A few small changes

[Worbah]

1:Why can't I see the health of my horse? If you want to have any kind of idea about it, you must keep your eyes fixed on the lower left corner of the screen.

2:Crows. I love the way the battlefield looks like a battlefield, but having some crows and ravens circling in the sky would add to the atmosphere.

3:War machines. Chariots, small ballistae mounted on slave-dragged-platforms by a piston, A catapult that flings baskets filled with stones or javelins. I know that these are really, really hard to add to the game. But if you had a single war machine slot that had one of the above (which would be extremely expensive) I don't think the game would become too unbalanced, since you could always kill the crew. And if sieges were to be added, a ram or a trebuchet would be lovely.

I hope Armagan isn't too stressed about our constant nagging btw.

 

[Pharaoh Llandy]

3:War machines. Chariots, small ballistae mounted on slave-dragged-platforms by a piston, A catapult that flings baskets filled with stones or javelins.

I can only image what lugging around a siege weapon, slaves, and large stones for ammo, would do to your world-map movement speed.

 

[Tyreal the Imperishable]

The crow idea is a good one. I would like to see vultures circling in the sky above the battle. Perhaps even have them swoop down and start pecking at the dead during it as well.

Unless some form of siege combat was added, I can't see war machines such as catapults fitting into the game, personally. Perhaps adding siege warfare, assaulting fortified castles with battering rams and ladders would be interesting, but would require a lot more work.

Chariots would be wonderful. If they could implement chariots as well as they have horse combat, including having scythed wheels to ride down the enemy and cut them in twain, I would be giggling in joy.

 

[Worbah]

Well the chariots are probably the fastest thing in your army, the ballistae I'm describing are only slightly bigger than the biggest crossbows in the game (by slaves I meant prisoners), The only bigger problems would be the catapults.

 

[Lhorkan]

Chariots and any type of birds are good ideas (if implemented, it would be great). I wondered about the horse health as well. That is surely something that could be done I think.

 

[Worbah]

Hmmmm... just noticed that this is in the 'discussion' forum.

 

[Eird-Way]

Siege weapons? Are you serious? How big do the "battles" in this game get? Siege weapons reallly weren't used all that much against troops in the field and CERTAINLY NOT in little skirmishes between groups of thirty guys. Catapaults might be cool against huge formations of men, but come on, something that cumbersome being fired at two or three guys at a time?

EDIT: That's like saying you want to drive a battleship in Half Life, or fire a 30-inch Howitzer in Doom 3. If you're thinking of light ballista setups, they would have to be made pure fantasy to be as much fun as you want. Even the current crossbow is a little too user friendly. No game has ever depicted how unwieldy siege weapons are, I'm not even talking about those STUPID Sumerian Heavy Catapaults from Age of Empires I, not even Total War. PAH, ESPECIALLY not Total War!

Scavenger animals would be a great touch. Crows, and perhaps skulking vultures and hyenas if desert areas are added.

 

[JohnathanStrange]

Siege weapons? Are you serious? How big do the "battles" in this game get? Siege weapons reallly weren't used all that much against troops in the field and CERTAINLY NOT in little skirmishes between groups of thirty guys. Catapaults might be cool against huge formations of men, but come on, something that cumbersome being fired at two or three guys at a time?

Scavenger animals would be a great touch. Crows, and perhaps skulking vultures and hyenas if desert areas are added.

I agree. However, it does get one to thinking...to the Bat Cave, Robin!

 

[Severian]

Siege weapons? Are you serious? How big do the "battles" in this game get? Siege weapons reallly weren't used all that much against troops in the field and CERTAINLY NOT in little skirmishes between groups of thirty guys. Catapaults might be cool against huge formations of men, but come on, something that cumbersome being fired at two or three guys at a time?

True, but if seige warfare WAS added having catapults and ballistas would be pretty awesome. Honestly, seige warfare is the only thing this game is really missing at the moment (not counting polishing touches like more interiors and outdoor maps for more towns besides the first one).

Also, scavenging animals would be a nice ambient touch, but I would much rather see effort put towards improving current elements of the game. Or even adding new elements, like seige warfare .

 

[[GSF]Bang]

1:Why can't I see the health of my horse? If you want to have any kind of idea about it, you must keep your eyes fixed on the lower left corner of the screen.

I was thinking about posting this in the suggestions forum earlier today but forgot.

I hate trying to keep track of how many points of damage my horse has taken and guessing at how many total health he has.

 

[Pharaoh Llandy]

Siege warfare should be against buildings, not troops. What are you going to do with a battering ram on the field? Run slowly at the enemy and wait for them to move out of the way to mow you down in an orgy of blood and hooves? To have siege you'd need buildings with which to siege, meaning you'd have to have fixed map locations to actually attack.

 

[Lhorkan]

Just thought about chariots... Actually, they wouldn't really fit in a Medieval setting, I fear.

 

[Eird-Way]

It would be great if they could optimise the graphics engine far enough that skirmishes could consist of a few hundred guys per side (smoke some of whatever the RTW programmers been smokin!), and then antipersonnel artillery would be great.

This is something I think should be done and done right in the sequel.

For now, since I also suggest that towns be able to be taken, the battle for the town should just be a skirmish right outside.

Proper sieges and artillery should be in the sequel. So should sailing, ramming and boarding, ship-to-ship archery with fire arrows, swinging on grappling hooks . . . .

If sieges are added for the sequel, then so could thievery, etc., etc.

I agree that the current features should be perfected and major new ones should not be added.

 

[Worbah]

Siege warfare should be against buildings, not troops. What are you going to do with a battering ram on the field? Run slowly at the enemy and wait for them to move out of the way to mow you down in an orgy of blood and hooves? To have siege you'd need buildings with which to siege, meaning you'd have to have fixed map locations to actually attack.

I said 'if sieges were added'

 

[Shellcaster]

How would you handle sieges? Sieges often lasted months. It would need to be a bit more proactive than ordering your men to surrond a town and build siege engines and then waiting for days for the walls to fall.

I personally like the immediacy of the "slash & hack" skimishes. Loading rocks into a catapult ain't my idea of fun.

 

[Destichado]

Just thought about chariots... Actually, they wouldn't really fit in a Medieval setting, I fear.

Not necessarily so.
Yes, hello everyone, I'm new to the addiction too.

If the game has made the stretch to include "Vikings", "Huns" and Circa 15th century plate-armored knights into ONE game, it's not such a horrible stretch to consider something like the Britton war-charriot with a Pictish or pre-12th century Irish sort of people. The Mountain Raiders in particular would be suited to this sort of arrangement, I think.
As Britoon war chariots had their own charioteer (who did not fight) they were essentialy "battle-taxis", bringing their warriors in and picking them up when they needed to run away. For the purposes of the game, they're "mounts" who come when they're called, and thus they wouldn't change *too* much about the game-play. They'd be the equivalent of horse-archers -with javelins and axes.

Personally I think they'd be murderous opponets. I love it!

 

[Mad Larkin]

Chariots aren't a far stretch. Think the british light chariots from RTW. Two men, a driver and a bowman
Siege weapons? In the current version (without sieges and whatnot) the only
thing i see is the roman-style small ballistae (or damn huge crossbow)
I think they were called scorpions or somesuch, and were operated by two men.

 

[aw89]

I think the battle scale is to small for scorpions and/or ballistas.

 

[Pavlov]

Just thought about chariots... Actually, they wouldn't really fit in a Medieval setting, I fear.

They 'could' but not really in a warband format, since even in the early medieval times chariots were basically only used for ceremonil occasions. Never the less, a sort of scorpion mounted cross bow would be interesting, it could be made stationary to add in some randomness, and to take away or add to position and such.

 

[Loki Liesmith]

3:War machines. Chariots, small ballistae mounted on slave-dragged-platforms by a piston, A catapult that flings baskets filled with stones or javelins.

I can only image what lugging around a siege weapon, slaves, and large stones for ammo, would do to your world-map movement speed.

it would be nice to be able to use slaves for something other than selling, though.