On Diplomacy, how to advance it
I know the game is called total war, but wouldn't it be quite cool to be able to achieve victory in other ways too? Like in the old medieval 1 where you have Victory based on glory of the nation.
In most tw games as far as I know, the computer attacks you if it considers you weak, e.g you have weak borders, or one of your provinces is poorly guarded. I think total war games would benefit from a more nuanced approach to politics.
States/factions hostility to you should/could be based on their percieved level of threat of you.
As a modern example, even though hypothetical, France doesn't consider England a threat to their security, even though close proximity, and much military forces, but prob do get more worried if Russia builds up it's arsenal, for various reasons, even though Russia is much further away geographically.
In some cases, military or show of force should be able to deter other factions from attacking, or make them act more cautious. But at the same time, building up your military strenght could just as easily make other factions more hostile to you, them, percieving your military build up, or making of aliences as a hostile action against them.
Seeing how CA wants rome 2 to have factions with different personalities, I think this is a good oppurtunity to implement these kind of aspects to the game.
Instead of just factions acting different diplomatically, that is based on their cultures or norms, it should also matter what kind of leader they have, e.g. attributes and ancilliaries, like how paranoid that leader is. Furthermore one leader could be belicose while another more peaceful in his ways.
Some leaders/factions, might exercise more soft power, e.g. more often trying to manipulate other, smaller factions's politics through their own faction's influence, economically, culturally, as well as militarilly, while others factions/leaders exercise more raw power, or hard power, choosing a more direct way, e.g wars to make other factions bow to their will.
Wars were very much a part of the Roman age, but they didn't always lead to complete conquest, or at least not the destruction of a nation, and even less so in later eras. It should be expensive to wage wars, in rtw 1 I didnt see the need to make peace so much, since if i was winning the war I might as well take all of their lands. Peace treaties should be easier to achieve.. demands on the loser as well, meanwhile it should be more difficult/expensive to wage wars.
This is just some thoughts.. what do you think?
Reply With Quote
