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 update - what would you like to see?

2456

Comments

  • ArclathArclath Posts: 23Registered Users
    1. Diplomacy: It is IMPOSSIBLE to break apart your enemies' vassals, even when you have a clear power advantage, and they're down to just one tiny settlement they still won't release their vassals as part of a peace settlement. Either get rid of the option that's already there, or better, adjust the points so that it's actually possible.

    2. Vassals: Don't limit annexation. If you're the overlord of a vassal with a similar culture group (for example, if you're Gwined, and your subject nation is Dewet), make it so that you can incooperate them into your country. It's kind of boring if the only way of consolidating your country in a region is the same way every time, aka conquest.

    3. Allies / countries with good relationships suddenly attacking you: I get the idea that you want the AI to be unpredictable and yield more dynamic gameplay, but with every faction I've played after the last update, my allies and countries with good relations to me ALWAYS just attack me out of nowhere, even if it's countries in the same culture group, and no geographical gain from attacking me (Gwined and Strat Clut), so please look into that.

    4. Dlc: One set around the Anglo-Saxon invasion of Britain, or the original Great Heathen Army's invasion would be cool.
  • ESKEHLESKEHL Senior Member Posts: 482Registered Users
    CA, I have said it before and I say it again, thanks for great game!!!

    Here are some of my suggestions;
    • Vassals need to be improved, so that you actually get something from creating them. One thing could in the style of some mods that I have seen that actually puts pressure on you to make vassals to keep your kingdom together.
    • Governors should be unlimited. I play with the unlimited governors mod and I can see no reason to not have it like that in the game. It works and it makes the whole minigame of keep ing your subjects loyal more interesting.
    • I think governors could reworked a bit. In the crucible of kings mod, they are instead titles of nobility, and they gain a trait saying that they are eldormen or jarl or something of that sort. I think that is the way to go, it makes more sense given that the game is set in medieval times.
    • I would really like to se a separate window for government and more government positions. Also add missions for these characters like in Rome II, that depending on what rome they have they can engage in different missions wheter it is governance, command or zeal based government positions.
    • Religion would be nive if it was included in some way! Right now you have culturally different buildings for many of the building both in villages and in cities. But it would be nice to have religion included given that at least the vikings where pagan, and at that point there where still some fusion of culture where som areas of Britannia could not decide wheter to be pagan or christian.
    • I really miss the different stances from Rome II, such as ambushes and forced march. Now when I play as Circenn it takes me more than a year to go over from one side of Scotland to the other. It makes no sense.
    As a DLC I would really like to see the normands invading Britain, but most of all I would like to see normands after the invasion of the british isles, when they go out into Europe pillaging and conquering. That would probably require a map of the size of AoC
  • tak22tak22 Senior Member Posts: 2,384Registered Users
    Inocybe said:

    Playing as Mide, decrees aren't really worth it since they cost precious legitimacy which you're trying very hard to save up for annexing neighbors. By the time in the campaign where you have enough legitimacy to burn on decrees, you're already big enough that you don't really need them or they have minimal impact.

    I think removing the legitimacy cost for decrees (perhaps changing the gold cost for balancing as needed) would be good. Or perhaps changing the "Fair of Tailtu" so that it provides a small amount of legitimacy. Prior to the patch, I enjoyed how hosting the Fair was a reliable way of building legitimacy.

    Definitely agree with this
    I don't want to be rude (and excuse me if, at the end, I sound rude) but I think you don't know how to manage and gain legitimacy.
    You can gain very easily 3 legitimacy in one turn by raiding with one army and one very small army. 3 legitimacy is the cost for enacting decree. Legitimacy isn't precious anymore, really. I personnaly think the legitimacy system is great and doesn't need any fix or improvment. People are to use raiding more to gain legitimacy. If you play during eight turns while raiding (one army and one small army), and you enact two decrees, you will earn (18 legitimacy, nearly enought to annex one gaelic country. Don 't tell me legitimacy is precious… Playing gaelic kingdoms is different, you will need sometimes to wait before taking one province, while raiding it a little to gain legitimacy. But at the end, it is enoyable and th current system is working great.

    Personnaly, I think the late game system is terrible with Mide. You never have an invasion in Ireland, and If i am the king of irish, i don't give a **** of invasion in england… To achieve ultimate victory, it forces the player to deploy his army far from his kingdom. I would prefer 4 armies to come in Ireland, and I have to kill them to gain ultimate victory, For short, I think invasiion should target the player instead of scripted invasion location. Practically, I hardly ever play after long victory, because I think the invasion system akward.
    Not something I anticipate changing, but from before release I was hoping that the end-game would be more of a 'grand coalition' invasion from the other main factions on the map, rather than magic doomstacks appearing from nowhere. IMO it doesn't make sense for the Normans to invade Ireland (at least, not until they've conquered England), but it would make sense for the major powers of Great Britain to make an attack. I forget the name of the battle, but there was historically a coalition battle against the English around the end of the game period which marked English dominance of Britain, whereas the invasion forces are a century and a half too early and very ahistorical.
  • dongwongdongwong Posts: 3Registered Users
    edited October 2018
    The game seems broken, the numbers always seem off, regardless of what is upgraded or changed. you can raid your own provinces for massive amounts of money, often time more than enemy territory. Is that intentional? Or is there something very off about this game?

    Also trading for food would be amazing
  • aguirreaguirre Posts: 1Registered Users
    jamreal18 said:

    In Battles,


    • When 2 shieldwalls collide, there should be impact upon contact which means the unit being charged should bounce back
    • There should also be new animations like push and stab.
    • Also heavier units should be able to push lighter units little by little.
    • Make bodyguards act like real bodyguards by protecting their general at all cost everytime their general is harassed. They should compress and form shieldwall automatically if their general is being showered by arrows.
    • More men falling off from the walls. It's easier to push enemy instead of killing them when fighting on the wall.

    I second this! and I would also love to see some animations for when a unit is attacked in the rear. The not so great thing that units slowly turn around to face the enemy when attacked in the rear has been along since Rtw2. Thins applies to the combat in general. Throw in some stabbing to the backs!
    Love the campaign and the beautiful, large map!
  • InocybeInocybe Posts: 144Registered Users
    tak22 said:

    Inocybe said:

    Playing as Mide, decrees aren't really worth it since they cost precious legitimacy which you're trying very hard to save up for annexing neighbors. By the time in the campaign where you have enough legitimacy to burn on decrees, you're already big enough that you don't really need them or they have minimal impact.

    I think removing the legitimacy cost for decrees (perhaps changing the gold cost for balancing as needed) would be good. Or perhaps changing the "Fair of Tailtu" so that it provides a small amount of legitimacy. Prior to the patch, I enjoyed how hosting the Fair was a reliable way of building legitimacy.

    Definitely agree with this
    I don't want to be rude (and excuse me if, at the end, I sound rude) but I think you don't know how to manage and gain legitimacy.
    You can gain very easily 3 legitimacy in one turn by raiding with one army and one very small army. 3 legitimacy is the cost for enacting decree. Legitimacy isn't precious anymore, really. I personnaly think the legitimacy system is great and doesn't need any fix or improvment. People are to use raiding more to gain legitimacy. If you play during eight turns while raiding (one army and one small army), and you enact two decrees, you will earn (18 legitimacy, nearly enought to annex one gaelic country. Don 't tell me legitimacy is precious… Playing gaelic kingdoms is different, you will need sometimes to wait before taking one province, while raiding it a little to gain legitimacy. But at the end, it is enoyable and th current system is working great.

    Personnaly, I think the late game system is terrible with Mide. You never have an invasion in Ireland, and If i am the king of irish, i don't give a **** of invasion in england… To achieve ultimate victory, it forces the player to deploy his army far from his kingdom. I would prefer 4 armies to come in Ireland, and I have to kill them to gain ultimate victory, For short, I think invasiion should target the player instead of scripted invasion location. Practically, I hardly ever play after long victory, because I think the invasion system akward.
    Not something I anticipate changing, but from before release I was hoping that the end-game would be more of a 'grand coalition' invasion from the other main factions on the map, rather than magic doomstacks appearing from nowhere. IMO it doesn't make sense for the Normans to invade Ireland (at least, not until they've conquered England), but it would make sense for the major powers of Great Britain to make an attack. I forget the name of the battle, but there was historically a coalition battle against the English around the end of the game period which marked English dominance of Britain, whereas the invasion forces are a century and a half too early and very ahistorical.
    The idea of a coalitation against you seems intresting, I like it. That could be an alternative to the late game crisis "invasion" (or replace it). For Mide for exemple, you need to have settlements in sctoland and cornwall I think, and a coalition would make sense because ireland are invading other part of britain. Now regarding ireland invasion, that could be the Norse instead, and It could make sense. For the normands, anglo-normand invaded ireland in the 12th century to help one gaelic king. It would be fun that a similar system is implemented for invasion : e.g. one major faction lost its last settlement and call for help invaders. The game would become much more dynamic and challenging.
  • CanadianNewbCanadianNewb Posts: 29Registered Users
    edited October 2018
    PLEASE QUICK BATTLE & LADDER !!
    I think something you could do that I would love to see become a trend across ALL total war games is adjust how quick battle works.

    I can think of several ways that would instantly improve the experience for all but I think the VERY LEAST WORK needed for the BIGGEST POSITIVE outcome would be:

    Increase lock time but remove lock resetting; I am not picking a time but I would say even 3 minutes would be HUGE! Look at other competitive games like LoL where its atleast 5minutes to get into a ranked game. ONE minute is unacceptable! Do you know how many panic 'quit games' ive seen, nevermind i've even had to do it a few times and I have PRESAVED over 20 armies!
    IF you want to have a 'Quick' Battle option then have a 'Ranked' battle option!!
    However with increase time you have to lock the resetting of the timer when someone swaps faction or loads an army, this removes the negatively long delayed starts AND forces players to stop spam swapping for counter plays.




  • norseaxenorseaxe Posts: 402Registered Users
    I'm glad CA are still giving updates and still working on this great game.
    1. seems a lot of people don't want garrisons in minor settlements. Maybe increase how far armies can travel.
    2. I know that no total war game has done this , is there any way you can make the garrison army leave settlement to confront invading army to protect smaller settlements. If army is larger than garrison army maybe have way to call up fyrd to join in battle against invader.
    3. for dlc can you add 1066 offmap invading normans william the conqueror and offmap invading harold hardrade of Norway. have them invading at same time. can either play one of them or Harold king of England.
    4. I know this is a stretch be nice to expand map to include part of france, Norway, Denmark and Sweden and maybe Iceland
    5. in next saga. maybe add a rise of Saxons campaign. Thanks CA for this great game.
  • BoicoteBoicote Senior Member Posts: 638Registered Users
    Sorry if I'm being rude but ... I want more updates for Rome 2 and Attila. I don't care about Thrones of Britannia.
  • Karoten2Karoten2 Posts: 167Registered Users
    Boicote said:

    Sorry if I'm being rude but ... I want more updates for Rome 2 and Attila. I don't care about Thrones of Britannia.

    What about people, who like Thrones of Britannia? Do You care about them?
  • Jtlsoccer9Jtlsoccer9 Posts: 4Registered Users
    I have thoroughly enjoyed Thrones and looking forward to another update. Here are a few things I would like to see improved/added. I know some of these have already been mentioned in the thread.

    1. Vassals - if this system could be reworked so that you could trade/demand settlements from your vassals and have the ability to give a settlement to the vassal. Also, I think it would also be nice if your vassals provided you a certain percentage of their money and food as a tribute. Similar to the tax system the player can change the percentage amount and the higher the percentage the more likely your vassal has a rebellion.
    2. For the Viking Invasion/raiding forces that happen through the campaign It would be cool if you could pay them off to not attack you or hire them to attack one of your enemies.
    3. Make some of the Viking raiding factions like Wicing playable for the campaign. Their objective could be to survive and carve out a piece of Britannia for themselves.
    4. The unit diversity is pretty good compared to how narrow the time and location focus of Thrones is. However, if we got a few more units for some of the factions I think that would be awesome.
    5. Lastly, kind of connected to #3 make a few of the minor factions playable.
  • AstraeusAstraeus Member BrittonisPosts: 356Registered Users
    1. No cave-in to minor garrisons/walls requests. No return of stances.
    2. AI to comprehend de-capping and act.
    3. AI to make use of the entire seige map, or at least liven up seiges with a rare dice-roll that signals a defensive retreat to regroup at a strategic point; the vast scale of the cities is wasted and it may as well be the zoomed-in TWW format. I fully understand your win/lose at the gate emphasis, but a little variety would be welcome.
    4. Routing AI charging into the gate melee to flee into the fields saddens me greatly.
    5. I did not understand why when capturing via a port I already had some units on land, behind enemy lines? A few times they were at least outside attacking a defended gate. I gave up on manual port battles quickly.
    6. Better tree/wall/landscape interference to archer/crossbow/flaming arrows.
    7. Generals under seige seem far too vulnerable to incoming arrows when simply maintaining morale boost circle proximity for his defending units. It is frustrating when my traited general dies so easily despite the fact he could Brian Blessed from the safety of being another 200 yards further back out of archer range. Likewise, I feel I am cheating when I order all my archers to simply bombard the enemy general ignoring all other troops.
    8. Battle realism tickbox to 'allow issue orders whilst paused' - frankly I just want the fog of war challenge/surprises and not the brain-hand-eye coordination part of it. This is why I have no interest in and I am not good enough to cope with legendary mode, but I would very much enjoy Hard/VH foggy! (Same fact with all TW for me.)
    9. A few major rivers introduced (bypassing trespassing penalties and/or faster inland travel) and perhaps river battles - a simple modified port/sea battle map could possibly suffice.
    10. Implement bribery and corruption diplomacy/traits. (only if you can afford it, or have a glut of food to spare, or have a virgin daughter ready for marriage.) AI seem very reluctant for cease-fire/entering war as it is, but surely some smaller, desperate AI could be bribed to raid my enemy?
    11. Adjust topographical road networks for fairer, more realistic compass travel durations. (Seems awry, especially Devon/Cornwall/Gwent basin/summer Scotland, but not sure how to improve this one exactly...)
    12. Definitive confirmation as to any future dlc expansion; or never going to happen as ToB is a Saga and the next Saga is already underway.
  • ComradeChernovComradeChernov Posts: 4Registered Users
    In addition to the points I made on page 1 - PLEASE bring back Flann's original voice lines. They were so meme-worthy, and now they've been made so bland.
  • kinjokinjo Senior Member Posts: 1,610Registered Users
    edited October 2018
    After playing about 250 hours and dozens of hours modding the game this is what I would personally like to see:

    1. Cohesive Ai battle lines - The Ai battle line tends to fall apart as they move across the battle map killing any sense of shield wall immersion. If the Ai can form a battle line and move as a cohesive shieldwall it would be a very nice improvement imo.

    2. Diplomacy upgrades - Any improvements in this area would be welcome additions, but trading or gifting regions is what I long for as it increases replayability. The ability to annex vassals also makes sense as it seems like it would be the next logical choice when dealing with vassals with good relations.

    3. Agents - Bring agents back in a limited capacity, for example each faction could have an agent type priest, skald, and bard. They could be deployed in regions for bonuses especially since there is allegiance now, but also sent to other factions courts to try to improve relations as well. Kind of like father Beocca from the Last Kingdom series.

    4. Culture based area of recruitment - Troops types available should be determined by the allegiance of the regions so that it is possible to obtain troops from different factions even if it is just low tier troops.

    5. Ancillary Items - Please introduce these back into the game as it is part of character development and it is just badass when one of your best warriors gets an Ulfberht sword or some other unique item like a war horn.

    6. Wonders - At least add a few wonders or important landmarks like the Hill of Tara have some significant bonus for holding.

    7. More Immersive weather - Maybe make some of the storms stronger with more grey skys, looks like Sesame Street on most of the battles.

    8. Giant plants - Some of the plants are way TOO big on the battle map I'm talking 3-5 times their actual size looks pretty silly.
    https://i.imgur.com/qLVahtH.jpg

    Also more weapon types and basic clothing items would be nice to make the factions a bit more unique for example long spears for the picts with proper animations and more Irish clothing items and medium round shields.
    Post edited by kinjo on
  • MalcolmMMalcolmM Posts: 2Registered Users
    I think there is five things that, for me, I would really like to see changed about TOB:

    1. Areas of Recruitment - It makes absolutely no sense that I could, as Mide, conquer regions of England and instantly be able to recruit Irish units there. I honestly find it staggering that CA chose to go with the recruitment system that is currently in place, there must be some reason for that that I am missing.

    Areas of recruitment would also more the game more varied and interesting to play - as well as allowing modders to add units.

    2. Ambush battles - The TOB campaign map is glorious, hats off to you. I understand that not many % of battles in previous TW were ambushes but this campaign map would be so well suited to them. The are significant historic precedents for including them in this period as well. It just makes sense to have that option in here.

    3. Governors & Estates - I'm not sure how possible this would be under the current system but here we go... I would change "governors" to "high nobility" or something like that and make them playable as generals. The individual governor titles could be along the lines of "Lord of...", "Earl of...", or maybe "Mormaer of...".

    Combine this with areas of recruitment and you could have armies made up of a regions Earl or Lord and units specific to that region. Things like this make the game play far more interesting. Personally I would also have each "governor/lord/earl" appear with a unique banner for the region when they are in battle - in the same way we have a standard being held by one of the units in the generals bodyguard.

    4. Make a time penalty for armies moving to ships - come on, like at least a turn. It just makes no sense to immediately get a whole army into ships.

    5. More diverse battle maps - This has been a problem for ages. Not sure why battle maps are so boring and featureless but it needs to change. There have been some improvements, with some kind of impassable marshland appearing on battle maps in Ireland but the overwhelming majority of maps have absolutely no obstacles to get around apart from a gentle hill and some trees. It's not realistic and it makes battles really repetitive.

    I know I only said five things but here is two tiny, really easy points to change:

    1. Change "Welsh" to "Cumbric" - having "Welsh Spearmen" in Strathclyde is embarrassing.
    2. Get rid of the "Stone of Scone" missions for Circenn - I mean seriously, I know you were probably desperately looking for some easy way to make Circenn unique but being told of "rumours" of it being in a region in southern England that at the start of game isn't useful or fun.

  • FossowayFossoway Posts: 1,926Registered Users
    Would it be possible to add more marching stances? I don't expect you to re-add the ambush and forced march stance, but maybe something like converting regions to your allegiance, or instigating a rebellion in enemy territory? Maybe even giving each faction a different stance unique to their culture, for more diversity?
  • CnConradCnConrad Senior Member Posts: 3,085Registered Users
    ESKEHL said:

    Well, a better vassal system would be much appriciated. I have really tried to recreate East Seaxe as West Seaxe and that really is hard given that South Seaxe or Cent always end up overtaking that region of East Anglia before I can get my new vassal expanding.

    I really like the trait system that was impelemented in the last update, but I really would like to see that governors gain traits as nobleman of that province as in Crucible of Kings. Also I would like to unlimited governors. I see no point in having that restriction given that it really makes late game more difficult given that you need to keep your realm together.

    I would also really like to see more councillors to the king and and a screen or area of a window for those. They could get missions as character can in Rome II?

    In terms of a DLC that follows with the game, perhaps normands, and then I don`t necessary mean William the Conqueror, but rather focus on the normands after William did his famous invasion. That would mean following the normand conquest and harrassment wars around Europe following up to the first crusades.

    Very similar request here.

    The combat is fine the the campaign mechanics are fine.

    My biggest request is to focus on making politics and allies work in the game. I would love to have politics and political marrages matter and allow you to annex weaker settlements After all that is how Mercia fell to Wessex.

  • FossowayFossoway Posts: 1,926Registered Users
    edited November 2018
    CnConrad said:

    ESKEHL said:

    Well, a better vassal system would be much appriciated. I have really tried to recreate East Seaxe as West Seaxe and that really is hard given that South Seaxe or Cent always end up overtaking that region of East Anglia before I can get my new vassal expanding.

    I really like the trait system that was impelemented in the last update, but I really would like to see that governors gain traits as nobleman of that province as in Crucible of Kings. Also I would like to unlimited governors. I see no point in having that restriction given that it really makes late game more difficult given that you need to keep your realm together.

    I would also really like to see more councillors to the king and and a screen or area of a window for those. They could get missions as character can in Rome II?

    In terms of a DLC that follows with the game, perhaps normands, and then I don`t necessary mean William the Conqueror, but rather focus on the normands after William did his famous invasion. That would mean following the normand conquest and harrassment wars around Europe following up to the first crusades.

    Very similar request here.

    The combat is fine the the campaign mechanics are fine.

    My biggest request is to focus on making politics and allies work in the game. I would love to have politics and political marrages matter and allow you to annex weaker settlements After all that is how Mercia fell to Wessex.

    That is an excellent idea. A good way of making political marriage matter could be, for example:
    - let's say I marry a Gaelic princess as Mide or Circenn
    - after something like 30 turns, if I have good relations with my wife's original faction, I get to confederate
    - alternatively, if my bride's father (aka the king) dies, I get to claim all his lands and annex everything

    Marrying off your own daughter should also make her new husband more willing to confederate, after a set amount of time (and his realization that it is safer for him to join his father in law rather than stay a little fish among sharks).

    This would actually give us the option to plan far ahead, and give us more dilemmas to make the player feel like a real monarch ("do I marry this beautiful woman - with a nice bonus - or this ugly old lady that give me a chance to inherit this neighboring faction?")

    And, like people already mentioned, it would be nice if we could "peacefully" annex a vassal after a fixed amount of turns. That would mean we could have other means to expand our territory other than conquest.
    Post edited by Fossoway on
  • kinjokinjo Senior Member Posts: 1,610Registered Users
    edited October 2018
    Fix the Stone of destiny quest, effect is temporary and have to travel across the map to capture a settlement. At least make the effect permanent.

    Really nice ancillary art in the game that was never used:



    Hopefully they get used as ancillaries has been a part TW character development for a long time.



  • AxelradAxelrad Senior Member Posts: 629Registered Users
    Thrones is great and one of my favorite games in the series, so I look forward to any future content for it. The things I like the most about the game and would like to see unchanged:

    1. Battle feel / pace: I like the slower, more unique feel of shieldwall heavy armies with weaker cavalry that the game provides. I'd hate to see anything change that, unless it was something like a Norman expansion that let us play with their cavalry in a campaign.

    2. Unit diversity: I really like the current balance that is struck with different factions having clear strengths and weaknesses based on their warfighting culture while still being able to field balanced armies. If anything, I'd like to see stronger spears overall to reflect the historical supremacy of spears on the battlefield, but I know there's gameplay balance to account for.

    3. Agents: I LOVE the decision to remove agents and move their actions into characters. It frees up so much turn time to be spent on other things and makes for a better feeling, deeper game, imo. Less micromanagement, more strategy.

    4. Siege battles: I love ToB's take on siege maps and would like to see that approach continued in any future content the game might get.

    5. Naval battles: I love naval battles in my Total War games and appreciate ToB's period-authentic representation of them.

    6. End Game Invasion: I really like the whole Norman/Dane/Norse invasion event at the end game, and think it adds a lot to the campaign.

    7: Art style: I love the painted-glass art that permeates the game. It's beautiful and immersive.

    8. Province management: I'm a fan of the more specialized provincial system, since it forces you to find resources & building chains on the map instead of just getting a new construction area and building whatever you need. This ToB system is much more akin to actual warfare, which is often driven by resource acquisition, so I'm kind of in love with it.

    As for things I would like to see changed, here are a few things off the top of my head:

    1. Estates: I've never really liked how these were implemented, even after the Allegiance Update. It's great in theory, but in practice it just seems to be annoying micromanagement to keep generals loyal. I would guess they either need to be a bigger part of the campaign, with more tied to them, or just removed. Idk.

    2. Ambush Battles: I've never agreed with Jack's reasoning for removing them and would like to see them reimplemented if possible, especially given that 1. we know 3K has them returning and 2. the Gaelic factions of this period made extensive historical use of raids and ambushes, so they fit the time period well.

    3. Navigable Rivers: I can see the pros and cons of both having and not having them, but my dream system would be to have the major rivers navigable, but have a high level of settlement upgrade simulate river defenses being constructed that cut off upriver access at that point, thus allowing you to block river access at strategic points. The current system basically assumes that river defenses are already in use everywhere, which is okay I guess but I would like to have those river raids be a part of the game if possible.

    4. Historical Battles: I am fully aware that I am in the minority on this, but historical battles have always been one of my favorite aspects of the series and I think that even if they're only played by a small percentage of the playerbase, they're important to keep around because of the tangental learning they provide to players, especially those who are learning about these historical events for the first time. My introduction to many battles as a kid was playing them in Shogun & Medieval, which prompted me to go read historical sources on them. ToB has the issue of poor documentation, but that hasn't exactly stopped CA from crafting scenarios whole-cloth before. It'd be fantastic to see at least 1-3 of the most pivotal battles represented. Everybody knows Hastings, but Edington and Brunanburh are practically unheard of outside of the UK.

    5. Vassals: I tend not to bother with vassals unless I start with them because the system seems designed to be difficult. After reading through this thread, I have to say that the suggestions for peaceful annexation of long-term vassals sound *brilliant*, and would also be quite authentic. It'd be nice to have a way to gain territory besides direct conquest - which is what I tend to do because it's the only reliable way the game currently provides.
  • JADennisJADennis Posts: 5Registered Users
    I have been playing Total war games since shogun 1. First time i have ever left a comment. I would love to see a dlc that expanded the map into Scandinavia. It seems that Scandinavia gets left out which is understandable for rome. But this particular game seems to be a good match for that time period and i would love to be able to fight it out in norway. I understand that a huge chunk of Scandinavia might take to much time to create seeing as how long it took to make the map of britian. But a sliver of playable Norway Sweden Denmark would be great. Maybe i am in the minority of players who would like this. But i would bet there are also those who would agree with me. Im also one of those people who has no problem spending money on a game i like. Takk skall du ha
  • AlexandroAlexandro Senior Member Zu Lai Temple againPosts: 1,401Registered Users
    Some mechanics that would allow via diplomacy the exchange/donation of lands if it served to appease those enemies that I can not win on the battlefield.
    But I would like this to have a cost like the loss of character's prestige and an increase of the people's clamor for his resignation.
  • PixeldiktatorPixeldiktator Posts: 125Registered Users
    I would appreciate a little fix: with the allegiance update the settlement UI was changed and it is currently not possible to get information about the public order of a settlement that belongs to another faction, which makes inciting rebellions with the priest follower kinda useless, since you will never know wether there is a chance that a rebellion will start or not.
  • MarkroxMarkrox Posts: 176Registered Users
    I've played every Total war game except Arena and the mobile games. The thing that stands out to me as unique and memorable in Thrones over the other TW games is greater emphasis on managing my generals and their loyalty, marrying members of my house to ensure heirs and forge alliances. Choosing the right governor for a settlement.

    I'd love that side to be developed futher. Develop these people so you feel a stronger connection to your faction and create really memorable campaigns. More events especially, with meaningful outcomes, random events that effect someone and tell a story are all fantastic. Even losing your best governor to a disease over winter and being pressured into using a rebellious swine in his place to try and keep him on side can change a campaign completely.

    I'd love to see factions within factions similar to the recent Rome 2 update introduced, but not necessarily always a political faction. Cultural differences are important too in this time period. Events could also impact these factions.

    Finally, I'd like to see Loyalty and similar mechanics be a concern late game. I've noticed often I have loyalty issues early on but then win my generals over after a certain amount of time, and then usually have very few issues. Logically, running a larger, more complex kingdom would be tougher than a few provinces. Not only dealing with external threats, but internal political intruigues.

    To summarise, push the story telling, narrative side of the game further. Make what you have run deeper, and increase replayability in different ways rather than exending the timeline. For Thrones, I think making the game deeper beats making it wider, for example simply extending the timeline. I wouldn't be against a timeline extension per se, but it should come with deeper mechanics as a package, e.g "1066 and politics and event depth DLC".
    Playing Total War since 2000

    Waiting on Total War: Three Kingdoms
  • SirAmsterdamSirAmsterdam Posts: 4Registered Users
    Hi Dev Team,

    When you attack a city with an army of 20 stacks and you build 4 towers(seige) and you attack him manually and you put down your entire army at one gate. and on the other gate you but 2towers(Seige) you can just go inside. without the AI doing anything, and then you capture the Victory point. The AI will stay on your side (Big armry) so wont move add all.

    Easy to fix i think when we put a army(1 stack or more) into the Victory point the AI should react on this.

    I would also love when u guys change the random war Declare system. alot of the time you got like +100 like from a faction and they still declare u war.



    Greets Sir Amsterdam.
  • ArclathArclath Posts: 23Registered Users
    Also:

    Items: Could you elaborate on the requirements to get items in-game? I've gotten Arthur's supposed dagger, spear, and sword as Gwined a couple of times, but it never tells me why they popped up. Perhaps add them as some sort of quest objective - "Once you capture X settlement, bla bla bla"
  • ZeardZeard Posts: 6Registered Users
    Hi there CA!

    In my opinion a great addition would've been zone of control rework. As the Saga series serving as a prooving ground (which i really enjoy) I think zone of cotrol should be represtened by a more impactful mechanism. Zone of control is key to making a fun and realistic navy experience. With it's current state you won't be able to make navy in campaign what it should be. List of ideas:

    - Zone of control should be crossable by enemies, but a question for player/AI for counterattack should present itself.
    - Zone of control should be able to be shaped by the player for example to create a blockade i would select my navy and DRAW my desired zone of control (with limitations). This change reflecs the fact that 1. in reality navies and armies can stretch their forces in order cover more ground. 2.Zone of control in the end is a mechanism that serves as a counter measure the turn-based strategy game, where you cannot intercept enemies, as you could in real time strategy and in real world.
    - Zone of control should be bigger as it reflects the range of army or fleet being able to intercept enemies.

    This changes would allow positioning to be more strategic and navies to become what they were in real world - an ancient higway for troops (ships could cover form 4 to 5 times a distance in a day than regular army on foot)

    Another desired change would have been army size(units per army). Right now we are unable to gather large epic armies without trouble. We have to pray the reinforcements will come on in good postions, gather them etc. I came up with the idea that you could for example gather 80 troops in your army in 1 stack and 80 in enemie's army and then on the battlefield scale them as if they were fighting 20 vs 20 fight. Graphicallywhise 1 unit would have at max 160 models as usal, but the unit would have had a purely mathematical number of 160 x 4 =640 man. To showcase the scale of battle the units would have been slower ( because we imagine that 640 man is changing it's position, but in a screen we see 160 models). This sollution would make big battle epic with keeping our PC alive.

    If anyone has better ideas of improvemnts to subjects above please feel free to comment :D
  • That_white_wallThat_white_wall Posts: 1Registered Users
    The fundamental issue holding this game back is the diplomacy / vassal system. In many of my campaigns, regardless of who I’m playing, it feels like my “allies” are really just enemies who haven’t attacked me yet. I’m constantly trying to get my same culture neighbors on my side, and regardless of how much gold I give them or the strength differential I’ll get back stabbed. I’d much prefer being able to hold onto a friendship and build towards creating an ally that is worthwhile to keep alive. Currently my strategy is to keep one neighbor happy so that I can knock out a different neighbor, then come back and prepare for the eventual backstab. Conflict can be good, but feeling like I’m under constant siege is not ideal.
  • morada454morada454 Posts: 1Registered Users
    mcar110 said:

    The first two might be outlandish, but here is my wishlist:

    Naval River Battles- at the very least the ability to travel up river on ships (see The Last Kingdom and Vikings TV shows :) )

    Expansion of the Campaign Map- Inclusion of Iceland, Normandy and the Northern european coastline, Scandinavia (Norway and Denmark specifically)

    Continuing the updating of Estates- they are in a lot better shape than they were at launch but they still don't have much of an impact on gameplay, at least in my experience

    Improving of Vassal System (to be honest this is something that needs to be addressed across all games)- there is no real incentive at present to have vassals at all.

    Implementation of Cavalry Charges similar to warhammer would be nice

    Yes...very much yes to the Campaign Expansion. I would like to Play real Vikings that came from scandinavia to raid England. Maybe a DLC Campaign in 800 A.D. (playing Ragnar Lothbrok).
  • AlexK82AlexK82 Posts: 5Registered Users
    Correct combat animations so that most of them are not blocked. I would like to see new animations with percussion weapons and axes, because this is their era. If DLC extended animation, I would buy it!
Sign In or Register to comment.