Feedback and Suggestions

Ranbir · Post by **Ranbir** » Wed Sep 10, 2008 6:25 pm

I think if a PA is assisting an established kingdom's army, they should be restricted going into the support layer.

KvChaos · Post by **KvChaos** » Wed Sep 10, 2008 9:57 pm

I am thinking about a person influence in the army.

Say three friends took a city together, with a combined PA from all three of them. If one person quit after that, it's gonna generate a percentage of army desertion isn't it, especially during the early stage of the newly formed kingdom. Eventually, this percentage will slowly decrease with time.

SituJinrong · Post by **SituJinrong** » Tue Sep 16, 2008 7:09 pm

As someone who uses personal army extensively, here are my 2 cents:

1. Nerf spamming PAs by enforcing a -10 morale (for the duration of the battle) to every PA that join the main force. This will realistically restrict the number of PAs that can cooperate together. Eg, a kingdom army + 1 PA = -10 morale, 2 PAs = -10 morale, 3 PAs = -20 morale etc.

2.

Well, why can't rerolls PAST the first turn a Player joined the game have one less BP to use. Third reroll only gets 2 BP, and the fourth, 1 BP. Anything afterwards gets zero. That doesn't sound so bad...=S

Still does not solve the problem of someone using his PA, then when that is exhausted, reroll, since you can look at it the other way he "gain" 3 BPs rather than "lose" 1 BP.

3.

Also, what's wrong with the idea of still paying for the troops even if you're establishing the kingdom after battle? How does that not make sense? Did you actually share of any of the real spoils with these victorious troops? =S

TBH, when I first started my planning, I made the assumption that the PAs have to be "bought" by the kingdom, and until that happens, they are considered PAs. I have since been told other wise.
PA currently is really a bad choice for starting BPs at this stage of the game. It is unfortunately a necessary evil at this stage of the game if one is to try a shot at indenpendent rule, rather than as a submisssive minor ally/vassal/ serving officer.

And depite me having a few guys taking PA, we are still dwarfed by those who started from game start. Zhao Yue i believe has a standing army about twice my size and even though its morale is not super high and armament not complete, it will still trounce any attack I can put together. So I would think that PA is not exactly overpowered now.

3. I guess it all boils down to how far into the game, the game designers wish to allow realistic chances for new rulers to establish themselves. As players, we all have our objectives, and we try to operate within the rules to achieve that objective as well as we can.

KvChaos · Post by **KvChaos** » Wed Sep 17, 2008 12:43 am

Simple and straight-forward.
A easy to access link for www.simwarlords.net/TurnTool/
to avoid a lot of unnecessary trouble.

Mardagg · Post by **Mardagg** » Wed Sep 17, 2008 4:33 pm

PA is good like this I think: I choose to take 4BP in an army when I joint in to go in the war in Yan and help: It took me a turn to loose everything... And now at this point of the game I have no item to boost my caracter wich is giving me no opportunity to be CiC anymore, but if I have chosen item or money I will probably be CiC as we speak or have better stats... dont forget that PA can be target individual so you can target them and they are separate like we did in the war in Shanggu
http://www.simwarlords.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=1922
other thing: they can not attack out of the province they are in... so you target them individually with field army and garnison: all of them will be ''alone'' so you can send specific army on them... target the support layer with a small garnison and he end up whit no support... I think that it is fun to have PA and mercenary in the game but I dont think it is too strong a city make around 5k troops/month so you need to be 6 mercenary to recruit this much (if all of them have npc) in 3 turn both army is going to be 15k but they can only have 10k in a war...

Post by **ann** » Wed Sep 17, 2008 5:48 pm

I've actually wondered whether to do away with PA BP at some point in the game - around the same time that PI BP stop. That's about to happen after all - there's not much room for Influence - maybe PAs should stop as well. Stop all this calling of friends to get sign up and get people more troops - and though we haven't made this a rule violation it's frustrating for those who find themselves facing insta-forces made the day of the invasion deadline.

Pang Ai · Post by **Pang Ai** » Wed Sep 17, 2008 6:07 pm

I'm sorry if my friends and I have caused this to come about. But the situation was that we wanted to be independent state and saw this game too late. By the time that we decided that we were going to play this game, it was already 7 turns in. We looked around, and were considering two possibilities. One was in Wei where another group was forming, and the other one was in Changsha where we had gained support. We had to do this because we knew that we didn't have enough resources to fight off the counterattack of another established ruler, so we have to make sure that we gain a support of another ruler before we step out. We had enough to win the first fight, but since we can not get a kingdom turn until the following month, we were subject to a counterattack by another ruler. So we had team up with another ruler. I think it's fair that we have to pay for our troop, looking at what has been said. I didn't know it was something that was shunned upon. We just figured that this was the best course of action for what we were planning to do.

As far as what to do with Personal Army, I think a way to diffuse this misunderstanding may be to designate where the personal army is at, at the signup section. This way, the rulers in that region will know what forces are in their region, and prepare for it, if necessary. Another way to do this is perhaps to limit its participation in Co-invasions. Like subject to supply layer as someone suggested above.

The way I see it, if you get rid of personal army all together, it will create another class (BP) to be superior to another. I've played games all my life that I know there is never a balanced game. There is always a best way to beat the game, and there's always a more difficult way to beat the game. In an online game, unlike a single player game, people play it for different reasons. So there will always be debates about balance issues.

KvChaos · Post by **KvChaos** » Wed Sep 17, 2008 10:15 pm

ann wrote:I've actually wondered whether to do away with PA BP at some point in the game - around the same time that PI BP stop. That's about to happen after all - there's not much room for Influence - maybe PAs should stop as well. Stop all this calling of friends to get sign up and get people more troops - and though we haven't made this a rule violation it's frustrating for those who find themselves facing insta-forces made the day of the invasion deadline.

Well, I still think my suggestion stands. Those that contributed PA to the overall force will have a percentage of influence in the army. Hence, when they left to reroll (a form of cheating) or becomes inactive (another form of cheating), a same percentage of total troops will desert.

For those who joined all the way, I don't find a problem with that. If you managed to convince a number of friends to stand with you all the way, that is your advantages.

Critical_Hit · Post by **Critical_Hit** » Fri Sep 19, 2008 7:15 am

I wrote:Also the rules state that a personal armies chance of avoiding combat is based on their Command+Might score (plus any Decoy skill levels). Now Command I can understand - this makes a lot of sense but I can't figure out why Might is incorporated into this equation. What relevance does a PC's personal physical prowess have to do with successfully avoiding an army? Command+Judgement or Command+Intelligence are much more plausible combinations - especially when you consider that the Decoy skill is Intelligence based.

ann wrote:I suppose someone thought physical ability made sense in determining how well and quickly you were able to move around.

Please put game suggestions and criticism in the Feedback! We really do use it for ideas Smile

I could understand Might being a primary factor if the evasion was simply to get only yourself away as quickly as possible, however the situation is that you are mobilising your army to retreat which requires organisation and logical processes whilst timing your retreat to evade the oncoming enemy army. Not having the ability to personally pick up all of your stuff in one go and run off into the distance.

KvChaos · Post by **KvChaos** » Fri Sep 19, 2008 8:11 am

I would say it'll probably be Command (Discipline) and Judgement (Executing the command at the right moment). Might is more on avoiding capture I would say.

It's like RTK6 I think, where you can leave behind a general to cut the enemies' pursue.. mainly based on his WAR.