|
|
Post by General Pang on Jul 4, 2006 4:31:13 GMT -5
After the last site ended I thought that something would be learnt-Garrisons suck balls already. To plant enormous ones within cities is just plain stupid. The very idea last time was heavily criticized to the point that the rule alone made people skeptical about Betrayals' success, and even caused several to leave.
25,000, even in a capital, is way too much. That number is, quite frankly, ridiculous beyond words. 2,500 is a lot as well, enough to drastically turn the tide in battle, even if those 2,500 were all militia. I feel that the garrisons need to be reduced significantly, since all large guard forces do essentially is force people into a stalemate. Nobody will want to attack because they will be horribly outnumbered by the extra troops provided by the stupid sentries and, as if attackers weren't already at a disadvantage, the additional troops will make battles ovelry difficult if somebody does attempt to launch an offensive campaign.
I vote for the numbers to be reduced to 500 militia for cities and 1,000 for capitals. These can be armed and turned into troops though, but they should be literally unable to move from the city they are in. They make up the guards, citizens volunteering to go to arms, formerly retired veterans roused into battle and so forth of a city. They will not leave the city, and will basically go back to their lives after an attacker is gone.
|
|
|
|
Post by Huang Zhong on Jul 4, 2006 4:36:13 GMT -5
Wtf? Either I'm the only who seems to get it, or I just misunderstood. I thought those Kingdom Troops in the capital could be used to support attacks aswell. Only the garrison troops are to stay in their cities. It's what one of the admins posted in the rules section, I know 100% for sure. These Kingdom Troops are nessacery to have battles. And the garrison troops just make it more fun.
|
|
|
|
Post by General Pang on Jul 4, 2006 4:41:49 GMT -5
That is correct Erik. You can move the 25,000 troops around, but if you do your capital is undefended. The problem I have with the 25,000 troops is the number, it is way too big for a kingdom to start out with. In my opinion the kingdoms should start small (not too small) and grow larger as time goes on. The number of troops you get to start, in my opinion should be more like anything from 500 to 5,000. I recommended 1,000 but I guess a little more would be ok.
The main issue I have is with the other troops. There shouldn't be 2,500 militia defending each minor city. The number, as I said, should be reduced to ENCOURAGE attacks, which are already something that people don't like doing simply because offensives are more difficult than defensive campaigns.
|
|
|
|
Post by Huang Zhong on Jul 4, 2006 4:45:43 GMT -5
2,500 isn't very much. Especially not if you have a good strategy, at least half of those 25,000 Kingdom Troops to back you up AND the personal troops of all officers that participate in the battle. I think it's just fine. Would be a lot of work to change it all too now. Not to mention too low numbers will result in easy victories. We don't want that to happen either, now do we?
|
|
|
|
Post by General Pang on Jul 4, 2006 4:51:43 GMT -5
Erik 2,500 troops in addition to being on the defender side makes it too easy. The defenders in every battle have the advantage of supplies, the advantage of morale, and most importantly the advantage of having a secure fortress to hide out in. Giving them another big advantage would be unfair in my opinion. The number should really be reduced, so that the offensive and defensive sides are more even.
As for the 25,000 extra troops: all they do is undermine the power of personal troops. I think the number should, in the very least, be reduced to 10,000, but really I feel it could be lessened more. If it is reduced by 10,000 that's quite a bit more fair though, because then at least your few thousand man army will mean something. Finally your point of easy victories doesn't really work since if the rule applies to everybody then things will balance out (part of the reason why I feel the need to address the 2,500 garrison thing is more important than dealing with the 25,000 troops each kingdom starts out with).
|
|
|
|
Post by Huang Zhong on Jul 4, 2006 4:59:03 GMT -5
Well, let's wait for an admin to reply upon this matter. Discussing with me about it won't change a thing  |
|
|
|
Post by Liu Bei on Jul 4, 2006 16:14:01 GMT -5
No comment.
|
|
|
|
Post by General Pang on Jul 4, 2006 17:31:25 GMT -5
Lyle your problem solving skills amaze me. -_-
|
|
|
|
Post by Damian on Jul 4, 2006 22:40:26 GMT -5
*Exhalts* Lyle, that was amazing. ;D |
|
|
|
Post by General Pang on Jul 4, 2006 22:59:56 GMT -5
I care more about the dieing issue now that I think about it. :/
|
|
|
|
Post by Huang Zhong on Jul 5, 2006 3:22:07 GMT -5
Then learn to keep your mouth shut about other things...
*Sigh*
|
|
|
|
Post by General Pang on Jul 5, 2006 11:37:30 GMT -5
Jesus dude. I didn't think it was a crime to post opinions in a board called 'PUBLIC COUNCIL.'
|
|
|
|
Post by Huang Zhong on Jul 6, 2006 3:35:07 GMT -5
Yes it is. You really think this public council is to make members have something to say? ;D
|
|
|
|
Post by Victor Fel on Jul 7, 2006 14:25:17 GMT -5
I have see that on all these sites garrisons stale mate the wars because everyone becomes to fear ful to attack. I think it would make sense to just give each kingdom X amount of troops for home defense and let the rulers distribute them as they see fit. It makes sense because in the time frame we are talking each city did not have X amount of troops. Regions were defended by field armies basically, and responded to any threat. Of course the number of this force should be small, so as not to be abused, but basically it would force rulers to be more careful with their over all forces so as not to leave their lands exposed. A second option could be this: Ruler's armies could be the garrison forces. It never made sense to me that the rulers of these sites have a pimp army while their officers stand around looking pretty. It seems to me the kingdom rulers personal army should also act as the territory defense forces, because it was the ruler's duty to defend the land..... just my newbish opinion.  |
|
|
|
Post by General Pang on Jul 7, 2006 15:27:44 GMT -5
I have see that on all these sites garrisons stale mate the wars because everyone becomes to fear ful to attack. I think it would make sense to just give each kingdom X amount of troops for home defense and let the rulers distribute them as they see fit. It makes sense because in the time frame we are talking each city did not have X amount of troops. Regions were defended by field armies basically, and responded to any threat. Of course the number of this force should be small, so as not to be abused, but basically it would force rulers to be more careful with their over all forces so as not to leave their lands exposed. A second option could be this: Ruler's armies could be the garrison forces. It never made sense to me that the rulers of these sites have a pimp army while their officers stand around looking pretty. It seems to me the kingdom rulers personal army should also act as the territory defense forces, because it was the ruler's duty to defend the land..... just my newbish opinion. Bingo! I completely agree and that's why I raised the point. As you can see there is a stalemate, and this is because of those stupid garrisons. :/ |
|
