Our Wish Lists

[Wodin]

OK. As it was mentioned it was still early in development and they where listening to us and what we'd like to see and what where not keen on I'd though I'd make this thread.

So if everyone writes down their list of things they like to see and things they would then maybe it might influence some parts of this game.

Want.

1. Heraldry make it really special looking.
2. A realistic feeling, make it dark and little grim, just how a Middle Ages battle would have been!
3. As many combat modifiers as you can cram in, aswell as weapon types and armour.
4. A big variety of Heroes\Commanders.
5. Turn based combat thats exciting and nerve racking.Or even better WEGO.
6. Simultaneous turns.
7. Lots of research and great tech trees that make sense. No you have to research a horse before you can have a knight etc.
8. Random map generator.
9. No Rock Paper Scissor mechanics, I hate them well not hate but find them boring.
10. Be able to MOD it!

Don't Want.

1. Battle Card combat like in Magic the Gathering.
2. A World of Warcraft aesthetic. Please no cartoony colourfull visuals!
3. Basic Combat mechanics I'm talking what goes on under the hood here aswell.
4. Not all about Magic. Make Combat interesting with or without it. I'm not saying don't have magic in. I'd like to see lots of spells actually.

I do think Dominions 3 should be looked at and learnt from and improved upon. Though it looks very dated no fantasy game comes close. it's a shame they dumbed it down with Conquest of Elysium 3. WHich is still a decent game but not enthralling.

[TheGrayMouser]

Well, Im kinda low key in my requirements for a "fantasy" game... I tend to enjoy more mundane fantasy, where "normal" stuff is the norm but spiced up by the fantasic. So worlds like Martin's Game of Thrones, Howards Hyborea(ie Conan), the HorseClans novels(and of course Fritz Leiber) etc. I truly dont like "epic" story line fantasy, at least for gaming, like Lord of the Rings where its good vs evil, I prefer a neutral world where ambition (to conquer all) is equally spread amogst all nations with a nice touch of grey.

Just a thought: Is there any reason a fantasy game MUST cloak itself in "medieval" gear? When i think of a world where there is enough bureacracy/resources etc to support standing armies of legions, Air Corps of Dragons(or dwarf zeppelins or ornithopters or whatever) and battle mages, the last thing i think of is medieval since medieval implies feudalism. I think of a world more in line with that of the Napoleonic wars in terms of military/operational capability (except no gunpowder ).

[generalgonzo]

Here my thoughts on a 4x fantasy Turn based strategy game and how it should be:

- many different factions which differ really in gameplay; have a look here at "Master of Magic" or "Age of Wonders: Shadow Magic"
- tactical combat with influence of the vegetations (woods, open plains, ruins, cities, ..) like in "Fantasy Wars"
- hero units which could be sent on quests
- quest rewards (in form of special battle cards?)
- a good resource system including more than just gold to have a look at (stone, iron, food, ..)
- random map generator for as much replayability as possible
- tech tree for troops, buildings and magic (global/combat)
- special units like giants, titans etc.
- terraforming of the landscape (if it fits into gameplay)
- really good diplomatic system like it was in "Master of Orion"
- challenging AI

[Wodin]

Well, Im kinda low key in my requirements for a "fantasy" game... I tend to enjoy more mundane fantasy, where "normal" stuff is the norm but spiced up by the fantasic. So worlds like Martin's Game of Thrones, Howards Hyborea(ie Conan), the HorseClans novels(and of course Fritz Leiber) etc. I truly dont like "epic" story line fantasy, at least for gaming, like Lord of the Rings where its good vs evil, I prefer a neutral world where ambition (to conquer all) is equally spread amogst all nations with a nice touch of grey.

Just a thought: Is there any reason a fantasy game MUST cloak itself in "medieval" gear? When i think of a world where there is enough bureacracy/resources etc to support standing armies of legions, Air Corps of Dragons(or dwarf zeppelins or ornithopters or whatever) and battle mages, the last thing i think of is medieval since medieval implies feudalism. I think of a world more in line with that of the Napoleonic wars in terms of military/operational capability (except no gunpowder ).

Dwarf zeppelins sound more on the lines of Warhammer than most fantasy books\games etc. I to like the Game of Thrones kind of fantasy that has a big foundation in realism and isn't about different fantasy creatures, however if you went that way with a game like this you'd be limiting your customer base I feel. Rome managed to form great armies and that was pre medieval and was very bureaucratic. However your Napoleonic idea fits in well with my fantasy game Idea I spoke about over at matrix, especially with regards to combat. However as it's fantasy then you can mix it up and have that sort of warfare but in medieval gear. If you start making it a cross between medieval and more modern your entering steampunk kind of setting. Which again would be cool and I don't know of any Steampunk 4X games.

[TheGrayMouser]

Hmm, I admit Im not too familiar w Steampunk and from what I know I dont think I'd enjoy it too much. What Im getting at is fantasy combat of well organized armies doesnt need to look medieval , ancient or napoleonic in costumes, just utility.
I like a "realistic basis" to combat , even if the fantasy is included.
So if dragons that can swoop down onto armies, battle mages that can chuck fireballs etc, are reasonably common, clearly troops arent going to fight in large pike blocks, unless they can counter such things.
So even if your basic infantry grunt is a sword and shield man, crossbowman , whatever, troop formations likley are going to be smaller , more dispersed and have a lot more articulation than normal(certainly no phalanxes) . You clearly would need integrated support troops to defend vs the fantastic. This could be mages assigned to every battalian to counter abnormal threats or even batteries of "AAA" , ie pintol mounted ballistas to take out dive bombing dragons:) I imagine an emphasis on well organised combined arms warefare/armies in such a mileu.

[Wodin]

Hmm, I admit Im not too familiar w Steampunk and from what I know I dont think I'd enjoy it too much. What Im getting at is fantasy combat of well organized armies doesnt need to look medieval , ancient or napoleonic in costumes, just utility.
I like a "realistic basis" to combat , even if the fantasy is included.
So if dragons that can swoop down onto armies, battle mages that can chuck fireballs etc, are reasonably common, clearly troops arent going to fight in large pike blocks, unless they can counter such things.
So even if your basic infantry grunt is a sword and shield man, crossbowman , whatever, troop formations likley are going to be smaller , more dispersed and have a lot more articulation than normal(certainly no phalanxes) . You clearly would need integrated support troops to defend vs the fantastic. This could be mages assigned to every battalian to counter abnormal threats or even batteries of "AAA" , ie pintol mounted ballistas to take out dive bombing dragons:) I imagine an emphasis on well organised combined arms warefare/armies in such a mileu.

Great ideas and pretty much similar to the game I'm thinking about developing.

[Xerkis]

Just some of the things I would like to see in this game:

* Elaborate tech trees and researching – as long as it makes sense and has a good interface and able to be completely under the players control on what is being done and where the focused research is being done.

* Detailed, intricate combat with lots of units to move around and get lost in the new world. All the speculation on the Battle Cards has me a bit “concerned” in this area – and will totally ruin the game for me if they are the only combat facture. As a bonus, sure throw a card in there. But why make a fantasy game and then not be able to enjoy combat by seeing and moving your hordes of orc berserkers in to a waiting army. Unless I guess you want the player to truly only dream about it. You might as well take a starving man to a buffet and only let him look at the menu.

* Everyone loves the mega creature in these things, but they should be very rare. Things like dragons are not something you run across on a normal day to day. Have them in – oh my yes! But not in an over abundance.

* Same goes with the “Heroes” – a leader of some sort, yes obviously. But the mega hero, no.

* It’s a game that I want to play – right? So let ME play it. Don’t automate everything. Let me click the buttons, move the units, make the choices. I know not everyone likes to do things that way so here’s a little secret – it’s called an “option screen”. Fill it with check boxes on what to automate and what not to automate and let the players decide what they want to micromanage and what they want the game to handle. Why should it be the Devs decision on what is “too much” for me to do while I’m playing MY game.

* An option to turn off all the amazing graphics I’m sure you will be putting in to the game. If I’m going to be able to play the game, guarantee I will have to shut off all the graphics to play it on my laptop. So please make sure that is in there.

* Real diplomacy, not just the “OK we’re allies now” that some games call diplomacy. But if you are going to have it the game then put it in. Something with detail, intrigue, changing forces, etc.

[OmegaMan1]

My one wish for this game is that it has a campaign map that allows multiple choices on which mission to pick, so each campaign will be different. Perhaps something similar to the old Fantasy General campaign map, or the maps offered in the Panzer General III games. And of course "bonus" missions that will offer side quests, extra units, etc.

[kafka]

turn based combat (aternatively dom3 similar combat model with formation and role assignment)
sandbox game (random map generator)
different units per faction
factions really play differently
dom3 style hero creation
faction specific tech trees, buildings, magic
quests
recruitable NPCs (as in fallen encahntress)
RPG style heroes development
recruitable mercenaries, monsters, neutral faction's units
upgradable units
maybe faction specific unit design as in fallen enchantress (assignable weapons, armor, magic items and traits)
deep diplomacy system
customizable spells
maybe dynasty system
siege battles
region specific unit recruitement

[Terrement]

With some duplication of above (consider it "I second the motion") things I'd like include:

A solid AI

National and leader AI that is biased by personalities - regardless of the nation / leader some will be more attuned to expansion, or research, or magical power, or conquest, or alliances, etc.

Random map capability for max replayability

NOT cartoonish like WHFB

Magic should be a tool in combat, the realm, politics, etc. but not be the equivalent of nuclear weapons

Magic items should provide advantages, but be more in line with plusses to the fight or the spell casting but not be the overbalancing "Swiss Army Knife of Slaying Everything" like in some fantasy games

Nations should have inherent bonuses(perhaps the equivalent of Vikings having better naval capability than dwarves, who are better at mining, elves better at political intrigue, etc. but with some additional points to customize the abilities of your nation / leader based on how you prefer to game.

Units should have some commonality, such as having heavy and light cav or the equivalent but they should have inherent differences - perhaps mannish HC are better at a charge attack and undead hit with cursed weapons that preclude healing until the unit goes to a temple, lizardmen having poison weapons that weaken the opponent during combat, etc. Units should NOT be like DBX where no matter what the unit (dwarven axes, Roman legions, Crusader men at arms, etc.) are all "Blades" just wearing different costumes but otherwise the same.

Economic factors include the ability to sustain what you have, build expansions, fund sabotage and spying, bribe traitors, buy items for magical spells, conduct trade, and determine the types of units you can build but also be a strategic target (think of cutting supply lines of armies affecting battles, chevauchees to plunder your foe, capture or destruction of enemy capabilities, etc.

Diplomacy that includes such factors as racial similarity and animus, "history" and reputation, skill of ambassadors, and the ability to affect third parties. Treaties should be possible at different levels (neutrality, non-aggression for X turns, suppost for X turns, Alliance for X turns) as well as "binding" ones (alliance, treaties guaranteed by marriage, etc.) which could still be broken but at a great price in credibility and trust in future dealings.

Customization of heroes and leaders

Experience bonuses for troops

No outcome is guaranteed - although going against stacked odds is a losing bet most of the time, there can still be things like the arrow shot that killed Smaug, or for example, what are the odds of shooting down a fighter plane armed with just an umbrella? Yet Indiana Jones father managed to do just that.

Decisions that have consequences - this could be things like the effects of breaking (or keeping) treaties mentioned above, or, development of one type of building / technology to enable doing X precludes the building of Y

Speed of gameplay emphasized over beauty of graphics

Terrain types giving advantages and disadvantages to armies

"Schools" of magic, with the option of choosing how diverse or how specialized your spellcasters are. More diversity allows more lower level capabilities while specialization might limit you to a given school (Earth, Death, Fire, etc.) but doing so allows more spells in a given school and access to the most powerful of those spells.

Magic should carry a risk - the greater the power of the spell, the greater the repercussion in case of failure (loss of mana, madness, demon eating your mage, etc.) Perhaps the greater the rune power invested, the greater the ability to control the spell itself, the power, the accuracy, etc, but again, nothing is certain.

If the span of the game is long enough, things such as "death of a ruler", "a hero is discovered" etc. should be in play.

Random events should add flavor and temporary advantages and disadvantages (bumper crops, minor famine, exceptional trade route, storms that hinder movement, etc.) but not be back breakers.

Game shold have different levels of difficulty, similar to Panzer Corps

Sound effects are optional and nice to have, but if too limited or repetitious, they are better off not being used

Background music is a nice to have item, whether a continuous background loop, or just a short theme to announce events or player turns.

Every nation has to be win-able
I'm sure I'll have more to add as time goes on, but there's a start

[jamespcrowley]

Named 'Characters' with various attributes that relate to the activities in the game, i.e. generals, assassins, diplomats, explorers, spies etc.

These are the important stars of the story, as in any book or film or, for that matter, in real life. They should be in short supply and would have the ability to positively enhance whatever act they are attatched to. They needn't all be high ranking either. You could have a lowly sargeant who has a major plus for the combat ability of a single unit (think Sharpe) or an explorer who can go on quests etc.

Some could have potentially dual roles and it is up to the player as to how best to deploy them. Either way they would give some 'life' as to what is often a mecahnical experience in these types of game.

[bocian]

hi. Sovereignty Crown of Kings is a fantastic game, thanks for effort makeing it. I have an idea to add to gameplay. What about countermarch for musketeers(any gupowder units), so one unit after giving shot can be replaced by another gun unit standing next to him so first one unit in normal condition woudn't be allowed to move but thanks to countermarch is swaped. Gunpowder units should make huge damage to any enemies in plain field, but if their are any terrain obtecles like hills or trees or mountains or other friendly unit between shoter and enemy- damage should be much decreased. I would like to see musketter unit for humans for sure and pike man unit for protecting them(getting bonus if standing somewhere next to musketer). Pikeman could have swap special ability with musketer, so musketer after give a shot could be replaces by pikeman standing behind him.musketer because of dealing huge damage should be very expensive in maintainance or elite unit( i would rather see expensive in mainteinance) and should be easy to kill. Countermarch should be research at maybe 3lvl. Oh and please raise maintenance for all units cos i think many huge armies just make chaos and lesser the strategy factor. I hope somebody from creators will read my post and concern my ideas. Thank You agian for this fantastic game. Best wishes

[Emmeric]

More than 2 medals!

Would like to see at least 5. Make the units super-special so that if they die, you really feel the pinch.

Is there a way to insert extra medals into the Sov_Charts? Medal3a, Medal 3b? Hmmm.

[Emmeric]

Have a build-forts button (like the repair forts button). Cost: 10 Stone and 10,000 gold - max of? 4? Some places really need them.

[Breca]

Haha, I started reading these posts from Grey Mouser and Wodin, and remember them from the Old Days, when Sovereignty was very much in its early stages of development. Posts from 2012!

Wonder if you guys are still around?

More medals, more forts are good ideas for later.

[Deca]

List of additional improvements

1 Faction Borders
Currently all faction borders are in purple on "main map", but I would like to see them outlined in the color of the owning faction's color, or some other means of better indicating the borders rather than in purple for all factions.

2 Main Map Armies # of troops indicator
On the main map, for armies it would be helpful to see a small number to indicate how many are there. It would be helpful to look at the main map and see at a glance how many troops are in the army rather than having to click on the armies tab or manually select each army. As the empire grows, this becomes more tedious and would help facilitate a better overall view from the main map to be able to see just how many are in each army.

3 Provinces Sliding Window Pane - army indicator
When clicking bringing up the provinces sliding window pane it displays good info, but it would be helpful if it also contain a circle, or number, symbol, or anything, to help denote that you have an army there too.

4 Diplomacy Sliding Window Pane - Click to focus on faction capitol
When we bring up the diplomacy sliding window pane, it would be helpful if we could also be able to double click on a faction name to then be centered on their capitol city.

5 Resources Bar
Can we get a "resources bar" somewhere on the main game window to see, at a glance, how many of each resource we currently have as well as WHAT types we currently have throughout our empire.
Ex: Gem: 10/1 Fish: 3/0 Iron: 4/2
In those examples there would be the resource icon
10/1 would mean I currently have 10 gems in stock & own 1 gem producing resource
3/0 would mean I currently have 3 fish in stock, but that I do not own any fish producing resource
4/1 would mean I have 4 iron in sotck and 2 different iron producing resources

6 Tactical vs Auto - Preference/Toggle
Although I understand that without a Hero/Leader/General we currently only have the option of doing an auto resolution, but at the same time it would be nice to have a Game Selection (Check/Uncheck) to be able to have a game in which if we wanted to fight each battle in tactical we could (or simply give us the choice to select it when engaging in battle).