| Author |
Topic Search Topic Options
|
Bonaparta
Postmaster
Joined: 03 Nov 2011
Location: Milky Way
Status: Offline
Points: 541
|
Posted: 29 Jan 2013 at 18:21 |
Mandarins31 wrote:
Elmindra wrote:
Leaving a siege in place and just reducing a town to 0 is an option, but what if a raze or capture attempt took all reinforcing troops along with it just like Sally Forth does? That to me would make perfect sense, and would be another good reason to have infantry as a viable troop type outside of dwarves. |
Non-sense. Infantry wont be more produced to attack cities, mostly with your "all attack in final assault" idea, as cities are made on plain: almost the only terrain to get 7 food tiles. (having 7 food mountains... is that an other idea for more balance?)
|
Cities could be buildings... that would give infantry some good use and would limit cavalry use for direct attacks greatly. Actually I imagine city as a group of buildings not plains that buildings are built on...
|
|
|
 |
Elmindra
Forum Warrior
Joined: 10 Sep 2012
Status: Offline
Points: 464
|
Posted: 29 Jan 2013 at 18:22 |
|
Cities are considered buildings when razing or capturing, so yes this is perfectly fine. As for 7 food mountains, they are quite easily produced with a little knowhow and a free alt.
|
|
|
 |
abstractdream
Postmaster General
Joined: 02 Oct 2011
Location: Oarnamly
Status: Offline
Points: 1857
|
Posted: 29 Jan 2013 at 22:28 |
Elmindra wrote:
Magic is going to force people to completely change some of their established cities and no one will complain.
| Not a chance...lol
|
|
Bonfyr Verboo
|
 |
Darkwords
Postmaster General
Joined: 23 May 2011
Status: Offline
Points: 1005
|
Posted: 29 Jan 2013 at 22:40 |
ES2 wrote:
This^^
Not much call to train the other unit types if the few such as Cavalry excel in nearly all fields. |
That is the point though ES2, when it comes to military there are only 3 fields. 1 - Attack strength 2 - Defensive strength 3 - cost ( or numbers sustainable) Whilst T2 cav clearly excel in one field the are the very worst in the two others. Bows excel in defence Spears excell in cost and Swords are kind of an all rounder ( although best in defence given certain terrain). There are clearly uses for all troop types, but I beleive people merely concentrate on offense which is really a mistake.
|
 |
HATHALDIR
Forum Warrior
Joined: 01 Jul 2011
Location: Adelaide
Status: Offline
Points: 380
|
Posted: 29 Jan 2013 at 23:49 |
|
castles should be classed as buildings not as terrain tile that would negate cav in a seige, which is only correct
|
|
There's worse blokes than me!!
|
 |
Darkwords
Postmaster General
Joined: 23 May 2011
Status: Offline
Points: 1005
|
Posted: 29 Jan 2013 at 23:53 |
|
Or you could use strategy as to where to build your cities.
But I guess power gamers want both the advantage of 7 food spots and good cav defense
|
 |
DeathDealer89
Postmaster
Joined: 04 Jan 2012
Status: Offline
Points: 944
|
Posted: 30 Jan 2013 at 00:09 |
How bout your allowed to build different types of walls?
You can have the standard wall, and then you can build a T2 wall that is strong against a certain type of unit. This would support anjire's idea indirectly of just having a better wall. But then you still have the unit triangle of what wall you should build. Most likely everyone will build cav walls making infantry more effective.
|
 |
Elmindra
Forum Warrior
Joined: 10 Sep 2012
Status: Offline
Points: 464
|
Posted: 30 Jan 2013 at 00:12 |
Darkwords wrote:
That is the point though ES2, when it comes to military there are only 3 fields.
1 - Attack strength 2 - Defensive strength 3 - cost ( or numbers sustainable)
Whilst T2 cav clearly excel in one field the are the very worst in the two others.
Bows excel in defence
Spears excell in cost
and Swords are kind of an all rounder ( although best in defence given certain terrain).
There are clearly uses for all troop types, but I beleive people merely concentrate on offense which is really a mistake.
|
Not exactly. You need to apply the strength to cost (most people use upkeep) ratio in order to truly judge a unit. Cavalry has the best attack to cost ratio of any unit by far. Even in unfavorable terrain, they are still superior (with the exception of buildings). Bows have the best defense to cost ratio, except for vs cavalry. The problem being is that the cavalry power ratio is so much that you can still attack any terrain (except buildings) and have the advantage. Attacking a town with a lvl 20 wall on plains with just 7k T2 cavalry will completely wipe 20k T2 archers. This should not be allowed to happen no matter what. That is a major disparity of power vs upkeep, with the 7k T2 cav costing 28kgph and the 20k T2 archers costing 60kgph.
My entire point is that there is absolutely no call to build swords if you are not a dwarf, and that while spears are still useful, their training time vs power ratio is not equivalent to bows so spears are not a viable choice as well. Yes spears are useful vs cavalry, but why train them when you can get more bang in the same amount of time with archers. We don't need massive changes, just tweeks to terrain and training times.
|
|
|
 |
Darkwords
Postmaster General
Joined: 23 May 2011
Status: Offline
Points: 1005
|
Posted: 30 Jan 2013 at 00:40 |
Elmindra wrote:
Not exactly. You need to apply the strength to cost (most people use upkeep) ratio in order to truly judge a unit. Cavalry has the best attack to cost ratio of any unit by far.
|
Yes that is 'exactly' what I said.
Elmindra wrote:
Even in unfavorable terrain, they are still superior (with the exception of buildings).
| And again you agree with me...
Elmindra wrote:
Bows have the best defense to cost ratio, except for vs cavalry. The problem being is that the cavalry power ratio is so much that you can still attack any terrain (except buildings) and have the advantage.
| And 'exactly' how does this differ from what I said?
Elmindra wrote:
Attacking a town with a lvl 20 wall on plains with just 7k T2 cavalry will completely wipe 20k T2 archers. This should not be allowed to happen no matter what. That is a major disparity of power vs upkeep, with the 7k T2 cav costing 28kgph and the 20k T2 archers costing 60kgph. |
If you are unstrategic enough to defend a plains square with archers and then get hit by someone strategic enough to use the best troops for that terrain you deserve much harsher losses if you ask me.
Elmindra wrote:
My entire point is that there is absolutely no call to build swords if you are not a dwarf, and that while spears are still useful, their training time vs power ratio is not equivalent to bows so spears are not a viable choice as well. Yes spears are useful vs cavalry, but why train them when you can get more bang in the same amount of time with archers. We don't need massive changes, just tweeks to terrain and training times. |
I would completely disagree with you, I am human and I build swords and I know many dwarven players that do so, they are very good if you have the brains to use them properly, from what I can tell, you want an even playing field between all troop types, and therefore all need for strategic thought or planning removed from the game. Why not just say we should have just one unit type called soldier and its defence ranking is the same and its attack? Yes cavalry are great in attack, they are the attack troop after all. But the other troop types also have their benefits, perhaps you should look at some tourney stats to see the evidence of which are most used. You base your claim on the idea that cav are the only troops worth producing, try doing that and see how well you can defend your cities?
|
 |
Darkwords
Postmaster General
Joined: 23 May 2011
Status: Offline
Points: 1005
|
Posted: 30 Jan 2013 at 00:44 |
DeathDealer89 wrote:
How bout your allowed to build different types of walls?
You can have the standard wall, and then you can build a T2 wall that is strong against a certain type of unit. This would support anjire's idea indirectly of just having a better wall. But then you still have the unit triangle of what wall you should build. Most likely everyone will build cav walls making infantry more effective. |
Not a bad idea and of course you would need to scout a city to discover what type of wall it had.
|
 |