Maybe armies really should be huge?

[jjkrause84]

Think about it. 1UPT forced a whole lot of stuff on us....mainly the painfully slow production speeds of EVERYTHING. This was done, presumably, to keep armies down in size. I was thinking though....do we need that?

Because of upkeep, population pressure (which MAYBE might be implemented better...I''ve never come anywhere close to having a problem with that. Maybe tier it so above a certain percentage of your population you lose production and happiness or something?), and most importantly TERRAIN people would refrain from building an army bigger than they needed anyways so why not bump up the production so we don't spend 50 turns building a courthouse in our enemy's former capitol?

EVEN IF countries did over-produce armies it woudl just mean multiple fronts which would be AWESOME and add yet another layer of interest as people decide where the schwerpunkt is and chose to favour one front over another.

It's just a thought but it would solve the 'boring' problem of taking forever to build basic units/buildings and also address the problem of building your first musketman a turn before you get the tech for riflemen (because science moves so much faster than production).


Whaddya think?

 

[KAuss]

The map sizes and rough terrain are too clustered to focus on massing more units... It's already a task itself to move 25 men armies...

Along with workers from open borders being a soft road block, the map just does not provide enough pathways to allow larger armies to work...

You literally have to play an open plains map to allow for greater battles... The one thing this game fails at is scaling unit sizes and strategic terrain to allow for tactical combat... There are way too many randomly generated single hex fortress walks of doom generated where archers can hold off their position just due to the slow walk speed through this 1x3 hex worth of hills...