I was bored so decided to create a list of some potential changes I'd like to see considered for cRPG/Strategus. Some of these I thought of, some I thought of - but they are so obvious even a Fallen would think of them
, whilst others I've almost certainly read before, but can't remember where
1) Horse bumps should damage the horse as well. I'm not exactly sure how horse bump damage is currently calculated, but perhaps a system where any bump damage soaked up by someones armour gets reflected back to the horse could work. Obviously the horses own armour would then come into play so that plated chargers can bump tincans all day long which is fair, however riders of unamroured horses would have to think hard before bumping a tincan. Even no-armour horses would be able to bump peasants thoug, without having to worry too much about damage. The aim is to simulate a system whereby the harder the thing the horse bumps, the more pre-soak damage the horse takes.
2) Introduce maximum army sizes for each strategus character and make it so that the individual armies can then combine when a battle is started (Like SP Warband). See my posts in
http://forum.c-rpg.net/index.php/topic,13486.msg191705.html#msg191705 for more details. But as a summary, the aim is increase the importance of active clan members in Strat over cash cows. This would also make proper use of alliances, defensive pacts and mercenaries, as people would be able to physically march an army to help someone in Battle. Holding fiefs would then increase your personal army limit.
3) Implement natural boundaries (Mountains, rivers, etc) on the Strat map as this adds more to the game tactically and will make idea #4 better
4) IF the new stronghold mode works well in allowing people to build their own castles within a cRPG map, then remove all castles from the strat map (would require a reset) and make castles buildable (and destroyable) wherever you want them on the Strat map. Not sure if a building time would be needed or how it would work, but just imagine a Strat Clan saving a massive pile of cash, picking a site for a castle and then building it themselves. Would be awesome
One thing that would definitely be needed is placeable houses that determine your max population. This should create a good balance between castle size and castle population. E.g. smaller castles are generally easier to defend but you get less tickets to defend them with. The destruction of those houses by catapults during a siege could then kill off large numbers of tickets. This would require limited ammo for catapults. 10 shots and then the catapult shakes it self to pieces and needs replacing perhaps?
Also, (if this doesn't already happen) I would halve troop unkeep when in your own castles so that there is a real benefit to building them, and it is cheaper (in the long run) to defend a territory, rather than attack it.
6) Add a bit more consistency to weapons. E.g. If a 2.0 weight, 105 length 2H weapon (The Heavy Bastard Sword) can be used with 1 hand then why can't the Katana which is a bit shorter shorter, and a whole lot lighter? Or if a 2Handed Mace has 2 modes, then why doesn't a 1 handed military hammer with almost identical stats?
7) Fief Loyalty. Fiefs should take time to gain loyalty towards a new owner. The change should be exponential and overall should take roughly 2 months. That would mean after 1 month, only 10% of a fief's population will have changed allegiance. However, after that you'll see a much more rapid change.
Only Loyal peasants would then fight for you when defending your fief and if the previous owner attacked, then all the population loyal to him would rebel and join the attackers.
This would;
-Give a greater opportunity for clans to regain fiefs that they have recently lost.
-Slow down any steam rolling in the game as you have to divert troops from the front line in order to hold captured territories.
-Make life more interesting
8) Add a minimum fee payable to all people hired in Strat battles. Then make that minimum fee dependent on the distance away from the battle of the person being hired. Only negotiated money above this minimum fee then goes to the person hired. The min fee itself is considered to be spent on travel expenses and is paid the moment the person joins the Battle. If you commander doesn't have the money, they lose tickets.
The idea of this is make battle commanders think more about who they are hiring and therefore make a greater number of people worthy of consideration. for instance, person A could be great but are the worth the extra money of having to get them to the battle when person B is decent and already nearby. It also makes factions over extending themselves more costly, as they will have a greater percetage of clan members spread further away from any battle. Of course the faction could move members up to support any battle, but then they might leave gaps that enemies can exploit. All in all, it just adds another dimension to Strategus.
The other advantage of this, is that neutral armies could then take distance into account as well when hiring so that noobs get a good chance at getting into battles if they happen to be nearby.
9) This idea was too complicated to put into words so I ditched it. It would have been amazing though
That's it - troll and complain away, although if anybody does have any constructive comments I'll try to reply
