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?

12346»

Comments

  • kokankokan Junior Member Posts: 50Registered Users
    I don't know if you guys are still looking for what we would like to see next in this post, but here it goes my feedback concerning TOB post Steel and Statecraft update.

    Really liking what I see concerning the Estates, it gives them more of a purpose and consequence on how they are managed which is nice. Also the new paths on the construction options are cool as it should allows us to tailor our provinces a bit better.


    Now for what could be improved:
    Recruitment System: you removed the chance factor from the unit availability, which I really disliked and replaced it by a cooldown of sorts. I think it could be improved… I think that having an option to manage our population would be a nice addition, a system that allowed us to allocate abled bodies into some functions in hours of need such as armies or farms.

    Example: We would have a couple of sliders to control the population distribution. In times of war that slider could be moved to army and recruitment but by doing so it would remove population from other functions such as farms/fishing (and thus reducing food production efficiency), mines (reducing resource production and therefore having an impact on trade values).

    Obviously in this scenario mines and farms would be the other sliders. Also, there would need to be an indication of when mine output and farms are at 100%.

    Also, while an already recruited unit is replenishing, it should increase the cooldown for the next available unit (these men must be coming from somewhere).


    Minor settlements/villages occupation: I think, in order to reduce how easily we and AI can just wipe out another faction by simply taking out these undefended settlements with a single general (which I am doing to the AI right now…) the Allegiance system could be used.

    The current application just gives a flat public order penalty if we occupy one of these villages, but its very easy to ignore.
    It would be probably more interesting application if there was a province capital + allegiance level system.

    The short version of this system would be: if the capital province isn't occupied and the overall allegiance is not in favor, any occupation of minor settlements/villages would not be definitive and would revert to the province holder when the occupation force moves away.

    Example: a force takes a small village.

    While the force remains in the region, that region's production would revert in favor of the occupying force in some way:
    - If the region was isolated from the rest of the kingdom (middle of the enemy territory), it would only replenish supplies and a minor troop replenishment (wounded recovery). This because people would be too afraid to work efficiently due to the occupation, and since the region was not linked to friendly territory, no production or reinforcements would be able to arrive efficiently. Once the allegiance of the region changed in favor of the occupation force, a very small pool of recruitment and increased replenishment would be available.
    - If it was adjacent to the kingdom, only a public order penalty would be applied and reduced output in function of the allegiance.

    If the force leaves and the capital isn't yet occupied the allegiance would revert in a couple of turns to the capital owner as well as the ownership of that village. This would allow for quick resource denial tactics

    I think a system like this should work very well to prevent both the player and the AI from just rampaging across the map and taking control of everything unchecked.

    Patrols: somewhat related to the previous point, I think there should be a patrol system in place once the "garrison" building is constructed on the capital.

    This system would simply remove a portion of the capital garrison and have it patrol the province. Higher levels of the this building could allow for more patrols. The options could be to have a patrol going around the full province or target specific regions.

    This of course should be togglable in order to have a full garrison in case of an invasion, but the patrol would probably be a deterrent to single generals going around capturing small villages. The patrol itself wouldn't be controllable on the campaign map and it would be visible much as we can see the trade carts going around.
    If an enemy force enters the territory there would be a chance event that the patrol would intercept it (if they engage it should the option of the player).
  • EfixEfix Posts: 266Registered Users
    The mad trait should be rare but all my generals got it at some points kinda annoying but props for the book of traits its awesome
  • norseaxenorseaxe Posts: 402Registered Users
    I would like to see more playable factions. I think playing a raider faction would be pretty cool be similar to horde mechanic in Attila. I wish they would expand on missions or expeditions be pretty cool to raid on one of expeditions yourself. Add slaves to sudreyar or to all faction just have dyflin collect more money from slaves or something.
  • dearmaddearmad Junior Member Posts: 21Registered Users
    edited December 2018
    I see lots of problems in my current game that made the internal politics boring:

    "Hard" politics level.

    Alfred has 12 estates.... my nobles 1 or 2. No problems at all. No one asks for stuff much. WHen they do the hit I take by ignoring them is 1-2 loyalty... big deal. Here have a priest.

    With 12 estates my influence is something like 20? So every political decision Imake can be made without regard to lowered influence.

    Why on earth did CA not limit the influence overflow somehow... 10 is 10, and as high as it should go. Ever, so if I have to lose 2 to make a decision it should cost me!

    After this last patch this part of the game disappeared. What gives? I'd like to see the political game come back!
    --

    Oh and getting ALL the technologies in 20 years?

    And does my income have to spiral to +13,000 or so per turn with a bank balance of 100,000's of thousands on vh/vh because the synergies are so damned powerful!?

    Get the economy and progression in order CA, really.

    --

    Battles are good.

    --

    No mods running.
  • Total_War_VeteranTotal_War_Veteran Posts: 446Registered Users
    Happy New Year, for all of you and CA ! May this year be better for us all and also for the future Total War .

    I would like to suggest some things that can liven up the campaign map abit (as it is currently kinda "empty") :
    - Historical event that happened in the mainland europe and in scandinavia
    - A splinter rogue scandinavian warband(doesn't related to any faction, just simply a rogue band) that wandering around plundering, looting and razing a settlement that must be dealt with before they create more damage.(just like rebels in M2TW)
    - Population system (that tied with recruitment as menpower & related with above rogue warband where if such warband being left free rein, it will always plunder our settlement and with it kidnapping our people thus reducing the population as a whole)
    Full support for CA and CA_Ella
  • inaxiousinaxious Posts: 7Registered Users
    Would be nice to have something done to feel some attachment to your territories. When you click on a settlement you only see icons with a number. Bigger buildings, more developed structures should feel like that when you look at them, be it an icon or a different kind of picture. But a number?

    "my king, let's conquer this settlement. They've got a port that is a 3 and next to it there's a church thing that has a 5 in it. Must be good!"

    I think it would add inmersion.
  • TheodoreTheodore Member Posts: 91Registered Users
    I would like to control the taxation of gold and food separately.
    By the way, China's warring states period would make an ideal setting for a total war game.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Warring_States_period
  • slapnut1207slapnut1207 Posts: 674Registered Users
    edited January 5
    I would like to be able to sell food for money, I have tons of food but I can't profit from it.

    Making Alternate History by adding in more choices and features. Such as the restoration of Roman Britain, a dynastic union between the Holy Roman Empire and your Faction. You would get unique units, a new faction icon if possible and several buildings you can research.

    For example, for Gwynedd you can research late 4th century Roman Units stationed in Roman Britain such as Legio XX Valeria Victrix, the Equites Taifali and the Victores Iuniores. I would like these units to appear in a Dux Bellorum dlc.

    I would like to have a story in my campaigns such as dilemmas that more or less, function as the campaign story besides your politics and invasions.

    Can you add citizens to town, port and city assault battles?
    Post edited by slapnut1207 on
    In Hoc Signo Vinces

  • sunshinetroopersunshinetrooper Posts: 68Registered Users
    edited January 14
    Just played a 215 turn campaign, where I completed all the victory conditions with Circenn on H/H/H. Goddamn it was easy compared to the last update. I had to do very little to avoid loyalty issues, where before it was manageable yet challenging; there was no intrigue or politics. I had 4-5 requests over 215 turns for estates, which ranged from 1-3 estates which didn't matter as I had 50+ estates. If i ignored them, I may get a loyalty issue but it was easy to respond as I had so much gold and influence, I could easily afford to lose influence or pay for loyalty. Although the new estates system is arguably better than before, it is more engaging and rewarding to use - its far too easy. You can now completely ignore estates and the game becomes easier for it.

    By the late early game inwards, I had so much influence, easily 20+ that the political consequences were no longer consequential. I had one character, fothad who was my best governor constantly give me political decisions which could be ignored where previously would lead to rebellion, me ceding power for loyalty, bribery or death. Fothad went on to be a governor where upgrades to building chains cost me 0 gold.

    The trait system and trait book is excellent, but an update the interface to filter by bonuses, would be handy to see what traits boost influence or say morale. Currently its just a memory game which the trait book was trying to address. Traits are buggared in the game, too many traits are gained and lost the very same turn with no explanation as to why - it seems like a bug. In my new playthrough, I have 2 generals and governor and they are all mad or raving - fantastic!

    I've said it before - taking settlements is too easy. I prefer the no garrison rule as this makes sieges on capitols fresh and more memorable but attrition and supplies should dwindle at a faster rate when in enemy territory. We lose soldiers in winter conditions but I think movement should also be reduced, as with morale and stamina in battle. What should be added in my opinion is adding a debuff when owning only the settlements, something like 50% income/food/replenishment/supplies unless all regions are taken - this would force players and AI to focus on taking the capital first, then the settlements.


    Also, does anyone intentionally complete the missions for Welsh or Circenn factions? Oh yeah, I'm in Wales and its turn 10, lets send an army all the way to Inverness because their was a famous battle there. Same for Circenn, yes I'm being attacked on 2 fronts and i'm at risk of Northymbre attacking from the South. Jolly good, lets send a force to take a city in Northern Ireland, its only a vassal of the 2nd most powerful faction in the game. Perfect, no bother!
    Post edited by sunshinetrooper on
  • tak22tak22 Senior Member Posts: 2,386Registered Users
    @sunshinetrooper - I think the point of Steel and Statecraft was to kill any challenge in the game. So it sounds like it was a success! :/

    Re: the missions, I've been saying for a long time they need to be scripted to start closer to home (border provinces), but apparently this isn't in the cards. At least for Gwined the missions just pile up over time and you get the bonus when/if you finally make it there. OTOH for Circenn since they're sequential and there's no conceivable way a player is going to invade (say) Northymbre or Wessex or the far reaches of Ireland in the early-mid game (esp. while fighting off the Sea Kings factions), the random locations render the Stone of Destiny mechanic irrelevant to the game.
  • PERICLES1789PERICLES1789 Junior Member Posts: 71Registered Users
    Hi,

    During sieges flaming arrows by human defenders should automatically aim the siege equipment, not the attacking soldiers as it seemingly do. Many thanks for the update.


  • Total_War_VeteranTotal_War_Veteran Posts: 446Registered Users

    Just played a 215 turn campaign, where I completed all the victory conditions with Circenn on H/H/H. Goddamn it was easy compared to the last update. I had to do very little to avoid loyalty issues, where before it was manageable yet challenging; there was no intrigue or politics. I had 4-5 requests over 215 turns for estates, which ranged from 1-3 estates which didn't matter as I had 50+ estates. If i ignored them, I may get a loyalty issue but it was easy to respond as I had so much gold and influence, I could easily afford to lose influence or pay for loyalty. Although the new estates system is arguably better than before, it is more engaging and rewarding to use - its far too easy. You can now completely ignore estates and the game becomes easier for it.

    By the late early game inwards, I had so much influence, easily 20+ that the political consequences were no longer consequential. I had one character, fothad who was my best governor constantly give me political decisions which could be ignored where previously would lead to rebellion, me ceding power for loyalty, bribery or death. Fothad went on to be a governor where upgrades to building chains cost me 0 gold.

    The trait system and trait book is excellent, but an update the interface to filter by bonuses, would be handy to see what traits boost influence or say morale. Currently its just a memory game which the trait book was trying to address. Traits are buggared in the game, too many traits are gained and lost the very same turn with no explanation as to why - it seems like a bug. In my new playthrough, I have 2 generals and governor and they are all mad or raving - fantastic!

    I've said it before - taking settlements is too easy. I prefer the no garrison rule as this makes sieges on capitols fresh and more memorable but attrition and supplies should dwindle at a faster rate when in enemy territory. We lose soldiers in winter conditions but I think movement should also be reduced, as with morale and stamina in battle. What should be added in my opinion is adding a debuff when owning only the settlements, something like 50% income/food/replenishment/supplies unless all regions are taken - this would force players and AI to focus on taking the capital first, then the settlements.


    Also, does anyone intentionally complete the missions for Welsh or Circenn factions? Oh yeah, I'm in Wales and its turn 10, lets send an army all the way to Inverness because their was a famous battle there. Same for Circenn, yes I'm being attacked on 2 fronts and i'm at risk of Northymbre attacking from the South. Jolly good, lets send a force to take a city in Northern Ireland, its only a vassal of the 2nd most powerful faction in the game. Perfect, no bother!

    Yes, I too feel the same! Hopefully Jack will address this issue in the next update.
    Full support for CA and CA_Ella
  • slapnut1207slapnut1207 Posts: 674Registered Users
    Please add Civilians into the settlements and towns of Britannia, this was a feature present in Attila.
    In Hoc Signo Vinces

  • Pickelrick47Pickelrick47 Posts: 11Registered Users
    Hi all, My name is Niko. Ever since I have heard about Creative Assembly and their many awesome strategy games like Rome Total war II and Total War Atilla, I have always wanted to be able to play a mode where I can play as either King Arthur or any Romano British Ruler during the historical Arthurian Age as I am interested in this time peroid of history. With the release of Total War Thrones of Britannia last and with the new DLC games for Rome Total war II like Empire divided and Rise of the Republic, I thought it would be a fantastic idea for Creative Assembly and Sega to create a DLC game for Thrones of Britannia that took place during the Arthurian age of Britannia when the Angles, Saxons, Jutes where invading and driving out the local Britons to west of Britain. I also think there should be a choice of playing 7 main Romano British kingdom as there were many during that time period and a couple of other playable factions as well. I also think that the Welsh/Romano British should be wearing armor that looks like the armour from Total War Attila. If you guys think this would be awesome addition to Thrones of Britannia let me. Can't to hear from you soon
    Sincerely,
    Niko Nantsis
  • MuhsinTpdMuhsinTpd Junior Member Türkiye Cumhuriyeti (The Republic of Turkey)Posts: 126Registered Users
    Ragnar Lodbrok DLC pls.
    “Victory is for those who can say "Victory is mine". Success is for those who can begin saying "I will succeed" and say "I have succeeded" in the end.”
    ― Mustafa Kemal Atatürk
  • TyphoonBlazeTyphoonBlaze Posts: 93Registered Users
    i want 2 things
    1. Ai use all siege map , they should rotate when needed
    2. Ai no more Blob , i mean they can add reserve even better
  • jimmy44jimmy44 Senior Member Posts: 351Registered Users
    AI armies build multiple stacks and uses multi stack armies against the player similar to Rome 2 and Attila
  • m2607m2607 Posts: 3Registered Users
    Is there any information about a new update or fixes or new content in the future?
  • Ephraim_DaltonEphraim_Dalton Senior Member Posts: 20,752Registered Users
    jimmy44 said:

    AI armies build multiple stacks and uses multi stack armies against the player similar to Rome 2 and Attila

    That's already the case. Had to content with five Wessex stacks invading my lands in my latest East Angle campaign and two of them were a full 20.

  • Emperor_NapoleonEmperor_Napoleon Posts: 122Registered Users
    m2607 said:

    Is there any information about a new update or fixes or new content in the future?

    There hasn't been any mention of ToB since the start of the year around the time of the last update. Even in the latest 'What The Teams Are Working On' blog post, which was the February edition, the game wasn't even mentioned. Instead they talked about a new Saga game they're working on. Safe to say that at this point ToB is dead and we likely won't be getting anything more for it.
  • m2607m2607 Posts: 3Registered Users

    m2607 said:

    Is there any information about a new update or fixes or new content in the future?

    There hasn't been any mention of ToB since the start of the year around the time of the last update. Even in the latest 'What The Teams Are Working On' blog post, which was the February edition, the game wasn't even mentioned. Instead they talked about a new Saga game they're working on. Safe to say that at this point ToB is dead and we likely won't be getting anything more for it.
    Thank you for your response. That's sad I like ToB but ...
  • MuhsinTpdMuhsinTpd Junior Member Türkiye Cumhuriyeti (The Republic of Turkey)Posts: 126Registered Users

    m2607 said:

    Is there any information about a new update or fixes or new content in the future?

    There hasn't been any mention of ToB since the start of the year around the time of the last update. Even in the latest 'What The Teams Are Working On' blog post, which was the February edition, the game wasn't even mentioned. Instead they talked about a new Saga game they're working on. Safe to say that at this point ToB is dead and we likely won't be getting anything more for it.
    Very important point. Thanks for information. You are right.
    “Victory is for those who can say "Victory is mine". Success is for those who can begin saying "I will succeed" and say "I have succeeded" in the end.”
    ― Mustafa Kemal Atatürk
  • HectorSalamancaHectorSalamanca Junior Member Posts: 59Registered Users
    I am not a fan of the current way governors are represented in the game. They are off the map, and cannot lead armies outside of the settlement they are governing (without some tedious gymnastics). This does not represent the actual historic situation: more often than not, governors were appointed to govern settlements and lead armies in their liege's stead.

    I would like governors to be represented the same way it was in the old games (Rome 1 and ME 2). In other words, I would like them to be psychically present on the campaign map. The armies they lead could be special: for example they can be called "governor's armies", with some modifiers like slow campaign movement.
  • Total_War_VeteranTotal_War_Veteran Posts: 446Registered Users
    so this thread is useless now ?
    Full support for CA and CA_Ella
Sign In or Register to comment.