Tasunke

A knight couldn't kill them all so easily ... no ... but if you had the single knight try to get the peasants to chase him, isolate individual groups of soliders/units, cut many of them down to form a route, do this several times, and then retreat ... over 5-6 battles of killing say, 100 peasants each battle, around 20-30 at a time, you could cause some serious damage to the mobs. Of course, while mentioning it is possible I also mention a single knight could probably kill no more tha

yep, high levels should be able to survive everything/anything easier than a newb troop. End of statement, simple as that. Of course, If they find themselves in a situation where they end up able to give no damage .... then they are kind of SOL anyways.

at moondoggie, I think it would be wise to enable well-played (and perhaps lucky) smaller army to defeat a poorly played (and perhaps unlucky) large army. Also, poorly-organizing a super-large army, even with victory, could quickly become a Pyrrhic Victory. Where-as leading-organizing a large army well could be a viable strategy for victory against a smaller elite army. This is what I would like to see. say, a double strength elite units army, but outnumbered 1:10, could kill

Maybe you could have a southern Island filled with Mercenary Lanun/Hippus, erm I mean Corsairs :D

Yea, ENGLISH longbows are obviously superior, but in general the entire peasantry did not have training sessions and such. Maybe their can be certain civics in which all the population is trained in a certain weapon in every-day life, tournaments, ect ... to gain extra starting strength when using that weapon type. Maybe HP/Strength when using a longbow can represent range. Ultimately an experienced longbow will be better than an experienced cross-bow ... although mercenaries usually

I would think each real second in battle would equate to about 15-30 seconds. (maybe 3 seconds?) Anyways, I think its already obvious from posts that we can control the speed of battle. As long as its in the proper proportion, so that like in total war, we believe a battle to take place in real time (because they travel across the ground in speeds we are used to) as opposed to "actual" real time where such a battle could of lasted for HOURS (instead of 30-40 minutes) ... althoug

[quote who="Demiansky" reply="69" id="2424687"] Quoting Climber, reply 67 Can we please stop trying to make a game that revolves around ensuring that a dragon rules supreme? It's the very first thing everyone mentions when they are addressing the legitimacy of a feature, and it's getting absurd. I thought the whole point of having better soldiers was so that they could fight on even terms with units that would otherwise be better equipped. And why i

[quote who="joasoze" reply="77" id="2425015"] I guess you know this but you can set workers in CIV IV not to build on existing improvements. I always do this. I control workers manually for the first half of the game and then let them roam freely.[/quote] It still doesn't help hinder the road-spam though ... I think there should be some bonuses to letting land stay wild (regenerating lumber, ect?), or sans that (and more importantly) once you start pavi

Yea ... ultimately the player should be rewarded for using the best resources, so better units are going to be "better" ... but I would certainly like a strategic difference between finely crafted mithril studded leather, and mithril plate. and even if not armor (in a system where full plate is simply better), then I want a differentiation between weapon types. I would certainly like for the decision between Maces, Axes, Swords, Longbows, Crossbows, Shortbows, and Spears (pike

Oh, definitely perks, specials, and different weapon/armor relations. I would like for choice of weapon and armor to be an interesting strategic choice, rather than simply boiling down to what I have more of (although if aquiring resources is made to be strategic, then please do so as well) Certain weapons and armor will probably be found to be simply "better" even if they ARE extremely rare (like a mithril deposit or something, only good for equipping 300 soldiers, and taking

I'd say my favorite "twisted" drawing is Snow White and the Seven Dwarves ... would make a great Sovereign imo :D

Rather than roads naturally, organically developing between large cities (or perhaps in addition too) ... seeing small, rural, agrarian communities slowly pop-up along major trade routes (a la gas-station cities) would be more logically natural, and could even have nothing more than an aesthetic affect (and perhaps to increase population demographics), except maybe they are included in taxable individuals.

So yea, as an update to what I said, no zone of control until 500 soldiers, 2 tiles for 5000, and 3 tiles for 50,000+ I think a sovereign/magical creature should increase LOS by one, but not be cumulative. Also, a Massive magical creature (like a Groblok or a dragon) should increase Zone of Control by 1 up to a total of 3 tiles ... will not increase zone of control for a massive 50,000 man army. It would still increase the Line of Sight by 1 though ... due to flying capabilities (but

hmm, I think after 100 soldiers, every time the size squares itself it gets another tile. So 10,000 soldiers would have a ZOC of two-tile radius. (might even take up more than one tile?) :) or maybe 500, 5000, and 50,000 make better milestones. for 1 tile, 2 tile, and 3 tile radius to zones of control. Naturally anything from a motte'n'bailey to a fortress would increase natural zone of control by 1, while a full citadel would increase zone of control by 2. So 50,000 people occupying

exactly ... you would have to invest an enourmous amount of food to gain enough people in one place to be deemed a super city. Also, supply of food should be less effective at great distance, so you can't have a border super city, but it needs to be at a true cross-roads within the empire. Initial first megacity to reach 20-30,000 should be doable with just the surplus food from all cities + a small investment, while getting a city near 100% would require at least 70% food from all ci

look to the resources paragraph in the numbers, numbers, numbers post

Well, I think Large armies vs Small armies is a battle of fatigue vs morale. Smaller armies of elite units have the advantage of dealing out potentially devastating hits upon opponent morale, and have excessively high moral themselves ... while the large army's job is to wear them out, and get them as exausted as possible so that they run out of steam before they blitz through the entire army. Do morale and Fatigue well, and you will see an interesting, and fun, dynamic.

I kinda think heroes should have relative Attk/Def values similar to their contemporary units (if slightly better and so-on) obviously changeable by specialty/ legendary equipment, ect. Just a basic guide-line for heroes, I would like at least, is to have massive health, and massive morale, (while basic Att/Def), with the ability to gain the best perks/skills on levels or at military academies, and perhaps with the possibility to lead an army if they have enough leadership/prestige (a

I would suggest working exclusively on the third age, at least at first.

it seems like Camp #4 has already been decided upon, and while keeping that code intact would be important, it would be nice to beta an alta in which camp #3 was used ^_^

yea, a perk + extra morale each level (maybe increased endurance, or slower fatigue, as well) I'll just say one thing about elite units ... while armor and weapons may be able to "somewhat" increase the effectiveness of a unit, morale is a key feature, and a proper perk, for elite units ... like royal guard or such. If you could some how add prestige or nobility to a unit, I think it should gain higher morale and become some kind of "Honorary Traditional Guard"

I suppose you could plan out a road ... and decide its "gravel" or "quality" whichever works to decide usefullness/size/and cost, decide its path, and then build it as part of the city. It takes time to build like any building, and costs a certain amount of upkeep depending on length and quality of road. In addition, any add-ons to the road will be added as a small proportional initial cost, with a proportional increase in upkeep. A potential weakness is that one city could end up wit

yea, I think anything using randomness should have a nice ... high bell curve, so that 60 times out of 100, the events will meet at 50% probability ... of either damage, attack, or defense range. This just means that out of the hundreds of permutations, 60% of them will be in the middle range (45-55% likelyhood) or so ... I think its hard to explain comparing percentages to other percentages, but its like 3 + 4 vs 4 + 3 ... they both arrive at the middle, but through different avenues. <

yea, I agree with PigeonPigeon.

yea, RNG shouldn't be an all-powerful god, enabling that one peasant to kill that one Sovereign or Dragon during that world-wide tournament game. Or something.