Mercenaries

[MasterGeese]

Mercenaries are a way to "rent" a military force, when you don't have the time or the ability to build one of your own.

You'll be able to rent mercenaries from other civs and from city states, but first let's focus on other civs. There will be an "Armies" tab in the diplomacy screen, like there is now for cities, resources, etc. There will be a list of all the military units that civ controls, and you can pick and choose what kind of units and how many you want, and they can be traded away just like any other asset. Units can be loaned for 30 turn intervals. If you renew the deal, the units will continue fighting in the same spot like nothing happened. Else, they will disappear and start heading back to the other civ. Once the trade goes through, the units will appear in your city nearest to that civ after 3 turns.

If another civ asks for your units, you may pick (via the gift-box system you use to gift units to city states) exactly which units you send to another civ, provided it meets the number of soldiers the other civ asked for.

While under your control, mercenaries cost double the unit maintenance of units you built yourself, to discourage overuse of this feature. If you declare war against the civ you borrowed armies from, the units will immediately leave your territory and appear back in the original civ's territory immediately, to prevent asking another civ for units then attacking them while they're in transit.

City states have a similar system of renting units, and the cost decreases significantly if you are friends or allied with that city state. (probably 25% less cost for friends, 50% less cost for allies.) Militaristic city states give a 50% discount for friendship, and if you are allies you can rent units from them for free! Remember though that they still cost double unit maintenance.

There will be a diplo penalty for loaning units to a civ's enemy. For instance, if I'm France, and England and Germany are warring, Germany may ask me for units. If I accept, I'll incur a diplo penalty to England for "aiding her enemies", though not nearly as much of a penalty for warring with her directly. The penalty will be roughly equal to declaring a DoF with Germany.

I'm thinking that this system would offer an incentive for some otherwise peaceful civs to build up armies, and adding another layer of depth to diplomacy in this game, which could always use some help.

 

[Xandinho]

The system Mercenaries is interesting, could also pick up military units borrowed from city-states, regardless of being militaristic

 

[searcheagle]

I like the idea but I see one giant risk that you haven't addressed. I rent mercenaries from you, have the units killed in attack, and then attack your new weakened army.

I think you could take your idea and do something a little different. An enemy could hire you to attack cities/units for them. They would operate like hidden flag pirate ships that would fly under the employing civ's flag. You would then receive a bounty for each unit or city you capture. (The captured city would be given to employer.)

 

[otaman1]

Recruiting mercenaries in non-friendly territory will make the mercenary and vice versa. Mercenaries would cost more to to maintenance than units produces by the player. You can also recruit barbarians ... with a missionary of course

 

[Rusty Edge]

While we're at it, can we hire guest labor?

 

[NJC]

Since mercenaries act without national borders like private enterprises why not try this method out instead?

Mercs cost a 1/4 of the gold to regular troops to actually create an incentive to purchase them in the first place but their upkeep is doubled and you can only disband them when their upkeep (Lets say 2 gold) reach's a quarter the original units cost in gold (so for a warrior in standard speed games thats 200 divided by 4 = 50 gold) This would mean you would have to pay for the merc for 13 turns then disband it or take it out for a re-loan.

Maybe I'm over-thinking this but its a great option for the merchant-style players out there (Venice much) who love building up civilian stuff over the military. Naturally it wouldn't work for every player.

If you can no-longer pay the merc, than one of three things could then happen
1 they turn into barbarians attempting to pillage land for upkeep
2 join the enemies side as regular units against the player or
3 turn into an new independent army which doubles and attempts to take one or more of the players cities to form one or more independent city states

All of these options are plausible in terms of gameplay and did actually occur throughout history. Even if only one of the above was chosen, it would definitely diversify gameplay.

 

[NJC]

I'd prefer option 2 and 3, it's good to remember many nations expanded due to other countries inability to control their mercenaries, for example the Roman empire to barbarian neighbors and Byzantine with turkish mercanaries who eventually came to dominate all of anatolia (now called modern day turkey)

 

[TheMightyRyon]

How about holy orders?

They would be similar to mercenaries, but require faith and only fight enemies of the opposite religion. You could hire them from religious city states and there could perhaps be a way for you to found a religious order of your own or team up with another civ of your religion to do it.

 

[searcheagle]

Since mercenaries act without national borders like private enterprises why not try this method out instead?

You could organically obtain mercenaries from either: Other civs, City States, or tied into barbarians somehow.

Mercs cost a 1/4 of the gold to regular troops to actually create an incentive to purchase them in the first place but their upkeep is doubled and you can only disband them when their upkeep (Lets say 2 gold) reach's a quarter the original units cost in gold (so for a warrior in standard speed games thats 200 divided by 4 = 50 gold) This would mean you would have to pay for the merc for 13 turns then disband it or take it out for a re-loan.

I don't think we should view Mercs as "bought" or "created" but rather rented for a set period of time. I think they should have high usage costs but shouldn't have costs to setup mercenary usage. So, therefore, they should not disband at the end of the contract.

Maybe I'm over-thinking this but its a great option for the merchant-style players out there (Venice much) who love building up civilian stuff over the military. Naturally it wouldn't work for every player.

I am thinking that Mercs would be used 2 situations: Use in a pinch due to impending doom or surge capacity for a wealthy nation that wants to manage a small military.

If you can no-longer pay the merc, than one of three things could then happen
1 they turn into barbarians attempting to pillage land for upkeep
2 join the enemies side as regular units against the player or
3 turn into an new independent army which doubles and attempts to take one or more of the players cities to form one or more independent city states

I like the idea of the mercenaries becoming barbarians because they like all the money they are making in their Merc careers. Of course, they could jump back into the Merc world if another country comes calling.

It doesn't make sense to have them join the enemy (unless you wrong them somehow).

As their own independent army, they could of course, conquer their own cities.

All of these options are plausible in terms of gameplay and did actually occur throughout history. Even if only one of the above was chosen, it would definitely diversify gameplay.

I think you could get a lot of diplomatic interactions and dilemmas if you have to recruit mercs from city states. You could control them like your own units but the City States will resent you if their troops die in your wars. If you take good care of their troops, your relationship will them will grow.

The City State will also benefit from your scientific technology and will be able to produce more advanced units.

 

[NJC]

How about holy orders?

They would be similar to mercenaries, but require faith and only fight enemies of the opposite religion. You could hire them from religious city states and there could perhaps be a way for you to found a religious order of your own or team up with another civ of your religion to do it.

Sounds plausible, but we can already purchase units with faith points.

Historically many religions have had religious orders for warfare, perhaps it could be a national wonder (called the crusader castle) for each civilizations religion, allowing soldiers to be purchased with half the faith points per usual in that city.
Then a world wonder (Krak des Chaevaliers) could allow for another 4 of those national wonders to be built in various cities. it would really enhance the religious gameplay of civ V

 

[NJC]

I don't think we should view Mercs as "bought" or "created" but rather rented for a set period of time. I think they should have high usage costs but shouldn't have costs to setup mercenary usage. So, therefore, they should not disband at the end of the contract.

If they are rented, then naturally they would disband at the end of the contract, to keep them, like in real life, you'd have to renew the contract

Otherwise, to complement your earlier ideas, why not have a mercenaries guild? Militaristic city-states could automatically gain them but civilizations would have to build theem manually. You'd have to rent mercenaries from the contracted nation (to which they can earn a profit) until the contract expires,

Lastly, mercs can go barbarian, but if an opportunist neutral civilization or an existing enemy has the gold for it, it would make sense for them (and the player) to have the option to contract the mercs into their own army for war

 

[searcheagle]

If they are rented, then naturally they would disband at the end of the contract, to keep them, like in real life, you'd have to renew the contract

This sounds like it could just be a disagreement over semantics and nothing more lol. If I hire a company to mow my grass every week, they will mow my grass every week until I stop paying them. At that point in time, I have my lawn that either I have to mow it myself or hire someone else. The people who mowed my grass in the past can now go mow someone else's lawn. The company doesn't disband- err completely dissolve- just because I fire them.

Same deal if I were to hire a corp of soldiers to fight on my behalf. I didn't bring them into existence (create them), I didn't train them, and I didn't arm them. I just pay them- and pay them well- to buy their loyalty.

If they leave, they will leave with their equipment, their troops, and their skills, which they can use to attack other civs- or me.

Otherwise, to complement your earlier ideas, why not have a mercenaries guild? Militaristic city-states could automatically gain them but civilizations would have to build theem manually. You'd have to rent mercenaries from the contracted nation (to which they can earn a profit) until the contract expires,

I think a better way to implement this would be to all city states to have 1 mercenary unit but Militaristic City States can have 3 mercenaries units.

Lastly, mercs can go barbarian, but if an opportunist neutral civilization or an existing enemy has the gold for it, it would make sense for them (and the player) to have the option to contract the mercs into their own army for war

Exactly, they should either go back to their CS OR if they go rogue and become barbarians. Barbarians could be hired by other city states, if the barbarians are happy with that.

 

[NJC]

This sounds like it could just be a disagreement over semantics and nothing more lol. If I hire a company to mow my grass every week, they will mow my grass every week until I stop paying them. At that point in time, I have my lawn that either I have to mow it myself or hire someone else. The people who mowed my grass in the past can now go mow someone else's lawn. The company doesn't disband- err completely dissolve- just because I fire them.

Same deal if I were to hire a corp of soldiers to fight on my behalf. I didn't bring them into existence (create them), I didn't train them, and I didn't arm them. I just pay them- and pay them well- to buy their loyalty.

If they leave, they will leave with their equipment, their troops, and their skills, which they can use to attack other civs- or me.



I think a better way to implement this would be to all city states to have 1 mercenary unit but Militaristic City States can have 3 mercenaries units.




Exactly, they should either go back to their CS OR if they go rogue and become barbarians. Barbarians could be hired by other city states, if the barbarians are happy with that.

Lols, its partially semantics, except what I meant by ending the contract was that they would leave the civilization they are serving and enter a pool of mercenaries accessible in the city with the mercenary guild.

I don't think each city-state holding its own mercenaries would work though, a nation like Venice could have the option to create massive mercenary armies due to its trade empire (which historically did happen) if they where focused in an unlimited pool where anyone could access them.

Perhaps then if you where to ally with another civ or just be on friendly terms with them you could then hire their mercenaries (eg friends with Japan = mercenary Samurai option).

The ability to raise massive mercenary armies would then renew conflicts on trade routes with each nation attempting to starve the other out of funds to end their hegemony. Plus its a bit annoying to get invaded when you go for the full civic build up mode, unless you can put that money to good use by buying a large stack of mercs without numerical limitations than I feel the feature would loose its usefulness.

Ofcourse, you wouldn't be able to get an unlimited amount of unique civ units like samurai, they would have to be limited to round 2-3.

Maybe the minimum relatinship level to get major civs and city state mercs could be "friendly?"

Otherwise, do you reckon the feature to buy soldiers currently in civ V should be eliminated to implement the mercenary system? because people might not consider getting mercs if they could just buy their own units for the full price.

 

[DudewiththeFood]

I think mercenaries should go into an international pool and as NJC says, buying units would have to be removed from the game.

The international pool would start with 3 units of each type per civ. So on a map with 5 civs, you can hire up to 15 scouts assuming no other civs have hired any. When you discover archery, 15 archers are added to the total. Alternatively, when you meet a civ that has researched archery, it also unlocks archers for hire even though you can't recruit them.

Classic era - 4 units/type/civ and 1/militaristic cs.
Medieval - 5 units/type/civ and 1/militaristic cs.
Renaissance - 5 units/type/civ and 1/cs.
Industrial - 6 units/type/civ and 2/militaristic and 1/other cs.
Modern - 6/civ and 2/cs.
After the Modern era, the pool stays the same.

Mercenaries have half the cost that purchasing units does now but you pay double maintainence. Commerce opener can be changed to hire them for free or something.

OR UUs not in the game for civs AND cs can be hired but cost triple maintainence. I'm not sure which is better. Also, in the international pool the amount of UUs is only 1/3 of the normal. So say there are 18 swordsmen availiable max and Rome aren't in your game there are 6 legions for hire.

How would that all fit?

 

[searcheagle]

Lols, its partially semantics, except what I meant by ending the contract was that they would leave the civilization they are serving and enter a pool of mercenaries accessible in the city with the mercenary guild.

I think uncontracted mercs should be allowed to be ranging barbarians- including in the modern era. If a city state wanted to hire them, they could do that too.

I don't think each city-state holding its own mercenaries would work though, a nation like Venice could have the option to create massive mercenary armies due to its trade empire (which historically did happen) if they where focused in an unlimited pool where anyone could access them.

I forget what the unique ability of Venice is. But there should be a limited number of mercs out on the map at any given time.

Perhaps then if you where to ally with another civ or just be on friendly terms with them you could then hire their mercenaries (eg friends with Japan = mercenary Samurai option).

I'm not opposed to that. Just want to make sure that players/AI won't exploit it.

The ability to raise massive mercenary armies would then renew conflicts on trade routes with each nation attempting to starve the other out of funds to end their hegemony. Plus its a bit annoying to get invaded when you go for the full civic build up mode, unless you can put that money to good use by buying a large stack of mercs without numerical limitations than I feel the feature would loose its usefulness.

I don't want to have massive merc armies- I want their numbers limited. That is one of the reason why I want them to turn into nasty barbarians if they are not employed- give them a nasty downside if you let them go!

Trade routes SHOULD be under attack in a war. That is why they were put into the game! To add another dimension to war.

I'm not a fan of "buying" units. I do it, sure, but it doesn't feel organic in the game. I think buying units should have a limit, too. But I think mercs would be a good replacement for that system, since you mentioned it.

Ofcourse, you wouldn't be able to get an unlimited amount of unique civ units like samurai, they would have to be limited to round 2-3.

I think you should be able to contract with whatever they want to give you.

Maybe the minimum relatinship level to get major civs and city state mercs could be "friendly?"

Definitely Friendly!

Otherwise, do you reckon the feature to buy soldiers currently in civ V should be eliminated to implement the mercenary system? because people might not consider getting mercs if they could just buy their own units for the full price.

I didn't think about doing that until you mentioned it. But I think that should be removed. Maybe you can leave it for an accelerated build program where you can speed up builds 50% by throwing cash at it.

I want to force the moral dilemma of getting mercs. You shouldn't be able to solve all problems with $ like you can at the end of the game as you can in Civ 5.

 

[NJC]

I think mercenaries should go into an international pool and as NJC says, buying units would have to be removed from the game.

The international pool would start with 3 units of each type per civ. So on a map with 5 civs, you can hire up to 15 scouts assuming no other civs have hired any. When you discover archery, 15 archers are added to the total. Alternatively, when you meet a civ that has researched archery, it also unlocks archers for hire even though you can't recruit them.

Classic era - 4 units/type/civ and 1/militaristic cs.
Medieval - 5 units/type/civ and 1/militaristic cs.
Renaissance - 5 units/type/civ and 1/cs.
Industrial - 6 units/type/civ and 2/militaristic and 1/other cs.
Modern - 6/civ and 2/cs.
After the Modern era, the pool stays the same.

Mercenaries have half the cost that purchasing units does now but you pay double maintainence. Commerce opener can be changed to hire them for free or something.

OR UUs not in the game for civs AND cs can be hired but cost triple maintainence. I'm not sure which is better. Also, in the international pool the amount of UUs is only 1/3 of the normal. So say there are 18 swordsmen availiable max and Rome aren't in your game there are 6 legions for hire.

How would that all fit?

You're idea's are good, I especially like the unit limitations, it makes sense as SearchEagle noted too limit the amount of available mercenaries, but perhaps double the amount of available mercs in the guild pool (not counting special units like samurai)

However, there should be a contract system. Reason being is that mercs could be purchased for a cheap half price in like five turns for a battle then disbanded with no real monetary cost to the player. (eg instead of buying warriors at 200gold on standard mode you'd buy them at 100 with an upkeeep of 4 gold per turn, if you have them around for only 10 turns this will amount to a total cost of 140 gold, much cheaper than just buying them!!!)

So, what if instead we have 2 kinds of contracts to balance this out? (for this example, we'll assume an upkeep of $2 and cost of 200 gold to buy an imaginary unit for simplification)
Pay upfront contract - buy at 3/4 price ($150) with triple upkeep (2 x 3 = $6) for 20 turns = 150 + (6 x 20) = $270 total cost for merc
or
Pay back overtime contract - buy at 1/2 ($100) price with quad-triple upkeep (2 x 4 = $8) for 20 turns = 100 + (8 x 20) = $360 total cost

These are pretty expensive mercs I know BUT I think if cities current gold output from trading and buildings was quadripled it would be affordable (along with double price increase of buildings)

The other advantage of increasing cities total gold output and the mercenary mechanic is that it would create a completely new budgeting layer to the game previously unavailable in Civ (all the formula's done above would ofcourse be automatically calculated by the game, people playing civ wouldn't have to do it themselves, that would just over-complicate it)

To make this work, a small budget screen of current expenses (eg building maintanance) and revenue (eg trade) could be created and placed next to the options of buying mercenaries showing the effect of buying mercenaries would have on the budget.

Naturally, a player is free to renew a contract if he/she pleases or upon its expiration disband the unit altogether.


I think the normal budget (income statement) screen should look like this

Revenue - trade rev: $20 + building revenue $20 + diplomatic agreement $10 = $50 gross revenue
Expenses - buildings maintanance $10 + regular unit maintanance $10 + mercenary maintanance $10 = $30 total cost
Net revenue $50 - $30 = $20

Then when looking at options to purchase mercs (cost benefit analysis) it should look like this

Current total revenue = 20 gold
Current Savings = $200
Pay-upfront contract - immediate cost 200 - 150 = $50 savings remaining --> revenue cost 20 - 6 = revenue for 15 turns reduced to $14
total cost overtime = $270
Pay-back overtime contract - immediate cost 200 - 100 = $100 savings remaining --> revenue cost 20 - 8 = revenue for 15 turns reduced to $12, total cost overtime = 360

A similar system could work for buildings, they could be built (not including wonders but yes including guilds) for half their current price BUT the upkeep for constructing the building would be double or triple its normal maintenance. Once the buildings construction is finished though, it would return to its normal upkeep

What do you guys think? Am I over-complicating it or is it simple yet in-depth layer of strategy?

 

[NJC]

I think uncontracted mercs should be allowed to be ranging barbarians- including in the modern era. If a city state wanted to hire them, they could do that too.

I forget what the unique ability of Venice is. But there should be a limited number of mercs out on the map at any given time.

I'm not opposed to that. Just want to make sure that players/AI won't exploit it.

I don't want to have massive merc armies- I want their numbers limited. That is one of the reason why I want them to turn into nasty barbarians if they are not employed- give them a nasty downside if you let them go!

Trade routes SHOULD be under attack in a war. That is why they were put into the game! To add another dimension to war.

I'm not a fan of "buying" units. I do it, sure, but it doesn't feel organic in the game. I think buying units should have a limit, too. But I think mercs would be a good replacement for that system, since you mentioned it.

I think you should be able to contract with whatever they want to give you.

Definitely Friendly!

I didn't think about doing that until you mentioned it. But I think that should be removed. Maybe you can leave it for an accelerated build program where you can speed up builds 50% by throwing cash at it.

I want to force the moral dilemma of getting mercs. You shouldn't be able to solve all problems with $ like you can at the end of the game as you can in Civ 5.

Venice gets double the normal amount of trade routes. Yes the number of mercs on the map should be limited and I like your accelerated building program idea.

However I don't like the idea of mercs going rogue barbarian randomly attacking cities when they could make just as much profit as serving an nation or city state. An alternative would be the financial system I outlined in the post before (above this one), its not perfect draft but it is a starting place.

Regarding the merc pool, I think there should be a limit to how many mercs a civ can draw out rather than a limited number of mercs in the world at the time because in legendary mode, a powerful civ would just take them all and prevent the player or weaker civs from buying any.

What do you think? do you believe it could work

 

[NJC]

I personally have no modding experience but would gladly help the budgeting and financial figures of anyone hoping to create this mod. Hopefully they'll even put this merc system into Civ VI or an expansion of Civ V

 

[PrimoXanthous]

Mr Gedemon already made a mod about this Mercenary, you could hire them on CS, unfortunately he don't update this on GnK and BNW.

 

[searcheagle]

Venice gets double the normal amount of trade routes. Yes the number of mercs on the map should be limited and I like your accelerated building program idea.

Thanks!

However I don't like the idea of mercs going rogue barbarian randomly attacking cities when they could make just as much profit as serving an nation or city state. An alternative would be the financial system I outlined in the post before (above this one), its not perfect draft but it is a starting place.

I think they should prefer to work as mercenaries. But if they don't work, they still have to make money to eat. And thus they try to loot neighboring towns.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QRSkCIx_-Qo

I want to have the addition of mercs add a moral dilemma. Strong advantage to using them. But giving you a negative consequence from using them. Side note: Not to mention that it would be historically accurate. Read up on the Vandals that sacked Rome. Very interesting story.)

Regarding the merc pool, I think there should be a limit to how many mercs a civ can draw out rather than a limited number of mercs in the world at the time because in legendary mode, a powerful civ would just take them all and prevent the player or weaker civs from buying any.

Hmmm... Lots of different options. Maybe each additional merc unit by a civ would cost more. I don't like hard limits in games.

Or mercs located further away would cost more?

Or City State Penalties for having too many mercs?

What do you think? do you believe it could work

Keep talking- We'll get something the developers will like.