Search the Community
Showing results for tags 'cities'.
-
I'm new to the game, and one thing I've noticed is the lack of labels for landscape features, i.e.; rivers, streams, hills, houses, bridges, fords, towns, woods, roads, etc. I think it would it would be a really interesting feature of the game and add a bit of reality to the battles. For example, on the Bull Run map, it would be nice to label things like the Warrenton Pike, Stone Bridge, Lewis Ford, Matthews Hill, Bald Hill, Dogan Ridge, Manassas-Sudley Road, Van Pelt Farm, Sudley Springs, Chinn's Branch, etc. I feel like labeling the features gives me a better understanding of the map and my battle plan. Maybe the names of these features to be revealed when either: 1) the mouse hovers over a feature, or 2) it was an option to turn on/off. I'm I the only one interested in this? It sounds like something the developers could add relatively easily.
-
I have a little suggestion that maybe can hep balancing the conquest game. What if, after a nation conquers any port, the same nation has to maintain an occupation force in the city just conquered. It will mean that to "keep" the town the nation has to commit some forces to it. Maybe some players have to build an outpost, or any other special building to maintain possession. If this is not done, after a period of time, city can go back to a neutral state. Another solution would be that the conquering nation has to do some upkeep routinely, like maintaining a garrison or something like that, forcing a member of the invading nation to pay for it, or even visit regularly. This system could be further develop if we had a political system. Like a Viceroy,or someone in charge, that can appoint any player to be in charge of a city. It would be up to the player in charge to improve the city, maybe pay taxes to the central government. If a nation has to commit to some kind of upkeep... well it will surely slow down the fast conquest of 3 5 ports every night. I will stop here. But the possibilities are infinite.