Much of my feedback has been that its too complicated and messy. I personally have not really liked the current system.

So here is an alternative idea that I think is very simple mechanically (making it easy for new players to use), and still has alot of strategic value.


- You can deploy an army from a Barracks at any time if you have the resources for the army.
- Once the army has been deployed (and paid for), that one Barracks becomes inactive for X turns (X depends on the level of the army).
- Each army deployed is 1 FULL stack.
- No limit to how many Barracks you can have.

eg, you click on a Barracks and deploy Squires. You now have 1 FULL stack of Squires. That Barracks is now inactive for say 4 turns, and cannot deploy another army (from that Barracks) until the cooldown period is over.

Obviously some units will allow you to deploy one full army every turn (lowest troop), while other units may lock up your Barracks for several turns (like HC or Knights).

Its a kind of reverse RTS system.
Normal RTS systems you buy a troop, the barracks waits for X seconds, then the unit pops out.
In this idea, you buy a troop, it pops out, then the barracks waits for X turns.

Its a very popular and familiar system, but this way is more immediate so you get to DO something right away (another big issue I've see in feedback).

Thoughts?

Seems just as complicated. How about troops automatically deploy when trained. Or somthing in that direction.

I find the current system works pretty well, but maybe thats just me ... also, this suggestion seems like a pretty good system also, ive played other games with a similar system and it works well

I like the idea, but there are a few things comming to my mind.

This won't allow us to deploy several low population troops on the same turn, ant that is needed sometimes... may be if we can split armies...

On a game I have the money to build about 40 HCs. with this rules, if I make 4 barracks next to the castle I want to attack i would be able to deploy them... in the actual system I have to wait about 30 turns to get them. I don't think it's fair to get the armies on the 1st turn...

Jux, its much much simpler. There is nothing simpler than clicking Deploy Squires and it appears.
There is no production numbers to worry about, or growth and decimals to calculate, and no large tables of populations to manage. This is much simpler.

vikingo, you cant deploy multiple armies from 1 barracks per turn, nor should you. These are FULL stacks, so are pretty powerful. If you need to deploy more than 1 per turn, you'd need more barracks, which makes perfect sense and is exactly in line with pretty much every good RTS game out there.

Yes, you get the HC as soon as you deploy, but it is a risk. HC would have the longest cooldown, so the barracks it was deployed from would be inactive for some time.
Remember, you still need to get the techs and assign troop types to a barracks, so you wont be able to deploy a full stack of HC that fast.

Well, that definitely takes away from the one pop deployment part of the game. There will no longer be any strategy to deploying a certain size of troop to fit your need...doesn't that make it a bit less strategic and tactical? I like having the one pop fodder, or 2 pop resource grabbers.

yes it does, which is the direction i am looking at going anyway (with the 1pop units in the future).

so instead it deploys 10pop units (full stacks) each time.
which does take away the 1pop fodder/blockers tactic which I have never been fond of.
it does mean you have to plan and use your armies better, because you cant just deploy 20 2 pop armies and go around and collect everything in the first 4 turns.

it also means you cant deploy 20 1 pop scout armies and go running around with little to no risk (who cares if a 1pop scout is killed while scouting).

This way, you have full stacks to manage, and whether you use them for scouting, resource collecting, defending or attacking, it is all of equal risk/reward. To me, that makes decision making much harder, meaning more strategic.

Now, its so obvious what you need to do to win.
This idea, not so obvious.
Simpler mechanic, tougher choices.

This might be super in the PG game, but will it put a drag on conventional camps and duels?
Are you going to provide us with the means to build all the barracks we want?

rex

yes, no limit to barracks.

I do have to agree with the fact that only deploying full pops isn't all that desireable in the current rules. The lower pops tactics will still be useable in that once you've used a unit enough it'll be smaller, but it'll be vastly limited.

Like i said in IRC last time, Req, i'd like to see at least some degree of variability in deploying if only it were to be a choice between a full 10 pop and a half strength 5 pop. That would still get away from the 1 pop fodder techniques, that aren't very realistic for retal, and yet would give more options in planning a strategy.

So, i do have a few questions though. Are troop costs going to change at all because of this? Currently costs seem to be balanced pretty well with production/income per turn while taking into account teching.

And, have you had any more thoughts into the issue of taking a castle? I still believe taking over a castle would be practically impossible for at least half the game if they can suddenly deploy 30 pop of scouts in 1 turn and another 30 pop on the next since scouts are basic troops.

Yes, I had thought about making a 5pop tech, so you could then deploy troops in half sizes, but with a slightly higher cost/time than 50%.

Of course this means that the minimum cooldown would be 1 turn. So the weakest troop would deploy Turn-1, Turn-2 is cooldown, then you can deploy again on Turn-3. Half armies would allow you to deploy every turn.

With castle takeover, we can simply add a rule that says the Cooldown doesnt count when an enemy is nearby. So if they deploy 3 full scout armies, if you have troops near the barracks, they cant deploy again. Either that, or the cooldown is doubled, so it takes twice as long to deploy in those cases.

Although in most RTS/TBS games I've played, you can keep deploying from barracks as long as you have the resources to do so, regardless of whether you are under attack or not. So not sure why we would do it differently

Req...

I like the various sized stacks... It can be a hassle, but can also play into tactics.

Not that I'm a master tactician. As evidenced by my stats...

Just my quickie thoughts..
Estes

Go back to the production amount we had before this last change where all troopkind at least produced some troops every turn. Instead you increase the cost of every new army of the same kind. First one costs x next 1.1x or something. (How much increase I didnt give much thought) You could then chose few cheaper or many but expensive
You could call it a commander fee as each new army would need a new commander.

Last Edited : Monday, 22 September 2008 - 09:00

How about just trying it in like the proving grounds first?

I think I might like it, wouldn't mind at least trying it before giving an opinion.

I have to say that I'm intrigued by the idea. It brings back some of the "battle" strategy elements into the campaigns. I've never been a big fan of the the 1 pop retal/fodder group tactic. Even though it's highly effective I never agreed with it's "realism" as it pertains to actual on the field battles. It should be more painful to take the retal.

I also would be a big fan of the unlimited barracks option, especially late in the game it could lead to some great action.

As for the castle take overs, I like the way it's setup now if the castle is occupied. You have the opportunity to fortify and you get the defense bonuses. My only suggestion might be the ability to still build walls or other defenses with the enemy still near?

What I'm not a fan of is the ease with wich you can take castles that have been abandoned by inactive players. I wish there was a way for barbs to show up and inhabit the area to make it more difficult to take over.

How about using the Battle points, so you can produce your full stack of troops if you have the reasorces, but the longer you leave it b4 doing so the stronger that troop is with BP ,really you would only need a 1 pop troop to do this

ie . a scout takes about 4 days to deploy at full power (BP)the same as now (about 2 pop per day),but if you deploy b4 that ,say after one day then the BP is only 25% of full power,

this would be strong enough to grab piles and scout but not much more ,

the diff would be that the opponent would not know the power/BP of the troop

With no disrespect harold... That idea isnt worth a velvet painting of a whale and a dolphin gettin it on...

HaHa maybe not Its just there for discussion

some issues regarding the new system:

- the current system regarding taking resources(piles, mines) or buildings will fall down since 2pop sc is able to take 1 pile and 5+1pop sc are able to take a mine etc...
- also the current system regarding building buildings will fall, since 6pop can build a market and 4pop coms 1 tower etc...this is my favorite
- the current damage done by rams & cats will fall also
- ballis will always have that 9x5 =45% more damage against 10pop
- no 1 pop retaliation and then full stack attack
- not enough money to pop up 10pop all the time...so you have to plan your money very carefully.
- sometimes you will desperately need troops in the current turn ...and that will force you to train low level troops despite the fact that your barrack is upgraded to the highest level.
- the one who control the resources will have more troops since he can build more barracks.
Here I have a new idea. Instead of quantity we may go for quality. That means, we can have an upgrade system to barracks so you can pop up troops with a higher level of starting att/def and maybe damage.
- 10 pop stack will surely simplify the strategy

and that's not all ...I'll add more while they will come into my mind

Last Edited : Monday, 22 September 2008 - 11:49