Ralegh
Posts: 1557
Joined: 2/1/2005
Status: offline
|
WCS are always thinking about features to put into patches, and what might be suitable for a sequel or to be built into other games based on the same game engine. I have a huge list - culled from lots of posts from other people - and here they are. Please nominate other great ideas, and let us know which of these you find the most compelling. (We want to pick things that would justify people paying money - these wouldn't be done for free.)
1. Enhance Multiplayer
A bidding system for assigning countries (they start with negative glory!)
The option during a multiplayer game to have the AI take someones turn
The option for a player to 'set' the AI to take their turns until a particular real date, and to specify which 'strategy' the AI should take [assume the strategy mod discussed in a separate suggestion]
The option during a multiplayer game to change a computer player to a human player, or a human player to a computer one
a web site to be the repository for the save game file, and a place where the players can have their own BB etc - where they can interact while it isn't their turn.
Be able to switch from PBEM to TCPIP and back, and even take a PBEM save game and play it out against the AI.
2. Enhance naval combat
Provide a detailed combat version of naval combat
Have a new status of ship "damaged" - ships captured in battle get escorted home and then have to be built up to make combat worthy again
3. Supe up strategic AI
Provide AI strategies for high level Ais
AI stragegies and leanings ("personalities") with radical change after insurrection?
4. Supe up detailed battle tactical AI
Some decision making based on strategic and tactical considerations
Better use of fortification vs fire-and-0movement decisions
5. Super enhance supply system
Separate ammunition from other supplies
Each ("ammo" and "supplies") would be a trade good (produced in cities, and tradable)
Units and containers would be able to 'hold' a certain amount of food/ammo - for containers, this would be configurable by the player and effecting the strategic initiative of fleets/armies/corps - and this is what they would take into combat. [So you could tell a city to stockpile supplies, and set an army to load themselves up before charging off into the wilds.]
On the strategic map, supplies flow from supply sources through depot chains to end units, with little stockpiles in depots, containers (armies, corps, fleets) and units (divisions and ships). When you conquer a depot, city or unit, you would get some of their supplies, creating a new incentive to take cities! If a supply chain was interrupted, supplies in the system on the unit end of the chain would continue to filter through until they run out, while supplies up stream would bank up. The player would control the degree of flow - supply sources could be set to create more or supplies in the province control area. Tthe degree of flow would narrow with each staging point (ie. only 90% of the supplies pass down to the next depot in the chain) reflecting some wastage.
. Similarly ships would have a stockpile of suplies to feed troops being carried, and could get more from their own ports, or buy some from allied ports as they sailed.
. Supplies could reach a unit via a supply chain, or by being carried - a fleet, army or corps could ferry out supplies to another unit/container.
In detailed combat:
. Units within their resupply range [an attribute of units type] of the caissons (a stockpile) would get some additional supplies every turn - the amount reducing with distance. A unit attempting to rally (ie passing its turn) would get significantly more. However each caisson would have a limit of the amount they could dispense in a turn - probably apply a rationing system based on current supply levels.
. Units in combat who are out of ammo would lose their fire attacks, and only be effective in charges.
. Units in combat who are out of supply would suffer reduced combat effectiveness, representing the foraging parties out getting food instead of being in the battle line.
. A division could be tasked to carry supplies to a point on the map, creating a supply dump. Such a dump would be accessible by units bordering it, but not mobile - creating an opportunity to capture supplies in detailed combat.
6. Permit battle resolution at the demi-brigade level
7. Supe up leaders
[Note that we expect to get another 10 or so leader abilities implemented in a patch
(OPTIONAL RULE) Based on combat, permit creation of new leaders, promotion and change in attributes of current leaders . When played, this would replace historical leader reinforcements.
Have more leader special abilities that flow down the chain of command....so a corps leader's special abilities are accessible by any division in the corps (and not just the division to which the leader is attached).
Have leader capabilities in managing protectorates/nations, which gives them economic advantages, and provides a new dynamic for the player between using leaders to enhance their military forces, or using them to enhance their economies. Maybe make diplomat capabilities available to all leaders, so they can be used that way too.
8. Supe up trade
Enhance the trade adviser, so the player can nominate the quantity of each type of goods they want to get from trade
make all trade after waste, not before
permit relative supply and demand to effect the AI's opinion of what a fair deal is (and the trades) as the game goes on.
9. Supe up Minors
[Note we expect a patch to reduce the impact of protectorates on waste, and provide a minimum feudal level for protectorates regardless of the nation's setting]
Add any province with adjacent territory into a protectorate
Permit enhanced minor diplomacy: treaties with minors
10. Army/corps/fleet orders:
Set a destination, as can be done for a division
Set an enemy stack or city as a destination
Add intercept option to an army or corps that didn't move (by definition, neighbouring area)
11. Refine treaties/surrenders:
Permit treaties with nations you are at war with, as long as one of the clauses is either cease fire or one side surrendering (allows negotiating surrender terms or terms for a cease fire)
Any time a nation makes a treaty with someone who is at war with one of the nation's allies, the ally should consider the situation and:
. require the nation to break one of the treaty or the alliance OR
. issue a complaint, reducing its attitude to the nation OR
. keep quiet because they are hoping the nation doesn't dump the alliance.
New treaty options:
. break alliance with X
. do not ally with X
. deny access to X
. do not supply X
. offer limited surrender to X
. do not trade with X for Y duration [include independant minors]
. declare war on X [include independant minors to current capabilities]
. Don’t attempt diplo actions against me!
Tweak treaty conditions:
. no duration/end date longer than 3 years
. depreciate AI valuation of outyears
Enhance treaty adviser valuation
. Treaty adviser currently doesn't correctly estimate DOWs, cedings, and interaction with other treaty commitments.
When a nation makes an unconditional surrender to one of the countries it is at war with, any allies of that power who are also at war with the nation and who were not surrendered to should have the option of:
. (i) accepting a white peace with the surrendering power (enforced peace, but no terms)
. (ii) requiring their ally to take a peace condition that forces the surrenderer to offer a limited surrender to them
. (iii) require their ally to break their alliance
. (iv) just continue the war
. [a nation would identify its selection from these options on the SET POLICY screen]
If a country surrenders to all powers - reduce the glory loss to the greatest value, not all of them
When a country surrenders to multiple powers have some sort of resolution system so they don't take impossible treaty conditions
. If multiple powers ask for the same territory, refund the guys who miss out
. Similarly, if one says "don’t dow x" and another says "do dow x"
. Computer to phase out any cash payments to make them possible to meet
12. Option to fight quick battles using a EIA-style tactical chit selection, and just be given the result. (super quick?)
13. Pre-game treaties, trade routes, units under construction etc
14. UI Enhancements:
Make the various lists sortable
Hyperlink to online help text
Only show me the provinces that aren't building anything option for province management
A "find" button for physical locations and/or units
Right click in detailed combat to give info about the terrain, as well as of the unit (if any) under the cursor, AND some info about the general attached AND garrisons to state their nationality
Provide mouse alternatives for all keyboard commands (and v.v)
Jump from military screen to that unit on the map
Make cossack super-avoidance of battle an optional rule
Historical archives - Old treaties
15. End of game review and keepsake
Major wars and who declared, and troops lost, and who won, and what the surrender terms were
Treaties entered into
Statistics - total trade, units raised by category, units killed/dying
_____________________________
HTH
Steve/Ralegh
|
Printable Version
Ideas/Votes for Sequel - 
What sleep Tim?
I think it has to be said in harshest words possible, because - I am sure - grongards that make up most of the audience here will surely ignore item no 14. and go for more "substantial" stuff like having more treaties etc. blah. In my humble opinion, nothing is more "substantial" than good UI. 
New Messages
No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages
Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages
Locked w/o New Messages
Post New Thread