Official Suggestions thread (Some suggestions organised into the first post)

[Xoxoman]

- Put down the strenght of Gwyned much, they're overpowered.
- Better AI. (Traveling the seas etc.)
- Larger map, more south.


That's all, and maybe something that your family gets more children.

[Cymry]

Some inputs from my side:

1) I've never been in wales, but i thought it has a little bit less reachable countryside... maybe create some mountains where you can't pass. ect...

2) Are you planning to implement missions? Missions are not really necessary - but they can sometimes increasy motivation

3) northumbria always gets wiped out in my campaings. maybe give them some more units for dunholm or bebbanburg ( eoferwig is always attacked)

4) Merchants are a little bit useless. Especially when compared to the skriped gold given when raiding...

I really like your great mod!!

[Gibu]

Siege engines ?

[Casual Tactician]

Here are some more suggestions. Sorry for making such a long list, but I hope the team is happy to have as many ideas as possible, to take into their consideration for the next beta.

CAMPAIGN BALANCING:

1.) Give all rebel settlements large(r) garrisons
Some rebel settlements could do with more troops, to make them harder to conquer. Especially in areas that will most likely not be threatened by other factions, after being conquered: e.g. Iceland, Norwegian hinterland/northern coast. Maybe unrealistic for some provinces, but TW-wise it's more fun having to fight for even small islands and hinterland provinces.
Most, if not all, rebel settlements could also get a general unit with good/high command and chivalry-dread values plus maybe a few elite or semi-elite units.
Maybe also place some immobile general-led rebel armies in the Norwegian and East-German countryside? Not sure about this one myself, but anything that makes the players life harder is welcomed by me.

2.) Iceland as one-(or two-)province area
Why? Because Iceland will most likely only be conquered by the human player, and will probably not be contested by the AI, once it's a part of the players dominion. If that’s the case, Iceland is a minor but secure cash cow for the human player. (And Iceland in particular was only populated very sparsely in that era and didn't have a large trade volume with the rest of Europe afaik.)
Alternatively: limit the constructability of higher tier trade/income buildings in Iceland.

3.) Fewer provinces in Norwegian hinterland/northern coast
Why? For the human player it’s same reason as above (2.); and regarding the Hordaland/Vestfold AI conquering them: it might make them overly powerful having such a secure hinterland basis.
Alternatively: limit the constructability of higher tier trade/income buildings in these areas.

4.) Garrison script
Already mentioned before, but I want to say that I’d like to see that as well. Possibly even only affecting the human player (i.e. only when the player lays siege on AI), if a garrison script would muck up the AI vs. AI gameplay.
The AI capitals could get a few medium and one or two higher tier units along with the levy troops. Other important AI cities could maybe get a few medium tier units along with the levy troops.

5.) 4 turns per year script
Also already mentioned iirc. I always preferred the 4tpy-modus. Why? I find it more realistic, if the countryside isn’t covered by snow every second turn and for half a year; and it makes the movement range of units a little more realistic as well (although having them totally realistic isn’t possible in TW of course). Sadly this feature is hardly used in M2TW-mods, whereas it’s virtually a standard in RTW-mods.

6.) More movement points for agents
Especially for spies and diplomats, as they are slow to move around the map.

7.) Bigger map: same area and number of settlements, but larger scale
I’m always for a larger (scale) map, can hardly be to big imo. But why? A) Larger distances between settlements reduce sieges and allow for more field battles and ambushes. B) Using a larger (and larger scale) map allows to create more strategic variety, by being able to place more permanent forts, mountains, dense forest etc. without making to map look overly crowded. C) It would increase the impression, that Dark Age Britain, Norway etc. is only sparsely populated with a fair share of (nearly) uninhabited wilderness.
Alternatively: Less movement points for generals/armies.

VISUALS & GRAPHICS:

8.) Different strat-map-city-models for the various cultures
First off: This might be a lot of work for only a small enhancement, and it’s not that important imo – but it would be some nice extra eye candy.
The city models could also get a more primitive or “Dark Age”-look, if this features is planned for a future release. I guess similar cultures e.g. Gaelic and Celtic could use the same models.

9.) More primitive or "barbaric" look for Viking and Gaelic battle-map-settlements?
First off: This might be a lot of work for only a small enhancement, and it’s not that important imo – but it would be some nice extra eye candy.
Maybe it’s possible to remove some of the more advanced, larger medieval stone-buildings, and perhaps it's doable to port RTW building models from it’s barbarian culture?

10.) Ruins of “Hadrian’s Wall” on campaign map
RTW’s Viking Invasion II has the ruins of the “Hadrian’s Wall” showing up on the campaign map. It would be a nice treat, if they were included in the TLK campaign map. Only eye candy though, and not important (perhaps it’s even highly unrealistic – I dunno).

MINOR STUFF:

11.) Detailed information where the income comes from
As it seems, some events and background scripts grant the player extra cash, that doesn’t show up in the (hardcoded?) “Financial Overview”-scroll (as e.g. conquering settlements and winning battles?). If that’s the case, having an text-explanation poping up via the “Show Help”-button, which lists all events etc. that influence the income, would be a nice extra. I guess DLV has something like that.

12.) A little more information in government building’s descriptions would be nice
It’s unclear (at least to me) how they actually work.
- Do they only grant culture conversion bonuses?
- Are they necessary to construct certain higher tier regional/factional barracks?
- What are their trade, income, pub-order or pop-growth boni etc. - if any at all?

13.) Event movies
Someone already suggested these for achieving victory. Could also be a treat having them for other events such as the unification of Norway. Nice bonus, but utterly unimportant though. I don’t really need them, but I just wanted to put that idea on the market anyway.

14.) A custom “The Last Kingdom”-soundtrack
Maybe with one or two gritty and gloomy tracks, representing the grim times and the dread brought to Christian Britain by the pillaging Vikings. Perhaps also customized TLK-selection-sounds (the one's when confirming to play battle manually etc.). Again… not really needed, and only an extra bonus.


Note on Vestfold accent:
Accents are already in the “Known Issues & Bugs”, but I just wanted to mention, that the Vestfold pre- and post-battle-speech referees to “victory for the whole of Christendom” and nonsense like that quite often.

[Ubermomo]

Thank god the winging about the lengths of the battles is over, now these are my suggestions

1. The AOR is very strange, because when playing as the saxons you can only recruit Fyrdmen and Scripftolan in every part of the country (i think thats how you spell it)

2. I think an all round bigger map is needed, especially for the Normans

3. I bet youve already got this planned but, Historical battles is a must for this era

4. Theres something about Wessex that makes me want to ONLY play them, i dont know what, but it could be me.

5. CAPES!!!! that is all

6. I know ive already said something about this, but there needs to be a bit more of a range and difference between nations within cultures

These are all of my suggestions, i hope they help you

[Ubermomo]

Oh and i forgot 1 suggestion

7. The East-Anglians betray me within 20-30 turns and they attack me with 2-3 stacks of Sciptoflan

[Cymry]

Oh and i forgot 1 suggestion

7. The East-Anglians betray me within 20-30 turns and they attack me with 2-3 stacks of Sciptoflan

but thats definitly no suggestion

[Ubermomo]

but thats definitly no suggestion

nice, but what i mean is where the East-Angles really that aggressive? and is it possible to stop the Angles from spamming cheap units

[Xoxoman]

I always agree with Casual Tactician Suggestions.

[Tasmansk Tiger]

I'd say the cavalry charges need to be stronger. 1 unit of milites couldnt kill more than 30 norse swordmen in repeated charges. They killed at most 10 people in a single charge (on flat ground)

[Ubermomo]

this is the second time ive had to do this, it just itself on me. These are my suggestions to help this already great mod

CAVALRY:
Im not sure if you guys are just holding back on any units that will be released later or not, but id like to give you some help. There is some eveidence of a more diverse cavalry arm of the Anglo-Saxon army, as can be shown. The first in the famous Sutton Hoo helmet: "Bareheaded cavalrymen riding down a footman armed with a spear and shiled, he rides without stirrups"
From another image on a helmet: "Helmeted, eagle crested warrior riding a horse armed with a spear and shield"
Depiction of a Mercian noblemen or King: "Moustached warrior with a sword and shield and possibly wearing scale or chainmail armour"

ARCHERS:
Archers seemed to have been more numerous in the North of England, possibly because of a mix saxon and viking ancestry, so a new unit type of archers could be available in the north for whoever controls it, it could be an AOR unit.

HIGH-REEVES:
These were men with differing degrees of power. There were Town-Reeves, Port-Reeves and more importantly Shire-Reeves who were the predecessor of the sherrif. But High-Reeves would go on to replace Kings(Cynings) of Northumbria, i dont know why they replaced them but they did.

EALDORMEN:
In game these men look like upgraded Arab Cav from the vanilla and that bugs me seeing a large group of shimmering/shining men who look like they are worth more than the King. I have found a picture which I think more suits the look of an Anglo-Saxon Ealdorman (the centre guy), he has enough chainmail to cover his vital organs, he wears a spanglehelm helmet (I think), i think this guy in picture should have a spear, and he has a nice bright shield that says "im important, im better than these guys around me"

Well i should be off to bed, its late and i should get my beaty sleep, if you like some more info jsut ask and i shall help

[Casual Tactician]

Another suggestion... yet again. I'm starting to feel bad about it, but I just want to contribute to this grand mod - and since I'm no use at modding, this is all I can do. Please do excuse my humble self, noble squires!

What about renaming Chivalry?
Why? Because having virtually all generals of the Scandinavian factions starting as Dread-generals is a little monotonous for the player imho. On the other hand, having many or even a few of them as "chivalrous" instead of dreaded generals seems somewhat odd and inappropriate, as Chivalry was a medieval code of honour that doesn’t apply to the Viking warlords of TLK’s timeframe afaik (same goes for Celts and Saxons, I guess).
So my suggestion would be, to simply rename Chivalry into Valour, Glory, Honour, Bravery, Courage or something in that direction, without actually changing it’s effects. That would allow having “Chivalry”-generals for factions commonly regarded as brutal, cruel and merciless towards their enemies, without having bizarre generals like “Eric Bloodfist” with 8 Chivalry – instead it would be “Eric Bloodfist” with 8 Valour (Courage or etc.).
Btw… I personally quite like having a good load of Dread-generals for Nordic factions, but a few with the vanilla Chivalry attribute would be nice, as it has a different effect in battles and for governorship as known – and as player turning them into "chivalrous" generals, doesn’t feel right. Regards!


@ Garrison script suggestion in my earlier post:

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

In my earlier post it might seem like, I’d only like the garrison script for AI capitals and important cities. Actually I’d find it just fine to have it for all AI settlements – conquering: a hard, gritty and bloody affair, that’s the way!.
What I intended to say was, that only AI capitals and important cities should get some good respective elite units, whereas the standard garrison army for all other cities could be light levy units only.

[smthhappy]

NO NO NO NO GARRISON SCRIPT

[Heathen Storm]

Another suggestion... yet again. I'm starting to feel bad about it, but I just want to contribute to this grand mod - and since I'm no use at modding, this is all I can do. Please do excuse my humble self, noble squires!

What about renaming Chivalry?
Why? Because having virtually all generals of the Scandinavian factions starting as Dread-generals is a little monotonous for the player imho. On the other hand, having many or even a few of them as "chivalrous" instead of dreaded generals seems somewhat odd and inappropriate, as Chivalry was a medieval code of honour that doesn’t apply to the Viking warlords of TLK’s timeframe afaik (same goes for Celts and Saxons, I guess).
So my suggestion would be, to simply rename Chivalry into Valour, Glory, Honour, Bravery, Courage or something in that direction, without actually changing it’s effects. That would allow having “Chivalry”-generals for factions commonly regarded as brutal, cruel and merciless towards their enemies, without having bizarre generals like “Eric Bloodfist” with 8 Chivalry – instead it would be “Eric Bloodfist” with 8 Valour (Courage or etc.).
Btw… I personally quite like having a good load of Dread-generals for Nordic factions, but a few with the vanilla Chivalry attribute would be nice, as it has a different effect in battles and for governorship as known – and as player turning them into "chivalrous" generals, doesn’t feel right. Regards!


@ Garrison script suggestion in my earlier post:

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

In my earlier post it might seem like, I’d only like the garrison script for AI capitals and important cities. Actually I’d find it just fine to have it for all AI settlements – conquering: a hard, gritty and bloody affair, that’s the way!.
What I intended to say was, that only AI capitals and important cities should get some good respective elite units, whereas the standard garrison army for all other cities could be light levy units only.

That's a great suggestion! Maybe i'll use this in my own mo... Ahem. What? Oh yes.

One suggestion I have would be the "select heir" function, which would be SO useful! I tend to get the horrible generals that I DON'T want as my king. Haha. So I end up sending them to an impossible battle to get rid of them.

[Casual Tactician]

NO NO NO NO GARRISON SCRIPT

Perhaps the team could let the player decide at the start of a campaing if a possibly implemented garrison script should be activated (using a yes/no-drop-down: yes>play with GS, no>play without GS). I guess the GS is something you either hate or love, without anything inbetween. I'd like one, but having the choice if to use it or not prior to every new campaing would be even better.

[mondpeiler]

I've only two little things to add.
They are not really important, only small details.

1) I played Wessex. And as the Kingdom of Norway united, my coat of arms near the building/recruiting-buttons changed to the norse one (me=Wessex, so => ?)
but some turns later I had my Wessex-coat of arms again...

2) The slogans beneath the loading-screens are (first of all) well chosen for the game, but some are simply too long (for me) to read in the short loading-time.

[diadok]

Perhaps the team could let the player decide at the start of a campaing if a possibly implemented garrison script should be activated (using a yes/no-drop-down: yes>play with GS, no>play without GS). I guess the GS is something you either hate or love, without anything inbetween. I'd like one, but having the choice if to use it or not prior to every new campaing would be even better.

For people who don't want garrison_script : it needs 10 seconds to delete it in the file...

[Tasmansk Tiger]

Anyone else finding the cavalry charges a bit weak..?

[dermax]

Just a few suggestions after spending a week with the mod. Undoubtedly many, if not all, of my observations have been noted before, but it never hurts to get feedback from the community.

1- Custom settlements. With the amount of detail that has gone into the units, it's just a bit jarring to see vanilla settlements on the battle map. Thankfully the construction of the period was not so elaborate as later times. Also there was not as much variety between cultures as there would be in a game that covered a larger area. It would be nice to see details like the Winchester Catheral or London Bridge, but for the most part it would take only a few new models to make the game that much more immersive.

2- A couple unit model changes. There's been some discussion about the wearing of capes by the units, I know that when I do live steel combat, I wouldn't want to be encumbered by a cape. I can imagine that in a life and death struggle a cape would be more a hazard than anything else. Especially in the close quarters of a shield wall. Another point, which is really nitpicking, is adding body hair on the shirtless units, the Berserks in particular. Shaving your chest was considered effeminate by the early Germanic tribes, who were not so remote ancesters of the units playable here.

3- Basic cavalry is not underpowered, in my opinion, although the more elite units should have a higher charge. Cavalry in this period, until the advent of the Norman knights, were not much more than mounted infantry. The days of a heavy knight ruleing the battlefield were still along ways off. With that said, however, I think that the basic cavalry unit should not be so hard to aquire for any culture. Vikings frequently raided lands, stole horses, and then used them for transport to reach the hinterlands quickly. Since basic cavalry is useful primarily for running down routing troops, they should be recruitable at a basic (or 2nd tier at most) barracks.

4- I should also note quickly that I am not, nor ever have been, a fan of garrison scripts. So if they are added, either make an option to turn them off, or post instructions on how to get rid of it!

[Ubermomo]

Can any team members tell me whether or not any futher units willl be introduced into a future patch, or whether any more units are in development