How to make Attila a more immersive game? More conspiracy features perhaps?

[ray243]

It seems that CA has improved the immersion of the franchise in ATW compared to Rome 2. Although I do find that the game itself has very little immersion features once you manage to save your empire. The aristocrats for instance doesn't hate you or conspire against you if you made a decision that might affect them negatively.

There's no fear of having your armies defecting and claiming someone else as emperor if you lose some battles or killed their favourite general. There's little to fear from ursupers trying to gain support from the other Emperor in a bid to undermine you. Part of the fun of playing a grand strategy game, especially one that focus on playing a game set during a period famous for intrigue, is you should be able to do tons of stuff beyond building armies and defeating enemies on the battlemap.

Trying to make alliances within your faction, playing off one sect of elites against another set of elites in order to keep your throne should be something that makes it fun and hard for the players. What other features could you think of that CA will notice and implement in their future games?

[juanplay]

Regarding rebel generals and civil war i think the game has potential with a little modding. Just playing as ERE i used a lot of my Emperor´s influence buying high offices and interrrupting marriages, as a result i was unable to maintain the loyalty of half my generals. So when i went to war against the Sassanids the most senior of my governors in Ephesus rebelled, initiated a civil war and half my armies deserted (including some with very high level generals). So the potential is there in my opinion

[Ngazi]

You have some good ideas. Those should be what Romans are actually afraid of, instead of massive armies spawning out of tiny villages.

[Charerg]

I think a more elegant solution would be expanding the family tree system. Essentially what I think it should have is that you have the "royal" family who you manage under one tab, but you also have various "sub-families" of aristocrats as your vassals, with their family trees under a "lesser nobility" tab. You can switch between various family trees, and appoint specific Noble Houses to govern certain provinces. As an added feature, the family trees of vassalized states could be added to this tree under the "lesser nobility" tab.

If CA were to make a DLC set at a later date, this feature might also be used to represent feudalism, with the King's various Earls, or whatever the title is for a specific faction, holding land. If the vassal's loyalty is low, you can lose control of that territory. Other than that, the player should still be able to control the construction projects, and possess the ability to levy local troops. However, concerning the region's public order and productivity, the main idea in a feudal state should be more of controlling your vassal holding the territory instead of directly controlling the territory. Of course the "ruling house" of a specific region should have a button in the Province box, allowing you to access their family tree where various political actions could be instigated.

In an even more comprehensive system you'd also distribute the spoils of war between the nobles, have rivalries between the various vassals and so forth.

[justfun]

Even without new features rebellions could be made a little bit more of a threat. A rebelling governour could take the whole province and not just a single settlement, and he could get a free army in the process. At present even his garrison starts at zero strength so you can easily crush the rebellion even after two or three turn. Also certain rebel or separatist armies could start with half a stack.

[jtfjtfjtf]

I think subcultures/political parties within the faction would be interesting. So if you took political action against someone other people would feel slighted as well. And if there was a rebellion they would join in on it.

[xjlxking]

I don't like it when games make you jus spam. To be quite honest, Rome 2, you can entirely play the game on any difficulty just by spamming 1-2 units. City management came down to, build a ton of public order building, and enough food, move on. It was spamming, the only immersion was the initial start of the game, once the wheel propelled, the immersion was gone

- there needs to be penalties to both player and AI when they spam 1-2 units in the same stack. Perhaps morale penalty of something. When there is no incentive to make a army composition unique, immersion is gone

- Multi- border war. By this I mean you should be just moving all your armies in one direction to capture. There needs to be incentive to keep a small army in a large province perhaps due to civil revolt

- civil war, needs more depth

- building building building, I still feel like the spam fest of Rome 2 and past tw games is present

[MathiasOfAthens]

I think a more elegant solution would be expanding the family tree system. Essentially what I think it should have is that you have the "royal" family who you manage under one tab, but you also have various "sub-families" of aristocrats as your vassals, with their family trees under a "lesser nobility" tab. You can switch between various family trees, and appoint specific Noble Houses to govern certain provinces. As an added feature, the family trees of vassalized states could be added to this tree under the "lesser nobility" tab.

If CA were to make a DLC set at a later date, this feature might also be used to represent feudalism, with the King's various Earls, or whatever the title is for a specific faction, holding land. If the vassal's loyalty is low, you can lose control of that territory. Other than that, the player should still be able to control the construction projects, and possess the ability to levy local troops. However, concerning the region's public order and productivity, the main idea in a feudal state should be more of controlling your vassal holding the territory instead of directly controlling the territory. Of course the "ruling house" of a specific region should have a button in the Province box, allowing you to access their family tree where various political actions could be instigated.

In an even more comprehensive system you'd also distribute the spoils of war between the nobles, have rivalries between the various vassals and so forth.

Expanding it. Sure. But as it is now the basic idea of a family tree is almost pointless.

I would love to see more interesting features like rebellions. The system is in place and one could theoretically mod the game to incorporate these things now. Generals rebelled in Empire and created new states or emergent kingdoms. This feature is still in Attila with states like Dacia and Macedonia among others. What I find to be annoying is the amount of ing slaves rebelling in my Rome campaign. Every goddamn mother ing turn there are more slaves. It doesnt matter how many slaves I ing kill they just keep replicating like rabbits.

Id rather see emergent rebels based on a new system of loyalty throughout the kingdom/empire (based on faction). Slaves can rebel if you have a high number of slaves in a province or region. It doesnt even seem like I can do anything about the public order.

But a game without rebellions and slave revolts would be boring as well. So my grander Idea to improve Total War gameplay is to create more replayability. What if players and the AI could found new cities or villages.

An army could settle or build a fort which evolves into a village. The fort could be founded as something permanent. Then the fort could grow its own region borders and the player could name the region or choose a default name based on some system. The fort could then be upgraded with a village around the fort. That would offer a lot more replayability to the game. Like civilization meet total war.