Rome Total War 2 Hopes, Dreams

[EmperorBatman999]

Quite personally I'd like to see traits again return on how you choose to use them in battle and city governorship, and just random traits. This gave a lot of personality. This died in Empire and the ability to pick traits and retinue were things I didn't like in Shogun 2.

Get rid of all ahistoric nonsense. No Head Hurlers or Screeching Women. I guess I'd be fine with some fun stuff, but as easter eggs.

I liked the "Families" system used in Rome, but maybe instead of making them all different colors, make them different shades of red or some other color?

Obviously more factions, no rebels.

Deeper Africa, map extending to India. China might be a bit of a stretch though.

[Parzival2211]

There have been numerous threads like this. But is there any plan to collect and possibly vote on suggestions and send them to CA before they start working on Rome 2 (which they may already have done)?

[Dava2710]

they don't care about people, we are just a beta-testing wallets for them

[sharkeyyyy]

I'd love it if they greatly increased the size of the map. Like in ETW there is africa and america etc if this could all be meshed into one map it would be amazing. Although I don't know if it's possible because if it was then there would be no need for the different "theaters" it would all have been one map. But CA might have a new engine for RTW 2 so you never know !

[GeorgiBG]

What I'd like to see in RTW2 is:
1. Larger map.
2. More campaigns.
3. More historical battles.
4. Improved AI.
5. Real time naval battles.
6. More factions.

[Outlaw]

I'd kill for Rome 2

[Vindictus]

I've got a brilliant idea... why not Warring States: Total War? China's warring kingdoms lol.

[Bringer Of Storms]

they don't care about people, we are just a beta-testing wallets for them

I respectfully disagree. They would have to take our suggestions, for we are the ones who make them money. Believe me, they and just about every other game producing company scour the internet for suggestions that can make their games better. The better their game, the more people buy it, the more money in their pocket. They read these things, and our suggestions do make a difference.

As for a what I'd like to see, I believe there should be more events for you to participate in. Medieval 2 Total War had jihad's, excommunication, crusades, help the crusading noble, Faction Leader XXX must participate in crusade, ect. Of course there won't be crusades in a Rome game, but my point is that Medieval had many events that involved you in the world.

[Nebulon]

I saw this idea on the forums before, i dont know if its been posted but i think it would be cool with a Rome total war 2 and a correpsonding one for china in the same time period, and then (if it is even possible which i highly doubt), if you got both games there is a signle campign which spans from britannia to taiwan.

this is my ultimate dream for total war, one can dream eh?

[stormer]

I'd kill for Rome 2

[Octyy]

An advanced political system for at least Rome as a faction would be nice. Imagine bribing magistrates, sending out your assassins and showing off military might just in order to prevent the senate from passing a bill that will drastically reduce your income due to trade embargo or sth like that! It would ask for a great lot of variety in the bills, a realistic voting system where you actually can influence what magistrates will be elected and good balancing to make sure not all your time goes into "that bloody senate again".
Together with Roman politics come a nice bunch of features for the different social classes and I reckon it would be fun to have an option where you can only mass-recruit when the plebeians like you.
The events to participate in, as bringer of storms says, are essential for a game to stay alive and not get boring after 40 hours of gameplay. Let's hope CA understands this...

[Punic Hoplite]

There should be something like: Your faction Leader/Heir (Roman's only mind you) has been selected to govern (territory on border of empire). The people scream for the people of (name of city in neighboring region, not Roman) to be put under good Roman Law.

You have X number of turns to agree to this request

Penalty: Character shall be shunned (no political influence, command, ect or what have you, and then suicide next turn)


And then if they decide to replicate the Civil War, have it set in some file groups of territories that border each other, so all Italian cities (Po riv valley included) would be one group, Gaullish cities, Greek cities, ect. Then when the player has conquered enough territories, say 10 territories away from winning, half of the territories would rebel, but as many whole groups would rebel as possible, then random territories would rebel to get to that halfway mark. This faction would be a legit faction, like WRE Rebels.

[zbeck008]

OK my two cents....my Biggest irritation is the sizes of units. Selecting a "cohort" to be made only gives 160ish men, THAT IS NOT A COHORT! There I'm fine now. I know that the engine probably couldn't handle a regular sized cohort at the time so its OK if they redeem themselves in Rome 2. Wouldn't it be awesome to actually station full legions around your map and they don't all have the same shield design? :-)

[Ishan]

Similar threads merged.

[tudor93]

OK my two cents....my Biggest irritation is the sizes of units. Selecting a "cohort" to be made only gives 160ish men, THAT IS NOT A COHORT! There I'm fine now. I know that the engine probably couldn't handle a regular sized cohort at the time so its OK if they redeem themselves in Rome 2. Wouldn't it be awesome to actually station full legions around your map and they don't all have the same shield design? :-)

you could try a big mod, especially a mod that focuses on Rome, like Roma Surrectum 2, for example, I never played it but I read about it and saw screenshots, there are many different legions (historicaly accurate)

[Navarh Lysandros]

1. I am focused on field battles.
2. As they are now, it's going from bad to worse from RTW to STWII. Even such a textbook, clear battle as Cannae cannot be modeled in any reasonable way.
3. On one hand, one needs more units on the field than just 20, on the other, even with 20 it's a management mess.

An excellent synopsis was given by a user called "Craximus", I am reposting his view:

No, I didn't mean "press a few buttons and win." I'm just trying to remedy the situation where you have to constantly micro manage every single one of your units. In large battles, I find that often it is impossible to execute my plan because while I'm maneuvering my flanking calvary and assigning targets to archers, one unit of infantry is getting destroying while the adjacent unit just stands there stupidly. When ordered to attack units pause, then present a tiny axis of advance instead of encircling the enemy properly.

What I propose is that groups of units could be placed under the command of AI lieutenants, given a general set of parameters, and left to their own devices for the most part. It's not an "I win" button. If you give a bad set of parameters, you'll lose. If your lieutenant doesn't have any experience and you give him a huge flanking force, it will go badly.

Meanwhile, this both enables for 1. Much larger battles in terms of men and units involved, 2. A more realistic battlefield: ancient commands did not have direct tactical control over most of their army, and 3. Allows the player to take a smaller group of units, 6-10, and be able to really focus on using them effectively as a smaller piece in the grand scheme of the battle.

Of course this would be dependent on very good AI. It's not meant to make the game easier, just less frustrating and clunky. The idea is never needing to pause and issue commands. Battles should be more frantic and dependent on quick thinking and maneuvering, not a lumbering affair and constant click fest as you try to position 20 units and get them facing the right way and not acting like idiots.


I should add to that several issues. "Link flanks between units" option must be finally implemented. The line thus formed must have some "elasticity", i.e. under pressure it, under certain conditions, could bend, without much loss of men or moral. In general, units (or sectors) under pressure, could make a gradual retreat, without breaking the line. More fluidity on everything, from loss of moral (a weighted average on several units, when one losses moral massively) to the thickness of the line (again a bit averaging).

And a bit of other considerations:

Early legion presently is a joke in RTW, and must be totally re-worked. The large Hellenistic states must be of potential strength comparable to Romans. Romans were pretty lucky and had good leaders when beating them. Hellenistic states were historically badly mismanaged after BC220, but at their peak, say in BC270, they were formidable military machines. I don't think the game must assume this mismanagement as granted. Parthia expanded too, and made hard to deal with.

I know all this can be done, but I seriously doubt it will be, looking at the recent releases, the game is going down the toilet drain. RTW is very bad, extremely stupid and childish, but still the best of the series.

[Rorarii]

You're asking alot of a company just out to make money .. what you need is a group of dedicated ancient wargamers with high level programming skills, who have time available to create the ultimate wargaming engine ... hmmmmm, isn't that how CA started out ??

I think M2TW engine came closest to create playable wargames, with it's moddable scripting, realistic battles etc. If we could get access to the source code and understand how the game ticks and fix some of the hard-coding, it would be 10X better.

Actually, If I was CA / SEGA, I would use a revamped M2TW engine for R2TW ... nah! I want trireme sea battles!

R

[alex_shields]

The thing to remember is that the reason we players can't assign cavalry to flank and pick targets for archers without finding that, at the other end of the field, our infantry are being overwhelmed by the AI is because the AI can control it's entire army and give order simultaneously all across the field. That's why using PAUSE isn't really a cheat. because it eliminates the handicap that a human faces vs. a computer opponent. Sure I can group units and have them attack the same target all at once, but the AI can assign multiple targets to multiple units all at once.
CA needs to hamper the AI so that it can only focus on one flank at a time or something to give the battles more of an 'ebb and flow' feeling.

[Belisarius1]

With the addition of combined land/sea battles I feel the engine is getting pretty refined at this point. I think what a lot of people would like to see are more detailed cities that reflect improvements. Bigger scale would be neat and diplomacy could also be a little more nuanced.

The period is so colorful a game using the Shogun 2 engine would be fantastic. Imagine a siege at the sea-walls of Syracuse with all of Archimedes war contraptions!

[Veliky Kaiser Theos]

Challenging AI without modders doing it.