View Poll Results: Should CA change the way we get advanced units during game?

Voters
97. You may not vote on this poll
  • Make it easier and faster

    26 26.80%
  • Keep the current system

    46 47.42%
  • Make it harder and slower

    25 25.77%
Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 46

Thread: Should CA change the way we get advanced units during game?

Hybrid View

Previous Post Previous Post   Next Post Next Post
  1. #1

    Default Should CA change the way we get advanced units during game?

    Please, read this before voting!

    The process of getting new units step-by-step always was one of the core parts of Total War series. But for me this process always was too slow. Battles I fought in TW were between armies (both mine and AI) consisting of basic and middle-class units. I don't even remember when I saw top-class units in action... if ever. After ETW the process of getting advanced units became even longer, because we have both technologies to research and new levels of buildings to construct.

    Moreover most of the new units which we get later in game are just variations of already available units. Those differences are very little, but we spend long time on research, then time and a lot of money on construction. For me those efforts doesn't adequate to result.

    Note: "Advanced units" doesn't mean "elite units". It means units that you can recruit at next level of building, or at the first level of building if this building needs research to construct. For example, in S2TW even catana samurais are "advanced" units, because you need to research technology, then construct building for them. Same with spear samurais. So no-dachi and naginata samurai will be "more advanced", etc.

    So the question. Do you think that process of getting new units should be changed?

    Actually there is much more tricky dilemma with this question. I guess most of us want R2TW to be realistic and historical. Most of us want armies in TW fight not "mob vs mob" style, but in proper historically correct formations and make manoeuvres, outmanoeuvres, etc. Most of us want to see real Roman legions composed of certain set of troops. But will it all be possible if you will have to wait long time till you get principes, then triarii, etc.? Think about it

  2. #2

    Default Re: Should CA change the way we get advanced units during game?

    I think that elite units should be hard to get and indeed need a lot of effort to build. But what is then needed for this system to work is an interesting and challenging late-game, otherwise you never get to see those elite units in action. If the AI is not able to provide enough of a challenge late-game then we can hope for an improved 4 player Multiplayer Campaign (and even if it is up the challenge, I would like to see an improved MPC)!

  3. #3
    ccllnply's Avatar Tribunus
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Ireland
    Posts
    7,360

    Default Re: Should CA change the way we get advanced units during game?

    You have to have better units being harder to get, that's just common sense.

    I just wish they would return to the first Medieval's way of doing it. You had to have a combination of buildings before you can recruit certain units. So a Master Armourer would be useless unless you had a weaponsmith. It was so much more fun that way


  4. #4

    Default Re: Should CA change the way we get advanced units during game?

    I think the current one already good

    because I end up never use any elite units to fight the last battle ..... lol
    Its easy to make war with others, its never been easy when we need a peace.



    My holy damn simple tactic; Strike First, Strike HARD and SHOW NO MERCY.

  5. #5

    Default Re: Should CA change the way we get advanced units during game?

    They should be harder to get, and alot better but also in pretty short supply - you can't spam them. However the "middle-ground" units should also become more powerful, specifically higher morale.

  6. #6
    Irishman's Avatar Let me out of my mind
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Posts
    2,850

    Default Re: Should CA change the way we get advanced units during game?

    I'd prefer an experience system for elite units. My problem with Shogun, for instance, is that I spent all this time trying to get my Shimazu Katana Heroes, and by that time I had won the game. They weren't necessary. Instead, getting that "hero" unit or guard unit out of the katana samurai that had fought 85 battles with me from the beginning of the game would make more sense.

    It would also make units more important.

    It wouldn't work for all units of course. Something like a knight will always have to be trained since they were largely landed rich, and thus it wouldn't make sense to have your knight unit have to emerge from the pikemen.
    The flow of time is always cruel... its speed seems different for each person, but no one can change it... A thing that does not change with time is a memory of younger days...

    Under the perspicacious and benevolent patronage of the great and honorable Rez and a member of S.I.N


    He who joyfully marches to music rank and file, has already earned my contempt. He has been given a large brain by mistake, since for him the spinal cord would surely suffice. This disgrace to civilization should be done away with at once. Heroism at command, how violently I hate all this, how despicable and ignoble war is; I would rather be torn to shreds than be a part of so base an action. It is my conviction that killing under the cloak of war is nothing but an act of murder.

  7. #7

    Default Re: Should CA change the way we get advanced units during game?

    Shogun 2's research was too slow for my taste. In order to get anywhere within ten turns, you would need certain technologies to research to make even the most basic stuff useful. Then again, you could only research them one at a time. When you were researching military technologies, you were neglecting civilian tech and vice versa. Empire had a pretty decend system in theory as you still could speed up the research and research multiple technologies at a time. It made the campaign more interesting in my opinion. However, there were way too many tech trees. Three for military, three for agriculture/industry and three for philosophy.

    Rome II tech should be similar to Napoleon tech trees in my opinion. There would not be 21 different trees like in Empire, but about 2-3 different ones for culture, expansion/civilian tech and military technology.

  8. #8

    Default Re: Should CA change the way we get advanced units during game?

    Quote Originally Posted by Augustus Scipius View Post
    Shogun 2's research was too slow for my taste. In order to get anywhere within ten turns, you would need certain technologies to research to make even the most basic stuff useful. Then again, you could only research them one at a time. When you were researching military technologies, you were neglecting civilian tech and vice versa. Empire had a pretty decend system in theory as you still could speed up the research and research multiple technologies at a time. It made the campaign more interesting in my opinion. However, there were way too many tech trees. Three for military, three for agriculture/industry and three for philosophy.

    Rome II tech should be similar to Napoleon tech trees in my opinion. There would not be 21 different trees like in Empire, but about 2-3 different ones for culture, expansion/civilian tech and military technology.
    Not bad.

    Maybe there could be local buildings or something which allows you get advanced units sooner. Like Campus Martialis in Rome or military port of Carthage?

  9. #9

    Default Re: Should CA change the way we get advanced units during game?

    A couple of things on this. The first is the I believe all the faction units, unique or not, should be available to the at faction fairly quickly.

    Secondly, I've no problem constructing a building or researching a tech to make this happen ----IF that tech is immediately available in all cities and regions under my control.

    I should not have to construct same building in the same time frame in every region/city under my control to get a unit I can already recruit elsewhere. Pay a small fee to upgrade is OK but not take the same number of turns to build as the original.

    "The trouble with facts is that there are so many of them." - Samuel McChord Crothers

  10. #10

    Default Re: Should CA change the way we get advanced units during game?

    Quote Originally Posted by douglas View Post
    A couple of things on this. The first is the I believe all the faction units, unique or not, should be available to the at faction fairly quickly.

    Secondly, I've no problem constructing a building or researching a tech to make this happen ----IF that tech is immediately available in all cities and regions under my control.

    I should not have to construct same building in the same time frame in every region/city under my control to get a unit I can already recruit elsewhere. Pay a small fee to upgrade is OK but not take the same number of turns to build as the original.

    This is what u mean, I play as the Roman, I conquered Alexandria from Egypt and all Roman building will appear out of nowhere.... k

  11. #11

    Default Re: Should CA change the way we get advanced units during game?

    What do you mean by advanced?

    I suppose you mean elite units, right?

    Then I think the current system is fine.

    I do think that core units should be available ASAP. Make research or whatever they implement make those core units better.

  12. #12

    Default Re: Should CA change the way we get advanced units during game?

    Quote Originally Posted by windsupernova View Post
    What do you mean by advanced?

    I suppose you mean elite units, right?
    Not actually. By "advanced" I mean units that you can currently recruit at next level of building, or at the first level of building if this building needs research to construct.

    For example, in S2TW even catana samurais are "advanced" units, because you need to research technology, then construct building for them. Same with spear samurais. So no-dachi and naginata samurai will be "more advanced", etc.

  13. #13

    Default Re: Should CA change the way we get advanced units during game?

    Quote Originally Posted by windsupernova View Post
    What do you mean by advanced?

    I suppose you mean elite units, right?

    Then I think the current system is fine.

    I do think that core units should be available ASAP. Make research or whatever they implement make those core units better.
    Tech research he means
    Its easy to make war with others, its never been easy when we need a peace.



    My holy damn simple tactic; Strike First, Strike HARD and SHOW NO MERCY.

  14. #14
    AngryTitusPullo's Avatar Comes Limitis
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Kuala Lumpur
    Posts
    13,018

    Default Re: Should CA change the way we get advanced units during game?

    I prefer the current system. CA can then sell DLC to insta-unlock elite units.


    CIVITATVS CVM AVGVSTVS XVI, MMVI
    IN PATROCINIVM SVB Dromikaites SVB MareNostrum SVB Quintus Maximus
    Want to know more about Rome II Total Realism ? Follow us on Twitter & Facebook

  15. #15

    Default Re: Should CA change the way we get advanced units during game?

    Quote Originally Posted by LestaT View Post
    I prefer the current system. CA can then sell DLC to insta-unlock elite units.
    I Agree 100% here, the current system is not bad.

  16. #16

    Default Re: Should CA change the way we get advanced units during game?

    Hrmm.. I think it should be more complex then a matter of just "upgrading to the next building level" i.e. Barracks ---> Advanced Barracks

    Maybe through battle experience.. A line infantry can become a sharp shooter or a melee oriented unit depending on how you used that line infantry in battle. Where tech would come in is improved bayonets and rifles and depending on the upgrade would allow for a new a ability such as a quick burst in accuracy. Just an example. When I think about it though.. this would just be expanding that chevron ranking system. Maybe they should.. instead of making line infantry v1.0, then line infantry v1.2, then v1.5, then finally line infantry v2.0 and having the balls to say there will be hundreds of units in the game. How do you unlock all these versions? by upgrading the goddamn barracks of course..

    Then what should advanced barracks be for? Well I don't know tommy.. how about something that isn't a new and improved line infantry?

  17. #17

    Default Re: Should CA change the way we get advanced units during game?

    Actually there is much more tricky dilemma with this question. I guess most of us want R2TW to be realistic and historical. Most of us want armies in TW fight not "mob vs mob" style, but in proper historically correct formations and make manoeuvres, outmanoeuvres, etc. Most of us want to see real Roman legions composed of certain set of troops. But will it all be possible if you will have to wait long time till you get principes, then triarii, etc.? Think about it

  18. #18

    Default Re: Should CA change the way we get advanced units during game?

    There could be an alternate system for acquiring more advanced units without having to build specific buildings, but the process would be more expensive, time consuming, greater upkeep and have a cap on the number recruitable.
    Eats, shoots, and leaves.

  19. #19
    hochmeister devin's Avatar Senator
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    halifax nova scotia
    Posts
    1,397

    Default Re: Should CA change the way we get advanced units during game?

    What CA should do is let each faction have atleast 1 city where they can recruit the units they used at game start, so rome gets princepes and triarii, hellenisitic factions macedonian phalanxs and heavy cavalry, etc. I want no more crap like medieval or rome where everyone starts with peasants and low quality levy troops, thats ridiculas they should get everything they could recruit at games start. Unless CA found sources saying the punic wars was fought with roman peasant mobs vs carthagianian peasant mobs...
    Last edited by hochmeister devin; September 13, 2012 at 08:50 PM. Reason: Spelt punic wrong...
    My mods
    -Mod Leader for the Wheel Of Time This is not the beginning, but it is a beginning
    -Mod Leader for Shogun 2: Foreign Invasion if you want a mod with alot of units this is for you, not only is there the 40 units CA made theres planned to be atleast 177 NEW units when its done.
    -Modder in the World War I and Shogun II project. The only full scale mod for FOTS and it plays nothing like FOTS. FOTS may have Gatling guns, WW1&S2 has tekidanto samurai, SNLF, MGs, kisho snipers, assault infantry(shotguns) just to name a few.

  20. #20
    AngryTitusPullo's Avatar Comes Limitis
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Kuala Lumpur
    Posts
    13,018

    Default Re: Should CA change the way we get advanced units during game?

    Quote Originally Posted by hochmeister devin View Post
    What CA should do is let each faction have atleast 1 city where they can recruit the units they used at game start, so rome gets princepes and triarii, hellenisitic factions macedonian phalanxs and heavy cavalry, etc. I want no more crap like medieval or rome where everyone starts with peasants and low quality levy troops, thats ridiculas they should get everything they could recruit at games start. Unless CA found sources saying the pubic wars was fought with roman peasant mobs vs carthagianian peasant mobs...


    CIVITATVS CVM AVGVSTVS XVI, MMVI
    IN PATROCINIVM SVB Dromikaites SVB MareNostrum SVB Quintus Maximus
    Want to know more about Rome II Total Realism ? Follow us on Twitter & Facebook

Page 1 of 3 123 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
  •