Should the horse/cavalry system be more complex?

Do you agree with OP

  • Agree with idea 1

    Votes: 2 33.3%
  • Agree with idea 2

    Votes: 1 16.7%
  • Agree with both ideas

    Votes: 3 50.0%
  • Disagree, disadvantage over advantage

    Votes: 2 33.3%
  • This is not an important question

    Votes: 1 16.7%

  • Total voters
    6

Users who are viewing this thread

After field battles involving cavalry, there's always some horses left on the battlefield with their owner killed/wounded, so it got me thinking:

1.The horses and war horses perhaps should not be permanently assigned to a soldier when upgrading. Instead, the horses with their owner slain should be refunded to inventory, and the cavalry unit with their horses slain would require new horses after the battle. When looting after battle, the surviving enemy owned horses should be looted to inventory along with the ones in enemy inventory.

To counter this heavy consumption in horses (which is logical), the production of horses should be increased as well.

2. The horses and war horses should be more dynamic. For instance, a horse surviving a few battles would be upgraded to war horse, and severely wounded war horse would downgrade to normal horse. Also, make training horses into war horses in towns/castles an option.

Pros:
1. Address the strategical importance of horses, more realistic.
2. Make horse producing villages more valuable.
3. Make looting cavalry enemy troops a profitable thing. (horse thief?)

Cons:
1. Not realistic, you're assuming the horses are immortal and won't die of age.
2. Extra workload for devs.
 
Back
Top Bottom