Feature requests - what's missing from Total War?

[CraigTW]

Mods, feel free to sticky this or move to a more appropriate forum

Hi guys,

As you know we've always listened to our community. Whether it be from the inclusion of naval battles, or in expanding the multiplayer functionality of our games - we've always taken community feedback seriously at the highest level.

So I'm asking you what you'd most like to see in future Total War games or expansions. What features would you like that you feel are missing from the game?

Please don't use this thread to complain about bugs - but feel free to be as specific as you like about features you're interested in.

Be imaginative, be honest and you never know, they might end up in an expansion or in the next major incarnation of Total War!

Craig

[Wodeson]

Of all the various things I'd like to see, Modding Tools are at the top of my own personal wish list.

[alhoon]

Of all the various things I'd like to see, Modding Tools are at the top of my own personal wish list.

That.

Or at least a campaign map that doesn't need a PhD to decode so we could make changes to it.

ALSO:
Perhaps a document or something to help modders understand how things work. The map guys working on the pathfinding for example, need some help. 2-3 pages on the back of the manual would go a long way to improve modability. At the very least they would make the public aware that there are mods and work being done with them.

[Juvenal]

Total War needs a battlefield chain-of-command system.

Instead of direct god-like control of your generic 20-unit army, you should instead be interacting with your senior commanders who in turn fight the battle for you.

This system can be as easy or complex as the player wants. Subordinate commanders can have traits which affect their interpretation of your orders, ranging from rash hot-heads to cautious safety-first types. They can also have different abilities, some able to coordinate large groups of units while others put themselves at the head of their favoured formation and use their charisma to inspire it to do great deeds.

The player would create a battle plan during the deployment phase, then watch it executed during the battle, giving new orders and setting senior commander objectives and stances as the situation unfolds.

Chain of command permits larger battles with more interesting events. Having played a decisive battle, the player should be able to go back and review the replay to find out exactly why things didn't go as planned.

[alhoon]

Total War needs a battlefield chain-of-command system.

Instead of direct god-like control of your generic 20-unit army, you should instead be interacting with your senior commanders who in turn fight the battle for you.

Actually, I wouldn't like that at all. I prefer the god-like control of my units.

[Juvenal]

Actually, I wouldn't like that at all. I prefer the god-like control of my units.

Without chain-of-command you are stuck with the 20-unit limit for all eternity.

[|Quintus Sertorius|]

Without chain-of-command you are stuck with the 20-unit limit for all eternity.

As I said in a previous post, one can already play with up to 80 units per army easily. They just have to change the UI to allow that many units. Most people can play fine without the UI though...

You idea of a chain of command does sound interesting though!

[Peachum]

Total War needs a battlefield chain-of-command system.

Instead of direct god-like control of your generic 20-unit army, you should instead be interacting with your senior commanders who in turn fight the battle for you.

This system can be as easy or complex as the player wants. Subordinate commanders can have traits which affect their interpretation of your orders, ranging from rash hot-heads to cautious safety-first types. They can also have different abilities, some able to coordinate large groups of units while others put themselves at the head of their favoured formation and use their charisma to inspire it to do great deeds.

The player would create a battle plan during the deployment phase, then watch it executed during the battle, giving new orders and setting senior commander objectives and stances as the situation unfolds.

Chain of command permits larger battles with more interesting events. Having played a decisive battle, the player should be able to go back and review the replay to find out exactly why things didn't go as planned.

Hear! Hear! At least make it an option. I want to feel like a real general.

1) Also, more units on the battlefield. Possibly a "soft" limit; the larger an army is, the bigger logistical problems you face and also the more difficult it is to control, so there is a "practical" size of the army.

2) Possibly differentiate from levees and elite units and also experience levels by the complexity of maneuvers it can pull off. For example, peasants may not be able to do much more than stand still or charge in straight. Any more complex orders can disorganize it. Of course, everything subject to historical accuracy.

3) Decisive Battles! sure, there may be lots of skirmishes, but I want wars to end with a long cat and mouse chase by the opposing armies trying to cut off the others supplies, gaining advantageous ground etc. before a climatic battle where one side has its back broken for years.

Lastly it would nice to really have a 30,000 men or whatever on the battlefield.

[Vasa]

Total War needs a battlefield chain-of-command system.

Instead of direct god-like control of your generic 20-unit army, you should instead be interacting with your senior commanders who in turn fight the battle for you.

This system can be as easy or complex as the player wants. Subordinate commanders can have traits which affect their interpretation of your orders, ranging from rash hot-heads to cautious safety-first types. They can also have different abilities, some able to coordinate large groups of units while others put themselves at the head of their favoured formation and use their charisma to inspire it to do great deeds.

The player would create a battle plan during the deployment phase, then watch it executed during the battle, giving new orders and setting senior commander objectives and stances as the situation unfolds.

Chain of command permits larger battles with more interesting events. Having played a decisive battle, the player should be able to go back and review the replay to find out exactly why things didn't go as planned.

Excellent idea. If the objective of the series is to emulate war, the battle system is overdue for an overhaul like the one Juvenal has suggested.

[Steph]

What I'd like to see in NTW (DLC or expansion):

I'll try to focus on things which are not too drastic and I hope could be reasonnably done. Also, I don't think it's important here to request more units, more historical accuracy, as we can do most of that with mods. So it's more relative to giving the proper opportunity to modders with a few changes in the engine.

1) Fix the voice issue. I want to be able to edit which voice to play for every unit when I mod. There seems to be XML/CSV file for that, we need a way to actually take benefits from it.
2) Possibility to have marching music configurable per faction
3) Possibility to add/edit region. Or at least a campaign map with a few more regions. I don't think we need hundred mores, but split the biggest ones (like France, England or Spain) in 3 or 4. It may be nice if the small nations have at two regions so they can't be conquered in only one go.
4) Built in possibility to select any faction in the grand campaign.
5) Cavalry flag bearer
6) Bagpipe for the Scots
7) Being able to add unit classes
8) Changing a little the recruitment, so units can be recruited outside of settlement. For instance, I'd like to be able to recruit cavalry directly in a horse pasture, or infantry in a city with small gun factory (at the moment, if you make the horse pasture allowing a cavalry unit, it becomes available, but only in the region capitable)
9) For building, add an effect "reduce upkeep cost" (with option for all, artillery, cavalry, artillery)
10) Being able to make units "upgradable" ( a bit like the transformation of units when changing government)

[Shaxx]

Outside of modding tools, definitely expanded Diplomacy features like giving/demanding settlements for peace. Or selling them outside of war.

Also, a lot of the old Shogun features, as mentioned a post or two above, like it's Throne room and it's videos when a new Daimyo rises etcetera.

Then, some Medieval 2 features, like the bigger more interesting forts and cities... sprawling streets, builldings you made on the battlemap, and more spacious fortifications and battlemaps. They get pretty cramped as is, and do not have as much of the 'epic' feel as previous total war games, Rome and Medieval 2.

The 'view City' option would be a great returning feature, that is, anyway, along with the return of sprawling cities as mentioned of above.

Basically, whatever was removed from the originals that was awesome, needs added back... so far, the Graphics increase with each release... but we have less toys to play with. No fun at all!

[gcybill]

Two Type of Battle which you can choose before start to play campaign:

1. Original Battle

2. Role-playing Battle
In this type of battle, you will be and will only control your General and your General's unit. The differences will be much.

Before battle start (Deployment mode), you could do:

• Setup formation
• Send spy to scout enemy's army if you bring spy along. Spy can be killed while spying or cancel because too dangerous. Spy can give you the formation of enemy if success.
• Setup the unit tactic for each unit regarding vs enemy unit / type. For example:

• "Against hoplites, only charge the flank",
• "Charge rear for everyone",
• "Fall back to formation if unit number below ##",
• "Shoot arrow when no friendly unit around",
• Even you allow us to mod this tactics to allow more personal tactic

In battle, you could do:

• issue command to whole army to march in formation to somewhere.
• issue command for unit to start engage the enemy or start the tactic.
• chain of command and area of command. As general, you command using loud voice which will be heard not that far away. Units which in your area of command will act directly after you issue order. For unit which is further will act late. More realistic.
• area of vision for each unit, this could act as a trigger to more complicated outcome. Like if no friendly unit seen around but you're being outnumber alone, start to run away. The unit could back to your formation and start fighting again. If the unit really don't see other unit until chased away outside the battle area, the unit routed.
• you could change the tactic for specific unit which is not engaging any enemy at the current time. Your general need to go near that unit to order, though.
• etc, etc, etc feature you could think on your own.

[Jedi]

I think battle realism mode should be added to multiplayer in future totalwar games.There are a lot of us who do not like the arcade banners and radar and with shogun now showing the debuffs like warcry on banners you are basically being forced into using them.Its so ugly CA have not once released a TW trailer using floating banners!

This would also make choosing ambush spots a feature of online tactics as well as making forests something to be feared! Even if u cant get rid of banners but can restrict the camera and have no radar you could just use the prettier NTW style floating Icons instead.



Another feature i would like to see is a smaller challange style map that is basically putting two players 1v1 in a mini campaign mode with 2 towns on a randomly generated map that has the same landscapes on either side but reversed so the maps are balanced and mirror like.Basically the same small kind of maps used in DOTA and Heroes of Newerth.

This gives players no reason to camp as it would be silly to be the invader and camp in someone's province.This enables you to get rid of the shrines feature and gives armies on the battlefield an objective where losing all your men can mean the end of the game.

Cities would also start off almost at max size giving players all the units but giving them trade and spy networks to build up instead and would make games faster due to lacking the need to build from low tier citys.


If you combine both these ideas into a 1v1 campaign with battle realism mode u have the most epic totalwar feature we have had in a long time.Infact if i thought this feature would make it into the next totalwar game i would hand over my money for pre order right now even if i did not know what the new title was.

[RedDeath]

Of all the various things I'd like to see, Modding Tools are at the top of my own personal wish list.

this x 1,000,000

[r3deed]

wish we can build cities , towns, colonies and fortress as long as we have the resources and the armies. no limit on that. yet Im wondering if we could represent them in the campaign map as a simple icons or an Images since the 3d model could cause some lag. unless you provide an option to either show a 2d or 3d model by pressing a certain key.

also, how about providing an interface similar to the one in paradox strategy game.

regarding trading we want to see more features like: different goods and how they affect or put prusseure on other factions. assume that one nation need to occupy a resource that provide gunpowder or should make an agreement with other naions to get gunpowder so that it can recruit musket or artillarey pieces.

there should be a constant supply of certain goods to make the population happy. depending on what nation you play.

perhapse spices to indians, tea to english and tobacoo to turkish.

regarding the acheivements how about presenting them in the game like this:




bragining about that before other players.

perhapse your general could wear some medals as he stand on the battelfield

[Birk]

Of all the various things I'd like to see, Modding Tools are at the top of my own personal wish list.

Same here. I'd like to see mods like Stainless Steel which was to MTW2 in the next TW game.
http://www.twcenter.net/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=314

Be able to customize the Sergeants/Troop leader of the troops would been awesome and maybe give them some skills? Like leadership? So if you general die An experienced troop leader can take the lead, and become promoted to a general or another noble title if he have proven that he is a great leader. If you don't have any experienced troop leaders in your army they will easily route.

Visible changes when upgrading an unit. Like armor and weapons.

Options to customize clothing on generals.

[Requies]

Possibility to save game on battle! On singleplayer I mean..

[fd7s]

more terrain styles and castle styles please

[MathiasOfAthens]

more terrain styles and castle styles please

I think the terrain improvements since M2TW have been huge already. But I agree with more castle styles, more uniqueness to cities. Maybe even a design your own kind of function while on the campaign map. Give the player the option of setting down barriers in front of the gates or building the gate on a certain side or other features to the city/castle in battle.

Another feature I would love that would fit well for Rome2 is river naval battles. Some rivers were very wide and Rome especially crossed them with barges or river boats. Perhaps there could be a type of intercept battle where there player fights trying to cross or defend a river with a bridge. So the AI or the player lands his ships with troops onto the other side. Obvious take a lot of work with the AI but I think it could be done. Similar to how the AI used rams and ladders.

And another feature would be to allow bridge crossings to be upgradeable and destructible on the campaign map like towns were in ETW/NTW. For example a player can place his army on a bridge and select an option to destroy it, reverting it back to just a river ford.

I would also love to see fortified bridges with forts on one side on the battlement. It would really create a chokehold feeling on the campaign map.

Oh and please for the love of God if the next game is going to be Rome2 dont make borders that extend into deserts like in M2TW the Algerian border... Make desert regions unconquerable like in ETW... I like liked certain border regions in there. But another problem with the borders is a lack of regions. France was one whole region so if a faction wanted a piece of it they had to take all of it... boring to say the least. So if the next game is Rome2 I hope there are hundreds of tiny regions alone to represent villages and tribes. Sure it will take a lot of work but it will be far worse if you just make one huge region for all of Northern Italy or another huge region for Southern France or whatever...

So please realistic borders that dont extend into the deserts. North African regions that resemble the border lines of Rome in North Africa. Plenty of small regions that allow the player to create a unique empire with a different combination of regions.

[Shogun17]

more terrain styles and castle styles please

Yes, plus the ability to place various traps and defensive elements