Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[10ebbor10]

Yeah, I'm going with nope as all three of those would shift the balance heavily to your side.

[Tack]

Well we currently are getting smooshed, and for every little mid-step we have to research or strategise, you get flamethrower scuttlebugs.

[10ebbor10]

You start controlling 90% of map and 90% of the resources.

If we didn't start with an initial advantage, we'd get crushed immediately.

Also, you appear to have literally bottomless reinforcements that increase every turn, so you can't really complain.

[Tack]

Do you not also have bottomless reinforcements which increase every turn?

[10ebbor10]

Nope.

Our reinforcements are strictly limited. What you've seen so far is all we got.

For the race with the supposed "terrifyingly high reinforcement rate", we're really short in reinforcement ability.

[Tack]

If that's what you mean, i think you might be making some incorrect assumptions about the humans.

Edit: that being said, I've no idea how your side works mechanically and you're the same with mine. I think that's how it's supposed to work, and, in a vacuum we're naturally going to assume the other side is OP

[Iituem]

Possible Mechanics Change: Training

Regardless of a decision made, this wouldn't take effect until after the next turn (or later, depending on coding difficulty).  Existing rules for all these resources would apply.

So, after a discussion on Discord about game balance there is the possibility of my rewriting the code to try and make things smoother or more representative.  Now, this might not be desirable full stop (don't shake the boat mid-game), and while I would do my best to adjust balance to make it all sane, it might not be a good idea.

Right now, Training works like ore and timber; you (and by you I mean the League specifically) produce a set amount of training each year depending on your cities and tech/other elements.  This serves as both building materials and maintenance, as well as a cap; if the League makes 1000 training a year and is spending 800 on troops, it only has 200 that turn to spend on training up reinforcements.

This has the weird effect that killing aphrokemae can be a good thing; it frees up training for mages and spearmen (or whatever else might be more desirable at a given time).  It also means that the amount of skill on the battlefield is constant; veterans don't build up over time, they remain constant.


The proposal is to change Training so that it isn't tied up in maintenance.  The annual cap would simply serve as a flat limit on production, regardless of the numbers and quality of soldiers already in the field.  This would result in rather situational pros and cons for both sides.

 - Veterancy.  Because a flat quantity of 'trained' troops of varying qualities would be added to fronts evenly each turn, the number of skilled troops would increase over time by attrition (slaves tend to die off, leaving vets alive).  Thus a Front would grow in strength over time as its troops collectively grew more capable.  The flip side is that killing those experienced troops would then deduct those veterans from the front permanently, and they would have to build back up.

  - Retirement not mandatory.  With flat training, skilled troops don't have to die on the field to free up training slots.  As a pro, it would lead to a larger influx of skilled troops to a front over time.  As a con, it means killing off the veterans is more of a blow because the 'stockpiled' training doesn't instantly refill.


I've set up a Strawpoll here for people to vote on what they think is the better system.

[Playergamer]

I'm not participating but I'm watching with interest and I definitely think it should be production-only. Might have to rebalance the numbers, but that makes the game more dynamic in my opinion.

[Nirur Torir]

I'm voting production-only. It may lean things towards the Hive in the long run, as a few kills could collapse a front entirely, but it adds narrative potential in the form of heroes.

[NUKE9.13]

As one of the instigators of this discussion, I thought I should share the main issue this addresses.
Namely that at present, the flavour is backwards.
The League, whose elite forces refill instantly (slaves barely matter, except as cannon fodder), has a "we have reserves" mentality. They can throw troops heedlessly into the grinder with almost no penalties.
The Hive, whose elite forces build up slowly over time, has a "we must conserve our elite forces" mentality. They need to be careful not to waste troops, as every loss is a permanent setback.
Whereas obviously the flavour is supposed to be that of a handful of brave soldiers holding fast against the seemingly bottomless hordes. Which is the case, only it's the League that is the bottomless horde.

[Tack]

Again, I have no idea what your mechanics are like, aren't your numbers limited only by food?

[RAM]

As a member* of The Hive's* I feel* it* urge*nt that The League not be bottomless. For if they lack bottoms, what shall we kick?
*Innuendo not intended.

Manpower is produced by Cities and Queens.
...
Both sides have a total limit to the amount of Manpower they can maintain at any given time, based off the number of Cities/Queens they have and access to Food.  Sides will reinforce up to that limit but cannot maintain more soldiers than that.

I was about to say something, but rechecking, it seems that yes, The Hive's limits are just food, apparently we can automatically fill to our food income. So nevermind what I may or may not have been about to say...
No, wait, logic sense frolicking! I think that I may have been making an improper assumption, there may indeed be an alternative... But probably not...

[Kashyyk]

As an observer, it appears manpower for the Hive is treated as a resource in the same way ore or wood I'd for the League,  whereas manpower for the league slowly gains "interest" like a bank account. This each unit of manpower for the League appears to be more costly to produce.

[NUKE9.13]

Again, I have no idea what your mechanics are like, aren't your numbers limited only by food?

At present, yes. But, unlike all other resources, manpower only refills slowly. Look:

Let's say that front A is full. The Hive has 300 Workers and 30 Soldiers. The league has 600 slaves, 50 spearmen, and 10 hoplites.
Now, both sides deal damage to the other. The Hive loses 150 Workers and 15 Soldiers. The League loses 300 slaves, 40 spearmen, and 8 hoplites.
Well, obviously the Hive is better off in this exchange, right? Wrong.
Now the fronts reinforce. The Hive reinforces 100 Workers and 10 Soldiers (they now have 250/25). The League reinforces ~150 slaves, and 40 spearmen and 8 hoplites.
Sure, the League is down a few slaves. But slaves don't matter. Only the elite troops really matter. And those are straight back up to full. Whereas the Hive has lost 1/6th of its actually relevant fighters, the League has lost nothing of importance. It didn't matter whether the Hive killed 40 spearmen or 0 spearmen, the next turn, the number of spearmen is the same. If things continue this way, the Hive will be attritioned down to defeat.

[Tack]

It's what seriously worries be, because if the Hive is pushing us back on all fronts already, what will happen now you have that lumber? What happens when you capture your first city?
Seems like a snowballing effect, and not in our favour.