Ability to transfer units from your ciies

[Idioticfuse]

There should be an option for you to transport your army from one city to another (giving full control of the army, i dint mean support). This would allow more strategizing and certain types of cities, such as a cav city, siege weap city, infantry, etc. Anyone agree?

[Valorgamer]

I agree, it would be difficult to implement, but would be beneficial. The difficulty would be the population cap;

This could be overcome by,

Have a slide similar to in the market where as one troop type rose others from the other city rose that way you swapped troops between cities upto the population cap, if one city had the room no troops would need to be sent back.

Or get rid of population cap as it stands and make it sustainable population, troops would consume at an hourly rate and therefore you would have to farm more and more to sustain your troops, this would mean you could potentially have larger armies but to do so would take time and effort.

[russianIvan]

I agree. Good idea

[Deigo 73]

Or get rid of population cap as it stands and make it sustainable population, troops would consume at an hourly rate and therefore you would have to farm more and more to sustain your troops, this would mean you could potentially have larger armies but to do so would take time and effort.

This would completely destroy the casual Valor gamer who doesn't log on everyday. I check my Valor between 5-50 times a day depending on how busy I am, but I know a few players who only check on theirs a couple times a week.

[Valorgamer]

I agree but that could also make for the guild to work closer together making sure regular supplies were sent to those offline.

Only a couple of times a week ! I've been playing this game over a month now and can't put it down even on Christmas day I was on, although it would please the mrs if it was twice a week I think I would develop withdrawal symptoms valor is a drug lol

[Valorgamer]

I just play the game yes it would be good to use your troops in which ever city they happen to be in at the time but I don't know anything at all abou the game making side,

That said what if we got rid of population cap of each individual city and had a collective population cap fo each members kingdom ?

[Stark Bledfast]

This would create imbalances quickly. You'd have your "core" cities where you started. These typically become your largest as you've had them the longest. As you range out conquering cities, you would just have your core cities producing units and sending them to the outlying cities to use.

Currently your army is a limiting factor. When you conquer a city it takes a while (generally) to get it up and running to create useful armies. So you have to send your armies long distances. That helps balance things. Fighting a long distance war is difficult. Large guilds battling smaller guilds far away are impeded. It can be done, but it is an obstacle that needs to be considered and strategies built around.

While this idea would make things easier, easier is not always good in the long run.

[Valorgamer]

This happens anyway with resources so why not troops ? It would still take time for the troops to move between your city the cap would remain the same and you wouldn't want all your troops 2 days away from your core cities so there would be a need to strategically place your army close enough to the front line to of use but close enough to defend your built up cities

[Stark Bledfast]

Because resources do not conquer cities. You can move resources to a newly conquered city, but it still takes time to build it up to the point that it can both sustain itself with resources and crank out troops.

Ie., it might take 15 hours to get your 6000 knights to a city. Or it will take 4 hours to get your 900 merchants there with 300k of each resource, which will allow your city to build 6000 knights in 20 days since it has a level 2 stable. During that time you can slowly build your stable up, but that is a slow process.

See the point here? The need to build your city is the balancing factor for long distance combat. If you could just send your ponies to your new city and let that city control them, then there would be no point to building up that newly conquered city. You could simply feed it and keep rampaging through enemy lines.

That completely shifts the balance of power, and makes distances a non-issue.

[Valorgamer]

Sorry I don't agree, if you conquer a city it would still benefit you to build it up, increase in resource revenue population cap ability to buy scholarships etc.

When any nation attempts to take control of an area it moves it army nearby, Britain and the falklands, NATO and Iraq, it would bring more use to your troops as you go along otherwise you end up with pile of troops sitting around doing nothing and of no use whatsoever.