You must be logged in to post messages.
Please login or register

Rome: Total War Discussion
Moderated by Terikel Grayhair, General Sajaru, Awesome Eagle

Hop to:    
Welcome! You are not logged in. Please Login or Register.24 replies
Total War Heaven » Forums » Rome: Total War Discussion » Improvements... I think...
Bottom
Topic Subject:Improvements... I think...
il Padrino
Legionary
posted 23 October 2004 06:13 EDT (US)         
Well, let Me first say I adore the RTW. I havenīt played the STW or the MTW. Iīm also a kind of map fetischist that loves to study maps and especially see the colour of my realm expand over them ( colour the world Imperial red ). What I like about RTW is the mix between boring day to day bureucracy and hardcore action on the battle field. You have to be a good administrator that control tax levels, entertain the populace, build infrastructure, improve trade etc. You also have to be a cunning diplomat that can choose your enemies and friends well, and be a skillful general on the field of battle. In short term: You have to be a good leader/King/Emperor/Caesar.

Although I have a few things that I feel could have been done better ( who doesnīt? ).

First of all I love that the game is more personal with the individual characters and their special abilities; how they can affect the outcome of the game etc. I also think that the idea of a family tree is cool and gives the game a whole new dimension and sense of "realism".

After playing the game for about a week, here are some of mine suggestions for improvement:


1. The Cities

You should be able to rule them harder. For example, the population is on the edge of revolt. You have put a good governor in the city, the taxes are low, games are held daily and everything that can be done to improve their mood has been done. What to do? Well, in my opinion I think that if you have a legion nearby, You could order it to decimate the population as a "warning example to rebels and enemies to Rome".

Generally I think that the presence of a large army nearby would have a calming effect on the angry population. "Realisticly" speaking, an army would seldom enter a city and stay there for a long time. It would camp outside the city ( for example, having an army near Rome was considered a political impossibilty and grave provocation ).

I also would like to see a higher level of city control when it comes to intelligence and secret police, who could spot the insurrection leaders and assasinate them. For example, a window could pop up and say: "Your secret police have located the hide out for the rebel leaders, should an attempt on their lives be made?" This should have conseqeunce, for instance, if the attempts fails, this could make the situation worse, and a successfull kill could either calm the situation down or possibly even make martyrs of the leaders.

2. Leadership

I think the term "Faction leader" and "heir" is a bit grey and booring. Why not have "Pharaoh" when it comes to the Egyptians, "King" for the Greeks, "Chieftain" for the Germans and so on.

And, when playing a roman faction, after conquering Rome and destroying the other roman faction and putting an end to the roman civil war, You should be able to declare your faction leader ( or the one You choose ) "Emperor". This move would have itīs pros and cons. For example, it could strengthen your position as the leader of the unified roman people, but it could also mean that your relatives become suspicious of you and tend to more easily betray you in favor for other countries ( Politics! I love it... ).

And when becoming emperor, it is absolutely vital that You produce a male heir, should the emperor die without an heir to the throne, it could split the empire and make it vulnerable to insurrection and foreign invasions that would like to take advantage of the political disorder within the empire.

3. The Senate

I was playing as the Julii family, and failed to carry out a few of the senates assignments ( I had a profitable trade arrangement with Carthage, so why should I block their ports, just because the senats said so? ). As a punishment, the senate investigated my finances. Fortunately, the "Questor" was a member om my family and helped me ( us ) out. I loved that kind of political aspect of the game. But what I really miss is the senatorial part of it. I think it would be great if You could take a larger part in the senates debates and votings. For example, the senate could consist of, letīs say, 51 senators spread among the roman factions. Once a while the senate debates certain issues; "Should we declare war on the germans" etc. Then it comes to voting, perhaps a war would benefit your faction since you already have a strong military presence there. You then vote "yes" to a declaration of war. Of course you could also raise certain topics in the senate. This would open up scenarios with bribing senators and sort of "political war" on another level in the game.

...and of course, should your faction become strong enough in the senate, and popular enough among the Roman population, you could disband the senate and proclaim yourself "Emperor" or "King".

In short: a more complex dimension of the demestic political situation would be great.

Keep in mind that english is not my first language, so I apologise for the spelling and bad langauge.

[This message has been edited by il Padrino (edited 10-23-2004 @ 06:20 AM).]

AuthorReplies:
Meursault
Legionary
posted 23 October 2004 06:34 EDT (US)     1 / 24       
I like #1. I like #3 even more - the politics are almost the best part of R:TW (not quite as good as the battles...).
snuggins
Legionary
posted 23 October 2004 06:58 EDT (US)     2 / 24       
yeah but the battles aren't that epic i saw time commanders and the graphics are beautiful i'm a little dissapointed about the fights but i would also like to this improvement: when you can minimise so you can see the people in the cities it would be way cooler with clerks sellin things to peeps and the trade carts entering the city plus gladitorial and chariot race games

EVOLUTION? REVOLUTION!- Liquid Fire Studios
Roberto George
Legionary
posted 23 October 2004 18:03 EDT (US)     3 / 24       
I agree with all those things... but the truth is, a game can't have everything, and even if this game did have all those things, none of us would have it yet, they'd still be working on it
Pladio
Legionary
posted 23 October 2004 18:39 EDT (US)     4 / 24       
I like all of those things, the ONE big problem as the person above me said, none of us would have gotten the game if they wanted to insert all of those things in, certainly not for over year.
All those political things will be kind of new for the devs and they will have a even harder time to find a way to straighten it out and keep the same atmosphere as the earlier TW games...
humorguy
Legionary
posted 23 October 2004 21:10 EDT (US)     5 / 24       
I agree with the original poster in all respects. I made a couple points in my thread "Immersive or not immersive, that is the question!?".

I disagree that the changes would have taken a year. The town graphics is a big job, maybe 3 months. But everything else is small two day-two week changes. Adding a routine to an AI engine is not huge and to have "Emporer" instead of "Faction Leader", etc is just a text change. In any event, if Creative Assembly had specifically mentioned the delay was to add the changes mentioned, I would have waited....

In general, if gamers gave a better impression that we would be willing to wait, we wouldn't get the bugged rush jobs we quite often get now!

Toastify
Banned
posted 24 October 2004 13:29 EDT (US)     6 / 24       
I just had some prollems with certain things with Rome. For example couldnt they have modeled the ingame city or Rome after the real thing? And whats with the circus maximus and colliseum - they arent even close to the size of the real things. I also totally agree that more politics should've been included. Politics is what drove the empire. Marcus Crassius wouldnt never invaded Parthia if he didnt think it would've given him political power (he failed miserably however - his loss is ussually considered second only to Cannea. But then who needs politics when total world conquest is possible?
Snook
Legionary
posted 24 October 2004 19:39 EDT (US)     7 / 24       

Quote:

I just had some prollems with certain things with Rome. For example couldnt they have modeled the ingame city or Rome after the real thing? And whats with the circus maximus and colliseum - they arent even close to the size of the real things.

Engine limitations?


Hello my name is Kristoffer Jørgensen and I am from Norweigen I come to see hot USA girls and history landmarks!!
Queen Honeymuffin II
Legionary
(id: Kman)
posted 24 October 2004 20:02 EDT (US)     8 / 24       
If they made the colloseum to full scale it would take up half the map.
Ketro Fett
Legionary
(id: Ketro_Fett)
posted 24 October 2004 21:08 EDT (US)     9 / 24       
Some of these are good suggestions, but think of what the game would be like if everyone changed something. Pretty messed up.

||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||

Đ 2004 by Ketro Fett. Winner of two Most Extensive Star Wars Knowledge and Best Sig awards, and the Best Strategist and Being Nice to a Racoon awards. Runner up for Most Underrated Forumer ('02). SWGBH Ladder.
Meteora
Legionary
posted 24 October 2004 21:55 EDT (US)     10 / 24       
The more complicated a game, the more little mistakes are going to be in it, the longer each turn/game will take, and (after a point) the more irritating it will be.

Honestly, I'd be unhappy if they added all that. I'm still trying to adjust from MTW, which was much simpler yet just as much fun.


★ ★ ★ ★ ★
Harpoon
Legionary
posted 25 October 2004 03:38 EDT (US)     11 / 24       
the populations rebel a tad bit too much

I mean seriously, if 2/3 of the city is massacared and crucified, wouldn't that keep rebellious thoughts out of your head for a while?

Kazem
Legionary
posted 25 October 2004 07:22 EDT (US)     12 / 24       
I completley agree with all points made by Padrino. It would make the game SO much better and more interesting. Perhaps something for an expansion ;P
snuggins
Legionary
posted 25 October 2004 08:16 EDT (US)     13 / 24       
to be honest it's a almost certain possibility they brought expansions for shogun and medievil they might bring it out in a few months or so in 20005

EVOLUTION? REVOLUTION!- Liquid Fire Studios
aom dude
Legionary
posted 25 October 2004 08:38 EDT (US)     14 / 24       
The game is already more complicated than most RTS games, CA should have only added a few small things such as being able to exterminate the people after you've conquered the city and rebels should be mostly peasants. What the game needs most is a much better AI. The enemy units just stand there being slaughtered by arrows instead of going into loose formation or attacking me, it's just sad such a great game has crappy AI.

It's lame to quote yourself - aom dude

[This message has been edited by aom dude (edited 10-25-2004 @ 08:58 AM).]

Mr Nice Guy
Legionary
posted 25 October 2004 13:28 EDT (US)     15 / 24       
Hmph... Give 'em an inch, they want a mile.

Uh, huh?
CoReDooM
Banned
posted 26 October 2004 09:30 EDT (US)     16 / 24       

Quote:

it would be way cooler with clerks sellin things to peeps and the trade carts entering the city plus gladitorial and chariot race games

Yes. These people will be selling and having fun while a roman army burns their city. Comeon, no citizen would dare walk around the city if their was a battle going on in the streets.

snuggins
Legionary
posted 26 October 2004 10:39 EDT (US)     17 / 24       
well actully you can also have them screaming their asses off while huge buring rocks hit them with catapults and even do a version of the vesuvius volcano eruption destroying pompeii but i meant when there isn't a seige go on the info bit where it says public order and trade (there menu where you cna change your capital) and there's a button with a magnifying glass click on it and it shows ulgy peasents walking around and just walking around and that's all they do

EVOLUTION? REVOLUTION!- Liquid Fire Studios

[This message has been edited by snuggins (edited 10-26-2004 @ 10:43 AM).]

il Padrino
Legionary
posted 26 October 2004 14:49 EDT (US)     18 / 24       
After some thinking, I would narrow it down [] to these:

1. More possibilities when it comes to cities. You should be able to:

- decimate the inhabitants whenever You wish
- wipe out the entire population and thereby destroy the entire city ( a really cool thing would be if the city then fell into ruins that you could look at just as you can with the cities right now ) A totally destroyed city would automatically mean that a new city would emerege close by.


2. More detail when it comes to characters:

- Instead of just "Faction leader/heir", there could be "King/Pharaoh/Chieftain" etc.
- The possibility, after conquering Rome and destroying the other Roman factions, to declare your leader "Emperor".

- be able to kill of your own family members! ( perhaps an "assassination button" somewhere?

- have the individual characters children grow up and become "playable" ( "Coming of Age" ) in the city where their father is governor ( should he be fighting somewhere, the kid could pop up in the capital ). I find it quite annoying that EVERYBODY emerges from the capital, regardless of where their parents are stationed. Sure, one could say that they went to the capital to be "educated" or whatever til the age of 16, but it would be more fun if the new characters were a bit more spread out across the land.


3. More possibilites when it comes to the senate:

- be able to take part in voting
- the number of senators your factions get depends on your success on the field of battle and financial situation
- be able to declare your leader "Dictator" for a limited period of time ( if your faction is strong enough in the senate, that is )
- be able to bribe other factions senators
- be able to raise questions in the senate ( limited to questions concearning warfare )


4. More possibilities when it comes to diplomacy:

- be able to offer/request a neutral/ally/enemys daughter/son in marriage to tighten the bonds to a certain faction
- when approaching an enemy city ( or city that you plan to attack ), you should be able to speak to the city without diplomats and just say: "Submit to the power of Rome, and your lives will be spared" or something.


5. More possibilities when it comes to warfare:

- be able to take prisoners in battle, expanding the options between "fighting to the death" and "Run away!" with "I surrender". ( for instance, high ranking members should be able to become prisoners and either keept inprisoned, sold back to their countrymen, be bribed or simply just executed )

6. Emerging factions

Once a while it could be interesting if a new faction emerged ( perhaps a former rebel leader with ambition to establish a kingdom of his own )

Thatīs it.

For now...

Mechstra
Banned
posted 26 October 2004 15:12 EDT (US)     19 / 24       
The idea of capturing prisoners for ransom was there in the previous Rome games. Any troops 'killed' after they'd broken weren't actually dead, but captured. You could kill the prisoners, ransom them off, or if the ransom wasn't paid, execute them. It was annoying because if you executed prisoners before waiting for a ransom (say if you'd captured an entire army and didn't want it coming back to get you) more than once, then you'd get negative attributes for your generals.

I prefer Rome's system - you don't need the money and it's more advantageous in the long run. Plus, it looked stupid in Medieval to have lots of bodies around when in reality the soldiers were just prisoners.

il Padrino
Legionary
posted 26 October 2004 15:38 EDT (US)     20 / 24       
Well, I wasnīt suggesting that you could capture entire armies, only leading members of another faction. And it wouldnīt happend that often. Only if you encounter Generals with a really bad sense of duty...

[This message has been edited by il Padrino (edited 10-26-2004 @ 03:39 PM).]

snuggins
Legionary
posted 26 October 2004 15:53 EDT (US)     21 / 24       
and also let the family members live a little longer and not just until 60! and can have female family members as leaders (eg bouddica)

EVOLUTION? REVOLUTION!- Liquid Fire Studios

[This message has been edited by snuggins (edited 10-26-2004 @ 03:54 PM).]

il Padrino
Legionary
posted 26 October 2004 16:02 EDT (US)     22 / 24       
The age is actually rather "realistic" since they did not live to long, specially if they were soldiers. You have to consider that they did not have modern medicine. If You check the traits You also see that a lot of them tend to drink and eat more than they should ( "drunkard" & "glutton" ), and that is not a good combination if You want to live long.

Speaking of age, my record is 77. Anyone had a family member reach over 80?

snuggins
Legionary
posted 26 October 2004 17:32 EDT (US)     23 / 24       
i agree with you and i don't agree with you some of them maybe hated fishpaste back then so they had a better life

EVOLUTION? REVOLUTION!- Liquid Fire Studios
Gaius Caesar
Legionary
posted 27 October 2004 09:17 EDT (US)     24 / 24       
my record was 81
You must be logged in to post messages.
Please login or register

Hop to:    

Total War Heaven | HeavenGames