Play Now Login Create Account
illyriad
  New Posts New Posts RSS Feed - Military Tweeks
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Register Register  Login Login

Topic ClosedMilitary Tweeks

 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <12345>
Author
HATHALDIR View Drop Down
Forum Warrior
Forum Warrior
Avatar

Joined: 01 Jul 2011
Location: Adelaide
Status: Offline
Points: 380
Direct Link To This Post 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!!
Back to Top
Darkwords View Drop Down
Postmaster General
Postmaster General
Avatar

Joined: 23 May 2011
Status: Offline
Points: 1005
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 29 Jan 2013 at 22:40
Originally posted by ES2 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.
Back to Top
abstractdream View Drop Down
Postmaster General
Postmaster General
Avatar

Joined: 02 Oct 2011
Location: Oarnamly
Status: Offline
Points: 1857
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 29 Jan 2013 at 22:28
Originally posted by Elmindra 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
Back to Top
Elmindra View Drop Down
Forum Warrior
Forum Warrior
Avatar

Joined: 10 Sep 2012
Status: Offline
Points: 464
Direct Link To This Post 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.
Back to Top
Bonaparta View Drop Down
Postmaster
Postmaster
Avatar

Joined: 03 Nov 2011
Location: Milky Way
Status: Offline
Points: 541
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 29 Jan 2013 at 18:21
Originally posted by Mandarins31 Mandarins31 wrote:

Originally posted by Elmindra 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...

Back to Top
Mandarins31 View Drop Down
Forum Warrior
Forum Warrior
Avatar

Joined: 05 Jun 2010
Status: Offline
Points: 418
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 29 Jan 2013 at 18:08
Originally posted by Elmindra 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?)


Edited by Mandarins31 - 29 Jan 2013 at 18:09
Back to Top
Elmindra View Drop Down
Forum Warrior
Forum Warrior
Avatar

Joined: 10 Sep 2012
Status: Offline
Points: 464
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 29 Jan 2013 at 17:58
I hear you on the elf/dwarf thing Belargyle.  It is completely opposite in my mind (Elf best in mountains, dwarves best in forests).  That being said, I would be ok with keeping that the same if some of the discussed changes were made.  At least you would see those other troops more useful than currently implemented.

As for changing things on the fly, get used to it because things change in Illy all the time.  Magic is going to force people to completely change some of their established cities and no one will complain.

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.
Back to Top
Bonaparta View Drop Down
Postmaster
Postmaster
Avatar

Joined: 03 Nov 2011
Location: Milky Way
Status: Offline
Points: 541
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 29 Jan 2013 at 17:55
Spearmen should train much faster for all the races and that would keep cavalry in check. Trueshots should cost 2 leather armour. Why are they the only t2 special unit that have reduced training cost? All other races must pay the same + 1 beer for their t2 special troops.

Back to Top
Mandarins31 View Drop Down
Forum Warrior
Forum Warrior
Avatar

Joined: 05 Jun 2010
Status: Offline
Points: 418
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 29 Jan 2013 at 17:37
Originally posted by Elmindra Elmindra wrote:

As for spearmen, I think the base training time on them needs some adjustment.  When deciding whether to train spears or archers, the archers usually win because of the superior defense rating and that they train at the same speed. 

Agreed, also T2 orcish spearmen cost more in T2 equips than T2 elfish archers. So the choice betwen an Elf and an Orc is quicly done. 

I saw speamen (mostly for Orcs) as weak but largely outnumbering soliers. Keeping their higher weapons costs (in the case of Orcs) but decreasing their production times would have more sense, and would create more balance Cav/spears, and give more disadvantage to CAv on forests or Mountains. 

So +1

Side effect would be to motivate people to build more infantry to counter siege and such and to be more territorial as Inf is slower than cav, which would be a bit less used. Archers would be less produced as they fear more Inf than Cav on mountains. All Balanced 


Edited by Mandarins31 - 29 Jan 2013 at 17:49
Back to Top
belargyle View Drop Down
Forum Warrior
Forum Warrior
Avatar

Joined: 17 Jun 2010
Location: USA
Status: Offline
Points: 401
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 29 Jan 2013 at 17:34
Hehehe... I agree with much of what is written here on both sides of the fence.

What is odd to me however (from an RP standpoint - which in truth is one reason most pick the character they do) is that none of the races excel on a given terrain, but in fact excel at what would be, technically, the opposite terrain.. lol.

Ok.. here is my LONG standing rant.........

Examples:
Dwarven Stalwarts (best infantry in the game) excel in the forests and not in the mountains or hills. (offensive)

Elven Longbowmen (best bowmen in the game) excel in the mountains, not the forest (defensive).


Don't get me wrong here either, in a practical sense, both should be good in either terrain, but since they born to and live in a particular natural environment, they would be 'better' due this fact, especially defending it. Even the game 'births', you so to speak, on certain tiles based on your race. But I mean heck, you wouldn't dare want to use a Stalwart in the mountains defending unless it was all you got left.. 

~~~~~~~~~~~~

I also agree that it is silly to have Cav as powerful as it is on EVERY terrain. Cav being as good as they currently are on mountain terrain is to my mind, silly. There should be some more logical bonuses and negatives regarding terrain. 

I think they aught to introduce RACE Bonuses and more specifically toward the natural terrain. This could possibly help with some of the discontent and give a more natural balance.. somewhat :)

~~~~~~~~

But again, It is my LONG STANDING rant in the game.. you can go back to ignoring me again :)



Edited by belargyle - 29 Jan 2013 at 17:37
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <12345>
  Share Topic   

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Forum Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 12.03
Copyright ©2001-2019 Web Wiz Ltd.