Epic Fails and epic Wins

[Swarbs]

Both sounds reasonable!
We actually use limits on national units and unique units quite excessively in Realism Invictus. Also, there is another type of limitation there, and this is for all units: units of the same unit class have increased production costs. E.g each knight-type unit cost is increased by 5% of the previous one: 1st is 100%, 2nd is 105%, 3rd is 110%, 4th is 116%, n. is 100*(1.05^(n-1))%). It actually promotes mixed armies, both for the AI and the human player.
I'm not really sure if I want to go in that direction for RFCE, it's a huge change on gameplay. Will have to think about the possibilities a little more.

Also the potential Ghulam route from SoI, in that each company unit also has a cost of 1 on top of the unit cost to discourage mass production.

And consider giving the company units the same penalties as knights and lancers when attacking cities - at the moment they don't have those which just makes them more OP imo.

 

[Swarbs]

To be perfectly honest I would love to see a limits on cavalry overall! Once Chivalry is researched military becomes a race of who can train the most Knights, which really breaks immersion for me. In both this game and SoI it becomes all about cavalry death stacks when it seems like infantry/gunpowder death stacks should be supplemented with cavalry

That's not really valid criticism for the current version of the mod - now cavalry has a significant attacking penalty vs cities you can't just knight spam enemy cities to death. Even with trebs to soften the defenders your knights are often at a disadvantage when attacking fortified macemen or arbalestiers inside a city. Although I agree that in open combat knights are often OP - maybe guisarmers need a boost as they seem quite underpowered imo. Even fortified on a hill they are only around a 50% chance to kill attacking knights.

 

[Force44]

I don't like limiting the amount off Orderly units at all.
Already they come with a hefty opportunity cost.
I look upon them as superior versions of units to perform certain tasks you can (overall) perform adequately with your regular units.
You can't plan their production center so if you want them, there is a reasonable chance a city will mess up its building queue.

I would prefer them to be augmentations to your standard army in stead of your standard army being augmentataions to your Orderly units (which is the case when you limit the amount of them you are allowed to have)

Tho nerf them I suggest a weaker version.
(eg I when Teutonic Knights are supposed to augment armored lancers they have one strength more than armored lancers (in stead of one strength more than knights as they currently have))
(eg II their cost (shields) should be made a little more competitive in comparison to regular units of the same function)
And also I would suggest to make them less reliable. (so it pays off to send them into battle first and consequently lose more of them)
Have them be eligible for crusades even when you decide not to join the crusade.
Have them protect your regular units from crusades.
(eg Every two Orderly knights sent to join a crusade prevent one regular knight from falling prey to crusading)

Taxing them is also a solution for making them less desirable to keep them around, but I would prefer a different method of making them less desirable because that method already is applied to mercenaries (why not just make Orderly Knights only purchaseable as mercs then, that limits the amount of them you can own even more effectively than taxing them.)

 

[Swarbs]

I don't like limiting the amount off Orderly units at all.
Already they come with a hefty opportunity cost.
I look upon them as superior versions of units to perform certain tasks you can (overall) perform adequately with your regular units.
You can't plan their production center so if you want them, there is a reasonable chance a city will mess up its building queue.

I would prefer them to be augmentations to your standard army in stead of your standard army being augmentataions to your Orderly units (which is the case when you limit the amount of them you are allowed to have)

Tho nerf them I suggest a weaker version.
(eg I when Teutonic Knights are supposed to augment armored lancers they have one strength more than armored lancers (in stead of one strength more than knights as they currently have))
(eg II their cost (shields) should be made a little more competitive in comparison to regular units of the same function)
And also I would suggest to make them less reliable. (so it pays off to send them into battle first and consequently lose more of them)
Have them be eligible for crusades even when you decide not to join the crusade.
Have them protect your regular units from crusades.
(eg Every two Orderly knights sent to join a crusade prevent one regular knight from falling prey to crusading)

Taxing them is also a solution for making them less desirable to keep them around, but I would prefer a different method of making them less desirable because that method already is applied to mercenaries (why not just make Orderly Knights only purchaseable as mercs then, that limits the amount of them you can own even more effectively than taxing them.)

I don't think there's an opportunity cost to them at all at the moment, particularly the Teutonic and Templar Knights. The order buildings give +2exp to the knights, so all you need is a barracks which has no impact on building queues given that 90% of civs will be running Feudal Monarchy at the time. They're also so much cheaper than regular knights that you don't need to worry about getting super production.

As it stands at the moment they are so superior to standard units that they don't augment them, they just replace them. Why build knights when you can build Teutonic and Templar Knights that are stronger and cheaper with no city attack penalties, and thus beat every other unit in the game at that time?

Although it is true that this only applies to the Teutonic and Templar Knights - these are the only ones who are superior to their equivalent standard unit in every way, and even superior to the armoured lancers who come before them.

So personally I think there are three main options for the order units:

1. Limit their numbers. Arguably more historic as the orders were very self limiting in the number of knights they fielded, but maybe less fun for gameplay
2. Add a monetary cost and boost the hammer cost to be similar to that of the equivalent level unit (I would say 130 for Teutonic and Templars). Helps control spamming but could be exploited as once you have these knights you don't really need to tech any more as they are unbeatable until pikes
3. Nerf them. Make two levels of units for the early orders - an early one which is comparable to armoured lancers and longswordsmen (for Calatrava and Hospitaller) and a late one which needs Chivalry to access and is comparable to knights and macemen (current level of units)

In general, I do like the idea of them being eligible for crusades even when you decide not to join the crusade. In fact, I would consider adding that as a potential penalty for refusing a crusade - all your order units leave in disgust and the order itself leaves your cities for a few turns. That would mean that the decision not to join a crusade can't be taken as lightly - currently it is close to the default for most Catholic civs as the bonuses are quite limited and the cost of ignoring the call is small. In contrast when you do join the crusade only around half your order units leave.

 

[AbsintheRed]

In general, I do like the idea of them being eligible for crusades even when you decide not to join the crusade. In fact, I would consider adding that as a potential penalty for refusing a crusade - all your order units leave in disgust and the order itself leaves your cities for a few turns. That would mean that the decision not to join a crusade can't be taken as lightly - currently it is close to the default for most Catholic civs as the bonuses are quite limited and the cost of ignoring the call is small. In contrast when you do join the crusade only around half your order units leave.

Funny you mention this, I just implemented something similar this morning
But instead of a penalty like you suggest, I implemented a bonus for company spread for all participating civs.
A very similar effect nevertheless.
Whenever it is possible, I would like to motivate the players with positive feedback, not negative.

Speaking of which, actually I'm working on making Crusades more beneficial for the non-leader civ. As in right now.
So far already added faith and GG points boost for all the other civs.
"Our Crusading units return home to their families, strengthening the faith throughout the nation and sharing their warfare experiences." (+2 faith and +10 GG points for each participating unit)
Thinking about some money (as in loot) and stability too, but those are not as clear.

 

[AbsintheRed]

In general, I do like the idea of them being eligible for crusades even when you decide not to join the crusade. In fact, I would consider adding that as a potential penalty for refusing a crusade - all your order units leave in disgust and the order itself leaves your cities for a few turns. That would mean that the decision not to join a crusade can't be taken as lightly - currently it is close to the default for most Catholic civs as the bonuses are quite limited and the cost of ignoring the call is small. In contrast when you do join the crusade only around half your order units leave.

Funny you mention this, I just implemented something similar this morning
But instead of a penalty like you suggest, I implemented a bonus for company spread for all participating civs.
A very similar effect nevertheless.
Whenever it is possible, I would like to motivate the players with positive feedback, not negative.

Thinking about this a little more, I will probably implement a small penalty too after all. So some of your units from the Chivalric Orders might leave even if you don't officially participate in the Crusade.
I definitely don't want to go as far as you suggested though, with removing all companies from your cities and all company units leaving.
That would end up in the decision being non-existant in the opposite way as before. While I do want to promote participation in the Crusades, I want to leave a valid option for the player if he/she decides not to.

So on refused Crusade, your company UUs have less chance to leave than they would have if you participated (and of course zero chance for your normal units).
To add some even more depth to the deicison, I'm thinking about a different kind of 3rd option, which is only available if you have enough gold. (I prefer this to the 2 refuse options which came up before, a normal polite refuse, and the go to hell where you belong refuse).
You can bribe yourself out.. err.. you can do a monetary contribution to the Crusade instead of sending units.

 

[gilgames]

Though this thread is not really about this...

Orderly units need some rending anyway. Currently they are op for sure. I think to make them the most historical and reality like, have to wait till 1.6. 'Cause it would trigger the whole military system overhaul. For now a little nerf will do like make them more costly i.e. knight hammer +20%. After all their training were more rigorous and harder, also took more time.

Crusade optoins in the future might be:
1; Of course your Highness (units leave +10% of the treasury) (big bonus)
2; If you really insist?! (30% of units leave + 30% of the treasury) (medium bonus)
3; I can not spare any arms now! (no units leave, pay gold: xx gold/city minor faith lose) (optional bonus)
4; No, it's not my duty to go there. (some units leave + faith lose) no bonus
5; STFU, YOLO. (no units leave, major faith lose) no bonus

actual bonuses are up to you. (i.e. trade route)

Right now, imo way too many Templar and Teutonic leave to crusade. In case of smaller army size it can be about 60-70% of them. Alas these units do not show up in such numbers at Jerusalem. Furthermore none returns. Also many archery units leave and none show up in the crusader army.
Personal adding, if Arabia is AI, it feels stupid to control such an army, that could wipe the whole civ!

 

[cmakk1012]

That's not really valid criticism for the current version of the mod - now cavalry has a significant attacking penalty vs cities you can't just knight spam enemy cities to death. Even with trebs to soften the defenders your knights are often at a disadvantage when attacking fortified macemen or arbalestiers inside a city. Although I agree that in open combat knights are often OP - maybe guisarmers need a boost as they seem quite underpowered imo. Even fortified on a hill they are only around a 50% chance to kill attacking knights.

Fair enough, I'm playing on a slightly outdated version at the moment so Knights are a bit stronger for me. I think my main issue is with Knights in open combat, yes--Guisarmiers I agree are almost pointless in their current state

 

[Force44]

I don't think there's an opportunity cost to them at all at the moment, particularly the Teutonic and Templar Knights. The order buildings give +2exp to the knights, so all you need is a barracks which has no impact on building queues given that 90% of civs will be running Feudal Monarchy at the time. They're also so much cheaper than regular knights that you don't need to worry about getting super production.

As it stands at the moment they are so superior to standard units that they don't augment them, they just replace them. Why build knights when you can build Teutonic and Templar Knights that are stronger and cheaper with no city attack penalties, and thus beat every other unit in the game at that time?

Although it is true that this only applies to the Teutonic and Templar Knights - these are the only ones who are superior to their equivalent standard unit in every way, and even superior to the armoured lancers who come before them.

So personally I think there are three main options for the order units:

1. Limit their numbers. Arguably more historic as the orders were very self limiting in the number of knights they fielded, but maybe less fun for gameplay
2. Add a monetary cost and boost the hammer cost to be similar to that of the equivalent level unit (I would say 130 for Teutonic and Templars). Helps control spamming but could be exploited as once you have these knights you don't really need to tech any more as they are unbeatable until pikes
3. Nerf them. Make two levels of units for the early orders - an early one which is comparable to armoured lancers and longswordsmen (for Calatrava and Hospitaller) and a late one which needs Chivalry to access and is comparable to knights and macemen (current level of units)

In general, I do like the idea of them being eligible for crusades even when you decide not to join the crusade. In fact, I would consider adding that as a potential penalty for refusing a crusade - all your order units leave in disgust and the order itself leaves your cities for a few turns. That would mean that the decision not to join a crusade can't be taken as lightly - currently it is close to the default for most Catholic civs as the bonuses are quite limited and the cost of ignoring the call is small. In contrast when you do join the crusade only around half your order units leave.

I lagree with you (Swarbs) that the Orderly units are more impactfull than is desirable.
(Personally I don't like to use the word overpowered for them because that feels to me like some kind of mistake is made whilst this imo is not the case. They are not doing something wrong, they are doing something right, just not as good as I'd like them to do it)

An example for the opportunity cost in an extreme scenario.

Four cities are builing knights and one city is building a market.
The city building the market receives the Teutonic order.

Because Teutonic Knights (currently) make knights look like rubbish in comparison you switch production from a market to Teutonic Knights.
You will now receive your market 4 Teutonic Knights later. And probably your stack of knights will also come later into play.

This is rather poor play. (it is probably better to aim for 3 knights and 1 Teutonic Knight. But this still gives you your market 1 Teutonic Knight later.)

I like your solutions Swarbs, they seem very efficacious to me.
But I'm not really sure if it is really 3 solutions.
The first and second solution aim for decreasing the amount of orderly units compared to the current situation.
The second and the third solution both nerf the unit (decrease the impact/cost ratio)

Personally I like the third solution best.
It looks natural to me to increase the amount of different kind of units an order yields when its existence is asynchronous with the timespan corresponding with a certain tier of units.

 

[Swarbs]

Thinking about this a little more, I will probably implement a small penalty too after all. So some of your units from the Chivalric Orders might leave even if you don't officially participate in the Crusade.
I definitely don't want to go as far as you suggested though, with removing all companies from your cities and all company units leaving.
That would end up in the decision being non-existant in the opposite way as before. While I do want to promote participation in the Crusades, I want to leave a valid option for the player if he/she decides not to.

So on refused Crusade, your company UUs have less chance to leave than they would have if you participated (and of course zero chance for your normal units).
To add some even more depth to the deicison, I'm thinking about a different kind of 3rd option, which is only available if you have enough gold. (I prefer this to the 2 refuse options which came up before, a normal polite refuse, and the go to hell where you belong refuse).
You can bribe yourself out.. err.. you can do a monetary contribution to the Crusade instead of sending units.

I like the idea for a monetary contribution option, sounds quite realistic and requires some advanced planning to be prepared for it, so you can't just run your treasury down to zero with no consequences.

Although I do think there needs to be some penalty for an outright refusal. At the moment you lose a bit of faith, but that doesn't affect anything apart from diplomacy and a loss of some potential (but far from guaranteed) buildings, gold and occasional tech from the Pope. I think a more obvious penalty would have more impact, like a loss of units or companies, or potentially some unhappiness.

Alternatively, maybe more of an obvious bonus from participating in the crusade, perhaps a chance to get a relic in your capital or bonus faith points so you have a better chance of leading the next crusade? At the moment it is too much of a slog, for any civ barring Germany, Burgundy, Spain and France, to catch up the number of faith points needed to lead the crusade. So you end up losing loads of units whilst having almost no chance to get the golden age reward.

 

[AbsintheRed]

Alternatively, maybe more of an obvious bonus from participating in the crusade, perhaps a chance to get a relic in your capital or bonus faith points so you have a better chance of leading the next crusade? At the moment it is too much of a slog, for any civ barring Germany, Burgundy, Spain and France, to catch up the number of faith points needed to lead the crusade. So you end up losing loads of units whilst having almost no chance to get the golden age reward.

You already get faith points with the latest updates. Also GGeneral points.
About relics, I have a clear plan, already posted about it a couple times. It's a bigger change though, don't have the time for it now.
Moveable relic units, like in SoI. Crusade leader gets 2 in the capital, all other participants 1. They can be "settled" in any of your cities (which have a temple) for a reliquiary, which becomes a special UB.
I think participating in the Crusades is already more desirable, but it will be complete with that update.

 

[SanJose]

Return to main concept of thread:

Spoiler :

 

[Swarbs]

Nice work

Pillaging others trade routes, or just tech rushing?

 

[El Bogus]

Wow, very nice! I rarely play to these late dates since my computer takes way too long for the turns so it's nice to see some late game here.

 

[SanJose]

Nice work
Pillaging others trade routes, or just tech rushing?

Pillaging, of course. Destroyed during game 325 carracks, 50 galleons, 77 caravells, 11 frigates and lost 229 of 233 privateers

Wow, very nice! I rarely play to these late dates since my computer takes way too long for the turns so it's nice to see some late game here.

My laptop does it with difficulty

 

[Swarbs]

Pillaging, of course. Destroyed during game 325 carracks, 50 galleons, 77 caravells, 11 frigates and lost 229 of 233 privateers


My laptop does it with difficulty

Nice

I managed a similar thing with Portugal a while back. Used BC to rush Astronomy and hordes of Privateers recruited from the Canaries, Azores, Madeira and Rejkavik to pillage every AA resource. Tho' I think England did manage to get a couple of colonies during a bad run of RNG which killed an entire fleet near Wales. In retrospect, I should have conquered Ireland and the Isles for a larger fleet and better projection of power.

Always fun to do either way!

 

[El Bogus]

Portugal.

 

[AbsintheRed]

You say they should have less production bonuses in the hands of the human player?

 

[El Bogus]

Well 25 % would surely suffice.

 

[AbsintheRed]

Well 25 % would surely suffice.

A part of it is the Portuguese UP though. A much bigger part is the owerflow, which basically doubles your production.
Actually production modifiers doesn't add bonus to your production, but decrease/increase the cost of the built item.