Recent Posts

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10
1
Conduct & Design Discussion / Re: Troops V2.0 - Unit Types
« Last post by De-Legro on December 11, 2017, 11:10:33 PM »
I think we need a better explanation of how you envision this new system. Because I am completely confused right now.
Do you just mean that mobilising troops from settlement garrisons will not be an instant action (as it is now) but a lengthy and costly process?

As soldiers are individuals you always have the option of moving/retraining them between forces. There would be some sort of retraining time associated.

With regards to mobilising units designated as militia, there is no current plan. I want to try and balance the ability to mobilise your militia in order to defend your neighbors, with the desire to put in some limitations regarding the ability of realms like Hawks to mobilise ridiculous numbers of troops when they go on the offensive. There is certainly a lot of balancing work to be done before this part of the troops upgrade sees the light of day.
2
Conduct & Design Discussion / Re: Burn ships!
« Last post by De-Legro on December 11, 2017, 09:42:41 PM »
Being an island realm is already a somewhat one-sided option, you know. Don't see anyone complaining. When you're raiding an island, you're already fucked if they manage to block the boats. Attacking mainland settlements leaves you a lot of room for manoeuvre. If your boats are blocked you can continue damaging the victim and then just leave by land eventually. If you're worried about unfair advantages, my suggestion does not create any but perhaps helps mitigate some.

Firstly lots of people complain, the "invincible" nature of the islands combined with the abundance of fishing settlements is the number 1 gripe I hear. That said if it is already one-sided, why would we want to introduce options that increases that advantage?
3
Conduct & Design Discussion / Re: Troops V2.0 - Unit Types
« Last post by Constantine on December 11, 2017, 02:18:35 PM »
Professional or Militia they would retain the current system of being named and having history. It would also be completely possible to train militia troops into a professional force, or retire professional troops into militia. It would simply take time instead of the instant actions we have now.
I think we need a better explanation of how you envision this new system. Because I am completely confused right now.
Do you just mean that mobilising troops from settlement garrisons will not be an instant action (as it is now) but a lengthy and costly process?
4
Conduct & Design Discussion / Re: Burn ships!
« Last post by Constantine on December 11, 2017, 02:16:16 PM »
Being an island realm is already a somewhat one-sided option, you know. Don't see anyone complaining. When you're raiding an island, you're already fucked if they manage to block the boats. Attacking mainland settlements leaves you a lot of room for manoeuvre. If your boats are blocked you can continue damaging the victim and then just leave by land eventually. If you're worried about unfair advantages, my suggestion does not create any but perhaps helps mitigate some.
5
Conduct & Design Discussion / Re: Burn ships!
« Last post by De-Legro on December 11, 2017, 02:03:25 AM »
Yes let me burn ships. As a Island nation I can then force anyone that dares land on my island to remain their forever or die. Or you know I could just camp the ships and use block area to achieve the same thing.

The question is, what would the down side to burning ships be? Without some sort of consequence it would be a very one-sides option, particularly as I noted for islands.
6
Conduct & Design Discussion / Re: Troops V2.0 - Unit Types
« Last post by De-Legro on December 11, 2017, 02:01:25 AM »
What is unique about M&F and what I really like about this game is persistent mortal characters who, once trained, hang around until dead or disbanded and can fill any role you need. They can ride to battle or man the walls. Every soldier has unique history. This is fantastic.


What is suggested here I see as a serious downgrade. When we go for restrictive troop types, we go back from truly flexible individual soldiers to gamey "units/unit types". I see a lot of harm in this but I fail to see any real benefits. The announced benefit was that less active players would have an easier time building up their garrisons? Not important enough for such a huge change, imo.


I do like the idea to sophisticate the equipment supply though. I don't fully understand how it's supposed to work though.

When did I say I was removing the individual nature of troops? Professional or Militia they would retain the current system of being named and having history. It would also be completely possible to train militia troops into a professional force, or retire professional troops into militia. It would simply take time instead of the instant actions we have now. Nor did I announce anything about allowing less active players an easier time to build up garrisons.

As I said at the beginning this is not about adding more flexibility, but about presenting choices. Once troops actually have on going costs Lords will need to decide if they want to dedicate their limited resources into have more of the flexible professional troops, or having a larger over all defense force by recruiting cheaper militia forces.
7
Conduct & Design Discussion / Re: Troops V2.0 - Unit Types
« Last post by Constantine on December 08, 2017, 03:22:11 PM »
What is unique about M&F and what I really like about this game is persistent mortal characters who, once trained, hang around until dead or disbanded and can fill any role you need. They can ride to battle or man the walls. Every soldier has unique history. This is fantastic.


What is suggested here I see as a serious downgrade. When we go for restrictive troop types, we go back from truly flexible individual soldiers to gamey "units/unit types". I see a lot of harm in this but I fail to see any real benefits. The announced benefit was that less active players would have an easier time building up their garrisons? Not important enough for such a huge change, imo.


I do like the idea to sophisticate the equipment supply though. I don't fully understand how it's supposed to work though.
8
Conduct & Design Discussion / Re: Troops V2.0 - Unit Types
« Last post by silvershot on December 08, 2017, 03:11:15 PM »
Please explain further how this will improve the experience. Basically this sounds like an introduction of "weaker" tier troops (garrison and levies). I don't see how this provides flexibility or choice at all.


Levies are weaker, but would allow you to bolster your ranks more quickly in the event you lose a significant chunk of fighting force. They can act as cheaper fodder to protect your more effective troops. Professionals would likely end up being more expensive, while levies would fill in the gaps with being less expensive. When not serving, they'd probably do more work around a settlement than the militia.

I should say, I'd expect something along those lines. I made a suggestion like this previously.


Edit:
In my suggestion, the training was front loaded as well -- you trained them, and later called them up. They produce a tiny bit less than normal peasants, since they can't forget their normal training -- and have a significantly reduced amount of time to call them into service whenever you do so. Think of it as time spent forming units, gathering equipment, any minor refreshers, etc.

I'd also imagine you could have any of the three do any job, just some less effectively, efficiently, or at greater cost. Professional soldiers would make fine militia, but they wouldn't contribute much to the economy and they'd cost more for likely not fighting much better than militia at the walls.

Militia would be significantly less expensive; a little less skilled, but they also work in the economy and can help pay for themselves. As said, they wouldn't likely want to leave their hometown, or possibly just get very upset for leaving their local realm even if they're able to. That's the domain of the professional soldiers, who won't complain about much.

Levies probably wouldn't be much less effective than militia at the walls, but in active defensive service they'd probably lose a chunk of the economic contribution. If you think a big attack is coming, you could try to rally them into service in time (but you'd run into training constraints). They'll also travel hopefully a little bit easier than militia. Meanwhile, they'd also be the cheapest upkeep. Since upkeep SHOULD be a thing.

It does make balance even harder, though -- to add a third option. But it might be interesting.
9
Conduct & Design Discussion / Re: Troops V2.0 - Unit Types
« Last post by Constantine on December 08, 2017, 02:54:44 PM »
Please explain further how this will improve the experience. Basically this sounds like an introduction of "weaker" tier troops (garrison and levies). I don't see how this provides flexibility or choice at all.
10
Conduct & Design Discussion / Re: Burn ships!
« Last post by Andrew on December 08, 2017, 01:18:35 PM »
This wouldn't be hard to do or implement, as far as stealing and burning ships.

Making rivers navigable would be.... tricky, due to how the game handles the land/sea logic, and how it handles you coming ashore. I'd like to do this, and I think it's sorta on my TODO list already, but it's nowhere near as easy.
Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10