Declaring war on Ally during Battle?

[♔ brucedickenson♔]

Whatever happened to this feature?


Would be great to see this return to TW

 

[Doyle141]

Whatever happened to this feature?


Would be great to see this return to TW

You could do that? In what TW?

 

[EmperorBatman999]

Whatever happened to this feature?


Would be great to see this return to TW

Hey! Hey! This is MY BATTLE for a city I want to be MINE! *Orders to attack Ally*

 

[zezimasslave]

You could do that? In what TW?

M:TW

 

[♔ brucedickenson♔]

It really added an awesome twist to battles, taking on a massive enemy with a large ally.. When the ally had crushed the enemy but with large losses, attack them while they are weak and take the city!

 

[ostrogoth182]

you can do it in the first medieval total war, i think

 

[Doyle141]

Oh... I didn't know you could do that. How do you do it? Just set a unit to attack an ally?

 

[ostrogoth182]

yah i think so and it askes you if you want to betray them.

 

[Gallant0]

This goes back to Shogun Total War. I remember creating MASSIVE musket battles 4 vs 4, slaying my foes, then declaring war on all of my allies just to see how high the kill count could get. It was a great deal of fun to watch even with these graphics.

 

[Petrov]

Wow, that would be FUN!

 

[HappyGoodVibes]

That really would be awesome, CA needs to add more detail to their game in terms of tactical options. With tighter diplomatic controls, i could see making an alliance with a faction, asking them to attack a specific city with me, and then turning on them and killing their army. However, it would be nice if you could attack an army when it was sleeping or still in camp. (I say this because at the moment if you attack an enemy army the bigest disadvantage they have is being surrounded or out of position.)

In a book series called A Song of Ice and Fire,

Spoiler

there is a point where this count is hosting a big party for his ally's army, he soaked the tents in oil and when everyone was getting drunk he dropped the tents on their heads and set them on fire.At another point in the books there is a battle where a city is under siege. This City is on the coast with a river running to the south of it, and as a result the attack on the city is two pronged, one with soldiers on boats that attack from the sea, and the other with soldiers attacking the gates who are already on land. Anyway, there is a mini battle between the City's fleet and the attacker's fleet as the gates are attacked. The city gets some fire ships and pwns the attacking fleet as they go up the river. There is a chain at the front of the harbor that was raised to trap the ships in, and since the water was flowing out toward the ocean, all the fire ships and fire were pushed into the attacking fleet. Even though the attacker's fleet was destroyed it looks like they will take the city. Then a surprise army shows up and owns the attacker.

If you could do things like this in Total War it would be awesome.

Battles in Total War seem to be pretty set, no twists or anything like what i was talking about in the spoiler tags. Armies are always ready to attack each other and soldiers are always fully armored in a night attack. They could change this for night battles by putting all the enemy soldiers in a camp, all the soldiers are running out to get into formations and with their groups in the night, and your general's night attack stats determine exactly how ready they are to fight back when you get there. It would be sweet to have some units not wearing all their armor or for some left over guys running out of tents to get into their groups as your army attacks. There are so many things that could add depth to the battles and make them less mundane, i would love to see this stuff implemented in the next Total War, or in Rome II!

 

[Gallant0]

A Song of Ice and Fire was a great series full of betrayal. I could really see the AI screwing up these kinda things though. I can't actally remember if Shogun: TW had the AI betray you during battle sequences. They sure did on the campaign map though.

 

[HappyGoodVibes]

Betrayal would be great for multiplayer campaigns, and the AI could handle it as long as you had some way of knowing if they were likely to betray you or not. Or if the AI only betrayed you if you have bad diplomatic relations or your attacking a friend of theirs or something. In my opinion its all just part of better diplomacy that i hope is in the next TW.

 

[Archimonday]

There are alot of things that need to return, even if in different ways. Such as Prisoners, and choosing what to do with them afterwards, and betrayal in mid battle, and the old style reinforcements with a button toggling their entrance into the fight.

 

[♔ brucedickenson♔]

Night ambush attacks, where your men are scrambling to find their companies would be awesome as the enemy closes in!

 

[EmperorBatman999]

Night ambush attacks, where your men are scrambling to find their companies would be awesome as the enemy closes in!

"Battle" of Cransberbes (sp?) anyone?

 

[Grenadier]

Well u can always fire arties while your allies advance with the enemy...well they shot mine when their arty appeared behind mine...so i let them go ahead to take the fort while i shower them with shrapnel...they don't look very happy after the battle though...Hostile
They lost around 1500 men and killed 300...

 

[alhoon]

Well u can always fire arties while your allies advance with the enemy...well they shot mine when their arty appeared behind mine...so i let them go ahead to take the fort while i shower them with shrapnel...they don't look very happy after the battle though...Hostile

They turned hostile? That would imply the AI realised it lost so many because of your artillery instead of the enemy.

 

[Tiberius Tosi]

Night ambush attacks, where your men are scrambling to find their companies would be awesome as the enemy closes in!

Even scouting is risky business near nighttime, i don't think we need to really see a return of nighttime battles...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Karánsebes

Realistically a commander would have no command over his army at nighttime, especially in this period of ever increasingly large armies.

 

[Monglor]

I think it is better to not allow it. It's really very, very rare in the modern age of governments and politics to betray people like that. In the old days when the King was the authority and he was there at the battlefield he could do what he liked, and in times when communication was fast enough it became possible again (see the British turning on the French Navy in WW2 and Germans attacking the Italians, but in both cases this was after their own governments had folded). In the Napoleonic era it'd be a communications nightmare. I mean this is the era of things like the Battle of New Orleans, a battle actually fought after the war that lead to it was over, you wouldn't want to be messing with diplomacy so much. That and there would be a huge risk of the army just telling you to sod off. Not many men would be happy to kill their former comrades at the drop of a hat.

 

[Chyeaaaa111]

I swear good ole MTW had some really awesome features in it. They also had the ability to assassinate your own family members which was awesome.