Results 1 to 19 of 19

Thread: Possible improvements to the ATW mechanics

  1. #1
    Jurand of Cracow's Avatar History and gameplay!
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Cracovia
    Posts
    8,451

    Default Possible improvements to the ATW mechanics

    The CA publishing policy consists of introducing some new mechanisms into the new games or DLC. In the Age of Charlemagne the new thing was War Weariness. I praise this solution very much: the player actually begins to care how to end a war. This is up to the old advice to the rulers: the wars start when you please, but they don’t end when you have a need. Well, it could have been implemented in a better way (there should be more weariness even if you win the war, the diplomatic relations should move slightly differently etc.), but never mind.

    As we await the Thrones of Britannia, I started to wonder what can come next – both in terms of the titles (see here), but also in term of the mechanics. Here are some ideas on the campaign mechanics:
    · Dynamic effect of integrity – relations between fighting (and moving?) capabilities and level of integrity (from a certain threshold, eg. below 25%). Easy to implement, I think.
    · Supply for armies – one of the main un-historicalities of the game is that you don’t care about the supply of your armies both at home and in the foreign lands. The only thing limiting you is the number of armies you have, possibilities to get reinforcements after your units suffer battle/attrition loses, and the amount of money you’ve got. Yet it was the main issue for many armies. This wouldn’t be for ToB (smaller map and the raiding armies could live out of the land), but for future titles.
    · Manpower – an issue that was fixed - to some extent - in the Divide et Impera / Ancient Empires mods for the R2TW/ATW: you may recruit any number of the troops given the funds you’ve got (what is an issue for smaller factions but then not really) and the imperium you’ve reached (number of the armies). If you lose your army, you can recruit it again – there’s no limit. Since this is pretty ahistorical, there should be one. This can be fixed in one way (M2TW refill) or another (introducing the population in the provinces like in DeI).
    · Sieges and walls – it’s very easy to conduct a siege now: if you’ve got a piece of artillery you do it outright, if you don’t – just wait one turn. I find is ok to be able to storm wall-less towns outright, but there should be a minimum siege-points level below which you cannot storm walled cities (like in the Europea Universalis: there’s a minimum number of troops you can start a siege, and then the duration of a siege depends on the number of troops). Some generals’ traits and ancillaries could be directed to shortening of this time.
    · Number of spaces for buildings in the cities – the 6/4/4 limitation makes the “growth” irrelevant from some point. It makes also provinces very similar to one another – actually they differ only in Fertility and Resources. And yet, in history, the fertile Po valley supported much more population than, say, Ireland. So I think there should be two modifications: 1. relating fertility of a province to the number of the buildings. 2. Opening possibilities of having more buildings that 6/4/4 with really high growth requirements (so that going above this limit would be possible only for exceptional provinces). This would not be pertinent to ToB, obviously.
    · Internal politics – well, this is a big thing, many options possible. Too many to list here. For now, I assess it to be a rather useless part of the game (but I haven’t played the Empire Divided DLC)
    · Traits – could be acquired by the generals more often and be more related to their actions. The generals should differ among themselves – for the moment each of my generals is identical as they have the same skills trees and it’s you who choose what skills are to be developed.
    · TW as a Real Time Strategy – ideas were discussed in this thread. What I have in mind is: 1. shorter turns (one-day , not three months), 2. turns passing not with the stroke of a button, but as you "let the time going" (the Europa Universalis style), 3. campaign time freezes for the time of a battle (this is another "time universe", so actually it'd not be a true RTS).

    However, the most badly needed change would be to counteract the "sniping groups of armies strategy". For now, the best way to play a recent TW game is simply not to play battles, but to hunt other armies. It's the most important reason why I chose to play M2TW mods, not the ATW.

    Any comments?
    JoC
    Mod leader of the SSHIP: traits, ancillaries, scripts, buildings, geography, economy.
    ..............................................................................................................................................................................
    If you want to play a historical mod in the medieval setting the best are:
    Stainless Steel Historical Improvement Project and Broken Crescent.
    Recently, Tsardoms and TGC look also very good. Read my opinions on the other mods here.
    ..............................................................................................................................................................................
    Reviews of the mods (all made in 2018): SSHIP, Wrath of the Norsemen, Broken Crescent.
    Follow home rules for playing a game without exploiting the M2TW engine deficiencies.
    Hints for Medieval 2 moders: forts, merchants, AT-NGB bug, trade fleets.
    Thrones of Britannia: review, opinion on the battles, ideas for modding. Shieldwall is promising!
    Dominant strategy in Rome2, Attila, ToB and Troy: “Sniping groups of armies”. Still there, alas!

  2. #2
    bigdaddy1204's Avatar Campidoctor
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Dar al-Islam
    Posts
    1,896

    Default Re: Possible improvements to the ATW mechanics

    Great suggestions, JoC.

    With buildings and provinces, I would like to see a bit more buildings too. It is a delicate balance, because the limited slots does force the player to think carefully about what to build. That's a good thing. Getting a settlement successful is satisfying in Attila TW. Maybe an idea would be to "unlock" a new tab of building possibilities when a settlent fills all of its available slots? This could make the long campaigns more interesting and avoid the situation "I already built everything".

    With number of buildings reduced for low fertility regions like Ireland, I think it's a bad idea. In my opinion bonuses to farming connected to fertility is already a better idea.

    Also, some provinces like Persia and Arabia could change the fertility, depending on the human player decision to build irrigation, aqueducts and water supplies. There is a mod for Attila that already does this.
    https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfil.../?id=635990190

    "Fertility increasing sanitation buildings" gives +1 fertility, +2, etc. for each new sanitation building. I enjoy this very much and think it should be a feature in all games.
    Last edited by bigdaddy1204; January 23, 2018 at 07:45 AM.
    Quote Originally Posted by Adar View Post
    I am quite impressed by the fact that you managed to make such a rant but still manage to phrase it in such a way that it is neither relevant to the thread nor to the topic you are trying to introduce to the thread.

  3. #3

    Default Re: Possible improvements to the ATW mechanics

    For starters, they could stop your arrow towers from setting your own buildings on fire. It's entirely pointless to use fire arrows when defending and I'd venture to say -other than mostly frivolous attempts to set siege equipment on fire- they were never used in the entirety of Dark Age or Medieval history for the purpose portrayed. "The settlement is burning," yes, we started it and now we have -9 melee attack
    Last edited by stevehoos; January 30, 2018 at 05:30 PM.
    Shogun 2, no thanks I will stick with Kingdoms SS.

  4. #4
    alhoon's Avatar Comes Rei Militaris
    Moderator Emeritus

    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Chania, Greece
    Posts
    24,757

    Default Re: Possible improvements to the ATW mechanics

    Simple: Lessen the impact of the thrice-bedamned Climate change that ruins my game! What's the point of unlocking nice big buildings if I can't build them?
    alhoon is not a member of the infamous Hoons: a (fictional) nazi-sympathizer KKK clan. Of course, no Hoon would openly admit affiliation to the uninitiated.
    "Angry Uncle Gordon" describes me well.
    _______________________________________________________
    Beta-tester for Darthmod Empire, the default modification for Empire Total War that does not ask for your money behind patreon.
    Developer of Causa Belli submod for Darthmod, headed by Hammeredalways and a ton of other people.
    Developer of LtC: Random maps submod for Lands to Conquer (that brings a multitude of random maps and other features).

  5. #5
    Nizam's Avatar Ordinarius
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Turkiye - Ankara
    Posts
    751

    Default Re: Possible improvements to the ATW mechanics

    first of all BETTER PERFORMANCE

    Ottoman Total Overhaul received the 2nd favorite Overhaul/Compilation Mod - 2016 award!
    by_TotalWarTurkiye

  6. #6
    billydilly's Avatar Senator
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Copenhagen
    Posts
    1,056

    Default Re: Possible improvements to the ATW mechanics

    Agree, BETTER PERFORMANCE.

    And possibility for trade agreements without direct access between capitals.
    CPU: Intel i7-8700. GPU: MSI GTX 1070 Armor 8G. RAM: Corsair Vengance, 16Gb HD: Kingston SSD 240Gb (System), Samsung 850 Evo SSD 500Gb (Steam), Western Digital 500Gb. PSU: Corsair CX600W

  7. #7
    Julio-Claudian's Avatar Senator
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Britannia
    Posts
    1,215

    Default Re: Possible improvements to the ATW mechanics

    Seems as though they aren't going to pay that much more attention to ATW.

  8. #8

    Default Re: Possible improvements to the ATW mechanics

    a) They need to reduce climate change. It's really boring being unable to move on the campaign map 3 out of 4 turns.
    b) Add guard mode, especially for archers. There is just too much micro management in battles.
    c) Add zone of control to armies on the campaign map. It's a strategy game, not Pacman.
    d) Change the start date to sometime in the 5th century with settled Goths, Alani and Suevi. They NEVER settle in western Europe and almost always are destroyed or irrelevant by 410. I honestly think they chose the worst of all possible start dates.
    e) Playable Armenia.
    f) Remove the unit upgrade system.
    g) Why isn't raiding an act of war? Armies in raiding stance should be open to attack without automatic declaration of war. Heavier diplomatic repercussions for raiders (eg. "known raiders -50").
    h)A toggle for towers: they kill far too many friendlies.
    i) No instant transports. Nor torches or whatever the hell is it that they do to destroy gates. It's okay to lose a siege assault because your equipment was destroyed. No, really, it's okay.
    j) Greater number of barricades and choices of where to put them.
    k) Remove ability of AI and player to see maximum range of armies on the campaign map. That lurking just out of range is a bad mechanic and must be banished forever from Total War.
    l) Retreating on the campaign map is a big, fat cheat for the AI.
    m) Add the ability to toggle high arcing archer fire.
    n) Remove the ability for archers and slingers to fire at enemies without line of sight, for example over walls and buildings (something which, predictably, the AI can do without a problem, but more often than not the human player can't).
    o) Shield values shouldn't be rolled into armour values in unit stats. Cataphracts have armour value of 27, while Germanic Spears have 53.

    Some of these are moddable, of course. But modding should be to add value to a game, not fix basic stuff.

  9. #9
    Darios's Avatar Ex Oriente Lux
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Dumbrava Roșie, Romania
    Posts
    2,259

    Default Re: Possible improvements to the ATW mechanics

    Quote Originally Posted by Theramines View Post
    f) Remove the unit upgrade system.
    Oh yea...I hate the unit upgrade system. It's really annoying to be forced to maintain expensive armies full of elite troops late game, which makes no historical sense whatsoever. Many of the lower tier units (ex: light lancers) also have certain uses that are not replicated by their more expensive, heavier, slower "upgrades."
    Under the Patronage of PikeStance


  10. #10
    billydilly's Avatar Senator
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Copenhagen
    Posts
    1,056

    Default Re: Possible improvements to the ATW mechanics

    @Julio-Claudian

    I'm not so sure. They are updating and adding DLCs to Rome 2. There is also a new campaign pack on the way for R2.

    I hope that they'll do the same with Attila when they are done with R2.
    CPU: Intel i7-8700. GPU: MSI GTX 1070 Armor 8G. RAM: Corsair Vengance, 16Gb HD: Kingston SSD 240Gb (System), Samsung 850 Evo SSD 500Gb (Steam), Western Digital 500Gb. PSU: Corsair CX600W

  11. #11

    Default Re: Possible improvements to the ATW mechanics

    Make buildings/settlement as WRE eventually not look dingy and depressing on the battlemap.

    If I manage to create a booming economy, positive public order and all that good stuff why does my empire still look a mess in battle? The cities are bathing in gold and the people well fed and happy, but you wouldn't know it from the cities we live in. There should really be something done so that, eventually places in the empire change aesthetically.

  12. #12
    Julio-Claudian's Avatar Senator
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Britannia
    Posts
    1,215

    Default Re: Possible improvements to the ATW mechanics

    Quote Originally Posted by billydilly View Post
    @Julio-Claudian

    I'm not so sure. They are updating and adding DLCs to Rome 2. There is also a new campaign pack on the way for R2.

    I hope that they'll do the same with Attila when they are done with R2.
    They're doing it for Rome II and not Attila because far more people already play Rome II and so are more likely to buy their dlcs. Seems as though they're going with the more successful game and not the more well developed one.

  13. #13
    billydilly's Avatar Senator
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Copenhagen
    Posts
    1,056

    Default Re: Possible improvements to the ATW mechanics

    I still hope they release stuff for Attila, because the ToB release date is in May and Three kingdoms is set for release in the Fall 2018. So there are approx 5-6 months between the release of ToB and 3K. Plenty of time to update Attila
    CPU: Intel i7-8700. GPU: MSI GTX 1070 Armor 8G. RAM: Corsair Vengance, 16Gb HD: Kingston SSD 240Gb (System), Samsung 850 Evo SSD 500Gb (Steam), Western Digital 500Gb. PSU: Corsair CX600W

  14. #14
    Daruwind's Avatar Citizen
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Location
    Prague
    Posts
    2,898

    Default Re: Possible improvements to the ATW mechanics

    Quote Originally Posted by billydilly View Post
    I still hope they release stuff for Attila, because the ToB release date is in May and Three kingdoms is set for release in the Fall 2018. So there are approx 5-6 months between the release of ToB and 3K. Plenty of time to update Attila
    Not really. There is right now no free team to do it and important things is, CA so far try not to release 2 project at the same month. Never ever so far.

    1) ToB release is April, we can expect some DLCs as well later ..probably before 3K
    2) Warhammer has DLC for May and we should get 1-2 more this year, plus lot FLC....
    3) 3K release is like September/October
    4) Rome 2 team is preparing new campaign, but it sounded like due to success ED+DK and like it will be little bigger campaign pack....so it will require little longer time to produce.

    So:

    April -ToB
    May - WH Lord pack + FLC + Norsca + 30thRoR
    June - ToB dlc?
    July - Rome 2 campaign pack
    September - WH dlc
    October - 3K
    November - WH dlc
    DMR: (R2) (Attila) (ToB) (Wh1/2) (3K) (Troy)

  15. #15

    Default Re: Possible improvements to the ATW mechanics

    Any chance we can get performance improvements with the release of Tob?

  16. #16
    billydilly's Avatar Senator
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Copenhagen
    Posts
    1,056

    Default Re: Possible improvements to the ATW mechanics

    Quote Originally Posted by Daruwind View Post
    Not really. There is right now no free team to do it and important things is, CA so far try not to release 2 project at the same month. Never ever so far.

    1) ToB release is April, we can expect some DLCs as well later ..probably before 3K
    2) Warhammer has DLC for May and we should get 1-2 more this year, plus lot FLC....
    3) 3K release is like September/October
    4) Rome 2 team is preparing new campaign, but it sounded like due to success ED+DK and like it will be little bigger campaign pack....so it will require little longer time to produce.

    So:

    April -ToB
    May - WH Lord pack + FLC + Norsca + 30thRoR
    June - ToB dlc?
    July - Rome 2 campaign pack
    September - WH dlc
    October - 3K
    November - WH dlc
    You're probably right, still I just hope they finish R2 and then "fix" Attila. I mean, they can't add stuff to R2 forever
    CPU: Intel i7-8700. GPU: MSI GTX 1070 Armor 8G. RAM: Corsair Vengance, 16Gb HD: Kingston SSD 240Gb (System), Samsung 850 Evo SSD 500Gb (Steam), Western Digital 500Gb. PSU: Corsair CX600W

  17. #17
    Daruwind's Avatar Citizen
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Location
    Prague
    Posts
    2,898

    Default Re: Possible improvements to the ATW mechanics

    I stated in different thread. The current success of R2 DLCs makes much more possible any DLC or fixes even for Attila. Like year two ago nobody would bet on any content for Attila or Rome 2 whatsoever. Look now, third DLC for Rome 2 and that team would probably sooner or later move to other project. And ToB success might brings people back even to Attila..just to try it once more. :-)
    DMR: (R2) (Attila) (ToB) (Wh1/2) (3K) (Troy)

  18. #18

    Default Re: Possible improvements to the ATW mechanics

    Generals should live longer.
    Climate change reduced.
    The cities/province system at this point I don't think can be fixed more than they already did compared to Rome II. It's just a bad design. Indeed growth becomes worthless after a while. I think there are some interesting aspects, but I'd start with bringing back population like it was in Rome 1/Med II. The gameplay, unfortunately, is too fast. I'm not even rushing or trying to make one of those ''let's conquer the map in 9 turns''. But the gameplay is really, really fast. The map is beautiful but the mechanic is poor. I made a long thread about it.

    As far as character, traits etc. the thing is, once you have played Paradox games, there's nothing TW games can offer better than that. I assume at a certain point we're going to get some amazing game that has Paradox strategic map and character development along with TW battles and that'll be great.

  19. #19
    General Maximus's Avatar Vicarius Provinciae
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Bhopal, India
    Posts
    11,292

    Default Re: Possible improvements to the ATW mechanics

    This game needs: Population Mechanisms

    This is a must in this setting. Especially considering it plays such a huge role in how societies function in this era.

    Population should be a definite number. It should be based in individual cities and towns, rather than entire province.

    It should be divided into social classes. Peasants, farmers, labourers, aristocrats, merchants and so on. Each of these should have an impact. Population should also depend on factors such as -

    - Food availability, the biggest factor of all. Food will grow a region's natural birth rate, while in times of famine people in starving areas would try to migrate to well fed areas.
    - Presence of diseases VS hygiene factors. Empires like Rome and Persia can maintain huge populations due to clean water, sewage and baths, while barbarians live in a poor state and cannot maintain as large populations. The game should reflect this.
    - Sieges, raiding and pillaging should kill off vast swathes of population.
    - Population grow slowly, and it should take lots of decades to repopulate a region to its full potential, if you previously razed it to the ground for example.

    Social Classes should matter. After all it was part of the chaos.

    Aristocratic class should be required for efficient running of a province. After all, they are the noblemen who rule an area. Too many aristocrats should create political problems and make excessive demands for buildings, goods and facilities. A real life example is Italy, where Roman nobility was present in such a large number that Emperors (especially those like Diocletian) actively tried to avoid that region altogether.

    Merchants should handle trade. If your merchants were killed off in a province, trade income from there would almost entirely stop. At the same time, too many merchants would give you a trade boom, at the cost of clamouring for urban privileges and rights. Raiding would cripple them and cause them to turn into peasants if trade dries up somehow. You have Axum in this time as a real example of a big merchant boom - Indians, Romans and Persians all had traders in huge numbers there.

    Clergy was a growing class in this era, so it should affect religion and public order. They should also demand temples and agents and so on.

    Peasants should staff the production buildings. They are required to farm the fields, fish the waters, breed cattle and horses in ranches, you get the idea. They area not easy to please, but can be controlled with religion and clergy, entertainment and garrisons. Too many peasants = squalor, slums popping up around cities and eventually disease and famine from overpopulation that will bring the entire province down (as well as affect neighbours). Too few peasants means little food and resource production.

    Slaves should be a separate class, with slave trading mechanisms perhaps. Their presence should boost economy a lot (and allow slightly cheaper navies). They should also be able to staff the production buildings like farms etc. Too many slaves means chance of slave uprising (and upset unemployed peasants), but too few slaves would make aristocracy mad and create another set of problems.

    And finally, foreigner class represents all non-aristocratic element of population not originating from your lands. These should have their own ethnicities and cultures. And give loads of bonuses and maluses depending on how the game handles this. They should integrate and turn into other population classes after a decade or so.

    Manpower should be introduced, based on population numbers. This was a time when every man that could fight had value. You shouldn't be able to create huge armies simply out of thin air. Armies require more than just gold - that part was and should be the realm of mercenaries. They need

    This is a time when a famine and disease could cripple entire regions. Both WRE and ERE had a hard time finding loyal men ready to fight. ERE stabilized itself and kept going, whereas in gaming terms the WRE was clearly out of manpower by the time Emperor Majorian (the last powerful Western Roman Emperor who reconquered much of land back). One large battle could kill a nation's army for years. The last Roman-Persian War completely and utterly exhausted both of manpower, which resulted in rise of Rashidun Caliphate at such an easy and alarming pace.

    Heck, some emperors (both in Rome and Persia) put great efforts reorganizing their armies and using existing soldiers to create new units, simply because they did not want to disband units and waste precious trained manpower.

    While the realistic way would be to tie units and manpower to provinces (so if Egypt rebels, Egyptian units would also mutiny) but that would be too complex. Instead, introduce a single manpower count for the whole nation for now.

    Migration

    Well, this isn't known as the Migration Period for nothing. While a simple form of "migration" exists in the game (negative public order and a few minor effects mostly), it is too simple and needs to be tied to the proper population system.

    When people migrate, that should be on the city/town scale rather than entire provinces.

    - People should migrate from poor provinces to rich provinces.
    - People should migrate away from sieges as refugees to neighbouring provinces.
    - People should migrate to new provinces slowly based on edict, so player can for example repopulate dying regions.
    - People should migrate to newly conquered lands in large numbers if you are barbarian or nomadic.
    - Aristocrats should migrate to capital and major cities.
    - Slaves should mostly migrate around with and alongside aristocrats, to represent slave trade.
    - Higher tech nations (Rome, Persia, Axum) should be able to limit their borders to slow down migration, which should prompt actual migratory nomadic invasions to open them again.
    - You should be allowed to resettle people in some way if they appear on your borders.

    Settled foreigners within your empire, with a good public order in the province, should allow you to recruit cultural units. Want Germanic Foederati for example? Settle the Goths in your lands. At the cost of them being unruly and treacherous of course.

    Also, tweak the naval warfare in its entirety. It is too fast and boring just like Rome 2.
    सार्वभौम सम्राट चत्रवर्ती - भारतवर्ष
    स्वर्गपुत्र पीतसम्राट - चीन
    महाराजानाभ्याम महाराजा - पारसिक

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •