Suggestion: Unit buffs / debuffs based on territory

[MirceaKitsune]

Another simple but powerful idea I wanted to suggest: What are your thoughts on implementing a tiny stat boost / unboost based on the territory your units are standing on? Whether for health or how well an unit preforms in combat or some other unit stat. It would be identical to how a hero boosts the strength of units close to them but for territory.

It's based on the idea that when near their home, soldiers feel safer and can preform better... when in an enemy's territory by comparison, they're more scared and might preform a bit more poorly. The phase of the territory you're standing on should increase the effect, thus village is weaker (it's a small and weak place) town is normal (a larger and more crowded establishment) and city is stronger (big city so more reason to feel safe / scared). Optionally there could be a bravery upgrade that can be researched to mitigate this.

The gameplay effect would of course be that attackers have a somewhat harder time conquering an enemy base. I envision it as something among the following lines:

• Own territory, +1.0 boost: Soldiers are fighting in their home and feel braver.
• Allied territory, +0.5 boost: Soldiers are fighting in the territory of an ally, they feel safer but it's not their own home, halved boost effect.
• Neutral territory, 0.0 boost: Units are battling in a place owned by no one or a neutral faction, no buff / debuff.
• Enemy territory, -1.0 boost: Your army is alone on the enemy's land, they're nervous and may have a harder time preforming.

[Jofursloft]

2 hours ago, MirceaKitsune said:

Another simple but powerful idea I wanted to suggest: What are your thoughts on implementing a tiny stat boost / unboost based on the territory your units are standing on?

Would discourage rushes and favour turtling. Terrible if implemented in 1v1 games

[Radiotraining]

Oh..! I guess you would be right

too bad! I actually like the concept cos it would make territory area strategically relevant but yeah, I see the problem.

Maybe a compromise could be to have it only as a special bonus for some civ, so the effect would be limited to civ choice and not dominant in the game?

I don't know, I imagine competitive players wouldn't find it necessary at all. I remember something similar was conceptualised for the Romans, but in that case was a speed bonus inside the territory. I'm not sure that will be implemented, but I thought it was a cool way to differentiate that civ from others. 

[MirceaKitsune]

42 minutes ago, Radiotraining said:

Oh..! I guess you would be right

too bad! I actually like the concept cos it would make territory area strategically relevant but yeah, I see the problem.

Maybe a compromise could be to have it only as a special bonus for some civ, so the effect would be limited to civ choice and not dominant in the game?

I don't know, I imagine competitive players wouldn't find it necessary at all. I remember something similar was conceptualised for the Romans, but in that case was a speed bonus inside the territory. I'm not sure that will be implemented, but I thought it was a cool way to differentiate that civ from others. 

Or a special building boosting unit stats across a large radius? Unlocked in city phase and costing enough to build so that it's not abused. This could also be an alternative, some civs might already have it.

The initial idea should be a very small effect though, mostly for realism and strategy. At most it should make a difference among the lines of, if 10 units are fighting 10 enemies on their territory this should give 1 unit that wouldn't have normally won the victory.

Edited October 22, 2021 by MirceaKitsune

[Ceres]

If I remember correctly, territory is all the same for the code; therefore, currently it's impossible to e.g. slow down units in swamps, water, or marshland. I don't know what it takes to make this happen.

Maybe it's different when looking at trees/forests, though, about which there's also a discussion somewhere in the forum (about making units in deeper forests "invisible").

@Stan`

[ChronA]

17 hours ago, Jofursloft said:

Would discourage rushes and favour turtling. Terrible if implemented in 1v1 games

Which is why it would need to be paired with compensatory nerfs to other components of defenders advantage. Maybe get rid of the CC's attack so people will stop clustering their farms around the thing?

[alre]

turtling is not a bad thing, many players like that strategy and should be given the opportunity to enjoy it. hence, there is no need to just penalise turtling in every change to the game. actually, turtling is pretty weak in this alpha and I don't think that buffing it would be bad at all.

[MirceaKitsune]

7 hours ago, Ceres said:

If I remember correctly, territory is all the same for the code; therefore, currently it's impossible to e.g. slow down units in swamps, water, or marshland. I don't know what it takes to make this happen.

Maybe it's different when looking at trees/forests, though, about which there's also a discussion somewhere in the forum (about making units in deeper forests "invisible").

@Stan`

That would be another idea if the limitation you mentioned could be fixed: Buff / debuff the walking speed ever so slightly, so you're a bit faster on your own territory and slower on an enemy's. That's one that should make little difference in combat and not throw off the balance noticeably, but on the downside it would look a little odd if units switched speed while walking.

[leitoso]

I like the idea, since this alpha, aggression became the main focus, I miss the old days of walls, trading, defense and so on ...

now most games I play within 15-20 min is over

[MirceaKitsune]

6 minutes ago, leitoso said:

I like the idea, since this alpha, aggression became the main focus, I miss the old days of walls, trading, defense and so on ...

now most games I play within 15-20 min is over

If you ask me, I also think attackers are a bit overpowered sometimes... sometimes. I'm mainly thinking of this change for realism as a very tiny boost, but it would be interesting to see how it could affect gameplay too.

[davidsrsb]

I always was told that an attacker needed to have about 3x the strength of the defender to be confident of winning. Defence naturally gives advantages. A25 does not feel like this at all.

[leitoso]

maybe something like a "defensive mod" for the great aspect of community games in which trading, defensive walls, defensive siege could be valued.

but I also agree that a25 favors speed and aggressiveness and to counter it a bit, proposals like that could help a bit, thanks @MirceaKitsune