From Cavalry to Infantry, and Recycling Veterans

[eggman]

Here's a few cavalry related ideas:

I really like the idea of cavalry dismounting, which has already been brought up several times. I also think that the riderless horses should run back to the nearest (or player selected) stable and wait for their masters there. Then the horseless riders could call them back when they wanted to ride again.

When cavalry units are near death, say with 10-15% health left, there could be a 50% chance of their horses dying before they do, and they would become injured "dismounted cavalry" (or just standard infantry, whatever works). The total population would also go down by one, of course, as half of the two-point cavalry just died.

This would heighten realism and could make things more interesting in the heat of battle.

Another idea expanding on this is to have the "dismounted cavalry" retain their earned rank. That way, if they could escape the battle and make it back to the stable, the player could pay one population point and have them re-mounted, turning them into the original cavalry, with the rank they had when they fell off their horse.

[Belisarivs]

Would it really increase realism?

I don't believe, that horses were trained to find a way home (especially in campaigns, where terrain permanently changed) and then run back to their masters?

Horses were upon dismounting before battle gathered and held in rear or during battle were left to run anywhere and then probably caught back.

I would let it be, or dismount permanently, so horses would run away and never return.

Remember, this isn't simulation. This is AoK in 3d in different time and some enhancements.

More enhancements = bigger delay of release.

Also, this is about battling. Player won't care about micromanagement when in heat of battle.

Dismounting could help, but boring and repetitive stuff around just because it is more real would unnecessarily draw his attention which is needed elsewhere.

[MrEmjeR]

yes ur right

and there cant be to much commands in the game cuz then it takes very long for new players to became good

and you loose your overview and structure and that decrease the strenght of ur strategy

[Justinian]

It'll also help us if the game doesn't have too steep a learning curve.

[Silver]

It'll also help us if the game doesn't have too steep a learning curve.

Yep, most game makers want a wide audience. Making simple things even more complicated is a step backwards.

[MrBlack103]

Take Theocracy, for example. It's a great game, on a massive scale (possible to have thousands of units at any one time), but it takes so long to learn to play effectively because it is so micro-intensive. Good thing it's one of those "do your actions and let time run" games

[Silver]

Here's a bad example of what this will create:

GunZ is really micro intensive. It is all about microing and never standing still. 99% of the game you would be maintain a butterfly style of combat. Which is where you block, dash, shoot, switch from sword to gun and back, and jump in the span of a second, and you keep that up for minutes at a time. Not only that, but you have to move forward left right or wherever you have to go.

It's a bad example, but that is a game where 1 guy takes an insane amount of micro, imagine microing armies, types of units, formations, ore, food, wood, trade, scouting and then having the added worry about horses being dismounted in combat potentially blocking other hand to hand units from attacking the enemy. (I personally am always clicking or doing something, I never sit around and wait for anything in any game, having dismounted cavalry in a battlefield would be one thing I would hate when microing in battle.)

I just think this idea and others like it meant to create realism (over complicate the game.) are going to make the game harder for everyone and less interesting, I know lots of top end players who quit games because of patches and expansions that do these things.

[Mythos_Ruler]

Silver is right. You have to balance realism with gameplay. I think we, in our game design, are striking a good balance.

[eggman]

ok, well it was just a thought

I really am looking forward to playing it...