Attila - Introducing the changes (OP updated October 22nd)

[Noif de Bodemloze]

Awesome news!

[Julio-Claudian]

-smaller faction's attitude towards other factions are solely based on the faction leader, for example if you are friendly with the franks and their faction leader dies and the heir that comes into power hates you, then that faction will become far more aggressive towards you

Looooove this. Something I've always wanted.

[Kahvipannu]

-smaller faction's attitude towards other factions are solely based on the faction leader, for example if you are friendly with the franks and their faction leader dies and the heir that comes into power hates you, then that faction will become far more aggressive towards you

Looooove this. Something I've always wanted.

Yup. It should be characters colliding, shaping the history of entire nations, that is how you get your "TW-stories". Rome 2 had none of that, I'm very happy CA is going back to family-trees and such.

[❋ Flavius Belisarius ❋]

-armies can still transport over sea but in doing so will inflict strong penalties such as sea sickness and other effects

Good news as well. Make you think twice before invading an oversea country or make it more difficult to send help to the father terretories.
But this concern mainly the Romans factions.

-Civilians are not controllable, however it is a random generated choice as to whether they want to flee or fight. Civilians will be doing day to day stuff on the battlefield, (farming etc) and will then decide their action. If they flee they can either run into buildings and hide or (I assumed go off the map) if that building is on fire or about to be destroyed then the civilians will run out of them.

This is very good I'm wondering if we'll be able to order our army to attack foe's civilian or they will fight only if they are on the way.


I'm really optimistic when it's come to this game, CA wil never take the risk to ruin it after what happened.

[The Useless Member]

-smaller faction's attitude towards other factions are solely based on the faction leader, for example if you are friendly with the franks and their faction leader dies and the heir that comes into power hates you, then that faction will become far more aggressive towards you

If that's what I think it is, kudos to CA. This feature is some CK2 . Finally, some sort of emphasis on characters.

[Maximinus Thrax]

Similar threads merged.

[VINC.23]

http://www.twcenter.net/forums/showt...ng-the-changes
I guess that sailling ship is something to transport troops...isn't?
How it will move?
Can we expect the wind energy coexisting with the oars power? Having galeres using both oars and sails, and transport ships using only the sails.


Please, don't put oars on that, reintroduce the wind like in Empire!

[AnthoniusII]

Well judging the Pre-Alpha I have to point out some changes that "never came"!

• Fully walled cities : Reason AI can not order horsemen to leave their horses and asault as infantry. That is why CA chosen the Rise of Samurai consept!
• More building slots for cities. Still AI will be "forced" to build barracks to increase the defense of its settlements and eventually die from hanger!
• Unhistorical use of siege machines by "barbarians" : reason even with the low barigate wall feature AI seems that can not asault with large number of ladders or rams or siege towers and AI needs catapults etc! From the leaked 2 min video it seems that AI needs more work to reach BI AI level!!!
• Limited armies to the number of generals with no option of reinforcents feature.
• No buildable wooden or stone forts for Romans and Sassanids that were masters of fortifications!
• Still the same basic idea of food/public order penalties for buildings!!!!!!
• Still the same "fool" idea of techonological development! It seems that CA thinks that people of that time needed to learn what they knew for thousands of year again and again!

I hope that CA will prove me wrong but the apearence of the low wooden barigates -same as RiOS- that warriors can go over them makes me clear that CA AI developers have NOT yet find solutions in siege tactics! That is why "tunnels" are still missing from a TW game!

[Causeless]

Well judging the Pre-Alpha I have to point out some changes that "never came"!

• Fully walled cities : Reason AI can not order horsemen to leave their horses and asault as infantry. That is why CA chosen the Rise of Samurai consept!
• More building slots for cities. Still AI will be "forced" to build barracks to increase the defense of its settlements and eventually die from hanger!
• Unhistorical use of siege machines by "barbarians" : reason even with the low barigate wall feature AI seems that can not asault with large number of ladders or rams or siege towers and AI needs catapults etc! From the leaked 2 min video it seems that AI needs more work to reach BI AI level!!!
• Limited armies to the number of generals with no option of reinforcents feature.
• No buildable wooden or stone forts for Romans and Sassanids that were masters of fortifications!
• Still the same basic idea of food/public order penalties for buildings!!!!!!
• Still the same "fool" idea of techonological development! It seems that CA thinks that people of that time needed to learn what they knew for thousands of year again and again!

I hope that CA will prove me wrong but the apearence of the low wooden barigates -same as RiOS- that warriors can go over them makes me clear that CA AI developers have NOT yet find solutions in siege tactics! That is why "tunnels" are still missing from a TW game!

• Fully walled cities : Reason AI can not order horsemen to leave their horses and asault as infantry. That is why CA chosen the Rise of Samurai consept!

There are already fully-walled cities. That's a pre-damaged city due to the siege escalation system. And this is nothing like Rise of the Samurai...

• Unhistorical use of siege machines by "barbarians" : reason even with the low barigate wall feature AI seems that can not asault with large number of ladders or rams or siege towers and AI needs catapults etc! From the leaked 2 min video it seems that AI needs more work to reach BI AI level!!!

Those walls cannot be climbed. Only the barricades can. Calm down, we don't know how the AI will be yet... EE siege AI was decent...

• Limited armies to the number of generals with no option of reinforcents feature.

Who said there would be no reinforcements feature? This is just guesswork on your part.

• No buildable wooden or stone forts for Romans and Sassanids that were masters of fortifications!

Again, guesswork. Fortifications have been neither announced nor denied...

[AnthoniusII]

Well judging the Pre-Alpha I have to point out some changes that "never came"!

• Fully walled cities : Reason AI can not order horsemen to leave their horses and asault as infantry. That is why CA chosen the Rise of Samurai consept!
• More building slots for cities. Still AI will be "forced" to build barracks to increase the defense of its settlements and eventually die from hanger!
• Unhistorical use of siege machines by "barbarians" : reason even with the low barigate wall feature AI seems that can not asault with large number of ladders or rams or siege towers and AI needs catapults etc! From the leaked 2 min video it seems that AI needs more work to reach BI AI level!!!
• Limited armies to the number of generals with no option of reinforcents feature.
• No buildable wooden or stone forts for Romans and Sassanids that were masters of fortifications!
• Still the same basic idea of food/public order penalties for buildings!!!!!!
• Still the same "fool" idea of techonological development! It seems that CA thinks that people of that time needed to learn what they knew for thousands of year again and again!

I hope that CA will prove me wrong but the apearence of the low wooden barigates -same as RiOS- that warriors can go over them makes me clear that CA AI developers have NOT yet find solutions in siege tactics! That is why "tunnels" are still missing from a TW game!

I hate my self when CA proves me right!!!!!!!!
[/QUOTE]

Someone said that CA did not coppy the RiOTS barigade system!
The CA video proves i am right!!!!!!!!
Now watch the HUGE UI of unit cards that RII customers ask for a year to become smaller because with 40 units under orders 1/3 of the screen is hided behind UI!!!!
What i saw is the lack of explotive shells by catapults! Starnge CA tried to convince us the gunpounder was known in Rome's era and gave catapults explosive shells!!!!!!!
The video proves that instead of BI kind of sieges they "downgraded" city defenses in order to allow AI attack without problem!!!!!!!!!!!
Indirectly CA aknowleges the fact that 12 years after Rome I they can NOT reach the AI behaviur to those standards!!!!!!!!!!
I am realy curius to see not Londinium but Antioch or Ktesiphon with their HUGE wall and tower structures!!!!!!!!!! Would they be "barigates" too inorder CA to avoid humiliate the AI development team of it?
ALSO nottice that Saxons have huge catapults!!! If those Saxons saw CA today they would laugh hard!!!!!!!!!

[Sharpe]

ALSO nottice that Saxons have huge catapults!!! If those Saxons saw CA today they would laugh hard!!!!!!!!!

They would probably be like "good idea bro"

[Abdülmecid I]

That's not the most reliable source, Total war did have the February date stamped on the homepage, however they've now since removed it. Perhaps it was some placeholder for a new page or something but whatever we think the date is, is now unverified.

Yes, IGN is a joke, sometimes, but they announced in their last twitch (http://www.twitch.tv/totalwarofficial/b/572003665) that the Huns will be unplayable, so that leaves no doubts. It's a 1 year/4 turns game starting at 395, so it's not totally unreasonable, I guess. Finally, if they were playable, don't you think that a ca rep would come and clear the confusion?

[ariyan]

Ahah,Sassanian look so epic

[vlakc]

I don't know if this is the right thread to ask, but I remember hearing speculation about the following features being available besides the religion system (which is confirmed by looking at the campaign map during the preview shown)

-You will be able to change your faction's religion
-Culture and Religion will be in the game as separated concepts

Has CA confirmed, denied or even said anything about these?

Thanks in advance.

[Hresvelgr]

I don't know if this is the right thread to ask, but I remember hearing speculation about the following features being available besides the religion system (which is confirmed by looking at the campaign map during the preview shown)

-You will be able to change your faction's religion
-Culture and Religion will be in the game as separated concepts

Has CA confirmed, denied or even said anything about these?

Thanks in advance.

Not sure about the second one but in at least one interview they did say you could change your religion, like going from Catholicism back to Roman paganism for example.

[vlakc]

Not sure about the second one but in at least one interview they did say you could change your religion, like going from Catholicism back to Roman paganism for example.

Thanks a lot for confirming Hresvelgr, that's good to hear, I hope they don't limit this feature's possibilities and you can change to any religion with any faction, like picking the saxons and settling in the Eurasian steppe and becoming tengri or perhaps settling near the Sassanid empire and becoming Zoroastrian.

Maybe in 1 in a hundred gameplays the huns become christian similar to how the mongols became muslims, or perhaps another scenario where the Sassanids annex all of the ERE and spend the next decades converting the provinces to Zoroastrian only to then for X or Y reason they have a rebellion in those lands and the ERE rises again but with Zoroastrian as their religion.

I don't know if they'll go this far with this feature, but I think it's one of the features of Attila that will make sure we have less repetitive gameplays.

I hope CA confirms or denies the other feature I've heard speculation of (cultures) sometime in the future.

[Abdülmecid I]

There is confirmation that it will be a 4tpy campaign., so it will be 280 turns.

The timeframe of the game is between 395 and 470, so there'll be 300 turns.

[The Roman Republic]

The timeframe of the game is between 395 and 470, so there'll be 300 turns.

It's been stated that the campaign is 70 years, so I'm not sure where you got the start and end dates from?

[Hresvelgr]

It's been stated that the campaign is 70 years, so I'm not sure where you got the start and end dates from?

I've heard 75 years as well, and it's been known that the start date is 395 for a while, the time when the Eastern and Western Empires were truly split.

[Humble Warrior]

I've heard 75 years as well, and it's been known that the start date is 395 for a while, the time when the Eastern and Western Empires were truly split.

Interesting stuff about civilians. I've always said for many wargames that it's strange you never see the civilian at all-ever. However, once civilians decided to fight for you, they should fall under your control. In reality, such civilians would try to find the army and place themselves at its disposal. Most of it sounds ok, though it is a huge pity the whole work on Family trees, etc are not in RTW2 and why not I wonder?

Sounds like insta-ship-armies are still in. And what will sieges really be like? Will we still get stupid torches? Or even fire spears?

It's always the things not mentioned I look for clarity on.

Just curious, of course, I won't buy until I am sure what will actually be produced, cos it's still way, way pre-alpha.