1) Remove tech tree for random tech break-throughs (based on skill of main characters) & Spys, current system tooo much like Rome2 TW .. yuk
(2) Make UI more user friendly, more like other games, options down the bottom maybe?
(3) More precious resources like gold, silver, iron, copper etc (like CIv)
(4) managing cities & populations should be simpler. maybe one screen to manage both visually, Like this - http://i738.photobucket.com/albums/xx23/ArchaicWarrior/SettlementScreen2.jpg

In addition to my previous thread. .

- city screen should display resources.
Separated into internally produced, and imported (i.e. should I build a caravanserai?)

- city ui should make it easier to see the reasons for unhappiness.
If you expand all the details for noble and peasant unhappiness, it basically covers the whole darn screen :/

- as a side note, labour unhappiness is really annoying. My main cities have like -50 and it looks like I will have to halt construction for 30 turns for it to drop to zero lol.

- please make it more easily visible which external construction is selected. Sometimes mix up roads vs farms because I didn't realize which one was picked.

Make option to put off help bubbles on start of the new game. They are kinda annoying when you starting third time and already knows all this thing. It's even worse that they resetting after game reload.

Color indication for good and bad influence on unhappines on city screen.

Originally posted by TB Rules:

1) Remove tech tree for random tech break-throughs (based on skill of main characters) & Spys, current system tooo much like Rome2 TW .. yuk
(2) Make UI more user friendly, more like other games, options down the bottom maybe?
(3) More precious resources like gold, silver, iron, copper etc (like CIv)
(4) managing cities & populations should be simpler. maybe one screen to manage both visually, Like this - http://i738.photobucket.com/albums/xx23/ArchaicWarrior/SettlementScreen2.jpg

1) I personaly against it, i like how it's done. You should plan far to win, not pray for god of random.
2) +1, buttons to go between cities/units on the bottom should be useful too.
3) They are already in the game, thought most used as trade resource, while it can give more bonuses but it's need balancing.
4) It's seems you just don't understood how population works in this game. Food is population limit, by the way, you don't need other indicator.

I understand it is not total war, but some improvements to the battle animations will increase immersion greatly. Also I see units passing through enemies without attacking each other.. That looks silly.

I hope the game is going to be great

Thanks for this nice thread !

- The illustrations of the backgrounds are very beautiful (the ones for technology, finance, edicts etc.) It's sad that they are so blurry, please could you consider an option to un-blurry them ?
- The size of the text looks a little small. Maybe an option in the future to set the size of the text please ? (Lower resolution makes the text very blurry and tiring for the eyes so lower resolution is worst than little text.)

Improving combat. Having the units grouped properly during attack. For example, when I have 3 standard militia units attacking, I order them to attack head on but the enemy's movement almost always makes battles diagonal. When this happens my units just walk past the enemy (if my army is wider than theirs) and then they just stand there. Eventually they turn around but for half of the battle my advantage is useless. This could be the difference between my core retreating or not, which can turn the tides of battles

Rebalance the "Labour Service" malus. The tool tip implies that all the malus built up will go if you give a city "A few turns off" however it only goes down by 1 per turn.

Maybe I missed this one but I could not see any status/overview of ongoing battle, just the animated armies, which cannot be selected for details. Without this information, battles are just animations I easily get bored and want to skip. It is a pitty since following the progress of a battle can give some thrill.

Hum, I only play two hours, but I feel a little disapointed 'cause I don't see the historical part. I mean, as manny players of this game, I don't know manny things about acient China, and I was expecting learning a lot of things in this game, by text or event, or video, or.. I don't know. There is quite no games about these area, except maybe the dynasty warrior. Buying this I was expecting an historical game, something more close from an old total war, 3KR or CK2.

So maybe I didn't played enough, but this is my first impression.

Right now I don't feel the immersion. For me the game could be in Africa, Europe or on Mars, we know it's China only because of few pictures and musics. I mean, I feel more I'm playing a chess game, probably interresting strategy game, but I don't feel the "historical".

So few things who could help me to feel in China :

First : Add a minimap. With smoke, I just see hex and hex... I wanna know where I am in China. I like TW because it"s based (or quite) in historical area. In a Shogun Total War, I can say "Oh ! This is the Sanada Land !" "oh this is Iga area, the ninja came from there" - For now in OE I just see Hexagone. I would like being able to clic in an Hex, and know the name of the mountain, or of the river...

Second : a family tree is needed.

Third : Are our general we start with are famous or do they have random name ? In first case, a short resume of their lifes could be awesome (and about other characthers we can meet) - We could learn a lot. In second case... well that should be disapointing.

Four : Add a tutorial please. In a TW, we have a small campaign to teach how to do. We feel directly in the history. The history of a small place, but history anyway.

Five : Audio ? If you could record some voices for the help buble, that should be much more cool. ^^

Faction-Idea: More Nomadic Turko-Mongolic Factions :)!
(Like the Xiung Nu)

For example: The Gökturks

1. A "Very Easy" game mode to play as a tutorial. This game is rather difficult, and it can be frustrating to put up with that many rebellions or ping-pong bandit stacks when you try to learn.
2. A mini-map.
3. More events and possible spacing of disasters in the same region.
4. A slightly more developed dynastic system, perhaps. The current number of generals is a bit limited, a clan would do nicely.
5. Some edicts that can calm peasant unrest, such as temporary tax cuts?
6. A few tooltips/advice on UI. I realized an auto-explore button exists a bit too late, for example.
7. Korea, Vietnam, Japan as would-be factions?
8. More feedback from the game, in general. E.g. a profit estimate if you build a market. It would help.

That would be it, for now.

Short term things: Road building on gentle hills? Those guys built The Great Wall.. Shouldn't we be able to connect cities over gentle hills..?

Trade route recalculating after removing forest tiles, I know u guys are working on it.. As well as tuning up battle animations/clipping thru soldiers when the retreat trigger hits.

Also track down the city banner issue. And moving a stack to attack someone else's army pillaging your farms, you get the pop up that it's not a declaration of war since they're in your territory.. but your unit just moves to them and doesn't attack..

Overall I'm surprising pleased and the game hasn't crashed once on me comparing to other EA pos's out there and am enjoying how it takes a lot of finesse to balance pop and happiness

A gatehouse with an actual gate door or somekind of portcullis would be awesome. Building those 20-40m up high walls are fun but I don't think their that usefull if invaders can waltz into cities like its nothing.

https://steamhost.cn/steamcommunity_com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=767703413

One suggestion I have is to allow units of faction A to pass through a hex with units of faction B if faction A and faction B have an active NAP (or alliance but I've never formed an alliance so far so that might already be the case). It was rather annoying when my large army of elite nobles and militia spearmen got caught by the Han because a tribal faction I had an NAP with was blocking the only ford across the Yellow River. Luckily they managed to not only survive but win the resulting battle (probably because I had noble units and two good generals present when the Han had only militia) but it still cost me a veteran unit. It doesn't really make sense that I cannot pass by neutral armies in neutral territory.

Second related suggestion for a give way mechanic. A very large army should not (barring certain circumstances) be barred by a very small army. Even if I did not have an NAP with that tribal faction there is no way they would have been able to hold the ford against my army and they would have been massacred if my units had forced the ford. It was 1 weak unit against 6 strong, though somewhat depleted, units. Any real army would have fallen back or given way before such a force. Indeed Bronze Age warfare both in Asia and Europe lacked any way of bringing a reluctant enemy to the battlefield. Even cavalry and light infantry were rarely fast enough force a battle without help from the terrain, weather or other circumstances (exhausted enemies, night marches etc.). Battles could only really be forced at natural chokepoints or where the terrain/circumstances allowed one army to manoeuvre part or all of its force in front of the reluctant enemy force without being detected or, if detected, faster than the enemy could react. I guess the withdraw command for units tries to simulate this. I have so far only set it on settlers and I've never been stupid/unlucky enough to have a settler + escort get caught so I don't know how it works. However, that seems to be a tactical withdrawal once a battle has, in some sense, started not an operational withdrawal which is what I'm talking about above.

Some basic rules for figuring out whether an army should withdraw or not might be:
-If an army is hostile to those trying to enter its tile and led by a general, it will never withdraw unless it (or its units) have explicitly been put in the withdraw stance by the player.
-Lone units facing off against an army of two or more (maybe three or more) units will always try to withdraw unless they are a general unit or put in the defend stance. A lone unit put in the defend stance will have the ratio increased to maybe 5 -1 or 6 -1. Could vary depending on unit type as militia are less likely to make a desperate holding action on the whim of a commander vs. nobles whose honour is on the line or professional soldiers.
-Noble and regular units, even without a general, should be more likely to hold, especially if they are put in the defend stance, than militia or artillery units. As we are trying to simulate an operational withdrawal that is planned, armies will not partially withdraw. Thus, the overall balance of an army will determine its likelihood to withdraw. Perhaps link this to an averaging of morale which is already in some way simulated in the game.
-This may be impossible to do but terrain could also have an effect. Units are more likely to hold when they are flanked by impassable terrain (fords or mountain passes) or rough terrain (steep hills, forests etc.). If field fortifications or forts ever get simulated in some way, then they would pretty much guarantee a hold especially in a choke.

I realise this may be impossible to add anyway given the late stage of development etc. However, I really think allowing units to pass through (not share) tiles occupied by NAP units should be added in! Assuming it's possible...

1. If i could get some more life in the city. We have the basic animations yes, but having random people walking around and buying goods but bring it more to life.

2.the finance tab could use an addition breakdown for trade so i know what is selling.

3. multiplayer with save features

4. some form of guard tower that be build instead of farms to slow down bandits pillaging farms.

5. CLOSED BORDER POLICY! I hate how people can just sit their army in my borders- This would be an act of war unless we were allies