Alternative victories ?

[PROMETHEUS ts]

I was thinking that could be nice to have alternative ways to win the game that doesn'T solely rely on the conquests and expansions....

What about cultural victory:

Like if your faction evolves so much by culture that all neightbouring ones start to imitate and change their own to yours ... Like what happened with Romans at contact with Etruscans and greeks... The same could happen with a barbarian tribe at contact with greeks for example ... Orviceversa if the level of celtic culture gets to new peacks the greeks could celtify themselves. In tyle without having to conquer them...

Diplomatic victory :

Beeing able to survive among big powers by extreme usage of diplomacy , pacts , alliances , trate etc... Particularly suitted. For small cities or endependant little states for example...

Religious victory :

Based on assuming a dominant religion and getting that spread among other foreign nations up to detronize local rulers in favour of the new faith and join your causes...

Intellectual victory :

When the achievements in sience , from engeneering to mathematics etc create a vast difference between the surrounding factions that will be subdued by the superiority of technology and knowledge similarly to the cultural victory but regarding sience and discoveries....

Commercial victory :

When the faction reaches to dominate all then known world markets , trade routes etc...and by playing with the foreign nations economy have the power tomput them to knees withoutnn needing the use of weapons

Some of them could be mutually exclusive

[weirdoascensor]

Totally Agree with this excellent Proposal, Sir...

[AgentGB]

I already patented this idea! But yes i agree, much like some of the paradox games, so it invite people to try different play styles then just conquest maybe. Having more then one way to skin a cat, could allow for some smart mulitplayer campaigns, but would only be truely enjoyable if the the amount of players that could play was increased in the campaign.

Against the ai, singleplayer, im not sure if the ai will be challenging enough, since like the paradox games, it isn't hard to beat the ai in that either, apart from great britain in victoria 2. Thats a prestige beast.

[TheRomanRuler]

Great proposal

[Muizer]

It's not a bad idea per se, but if you think about it, it goes well beyond just the victory conditions. It presupposes that all these are proper gameplay arena's as it were. If the game is all about war and battles with just perfunctory portrayal of politics, commerce, religion etc. (like in the original), such alternative victory conditions would not make sense.

[AgentGB]

It's not a bad idea per se, but if you think about it, it goes well beyond just the victory conditions. It presupposes that all these are proper gameplay arena's as it were. If the game is all about war and battles with just perfunctory portrayal of politics, commerce, religion etc. (like in the original), such alternative victory conditions would not make sense.

Thats a good point, i was thinking along the terms that maybe it should be represented some how to make the player pay attention to these developments, since in Shogun, many people seemed to be posting threads wondering why the whole of japan would be attacking them mid game, not actually paying attention to there standing. During a multiplayer campaign i had, i managed to pay of alot of factions and my vassals of my friend to fight against him, inciting revolts, opening up near front lines to draw troops away from expanding toward the shogunate, and allowing myself to catch up. At this point our play styles change and everything in the game was utilised to get the upper hand on each other. The amount of gold we pumped into diplomacy was incredible, but it was working.

in singleplayer, its not so much a problem with diplomacy, religion etc, since we all end up attempting to paint the known world one colour. But maybe seeing the ai forming confederations and such, should be enough to make me look at my diplomacy screen every now and then, since when i play as rome, there will only be conquest by the sword.

[Toho]

I also hope that winning and the game do not force you to just snow ball the entire map at the later stages of the game.if I want to diplomatically win or win economically I should be able too!as Carthage I want to recreate the maritime empire that they never got complete and I don't want to conquer half of Europe and north Africa just to achieve it, some key locations will suit me just fine.

[TheCzech]

So pretty much just like Civilization.

[Ultra123]

indeed sounds exactly like civ to me. not sure on the science victory, its not like your going to be able to hit space age for example. however the rest are valid points, like the trade one especially

[Alpha TWC]

Or an option for No victory conditions at all... just "survive".

[Ultra123]

totally agree alpha i dont normally stop after victory conditions are done in my games in RTW:1 i conquered the entire map with all my fav factions, if i 'won' my vic conditions it was usually by accident on my part! thanks to this my campaigns can usually take months to complete and even longer if i have more then one on the go.

[Trixie]

These are actually pretty good ideas, if implemented right that is. I could imagine dominating the market so your faction can hold sway on foreign affairs like a hegemonic power. Holding any of these powers can have your faction's voice carry more weight in diplomacy.

[Inhuman One]

Could never hurt to have these options.

It would encourage more defensive games. there will always be battles so no need to worry about that. Can be as many battles as the player wants there to be. If another faction has far more wealth than you and the campaign is won by who obtains the most, you could go to war with this rival to cripple their assets.

[D E C]

These all sound pretty good to me. Personally I would like a mix of these conditions and a few notable provinces for one set of victory conditions (for somebody who would want a more balanced game) and another set based more on steamrolling the map (for somebody in the mood for a more aggressive style).

[Petroniu]

If this was a Paradox game, yes, but this is a TW game, you know, a Total War game? Victory should be achieved through war, that is the purpose of this game. While I do agree that the TW games need more depth in those matters, victory shouldn't be related only to the war factor. That is what I believe at least.

[torongill]

I was thinking that could be nice to have alternative ways to win the game that doesn'T solely rely on the conquests and expansions....

What about cultural victory: Like if your faction evolves so much by culture that all neightbouring ones start to imitate and change their own to yours ... Like what happened with Romans at contact with Etruscans and greeks... The same could happen with a barbarian tribe at contact with greeks for example ... Orviceversa if the level of celtic culture gets to new peacks the greeks could celtify themselves. In tyle without having to conquer them... Diplomatic victory : Beeing able to survive among big powers by extreme usage of diplomacy , pacts , alliances , trate etc... Particularly suitted. For small cities or endependant little states for example... Religious victory : Based on assuming a dominant religion and getting that spread among other foreign nations up to detronize local rulers in favour of the new faith and join your causes... Intellectual victory : When the achievements in sience , from engeneering to mathematics etc create a vast difference between the surrounding factions that will be subdued by the superiority of technology and knowledge similarly to the cultural victory but regarding sience and discoveries.... Commercial victory : When the faction reaches to dominate all then known world markets , trade routes etc...and by playing with the foreign nations economy have the power tomput them to knees withoutnn needing the use of weapons Some of them could be mutually exclusive

Sounds interesting, but reminds me of this:



As for the "intellectual victory", the example of the Mongols and the Abbasid Caliphate comes to mind. Alternatively you can check out the last episode of the new History channel series "Vikings"

Commercial victory - this was not really possible in ancient times. Besides, Carthage was the commercial powerhouse of the Med and we all know how this worked out
Spoilers ahoy, not censored

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

[NitzanLeo]

Some of these make good sense, though I find the religious victory and commercial victory silly. The commercial victory can easily be swiped away by any nation with a stronger military. And the religious one... I don't know, I don't like it. I think that religion will be more a helping mechanic to your nation rather than a powerful mechanic that can bring your nation safety like military, political or economical power.

[B. W.]

I like the idea in general, although your ideas might be asking for too much. I was hoping for something along the lines of a "Prestige Victory" such as that in Empire...But you're right, there should be victory options to suite different moods of play.

[Deafening Milk]

Yes, it is civ like but i dont see whats wrong with taking ideas from another game if it is to improve another. If no ideas were taken from other games ever then thered be a lot less and a lot worse games around

[myaku]

No, I do not think this is a good idea. Military should be central to Total War. It isn't Civilization (which is my second favorite game series) or a Paradox game. This should be reflected in the victory condition. That, or there shouldn't be victory conditions at all.