how could KoH2 sell MUCH better without disappoint the core-fans?

[Madmax]

hi all,

from the posts of Frujin of the last weeks and from the patch itself, I realise that KoH might actually have a future. However, a future in industry is always bound to earning money, let's face it.

The question in this thread is to the fans and it is aimed to give some hint to BSS.

More in particular, each of you could try to think of a short list of features that would make the next KoH game a good sell, which means would attract much more customers, simultaneously remaining a product that we would enjoy EVEN more than this KoH 1.05. Of course the customer target must be clarified at first, motivating also why THIS target and not another (i.e. why core strategists and not younger audience: more strategic choices and more realism, not eye candy).

The list should be:
1) short: about three points would do it
2) each point should be good motivated and should indicate to which customer type are they aiming.

Come on, lets brain storm for BSS :go:
--
My personal suggestion is to appeal the strategy fans of the total war serie. Not the young eye candy lovers, but the core strategists that loved the first totalwar titles. If I am not wrong, though being not really wide spread, Shogun and Medieval had good sells. The possibility of having great campaign features and great field battles will satisfy all tendencies of this customer target.

- STRONG IMPROVEMENT OF THE FIELD BATTLES: a 3-D strategic map keeping the 2D sprites for the troops; a lager amount of units and troopers; more in the direction of a wargame simulation. Shogun Total War is definetly the example to follow.

- FULL MULTIPLAYER: campaign and battles playable in multiplayer, in permanent servers and/or in multi-sessions games. The first game ever to offer this options in multiplayer!

- GENERAL : MORE REALISM AND MORE OPTIONS IN THE CAMPAIGN: not a drawback from the KoH style IMHO if the present options are expanded and the gameplay is kept at first place. Also, a bit of realism more will help with the core strategists

The aim is to get the final medieval strategy game!

[Knight of the old times]

Well what i am most worried about is that nowadays graphics and all the stuff that goes with it are the most important things for good sales. If we want a possible KOH2 to be succesful it has to make profit and like i just said we need some cool eye candy which well satisfy possible new customers, if they won't add new eye candy things, koh2 would be to dependant on those who just know BSS delivers good games. That just won't cut it in this industry, we have to realize that the way KOH looks right now is not enough, it has to be even better and deeper (and all those sort of things with which current games are coming out with).
So i say we should not force BSS to just make a refurnished KOH2, but rather a completely new KOH2 with some KOH feature in it...
That is if we want the creators of this great game to make a living:wink:

It is not because i don't like how KOH is, hell no, but it's necessary for the game and it's future.

PS: i'm not talking about Directx 10 kind of graphics, just inbetween of what we have now (with koh) and what will come with directx 10.

[Borsook]

If I may comment on the "eye candy" aspect of things - while it is certainly a way to bring more sales by atractining players who do not pay attention to anything deeper, there is still quite a lot of people (I personally can think of about a hundred names I know via personal/internet contacts) that would buy e.g. MTW2 if not for the fact they do not have systems powerful enough (though MTW2 actually scales very well). So should KOH2 go into 3d realm, I'd say paying attention to that niche might be the way to go. Repeating the graphical "hype" that CA goes for won't be IMO successful simply beacuse their games have already a wider audience so giving a very similiar product won't give any advantage.

[Angryminer]

1. The europe map
The current map is a mix between a real map and a table-top game. It somewhat looks like a real map, but there are strange "realms" on it, and "zones" that can't be conquered, etc. etc.
I think a big improvement would be to make the map seem real. That isn't just about graphics, also gameplay. Remove provinces, but keep towns. A town owns villages, a duchy has towns, an earldom has duchies, a kingdom has earldoms, an empire has kingdoms. But all of these are dynamic. Towns can trade villages, duchies trade towns, etc. etc. Using Ai vasalls this can both decrease the workload on the player and create a more realistic athmosphere.
Graphically the game should try to keep everything as real as possible. Especially concerning colors. Lesser concerning dimensions (for reasons of playability).
The game should thrive to give the player the feeling that he's looking at europe of 1200 a.d. Not just a map of it, the monitor should appear as a time-machine.
2. Battles
The first thing to think about should be the numbers of soldiers involved. This is to again give the player the feeling he's looking at a real battle that happened sometimes during the medieval. Not a graphical representation of it, a real battle.
Obviously that needs a different approach regarding graphics, because the size-scales are huge compared to the current system.
Another topic is the involved time in battles. Battles did take quite a lot of time if the involved numbers were high enough. In KoH the battles get more hectic if the numbers rise, but they don't take much longer.
This could be solved by making battles last longer, but make it possible to zoom out of them and zoom back in later (obviously that needs the battle to go on in the zoomed in view while I look at the europe map). That way I could zoom in, take a few decisions, move out, look for my empire and later check back on the battle.
3. Diplomacy
Each AI character needs a sheet of priorities (not visible to the player) he wants to do. Knights, Kings, governors, etc. That gives me the basis to talk to them. I want the Earl of Wessex to declare war on Wales, but keeping peace is high on his priority list, because he is also in need of money. He tells me that he doesn't want to go to war because his treasury doesn't allow it. So I hand him a nice coffin with gold, and now declaring war on Wales rises up in the priority list because declaring war means he gets my gold, which means he can fullfill his fund-raising-priority on his list.
Again this only leads to a more life-like behaviour of the AI charcters, which improves the time-machine-feeling of the game.

Angryminer

[hawk_knight]

1. The europe map
The current map is a mix between a real map and a table-top game. It somewhat looks like a real map, but there are strange "realms" on it, and "zones" that can't be conquered, etc. etc.
I think a big improvement would be to make the map seem real. That isn't just about graphics, also gameplay. Remove provinces, but keep towns. A town owns villages, a duchy has towns, an earldom has duchies, a kingdom has earldoms, an empire has kingdoms. But all of these are dynamic. Towns can trade villages, duchies trade towns, etc. etc. Using Ai vasalls this can both decrease the workload on the player and create a more realistic athmosphere.
Graphically the game should try to keep everything as real as possible. Especially concerning colors. Lesser concerning dimensions (for reasons of playability).
The game should thrive to give the player the feeling that he's looking at europe of 1200 a.d. Not just a map of it, the monitor should appear as a time-machine.
2. Battles
The first thing to think about should be the numbers of soldiers involved. This is to again give the player the feeling he's looking at a real battle that happened sometimes during the medieval. Not a graphical representation of it, a real battle.
Obviously that needs a different approach regarding graphics, because the size-scales are huge compared to the current system.
Another topic is the involved time in battles. Battles did take quite a lot of time if the involved numbers were high enough. In KoH the battles get more hectic if the numbers rise, but they don't take much longer.
This could be solved by making battles last longer, but make it possible to zoom out of them and zoom back in later (obviously that needs the battle to go on in the zoomed in view while I look at the europe map). That way I could zoom in, take a few decisions, move out, look for my empire and later check back on the battle.
3. Diplomacy
Each AI character needs a sheet of priorities (not visible to the player) he wants to do. Knights, Kings, governors, etc. That gives me the basis to talk to them. I want the Earl of Wessex to declare war on Wales, but keeping peace is high on his priority list, because he is also in need of money. He tells me that he doesn't want to go to war because his treasury doesn't allow it. So I hand him a nice coffin with gold, and now declaring war on Wales rises up in the priority list because declaring war means he gets my gold, which means he can fullfill his fund-raising-priority on his list.
Again this only leads to a more life-like behaviour of the AI charcters, which improves the time-machine-feeling of the game.

Angryminer
angry thinks the same way as me about it so his 3 points are my 3 points too :go:

and for the battle i have just one more thing to add. at the castle assaults if there is a drawbridge let it come up :biggrin: to give the enemy more difficulty to attack the city head one. and maybe a better squad management system as when we have like 2 full marshals on the field you have like 18 squads but its a bit more diffucult to select every squad to make a group and line them up fast to prepare for the enemy or form up to attack them head on.

And maybe something for te forts that the marshals can make they only make towers when the fortify camp why not give the a small pallisade(not so strong offcourse) as when i see an enemy marhsal made a fortified camp and i attack the mi can easly send my men to there camp and fight the enemy when there still getting out of there camps.
So if there is a pallisade it wll giff the defender more time to line up his/herr forces to repell the invaders. And it gives the fortified camp more protection then a normal camp as now the only diffrence bewtee the fortified camp and the normal camp is that it has 2 or 4 towers which shoots some arrows :wink:

[Knight of the old times]

If I may comment on the "eye candy" aspect of things - while it is certainly a way to bring more sales by atractining players who do not pay attention to anything deeper, there is still quite a lot of people (I personally can think of about a hundred names I know via personal/internet contacts) that would buy e.g. MTW2 if not for the fact they do not have systems powerful enough (though MTW2 actually scales very well). So should KOH2 go into 3d realm, I'd say paying attention to that niche might be the way to go. Repeating the graphical "hype" that CA goes for won't be IMO successful simply beacuse their games have already a wider audience so giving a very similiar product won't give any advantage.

True but MTW2 and RTW have realistic looking battles, koh doesn't and that's where they will lose customers (if KOH2 would ever be made), if they would make somthing as is shown in the startup movie then this game would go allong with the time we are living in, or atleast something similair to that video.
So i'm not saying it all has to look like fps games but to be competitive against, say Supreme commander it should have something which looks nice and ofcourse a nice new feature wouldn't hurt (like supreme commanders split screen thingie).
I understand it's a hell of a job but it does ensure a future for KOH kind of games:).

[Richard]

WEll In my opinion the map looks very well right now. However I would love a WELL DONE 3d battle system. If they aren't going to do it right, then leave it at 2d.
Add more events like the ones in Koh tha were never finish, a better family representation(look at crusader kings for a nice way to do so). Add the possabilities to play as counts/dukes not just kings.
And ofcource multiplayer maps. Like I have always say, not the entire europe map, but small parts. Like British isles, balkans, iberia,germany,Italy, ect...
Knights should die of old age as well.

[Scott716]

If they go the eye candy route I promise you it won't be the same game, it will lose all it's charm and end up being like all the other games out there that have tried it. It's all about the gamplay, why do you think games like X-Com and Close Combat are still played to this day while other eye candy games come and go, it's the atmosphere and gameplay. It seems the trend these days is to dumb down the gameplay and pump up the graphics(See Railroads!). I'm not saying they can't be improved a little bit(but right now love the map), but not to the extreme that it is the main focus.

I would like to see the gameplay refined even more, as said increase the family details, have other members of court age as well..overall just increase the details.

[Frujin]

Interesting thread :)

[hawk_knight]

Interesting thread :)


it is he :biggrin: have you seen some good ideas for koh2 already :angel:

[dearmad]

1:
Drop player controlled battles entirely. You can NOT compete with M2TW on this front. Don't waste resources here. Keep battles a more strategic affair. Besides the AI for battles is always poor (it is in M2TW) and makes the game entirely unbalanced in the player's favor.

2:
Focus on the strategic elements of the game- the dynasties, the diplomacy, the economies, trade, espionage, etc...

3:
Increase the depth of playing your royal house a bit- not to Crusader Kings levels, but keep it still fun. Internal political intrigue might be fun.

[Elvain]

Interesting thread.

For now I can only say that I was very surprised how my opinion isn't very far from Angryminers, especialy in diplomacy.

I think that the place of KOH lies somewhere between Crusader Kings/EU and Total War Series with touch with your lands, being able to attract both groups - those who like deep diplomacy and medieval touch but are able to lead battles.

The crucial poionts are:
1. Ability to zoom, controll your lands more directly than from "one city which looks the same like 100 others", with the possibility to enter battles too

2. Medieval economic system where nothing is more important than food (and number of your subjects) and controll over international trade. One gives you human capital to expand, the second money to buy technologies and buy better weapons

3. diplomacy. Deepen and widen it. Get inspiration in Crusader Kings, Control your royal family, kins and vasals, make the diplomacy the key even more than now. As said by Dearmad - intrigues are always fun

if the player will be able to use all of these, and possibly leave one or two of them to skilled AI, all people will like it.
if you offer a multiplayer... I won't repeat my multiplayer opinoin.. you all know it

[Madmax]

I am really glad you peeps find the topic interesting :bday: :wink:

I also, as Elvain and others, find excellent the ideas of Angryminer

Back to the field battles, I would just like to add, MTW2 is not unbeatable on the battle system, not at all. KoH does not need to reach a comparable graphics: it is enough to give something MORE, something DIFFERENT, NEW. One example is to allow the multiplayer campaign, I cannot think yet of a better idea than this one. An exceptional feature could be the number of players that can join the campaign. As somebody else mentioned, not necessary on the whole europe, there might be some smaller scenarios. This idea can develop a fantastic game, IMHO.

Another good idea given above is to give, for example, a larger number of troops that a full 3D system can ever give: you don't need a super-pc for it and you can win lots of not-up-to-date-machine customers. Furthermore it fits with the corestrategists, which don't care too much for eyecandy and don't have super-pc.

To Dearmad, I think that completely dropping the field battles would not be KoH anymore, but a clone of EU or Crusader Kings.

A final thought: I agree with Borsook , above, if BSS wants to bet on graphics, then they must deliver something comparable with actual total war and warhammer titles, otherwise there is no chance of success, IMHO.

[Angryminer]

After re-reading the thread (and my own post) and after reconsidering the formulation I think the really most important thing about KoH is the mentioned time-machine effect. That's what KoH should try to improve in the future. I think that's really the absolute maxime of KoH. It's why I like KoH now, and everything that disrupts this effect is what I don't like about KoH.

I believe many people can agree on that. For people who think differently there are propably better games around.

Thinking about what establishes the time-machine effect is a slightly personal matter though, especially graphical. Everyone has his own image of a medieval world, I guess.
To me, the things that disturb this effect are mostly the forced structures of the game. Like for example:
- If I siege a town I may not just zoom in, decide to fire a few burning rocks into the town and then zoom out to wait how well the city will cope with the problem of having it's granary burned down (if the governor of the besieged town was so stupid to build the granary in the range of my catapults).
Neither may I assault the town, take down most of it's defenses and a part of their soldiers and then draw back, so the remaining enemy troops know they'll die either way and hand over the city soon, without me having to sacrifice the necessary soldiers to kill them.
- Most towns somehow look exactly equal. It is very interesting that the governor of Wessex choose the exactly identical layout to build the citywalls as the governor of Paris.
- I can't tell other kingdoms what I think about their actions. Great, Poland attacked the Teutonic Order, I never liked them anyway, I love Poland! ... but my relations with Poland are still neutral.
This boils down to the fact that the AI characters are very simplistic. Their degree of complexity is often not enough to react in a natural way.
- I have a town that I'd like to take control over that farm-village there that is currently under the control over it's neighbouring city. I'm the king, but still I can't issue that!

You get the idea - when designing the game you chose a few structure-elements that rather restrict me than support me. You should thrive to make a design that has simple rules but allows an excessively high complexity. Now allow the player to delay work to vasalls and the game gained complexity and immersion while decreasing the amount of necessary rules and decreasing the amount of involved management by the player.

...Of course that does increase the complexity on *your* end, but I'm the customer here, ain't I? :smile:

Angryminer

[Borsook]

1:
Drop player controlled battles entirely. You can NOT compete with M2TW on this front. Don't waste resources here. Keep battles a more strategic affair. Besides the AI for battles is always poor (it is in M2TW) and makes the game entirely unbalanced in the player's favor.

If I may disagree - not only are the battles in KOH very enjoyable, also I don't think AI is a real problem - in all TW series (including MTW2) it's the campaign AI that's awful not battle one, in MTW2 (as in partly RTW) it just has to be modded a lot to it's full potential, possibly the "dumbness" is there on purpose (seeing as majority of the players hate to lose and have to look up "tactics" in a dictionary)

[Scott716]

I have to agree, player controlled battles must stay. You can say it's not challenging about most games that have playable battles. I like having the choice to play it out or let the computer do it. It's a fun part of the game and gives a little diversion from the other strategy parts, almost like a side game in itself but It's part of the whole package and one of the many things I love about this game. I think BSS has a good handle on the atmosphere and what's fun, just needs some small changes.

[LordSlayer]

As a (visiting) Total War player-that is MTW/VI and Shogun, I ve always felt that if the battle map ideas could be added to the present KoH, then you d have a perfect Medieval game with all the depth and "realism" required to combine roleplay and strategy.

I dont know KoH that well as Ive had it for 2 years and not been able to install/ get it to work , hopefully till now.

However , looking at the quality posts here and the obvious sophistication of the gameplay Id say the battle side is "all" that needs tweaking, making it superior to RTW and M2TW in my opinion.

The longevity of the earlier Total War games is due to the richness of content-a richness KoH seems to achieve strategically.

[dearmad]

Well IF battles stay in on the tactical level- they need to be severely changed so that they aren't so cartoony (not in looks but in how they play). They are like arcade games as they are now, not enough strategic depth and the pacing to them is too fast.

[kevincompton]

Well IF battles stay in on the tactical level- they need to be severely changed so that they aren't so cartoony (not in looks but in how they play). They are like arcade games as they are now, not enough strategic depth and the pacing to them is too fast.


then play M2TW!

;), watsup dearmad, i'm also on twcenter.

[dearmad]

heh- heya. And believe it or not I once modded this game too- but t was MUCH harder to do... :)