Limit Noble Troops

[Sweynforkbeard]

At this point, 'noble' troops is not much different from WB with their 'characteristic' elite troops; ie nord huscarl, swad knight, vaeg marksman, etc...Which is fine, TW turned them into those essentially with BL - just with a slightly more convoluted way with their different 'recruit' linear path. I would think many of us thought 'noble troops' would've been more like 1/2 companion worth in terms of 'specialty' - stronger but more costly (recruit/upgrade/rarity).

I'd rather the game's troop diversity be less homogenized; De Re Militari mod being the closest to what I would prefer (and will probably use once game finally finishes development).

Thats what mods do well. They help you to tailor the experience to your preferences and they are optional.

Speaking of which, I should really start looking for one that can take me back to the glory days of a pure companion party

 

[JunKeteer]

Thats what mods do well. They help you to tailor the experience to your preferences and they are optional.

Speaking of which, I should really start looking for one that can take me back to the glory days of a pure companion party

This is the one area I don't particularly care if they do or don't. I do have the intention to mod this aspect - I just need TW to be done with the damn game so I don't waste time doing 'unfinished' playthroughs and messing about with each delayed update.

 

[RozBritanicus]

I would like the noble troops the be limited around 40 per army sounds good to me. They should cost gold and influence to buy maybe even one of them speech checks as you ask a noble for the special troops.. I am using a shieldwall of 100 men (mixed just need a shield) and 120 fian champions and 40 cav and i can take armies of 400 to 500 fairly well and i don't come off to badly. I haven't lost a battle since getting my fians. Also part of the issues is the a.i doesn't level its units and brings lots of tier1 troops. I would like to see added to each faction a pike troop with brace ability too.

 

[HalfMetalJacket]

I'd rather the game's troop diversity be less homogenized; De Re Militari mod being the closest to what I would prefer (and will probably use once game finally finishes development).

That is basically my ideal and what I am actually trying to create for my own mod. Limiting troops by their potency, while still allowing players to eventually get nobles anyway if they REALLY want to... even if its as impractical as it is IRL.

Its either than of the VC way- very difficult to level troops... and that's using the easiest training difficulty.

 

[Sweynforkbeard]

That is basically my ideal and what I am actually trying to create for my own mod. Limiting troops by their potency, while still allowing players to eventually get nobles anyway if they REALLY want to... even if its as impractical as it is IRL.

Its either than of the VC way- very difficult to level troops... and that's using the easiest training difficulty.

If you really want it there is probably a much simpler solution, just remove the speed penalty from party size.

What truely makes the elite army so valuable, or even necessary, is that you need to balance your fighting power vs. your mapspeed. Take away that issue and you will have alot more freedom to choose between quality and quantity.

How many actually use their full partylimit after tier 2 or perhaps tier 3; depending on who you use as your steward?

 

[NPC99]

How many actually use their full partylimit after tier 2 or perhaps tier 3

Even at clan tier 6, I play with an army of maximum clan parties lead by companions/offspring with full parties of mixed troops. Hard limits are a bad idea, they just curb other people’s play styles. IMO capping noble troops or anything else is fine in a mod but a horrible idea for the base game.

 

[Sweynforkbeard]

Even at clan tier 6, I play with an army of maximum clan parties lead by companions/offspring with full parties of mixed troops. Hard limits are a bad idea, they just curb other people’s play styles. IMO capping noble troops or anything else is fine in a mod but a horrible idea for the base game.

You are talking lategame. Lategame is a numbers game.

You need a constant flow of new recruits that you can throw into recently captured fiefs. So, you are going to end up with parties comprising mostly whatever you can get your hands on.

 

[HalfMetalJacket]

If you really want it there is probably a much simpler solution, just remove the speed penalty from party size.

What truely makes the elite army so valuable, or even necessary, is that you need to balance your fighting power vs. your mapspeed. Take away that issue and you will have alot more freedom to choose between quality and quantity.

How many actually use their full partylimit after tier 2 or perhaps tier 3; depending on who you use as your steward?

Elite armies don't hinder map speed as far as I am aware. If anything, a full Khan's Guard stack will plenty fast.

I'd rather remove Party Size limit instead and greatly increase troop expenses and make party morale a bigger factor. Now you can have small, but elite forces or cram as many conscript as possible. No more worry about making the most of each 'slot'

 

[Sweynforkbeard]

Elite armies don't hinder map speed as far as I am aware. If anything, a full Khan's Guard stack will plenty fast.

I'd rather remove Party Size limit instead and greatly increase troop expenses and make party morale a bigger factor. Now you can have small, but elite forces or cram as many conscript as possible. No more worry about making the most of each 'slot'

No, they dont hinder mapspeed. Thats my point, with an elite force you can have a smaller force that can move faster and still have the fightingpower to handle the tasks you need to perform.

Removing the partysize limit really will do nothing early-midgame. Its still a tradeoff between mapspeed and fightingpower.

 

[JunKeteer]

If you really want it there is probably a much simpler solution, just remove the speed penalty from party size.

There's a lot more issues to contend/balance with removing party speed penalty (overworld balance); wouldn't think it would be simple as I can imagine the AI armies would be a mess.

What truely makes the elite army so valuable, or even necessary, is that you need to balance your fighting power vs. your mapspeed. Take away that issue and you will have alot more freedom to choose between quality and quantity.

How many actually use their full partylimit after tier 2 or perhaps tier 3; depending on who you use as your steward?

One of the problems I notice with this is how easily it is to recruit top tier prisoners and how many prisoners there are you can 'save' too. With how back-and-forth certain castles/battles can be, more often than not, there's hundreds more prisoners than you can hold - and same goes when rescuing them either from a castle/town or from an army. It's way too self-sustaining/easy to perpetually have max troops and 90+prisoners (even if you only grab T5+ ones) that are already ready to recruit immediately.

 

[NPC99]

You are talking lategame. Lategame is a numbers game.

Middle & late - the longest parts of the game.

 

[Sweynforkbeard]

There's a lot more issues to contend/balance with removing party speed penalty (overworld balance); wouldn't think it would be simple as I can imagine the AI armies would be a mess.


One of the problems I notice with this is how easily it is to recruit top tier prisoners and how many prisoners there are you can 'save' too. With how back-and-forth certain castles/battles can be, more often than not, there's hundreds more prisoners than you can hold - and same goes when rescuing them either from a castle/town or from an army. It's way too self-sustaining/easy to perpetually have max troops and 90+prisoners (even if you only grab T5+ ones) that are already ready to recruit immediately.

Ahh, over playstiles are problably a bit too different so share the same experiences.

 

[Sweynforkbeard]

Middle & late - the longest parts of the game.

Yes, but the topic of the thread is that nobles are too plentiful. As you say, you do use a mix of troops lategame. The pure elite parties are probably more often an early-midgame thing.

 

[Ananda_The_Destroyer]

How many actually use their full partylimit after tier 2 or perhaps tier 3; depending on who you use as your steward?

It becomes very counter-productive to have full parties all the time so it 's very rare for me, especially once you get the perks for that extra party and the +size to everyone... yeah it's just not going to happen whiteout wasting a massive amount of time. It can happen though that you defeat an army and get 200 rescued prisoners and having the space to absorb them is great. Not because I want them for battle, but because they can be garrison fillers.

But yeah battles are carried by the same 200 or so troops, anything else is just "and I helped", it does help, it can be useful but honestly many battles I just leave extra stuff back so I don't lose them, since again, they can go in a garrison.... which is them used to produce a new clan and so on. It's also that because of the maps and UI, using more then 200 or so troops effectively doesn't work so well, you just can't see where they are and what they're doing to move and control them all.

 

[Hero07911010]

That seems so random to cap noble troops in a party. What's next, cap how many horse archers you can use? Then, how many archers or cav you can use? Force everyone to play the game the same way?

I may start off with a lot of noble units, but as war breaks out, I have to replace them with whatever is available. I can't stop defending or attacking to run over to some area of the map and grab more noble units. THAT is the limit on noble units. If you want to put restrictions on how you play your game, that's fine you paid for the game play it your way. But to suggest TW modify the game so we all play the game your way is a joke, right?

Make a challenge to player to use less nobles or certain troops or play one-handed, don't suggest TW change the game and force us all to play that way.

 

[RozBritanicus]

That seems so random to cap noble troops in a party. What's next, cap how many horse archers you can use? Then, how many archers or cav you can use? Force everyone to play the game the same way?

I may start off with a lot of noble units, but as war breaks out, I have to replace them with whatever is available. I can't stop defending or attacking to run over to some area of the map and grab more noble units. THAT is the limit on noble units. If you want to put restrictions on how you play your game, that's fine you paid for the game play it your way. But to suggest TW modify the game so we all play the game your way is a joke, right?

Make a challenge to player to use less nobles or certain troops or play one-handed, don't suggest TW change the game and force us all to play that way.

Its not happened guy.

 

[Hero07911010]

Its not happened guy.

Read it again guy.

 

[kyle_usmc]

If anything I want more both for me and the AI, I want my army to match, having a random recruit in my lime of legionaries makes me twitchy.

 

[SomeWeirdSins]

Forest bandits are the most OP troop in the game by far.
Why bother with nobles when fights are so easy? Just stomp them with forest bandits, get insanely rich from roguery, and win the game in 5-6 years

 

[Sweynforkbeard]

Forest bandits are the most OP troop in the game by far.
Why bother with nobles when fights are so easy? Just stomp them with forest bandits, get insanely rich from roguery, and win the game in 5-6 years

They are absolutely worth including. However, there is a tradeoff. whatever experience goes into roguery comes at the expense of leadership. So, a mix of both is a better choice.