Rome II: Total War : Features You want to see!

[SPECTREtm]

Rome II: Total War^tm

Imo, it is the only logical and commerically viable move for CA. Rome is generally viewed as one of the best games in the series, and it is by far the most popular timeframe and setting for a total war game. Many years have pasted since Rome was released and CA has learned a lot since then, and had it's engines refined over and over again. We now have real time naval battles, a feature long awaited and something that will make Rome II possibly the greatest. It is no brainer; If CA has any intelligence then Rome II will be the next game! Period!

!The idea of this thread isn't to discuss what will be the next TW, there is already a thread for that!

Let us be navie and make a list of what we want to see in Rome II (Better A.I is too obvious, so don't bother), and hope that they might listen to the community!

#1 A clear distinction between professional armies and levied armies (with clear strenght and weaknesses):

Professional: A standing army that is at all times ready for war. It can campaign indefinitely as long as the supplies are there, and the saleries are paided. It is an effective fighting force and it is much less prone to desertion, as long as it's demands are meet. However, it is more limited in size and cost more per soldier to raise and keep. The post-Marian Roman army is an example of this.

Levy: A levied army is made up mostly by the lower classes; farmers, merchants, citizens. It is a rather cheap fighting force and somewhat effective, but it is heavily limited. Because it isn't made up of full time professionals, you can't keep it active throughout the entire campagin, and therefore you are forced to end each campaign as fast as you possibly can. "Farmers" need to attent their crops, and will not be pleased with you keeping them against their will. Doing so will greatly reduce troop moral, raise desertion, and may even cause rebellions! The advantage over a professional army is that you can raise much larger numbers of troops in a shorter period, and the costs are lower. The pre-Marian Roman army is an example of this.

[Lord Baal]

My post http://www.twcenter.net/forums/showthread.php?t=451037 may please you with some ideas (I think).
I do like your ideas..

The levy armies would have a "moral counter" that diminishes either every turn they are out of town or until they are disbanded. That way they will be truly temporal levies.

For a eventual Rome 2 I will like all the things I put in that thread.

[Zipzopdippidybopbop]

Basically to revert to a similar file format like Medieval II (to enable easier access and subsequent modding).

Also the bloody "region exchange" option back. More diplomatic options (eg. keep Shogun II diplomatic options + add request/demand cease war with X faction; aforementioned give/demand region)

Less daft fantasy units (Urban Cohorts as the best unit for Rome??! What eejit advised that in the original?)

CA have done brilliantly when it comes to graphics - lets see a bit more prioritisation on the gameplay this time round eh?

Bring back the "zoom in on city" function. That was absolutely brilliant =D

Allow us to rename the cities (like in Medieval 2)

Maybe a recruitment system could be implemented (especially for Rome); eg. cant recruit legionaries in a province until its been under Roman control for 30 turns or something.

Overall, most of these are plans that can be MODDED in; so the core thing for CA to do is to make the new game files more accessible to the gaming community!

Come on CA, dont let us down ¬_¬

[Zipzopdippidybopbop]

Rome II: Total War^tm

Imo, it is the only logical and commerically viable move for CA. Rome is generally viewed as one of the best games in the series, and it is by far the most popular timeframe and setting for a total war game. Many years have pasted since Rome was released and CA has learned a lot since then, and had it's engines refined over and over again. We now have real time naval battles, a feature long awaited and something that will make Rome II possibly the greatest. It is no brainer; If CA has any intelligence then Rome II will be the next game! Period!

!The idea of this thread isn't to discuss what will be the next TW, there is already a thread for that!

Let us be navie and make a list of what we want to see in Rome II (Better A.I is too obvious, so don't bother), and hope that they might listen to the community!

#1 A clear distinction between professional armies and levied armies (with clear strenght and weaknesses):

Professional: A standing army that is at all times ready for war. It can campaign indefinitely as long as the supplies are there, and the saleries are paided. It is an effective fighting force and it is much less prone to desertion, as long as it's demands are meet. However, it is more limited in size and cost more per soldier to raise and keep. The post-Marian Roman army is an example of this.

Levy: A levied army is made up mostly by the lower classes; farmers, merchants, citizens. It is a rather cheap fighting force and somewhat effective, but it is heavily limited. Because it isn't made up of full time professionals, you can't keep it active throughout the entire campagin, and therefore you are forced to end each campaign as fast as you possibly can. "Farmers" need to attent their crops, and will not be pleased with you keeping them against their will. Doing so will greatly reduce troop moral, raise desertion, and may even cause rebellions! The advantage over a professional army is that you can raise much larger numbers of troops in a shorter period, and the costs are lower. The pre-Marian Roman army is an example of this.

They will probably implement this anyway (remember the Marian Reforms in RTW1). Other examples of Levy armies would be the Greek city states (eg. hoplites needed to return home before the harvest) and the Carthaginian native citizens (eg. Poeni Spearmen or something).

Another good example of a professional force (apart from the later Roman army) would be the armies under the Diadochi (eg. Macedonia, Egypt, Seleucid Empire etc).

What would mercenaries fall under? Remember Carthage relied almost exclusively on foreign mercenaries for its armies.

[Zipzopdippidybopbop]

PS - re-introduce changeable capital cities. Forgot about that one!

[MathiasOfAthens]

Naval battles are obviously in but one thing that would up the ante on naval and land battle would be land invasion. It cant be impossible. Imagine an army that wants to cross a river but theres no bridge or the bridge is blocked. Well the player brings a ship down the river where the players army is and he begins to cross on the ship which takes a turn to unload no matter the distance. The enemy happens to be nearby and when you press end turn the enemy AI is given the option to intercept at the river bank. In the battle the player has his men on barges or similar ships that must disembark somewhere on the opposite bank and you get to navigate the ships to the shore and unload the men on the beach. Would be awesome to say the least.


Now when it comes to bridges they should be upgradeable like towns in ETW. They should go from crossings to bridges. I would also like to see the ability to build forts on the bridge perhaps as part of the upgrade or when you have units garrisoned on the bridge a fort battle around the bridge would appear if attacked. The Fort would be wooden and have 3 sides in front of the bridge. Would be another layer of gameplay to say the least. Plus invading forces can destroy bridges as they could destroy towns in ETW.

[goro]

bring the damn console back.or at least another easy way to cheat .im not joking.1/4 of my campaigns in rome and medieval 2 was screwing around with the console experimenting just for the fun of it.for me its a must.if console is not possible because of new engine they should add options which are like console commands like many other games do

[Dodanodo]

new campaign map overhaul. the new system is fun and all, but it feels wrong for Rome. they should try to reinvent it. I have some suggestions, but they are to long to pen them down right now and CA wouldn't listen anyway.

[CK23]

Realistic Senate - Within the Roman faction, have the Senate be a serious force in driving your campaign, as the Senate was in actual Rome during the Republic.

Historical events - The obvious ones, punic wars, marian reforms, historical civil wars.

Republican Civil wars - During the Republic and even early Empire, random civil wars should sprout up, meaning, if you have a General of a Legion on the far flung banks of the Oder or the Rhine and they gain a certain amount of "disloyalty" and will revolt, if you are in the Republic phase, he might have supporters in Rome, or around the Republic which will lead to increased support for him in the Senate, or some of your lesser Generals rebelling and joining him.

Imperial Civil wars - If your in the Empire phase, your Emperor has a legitimacy rating, on a scale of 1 to 10, 1 being no legitimacy (basically a usurper or claimant) and 10 being full legitimacy (blood line, or extremely cemented power.) If your Emperor's legitimacy rating is low, disloyal generals will have the chance to either announce themselves as Emperor and create their own faction/empire, or they can band together and force you to abdicate to someone of their liking.

Also, an event can happen where if you "annoy" the Praetorian Prefect enough, the Praetorian Guard will kill your Emperor, and the heir will immediately take over or someone of their choosing, like a general or the praetorian prefect himself. Another method would be taking traits away from certain characters, such as a beloved General of a legion, if you remove him from command, he and his former legion, may rebel.

Transition to Empire- - Eventually an event will occur where you can transition to the Roman Empire or attempt to continue as the Republic.

Empire features - Ability to appoint Magister Militum, Magister Equatium and so on, these offices were important and decided the fate of the Empire, such offices should be allowed to be chosen at the players will, and taking them away from a character will have serious repercussions (see Imperial Civil Wars).

Ability to kill your own family members, faction members and generals - This happened in Rome, why can't it happen here? When you recruit an assassin, he can kill family members, faction members, generals, senators, obviously features such as killing enemy family members, faction members and so on can happen.

Thats all I haz for now.

[goro]

well your family members dont have free will.so unless their loyalty is low you shouldnt be able to kill them.there is no reason for that.it should work like shogun.where if a general is going to become ronin you have 2 options.

[MathiasOfAthens]

I just thought of a good idea. Make the Senate some sort of feature where you can actually see the members there. In the Republican phase you cant change the members but in the Imperial phase you can add or remove members but doing so would create friction and make others angry.

The idea though is Generals can be represented by supporters in the Senate and you can see this on the Senate menu. So if a Senate faction becomes too upset with you their supporters in Generals might rebel and show up on the map as a breakaway Roman faction. Perhaps they can found a competing Roman Empire or just work to seize Rome, IDK.

[Blatta Optima Maxima]

Expansions, covering different time periods in the general range, not neccesarily including Rome, BI 2.

[MathiasOfAthens]

Expansions, covering different time periods in the general range, not neccesarily including Rome, BI 2.

Shame because mods use to be able to change the maps and edit/add/remove regions but prob wont be able to anymore and that will inhibit new timeframes.. besides DLCs.

[BarSteward]

I would love a part more complex economic system that gives you more choice in how u finance ur army and develop. it would had a lot of option to the game. maybe add ur leaders personal wealth which he could use to gain favor in the senate?

[empr guy]

a more complex economic system would definitly improve this game ten fold, in the original rome once you got 10 ports you got some very good trade. IN empire they just made it stupid with everyone trading through 1 port and your provinces didnt trade between themselves., but at least they added the trade node concept. Now they just need it more in depth, with more options, etc.

Also, i think random events like in paradox games would be awsome. I mean, you see them in S2 but like 5 in the 100+ turn campaign....

[Veliky Kaiser Theos]

A campaign where the Ptolemies don't absorb half the map.

Heeyyyy.... It's post 666. Satan must love me.

[MathiasOfAthens]

a more complex economic system would definitly improve this game ten fold, in the original rome once you got 10 ports you got some very good trade. IN empire they just made it stupid with everyone trading through 1 port and your provinces didnt trade between themselves., but at least they added the trade node concept. Now they just need it more in depth, with more options, etc.

Also, i think random events like in paradox games would be awsome. I mean, you see them in S2 but like 5 in the 100+ turn campaign....

Exactly, greater diplomatic and economic options.

Perhaps they could add in an upgrade to port levels... sorta of like a side tier which is simply a warehouse. Build the warehouse so you can trade more.

A campaign where the Ptolemies don't absorb half the map.

Heeyyyy.... It's post 666. Satan must love me.

Also a problem with how few factions there were... when one gets steam rolled theres nothing to stop the steam roller from continuing. In real life there were logistical issues affecting troop movements. Rebellions, other hundreds of other powers and would be powers.

I would love for there to be more than 200 regions and almost every region representing a tribe... so when a city rebells the rebel faction isnt just something generic like "rebels" but an independent emergent faction like the a tribal name within the area.

This would make the game a lot more replayable. Each game would be different. The map would always evolve different... sometimes emergent powers could become major empires too. Plus its a good way to portray future events. Like the Parthians could be Emergent.

[Veliky Kaiser Theos]

I think that the Parthians should start like the Mongols in M2TW, with that foreboding music and the somewhat dramatic narration. Then the Yeuzhi should do that to the Sakas, and then the Sakas do that to the Bactrians and the Indo-Greeks. I would buy another Total War game if it had dramatic chain reactions like that. Or if it had a campaign system like Europa Universalis 3 where you can play from any date, and being able to use save games as new campaigns.

[MathiasOfAthens]

Except the Parthians were not a horde... they broke free as an already established Satrap in Eastern Iran.

[Veliky Kaiser Theos]

Except the Parthians were not a horde... they broke free as an already established Satrap in Eastern Iran.

By horde I meant emerging army without a region, like in BI.