Home English (UK) Ideas, Suggestions & Feedback

We need new Moderators!


ModeratorWe are always on the lookout for talented people to join the team. That means you! If you think you could help us organise and inform the community while entertaining everyone then apply. We need people to help out on the forum, behind the scenes with announcements, on Discord and on our other Social Media channels.


If this is something you think might be of interest to you, HERE

Defence

Sometimes, I want to say, put all my spear men on one flank for example, I can't. The defense menu would be better if you could deploy soldiers manually.

And traveling armies should NOT consume food. Instead, they should use food as part of the travel costs, like they do with gold.
Post edited by NoblemanJames (AU1) on
NoblemanJames @ au 1
NON RUBY BUYER
  Mr peasant, you are right, the archetect is silly, letting rain and snow fall off the roof into the chimney.

Comments

  • Cornet6 (US1)Cornet6 (US1) Posts: 1,740
    edited 20.09.2013
    Totally disagree with you for the second one.

    To put more troops on the wall, you have to upgrade your towers.
    Cornet6 @ usa 1
    Cornet6 @Canada 1 #TheDreamLivesOn

    Proud Founder of AAG

    http://www.associatedalliances.com/
  • HeroShahidyHeroShahidy Posts: 1,861
    edited 20.09.2013
    Set the ratio for amount of defense and the melee/ranged ratio on each flanks.
    HeroShahidy @ USA 1
  • fmsfms Posts: 83
    edited 20.09.2013
    I like the first idea. It would save a lot so soldiers when i'm attacked.
    4.jpg
    19.jpg
    8.jpg
    18.jpg
  • fazza27fazza27 Posts: 384
    edited 20.09.2013
    No, I agree with original point. The melee:ranged ration slider only goes so far in details, and manual abilities would really help.


    As for the second point, that could be quite complicated, with spare food (production-consumption) often changing massively. Plus, if a high level player sends a big army, especially if it is support, it may not be physically possible, as the food would cost more than max. storage. So, nice idea, but I'm not sure it would work.
    fazza27 @ en 1 Non-Ruby-Buyer

    If you are complaining about ruby advantages, remember who funds the game for you...

    What do you guys think about a new kingdom...
    http://en.board.goodgamestudios.com/empire/showthread.php?74066-New-Kindom-Sharktooth-Isles
  • NoblemanJames (AU1)NoblemanJames (AU1) Posts: 217
    edited 21.09.2013
    No, just as travel costs, except, you could tell the army to plunder rbs on the way.
    NoblemanJames @ au 1
    NON RUBY BUYER
      Mr peasant, you are right, the archetect is silly, letting rain and snow fall off the roof into the chimney.
  • Manatee (US1)Manatee (US1) Posts: 2,711
    edited 21.09.2013
    I think NoblemanJames's point about the troop arrangements had more to do with which specific type of troop he wants stationed in the towers. Not simply ranged versus melee.

    I can see why. When I'm getting hit by a smallish force, I prefer to defend with my weaker troops (spears, bows, archers), then simply replace them. I don't necessarily want my veteran spears and such stepping up in the towers to take those hits. I want to save them for the bigger battles, or for defending my castle overnight while I'm asleep. Otherwise I'd like those more difficult to obtain troops to remain n the Keep. I would prefer not to have to constantly shift troops back and forth with my outposts to counter it.

    The second point (initial food cost only) I don't like. I think it would have too big an impact on various elements of the game. For example, I play heavily in the red (my food production is always in the heavy negatives). So I don't have ample food stores just sitting around to send armies out on a long campaign. Instead, they are fed by what food I haul in every few hours via sending my other armies out foraging from nearby castles and RBCs.

    People would need to accumulate 50,000 food just to send an attack of 1,040 troops 6 hours away.
    I like being able to play at low food stores (in the red). That combined with dropping my honor helps make me a less inviting target.
    manateesharkjpeg


    Manatee @ usa 1
    My ideal method of suicide: climbing Ultimo's ego and jumping to his IQ
  • NoblemanJames (AU1)NoblemanJames (AU1) Posts: 217
    edited 21.09.2013
    I just smash everyone I think is a threat.
    NoblemanJames @ au 1
    NON RUBY BUYER
      Mr peasant, you are right, the archetect is silly, letting rain and snow fall off the roof into the chimney.
  • DirtnapDirtnap Posts: 170
    edited 21.09.2013
    I agree with both, especially the food consumption. It should factor in buy using how much each troop consumes vs the time they are on the march and just take that off the top immediately. Everyone knows that you will most likely lose some troops and if you are borderline on food production/consumption this slows the process somewhat for recruiting more troops. You don't know exactly how many troops you will lose but know you will lose some so you can start the recruitment a bit earlier instead of waiting for the battle to be over to find out how many replacement troops you will need.
    "I am an acquired taste, if you don't like me you need to acquire some taste!"
  • NoblemanJames (AU1)NoblemanJames (AU1) Posts: 217
    edited 21.09.2013
    Although on long journeys, the soldiers should plunder food from level 1 rbs.
    NoblemanJames @ au 1
    NON RUBY BUYER
      Mr peasant, you are right, the archetect is silly, letting rain and snow fall off the roof into the chimney.
  • edwardromoruleredwardromoruler Posts: 189
    edited 21.09.2013
    I think the first is a okay idea. The second I agree 75%. I do think that solders should not eat food while there away but I you should not give them food on attack.
  • Daniel DegudeDaniel Degude Posts: 1,645
    edited 21.09.2013
    i think that the first idea was a good one, and i hope they implement it.
    the second one i disagree with.
    first off, it would make stealing op's extremely expensive for level 13 players who get there first castellan. let me explain. lets just say that ur a happy go lucky level 13 player who is about to steal an op from a player with a castle in ruins. u have to send at least 50macemen and 50 crossbowman to take his remainding defence force out. that means your troops are eating 200 food per hour. usually, it will take about 6 hours to capture the outpost. add the 24 remainding hours occupational period, and u have 30 hours. thats 6000 food. it would be so much easier to just keep it the way it is. besides the cost for attacking would become enormous. especially for people who like to have more troops and keep in the red.
  • eyedyeyedy Posts: 74
    edited 21.09.2013
    I love the first idea. However I don't with the second idea, it would alter a lot of things about the game. As for your army hitting robber barons as they travel, this is an idea that sounds ridiculous. If you want to hit robber barons when your army is being sent to attack someone then hit it with a second army.
    Proud Sergeant of Amalgamation
  • 123guy123guy Posts: 2,956
    edited 21.09.2013
    Manatee wrote: »
    I think NoblemanJames's point about the troop arrangements had more to do with which specific type of troop he wants stationed in the towers. Not simply ranged versus melee.

    I can see why. When I'm getting hit by a smallish force, I prefer to defend with my weaker troops (spears, bows, archers), then simply replace them. I don't necessarily want my veteran spears and such stepping up in the towers to take those hits. I want to save them for the bigger battles, or for defending my castle overnight while I'm asleep. Otherwise I'd like those more difficult to obtain troops to remain n the Keep. I would prefer not to have to constantly shift troops back and forth with my outposts to counter it.

    I find that an easy solution for that, send them away from your castle a few seconds before the attack hits and then recall them.
    Retired from game, sorry if I answer a question with outdated information

    [email protected], General of Ninth Legion, 78th in the alliance honour rankings.

    Soon the empire world will be united under one banner...[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
  • Manatee (US1)Manatee (US1) Posts: 2,711
    edited 21.09.2013
    Thanks 123guy, that's what I do, lol.

    I'm saying his option #1 would be well liked since we wouldn't have to be online at the exact window of time to both send out the troops and then recall them before it's too late. Plus we wouldn't have to keep a commander in reserve. It's just super annoying for those of us who have some specialty troops we'd like to hold onto for 'real' battles.
    manateesharkjpeg


    Manatee @ usa 1
    My ideal method of suicide: climbing Ultimo's ego and jumping to his IQ
  • NoblemanJames (AU1)NoblemanJames (AU1) Posts: 217
    edited 22.09.2013
    I agree, But I take back the second idea.
    NoblemanJames @ au 1
    NON RUBY BUYER
      Mr peasant, you are right, the archetect is silly, letting rain and snow fall off the roof into the chimney.

Leave a Comment

BoldItalicStrikethroughOrdered listUnordered list
Emoji
Image
Align leftAlign centerAlign rightToggle HTML viewToggle full pageToggle lights
Drop image/file