More weak troops - less elites

[Askorti]

Hi everyone! I'm playing M&B for quite long time and thing that surprises me now is that:
a) Lords have too little troops,
b) have too much elites instead of weak units,
c) elite units are way too cheap.

So my suggestion is to make elite units a lot more expensive, make lords use less of them to balance that and let me and lords have more units.

Why? Realism. As I know most of medieval armies were built from a masses of weak units and few elites like knights.

 

[siprus]

it just difficulty settings... good camping ai should be just renamed hard.

 

[Qwertyman]

yeah,  so long as troops wages are adjusted accordingly to make fielding large numbers of recruits easier and elites harder for players.
bring on the arrow fodder!

EDIT:  by that I mean,  dont adjust initial prices but instead go for wage prices.

 

[Askorti]

it just difficulty settings... good camping ai should be just renamed hard.

But still armies are too small. I know that I can change that by tweakMB but I think that it should be improved without modding. In my opinion lords should have no less than 150 or even 200(weak) units.

 

[munchiepoo]

A lord with 60 aint small lol. i never see a lord with less than 50.

 

[Achilla]

Hi everyone! I'm playing M&B for quite long time and thing that surprises me now is that:
a) Lords have too little troops,
b) have too much elites instead of weak units,
c) elite units are way too cheap.

So my suggestion is to make elite units a lot more expensive, make lords use less of them to balance that and let me and lords have more units.

Why? Realism. As I know most of medieval armies were built from a masses of weak units and few elites like knights.

Stop playing on 'hard' and then complaining, lol.

Before the campaign difficulty patch, game operated on 'lowest' campaign difficulty and lords would very soon end up with recruits and tier-2 militia units after getting ganged up once of twice. It was neither realistic nor smart, it simply killed any challenge and interest in playing the game that was there left.

Now we have three difficulties and each of them gives more than enough room for enjoying the game at own pace.

 

[Askorti]

A lord with 60 aint small lol. i never see a lord with less than 50.

It's not enough for me, and probably for a lot of people
It would be great to have really big battles

Achilla: I know but Lords should have more troops. It would make game more interesting. I think so

 

[siprus]

so you mean instead of raising number of elite troops you would rise size of army of lords... but then they get slower which means they can't catch you.

 

[Achilla]

A lord with 60 aint small lol. i never see a lord with less than 50.

It's not enough for me, and probably for a lot of people
It would be great to have really big battles

Achilla: I know but Lords should have more troops. It would make game more interesting. I think so

Game-breaker.

I can confidently solo 200 swadian infantry units at custom battle as Hegen when dismounted, because most of them are militia-quality crap.

20 Nord Huscarls are more dangerous than 200 Nord Footmen under any circumstances, to give but a single example.

 

[siprus]

not to mention!

don't you dare take away my loot! my precious... loot. IT MINE MINE MINEE!!!!! right loot? you are mine? yes... YES! *glunk*

 

[Grimmend]

would enjoy larger battles, but also enjoy high class army.  I like the idea of adjusting the army cap equation to allow more people in armies (maybe one that also increases army size by fiefs owned, like village+5 castle+10 and cities+15 or something)

In fights, peasant armies are boring, elites duking it out is far more entertaining to watch (and more challenging to advanced players)

what if the added another tier, like a royal guard or something.
they would be somewhat the same, but in lordly stat gear and have the a surcoat type armor on.
Also, they couldnt be removed from the party into garrisons, and only a limited amount can be available at any time?

 

[Vornne]

Things contributing to this have been changed significantly in 1.126; try starting a new game with that version.

 

[Askorti]

what if the added another tier, like a royal guard or something.
they would be somewhat the same, but in lordly stat gear and have the a surcoat type armor on.
Also, they couldnt be removed from the party into garrisons, and only a limited amount can be available at any time?

Yea, that would be pretty interesting. And maybe make AI guardians always follow their leader on battlefield
btw. Knocking down a commander should affect units on battlefield like decreasing their attack rate but increasing speed.... When running away

 

[siprus]

true since you being knocked out is pretty much means your army is gonna lose (i hate i especially when your troops just killed cavalry and your troops move onto archers and which start  to die with very little causalities to your troops. then one lucky arrow to the leg and your troops withdraw with huge casualties )... it's not fair enemy lords can just charge and no penalty what so ever.

 

[Askorti]

true since you being knocked out is pretty much means your army is gonna lose (i hate i especially when your troops just killed cavalry and your troops move onto archers and which start  to die with very little causalities to your troops. then one lucky arrow to the leg and your troops withdraw with huge casualties )... it's not fair enemy lords can just charge and no penalty what so ever.

Adding something that modders already made shouldn't be too hard for devs. What I mean? In plenty of mods I've got a possibility to "fly" upon the battlefield and watch my units fighting after someone knocked me down. I would resolve problem of auto-defeats when I(as a character) fail.