Just a little screenshot of a feature in development...

[Anaris]

Pretty much because it's the kind of thing everyone would know. 

All units are going to have some kind of army banner; it's part of how you know who you're supposed to kill, and who you're not.

[Longmane]

So wh would you want the enemy to know what troops are in what army? I like the idea, but I'd still prefer keeping that information away from the enemy's hands ...

In medieval times the enemy would, like yourselves have heralds among their retinue, whose sole job it was to mark and note such things.

[cjnodell]

Perhaps as the leader of the militia, the region lord could chose a banner for his region that is displayed for the militia or that region and any knights of that region not assigned to an army? It seems to me that the militia's loyalty is to the region and region lord not to the realm or the crown.

A banner for rouges would also be nice. I also think that the ruler should be able to set the banner for unaligned nobles

Army Banner - Displayed by units a part of an army (If set)
Rouge Banner - Displayed by rouge units
Region Banner - Displayed by militia of a given region and knights of that region not assigned to an army.
Realm Banner - Displayed by unaligned unites of a realm.

[Anaris]

That sounds like it's a bit over-complex, at least for now.  I'm not going to rule out any of that for possible future development, but for the moment, I think what we have will probably do.

[Bluelake]

Just a minute...

If the banner paraphernalia isn't meant to be the actual banner flying over the unit, as a gathering point and improving the unit's morale, etc etc etc, why do we still call it "banner" in general?

I don't see why units without banners should have banners (or perhaps they should have the realm's standard banner instead? which doesn't add to morale since all units have the same banner? ah...). Unless it's specified that the paraphernalia banner is actually a banner of the noble leading the unit, and not a realm or army banner. Then maybe that should be said on the paraphernalia banner description somewhere?

Well, I was thinking we'd see banners being purchased because of pride and aestethics (as a good nobleman would). Making people give it some thought instead of having it automatically added to you. Making poor troopleaders unable to identify with the army, or those who want to protest against it too. Something like that.

-----------

On another note, nowadays the banner hidden on the unit name enables people to see the armies on scout reports and region listing (like: fear us, the XYZ Army is all camped here to defend this region). This could be considered for implementation at some point?

Despite my "complaints", I really love this feature. Thanks.

[Tom]

My opinions:

• rogues, monsters, etc. should not ever have banners. They simply don't have them, so why display them?
• likewise for militia
• it would be really nifty if only units that have a banner show one on the battlefield. It would give players something "tangible" for buying a banner, and it simply makes sense. But the feature is so cool that this is not really the important point.

[Anaris]

it would be really nifty if only units that have a banner show one on the battlefield. It would give players something "tangible" for buying a banner, and it simply makes sense. But the feature is so cool that this is not really the important point.

I'm really very resistant to this.  I think that the important thing here is not anything related to the paraphernalia item, but the indication that I believe all units in such a milieu would have of what army they belong to.  It's meant to aid in promoting the camaraderie that goes along with being part of a particular army, and in indicating, at a glance, who each line in the report is talking about.  It can be very difficult to keep track by unit names of which side any given unit in a battle is on; the banners should make that vastly easier.

I agree that it would be nifty to have some additional indicator of who has banners, and, indeed, who has siege engines.  Perhaps there should be some additional tiny icons made for those?

[Indirik]

On another note, nowadays the banner hidden on the unit name enables people to see the armies on scout reports and region listing (like: fear us, the XYZ Army is all camped here to defend this region). This could be considered for implementation at some point?

I'm not sure what you mean by this. The banners are shown on scout reports. If you mean something else, can you maybe explain a little more about what you mean?

[Bluelake]

I'm not sure what you mean by this. The banners are shown on scout reports. If you mean something else, can you maybe explain a little more about what you mean?

Oops.

Since I didn't see this on the screenshot Timothy posted, I didn't suppose they did show. Ok, then.

[...] I think that the important thing here is not anything related to the paraphernalia item, but the indication that I believe all units in such a milieu would have of what army they belong to.  It's meant to aid in promoting the camaraderie that goes along with being part of a particular army [...]

I get what you're saying, but maybe this comraderie should be optional? What if I don't want to be identified with my army, what if the army wants to be anonymous? (at the cost of the benefits the paraphernalia brings, of course)

Surely the matter of identification of sides is easily solved if all units (or at least bannerless units or untis from bannerless armies) would have the banner of their realm by them (which was already mentioned before?). I suppose you could hide which army you're from, but not which realm? Game mechanics already say that, at least.

[Peri]

As I said already elsewhere, this is incredibly cool.

One location where in my opinion banners should be added "list the armies" link under command tab. This way, at least lords, can go there and see which army has what banner. That should be nice.

[Anaris]

I get what you're saying, but maybe this comraderie should be optional? What if I don't want to be identified with my army, what if the army wants to be anonymous? (at the cost of the benefits the paraphernalia brings, of course)

If you don't want to be identified with an army, don't join one.

If you want an "army" to be anonymous, then just use a message group.

Surely the matter of identification of sides is easily solved if all units (or at least bannerless units or untis from bannerless armies) would have the banner of their realm by them (which was already mentioned before?). I suppose you could hide which army you're from, but not which realm? Game mechanics already say that, at least.

I guess I still just don't see why you want to hide what army you're in.  I don't see how it grants you any kind of advantage.  Furthermore, it is emphatically not the kind of thing that would have been easy to hide, or should be easy to hide: you're moving with these people all the time, you're following the orders of your Marshal in battle—if you don't want to do any of these things, just don't join an army.

[Bluelake]

if you don't want to do any of these things, just don't join an army.

Yes, I agree. But it isn't really you who chooses which army you're in (unless you're a region lord). And nowadays, you still see knights who don't use the informal army banner, and I'm not sure they do it just because it looks ugly on the unit name. Though I have to say it's rare to see conflict between knights and armies in this level.

Maybe you're right, and everyone should be identified whether they want it or not. It just seemed so logical to me, an opportunity to tie two "loose ends" together, to tie one of the imaginary tools of game mechanics with a graphical resource that would solve an identification problem... I was just surprised to see it wasn't what you had in mind.

[De-Legro]

the "informal" army banner is also not liked by a lot of people. I believe that most SMA followers have banned it, and many other realms don't use it either.

[Anaris]

Yes, I agree. But it isn't really you who chooses which army you're in (unless you're a region lord). And nowadays, you still see knights who don't use the informal army banner, and I'm not sure they do it just because it looks ugly on the unit name. Though I have to say it's rare to see conflict between knights and armies in this level.

The so-called "informal army banner" is an abomination.  Tom is, and always has been, adamantly against its use anywhere in the game.

Your unit name is a name.  It is not a banner.  It is not a handle.  It is not a place for hanging clan tags.

One of the reasons we wanted to implement these army banners was to eradicate that utterly atmosphere-breaking practice altogether.

[Tom]

The so-called "informal army banner" is an abomination.  Tom is, and always has been, adamantly against its use anywhere in the game.

Your unit name is a name.  It is not a banner.  It is not a handle.  It is not a place for hanging clan tags.

One of the reasons we wanted to implement these army banners was to eradicate that utterly atmosphere-breaking practice altogether.

Absolutely. In fact, I'm all for limiting the name field to alphabetic characters and a few specials (space, - ' etc - stuff that actually appears in names). Problem with that is that it would also affect accented characters, etc.