Ideas and suggestions

[ThisIsRealWarfare]

Originally Posted by Goblin Wizard

It's personal taste but imo XVIII/XIX is not a good time frame. It's 90% about guns and shooting which is really boring (as E:TW and N:TW were). My choice would be XV/XVI century - medieval twilight and dawn of the gunpowder era. It's the best time because the whole variety of units can be represented and everyone can choose his own army composition and tactics.

Thirty years war perhaps? A great variety of sligthly old-styled cavalry and infantry, getting modernized with gunpowder weapons. Pikemen, Musketeers, A quite large variety of cavalry, like Cuirassiers, Lancers, Polish hussars.. cannons... That'd probably be a nice time of the game. (Even though we already have With Fire & Sword).

If interested to read, here are my ideas that I've sent already. Note that it's alot of text.

First: I've mentioned it in many posts. The strafing. It should work to do oblique (In 2 directions simultaneously), so it's way easier to use the camera (especially on the battlefield).
Next: The Campaign as well as the battles have a great potential. To make the campaign better, you should add some improvements and more options when it comes to managing cities, entering battles, and so on. It also lacks many important things such as unit recruitment costs, which only appears after you've bought them, they should be visible before buying. Additionally, more quests so that a too-hard-one wont stop the player, rather that he/she gets some extra smaller quests to do, and in that way gain money, experience and so on for his/her army, which makes it easier to get better units and face even the hardest quests. Do NOT make the main-quests easier though, as they are fun when it's hard to win.
Last here; More unique units would not be so bad.

Continuously, The battles could in many ways be improved. The units (Speaking of a regiment now, not just an individual), are too close-packed. They look really small even if it's irregulars with 200-260 men. If making them in a bit more loose formation, it would look much nicer. Also, it's a bit annoying that they are always put in a really big column rather than 3-4 nicely organized lines.
The battle controls are quite well done, with good formations and so, but the units react very slow on orders. Usually they don't even run when having orders to. I think it would be better if they had running as basic rather than walking, and perhaps they'd walk if you just pressed anywhere on the map, but if you assigned a certain place to them dragging the regimental cursor, the "how the regiment shall form up when in position", they should run (Compare with Shogun 2 Total War).
Something else very annoying is that archers and Crossbows barely deals any damage on long distances. At the same time, they deal a bit over-powered damage on short distances. Arrows should do more damage even though they have flown long, but perhaps with less accuracy. If they fire at enemies close to them, the arrows should basically do about the same damage, but with much greater accuracy.
Last idea for the battles: It would be good if you could have a deployment phase before the battle, especially at siege battles, since now the walls are quite useless because of that the enemy gets to them in no time.

And it would be well appreciated if you guys could fix the crashes, which occur more on some battles/sieges than others.

[NalgaSucia]

Even though my troops are walking in the middle of a forest, on the Ground tab of stats and info of unit selected it says field, it should say forest and give you like -2 arrow damage or something.

[mitra]

the ground parameter indicate only the ground type for movement penalties, the forests or fortifications are not directly linked to ground where they are placed. Anyway a additional parameter ad hoc is a good idea.

[rico20012]

there are any trainers for this game?????????

[mitra]

there is the battle tutorials, the the storyline campaign is throught to be a tutorial to sandbox campaign.

[Glabro]

He means cheating programs. But Google can answer this to him.


I've found the irregular missiles, at least, to be quite useless compared to irregular melee units. There is precious little time to fire before the distance is closed and melee ensues, and there the number of men is decisive.

Maybe units move too fast, maybe archers do too little damage from afar as well, but fact is that I at least will be skipping missile units for now, until the AI can prove to me their usefulness.

[6ann]

Hello guys.

Originally Posted by Glabro

I've found the irregular missiles, at least, to be quite useless compared to irregular melee units. There is precious little time to fire before the distance is closed and melee ensues, and there the number of men is decisive.

Maybe units move too fast, maybe archers do too little damage from afar as well, but fact is that I at least will be skipping missile units for now, until the AI can prove to me their usefulness.

I think that is a good point of this game. A single archer unit is ineffective in long range, especially against targets with shields. But in close range, arrows can kill even horse knights. And if you use several archer units as a group, their salvos demolish enemy moral very effectively.

[PeteSKTemplar]

I am satisfied with archery but horse archery. Most infantry have shields finally a game where those shields are not just texture. Irregular archers if upgraded primal weapon are really good and plenty of them. I very rarely use them in front, I prefer to hold them just behind infantry line. Infantry will defeat anyone if supported with those archers even heavy cavalry if they are in round formation. I agree with that close range lethality (what make horse archers assassins of heavy cavalry) - its too much, especially does not make sense against good armored units though I found that using spread formation is saving the day against them for me plenty of times. I would like to see just bit increase in damage for long range but substantially in close especially against heavy units. Perhaps crossbows might be bit stronger but much slower - trade of against those heavy units in comparison with bow though eastern bows were strong in that time against all but best armors but that does not mean that shields could be ignored with them.
Right now what bother me are ctds.