W. SHAKESPEARE (1564-1616) dans "Mac Beth"
  • Mabzie55Mabzie55 Senior Member Registered Users Posts: 365
    edited October 2014
    1. Seeing armor upgrades visually on units in battle (as in medieval 2)

    2. More buildings per settlement

    3. I would also love to see a game set between 1400 and 1700 AD.

    4. Moar dogs!

    5. More random events (be they political, natural, or otherwise.

    I'll post again when I have better ideas.

    Edit: okay this I'd the big one, and would help a lot for those of us who roleplay-- please put back in something similar to the prestige victory (like in Empire) but without province requirements. It really sucks to have to go to war with my greatest ally just to get some province I don't need just because it's "required".
    I'm fine with it being " have highest prestige and hold 40 provinces " but please stop with the specific province requirements, it really breaks immersion when RPing.
    Also it makes no sense to have every single province except one and somehow not win.
  • zdowjr41zdowjr41 Junior Member Registered Users Posts: 4
    edited October 2014
    I would like to have the family tree back and the politics I feel are too heavily favored for the computer and lack a good explanation in the wiki articles (unless this has changed recently).
Sign In or Register to comment.