techs I don't like capturing

[wowgetoffyourcellphone]

I think capture should be made more special and important in a sense.

Remov capture for most individual building. Instead, make the Civic Center the focus of capture, like a "capture point" that is different for every match. What can change is this: Capture the Civic Center and you instantly get all the houses within its territory and all the women workers. YUUUUGE effect that can swing a match. Also, important to save your civic centers from capture. My thing is to reduce the grind and make DRAMATIC events a key components of this game. The right charge, the right battle, capturing a key civic center, major events to turn the tide.

 

 

EDIT: As consequence, the Civic Center have more capture points of course,

Edited April 16, 2016 by wowgetoffyourcellphone

[wowgetoffyourcellphone]

Maybeplayer get something like this when player trains a hero:

 

Since you have a hero to lead your men, you can have these policy that toggle their behavior. Attack or Capture. of course, player can override groups of selected units if they wish to.

Edited April 16, 2016 by wowgetoffyourcellphone

[PASilva]

I like the capturing dimension of the game. What really sets me off is its conjunction with the deletion feature, which makes capturing+delete a lot quicker than destroying the building from the start. Furthermore, I know this feature has been since forever in RTS games but, instant building and siege destruction did not happen in medieval times. I see two solutions for this:

1- Disable building deletion. Buildings shouldn't be automatically destroyed. A player should have the option to attack his/her building in order to destroy it, no matter the time it takes (maybe there is a damage bonus to its own buildings).

2- (As already suggested by others,) When a player deletes a building it catches fire and slowly looses health until it is destroyed (repairing the building sets the fire out). The difference I propose here is that this happens for every building owned and there is no special damage for freshly captured buildings (if there is one, it should be a penalty, emulating the soldiers not knowing the weak spots of the "alien" structure, but I think this is unnecessary complication).

One can regard capturing as gaining access to the building interior and deleting as striking at key pillars (1) or setting it on fire from the inside (2), which should be quicker than hacking and slashing from the outside.

Personally, I prefer the first option with a (slight) bonus to damage. Players should be careful to position their building (especially early on, as it will take time and workforce to destroy them). The second option requires less micromanagement and resources to do it. Either way, the time to capture+deletion should not be excessively different from attacking.

[Lion.Kanzen]

1- yeah that's unrealistic in many cases.

2-yes. I agree.

[Grugnas]

In most RTS you can destroy buildings with soldiers.

Capturing and "suicide" buildings is an alternative way to get a building down and a strategic choice to use it at own advantage once captured.

Io can still use sieges to destroy buildings and get a small amount of resources as reward though.

[DarcReaver]

On 10.6.2017 at 9:25 AM, Grugnas said:

In most RTS you can destroy buildings with soldiers.

Capturing and "suicide" buildings is an alternative way to get a building down and a strategic choice to use it at own advantage once captured.

Io can still use sieges to destroy buildings and get a small amount of resources as reward though.

So, what is the advantage of not suiciding buildings? In the last version buildings automatically went to neutral within a couple of seconds anyways and couldn't be used anymore unless you kept half your army next to it to keep it occupied. Which binds significant amounts of soldiers that could instead go around and kill stuff. The fact that Town Centers are almost uncaptureable with earlygame/midgame armies and enemy soldiers garrisoned inside doesn't help either.

Either scrap capturing or suiciding. Both at the same time makes no sense.

[Grugnas]

The advantage in capturing structures like barracks, fortresses, civic centers and towers is quite obvious. You can expand your territory influence or simply train units directly from enemy barracks. You could even use the "converted" territory influence to build a civic center or a military colony which builds even faster than a cc and start to invade enemy territory .

By the way when you capture enemy barracks, you know where enemy units can be trained from, thus 1 unit garrisoned per barrack will keep them captured with no risk.

I must agree that capturing without suiciding houses makes no sense unless you bring women into fight and garrison them into houses (still the pop gained from a single isn't worth the effort).

Indeed capturing is much faster than destroying them with sieges or elephants, matter of fact most of the times units just clear out stuff like storehouses and houses and clear the path for sieges.

Still one can't pretend rams to one shot buildings (perhaps they could have slightly more damage) and most of times the buildings loot is not reclaimed, especially the really low wood loot that houses and such provide or the exp bonus that basically makes no sense since rams can't get promotion. On the other hand, having units able to capture buildings makes the life of a catapult much easier, otherwise a catapult has to destroy any single house in order to reach the "main" building which is actually bad due catapult accuracy.

[Servo]

I like the capturing system but needs some fine tuning imo. Example...

1. There should be minimum number of units garrisoned (not 1) so that the structure does not revert back to original owner even if there's no unit/s attempt to recapture it.  This should apply to military buildings, temple and CC/military colonies. 

2. Recapturing abilities must be lessened maybe 2x the capturing abilities of the captors garrisoned units. 

3. Deleting structures or units just doesn't make sense and unreal. I rather have a "razing" style like RoN. The razing time for the owner should be faster than the captors. Most players (good ones especially) exploit some game mechanics defects just to gain more advantage. Although mechanics applied to everyone but lesser skilled players are more vulnerable to these exploits. Deleting units to save loot, gain more military unit numbers is really a bad mechanics. 

I hope attrition damage is in place in the game. 

[Stan`]

If I understand what attrition damage is it will be included if #1910is commited at some point.

[Lion.Kanzen]

Can be possibility to near houses would be considered a single entity? And then you capture more than a house in a rush.

this How siege work in cities, example Siege of Jerusalem by Romans.

[DarcReaver]

On 13.7.2017 at 1:22 PM, Grugnas said:

The advantage in capturing structures like barracks, fortresses, civic centers and towers is quite obvious. You can expand your territory influence or simply train units directly from enemy barracks. You could even use the "converted" territory influence to build a civic center or a military colony which builds even faster than a cc and start to invade enemy territory .

 Dude you_can't_use_the_structures. Because there is no converted territory next to 1) Towers, 2) military buildings and 3) most importantly next to Civic centers. Which makes the system obsolete. Just delete while they loose capturing points before they turn neutral.

Quote

By the way when you capture enemy barracks, you know where enemy units can be trained from, thus 1 unit garrisoned per barrack will keep them captured with no risk.

I must agree that capturing without suiciding houses makes no sense unless you bring women into fight and garrison them into houses (still the pop gained from a single isn't worth the effort).

Quote

Indeed capturing is much faster than destroying them with sieges or elephants, matter of fact most of the times units just clear out stuff like storehouses and houses and clear the path for sieges.

Still one can't pretend rams to one shot buildings (perhaps they could have slightly more damage) and most of times the buildings loot is not reclaimed, especially the really low wood loot that houses and such provide or the exp bonus that basically makes no sense since rams can't get promotion. On the other hand, having units able to capture buildings makes the life of a catapult much easier, otherwise a catapult has to destroy any single house in order to reach the "main" building which is actually bad due catapult accuracy.

The reason why houses should have more population and cost more instead of being cheap and spammable buildings in the first place.

Edited July 14, 2017 by DarcReaver

[DarcReaver]

On 13.7.2017 at 5:14 PM, Servo said:

I like the capturing system but needs some fine tuning imo. Example...

1. There should be minimum number of units garrisoned (not 1) so that the structure does not revert back to original owner even if there's no unit/s attempt to recapture it.  This should apply to military buildings, temple and CC/military colonies. 

2. Recapturing abilities must be lessened maybe 2x the capturing abilities of the captors garrisoned units. 

3. Deleting structures or units just doesn't make sense and unreal. I rather have a "razing" style like RoN. The razing time for the owner should be faster than the captors. Most players (good ones especially) exploit some game mechanics defects just to gain more advantage. Although mechanics applied to everyone but lesser skilled players are more vulnerable to these exploits. Deleting units to save loot, gain more military unit numbers is really a bad mechanics. 

I hope attrition damage is in place in the game. 

The question is : Why should it be necessary to have a delete feature in the game in the first place?

Are there necessities to delete entities or structures manually because they are required? From what I've seen it's just unnecessary - UNLESS you're capturing enemy structures. There it's super useful to just delete it after capturing.

[Lion.Kanzen]

Space and some structures have limited by number thatvwhy you need delete them.

with houses you got right point but not all factions have same houses, some faction have different bonus and capacity or simple the cost is nothing.

Britons houses are cheap but small. Less population limit

Romans are expensive but you have more population limit.

Ptolemies houses cost nothing but are hard to finish the cost balance is time.

 

@DarcReaver what is you idea for capturing?

 

[Servo]

@DarcReaver For multiplayer "delete" shouldn't be applied once a structure are built or portions of it built. Raze is in my opinion the appropriate way. Same as units once they are trained they are supposed to either live or die. That way you don't exploit the defects of real gameplay. 

But in single player The delete feature is very much useful and enjoyable. 

If the developers can toggle to either have it or not in either multiplayer or single player mode imo the better. 

[DarcReaver]

2 minutes ago, Servo said:

@DarcReaver For multiplayer "delete" shouldn't be applied once a structure are built or portions of it built. Raze is in my opinion the appropriate way. Same as units once they are trained they are supposed to either live or die. That way you don't exploit the defects of real gameplay. 

But in single player The delete feature is very much useful and enjoyable. 

If the developers can toggle to either have it or not in either multiplayer or single player mode imo the better. 

This doesn't help with the issue at all. If you capture and raze the building it's still the same?!

What's so hard to understand that capturing and deleting buildings (call it delete or raze over time) contradicts each other fundamentally because structures in enemy territory become neutral anyways?

The issue is that you have no benefit from capturing at all, it's the same as destroying because you prevent the opponent from using it. It would only work if capturing is permanent. But right now it isn't. So the only reason to capture is to manually destroy it after capture to cause a damage to the enemy.

Edited July 14, 2017 by DarcReaver

[wowgetoffyourcellphone]

Here's what I'd do. I would focus capture on the Civic Center. Once that is captured nearby buildings then become capturable. Until the CC is captured you have to destroy the enemy buildings as per tradition.

Edited July 14, 2017 by wowgetoffyourcellphone

[Lion.Kanzen]

2 hours ago, wowgetoffyourcellphone said:

Here's what I'd do. I would focus capture on the Civic Center. Once that is captured nearby buildings then become capturable. Until the CC is captured you have to destroy the enemy buildings as per tradition.

This the same way as RoN.

[vladislavbelov]

I like capturing, but it could be improved. About capture + delete to destroy a building: I think deleting shouldn't be an immediate process, it needs to be a continuos process. It could be faster than capturing.

Edited July 14, 2017 by vladislavbelov

[Lion.Kanzen]

On 15/4/2016 at 7:40 AM, X-Seti said:

I do not see a problem with taking enemy buildings, default should really be destroy and control left click to takeover, however I'd only take over buildings if there was other armer / weapon tech /units to use.

We talk abou that and the team don't take a solid decision about default behavior.

[sphyrth]

I prefer DE's Capture Mechanic better. Some buildings like Storehouses and Farmsteads can't be captured. Sure it messes up the consistency, but they're among the obvious structures to capture+delete anyway.

Civic Centers, Military Colonies, Barracks, and Fortresses are another thing. I have witnessed people take advantage of these captured buildings.

[Lion.Kanzen]

The buildings must be assimilated before you will 100% owner

this should be work like real life, my example favorite is the Siege of Jerusalem.

you can focus first in take defenses before take city and then you take piece by piece, attrition must be a thing but I'm not sure of can be fair to both sides.

 

asimilation basicly is how a culture and invader try to capture or conquest another, so the local people are try to rebel ( Gaia) and you with the time transculturalized them, instead be Celts or Judean be a Roman.

 

so to be a building 100 yours:  you need a minutes after capture and probably investigate technologies and have cultural buildings around to transculturalized people.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transculturation