SP - General Faction unique formations (tactical adv/disadv) & formation bonuses (buff/debuff) & REAL training ground

[kreamy]

Straightforward.

1) Not only will these formations provide a tactical use, using them appropriately, or with a faction type buff will allow COMBAT to be BETTER BALANCED. by certain buffs & debuffs (can of course be multiple, and be smart). Adds tactical depth, planning in battle and thinking ahead, rather than reacting. will make errors count more.

Empire = testudo (better shield coverage buff, movement speed debuff etc) = tactical, units more tightly packed + arrow defense
Khuzait = cantabrian etc
Sturgia = guerilla / loose space & surround (increased melee damage, less morale?), = tactical, units more dispersed be picked off but can surround and attack from sides to break a formation.

2) changing a formation type, should have buff temporarily not enabled, and even a debuff while troops get into order (like, decreased morale if charged or etc). -> serves multipple purposes, obviously exploit protection, but also tactical consideration, if you change formation while engaged, your fkn formation is gonna blow and make you vulnerable.

3) formations that are complicated should take more time to implement
4) units that are less trained have less effective formations, and cannot execute some (testudo can be for **** troops, and square, circle etc either).
5) higher tier troops get into formations faster, have less debuffs, maybe slightly buffed -> nobody wants to fight a group of knights charging in wedge for example.

etc etc.

EDIT:
In addition, units can be subdivided under a commander, like in sieges. The advantage here is to have a tactical formation that can be "pre-determined"

IE 4 subgroups of 1 infantry division (IE X amount, or 100 or watever) -> can form 4, 25man shield walls in a unique positioning.

(WIP) TRAINING GROUND
In here, you should be able to play around and determine preset battle orders, or the subdivision and positioning for your divisions & their sub groups. It should function in both 3rd person & 'tactical' deployment mode. The advantage is the see it, test it and be able to use it in battle, without having to micromanage.

BONUS Cohesion/Tactics/Leadership-> This could affect leadership skill & tactics. I HIGHLY believe your leadership & tactics skill should correlate with how fast units get into formation, their morale and the buffs/debuffs. (This with their skill level, other factors affecting morale like food etc). By drilling on the map, you can have units 'practice' a formation, obviously the most amount of XP comes from use in battle.

 

[jagy_CZ]

No pls

 

[jagy_CZ]

Formations are ok, but no buffs/debuffs

 

[kreamy]

Formations are ok, but no buffs/debuffs

well then as long as this is moddable. I dont see why its a big issue if each faction has bonuses when you make a character (20% XP bonus battle etc). Factions should fight uniquely. And this should then either be able/disable potential.

If you are going to make perks, benefits, bonuses etc, put them across the board. This will add uniqueness and richness to the game. And they dont have to be big buffs, but they should. When you are tightly packed, you can hold against a charge better, when you are spread out from ur group, you can take a bigger swing without hitting them.

These are necessary, add immersion, give extra balance capability and add variation to their use and enhances tactical depth.
Also, i edited the thread to add something super good

Double also, nobody asked for your opinion, its not a poll.

 

[CalenLoki]

I agree with Jagy: no magic buffs and debuffs.
Those are just lazy way, suitable for RTS kind of games.

It's better to improve core features and manipulate troop skills and equipment.

I.e. give empire bog shields, khazuit more horse archers, sturgia higher athletics.

Link troop AI to their skills: I.e. troops with higher tactic skill stay in formation tighter, troops in first line of shieldwall focus on blocking, while those in the back rows on attacking, troops with long swinging weapon keep more distance in formation than those with short ones, ect.

 

[Qustinnus]

Honestly you shouldn't frame them as buffs or debuffs, they are pros and cons. A literal tetsudo IS slow and has better shield coverage. not because of a buff but because of the inherent nature of a tetsudo.

 

[kreamy]

Honestly you shouldn't frame them as buffs or debuffs, they are pros and cons. A literal tetsudo IS slow and has better shield coverage. not because of a buff but because of the inherent nature of a tetsudo.

when a literal testudo is formed, people make these 'debuffs/buff's' come into reality. in this game, you would need to debuff movement speed (its just a fact, the game needs some form of logic to mimic whatever is intended). The shield coverage is a different issue, it probably just need the shield to be place in a certain way (almost capable of doing Id say).

Good feedback