Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Thorfinn the Shallow Minded

Garrisoning and Loyalty

Recommended Posts

As the current system works, if a unit garrisons in a building, that structure regenerates loyalty and, if it is a defensive one, they add to the arrow count.  Personally, I would prefer it if melee and ranged units offered distinct functions for garrisoning.  Ranged units could add arrows, but not contribute much to the loyalty, and melee units would only provide a substantial boost to loyalty.  I think that this approach would make defending and attacking buildings more nuanced since one kind of unit would be good as anti-personnel at the cost of keeping it vulnerable to capture if there would be a substantial enough force present.  Melee units might make the building resistant to capture, but occasional sorties would be necessary to mount if the player wants the structure to stay up from direct attacks.

  • Like 4
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Thorfinn the Shallow Minded said:

As the current system works, if a unit garrisons in a building, that structure regenerates loyalty and, if it is a defensive one, they add to the arrow count.  Personally, I would prefer it if melee and ranged units offered distinct functions for garrisoning.  Ranged units could add arrows, but not contribute much to the loyalty, and melee units would only provide a substantial boost to loyalty.  I think that this approach would make defending and attacking buildings more nuanced since one kind of unit would be good as anti-personnel at the cost of keeping it vulnerable to capture if there would be a substantial enough force present.  Melee units might make the building resistant to capture, but occasional sorties would be necessary to mount if the player wants the structure to stay up from direct attacks.

If anything I would say garrisoned melee units should add significantly less ranged defense(arrows) compared to garrisoned ranged units, but it's not unreasonable for them to add at least some capability there (even throwing boulders, dumping pitch, etc. a short distance, basically the "murder holes" tech of AoK). But they won't magically become sharp shooters. At least conceptually it makes sense, but it might "feel" differently in games.

Conversely, melee units should add more loyalty than ranged units, but even a building held by archers would have some inherent "loyalty", only they aren't as effective at close range.  I think you're already making that point, in which case I fully agree :-)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

otherwise capture technologies should be developed and basically avoid capturing a lot in the first phase, the first units should hardly be able to capture, unless it is a huge army.

And certain civic buildings raise loyalty, like temples.

Edited by Lion.Kanzen
typo
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, historic_bruno said:

If anything I would say garrisoned melee units should add significantly less ranged defense(arrows) compared to garrisoned ranged units, but it's not unreasonable for them to add at least some capability there (even throwing boulders, dumping pitch, etc. a short distance, basically the "murder holes" tech of AoK). But they won't magically become sharp shooters. At least conceptually it makes sense, but it might "feel" differently in games.

Conversely, melee units should add more loyalty than ranged units, but even a building held by archers would have some inherent "loyalty", only they aren't as effective at close range.  I think you're already making that point, in which case I fully agree :-)

By and large I agree, and the thing about melee units is basically what I was going for.  As to whether they should add any projectiles, I'm not against that approach, but it might make their role unclear.  Obviously making them incapable of dropping some boiling water would be an abstraction and one I could live with, but I think that if there is a difference between melee and ranged units, it should be intuitive, of which I would say my proposal generally is.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is it possible to make capture attack as an area of effect and auto-attack? (More like an aura that drains loyalty points)

This way units will not bother to switch attacks or capture enemy buildings but focus on combat.

Capturing will also not be limited on who fits on the footprint. Dozen of units are slowly getting mowed by guard towers just because they cannot overpower the garrison, ignoring the fact that the attacking units are far more superior in numbers.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

may be some bonus aura for placing houses close (Neighborhood). 

Cavalry taking tower...hmmm no, that is not realistic.

Since it was implemented, there wasn't any  addition of technologies for and against capturing.

 

Edited by Lion.Kanzen
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, wackyserious said:

Is it possible to make capture attack as an area of effect and auto-attack? (More like an aura that drains loyalty points)

This way units will not bother to switch attacks or capture enemy buildings but focus on combat.

It will be with D1838 and D2092.

6 hours ago, Lion.Kanzen said:

may be some bonus aura for placing houses close (Neighborhood).

Looks like a morale thing. Which would be nice to have as well :)

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, wackyserious said:

Is it possible to make capture attack as an area of effect and auto-attack? (More like an aura that drains loyalty points)

This way units will not bother to switch attacks or capture enemy buildings but focus on combat.

That's already doable with an aura.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/21/2019 at 1:54 PM, Thorfinn the Shallow Minded said:

 Ranged units could add arrows, but not contribute much to the loyalty, and melee units would only provide a substantial boost to loyalty

One of the two points is just template editing. The only annoying point is the micro needed to put the right units in the right place (I guess currently people use the military selection filter)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, fatherbushido said:

That's already doable with an aura.

Oh yeah, you're right! I even have that implemented already. Oh ignorant me again.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...