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

Thrones of Britannia - Post-Release, What's Next?

Jack_Lusted_CAJack_Lusted_CA Creative AssemblyBrighton, UKPosts: 1,349Registered Users, CA Staff Mods, CA Staff
https://www.totalwar.com/blog/thrones-of-britannia-whats-next

Hello,

Thrones of Britannia released just over a week ago today and we’ve been really pleased to see so many people playing and discussing our first Total War Saga title. And there has been a lot of discussion.

We did expect that Thrones might be divisive. Our design approach was to question Total War’s standard formula and to try some things. This really paid off in some areas, like the changes we made to Recruitment for instance, this seems to have gone down really well with the vast majority of players.

Every change we made in Thrones was considered, debated and agonised over but ultimately, it’s your opinions that count, and we know that the game is currently not pleasing everyone as much as it should. I want to respond to some of the issues being raised and talk about what we have planned for the game going forwards.

The first one is the difficulty of the game. Some of you are finding campaigns too short, food and money too abundant, battles too easy. Thrones isn’t giving you enough of a challenge for you want to keep you playing. This is something we can address quickly since it is in large part down to balancing.

Right now, we’re working hard on a patch that will introduce a lot of balance changes which we hope will improve the difficulty level and serve up more challenge. It will be available as part of an opt-in public beta next Tuesday (15th May).

This is not the complete list but included in the patch will be changes like:
  • Adjusting victory conditions
  • Increased food consumption from buildings
  • Increased building costs
  • Adjustments to corruption and corruption reduction as well as certain Market income buildings to help reduce the amount of gold in the late game
  • Reduced certain bonuses from techs that were making battles too one-sided until the AI researches them as well
  • Balance adjustments to battles based on early concerns from the multiplayer community
  • Alongside these changes the patch will also add some quality of life improvements to the UI and a number of bug fixes.
We’ll continue to balance this patch once it is in public beta, and of course going forward in any future updates we make after this one.

Another theme that keeps coming up in feedback and reviews is a little less straightforward. It’s the notion that Thrones has cut features or ‘streamlined’ aspects that you’ve enjoyed in previous Total War games.

We have made a lot of changes to how the campaign plays, and our aim in this was to deliver the same depth that our players expect from a Total War game, but with a new and consolidated focus. Reading the feedback in reviews and on social media so far, it seems that what we’ve added and changed is not delivering that depth of experience and absorption for some.

We need to look at the mechanics, especially culture and faction mechanics, and decide what may be possible to change to address this.

It should be said that we won’t be re-introducing all the old systems and options that were available in Attila (many of them were re-configured for good reason) but we will be looking at where we can create more depth and opportunity for mastery, whilst not throwing away all the good stuff that you might otherwise be really enjoying in Thrones.

Once we have a more concrete plan for this I will write a follow up post to let you know what we have in mind. In the meantime, I mentioned before that we are particularly interested in culture and faction mechanics, so please let us know what you think is working and what you think isn’t adding much.

Thank you,

Jack
Game Director - Thrones of Britannia

Disclaimer: Any views or opinions expressed here are those of the poster and do not necessarily represent the views or opinions of Creative Assembly or SEGA.
«13456

Comments

  • SuliotSuliot Senior Member Posts: 685Registered Users
    Good to know, and yeah I agree the game is a bit too easy right now, so I'm looking forward to the patch.
  • DangerGirl50DangerGirl50 Senior Member Hessen, GermanyPosts: 225Registered Users
    Glad to see this, definitely raises my hopes for the future of this title! It may be different but I for one am definitely enjoying the new change of pace, although there is always room for improvement!

    If you are particularly interested in culture and faction mechanics I would say look into the vassal situation. Many factions need vassals to achieve their victory conditions and they are a little bit of a pain to acquire, often times having to beat them back to their last settlement just to subjugate them, making them both weak and with a reason to hate you and rebel later.

    Maybe even a way for players to work on annexing culture appropriate vassals?
  • MrJadeMrJade Senior Member Lansing, MIPosts: 7,162Registered Users
    Like I talked about in my review:
    1. Make food and supplies matter.
    2. Make loyalty matter.
    3. Keep agents out of the game.
    4. West Seaxe needs something to happen to it for balance.
    5. Gael's kingdom conditions need to be changed, and I think the easiest fix is that when you restore a faction it is a vassal.
    Thrones of Britannia: 69/100
    Warhammer II: 73/100
    Warhammer: 79/100
    Attila: 70/100 [Age of Charlemagne: 72/100]
    Rome II: 49/100
    Shogun II: 93/100 [Fall of the Samurai: 95/100]
    Napoleon: 58/100
    Empire: 53/100
    Medieval II: 90/100 [Kingdoms: 90/100]
    Rome I: 88/100
    Medieval I: 92/100
    Shogun I: 84/100
  • julius_civilisjulius_civilis Posts: 365Registered Users
    edited May 2018
    I'm liking what I read Jack. Good to know you guys are adressing some of the issues the community has with this game.

    One of the things which annoys me a bit is how the AI manages it's buildings in major settlements. They often build things which aren't really logical like a building which multiplies market income while there are no markets in the province.

    A way this could be solved is by not enabling certain buildings in certain provinces. A province which has no markets in it's minor settlements doesn't need a market multiplier in it's major settlement so by removing the option to build one the AI can't make the mistake.

    Another problem I have are the steam achievements; You can only get achievements for one of the three victory condition branches each campaign. I'm wondering if this is on purpose or if this is a bug? I'm thinking about a 100% achievement score on this game but I don't know if I'm going to if I have to play every campaign for each faction 3 times..
    My other problems with the game seem to be touched upon in your post so I'm confident they will be fixed in time.

    Overall though I really like the game and like you stated yourself with this many changes to the formula you were bound to get some backlash from the community. Total war games are a sensitive subject.
  • ESKEHLESKEHL Senior Member Posts: 484Registered Users
    Awesome! Looking forward to the future of Thrones @Jack_Lusted_CA
  • DruidsbrookDruidsbrook Junior Member Posts: 64Registered Users
    Been really enjoying the game and the new mechanics I respect a developer whos prepared to experiment, eispecially with long running franchises where its easier to play it safe and avoid rustling feathers.

    I think the Here King trait for the Viking Army cultures could do with tweaking. On Hard difficulty trying to appease the English has been a waste of time anything I could do to placate them would be cancelled out by warring with the English Kingdoms that I had no choice but to fight (they declared war on me)

    I've resorted to completly ignoring the English and just eating the penalties for their dissaproval in exchange for having a happy army I'm not sure if this is an intented way to play as it doesnt seem like I should be able to simply ignore the English and carry on.

    Id like more of your decisions to influence the Here King system, I recall a Here King Dilema where I was given the option to build a great hall or a church which would please the army or the English respectively. Why dont actual buildings have these effects? Perhaps building the law building or church would give me a bonus to English approval while a fighting pit or garrison would please the army. You could even introduce mutually exclusive buildings that please one side or the other.
  • EfixEfix Posts: 268Registered Users
    edited May 2018
    After 50hrs I have a few easy to fix suggestions:
    1.Rework the Gaelic kingdom victory to conquering lands instead of having vassals.
    2.When you liberate a settlement, it should become a vassal instead of a military ally.
    3.Viking sea kings should be able to force annexion over minor viking sea kings after defeating their king in battle.
    4.Add the Dyflin slaves mechanics/building to Surdeyar.
    5.Buff the late game invasions
    6.Buff the province capital garrison to help the AI defend itself after losing his main army.
  • 123223123223 Posts: 42Registered Users
    " I mentioned before that we are particularly interested in culture and faction mechanics, so please let us know what you think is working and what you think isn’t adding much." - I quote the developer.


    Developers, add each culture a unique formation or one of two to choose from...


    In real-time battles, the "Wall of the Shields "with "Attila".Give it is possible to choose the formation of "Shield Castel" - protection from arrows or "Wall of Shields" - protection in close combat and bonuses.
  • Jack_Lusted_CAJack_Lusted_CA Creative Assembly Brighton, UKPosts: 1,349Registered Users, CA Staff Mods, CA Staff
    123223 said:

    " I mentioned before that we are particularly interested in culture and faction mechanics, so please let us know what you think is working and what you think isn’t adding much." - I quote the developer.


    Developers, add each culture a unique formation or one of two to choose from...


    In real-time battles, the "Wall of the Shields "with "Attila".Give it is possible to choose the formation of "Shield Castel" - protection from arrows or "Wall of Shields" - protection in close combat and bonuses.

    The way units are deployed by default represents the shield wall already.
    Game Director - Thrones of Britannia

    Disclaimer: Any views or opinions expressed here are those of the poster and do not necessarily represent the views or opinions of Creative Assembly or SEGA.
  • 123223123223 Posts: 42Registered Users

    123223 said:

    " I mentioned before that we are particularly interested in culture and faction mechanics, so please let us know what you think is working and what you think isn’t adding much." - I quote the developer.


    Developers, add each culture a unique formation or one of two to choose from...


    In real-time battles, the "Wall of the Shields "with "Attila".Give it is possible to choose the formation of "Shield Castel" - protection from arrows or "Wall of Shields" - protection in close combat and bonuses.

    The way units are deployed by default represents the shield wall already.
    Forgive me for my bad English.

    This is not practical, I have been playing for a long time in real time battles. It is necessary to add an active formation with bonuses:
    + 200% reflection of the onslaught
    + 10% melee skill
    + 15% effectiveness of shields
    (for example).
  • 123223123223 Posts: 42Registered Users
    Turn to me, an active "Wall of Shields" with bonuses for a protracted battle will change into the best battlefield in real time.
  • MattzoMattzo Member United KingdomPosts: 1,433Registered Users
    edited May 2018
    123223 said:

    123223 said:

    " I mentioned before that we are particularly interested in culture and faction mechanics, so please let us know what you think is working and what you think isn’t adding much." - I quote the developer.


    Developers, add each culture a unique formation or one of two to choose from...


    In real-time battles, the "Wall of the Shields "with "Attila".Give it is possible to choose the formation of "Shield Castel" - protection from arrows or "Wall of Shields" - protection in close combat and bonuses.

    The way units are deployed by default represents the shield wall already.
    Forgive me for my bad English.

    This is not practical, I have been playing for a long time in real time battles. It is necessary to add an active formation with bonuses:
    + 200% reflection of the onslaught
    + 10% melee skill
    + 15% effectiveness of shields
    (for example).
    This is not needed.

    Units fight in this way by default where appropriate.

    ______

    As to what's next for Thrones, I like what I'm reading and thank you for addressing our concerns Jack.

    PS Buildings.

    (I may have mentioned buildings already... and huscarls with shields)
    "Everything in war is simple. But the simplest thing is difficult."
  • MrJadeMrJade Senior Member Lansing, MIPosts: 7,162Registered Users
    123223 said:

    This is not practical, I have been playing for a long time in real time battles. It is necessary to add an active formation with bonuses:

    You've posited this before but never provided an adequate answer to this question: If the units already have bonuses baked in what does it accomplish? Unless there is a trade-off, there is no point to adding this in, it is just a useless toggle switch that you have to throw.
    Thrones of Britannia: 69/100
    Warhammer II: 73/100
    Warhammer: 79/100
    Attila: 70/100 [Age of Charlemagne: 72/100]
    Rome II: 49/100
    Shogun II: 93/100 [Fall of the Samurai: 95/100]
    Napoleon: 58/100
    Empire: 53/100
    Medieval II: 90/100 [Kingdoms: 90/100]
    Rome I: 88/100
    Medieval I: 92/100
    Shogun I: 84/100
  • 123223123223 Posts: 42Registered Users
    You probably do not play very much in real time battles.
    Formations are necessary for a stable balance and atmosphere of a given time.

    "Wall of Shields" should be an active skill with bonuses for a protracted battle.
  • Jack_Lusted_CAJack_Lusted_CA Creative Assembly Brighton, UKPosts: 1,349Registered Users, CA Staff Mods, CA Staff
    Again, they're in a shield wall style deployment all the time, for units where its appropriate. They already are great when braced and have shields that make them tanky in melee and good v arrows, with an extra formation to give them even more protection v missiles. Adding it as a button would be a step backwards, not forwards. Let's leacve that discussion there.

    Thanks all to your comments so far, keep it up. Interesting to read what everyone has to say.
    Game Director - Thrones of Britannia

    Disclaimer: Any views or opinions expressed here are those of the poster and do not necessarily represent the views or opinions of Creative Assembly or SEGA.
  • MattzoMattzo Member United KingdomPosts: 1,433Registered Users
    Having an active skill for a shield wall is pointless.

    It's like having an active skill for Napoleonic era infantry to stand in a line. It's the way those units always fight, it does NOT need to be an active ability.

    On topic again: I will try and write up some constructive points over the weekend, Jack. But the two over-riding criticisms of the game I have I've mentioned several times before (and in this thread!)

    1) The lack of building trees. Major settlements are fine, but adding a branch at a high tier for minors would really add depth to the campaign late game as it would force choice. At the moment I don't even bother looking at what the building is. Just click, upgrade, click, upgrade until money runs out.

    2) The Fyrd mechanic. It's not interesting, not fun, and not historical. If it's meant to somehow limit Wessex it's not working either. I'd desperately like a rethink on it.
    "Everything in war is simple. But the simplest thing is difficult."
  • MrJadeMrJade Senior Member Lansing, MIPosts: 7,162Registered Users
    123223 said:

    You probably do not play very much in real time battles.
    Formations are necessary for a stable balance and atmosphere of a given time.

    "Wall of Shields" should be an active skill with bonuses for a protracted battle.

    You already start off by committing 2 logical fallacies:
    1. Strawman, did I ever say that I don't play real time battles?
    2. Genetic fallacy, even if it did come from someone that doesn't play many battles, why does that matter?

    Again, if the formation doesn't change anything, like the line formation for Empire units, why should it be a toggle. Answer that, and we can talk.
    Thrones of Britannia: 69/100
    Warhammer II: 73/100
    Warhammer: 79/100
    Attila: 70/100 [Age of Charlemagne: 72/100]
    Rome II: 49/100
    Shogun II: 93/100 [Fall of the Samurai: 95/100]
    Napoleon: 58/100
    Empire: 53/100
    Medieval II: 90/100 [Kingdoms: 90/100]
    Rome I: 88/100
    Medieval I: 92/100
    Shogun I: 84/100
  • 123223123223 Posts: 42Registered Users

    123223 said:

    " I mentioned before that we are particularly interested in culture and faction mechanics, so please let us know what you think is working and what you think isn’t adding much." - I quote the developer.


    Developers, add each culture a unique formation or one of two to choose from...


    In real-time battles, the "Wall of the Shields "with "Attila".Give it is possible to choose the formation of "Shield Castel" - protection from arrows or "Wall of Shields" - protection in close combat and bonuses.

    The way units are deployed by default represents the shield wall already.
    Developer, you are wrong. All cultures have a "Shield of Castle", this does not make cultures unique in real-time battles. In all cultures, detachments have the same formations and passive skills. This is a "step back".
    Add one of the cultures, for example, to the Anglo-Saxons, the active ability "Shield Wall", which can be activated.
  • MrJadeMrJade Senior Member Lansing, MIPosts: 7,162Registered Users
    123223 said:

    Add one of the cultures, for example, to the Anglo-Saxons, the active ability "Shield Wall", which can be activated.

    Everyone in this era in this area fought in a shield wall. Everyone, not just Anglo-Saxons. Why then should it be a toggle when everyone does it? Should couching lances be a toggle for just France in Medieval III? Should lowering spears against a cavalry charge be a toggle for Greece only in Rome II?
    Thrones of Britannia: 69/100
    Warhammer II: 73/100
    Warhammer: 79/100
    Attila: 70/100 [Age of Charlemagne: 72/100]
    Rome II: 49/100
    Shogun II: 93/100 [Fall of the Samurai: 95/100]
    Napoleon: 58/100
    Empire: 53/100
    Medieval II: 90/100 [Kingdoms: 90/100]
    Rome I: 88/100
    Medieval I: 92/100
    Shogun I: 84/100
  • Jack_Lusted_CAJack_Lusted_CA Creative Assembly Brighton, UKPosts: 1,349Registered Users, CA Staff Mods, CA Staff
    123223 said:

    123223 said:

    " I mentioned before that we are particularly interested in culture and faction mechanics, so please let us know what you think is working and what you think isn’t adding much." - I quote the developer.


    Developers, add each culture a unique formation or one of two to choose from...


    In real-time battles, the "Wall of the Shields "with "Attila".Give it is possible to choose the formation of "Shield Castel" - protection from arrows or "Wall of Shields" - protection in close combat and bonuses.

    The way units are deployed by default represents the shield wall already.
    Developer, you are wrong. All cultures have a "Shield of Castle", this does not make cultures unique in real-time battles. In all cultures, detachments have the same formations and passive skills. This is a "step back".
    Add one of the cultures, for example, to the Anglo-Saxons, the active ability "Shield Wall", which can be activated.
    Everyone fought in shield walls in this era. Having it unique to just one culture would be completely against the time period.
    Game Director - Thrones of Britannia

    Disclaimer: Any views or opinions expressed here are those of the poster and do not necessarily represent the views or opinions of Creative Assembly or SEGA.
  • SutefanuSutefanu Posts: 17Registered Users
    Looking forward for the patch.

    In my Dyflin campaign on very hard difficulty, I conquered all of Ireland and northern Britain without the AI declaring war on me ,even a single time. This really makes the game too easy as you can pick off your enemies one by one and don't have to worry about having to fight on multiple fronts.

    The balancing changes and increased challenge sounds good, but hopefully there will also be AI changes in addition to the changed mechanics.
  • dge1dge1 Moderator Arkansas, USAPosts: 18,899Registered Users, Moderators, Knights
    Folks, excellent opportunity here to provide input so let's not get side tracked and start arguing about one point or another. We all want the game to be as good as it can get, so please discuss and post opinions/thoughts without rancor.

    Thanks.
    "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
  • 123223123223 Posts: 42Registered Users

    123223 said:

    123223 said:

    " I mentioned before that we are particularly interested in culture and faction mechanics, so please let us know what you think is working and what you think isn’t adding much." - I quote the developer.


    Developers, add each culture a unique formation or one of two to choose from...


    In real-time battles, the "Wall of the Shields "with "Attila".Give it is possible to choose the formation of "Shield Castel" - protection from arrows or "Wall of Shields" - protection in close combat and bonuses.

    The way units are deployed by default represents the shield wall already.
    Developer, you are wrong. All cultures have a "Shield of Castle", this does not make cultures unique in real-time battles. In all cultures, detachments have the same formations and passive skills. This is a "step back".
    Add one of the cultures, for example, to the Anglo-Saxons, the active ability "Shield Wall", which can be activated.
    Everyone fought in shield walls in this era. Having it unique to just one culture would be completely against the time period.
    All units in all cultures have the same formations and passive skills - this makes battles in real time very monotonous and boring. The "shield of shields" protects only from arrows, it is no longer worthless. Add more active formations for the units. Make interesting battles in real time. Each unit must choose what formation / formation to apply to the" Wall of the shields" or "the Castle of the shields".

    Add the same shield wall as in "Total War: Attila".Many players used this construction..
  • InocybeInocybe Posts: 154Registered Users
    I really enjoy the game so far and I have been playing it a lot since it's release (67 hours already, it's really bad...). I really love the new features (recruitment pool, unity not starting at full strength etc.)
    I have a few suggestions for improving the game :

    1/- In a lot of game (Europa universalis IV, Stellaris) vassalization is a first step toward annexion. However in ToB, the player can't annex its vassal. It doesn't really make sens and it force the player to severes ties with the vassal and attack it. It is especially true with Mide which can annex kingdom using legitimacy (but this option isn't available for vassals).

    2/ Some building are useless (the tower that boost the church income in Ireland is not worth it).

    3/- When you capture a stone gate during a siege, the two towers collapse killing everyone arround. It doesn't make sense and it is painful if you want to kill the archer that usually protect the gate.
  • DukeDan1DukeDan1 Posts: 20Registered Users
    First off, I must say that I love the new game for what it is - a refreshing addition to total war that tests some new mechanics. I love all the new features and I think that they help make this game a joy to play with. I was playing on normal with Irish Vikings/Dyflin for this first campaign as I wanted to get used to the new machanics before progressing in difficulty. I was disappointed when the viking invasion that was hyped up by the game for ages (Normands) arrived and was destroyed by the Anglo Saxons before I could send my armies down to challenge them! I would like to know if I can expect another invasion or if I need to try a new difficulty level at this point.
    If there is no other force due to arrive, I would like it if the invasion was made a bit bigger and more difficult to defeat (Anglo Saxon destroyed them in 4 turns :/)

    Thanks in advance.
  • MaedrethnirMaedrethnir Senior Member Posts: 5,834Registered Users
    Of course there is no mention whether or not Blood and Gore will come out.
    Drowned in stars, bloated we shine.
    ... .... .... --··-- -. --- - . .- .-. ... ·-·-·- --- -. .-.. -.-- -.. .-. . .- -- ... -. --- .-- ·-·-·-

  • MattzoMattzo Member United KingdomPosts: 1,433Registered Users
    Is this thread the best place to leave long wall of texts?

    Because I fully intend to write one!

    I love the game, I can tell you're passionate about it too, and I really want it to be the best it can be. Dreamed of this era in a Total War game for a decade so it's just a pleasure to be able to load the game.

    Although not much more writing tonight, perhaps. It's been a long week at work so going to play the game rather than write about it!

    First limited edition I ever bought. No regrets.
    "Everything in war is simple. But the simplest thing is difficult."
  • thetotalwarriorthetotalwarrior Junior Member Posts: 4Registered Users
    I would rather you did not change the game so soon.
  • JollyRogeroJollyRogero Member Posts: 668Registered Users
    edited May 2018
    This exploding towers thing is kind of obnoxious. Not only does it look strange but rewarding my units for capturing a tower by wiping out a good chunk of them in an explosion? And in a game that (so far) has slow replenishment which makes taking minimal losses important?

    Is there any mod or a work around to this issue besides avoiding towers like they are radioactive? They only solution I know of as of now is to destroy them at range before going for the walls.

    Thats my only issue - really enjoying the game otherwise, particularly in the sound, music and general atmosphere.
  • tak22tak22 Senior Member Posts: 2,386Registered Users
    I've said in a number of places, and I'll say it again, I'm not all that big on Vikings (would have preferred 6th c., personally, for a British setting) but TOB is already a serious contender for my favourite TW game to date, and I've been playing since M1.

    I'm in my busiest time of year with work, so I've only put in a limited number of hours, but so far here's what I've got:

    Good concept, good implementation.
    • I love the recruitment system. Don't change a thing!
    • I don't miss agents at all. It's a bit nerve-wracking at times not to know what's coming at me, but for a strategy game I think that's a good thing.
    • I also like the settlement/province design. There might be some tweaks possible, but nothing major is needed.

    Good concept, needs some help
    • Supplies: I was excited to see this as a mechanic, but currently I've not had it affect any of my actions since the first couple turns where I decided to wait a bit before starting my first invasion. Granted I'm playing Strat Clut and they get a bonus, and given the distances in the North I've also invested in the Quartermaster for my main generals, but I'd think that bonuses like that should make the mechanics easier, not irrelevant. Maybe nerf the bonuses, and increase the consumption rate (maybe tied to difficulty)?
    • Food: using food as a soft cap on units is a very good concept, and works well in the early game. By mid-game, though, it's not really an issue. Part of this is due to the passive AI, since I'm not be pressed anywhere (see below), but still, I have two full stacks, several 1/2 to 3/4 stacks, and a handful of small armies, with a surplus of 300+ food to work with. I'm not terribly concerned about losing territory, so I feel pretty comfortable. OTOH, if the campaign map was a little less stable, I might not mind having that food as a reserve. But right now, I'm more comfortable than I'd like.
    • AI Resilience: This one is a bit of a tug-of-war between history and gameplay, I realize. But it's not very satisfying - and limits other game mechanics (e.g. character development) to have sizable factions evaporate after a couple decisive battles. In general, I'm a fan of having the AI follow roughly the same rules as the player, and I like the concept of having multipliers on the bonuses rather than flat bonuses. There are a couple things possible here. 1. AI: have the AI factions keep a reserve of troops close to home, just in case of invasion, and/or maintain a reserve of food to raise units in an emergency. 2. Pool/Map replenishment for units: some bonuses here, esp. if tied to difficulty, would help them field stronger armies faster after a defeat. I don't want them to completely circumvent the game mechanics, but if there were enough of an army to make a 'last stand' when I reach their capital, it would make the game more satisfying.
    • Estates: again, not a bad concept, but feels very much like something tacked on to the side; needs to be tied into other parts of the game.
    • War Fervour. I was looking forward to it, but currently it's irrelevant to the game.

    Needs Work
    • AI Aggression: I have yet to have an AI faction declare war on me, even in the early game when I was relatively weak. Since I've gotten bigger, I feel relatively secure, since I have a number of friendship pacts and there's no indication that the AI is interested in attacking me - even when my armies are on the opposite end of my kingdom. The AI seems to be very opportunistic about piling on when a faction is weak; it also seems to need some sense of how to calculate when you're vulnerable due to your armies being away. A player can watch a number of things - which sides they're at war on, changes in the power bar for battles being fought, how many food settlements they have - to calculate whether there's an opportunity, the AI should be able to do that to the player, too.
    • Loyalty. The issue here is that it seems too static - they get low, you buff them up, they sit there with their loyalty until you pick up too many estates, you hand one out ... Events & dilemmas could help with that, but it would also be nice to have it tie into actions on the campaign map - character likes Vikings, you attack Vikings, loyalty goes down. Character likes you defending territory, you deploy all your armies abroad, loyalty goes down. Character likes trade/religion etc., the longer you do without building related things you have a chance that loyalty goes down. Character is an opportunist, you're away with the army/defeated in battle, loyalty goes down. (Obviously, the opposite kind of events should make it go up, too, but you get the idea).
    • PO: so far, no issues or rebellions. Again, destablilize it with events, war fervor penalties, building missions etc. (E.g. the people of x province want a church to commemorate y, build one in z turns).
    • AI faction rebellions. Generally, the map is too stable. Tweaking some of these things, if it's applied to the AI as well, should help; but I think the game would be more interesting if big factions were occasionally breaking up due to rebellions - the feel of the game, I'd think, should be as much about keeping the kingdom you've built, as building it, and more factions on the map that are serious contenders would keep the pacing of the game going. I don't necessarily mind if factions win & get big - but then it would be nice for them to have a chance to break up, too.
Sign In or Register to comment.