BattleMaster > Development

Angry Peasants - Remove, Keep, or Change?

(1/3) > >>

Vita`:
Anaris and I were considering an edgecase regarding angry peasants being misused, when we came to a more fundamental question: what do angry peasants popping up from just entering the region add to BattleMaster? My initial thought is that it does add roleplay value, but I can't think of any game reason for their existence. However, I wanted further feedback and thought on this before any changes are made.

They aren't (nor should be) a genuine threat, it depopulates the region, and is potentially exploitable. If their main value is roleplay, Anaris proposed changing the mechanic without changing the fluff - instead of angry peasants as a combat unit fighting them have angry peasants slow unit travel, reduce unit morale, maybe even steal supplies.

Thoughts?

D'Espana:
I like it. Would it be possible to make a combination of both concepts? As in, peasants still rise against low numbers of military strength (as in, fewer than 2k-3k CS or their rough equivalent in number of soldiers), which would help prevent a single knight or two staying in the same region and looting for a long time (I can see a bunch of peasants having funny ideas without many troops in the region, after all). However, if military strength is greater than that (a smallish group of coordinated nobles, and obviously an entire army), peasants do not dare to face them in open combat and thus resort to guerrilla tactis (such as the ones proposed by Anaris), thus preventing the entire slaughter of the region in open combat by raising wave after wave of peasants by looting a little. If you want to clear out a large region, it should take time and you should need to use the kill looting options.

I'd say militia should be counted for the threshold as well, intimidating peasants into indirect warfare as if they were mobile units.

Zakky:
I dislike auto popping angry peasants from entering a region. You can literally just walk across your enemy region without looting and devastate those regions automatically. Don't even need to loot.

instead of angry peasants as a combat unit fighting them have angry peasants slow unit travel - This will make defenders who are already advantageous even better at defending. Remember, BM is a game where defenders already have an easy time defending. Not sure making it even more difficult want people to fight more often.

reduce unit morale - It is already annoying enough to fight outside of your own realm. I am against this idea. If this gets implemented, looting should increase your morale in return.

maybe even steal supplies - This implies that peasants are even allowed to be near any army. Have you ever approached an army base before?

Anaris:

--- Quote from: Zakky on May 10, 2019, 11:19:03 PM ---instead of angry peasants as a combat unit fighting them have angry peasants slow unit travel - This will make defenders who are already advantageous even better at defending. Remember, BM is a game where defenders already have an easy time defending. Not sure making it even more difficult want people to fight more often.

--- End quote ---

Hinterlands, by itself, should hugely shift things toward attackers. When you can "take over" a region in a turn or two, with a fraction of your army, that makes you much more able to strike at will. I have some other thoughts about things that can improve life for attackers, too (for instance, I'm strongly considering reducing equipment damage, especially that suffered outside combat, by a lot).


--- Quote ---reduce unit morale - It is already annoying enough to fight outside of your own realm. I am against this idea. If this gets implemented, looting should increase your morale in return.

--- End quote ---

Looting probably should raise morale more than it does now, in general.


--- Quote ---maybe even steal supplies - This implies that peasants are even allowed to be near any army. Have you ever approached an army base before?

--- End quote ---

No one's talking about army bases. This is a unit on the move, through hostile territory. Depending on the terrain, you might not even know the peasants were there.

But you would know your dinner was missing when you went to camp for the night.

Zakky:
I think you are underestimating how heavily guarded army supplies are.

But if it is only affecting provisions, I doubt people will care much about this. Just a minor annoyance which you can deal with by looting for food.

As for looting, I think there should be some big difference between lenient, normal and strict.

Lenient granting a huge morale boost + doing unwanted damage.

Maybe there should be an option for TLs to decide how they want to punish their own men as well. Execute arsonists or something XD.

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page