Page 1 of 13 1234567891011 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 282

Thread: Letter to CA - From a Citizen on major gameplay issues.

Hybrid View

Previous Post Previous Post   Next Post Next Post
  1. #1
    Kinjo's Avatar Taiko
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    United States
    Posts
    5,758

    Default Letter to CA - From a Citizen on major gameplay issues.

    Dear CA,

    This is a letter I decided to put together in an attempt to give feed back to the DEV team to hopefully influence the possible direction for future patches/expansions and also see if the community feels the same way I do about these issues. This post will mainly deal with game play aspects rather than the technical issues that many are experiencing. The forums are very active and sometimes it’s hard to keep up with, so I will try to compile many of the major game play issues into one post.



    Diplomacy

    Diplomacy while being an improvement over previous games continues to have issues for many, so I will try to break down some of the issues that continue to come up.


    Diplomacy Problem 1:

    Ai factions permanently at war!

    As many of us have experienced during our ETW campaigns is that AI factions stay at war with each other for the entire campaign or at least it appears so. This severely damages the AI faction’s ability to develop as a nation and makes them rather weak in the end game.

    Solution:

    Have AI factions make peace with each other periodically so they can recover from the cost of being at war and regain the loss of trade revenue. Example of some triggers that could cause cease fires for AI factions; France goes to war with Britain so now you have France’s allies at war with Britain and Britain’s allies at war with France. If France and Britain make peace with each other so should their allies.


    Diplomacy Problem 2:

    Protectorate system not working properly!

    When a faction is made a protectorate they stay at war with the allies and other protectorates of the protector faction. For example Sweden is allied with Prussia; Sweden then goes to war with Denmark and makes them a protectorate. The problem is Prussia stays at war with Denmark.

    Solution:

    When a faction is made a protectorate they should immediately cease fire with all allies and protectorates of the protector faction. To be honest it probably would be a good idea to make protectorate factions have a globe cease fire, so that if any factions that wishes to continue to be at war with the protectorate faction it at least gives the option for the protector faction to get involved.


    Diplomacy Problem 3:

    There is no button to ask a faction to declare war or make peace with another faction!
    This is probably the most important feature missing from diplomacy and would enable players to dabble in politics more. M2TW had this feature; it was great to have the option to pay a faction to go to war with another without going to war yourself. On the other hand it would give the player the ability to control globe politics a bit more by asking a faction to cease hostilities with another faction. This would be a great way to slow down expanding factions in theaters that you are not active yet.

    Solution:

    Bring this feature back please!


    Diplomacy Problem 4: Tribute and State Gifts

    State gifts no matter how large they are 2500, 5000, and 10000 only give a +100 to diplomatic relations. Also giving tribute for multiple turns never ends, for example a tribute of 1000 pounds for 5 turns does not end at 5 turns but continues for the rest of the game.

    Solution:

    -State gifts should have a different value i.e. 2500 +100 relations, 5000 +200, 10000 +300 etc.
    -Tribute for 5 turns should end at 5 turns and not go on for the rest of the game.



    Campaign AI

    Campaign AI is a game breaker for many and has some serious issues, so I will try to cover the main complaints.

    Campaign AI Problem 1: AI naval invasions

    AI Faction are not attacking islands with land units!
    Many have noticed when playing factions like Britain you don’t get attacked at your homeland by enemy land armies. Also you don’t see faction starting colonies or sending land units to the different theaters i.e. India or the Americas.

    Solution:

    Program the AI to campaign more like a human player;
    -Build up 1-2 invasion fleets of 6 + ships each
    -Build up a large invasion force of 1-2 stacks with 12 + units each
    -Blockade ports and remove naval threats before moving troops over
    -Invade in one wave/coordinated attack

    For the AI to present a challenge to the player the Ai would need at least two invading armies to invade Britain simultaneously. This would change the dynamics of the game tremendously and make it much more challenging. You could tie the size of the invading armies to the difficult settings med = 2 stacks of 12 units, hard= 2 stacks of 16 units, and very hard= 2 stacks of 20 units. The same goes for the fleets med = 6 ships, hard= 12 ships, and very hard=20 ships per fleet.


    Campaign AI Problem 2:

    Passive AI on the campaign map!

    The Ai builds large passive standing armies mainly in Britain and also in Spanish Flanders. The British AI is probably affected by the lack of navel invasion and the land passiveness is most likely caused by not having military access to pass through regions.
    Solution:
    Again this goes in line with having the AI plan a campaign more like a player would.
    -Obtain military access to the region of the faction it is at war with.
    -Build an invasion army same as above 1-2 stacks the size of stacks determined by difficult setting.
    -Invade with both armies at the same time.

    Campaign AI Problem 3:

    AI spamming units and ships and not recruiting at generals and admirals!

    The AI is in some serious need of restructuring how and when it builds armies and fleets. The AI spams multiple small and large stacks with no generals or admirals, most likely due to the cheapness of units and ships. There are too many fleets and small nation have multiple large armies, there needs to be some balancing done here. It doesn’t make since when factions like Hanover and the Netherlands have more powerful land armies then France. In fact the Netherlands often overrun France in the Grand Campaign.

    Solution:

    -AI factions should build units and ships at generals and admirals only unless strengthening a garrison.
    -AI faction like France should have larger standing armies in their capitals then minor faction and they should be better quality troops in the mix like guards, grenadiers etc. For example France at peace should have one and a half stacks defending Paris and when they go to war they should increase their home defense army to two full stacks. Then once France has built up its home defense army it will start to raise its campaign army of two additional stacks. On the other hand a faction like Hanover should have a half stack guarding its capital and when its at war it will raise its home defense army to one stack.
    -There are too many fleets in some parts of the grand campaign I counted 9 Turkish fleets by Greece alone in one campaign. Ships should cost at least x2-x3 as much as they currently do which will help reduce the amount of naval battles too fight. This will affect the game in a positive way; it will be much more rewarding when capturing ships and the prize money will be more worthwhile.
    -The same could go for land units they are simply too cheap for the amount of money players are raking in, what is 500 pounds for a unit when you are bring in 25K+ a turn.
    -AI factions should use their fleets in two different ways, squadrons of 2-3 smaller ships (frigates, sloops, 6th rate etc to protect trade and raid trade routes. The AI should use fleets of 6+ ships to try to gain naval supremacy by going after other large flees blockading port and transporting land units for naval invasion.
    -When an Ai faction has completed a war it should disband its campaign army, this will also help the AI faction have more up-to-date units by disbanding lesser tech troops like pikemen. So in the end game you will be facing late period troops.



    Reinforcements

    The reinforcement system in ETW is another game breaker for many players that like to play the Grand Campaign.


    Reinforcement Problem 1:

    Reinforcements are not being represent in the right location on the battle map. For example you have two armies attacking from the South and the AI has two armies attacking from the North (campaign map), for whatever reason your reinforcement army appears on the North and the AI reinforcement appear on the South behind your army.

    Solution:

    -Make reinforcements appear in the correct location on the battle map i.e. no random teleporting on the battle map (if this was an intended feature its horrible) if you have two armies attacking from the South on the campaign map they should appear on the South on the battle map.


    Reinforcement Problem 2:

    AI fixed artillery reinforcements not allowing players to complete the battle without quitting or letting time run out. In other words they stay invisible behind the red line and can’t move since they are fix artillery.

    Solution:

    -Don’t allow fixed artillery to be reinforcements or make all artillery have a carriage system so they can move onto the battle map.



    Sieges

    Sieges from my experience probably sees the auto resolve button used more times than not. There are some serious game play issues to resolve in this area from everything from pathfinding to the surrender function.


    Siege Problem 1: Poor Ai siege assaults!

    The Ai when assaulting seems to be making a mad dash for the center of the fort, sometimes running through or around units to get there. This doesn’t seem like a coordinated attack by any means and is easy to crush once you know that’s what the Ai does. This really does not portray 18th century warfare very well and is a failure in many fans eyes. Forlorn hopes were a big part of siege warfare during the 18th century, they where the first wave of infantry to assault the breach.

    Solution:

    -Program the Ai to make more coordinated attacks. For example have the Ai attack the walls first with its artillery before sending the infantry in. Once there is a breach in the wall the Ai should send its forlorn hope (assault troops - grenadiers, line infantry, etc) to attack the breach while it sends its light infantry to attack different sides of the fort with grappling hooks. If the Ai has cavalry it should try to go in one of the gates opened by the light infantry. The light infantry with grappling hooks should be a secondary attack only and not a primary one as it is currently. Most of the Ai focus should be trying to breach the walls with the artillery and then assaulting the breach with the infantry.
    -Also limit grappling hooks to light infantry only, it seem the Ai does the same thing every siege. The Ai always sends all of its infantry forward and attacks the sides of the fort with grappling hooks even though it has artillery.


    Siege Problem 2: Pathfinding

    As we all know pathfinding is a real problem with sieges and can make battles frustrating do to units not manning wall cannons to not using the ramps to get off the walls. Sometimes troops when order to move off walls will use the enemy ropes instead of the ramps. Also the defenders units sometimes use ropes to get back into the fort instead of using the gate.

    Solution:

    -Improve pathfinding. Defenders should not use enemy ropes to move off walls and should use the gate when trying to get back into a fort.


    Siege Problem 3: Surrendering

    The Ai never surrenders regardless of how outnumbered they are. If a city is only garrisoned with 1-2 flintlock militia units and it is being assaulted by a large 20 unit army it probably is better off surrendering.

    Solution:

    -Increase the chances of small garrison militia to surrender when facing large professional armies.


    Siege Problem 4: Trench Works

    Attacking players have no option for trench works during sieges.

    Solution:

    -If a player sieges a city for more than one turn he should have the option to deploy trench works.


    Siege Problem 5: Ai defense of fortifications

    The Ai when defending a fort will sally forth once there is a breach in the wall making them even easier to kill.

    Solution:

    -Program the Ai to defend the breach and not sally forth.



    Pathfinding

    Pathfinding Problem 1: Bridges

    Many players have reported pathfinding issues with bridges, units when ordered to cross a bridge look for alternative longer routes to cross. Also there are reports of horse artillery dieing while running across bridges.

    Solution:

    Improve pathfinding for units when crossing bridges and not make it fatal for horse artillery moving double time across bridges.



    Unit Balancing

    Unit balancing will cover everything from unit size to stats to artillery range.


    Unit Balancing Problem 1: Mortars

    Mortar range is way too long, they were high trajectory artillery designed to shot over fortification walls such as star forts. The problem was they had a much shorter range then cannons and required trench work to get them close enough to bombard the inside of the fort.

    Solution:

    -The range of artillery should be like this cannons > howitzers > mortars there is a pattern the higher the trajectory the shorter the range.
    - Mortars should have a carriage system like foot artillery to make up for the short range so they can be towed close to a fortifications wall. This in turn gives players a chance to use wall cannons to stop them before they get too close and pound them to dust.
    -Also Decrease mortar accuracy


    Unit Balancing Problem 2: Cannons

    Cannons not killing soldiers on direct hits, it is almost better not to waste a unit slot on cannons as they cause so few casualties. I have literally had games where I had 3-4 units of cannons cause less than 20 casualties combined despite multiple direct hits.

    Solution:

    -Increase cannon kill ratio a bit, the accuracy seems to be fine.


    Unit Balancing Problem 3: Unit Size

    Unit size seems to be off for some factions for example you have the Austrians that have 200 men in their line infantry unit vs. faction like the Russians and the Turks who have 160 (Ultra settings). Also the Native American faction units seem to be too large and outnumber most European armies.

    Solution:

    -Increase unit size for Russian and Turkish line infantry to 200 like the Austrians since they both were known for large armies.
    -Decease Native American faction unit size to 80 for regular units and 60 for elite units this will better represent the man power shortage that native tribes had fighting the Europeans.
    -Decrease pirate unit size to 80 and make them better in hand to hand.


    Naval Unit Problem 4: Flag Ship


    This is a problem with the wrong ship getting the admiral flags; it appears to go on random ships and not the admiral’s ship.

    Solution:

    -Code the Admirals ship to have the admiral’s flags; these are the three flags that appear on top of the mast.


    Unit Balancing Problem 5: Some Units not recruitable

    Some units are not available in the grand such as Highlanders and many of the minor nations can only recruit a few units.

    Solution:

    -Add these units so they can be recruited in the grand campaign by the players and the Ai.



    Quality Control

    This mainly refers to the quality of the 3d models and User Inface.


    Quality Control Problem1: Special Force units

    -SF edition comes with six extra in game units as we all know but 2 of the 6 units have issues. The Turkish Organgun is missing a lod file, so when you zoom the camera out the orgagun disappears.
    -Rogers Rangers model has issues when you zoom in their hat/ head model changes.

    Soultion:

    -Models should be repair, most customer might not be happy paying $20.00 for six unit and two of them have rendering issues.


    Quality Control Problem 2: Units missing textures/ proper faction colors

    Many units for faction such as France and Austria are missing there faction color texture on the battle map i.e. they are using the windscape default color grey. Units that are confirmed to missing their textures

    Austria: Carabineers, Hungarian Hussars, Unlans, Grenadiers, and Jeagers.

    France: Carabineers, Chevaux-legers, Infanterie Vieux, Grenadiers, and Coureurs de Bois has the same issue as Rogers Rangers with the hat/head model changing when you zoom in and out.

    Solution:

    -Give these units the appropriate faction colors textures i.e. give the French units Blue/White and give the Austrian units Green /White as it stands these units for both factions are using the exact same color for the unit mentioned above Grey/Grey.


    Quality Control Problem 3: Unit Cards and Unit Information Pictures are the wrong color.

    -Most of the 12 playable factions are not using the proper color for the uniforms for the unit cards and unit information pictures. For example Britain’s faction color is red and blue for their units on the battle map but none of the ui match, most of the ui is red and yellow or red and white. Again this is a problem across the the board for the playable factions. There are even a few units that have the wrong ui all together such as the Siberian Hunters for the Russian faction.

    Solution:

    -Review the units of the 12 playable factions and add the proper ui color for the factions.



    Modding


    Modding has always been important to the totoalwar community, it keeps player involved in the series in between the devolvement phases when players get bored with vanilla. Please continue to support the modding community.

    -Please support the mod folder (EDIT:looks like there will be a mod pack feature that comes with the mod dev tools)
    -Please make files like the Stratpos more accessible by putting them in xml file format.


    -------------------------------------------------------------------------


    As long as CA lives up to their promises of continually supporting Empire it will be a fantastic game when most of the issues are ironed out. Maybe CA will do something special with the patches like unlock a faction with a new major patch, the Mugals and the Portuguese would be excellent candidates and it would be way to reward the fans for some of the issues we had to deal with. I hold the CA DEV team with the highest regard and have faith they will address the follow issues listed above.



    If there is anything I didn't mention feel free to speak up.


    Reiks
    Last edited by Kinjo; March 21, 2009 at 05:16 PM.

  2. #2

    Default Re: Letter to CA - From a Citizen on major gameplay issues.

    Signed

  3. #3

    Default Re: Letter to CA - From a Citizen on major gameplay issues.

    You've made a good list of issues but what's sad is you barely scratched the surface. Diplomacy is totally unbalanced and unfinished. The issues are too many to list. I just hope someone at CA sits down and plays each major faction through and fixes the obvious slap-you-in-the-face problems. Don't even get me started on the Campaign AI and unit balancing. But again, good list. I hope it gets some attention.

  4. #4

    Default Re: Letter to CA - From a Citizen on major gameplay issues.

    Don't forget the wide variety of CTD's which have rendered this game unplayable for a vast number of people. If they just worry about AI issues in the next few patches, and these CTD's remain, this game will do nothing but collect dust on my shelf.

  5. #5
    Kinjo's Avatar Taiko
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    United States
    Posts
    5,758

    Default Re: Letter to CA - From a Citizen on major gameplay issues.

    Quote Originally Posted by x0teutonic0x View Post
    Don't forget the wide variety of CTD's which have rendered this game unplayable for a vast number of people. If they just worry about AI issues in the next few patches, and these CTD's remain, this game will do nothing but collect dust on my shelf.
    I have a feeling that virtual address space is what is causing a majority of the crashes, I was trying to avoid technical issues if possible.

    http://www.twcenter.net/forums/showthread.php?t=238484

  6. #6

    Default Re: Letter to CA - From a Citizen on major gameplay issues.

    Quote Originally Posted by Reiksmarshal View Post
    I have a feeling that virtual address space is what is causing a majority of the crashes, I was trying to avoid technical issues if possible.

    http://www.twcenter.net/forums/showthread.php?t=238484
    Thanks for the thread! I agree with your gameplay suggestions nonetheless. Signed.

  7. #7
    Naked Emperor's Avatar Centenarius
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Norway
    Posts
    828

    Default Re: Letter to CA - From a Citizen on major gameplay issues.

    Quote Originally Posted by Reiksmarshal View Post
    Dear CA,

    This post will mainly deal with game play aspects rather than the technical issues that many are experiencing. The forums are very active and sometimes it’s hard to keep up with, so I will try to compile many of the major game play issues into one post.
    As seen in the above quote he is focusing on game play

    Great post

    Signed
    No battleplan ever survives contact with the enemy
    - Field Marshall Helmuth Carl Bernard von Moltke -

    ____________________________________________________________

  8. #8

    Default Re: Letter to CA - From a Citizen on major gameplay issues.

    I'm aware of that. I just don't want the chorus of voices screaming about naval invasion and passive AI's to drown out everything else.

  9. #9

    Default Re: Letter to CA - From a Citizen on major gameplay issues.

    As a citizen of this site, I also sign this great letter, although I don't think that all of these features can or will be implemented. Let's hope for the best anyway.

  10. #10
    danova's Avatar Protector Domesticus
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Hungary / Budapest
    Posts
    4,668

    Default Re: Letter to CA - From a Citizen on major gameplay issues.

    signed

  11. #11

    Default Re: Letter to CA - From a Citizen on major gameplay issues.

    Also Under unit/tiles matching: Playing as Great Britain, the East India Company Lancers have a ui tile making them look like sapois, while on the battle map they are anglo east india mercinaries.

    Signed.
    ~Loyalty always, but honor first.~

  12. #12

    Default Re: Letter to CA - From a Citizen on major gameplay issues.

    25K per turn? I'm making 150K in 1716! It feels like cheating! I just bought all the French provinces in America for like 600K, it only means a few turns of income, I have like +3M. Takes all the fun away...

    Edit: double signed!

  13. #13
    Kinjo's Avatar Taiko
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    United States
    Posts
    5,758

    Default Re: Letter to CA - From a Citizen on major gameplay issues.

    Quote Originally Posted by Lechuza View Post
    25K per turn? I'm making 150K in 1716! It feels like cheating! I just bought all the French provinces in America for like 600K, it only means a few turns of income, I have like +3M. Takes all the fun away...

    Edit: double signed!
    Thats why I put 25K+, but none the less the economy is in some serious need of tuning.
    Last edited by Kinjo; March 17, 2009 at 06:46 PM.

  14. #14

    Default Re: Letter to CA - From a Citizen on major gameplay issues.

    Quote Originally Posted by Reiksmarshal View Post
    That why I put 25K+, but none the less the economy is some serious need of tuning.
    I couldn't agree more with you, units and ships are waaay to cheap or/and the amount of money you can make out of trade is unbelievably high.

    I love the idea of making ships way more expensive, that way there would be less fleets but more meaningful, the same goes when you capture a ship.

    Great letter btw!

  15. #15

    Default Re: Letter to CA - From a Citizen on major gameplay issues.

    Actually, I'm happy with the economy and troop structure in Empire. This is 1700-1800. This is the era of huge standing armies and huge navies. The Thirty Years war in 1618 and the Napoleonic Period in the 1800's both involved massive armies. Naturally, Empire's period should continue that pattern. It's just that the AI is such a bore, having huge armies like that seems pointless.

  16. #16
    Kinjo's Avatar Taiko
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    United States
    Posts
    5,758

    Default Re: Letter to CA - From a Citizen on major gameplay issues.

    Quote Originally Posted by x0teutonic0x View Post
    Actually, I'm happy with the economy and troop structure in Empire. This is 1700-1800. This is the era of huge standing armies and huge navies. The Thirty Years war in 1618 and the Napoleonic Period in the 1800's both involved massive armies. Naturally, Empire's period should continue that pattern. It's just that the AI is such a bore, having huge armies like that seems pointless.
    There comes a point when you have to draw a line on how many units the AI spams. Here is a few pics of what I'm talking about, this just seems a bit ridiculous.

    http://www.twcenter.net/forums/pictu...ictureid=12685
    http://img9.imageshack.us/img9/4841/...1405551459.jpg
    http://img9.imageshack.us/img9/9341/...1406030720.jpg

  17. #17

    Default Re: Letter to CA - From a Citizen on major gameplay issues.

    Quote Originally Posted by x0teutonic0x View Post
    Actually, I'm happy with the economy and troop structure in Empire. This is 1700-1800. This is the era of huge standing armies and huge navies. The Thirty Years war in 1618 and the Napoleonic Period in the 1800's both involved massive armies. Naturally, Empire's period should continue that pattern. It's just that the AI is such a bore, having huge armies like that seems pointless.
    Ships should be more important than they are now, and full stack armies should mean more. I have +3M in 1716, I bough a whole continent from the French and I wouldn't care less about loosing whole armies when I can just spam whatever I want.
    To make things short, I have so so sooo much money! It's like not having any, like if there even wasnt an economy/trade system in the game.

  18. #18
    Shabby_Ronin's Avatar Primicerius
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Ohio, United States
    Posts
    3,249

    Default Re: Letter to CA - From a Citizen on major gameplay issues.

    Signed

  19. #19
    Berdiche Knyaz's Avatar Biarchus
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Atlanta, GA
    Posts
    638

    Default Re: Letter to CA - From a Citizen on major gameplay issues.

    I GOOD SIR SIGN THIS LETTER!!!!
    *Signs it in the most awesomness way possible*

    -Berdiche Knyaz
    America: Total War Teammate
    http://www.twcenter.net/forums/showthread.php?t=224197

  20. #20

    Default Re: Letter to CA - From a Citizen on major gameplay issues.

    Agreed.

    -TheSavage

Page 1 of 13 1234567891011 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

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