Level Up Bonus: Guardian

How to make it exciting

Currently the guardian upgrade really doesn't do much good as a city level up choice. It may help in the short term by getting a unit early on with armor and maybe and ability but in the long term, it hurts the city. Here is my suggestion on how to improve this city level up bonus

 

City Bound

Guardians cannot ever leave a city. In addition, guardians having their soul tethered to this place will regenerate if defeated. So whether the defender wins the battle and their guardian is defeated or if the attackers win, the guardian will eventually return to life.

 

This way, the guardian is a permanent bonus to the city.

 

Thoughts?

10,336 views 16 replies
Reply #1 Top

First, the option is supposed to be a short term choice. It doesn't make sense to say that it's not good because it's short term, when that is how it is designed.

Second, I agree with you and this sort of military level-up bonus is something lacking when it comes to making each city unique.

Reply #2 Top

Quoting Heavenfall, reply 1
First, the option is supposed to be a short term choice. ...
End of Heavenfall's quote


What in the UI makes you think a player should understand this very important distinction? All the other options are permanent production bonuses that have long-term benefits. Are the newest players expected to know instinctively that 'free' units will eventually become obsolete? Despite the fact that the current UI makes that one short-term choice visually appear equal to the various long-term choices?

Reply #3 Top

It's not represented in the UI. It is logical to assume that a one-time army bonus is a short-term option.

Reply #4 Top

Logical to some maybe, the first few times I saw it myself my immediate assumption was that it'd work as a permanent bonus, essentially thought of the guardian as an avatar of the city - As the city grows so does the guardian, and so long as the city exists the guardian would survive/respawn in some form.

One way or another, some clarification in-game can't be a bad thing. Personally I prefer the idea of it being a permanent but defence-only boost.

Reply #5 Top

The most obvious soutions come from realism: why doesn't a REAL city get burned by bandits? Because their help can be bought out or because citizens form a miltia that never leaves the town but can only defend it. Why doesn't a REAL city get burnd down by bears? Well, bears and wolves just don't burn cities, they can just kill the population and or steal food.

Everything else can be fine, but at least the above options should apply. Not going for realism in basic stuff like that, IMO is always a mistake.

Reply #6 Top

It's a situational thing. If enemies are just outside your walls and your city pops a level it's a good choice. In any other scenario you're better off takeing +x% to whatever you specialised your city in.

The UI ,as always, could use some work. But it's not that hard to understand.

Reply #7 Top

I dunno, it was pretty obvious to me the first time I saw it. Short term gain/long-term loss (most of the time).

However, if it means keeping the city, or having a major unit early in the game (that lets you get access to an area before someone else), then it can still have long-term game ramifications.

 

I think it's a perfect option alongside the others. I tend to play the "improve my cities" approach, and so I pick one of the % options most of the time. But I have made a city more than once that was more strategically placed for bottlenecking instead of focusing, and picked the guardian option a couple times.
It was nice to have those free units to quickly clear out an area and gain a couple prime spots for gold and tech producing cities.

Getting something a number of turns early can mean a huge difference in a game like this. Think of it as an invisible long-term gain, that depends on how you use the resource.

Reply #8 Top

"Guardian" sorta makes me think permanant protector of the city.  I like the idea of the guardian being bound to the city it's suppost to protect & possibly gets stronger as the city grows, would sorta work as a militia wich I believe all cities should have some sort of.  I personally never use this option due to my one big city turtle style of play, it just pales in comparison to the % bonuses.  (Just think a lvl 5 city could have a dragon living under it that you've 'struck a deal' with to protect you & yours that live there.)

 

Possibly: lvl 1= egg lvl 2= whelp lvl 3= drake lvl 4= dragon lvl 5= large/ancient dragon

Reply #9 Top

I do Gildar 100% of the time, all cities. Never needed the guardians and the bonuses to arcane or tech aren't really needed imho.

Reply #10 Top

I do gildar 100% of the time too.  I would love to do the random troops, but they are so often crappy, I don't bother.

Reply #11 Top

I do research always.

Reply #12 Top

One change I would make- palisades avaliable as an early game building (only time to build and materials)  Offer a little defense bonus, and stops low-level monsters from destorying city.

 

 

Reply #13 Top

Quoting Heavenfall, reply 11
I do research always.
End of Heavenfall's quote

On all cities or just the one you're gonna focus on techs with endgame level 5 buildings and such? I've done that too but over time just landed on the gildar thing.

Reply #14 Top

In every city, because boosting to the highest weapon quality is the easiest way to beat the highest difficulty AI. Putting it in gildar would get me to the same place, but slower.

Reply #15 Top

Palisades pretty much are hedge walls, except they're made out of wooden poles

Reply #16 Top

I have to admit, on paper it seems stupid, but in practice the guardian has saved me at least 2-3 times per game, weird how it comes just when you need it.