standing armies and conscription

TGNLPp

Chieftain
Joined
Jul 16, 2004
Messages
11
An Idea I'd like to offer for consideration, I looked, and didn't see this mentioned anywhere(i really did). Id like to see Conscription offered earlier in the game, Really from the start. And see the use of standing armies reduced.

Historically, Most nations have not maintained a large standing army, at the very least, with one exception being the cold war, nations have not maintained an army that was large enough to do much of anything for any real length of time.

Generally speaking, whenever a nation wanted to go to war, or saw one coming their way, they conscripted local populations, they had a few verteran units from their standing armies, the rest were either green irregular soldiers, or mercenaries. Forces that were almost always disbanded as soon as the conflict ended.

The reason for this, standing professional armies are expensive, really expensive. You keep a standing army large enough to quell rebels and keep local populations in line, as well as watch your borders to deter enemies thats it.

Civilization is nothing like this in my oppinion. In my experience, from nearly the begining of time the world is practically covered with armies. The problem I have with this is that generally one nation arises to be the most powerful, builds a huge vast army, and slowly wipes the rest out with little chance of being dethroned as the world power.
Conscription or the draft, as they call it, isn't even available till late in game despite it being a vital part of national defense throughout history.
In my experinece, war rages relentlessly from start to finish, despite what should be crippling economic strain. There is no restraint on the game to waging unending war, so it does it freely, i've found treaties aren't worth the virtual paper they are written on, and it gets silly.

If armies were made more expensive to maintain and conscription made available from the start, then I think you could actually make the game more interesting as large superpowers now actually become their own worst enemy And you actually create an oppertunity to dethrone them

-A large empire will have far more unrest than smaller empires, and need more troops to maintain control. This means a greater economic strain on funds needed for research, growth and developement.
-A large empire will have more borders to protect and more enemies and people coveting their lands. It will also have more interests to protect, allies, trade routes and colonies. Meaning more soldiers and more economic strain.
-Now when one of these smaller empires attacks a larger empire, that empire will likely be forced to conscript soldiers to repel the incursion, while they obviously have more resources to draw on, there would be a catch
Conscription should cause unrest amoungst the population. For large empires already under strain, this could be devastating, for smaller empires, which have less internal strife, the impact is more easily absorbed.
-Because there is a real cost in waging war now, it would also force the computer to do it with a little more intellegence and reasoning than i have ever seen it use.
-It creates the real life situation where war ends, peace is sought, not so much because one side lost, but because the strain has grown too great for either to maintain the fighting. It also creates the situation where the victor does not neccessarily sieze all the territory he can from an enemy, but siezes what they need or want, and no more, because the strain on their military to control it and the local population would be too severe. They may sieze nothing.
-It forces large nations to rely on espionage. They'll need solid intellegence on their enemies to know when they need to conscript and build up a defense, or how to circumvent an attack to minimize the damage

Ofcourse Conscripted units should be weaker, less skilled than regular troops but costing the same, and should draw from the population, with the current (read Civ3) city growth model this could be a population point, or something less severe, you could remove food from the granary as a symbolic population reduction, since a full point in the early stage of the game is really severe.

Hopefully, it would extend the length of the game, require more strategic thinking on part of the players, and prevent the all powerful undefeatable super nation from happening.

Comments, arguements appreciated.
 
Good Ideas, IMHO :)!

-Having variable food, gold and even population costs for units would help to curtail the size of armies-particularly in smaller empires. In addition, it might be possible to have differing levels of "readiness, and have that readiness level effect maintainance costs-as I have suggested elsewhere, which will allow a nation to maintain a bigger army, but have them at greater risk of sneak attack (or vice versa!).

Yours,
Aussie_Lurker.
 
I like the direction this is going and here is more on how to implement it.

First, we have to create the distinction between "professional" and "conscripted" military units.

Professional units are full-time and require constant support and appropriate facilities. Until the modern army emerges, soldiers pay for their own gear, so only rich soldiers will get good stuff. They are also properly trained so they have much better health and stats.
Conscripts/Peasants/Militias are the normal people taking up arms. They don't require a lot of support staff or infrastructure, but die a lot quicker.

Here I will branch off between which soldiers are professional, and which conscript.

Professional:
Ancient Era - Legionaires, Immortals, Swordsmen, Ancient Cavalry, Hoplites, War Chariot, Chariot, Three-Horse Chariot
Middle Ages - Knights, Riders, War Elephants, Samurai, Cavalry, Cossack, Longbowmen, Berserks
Industrial Era - Once you get here and modern, your professional army is simply better trained.

Conscript:
Ancient Era - Archers, Horsemen, Spearmen, Warriors, Iroquis Warriors, Bowmen
Middle Ages - Medieval Infantry, Pikemen, Musketmen
Industrial Era- read note above

Professional Army:
At first, maintaining a large standing army would be complicated and expensive. You are limited by city size to how many professional units you can support. Technology will gradually improve the number of professionals you can support. A couple wonders will also increase that number.

Conscription:
Each time you conscript a unit, food is taken out of the food storage. Whenever your food storage is depleted, a pop unit is lost. The amoutn of food will increase with each draft in a particular city. Conscripte dunits require support and cannot be reintroduced back into cities.
 
Why not have the option to communicate with nearby barbs and hire them for a period of time (standard 20 turns?). Since they supposedly live by banditry in the game, they should be considered trained fighters although in more of a slash-and-burn style instead of nicely executed formations. This would automatically have to be renegotiated after the 20 turns and they might get a better offer from your opponent at that time. If the war ends during your 20 turn agreement, there could be a very slight chance (because they are impressed by your culture and food supply) the barbs would decide to join your civ as a settler.
 
Conscription would be better for certain governments than others, the best would be despotism (complete power) and feudalism (oath of fealty).
 
Aussie_Lurker said:
Good Ideas, IMHO :)!

-Having variable food, gold and even population costs for units would help to curtail the size of armies-particularly in smaller empires. In addition, it might be possible to have differing levels of "readiness, and have that readiness level effect maintainance costs-as I have suggested elsewhere, which will allow a nation to maintain a bigger army, but have them at greater risk of sneak attack (or vice versa!).

Yours,
Aussie_Lurker.

As far as the army readiness goes, i was thinking of an option, perhaps really only applicable to naval vessels, to decommision, "mothball", units. they would loose any experience levels, take a turn to reactivate. Be completely vunerable, but allow you to have the units without paying the entire upkeep fee. I dont know...

i disagree with whats been said earlier by some people, that having a military readiness setting works only in a more war orientated game. In a war oriented game, you'd never go off military readiness. really id say its more of an economic feature than a war one, even a diplomatic feature. Really, you're on high alert but not at war, your neighbors might start behaving differently at the negotiation table.
But i think alot of other elements of the game would have to change for this to be a really worthwhile edition. In general, i've never seen the wars end for long enough to be worth my time to use such a setting were it available.
In my oppinion The main focus of the game is war. until that focus changes...

now im getting off topic, but..
Really, the way i see it, cultural victories and diplomatic victories are more of an afterthought addition to the game. they are just there, without any real supporting features. infact, from what i've seen, they are only achieved through a near domination victory anyways.
little things, like the ability to enter into nato like treaty organizations, i.e. more than 2 treaty participants, will help. especially since it would give weight to things like trade embargoes which are worthless from what i've seen so far since no resource is ever controlled by just 2 empires unless one dominates the world already.

I think the readiness setting would help too, Granted if done improperly, the readiness setting might just be needless micromanaging tedium, but if tools were put in place, things like, you are attacked, you automatically enter high readiness, troops cross your border and you get a popup menu, an espionage adviser warns you about enemy activity and has that setting easily accessible from his screen, though its still there from the war advisors. Etc. Etc.

ill stop Rambling.
TGNLPp
 
Conscription should only be used for infantry, mounted troops and perhaps aircraft, but for battleships or other modern navy units conscription should make them slighly more powerful (more men at the guns).
 
Chukchi_Husky said:
Conscription should only be used for infantry, mounted troops and perhaps aircraft, but for battleships or other modern navy units conscription should make them slighly more powerful (more men at the guns).

Theres always commercial merchant ships which could be "conscripted" or "commandered"(sp?) as troop transports. They would probably have a penalty that they could only unload within a city with a harbor since they aren't geared to really deploy troops, or something similiar, so you'd have to sieze a city with a harbor first.
 
Perhaps if all units have variable population costs, then you could have conscription only applying to units with population costs above a certain threshold.
In addition, conscripted units should have a lower starting XP level, and advance at a much slower rate than standard units.

Yours,
Aussie_Lurker.
 
i like the idea as well, and too it might reduce the number (not variety) of units.
A gazillion units moving around at the end of the game is not my idea of fun, and too, the reverse has actually happened...the trend is toward smaller specialized forces.
 
My immediate idea from the first post was that the pro units would require gold (&food?) upkeep, while the conscripted units would require only food upkeep. This food upkeep could be taken from the nearest city(or something like that). So you could keep a massive conscripted army with minimum gold, but that would severely restrain your growth.
 
Actually, that may be a good idea, although my professional army only takes away gold. The professional army should always be around, but the conscripted troops are for wars and only require gold support, if food too it would favour agriculture civs too heavily. I figure losing pop points is harsh enough. Maybe after 20 turns or so, conscripts shold just start going back into the population of their own accord(tour of duty), reintroducign the same amount of food as they cost.

Another idea would be progressively more expensive conscripts. The first conscript from a particular city would cost 5 food. The next 6, the next 7, and so on. This way you would be encouraged to end wars before having to get a new set of conscripts. Also the incremental cost would stand over time.
 
Ah, but if you also made each conscript, after the first, cost that city 1% point of happiness, then you have an inbuilt balancing mechanism!

Yours,
Aussie_Lurker.
 
Personally, I like things the way they are with armies. Granted it takes awhile for the comptuer to move in the mdoern age, but, somethign about this idea, i can't put my finger on it and i'm not saying it's bad, jsut doens't wit well with me.
I think that the game is a strategy game, yes, and that it's major path to victory is with war, but then again, historically, war has been the most effective way to get what you want.
 
crimson238 said:
Personally, I like things the way they are with armies. Granted it takes awhile for the comptuer to move in the mdoern age, but, somethign about this idea, i can't put my finger on it and i'm not saying it's bad, jsut doens't wit well with me.
I think that the game is a strategy game, yes, and that it's major path to victory is with war, but then again, historically, war has been the most effective way to get what you want.

Ah, good, a dissenter. Can i get you to elaborate? I really want to know exactly what bothers you about it?

Yes it reduces the frequency and duration of war, but i think it makes the wars that do happen alot more interesting, alot more meaningful, and fun, atleast to me.
Granted some of my gripes are more an issue with the AI than it is a need for these suggestions, but alot has to do with the way wars just seem to feel, to me, like a nuisance or a chore instead of vibrant portion of the game, especially late in the game, and i think this would help. Although i could be completely wrong.

Under the current system, i build masses of units, when war breaks out, i throw them at the enemy. The biggest empire usually has the most troops since they build constantly, and have the best technology, and while at the begining of the game this gap doesn't mean much, by the end of the game, which is often the middle of the time line, the gap is enough that the bigger guy is big enough and wins.

For me, the game seems to reach a point where the outcome is determined long before any victory goal has been achieved, i.e. someones gauranteed to win, even though they havent yet gotten enough territory to nab that domination, or culture to nab the cultural victory

I could up the difficulty, but im not looking for a harder game exactly, just a more intellegent one, and besides i can only stand watching so many tanks get defeated by the same dang rifleman before i loose all patience with the game, regardless of whether im winning

I mean really, could we atleast introduce some kind of battle fatigue penalty so that by the time a unit has 10 or 11 consequetive wins in a single turn it is fighting at such a penalty that it has little to no chance of winning again until it''s rested for a turn... sorry, had to get that off my chest

And while war was frequently used as a means to get what you want, (successfully or not) more and more its giving way to other tactics, thanks to globalization, war means interuption in trade, money, its also a strain on all the nations nerby, with the threat of it spilling over. For example, how many nations have been bought off, paid, to not go to war, simply to prevent an interuption in trade. Its not the country that will potentially be attacked thats doing the paying, its some third party, usually with an economic interest in the area, that is effectively paying tribute to prevent the war, often to both sides. Its not war that gets these countries what they want, but the threat of war, or rather the threat of interuption to another nations income from many forms, including the threat of war. Some of the suggestions here would, i think, definetly contribute to representing that element of history.

Am i heading in the right direction here?
 
I am 98% in support of this idea.
It will make war a much smaller part of Civilization, and empire-management a much larger part. Of course, for warmongers, who like to conquer the entire planet one bit at a time, that's a bad thing. For empire-managers, who like to build their empire and only war when territory/resources/entertainment is needed, it's a good thing.

I don't think that it should happen at all in the Ancient Age- that would be the 'conquering phase', and in ancient times, massive armies did tend to roam around, conquering things and whatnots and such (Rome, Sparta, etc..)

As soon as the Medieval Age begins, conscription should begin- standing armies have become very, very expensive.
And in the Modern age, conscription would stop.
In the modern age, a well equipped army takes.. well.. big enormous honking chunks of money. But most of the major countries are keeping it up. Conscription isn't allowed anymore, not in Democracies. So instead, Armies are smaller and smaller groups of very expensive professionals.

Mercenaries need to be a part of Civ 4.
I mean, it's a HUGE part of history.
 
I think, TGNL, that the main reason behind me not liking it is it's perhaps too closely mirroring history, and feel that somehow, or rather i fear that somehow, this will deduce from the rewrittability of history in the game. I am all for less frequent wars, I can understand that there needs to be a profitable path to peace for the AI to take if it so chooses, but, i think that there also has to be the ability to be war like. Do you get what i mean?
IN order to make the game fun for all players they must do a fine balancing act. Now, IMO, i think the war side of the game is very well done. I like waging war, and so does the AI. They do need to smarten the AI, re work someof the units, and ofcrouse, build more viable paths to peace.
I dont think the way to do this would be more exspensive units. Imagine, you have a few cities in the industrial age, say it was a bad start for you, You have to go to war.
Well, by the time you finish building up those eletite troops which now cost more, it's the modern age, and they are obsolete. Granted im embellishing perhaps a lot there, but you get the drift.
I may just be paranioia, I'd still buy civ 4 reguardless. But I think that causing war to be more mostly in civ might also deduct some of the fun.
I personally do not want to have to go through every city and begin recruitning people whenever the AI atumble across one of my resources, or whenever I have to go invade a small island, for say, spices.
Ofcoruse this is not to poo poo any ideas, as i said, i can't exactly put my finger on it, but i think that's the basic dislike of this idea.
 
I didn't mean for this systme to reduce wars, but to make professional troops more interesting in terms of war tactics. I agree that currently war is just pushing the same troops against each other. One of the best parts of SMAC war was that the militaries were all varied by various factors. The Spartan faction depended on better training. The Morganites depended on quantity of troops. The Gians depended on irregular troop types. This variety in military made every war feel different. We can't exactly replicate that, but we can at least make it so the profesiosnal and elite corp of one military is distinct form the regular part of the army.

Also, you would have to decide where to commit your more experienced and superior troops. Ancient Armies were frequently made of of normal citizens filling in soldier roles. Same in the middle ages. These armies were massive, but still not truly trained professionals whose sole purpose was combat. Now Knights would actually be useful for fighting out tough battles. In the more modern eras most of the fighting would be done by more professional soldiers. This way military sophistication would increase over time.

Mercs are a good idae, so here is my model for them:

Your military advisor would have a list of merc armies looking for work. You would negotiate with them like any nation, with a fixed contract time(not always 20 turns). They would also accept more then money, including techs, rights to own a city they help conquer, or even trade goods for future use. you would get to see what kind of type of units you were hiring. the professional soldiers in the merc army(most likely the whole thing) would not count against your limit. There would be some peasant merc armies, but mostly professional armies. If these armies get a city, they form a warrior kingdom that is dealt with as any other civ, but will hire themselves out furthermore, or eventually decide to join their employeers civ as citizens.
 
Back
Top Bottom