View Full Version : Special Units - Pro vs Con
Angryminer
12-01-2004, 18:21
I want to create this new thread on special units to discuss destinct special units, which should be added or removed, and if, why.
There is another thread here (http://forum.sunflowers.de/showthread.php?s=&threadid=379) but it's on "how and where".
Elewyn began the discussion here (http://forum.sunflowers.de/showthread.php?s=&threadid=119) so I quote him:
Mounted archers, they are, but maybe, for Hungary, there shold be special light cavalry-archer, or Cuman light cavalry(also archers). They fere famous.I don't think that mounted archers should be popular on the battlefield, so they are still something special and very surprising if you lead them into battle.
We already had the discussion that mounted archers were always a very rare sight on the battlefield, so it wouldn't be sensefull to create a new unit-type for 'not-that-good-mounted-archers'.
Source: *click (http://forum.sunflowers.de/showthread.php?s=&threadid=334&highlight=archers+mounted)* (last post of Henrik and following)
My opinion is that unit-trading between allied nations (I hope it'll be an option) would do the trick to make mounted archers popular enough but still rare to so they are still something surprising.
Angryminer
Unit trading? Like mercenaries?
Angryminer
12-01-2004, 18:40
More like:
"I want to buy that realm, but the current owner doesn't want my 5000 goldpieces... Let's offer him 3 squads mounted-archers and 4000 pieces of gold."
But... the devs never said anything on that - it's just me hoping for it ;) .
Let the devs discuss that on their own and stay ontopic.
Angryminer
Hmm, sell your men? Sounds like slavery to me :p I don't think it will be possible. And it doesn't seem logical either. Why would your regular army accept being traded to some other country?
"Great, we are brittish, and now we have to fight for France."
EricTheRed
13-01-2004, 23:21
Exactly my thoughts, Jorghan dosen't seem logical. Now i could see trading with siege weapons or ships , thats a different story.
Jarlabanke
13-01-2004, 23:38
I'd say that depends on how you look at it, I'm not really for buying an army, but lending one. At least here in Scandinavia that happened numerous times, a king didn't like the king in the neighbouring country and thus supported a rebel or former royal family with men in exchange for either money or land if he succeded in dethroneing the current king, or just be happy that his rival was gone. Afterwards the army would go back to it's homecountry.
Why not make it possible to buy mercenaries like in LOTR....erm...i think we have descussed this subject before !
Angryminer
14-01-2004, 10:50
@Jarlabanke
Yes, I thought of something like that, too.
Angryminer
But lending out men is a pretty complicated thing to do in a game. It would be a cool feature, and perhaps even be able to lend out knights, but I doubt it will be there. Just simply selling men (letting you get the permanent control of them) is something I don't think would be very realistic however.
Jarlabanke
14-01-2004, 14:45
The lending thing can be seen in Both Hearts of Iron and the newly released Victoria, it would just make the army switch to the control of who ever's lending them, perhaps they could cost more in upkeep, and that extra cost could go to the king who provided the army.
Originally posted by Jarlabanke
perhaps they could cost more in upkeep, and that extra cost could go to the king who provided the army.
I think the idea is great :) - I would like to ad a little extra to your suggestion: I should be possible to order, the troops you've lended out, to redraw if forexample they were about to attack someone which you're friends with ( remember the game is about "your agenda" ) and it wouldn't be paticulary wise to have your own troops attacking your allies and thereby weaken them and as a consequense weaken YOU !
Of course, but you must do it as a first thing. You need to check who do you lend your troops to, before you do it. If he's forexample enemy of your allies, your very important allies, it can be almost dangerous just offering him your troops...
Why borrow units when you can train em your self. Its genne cost about the same amount most like it will cost a bit less sincs its your own people and your not borrowing them. I think lening/ borrowing is a wast of money. If i don't have enought men to win this war i will make a treaty and give my enemy some to stop him from attacking me. Then later when i got a big army i will take it back.:)
But what to do, when you have lots of money, but no free population? Huh? And you NEED soldiers... What? Borrow them ;)
Originally posted by Elewyn
Of course, but you must do it as a first thing. You need to check who do you lend your troops to, before you do it. If he's forexample enemy of your allies, your very important allies, it can be almost dangerous just offering him your troops...
You're sorta right on that one - except that ( unless you have a fortune cookie :D ) you can't foresee what will happen in the future ! I.e. maybe it seemed the right thing to to when you lent him the troops way back, but maybe the "political climate" has change into a state where it suddenly are not into your advantage that king "B" attacks king "C" - so that why i suggest this little "emergencybreak"
The same thing happend in the movie Braveheart - remember the scene where William was about to attack when suddenly the Scotish nobles redrew their cavalery because they were promised titles and land, and from their point of view it was a smart move and from Williams point it was a dissaster.
Btw, If this ability is implemented you will get yet another way to backstab one of your "friends" I.e. make him attack another king with the promise that you will supply the troops he need and then when just as the battle are about to commence you redraw your troops and then it's bye bye king muhahahaha :D
Angryminer
14-01-2004, 20:37
@Cork2:
Did you ever think of the fact, that not every nation can produce every kind of unit?
english longbowmen?
teutonic champions?
Does that ring a bell?
;)
Angryminer
@Angryminer: Those are special units. But each nation can still produce the basic ones archers sword man. But how it works is. Say your english. You can't make archers but you can make Longbowman instead of a archer in england.
Here is why lending could be bad.
Imagine You play a King you could be good or evil. You lend some of your armys to another king for gold which you need. The other king pursvades your army to stay with him and be on his side and then he attacks you. He has a bigger army then yours, since he borrowed your army and then pursvaded to stay with him. He attacks you, defeats you, gains your land, people and gold. He keeps taking more and more till you have been whiped out. You didn't have enought men to defend because you lend men to another king.:cheers: :D
Sounds quite anti-nationalistic to me. If it is implemented the way Henrik suggests, it might be a nice feature, so, he couldn't attack your with your own men, and you could always call them back.
But in this game you are able to bribe armies.
Oh. If he bribed your arme lended to anybody else, don't you think, he would do it even if the army was yours?
If the knight is bribable, then doesn't matter for who he is actually fighting ;)
@Angryminer: yea, that's true, but the point is that longbow-regions can't produce "ordinary" archer, which has some other positives in other way than longbowmen. I hope, it's not like that the "specal units" like templars are in all ways better than "ordinary". Every unit has, as I hope, it's own positives and negatives in particular way of combat.
vBulletin v3.5.4, Copyright ©2000-2007, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.