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

Some ideas for new features in III

QBallSlidesQBallSlides Registered Users Posts: 1
  • Currently, artillery on autofire mode always applies the same rules regarding risk of hitting friendlies when targeting. This should instead be a setting for each artillery unit in its menu, with (for example) four options: We Have Reserves: fire on enemies without regard to friendly units; Danger Close: fire as long as you think you'll kill more of them than us; Fire for Effect: fire only if the risk of hitting friendlies is small; and Range Safety: do not fire on a target if there is any risk of hitting friendly units. There could also be settings to specify automatic target prioritization, e.g., weakest armor (Hellstorms would use this), strongest armor (for cannons), leadership lowest (for a "shock and awe" approach), maximize hit chance, least distance, etc.
  • Trees should be destructible - though fires spreading would probably be too computation-intensive, artillery should be able to knock them down for a clear field of fire. The presence of lots of trees on a map is crippling for artillery-dependent Empire armies.
  • Assimilation of recruitment: when lore-appropriate, capturing certain settlements would allow recruitment of units which the original holders use, but at significantly greater recruitment and maintenance cost, and with a leadership penalty (those being for balance). In addition to improving lore compliance, this would add more flavor to settlements and make fighting certain factions less predictable. For example, a vampire faction capturing Nuln would be able to recruit artillery units from it, manned by human crews (who would rather not be there, hence the leadership penalty - they only keep fighting as long as they're more scared of the vampire lord than the enemy). If the Empire or one of its provinces has some former vampire settlements and the Vampire Counts are defeated, they would be able to recruit vampire heroes, who chose to trade service for their continued existence. Capturing certain Norse settlements could allow recruiting war mammoths, goblin settlements goblin catapults, and so on.
  • It should be possible for factions with NAP or stronger treaties to exchange settlements when that is necessary (due to uneven conquest or resettlement) to give both factions a "complete set", so both can use edicts.
  • There should be options in dealing with other factions whether to be aggressive, defensive, or look for a diplomatic solution. In the first game, a Bretonnian tech gave a bonus when fighting Wood Elves, but also a huge relations penalty that could not be avoided. My suggestion is that such a tech in TWWhIII would trigger an event with, for example, three options: one which gives a bonus when fighting Wood Elves outside Athel Loren but a relations penalty, one which gives that plus an additional bonus when fighting inside Athel Loren but with an overwhelming relations penalty, and one which gives no combat benefits but a substantial relations boost. Every faction would have similar options, with a game mode setting for whether the AIs would select one at random, decide based on the situation (be more inclined to appease stronger adversaries), or pick the lore-consistent option. For anyone who's played HOI4, I'm imagining it somewhat like how focuses work in that game. This would make every game different, with a variety of unpredictable interactions between factions.
  • Some heroes would be able to carry out "propaganda" operations against armies (resulting in a significant leadership malus for several turns to that army), or against settlements (resulting in a very small but stackable leadership malus to all units in that faction). I imagined this in the context of war between Bretonnia and the Empire, with Franz sending spies to convince the peasants that the Empire are their liberators and the chivalry, not the Empire, are their enemies.
  • Albion should exist in the main map campaign, ideally even as a playable faction.
Post edited by CA_Will#2514 on
Sign In or Register to comment.