Feature requests - what's missing from Total War?

[actionbrain]

Hello,

Out of hundreds and thousands features you can implement in this game,,, including an option to slay your own routing units will be a very good feature.
I believe it will at least add fun and frustration off the game a bit.

Thank you for considering.

[emotion_name]

Yeah, more than 1v1 MPC would be awesome. If people think it would take to long, then dont play it, stick to 1v1, but for those of us who have a shed load of mates, a few crates of beer and some free weekends it would be epic!

Also, i've said it before and ill say it again - bring back hotseats! Whilst not perfect, the ability to play all human campaigns with people from all over the world was awesome in M2TW and Kingdoms, bringing it back would add even more longevity to your titles!

[Inhuman One]

You think south africa should be implemented into it Shogun 2 ? let me take a guess your Dutch.

I have said it before and will say it again. 2v2 Campaign capabilties.

Make it fit by using a 3 turn system. 2 Allied Locked players serve their term simultanous

So 2,2, AI seen? You will be nothing but a rainy day game where you have your best epic experiences alone where nobody can see them. which is so sad because how many times have you felt like showing everyone that epic battle or conflict you had ?

LISTEN 2v2 Campaign!

No, for empire total war. I was continueing the discussion of posts before me.

[r3deed]

thanx for the defection featuer I was requesting one didn't know you applied to s2tw

[alhoon]

You think south africa should be implemented into it Shogun 2 ? let me take a guess your Dutch.

I think you should look a bit earlier than his post alone friend.

[Humble Warrior]

They should include a good chunk of Africa. That would make the Dutch more formidable as well since they owned land there that could provide with some extra wealth. And the Netherlands being given a second small region thats not too profitable, but simply allows for them to not be destroyed so easily.

Once you start doing that you would have to create an indigenous African Faction as it looks totally racist to have European factions in Africa and not include at least one African Faction to attempt a fight back.

Africa had to be subdued y`know, it didn`t just sit there and say, `Ok, Europe, rape me please`.

and on another topic:

Hello,

Out of hundreds and thousands features you can implement in this game,,, including an option to slay your own routing units will be a very good feature.
I believe it will at least add fun and frustration off the game a bit.

Thank you for considering.

Slaying your own routing units would only work as:

a, A means to prevent others of your own men routing in the immediate and future battles.

b, Give a big negative morale bonus to your overall Campiagn (Generals, troops, loyalty, etc). NO ONE appreciates you killing your own men.

Having it to just add fun would be stupidly unrealistic and ruin the game. However as a realistic element as I listed above it would work. Think Stalin and his `Not one step backwards` order.

[HWick]

Hi there,

One feature i would love to see.

In NTW we had supply depots as a building available in certain provinces.

Its a great idea but do it the following way:

Historically when an army went on to campaign, it prepared supply depots on its way as far as it could with depot guards and so on.
We had an option for generals to build forts whenever when terrain permitted in ETW and before that.

It would be realistic, and a very good option for generals to build supply depots just like they built forts.

Ahead of the main army a general with some swift troops could estabilish a line of march building supply depots. Little lightly fortified places which would needed to be garrisoned otherwise would disappear in a turn or two. It could be built in allied or neutral territory too with maybe a military access agrement.

This sort of way to supply an army is very old, Even the Crusader armies estabilished supply bases. Maybe not quite the same way as Napoleon ordered supply depots stocked all the way to Russia in 1811-12 but still.

To make it worthwhile, it would give certain bonuses, like increased replenishment rates and faster army movement in own and allied territory. On neutral land it would give the possibility to replenish even if slowly to maintain balance.

To elaborate on the idea, one could decide if an army would forage in enemy territory or build depots/arsenals. the implications would be different public order penalties upon conquering.

Let me know if you think this is a good idea or not.

Thanks,

HWick

[r3deed]

Once you start doing that you would have to create an indigenous African Faction as it looks totally racist to have European factions in Africa and not include at least one African Faction to attempt a fight back.

Africa had to be subdued y`know, it didn`t just sit there and say, `Ok, Europe, rape me please`.

and on another topic:



Slaying your own routing units would only work as:

a, A means to prevent others of your own men routing in the immediate and future battles.

b, Give a big negative morale bonus to your overall Campiagn (Generals, troops, loyalty, etc). NO ONE appreciates you killing your own men.

Having it to just add fun would be stupidly unrealistic and ruin the game. However as a realistic element as I listed above it would work. Think Stalin and his `Not one step backwards` order.

It may not be fun. but romans used to execute 2/3 of soldiers who escaped fights. but I don't see it adds much to the game except that you gain more disciplined men but less in number.

[bertikusmaximus]

I'd like to see

- It's been said plenty already, but please add more variation and detail into cities and siege maps. MW2 and Rome had quality city battle maps so why has Shogun 2 got such bland siege maps?

- I think it would add to the game if you saw architectural variations on the campaign map. For example, in Shogun 2 it would be cool to see each different clan's castles on the battle map being unique to that clan. Or even just have regional variation of buildings, just to add that little extra detail that makes the game more exciting to play and discover.

- I also like the idea of supply lines which the enemy can raid in order to put pressure on your army. Perhaps though this might be best as a "normal" difficulty upwards option though.

- Echoing an early idea in this thread to do with chain of command for battles, I think it would add to the enjoyment of the game if the auto-resolve battle option had the choice to give "orders". Here's how I think it could work. When auto-resolving, you have the option to order a sub-commander in your army, a brigadier or a colonel say, to carry out orders on your behalf - e.g "attack aggressively", "attack cautiously and minimise casaulities", "keep troops in guard mode and aim to win without loosing formation" could be options. This would allow you to feel like you're getting something out of auto-resolving if you don't want to fight a meaningless, but necessary battle (e.g. mopping up that one unit of stubborn rebel resistance). Further, your general would then not take part in the battle, meaning any un-expected loss should see your general safe. However, your sub-commanders would gain traits and characteristics as in previous TW games, i.e. you have no control of what characteristics and retainers a character gets. Also, your general would not gain experience points since he would not be fighting himself.

- Finally, more unit variation. Shogun 2 is a bit bland on this front and I think it lets an otherwise fantastic game down.

[Steph]

It may not be fun. but romans used to execute 2/3 of soldiers who escaped fights. but I don't see it adds much to the game except that you gain more disciplined men but less in number.

2/3 of the army? Don't be ridiculous. Can you imagine an army that would survive long by executing 2/3 of its own soldiers?

The punishment for defeating legion (and it was seldom use as it was too costly) was decimation. And as the name indicates, it was the execution of one soldier out of 10 (10%). Legionnaries were organized in group of 10, and in each group a soldier was randomly selected, and then beaten to death by the 9 others.

[AnimaMea]

Historically correct, unique cities like in assasin's creed would be fantastic, as would naval assaults on cities, London and paris were both attacked along the rivers running through them

[Inhuman One]

Once you start doing that you would have to create an indigenous African Faction as it looks totally racist to have European factions in Africa and not include at least one African Faction to attempt a fight back.

Africa had to be subdued y`know, it didn`t just sit there and say, `Ok, Europe, rape me please`.

and on another topic:



Slaying your own routing units would only work as:

a, A means to prevent others of your own men routing in the immediate and future battles.

b, Give a big negative morale bonus to your overall Campiagn (Generals, troops, loyalty, etc). NO ONE appreciates you killing your own men.

Having it to just add fun would be stupidly unrealistic and ruin the game. However as a realistic element as I listed above it would work. Think Stalin and his `Not one step backwards` order.

Well it could be a little expansion, featuring new units and new factions. Just having new provinces and no new units would be boring after all.

All of africa could be included, being connected to the main map pretty much like India. Several african factions could be included, at least three of them.
And along with that any european held colonies in 1700.
Furthermore the gaps could be filled with minor tribes.

Since the africans their technology is less and they where less about guerilla tactics than indians, their unit sizes could generally be bigger compared to other nations. Swarming advanced european powers with grand armies.

[Humble Warrior]

2/3 of the army? Don't be ridiculous. Can you imagine an army that would survive long by executing 2/3 of its own soldiers?

The punishment for defeating legion (and it was seldom use as it was too costly) was decimation. And as the name indicates, it was the execution of one soldier out of 10 (10%). Legionnaries were organized in group of 10, and in each group a soldier was randomly selected, and then beaten to death by the 9 others.

Correct. Pity some people don`t actually think about what they suggest. The thing is executing your own men for desertion, etc had to be very carefully done and not too often or you could risk all out rebellion.

[eleftherios]

I would like you to organise your code use an Object Oriented system similar to java, so that everytime you change something or you need to fix a bug you can simply have your code Encapsulated (Organised in variables -something akin to java), that you can recall,repeat and modify at will; which will also tidy up the vast code and will be easier to implement your evolution/revolution changes.
Remember with each patch there are also new bug simply because you have to change the entire code making post release support very time consuming, not to mention the frustration of people downloading huge patches.
Your code becoemes larger with time you will need to organise your metadata structure to save development time as well. I know this won't be easy but it will save you in the long run A LOT of time and new bugs.

[EternalSilence]

Mods, feel free to sticky this or move to a more appropriate forum

Hi guys,

As you know we've always listened to our community. Whether it be from the inclusion of naval battles, or in expanding the multiplayer functionality of our games - we've always taken community feedback seriously at the highest level.

So I'm asking you what you'd most like to see in future Total War games or expansions. What features would you like that you feel are missing from the game?

Please don't use this thread to complain about bugs - but feel free to be as specific as you like about features you're interested in.

Be imaginative, be honest and you never know, they might end up in an expansion or in the next major incarnation of Total War!

Craig

I'd like to see Total war: Rome 2.
That would be awesome! ^^

[Megasalexandros]

first of all, LINES OF COMMUNICATION

[Ethien]

Honestly I just want the return of dirt and blood like Medieval II. You can do whatever else you want from there. If blood and dirt offends people, then have a button that turns it off. Simple.

[VOP2288]

Things I'd like to see:

1. More in-depth battlefield altering options. I like how in Empire, M2TW, and Shogun 2 you could sometimes (and with some units) place things like anti-cavalry stakes, barricades, etc etc. I'd like to see that be a possibly on a much grander scale and with every kind of unit (not just some of them). Actually, it would be best if these kinds of things were independent of a unit entirely - perhaps the amount of battlefield defenses and alterations can be decided by the rank of your general.

2. Bring more depth to characters, family members, generals, etc. Also how about the inclusion of secondary characters? As of right now the only character units that can be on the battlefield are generals and family members that act like generals. How about adding the option to choose from a pool of randomly generated characters to act as other military leaders (sergeants, centurions, tribunes, etc etc). These secondary characters, depending on their experience/skills/wins and losses/etc, can then rise through the ranks and perhaps one day take of the helm of general.

3. More "realistic" engagements on a strategic scale. Wins and losses in a campaign should have a much greater effect. While the name of the game is "Total War" and being able to be a 3 province nation with 2 fully stacked armies is fun and all it's nowhere near realistic and can sometimes lead to incredibly frustrating campaigns. A maxed out army should cost you (and the AI) a ton to provide support for and if that army gets knocked out it should almost seal yours or your enemy's doom. Historically a lot of multiple battle campaigns were usually fought by smaller forces or were skirmishes. The large battles between giant armies were the ones that mattered and whoever came out on top usually went on to absolute victory.

4. Fix the balance between how much time a turn accounts for (a season, a year, winter/summer, etc), how much an army or navy can move, and the scale of the map. For example, it shouldn't take my army 3 years to move from northern France to southern France...nor should it take 3 or 4 seasons to move from the castle in Iwate to the castle in Ugo in Shogun 2.

5. Introduce auto-garrisons (differently). Nothing bothers me more than launching a campaign and having to stop for a couple of turns every time I take a settlement so I can raise enough garrison troops to adequately quell the possibility of rebellion or enemy counter-attack. Perhaps when an army takes a settlement it can choose an option to spend a certain amount of money (dictated by settlement size, population, how much they don't like you, etc) to automatically recruit a garrison force. This will then allow the marching army to move onwards and continue the campaign. In other words, it shouldn't take me 20 years to properly conquer Gaul in RTW.

6. A military force in a settlement itself or camped in the province should have the same kind of effect on unrest.

7. If I want to give a province/region to another country/clan/etc no matter what my diplomatic stance with them they should certainly take it and be very grateful - not decline the proposal.

8. Rome 2 - 'nuff said

[crzyrndm]

Replays

Can you please change these to be actual recordings of the battle, instead of the current system which always looks so different(Units that routed initially, get 200 kills etc.).
Video format would be okay, but being able to move the camera around and still getting the actual battle would be way better.

[linc|Julius]

This is for multiplayer

• By far the biggest issue in multiplayer is lag, whether it is to high graphic settings, connection, netcode or a combination this has to be solved somehow. If you are aiming for a healthy team based gaming community that is.

• Dropping, drop hack or pulling the plugg is a announce and must be solved - perhaps with centralized servers? Incidentally centralized servers would also probably remove some problem with lag

The rest om my suggestions are minor

Tournament organization page with brakets and visual structure. Tournaments are simply the most fun thing you can participate in playing multiplayer. Instead of being forced to use a steam group page or dedicate an entire homepage for it, there should be a easy way to set up your own tourny.

Set battle rules in game lobby. This could be fully customizable or a few preset variants. Basically no matches played in multiplayer is without rules so this would be welcomed and I wouldn't need to write the rules over and over again as players enter the lobby.

In game chat ignore button. There is a lot of very angry players out there, sometimes i just want to ignore them

Capture points are great! Ad some more modes for fun - ever played Myth?

Dont worry to much about historical accuracy

Use sunscreen

Add touch support, how cool would that be, standing infront of your screen using hand gestures moving the units around? - super cool.

Make a map editor.

Unit movement/game speed. Have a few different choices of unit speed that is set in game setup. This would mean that less experienced players can play and or make battles matching their level. And oc more experienced gamers can crank up the speed getting the challenge they want

Dont have artillery with unlimited ammo its ridiculous, or at lest make it a choice in the 'rules manu' . Or skip the ammo limit all together. Long good matches usually end in a melee blobb because of this - its like having gummy bears for desert after a lobster champagne dinner. Also reduce fatigue penalty it encourages camping.

Make multiplayer free to play with the option to purchase veteran points.

Make an option to let your ally to control your units. This would also happen if your ally drops (steam crash) from the game .


Thanks for reading