Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.


Messages - Zakky

Pages: 1 ... 38 39 [40] 41 42
586
Dwilight / Re: The Shmaeless Swordfell Recruitment Thread
« on: December 03, 2017, 12:11:10 AM »
Not sure people want to serve Crixus though. Isn't Swordfell pretty much Crixus' plaything? He holds half of the high ranking positions.

587
BM General Discussion / Re: Discord
« on: December 02, 2017, 11:06:46 AM »
Listening to other people's voice ain't a bad idea but I can understand people being shy as well.

588
Development / Re: Different way to nerf militias
« on: December 02, 2017, 03:54:36 AM »
Wouldn't mind people being able to recruit more of them too...

589
Development / Re: Different way to nerf militias
« on: December 02, 2017, 03:03:03 AM »
Instead of nerfing archers, we can also just buff other unit types.

Making multiple archer hits on the same target can be addressed.

Like the first hit will be 100% but the second will be only 65% and all other hits after that will only do 30% to that target.

590
Dwilight / Re: Swordfighting bug or helluva bonus?
« on: December 02, 2017, 12:38:11 AM »
That means someone who is sitting at 100% fame has gotten his fancy swordfighting item back and pushed the upper bound even higher. It is not that you lost your skill level. It is just that someone gained more. So relatively speaking the gap between you and the best has widened.

591
Development / Re: Different way to nerf militias
« on: December 01, 2017, 11:50:01 PM »
I think monsters need to use skirmish by default and maybe cavalries should take less damage from archer fires by at least 50%.

Archers were nerfed not by a lot from all the hits I see. They were nerfed a bit. Maybe by 20% or so? They are definitely hitting a bit less than before but they still do quite a bit.

I think the biggest problem with archers is their range. Maybe lowering range of all ranged unit types by 1 would be nice.

592
Development / Re: Different way to nerf militias
« on: December 01, 2017, 09:20:55 PM »
I don't know what was the size of this siege of Alowca but from the name I am guessing it is on colonies which is too small of a sample size. Plus it is just a single siege with unknown number of different unit types. So you will need to give me more details for that one. Sounds like this Alowca was poorly prepared and got overwhelmed by gang up attacks from your story though.

The most effective siege tactic at the moment is to put your archers in skirmish and set them in the front with 1 infantry in each row with the rear having all other unit types except cavalry. Cavalry need to be set in the back to prevent them from charging into the walls.

Or if your archers outnumber enemy archers 2 to 1 and they only have a couple to few infantry units, you only send ranged units and set them in middle or back to take out infantry units.

As for out ranging your enemies that is not feasible in most cases. Almost no one runs pure R5 units and it is a dumb idea to only have an army full of SFs. Plus if your enemies have R5, it doesn't work. So give me an example of a siege that is more equal.

As for your suggestion regarding the new siege status, it looks like we just need some additional codes to the TO mechanic since TO already prevents some stuff.

593
Development / Re: Different way to nerf militias
« on: December 01, 2017, 02:34:25 AM »
Militia just blocks all actions. There's no fun in two realms spending 20k in militia, and then 5k in mobile forces that are so tiny all they can do is stare at each other all day.

Exactly. If you can only muster 5k CS then you should die. Not survive on the back of 20k CS militia units you've recruited with gold.

I can see people being able to temporarily increase their militia CS quickly but it should come with a heavy price tag since at that point you are not going to really recruit that many militias. You should be recruiting mercenaries and they cost a lot of gold.

594
Development / Re: Different way to nerf militias
« on: December 01, 2017, 02:31:56 AM »
Quote
1) Heroes and captains both boost the performance of player-controlled units so I don't think the comparison is accurate, and there's a lot more variability in militia performance in successive battles if they've retreated or are scattered than with player controlled units.

--Heroes and captains don't provide enough to impact the performance of units that much. So my point still stands. If heroes and captains made significant impacts, it would have been a different story but they don't. They are very minor.

Quote
2) Militias for the most part are immobile so have a more settled existence than player-controlled troops. They always have a place to live, first preference for any food and presumably local attachments.
--I am talking about their roleplay potential. They were either recruited by the lord from nearby regions which I guess in this case makes sense with your idea of them having preference to food and local attachments but in most cases people drop their own units to increase them quickly. This of course is not necessary for capitals but then again capitals are where all recruits gather so they would hardly have any attachment.

Quote
3) Most cities are not Oligarch and will not resist a sustained siege by a single realm committed to their capture. Having spent my entire BM career on the receiving end of gangup wars whilst practicing the black arts of defensive warfare I've never seen any evidence that the gangups occur because the victim has unconquerable cities.

Since you like to bring your BM career as an example here, I spent over 6 years on leading armies of various sizes. Unlike you, I spent my time both fighting off gangups and besieging cities both small and large. What changed everything was the archer bug fix. They hit harder than the days when Fontan fell with you. Or the days when I besieged Oligarch against Fane. With enough infantry to keep men off of archers, your militias are a lot more cost efficient than before. They are different from melee militia days of old because archers can damage your men long before you can even get near the walls. Either the walls need to be limited to lv3 at most for cities or militias need to be nerfed in one way or another. It is way too easy to defend fortified regions due to various changes over the years. While defenders got stronger, attackers did not. Actually there are less attackers now so even easier to defend.

Quote
4) Sieges could be handled with a new unit stance besieging which if all defenders are in normal or defensive would establish a siege and put the onus on the defender to attack (as with a TO) and lose the advantage of walls. During the siege food couldn't be moved into or out of the region. Enable the Black Market for traders and this could allow them to smuggle a proportion of food offers into the city at a sizeble profit siphoned direct from the region's tax office.

I am trying to provide an easier solution until these new features god knows when come. All the things you've mentioned need to be coded from scratch. Also some of them are planned already. Why do we need to unit status even.

[qutoe]5) There are still a few Priests and they make great Diplomats due to both having Oratory as a primary skill. I'd like to see more of them and think priests shouldn't count against a player's noble character count.[/quote]

I don't think this one belongs here. Nothing to do with militia.

595
Development / Re: Different way to nerf militias
« on: November 30, 2017, 11:38:19 PM »
Looks like you don't fully understand why militias are big problems in general.

I am not talking about just peasant militias. Despite them having their own set of issues, normal militias people are putting to defend are causing too many issues.

1) Militias are as strong as player controlled units
--Their only disadvantage is the fact they can't move. Why should they, units without any commander, be as strong as player controlled units?

2) Even when you can't pay them, they don't desert like player controlled units. A small portion of them will leave but not significant enough to deter even small regions without any capability of paying militias to recruit a lot of them.
--If a region can't pay for militias, they should burn the region to the ground and take all the gold and leave. Mind you, these militias are paid soldiers. In BM you are not commanding retinues or soldiers from your holdings. You are literally buying mercenaries off the market. That is why they will beat you up and take all your gold when you fail to pay them. You are bound by a contract to pay them in time. They don't wait for you to pay them later because they have no loyalty. Why should militias be any different? If your region cannot pay anymore, they should ransack your region and take what they can and leave not guard the region forever.

3)Cities being able to support way too many militias
--This is what is causing big issues. Cities were hard to siege before but at least you could starve one years ago. But even then it was still hard to take a city because you still had to deal with militias. Just getting enough siege engines alone take months. To siege a city with lv5 walls, you need at least 50 SEs and even then you will often see siege engines being too crowded. These days, with archers being stronger than the days when you could starve cities, it is nigh impossible to siege a city that is rich enough to put men on the walls constantly. One realm alone can't siege a city that has over 1.5k gold income. You need to bring more realms in just for one city. This encourages realms to gang up on one realm just to take a city. I am pretty sure the game is trying to discourage people from ganging up which it has failed to do so for the entirety of its lifespan. Not saying it is purely the game's fault however since people like to gang up and I don't think mechanics can discourage it. But at least it shouldn't encourage it.

4) With the addition of new market system (--which Anaris is working on to finish but since it is a major change it will take years) and food distribution change (which allows you to run your city at 50% food consumption 24/7 without any major downside), you will never be able to starve a city out. This forces you to the only other option on the table which is siege.

5) Skilled diplomats
They are very hard to come by. Have you checked how many non-warrior class there are in the game at the moment? Not many. There just aren't enough people anymore. You don't even have enough to fight off your enemies. For most small realms, they will hardly have one. Also, skill diplomats only affect relations not actual militias people put in their regions.

596
Development / Re: Different way to nerf militias
« on: November 30, 2017, 07:46:40 PM »
Militias haven't been nerfed at all. With our declining player base, militias are getting stronger than ever. There just aren't enough people you can bring to siege a city. Just look at the Northern Alliance on EC. At most they can bring 35k CS. If you haven't noticed, there is no cap or downside for recruiting militias.

They are way too good right now. Cities are already getting way too difficult to crack. When was the last time you've managed to starve a city?

For that to happen, it needs a complete overhaul of food system which won't happen for years or maybe never.

597
Development / Different way to nerf militias
« on: November 29, 2017, 11:09:55 PM »
How about drastically reducing the recruit production speed while a region has too many militias?

5k CS is probably a good line I think. Anything above that should probably be considered a bit excessive but that is just me.

598
East Island / Re: Greater Xavax Imperium
« on: November 29, 2017, 08:04:39 AM »
Tom made a horrible mistake by adding those islands.... always isolated from the rest.

599
Regions actually recover quite quickly even after you call peasants. Also, all peasants that spawn from a region are based on RC stats of that region. Where do you think these peasants are getting their weapons and armors from. Peasants aren't really those weaklings you used to slaughter anymore.

As for region lords being able to call peasants, I am actually against that. That would make attacking another realm a living hell.

600
Development / Re: Morale changes
« on: November 27, 2017, 09:29:13 PM »
Battle Results   (3 hours, 14 minutes ago)
Your unit participated in a battle in Fronepu. Your scribe has written down a battle report as a Scribe Note.
The battle lasted for 1 hours.
You have gained 0 Honour.
None of your men were killed in this battle.
Morale of your troops falls by 6 points. Combat training increases by 1 points. Unit cohesion rises 3 points.

Pages: 1 ... 38 39 [40] 41 42