How to keep the game fresh

[The True Roman]

We all know about how stale Total war game become near the end of the campaign. Endless Micro management of so many towns and siege after siege of that last hold out of your enemy's. So how would you like them to keep the game fresh even when it looks like nothing can stop you. I personally would really like it if they brought back Civil wars. They really can be a game changer consider you put all this effort to make a strong Faction then you have to chose what side your on and fight it out with the rest of your empire. Rea-merging factions would be good to, have a prince or a exiled king come back and re take the land lost in an old war. Because we need something unexpected to keep us caring about whats going on. I know they'll have the civil wars for the Romans but I would really like it if they had it for every faction.

[Heinz Guderian]

Like a Caesar vs Mark Antony if it meets certain campaign conditions? That would be cool. Remerging or hordeing factions would defo be great.

[Xerrop]

Civil Wars and Re-emerging factions?
Reminds me of good old Medieval1.

[Kinjo]

I loved the end of the M2TW campaign where you could travel to the Americas and battle the Aztecs. In Rome 2 I would still like that distant land that I can go to and explore and is extremely challenging to conquer. To me that should be India, I think it would be awesome to play as one of the Greek faction and try cross the Indus river and fight the massive armies of the Maurya Empire.

[cupoftea]

Implement some civil wars like Roma surrectum two did.

[The True Roman]

I loved the end of the M2TW campaign where you could travel to the Americas and battle the Aztecs. In Rome 2 I would still like that distant land that I can go to and explore and is extremely challenging to conquer. To me that should be India, I think it would be awesome to play as one of the Greek faction and try cross the Indus river and fight the massive armies of the Maurya Empire.

Ya that going to America was pretty cool but I wish it was more worth while. India should be like that for this game. Like that part of the map is blocked off until you reach a certain level in order to explore past a certain point.

[Lord Dakier]

Well I think there should be an attribute for every senator/general/family member based on their aggressiveness and honour.

Low Respect + High aggressiveness = Lowly Betrayal - A lowly general who could no doubt gather a few men to his cause, possibly a legion if good enough.
High Respect + High aggressiveness = Large-scale Betrayal - A senator, a few family or family member who could raise several legions even at a low level. Potentially capable of full civil war.

The idea is that someone with more respect of the people would no doubt gather more men. So gone would be the days of a carefree rebellion. Let's say a possible heir gets rejection of the throne and they command an army or control the city should they persuade the populace. Should they be an aggressive person by nature and feel they deserve it they should try so to take their claim.

[Destraex]

insane AI and Drop in\multi campaign

[He111]

A realm divide in Late Game would be great. I loved it in Medieval 1, so that you either could support the Royal Family or the Oppossing Forces.

[AngryTitusPullo]

To keep the game fresh ? How about play 10 minutes. Uninstall. Reinstall and play again for 10 minutes then repeat the cycle.

[Thefallenhun]

I'd just like to see a large number of factions balanced such that not the same ones get big in every game. Improving diplomatic tools and more economic features might help avoid "superpower syndrome" and see a more diverse mileau of alliances develop every game. Another good thing would be lots of variety between factions. Faction similarity really killed the replay value for me in S2. However, the basic game mechanics are going to be quite similair. I think that compared to most games, TW games have excellent replay value, if not quite on the same level as Civilization.

I think a pervasive problem in TW games is the singular goals. There is no way to win other than to conquer territory. This is coded into the AI which wants to win as well. So inevitably all AIs will seek territory, and some will win out over others leading the the establishment of large national blocs. It also complicates diplomacy because you can't keep allies. Both you and the AI know you're going to have to screw eachother over at some point, because that's how the game works. It would probably not fit within the scope of the game to include diplomatic, cultural, or scientific victories (it is total war after all), the objective of the game is going to make these late game scenarios inevitable. The only way I see to ameliorate it is make it harder mechanically to assemble a superpower.

[maximusdecimusm]

They should just implement what they already had back in Medieval 1. In that game, every so often civil wars would split my whole faction
and I would have to fight against my own beloved veterans. I think the civil wars should depend mostly upon your leader's authority
and popularity, as well as the ambition and popularity of high ranking generals who might be inclined to rebel.

[Shocked]

A good civil war system would be good

[Turkeys!]

Yeah definitely civil wars every now and then, It'd give more reason to not use one general too much, because then they might try to overthrow you :O

[Arakorn]

Shorter campaigns. I don't like to play the long ones anymore, I can't ever find the motivation to play them anymore. Short is more fun, and you have more time playing different factions!

[Fabricus]

The game will be fresh if they game is hard, really hard, but at the same time rewards you when you should be rewarded. In the original Rome, you never got enough money for taking rich settlements or winning battles(think about sacking their camp, stealing all that armor, and all that money! And making the survivors and their camp followers your slaves).

[magpie]

Civil wars are a must, Roman ones in particular, The legion against legion really leveled the playing field.

For those who are over the hill when it comes to the grand campaign. A Kingdoms style add on pack to cover the shorter historical campaigns of Rome or other nations.

Great buildings like the huge arena,s must be financed through the conquest and sacking of a rivals major city.Also this would further your generals political aims.

[RC-1136]

I think the main problem is that you are forced to build a huge empire. I think as a small Germanic tribe or even Carthage it shouldn't be the main goal to conquer but to sustain and gain influence. The conquest and holding of a province should be a remarkable event. Instead of that a small ambush, plundering and burning should play a larger part. For example the Celts which attacked Rome again and again didn't do it to build a larger empire but to make profit in wares and reputation.

[Xerrop]

I think the main problem is that you are forced to build a huge empire. I think as a small Germanic tribe or even Carthage it shouldn't be the main goal to conquer but to sustain and gain influence. The conquest and holding of a province should be a remarkable event. Instead of that a small ambush, plundering and burning should play a larger part. For example the Celts which attacked Rome again and again didn't do it to build a larger empire but to make profit in wares and reputation.

Good points. I also like smaller battles more than being forced to have constant full-stacks engagement in the late game. And the most interesting part is always the early game when a devasting battle could halt your expansion or bring serious trouble to your small realm.

Regarding the forced to build a huge empire part. The first two games of the series did it right with allowing more relaxed campaigns also.
In Shogun1 you had amongst others the Victory Condition of "surviving 70 years". Even when you had only one province left you got a Victory message. Another option was to level up your provinces and economy to the max and train a single Geisha or dozens of Ninjas. Just eliminate all other Daimyos (and their single or maximum two sons) to wipe out enemy factions and you got victory by being the only noble left in Japan. In my first Shimazu-campaign I had to conquer only 20 provinces during the early and midgame to have a secure border until I had leveled up my tech-tree enough for the Geisha-recruitment.

And in Medieval1 you had the "Glorious Achievements" were the faction with the most points won. Even when playing very passive and expanding not too I was able to win. Big factions that died during the campaign lost all their points, so when re-emerging they had to start from scratch. Was very fun to play a relaxed forced observation campaign where I supported smaller factions and raided larger factions territories until they collapsed.

[Kazuma Ieyasu]

-Civil Wars and Expanding to distant lands after completing a certain amount of task/reaching a certain amount of fame/respect as stated above are great ways to keep the fresh up.

-I also find that random events keep the game interesting too, anything from a marriage to a disaster (both human and natural disasters) to keep every game and campaign different.

-A variety in the types of factions are great as well, M2TW had variety, unlike Shogun 2 and FOTS, Rome 2 would last a lot longer if the CA keeps the variety in the game as Thefallenhun stated. But at the same time, keeping a balance between the units by having a strength and weakness for all units to keep the multiplayer battles interesting, basically enough balance to where every faction is useful in some way like M2TW and that players wont all stick to one BEST faction

Basic summary:
Civil Wars against your own people (killing your own men can bring some emotion to the game right?)
Random events and disasters
Large Variety with some balance