MACEDONIANS (Maybe Romans): Training Mercs from captured CC's.

[Dizaka]

When Macedonians capture CCs they can train merc skrim cav from the captured CC's instead of spear cav.  This may apply to Romans who also have spear cav from CC.

Also, just noticed you can train cretan merc archers.

 

Edited July 19, 2022 by Dizaka

[Stan`]

@maroder, @Langbart

[Darkcity]

@Dizaka, @Stan`  What's the expected behaviour here? Civilization A can train unit X from capture building Y of civilization B, only if unit X is supported by builidng Y of civilization B?

Becasue I have seen this broken many times. To give you an example.

If you are iberians and captures Embassy of Carthas, You can train merce sword cav. Which is weird because Iberians doesn't have merce sowrd cav. I will take snap next time and share the same.

[Stan`]

Basically we use two wildcards

<Entity>units/{civ}/infantry_spearman_a</Entity>
<Entity>units/{native}/infantry_spearman_a</Entity>

Assuming the civ of that building is han:
Assuming your civ is pers:

With {native} every civ can recruit han_infantry_spearman_a in that building.

With {civ} only a civ with a template called infantry_spearman_a can recruit one. And it will be pers_infantry_spearman_a. If the civ does not have that template it won't be recruited.

Now the issue here is that there are some leftovers templates that are not used anywhere, and become available through those buildings.

IMHO this gives an interesting dynamic, but I can understand it may be confusing.

[maroder]

19 minutes ago, Darkcity said:

What's the expected behaviour here?

1 minute ago, Stan` said:

IMHO this gives an interesting dynamic, but I can understand it may be confusing.

yeah, not sure what we actually want.

[wowgetoffyourcellphone]

Why isn't the reaction, "Neat! I can train new units from this captured thing!"?

[Stan`]

6 minutes ago, wowgetoffyourcellphone said:

Why isn't the reaction, "Neat! I can train new units from this captured thing!"?

[Gurken Khan]

4 hours ago, maroder said:

yeah, not sure what we actually want.

LOL

If I may, shouldn't maybe the team figure out what they want?

[Player of 0AD]

If you capture an embassy, you can train all mercs which carthage can train, no matter what your civ is

If you capture a colony, you cant necessarily train mercs from it. Unless you are for example kushite and capture a ptolemy colony, then you can train cavalry from it - but of course not if its a seleucid colony! : D

[maroder]

51 minutes ago, Gurken Khan said:

If I may, shouldn't maybe the team figure out what they want?

well, the team is small and can't have eyes on everything. In this specific case I don't know what the original design plan was and I have (at least at the moment) no strong opinion if this is a feature or a bug, i.e. what the expected behavior is.

So all the player are welcome to chime in and give their opinion on how this should be.

Is this cool or confusing?

[Gurken Khan]

18 minutes ago, maroder said:

So all the player are welcome to chime in and give their opinion on how this should be.

I would want to be able to train my civ's units but wouldn't mind access to other units as well; as @wowgetoffyourcellphone put it, "neat!".

But that's from a single player's perspective. I don't know if from a MP/balancing POV that would be different.

[hyperion]

36 minutes ago, maroder said:

In this specific case I don't know what the original design plan was and I have (at least at the moment) no strong opinion if this is a feature or a bug, i.e. what the expected behavior is.

In the past Mauryas were only able to train rams from captured fortress, the Mauryas specific model existed for this purpose only it seems. I wager this was deliberate.

[alre]

1 hour ago, maroder said:

Is this cool or confusing?

both.

just make that a building trains whatever unit it's supposed to train regardless of its owner civ. it's cool and it's simple.

[Gurken Khan]

23 minutes ago, alre said:

just make that a building trains whatever unit it's supposed to train regardless of its owner civ.

What are generic buildings (CCs, barracks, stables) supposed to build? My civ's units or the units from the civ I captured it from?

[alre]

18 minutes ago, Gurken Khan said:

What are generic buildings (CCs, barracks, stables) supposed to build? My civ's units or the units from the civ I captured it from?

the latter.

[thephilosopher]

Does this work with Iberian opponents and fire cav? Could create some nice 'LOL' moments when you capture Iberian buildings and then use fire cav against them.

[Dizaka]

3 hours ago, wowgetoffyourcellphone said:

Why isn't the reaction, "Neat! I can train new units from this captured thing!"?

I've had this reaction for the merc camps for carthage, etc (You can train carthage mercs as any civ with captured camps).  This seems like a handicap though, what if  you capture a CC and your CC gets captured?

Edited July 19, 2022 by Dizaka

[Darkcity]

I think the whole point of not allowing training for certain units from captured buildings is to maintain uniqueness of the civlization. For example followings doesn't make sense

1. Romans makings eles from elephant stables
2. mauryas making siege towers from capture siege workshop
3. Sele making sowrd cav from gauls stables.

And many more...

I believe any capture building should only train units that are related to capturer. Which is the current implementation, except few bugs.

[Stan`]

2 hours ago, hyperion said:

In the past Mauryas were only able to train rams from captured fortress, the Mauryas specific model existed for this purpose only it seems. I wager this was deliberate.

It wasn't. It was my bad ^^

[maroder]

The more I think about it, the more logical this seems to me 

13 minutes ago, Darkcity said:

I believe any capture building should only train units that are related to capturer. Which is the current implementation, except few bugs.

 

[Gurken Khan]

4 minutes ago, maroder said:

The more I think about it, the more logical this seems to me 

It can be argued either way:

• "A civ can only train their own units, duh."
• "When a civ gets access to new units, they can train them themselves."

There were no elephants native to Italy, still the Romans utilized them when they had access to them. And if mercs were only sellswords I guess they'd offer their services to a new buyer if the old was out of business [historical citation needed]. If my Britons invade Africa, why shouldn't they use elephants?

I believe it's more a gameplay then a logical decision.

 

[Dizaka]

1 hour ago, Darkcity said:

I think the whole point of not allowing training for certain units from captured buildings is to maintain uniqueness of the civlization. For example followings doesn't make sense

1. Romans makings eles from elephant stables
2. mauryas making siege towers from capture siege workshop
3. Sele making sowrd cav from gauls stables.

And many more...

I believe any capture building should only train units that are related to capturer. Which is the current implementation, except few bugs.

 

38 minutes ago, Gurken Khan said:

It can be argued either way:

• "A civ can only train their own units, duh."
• "When a civ gets access to new units, they can train them themselves."

There were no elephants native to Italy, still the Romans utilized them when they had access to them. And if mercs were only sellswords I guess they'd offer their services to a new buyer if the old was out of business [historical citation needed]. If my Britons invade Africa, why shouldn't they use elephants?

I believe it's more a gameplay then a logical decision.

 

 

Weird.  Both points are valid.  The final decision on how capturing mechanic works I guess would be on Stan's hands as he's the "producer" @Stan`.

I think it would be interesting to have

• the "old Maury Siege Ram" applied to all siege (e.g., romans can build elephants from captured stables)
• Merc units should be "hirable" if buildings that produce mercs are captured. 

However, I do not see a reason for a Maury CC captured building Macedonian mercs, etc.  Mace mercs cannot even be built from the CC.

Edited July 19, 2022 by Dizaka

[Dizaka]

1 hour ago, Stan` said:

It wasn't. It was my bad ^^

Was a fun and unique mechanic, lol.  Actually seemed well thought out and only done vs civs that had arsenal at the time which was only 1 civ.

Edited July 19, 2022 by Dizaka

[alre]

6 minutes ago, Dizaka said:

 

 

Weird.  Both points are valid.  The final decision on how capturing mechanic works I guess would be on Stan's hands as he's the "producer" @Stan`.

I think it would be interesting to have

• the "old Maury Siege Ram" applied to all siege (e.g., romans can build elephants from captured stables)
• Merc units should be "hirable" if buildings that produce mercs are captured. 

However, I do not see a reason for a Maury CC captured building Macedonian mercs, etc.  Mace mercs cannot even be built from the CC.

the game, sadly, doesn't have a gameplay manager (Stan's words)

[Dizaka]

1 minute ago, alre said:

the game, sadly, doesn't have a gameplay manager (Stan's words)

That just a fancy way of saying that he didn't delegate the power to someone so he still holds it :P.

Edited July 19, 2022 by Dizaka