Update: WOK5 V3.30.6 released !!

[Dameon]

I basically agree with Al's distillation of the current conversation, and I also like the idea from Saladin that troops that don't get paid could possibly turn back into pop. I also agree with TK's long-ago idea that if we rehaul the non-paid troops idea to be more damaging, we need to reduce the amount troops cost, overall.

I do not like the capping the bonus from upgraded troops idea, but I do again agree with TK that strating near forests is a big advantage. However, it IS one that can be overcome; all you have to do is if you do not start near forests is to make sure you attack right away to get access to some. Either that, or do things like mine and get some more diamonds to create new trees for the mountains, or the like. It's overcomable, but it is a big advantage with the upgraded troops being strong and leveling being weak now. I think as we weaken the Mbakku tribe that particular starting bonus may start to fade some, too.

[TK]

* I also like upgrades, and they are especially "cool" on maps with varied terrain. Im not really in favor to cap the upgrades at a certain level, especially since the upgrade always is only handy for ONE type of terrain.

This is true, and works very well in the case of archers. The problems arise mainly with knights - they are very strong, and in the most common terrain. Catapults also have the ability to become unstoppable, but at least only in limited terrain.

* I agree that not payying troops needs some overhaul.

Yay! We did it!!

So far I take the following suggestions with me:
* starting Province should get 2.0 DEF to start with
* +LEV aim should be a bit more rewarding
* overhaul effects of not paying tropps (ie. disband them, downgrade them)

I would support all those points. However, be careful not to increase level too much. We already reduced it from 0.005 to 0.003. Perhaps 0.004 would be a nice value? With the added changes to upgrades we dont want to overpower the LEV.


Nice to see so much (sensible) input.


TK

[Bjorn]

I also agree with TK's long-ago idea that if we rehaul the non-paid troops idea to be more damaging, we need to reduce the amount troops cost, overall.

If you reduce the amount troops cost to maintain, do we also reduce the income? You don't want to make it TOO easy to maintain a large standing army. It sounds like there are a lot of us who like high levels of LVL. This is understandable, as it allows one to overpower the DEF of a province and easily squash lower level armies. The players best able to do this will meet in a "Clash of the Titans" at some point to decide the victor. Of course, if you can squash his POP and cut the income to zero the loss of units or LVL to non-payment of troops would be an easier way to do it.

I sense a couple of different issues here. One is that players want to build huge piles of upgraded troops because each upgraded troop provides a LVL boost in their favored terrain. Since paying them is so expensive, they just put 125 WOK on EFF and then manage their finances to never pay their troops. Since they are building LEV through troop upgrades all they really need to do is feed the workers so the EFF and WOOD keeps coming, then use the money saved by not paying troops to build more of them. One solution may be to not allow a player to convert POP to ARM if they don't pay the troops. Or you could not allow any troop upgrades if they don't pay the military.

The other issue is to balance the various ways that LVL is advanced. It appears that upgrading troops is preferred over putting WOK on LVL. Having WOK increase LVL in a province is tricky, as you have to feed the workers AND pay your troops for the LVL increase to occur. Maybe if we prevent troop upgrades if you don't pay you can achieve the same balance between the two methods.

[Bjorn]

Before I forget, my real purpose for following this thread was to document the changes to the Tribe benefits. I have a web page that I keep posted with the current Tribe number and benefits. See the WOK Tribes thread in the WOK5 folder for the URL.

I will try to update the list with the changes introduced in the most recent WOK5 engine update later this week. If there are other Tribe changes that have been introduced recently please send me a message or post it somewhere.

Buddy Bjorn

[Dameon]

This is true, and works very well in the case of archers. The problems arise mainly with knights - they are very strong, and in the most common terrain. Catapults also have the ability to become unstoppable, but at least only in limited terrain.

TK

You know, that is a very good point TK. Maybe the main problem with upgraded troops (and the Mbakku, perhaps) isn't that they are they are too powerful, it's that knights are powerful and usually maps are up to 50% plains. I've never seen a huge force of pikemen or archers cause havoc, and while I've seen catapults do it it's not nearly as common as with knights. If you really want to reduce the big bonus of starting near forests, Al, the best idea might be to switch the upgrade numbers between knights and archers y'know? I would still require more wood for knights than archers even if they gave less power simply because there are always so many plains available. Just a thought.

[Undertaker]

That's a good idea Nick. Switch the power of knights and archers. Knights would still be effective, just a little less dominating.

[Bjorn]

Maybe the main problem with upgraded troops (and the Mbakku, perhaps) isn't that they are they are too powerful, it's that knights are powerful and usually maps are up to 50% plains.

Knights are THE most important upgrade because without corn all else is meaningless. Due to the 500 limit on crops you need two and usually three areas with workers on HARVEST once you get into the end game. Knights are THE unit for defending your own areas and attacking other players food supply. If given the opportunity I will use GCAs on workers in plains just to cut into my opponents food supply.

[phred]

So far I take the following suggestions with me:
* starting Province should get 2.0 DEF to start with
* +LEV aim should be a bit more rewarding
* overhaul effects of not paying tropps (ie. disband them, downgrade them)

The 2nd point is irrelevant unless people can afford to do it, and the 3rd point makes the situation even more difficult than is currently is (ie. disbanded/downgraded troops would become the norm), unless troop maintenance costs were brought down to much lower level.

It seems to me that it would be more beneficial to work out a more appropriate maintenance level before looking at penalties for non-compliance or at LVL benefits.

[phred]

following on from the above message:

If you reduce the amount troops cost to maintain, do we also reduce the income? You don't want to make it TOO easy to maintain a large standing army.

I'm not sure if this is as much of a problem as it sounds. It would simply provide another option which players have to decide on, and spread the current misely amount on income a lot more thinly. Players would need to make a choice: troop maintenance OR spells (is there anything else apart from spells that people currently use gold for?), or possibly a bit of both.

Lowering the maintenece amount would have some side effects, one being that it would release a heap of workers (currently employed on EFF) to do other things like mining or harvesting or GCAs or to convert to a larger army. I'm sure someone can do the math to help work out a suitable maintenance amount and the follow-on effects on workers, and on disbanding/downgrading troops. Maybe 2 gold? or even 1 gold?

[phred]

some more thoughts, following on from the above messages:

If maintenance is to be cheaper, then it may also be a good idea to give the player the option whether to pay it not, rather than it being done automatically.


Thinking about the possible penalties, you could also consider dropping LVL if troops are unpaid. This could be done either by reducing the LVL (even below 1.00 if need be, say down to 0.9 or 0.8 as a minimum), or by using a LVL modifier, which could be applied to higher levels & upgraded troops.

An example:
Army LVL of 2.00 (comprising base LVL of 1.00 plus an extra 1.00 achieved through LVL training and upgrades)
Using a LVL modifier, let's say someone who has never paid their troops has a LVL modifier of only 30%, then the LVL calculation would be Base LVL of 1.00 plus extra 1.00 * 30% = 1.30 for the FInal Army LVL, instead of the 2.00 LVL if they had of bothered to pay their troops.

Sounds complicated, but it's not really. OTOH it may be easier to just disband or downgrade troops.

[gm_al]

You did read about the maintenance penalties in V3.30.7, now did you phred ?

[korexus]

I think he may have done. Even if not, the point of LEVing still stands. A player has to scrape a lot of gold together to level a big army group and now, if later down the line he stops paying them the work he did starts getting undone. So if Selfter is the tribe which allows you to LEV your troops, you have to stick with it when you finish just to keep the bonus wheras upgrades will always be upgrades. The suggested level multiplier could take care of this by being applied after upgrade bonuses. Alternatively we could have 10% of each upgrade in each province reverting to armies if the troops aren't paid.

Either way, increasing the penalties should probably come with decreasing the costs a little. Not as far as 1 gold, but maybe down to 3?


korexus.

[TK]

Either way, increasing the penalties should probably come with decreasing the costs a little. Not as far as 1 gold, but maybe down to 3?

Even 4 would be a good change in my book. It would equate to a 20% reduction in troop payments.

200 troops for 800 gold? Well, if you want to have an army of that size, you better have a lot of POP to pay for it. Sounds fair to me.

200 troops for 600 gold seems a bit too easy. Sorry Sal.

TK

[gm_al]

Lets see the new games and how much players struggle with the maintenance costs. I can see them decrease to 4, but I still think a player running a very large army with low numbers in POP (and no gold stocks) could always switch to Selfter and get the -40% maintenance costs... no ? Reducing costs to 4 would make Selfter once again a "bad" Tribe, no ?

Again, changes can have a much larger impact then you first can think of. Thats why we need rounds of testing before we change too much.

[korexus]

Lets see the new games and how much players struggle with the maintenance costs. I can see them decrease to 4, but I still think a player running a very large army with low numbers in POP (and no gold stocks) could always switch to Selfter and get the -40% maintenance costs... no ? Reducing costs to 4 would make Selfter once again a "bad" Tribe, no ?

Or switch to Femma and get a better bonus. Seriously, unless you have severe stock limit problems Femma beats Selfter every time. I don't think putting Selfter back to 60% reduction would make them "the new Mbakku" as players would have to stick with Selfter throughout an attack just to keep the bonus they worked so hard to get...

To get back to the point though, players didn't pay troops because the high costs weren't worthwhile to avoid the low penalties. Of course that can be stopped by pushing the penalties up a lot or bringing the costs down a lot but isn't it better to do a little bit of both?


korexus.

[phred]

You did read about the maintenance penalties in V3.30.7?

No I didn't, but I have done so now and I think my points still apply. If people cannot afford the pay maintenance continually, then they won't, and will get around the problem in some way or another just as they do now. Under the new rules, there would be nothing to stop players from paying maintenance for a single turn and do a bulk of upgrades all at the same time. The new LVL penalties for the turns when the troops aren't being paid will have little effect, as most troops wil be at 1.0 anyway, and the upgrades will provide the strength of the army just as they do now.

I think the question of how high or low to set the maintenance figure seems the main part of the problem, the rest (ie. what penalties to apply for unpaid troops, and the solutions that players can use to get around it) just carry on from that.