T2 Messengers |
Post Reply 
|
Page 12> |
| Author | |
Wartow 
Postmaster 
Joined: 20 May 2014 Location: United States Status: Offline Points: 870 |
 Post Options
 Thanks(0)
 Quote Reply
 Topic: T2 MessengersPosted: 28 Aug 2015 at 15:19 |
|
Did I post this already? Did someone else?
What if you could send messengers to an occupying force, obviously your own, and tell them not to return to the home city but rather to tell them where they should go next? It would also be nice if messengers had the ability to track down anything (of yours) that is on the move to recall them home. No more 14-30 day trips from Elgea to the BL when you forget to change cities before sending harvesters, diplos, or armies.
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
Agalloch
Wordsmith 
Joined: 12 Feb 2015 Location: USA Status: Offline Points: 127 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 28 Aug 2015 at 16:04 |
|
I think the ability to give orders to your armies in the field is the biggest flaw in this game imo, that is the one part that seriously hinders us.
|
|
|
|
|
Brandmeister
Postmaster General 
Joined: 12 Oct 2012 Location: Laoshin Status: Offline Points: 2396 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 28 Aug 2015 at 16:41 |
|
If you could redirect armies in the field, the biggest alliances could pretty much roll sieges continuously from target to target, once the enemy alliance was low on troops. The destructiveness of wars would rise exponentially, since time is the only limiting factor once one side has achieved a strong numerical advantage. Going home might be unrealistic, but it's a game balance issue.
|
|
|
|
|
Artefore
Forum Warrior
Player Council - Biographer Joined: 21 Feb 2014 Location: Earf Status: Offline Points: 312 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 28 Aug 2015 at 17:01 |
|
This would be very easy to exploit. Place armies 20 squares away from someone, coordinate t2 messengers, and have them attack the city, essentially launching a sneak attack.
|
|
|
"don't quote me on that" -Artefore
|
|
|
|
|
Wartow
Postmaster
Joined: 20 May 2014 Location: United States Status: Offline Points: 870 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 28 Aug 2015 at 17:13 |
|
What if... the redirection of armies was limited such that the new target cannot be a player city? These military plans (sieges and raids) are beyond what a messenger can deliver.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Brandmeister
Postmaster General
Joined: 12 Oct 2012 Location: Laoshin Status: Offline Points: 2396 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 28 Aug 2015 at 18:04 |
|
Then I don't understand the point of the advanced messenger. Unless your intention is still to allow siege camps to be moved adjacent to player cities, in which case it still has the same problem (as the camp is in many ways more dangerous than the catapults).
What are you trying to do? |
|
|
|
|
Angrim
Postmaster General
Joined: 02 Nov 2011 Location: Laoshin Status: Offline Points: 1173 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 28 Aug 2015 at 18:52 |
|
a side issue: as i understand it, having a messenger track down units in motion would require pathfinding.
|
|
|
|
|
Rill
Postmaster General
Player Council - Geographer Joined: 17 Jun 2011 Location: California Status: Offline Points: 6903 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 28 Aug 2015 at 19:23 |
|
Not being able to redirect armies in the field is definitely a limitation in the game. As others have previously noted, this limitation seems to serve game balance.
One thing that might still retain balance and follow on other discussions such as land claims and use of sovereignty would be to create a troop "depot" option. That is, alliances could claim sovereignty and build (with appropriate research) a map location to which troops from the alliance (and possibly allied troops) could be sent and then dispatched with other orders -- perhaps carried by a t2 messenger unit. If building the location required a substantial amount of time and the location had to be continuously occupied in order to build it, then battles over these "depots" could become as significant in war as battles over cities -- possibly with less personal animosity. I think this could probably be done in a way that preserves game balance, but it seems like it might be somewhat difficult to code, and might also add to periods of high server load with troops arriving at a depot site and being dispatched, not to mention the battles fought there. I'm interested in what other people think of this idea.
|
|
|
|
|
Bobtron
Wordsmith
Joined: 21 Mar 2015 Location: Canton Status: Offline Points: 123 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 28 Aug 2015 at 23:36 |
|
How about having T2 messengers just tell an army to extend their 'occupation of a square' time? That way, players using armies to mark resource location spots don't have to do maneuvers and calculations on sending occupying armies every 2 weeks.
|
|
|
I support the Undying Flame!
|
|
|
|
|
Brandmeister
Postmaster General
Joined: 12 Oct 2012 Location: Laoshin Status: Offline Points: 2396 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 29 Aug 2015 at 01:24 |
|
I think it's desirable to require modest effort to hold rare resources with armies. Lapses in occupations are one of the few ways that non-sov resources can change hands.
|
|
|
|
|
Post Reply
|
Page 12> |
Tweet
|
| Forum Jump | Forum Permissions You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot create polls in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum |
Topic Options