Basically the idea of this is like, a temporary city. One problems I've found with armies is you send them out to fight a war, and it takes ages to get there, then ages back, and it's all very slow.

The plan: If you could set up a temporary headquarters for military units, a large camp where they all gather.

This would be the plan. You send army X to occupy where your camp is placed. Once there, you can control that army from that camp site, send it to attack, raid, occupy, and once it's finished, it returns to that camp for further orders. That way if you're at war you could keep your troops close to the front line to be deployed quickly. But also at the added risk of that camp being attacked and destroyed, the troops with it. (As it wouldn't have the benefit of city walls, but perhaps sentry towers, and a light defensive bonus as apposed to regular camped armies).

I think this would be a great addition to the game and really pep up military movements. Thanks for reading. Ciao.

[02:41]<Athain> There should be some sort of balance, though, for stationing armies in "fake" cities. Like an extra hourly food cost to simulate the supply trains

Perhaps have an added cost of supplies sent to build the defensive structures.

+1 for the idea though :D

The thought behind it was, you set up the military HQ area (At some kind of cost, give it resources, money etc) and then when you commit an army to the post you can control it from that post it rests there etc. And if the post is destroyed when an army is out, when the army returns to find it in ruins, they return to the city that sent them there.

I think the minus to defense would be that the troops occupying the post will often be sent off to raid / attack cities or camps. So while the armies are away it's going to be slightly more vulnerable. And the cost of them (gold or resources p/h) would insure they don't remain there long anyway, it would me more of a short term usage to take the fight to the enemy for a small amount of time, to do quite a bit of damage quickly, but not sustainably, if you see what I mean.

Perhaps it could work on some kind of cooldown system. You can only send one command out, for a certain amount of time (depending on building / sov level) once every so often.

But depending on the use,

If like siege camps they cant be stacked meaning only one player can have a camp at the location, but he can atleast put all HIS troops in it, but this would be the minimum of keeping it even a little useful.

I do not think players will place them close to enemy towns since if the enemy finds it they will attack it heavily and for those that has seen heavy warfare that means a minimum of 60k troops heading towards your camp

And to follow on that, any nerfs to the defense of the camp is a bad and wierd idea, it should get maybe a 10% increase to it instead since the camp is closer it is easier for enemies to attack it.

On another note those calling against sieges being able to be sent from there, as a first attack upon declaring war this might be a "bad" thing for some, adding some kind of downtime on this, some here says no siege engines sent to the camp but can be built in the camp, that sounds cool, but the speed would need to be lvl 20 barracks me thinks.

Another way would be to just restrict their movement for a few days before they can be sent out again after arriving.

love the Ottomans btw ;)

Also currently in a War where the idiots who declared war against us are 5-8 days away from us and it takes an unnecessary long time to kill their towns because of the long travel time between killing them.

as said alot before, a siege is a big thing and should not be easy, but its very hard now and doesn't need to get harder.

dont piss off the big groups, and if you do beg for forgiveness in public so that if the enemy doesnt stop they get the GC crusaders looking at them with mean eyes :D