Archers
Kausca wrote:You could create archers for offensive purposes by giving them such low stats; the strength of the unit comes in the fact that it strikes first. When attacking with archers, if you have considerably more archers than the defending player has units, you could legitimately destroy their entire force without losing any units (besides what the algorithm normally calculates). Under normal circumstances this is unlikely, but if you properly scout a city and discover what types of units are there and how many they have, they may be the perfect attacker.
Moving over to archers as defenders we have to make sure they aren't the only unit you would ever want to create for defensive purposes. First strike can be a very powerful defensive tool which is why I believe that rams shouldn't damage only the walls but archers also (makes sense if we assume the archers are standing on the walls). The benefit to archers as a defensive unit is that it thins the enemy lines before the aggressor hits your stronger defenders.
I just read most of the thread on archers. To me this post on the fifth page made the most sense. Kausca's idea is to add archers to the game, that strike before other units do. This could add a lot more depth to the game, cause it offers a way to take out troops without losses. At the same time Kausca pointed out the archer should be relatively weak to balance the advantage. Personally I think it's an awesome idea and I would love to see it in action.
Just think about it. If the idea is properly implemented, players can use new tactics. For example one could focus on training a big army of archers in one city to clear barbs from there. Such cities can save the 300-400 zerks otherwise sacrificed, so it could prove to be of great value. Of course it should take a while to train that many archers.
That's why several parameters are crucial. The attack strength should be very weak, so huge groups are needed to take out a complete barb for free. Also their research requirements, training time and costs need to make sure players can't train extreme archer armies in the first week of a world. Furthermore they should consume 2 food to cap the max number. It would also make sense, that they are even less effective against mounted units.
This is why I propose these parameters:
Requirements: Forge level 15, barracks level 15
Training time: 5 min (at barracks level 15)
Consumption: 2 food
Resource costs: 60 wood, 40 clay, 40 iron
Attack strength: 1/10 of a zerk (so 10 archers do the same damage as 1 zerk)
Defense strength: 1/10 of a sentry (zerks and sentries are weak vs mounted units)
Movement speed: similar to siege weapons
Loot carry: 0 so other units are needed for looting
With these parameters archers can be a very interesting investment. It will take a long time before having enough to actually clear a barb for free and you will need to cap several barbs before the gains outweigh the costs. An army of archers will always be at risk of a counter attack by mounted units. So introducing archers will also add extra use to knights and guardians. In my opinion this changes all dynamics in a pretty cool way.
From a defensive perspective this can be an interesting support group at lord cities to take out (large chunks of) zerk attacks. I can even imagine guilds combining archer support at a city suspected of attacks in the near future to take out even the biggest zerk attacks possible without a single troop lost. However this would imply that the supporting cities are at risk of being captured and therefore handing over the archers to the enemy.
In a nutshell:
Introducing archers will open up new tactical possibilities for everyone. They can save lots of losses in the long run, but will always be at risk of either being overwhelmed by massive attacks or captured from their home towns. Reading Kausca's idea got me excited about the possibilities, I only added my thoughts to it.
So how about it? If you're a player who likes the idea, please bump the post or add your own thoughts to it. If you are a dev, I'd like to know if you will actually do something with it in the near future. Of course people will have to get used to it, but I honestly think this can make Valor even a cooler game than it already is.
Ok. Won't be the same though. I wanted to discuss your idea as it's been the only different one that has been remotely different. However, I have a few questions. I'll ask one at a time so we can discuss each one separately. If archers strike first, would that make rams obsolete? If not, explain how so.
Arguably, each unit has a counter unit with the current set up. To keep that balance, I believe you need to introduce
Another unit. I propose the Trebuchet.
You guys can hammer out the fine details, but for those who dont know, a trebuchet is a long-armed seige weapon that uses a counterweight to launch a large stone, or cows, or whatever you want to launch.
What im thinking is attacking armies can use Trebuchets as a more effective way of tearing walls down, and/or as a means to counter defensive archers. Trebuchets should do more damage to the walls than rams per population but should cost between 10-30 population per unit. In real life this was about how many people were needed, regardless of that it cant become a super unit in game, so high population cost is necessary. I was thinking that it would have base damage that it would apply to the city as well as an archers-specific damage that was a percentage of how many levels they lowered the walls. Trebuchets would have a "stike first" bonus, same as defending archers.
I think attacking archers should work the same as combat medics do. Due to their ability to "suppress" enemies in real life you could say they provide cover fire for ambulance teams to fetch injured troops from the battlefield, thus reducing your overall losses.
Thats my general idea. Like i said if y'all like it take it and run with it. If not go ahead and laugh at me.
Another unit. I propose the Trebuchet.
You guys can hammer out the fine details, but for those who dont know, a trebuchet is a long-armed seige weapon that uses a counterweight to launch a large stone, or cows, or whatever you want to launch.
What im thinking is attacking armies can use Trebuchets as a more effective way of tearing walls down, and/or as a means to counter defensive archers. Trebuchets should do more damage to the walls than rams per population but should cost between 10-30 population per unit. In real life this was about how many people were needed, regardless of that it cant become a super unit in game, so high population cost is necessary. I was thinking that it would have base damage that it would apply to the city as well as an archers-specific damage that was a percentage of how many levels they lowered the walls. Trebuchets would have a "stike first" bonus, same as defending archers.
I think attacking archers should work the same as combat medics do. Due to their ability to "suppress" enemies in real life you could say they provide cover fire for ambulance teams to fetch injured troops from the battlefield, thus reducing your overall losses.
Thats my general idea. Like i said if y'all like it take it and run with it. If not go ahead and laugh at me.
1. Rams would cost less population space. Trebuchets would take up huge amounts of population space, require lots of resources, and would have minimal defensive value, therefore becoming liabilities that need protection.
2. You might not realize it but all other units in the game have a unit that cancels another unit out IF you have enough of them. For example, defensively, Lancers will murder Guardians and Knights provided you have enough while berzerkers will destroy those same lancers. All defensive-ish units cancel out seige equipment, so on and so forth. How many archers you would need to counteract trebuchets would depend on how many trebuchets are attacking you, and vice versa.
2. You might not realize it but all other units in the game have a unit that cancels another unit out IF you have enough of them. For example, defensively, Lancers will murder Guardians and Knights provided you have enough while berzerkers will destroy those same lancers. All defensive-ish units cancel out seige equipment, so on and so forth. How many archers you would need to counteract trebuchets would depend on how many trebuchets are attacking you, and vice versa.
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 7 guests