Lighthope
-
Posts
483 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
48
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Gallery
Blogs
Events
Dev Diaries
Store
Downloads
Posts posted by Lighthope
-
-
52 minutes ago, Carl Lucas said:
I would like to have the option to just make a princess the Queen without a drawback but I can see the point.
Why can't she be a queen? *cough* Elizabeth I *cough* Elizabeth II
-
1
-
1
-
-
46 minutes ago, Carl Lucas said:
What about making fortifications decrease rebellions like some sort of middle age police?
I can live with that. Especially if they have to have troops to support the fortification.
-
Fortifications were used in Medieval 2: Total War and I never used them and I don't recall ever seeing the AI use them except rarely.
6 hours ago, Bagatur said:And if only taking one town is all that you need to do, how is that not boring and repetitive? You literally do the same think over and over again.
With fortifications, you're literally doing the same thing as taking a town, but now you have to do it multiple times for a single province.
As I said in the other thread: If you want to make taking a province more difficult, make the main castle harder. Don't make us take out the main castle and three other pest castles, because that is all they are going to be: Pests that are swept aside on the march to the main event.
-
1 hour ago, Bagatur said:
Ok. If castles don`t play any role what so ever,
I didn't say they don't have a role. I said it was a boring, repetitive role.
This subject is best kept in the original thread. That way, the developers can more easily follow player thoughts.
I'm just expressing my own personal thoughts. Others may think differently and believe Keeps would be a great idea.
-
1
-
-
38 minutes ago, Sultan Mubashar said:
My approach here is little different from that. These fortifications will be very expensive to build and to maintain.
I appreciate that, but it still is just something else to hack and slash through.
Rich countries have other tools at their disposal to set them apart from the poor ones, including the ability to hire mercenaries and replace losses more quickly. They don't need yet another advantage.
-
6 hours ago, DoVlaLegend said:
some perks (2-3 perks or maybe just 1-2) from your wife (she can have popularity perk, which makes population more happy since they like her.. or she has arrogant perk, which makes population unhappy since they despise her),
So if she is an unpopular wife, we can just Henry VIII her? lol
-
This idea was already covered in this thread:
For the tl;dr - There is a lack of interest in this idea as no one wants to have to fight the main castle plus three or four other "nuisance" castles, or in this threads case "fortifications".
It's historically accurate, but boring gameplay.
-
1
-
-
As it stands, there is no way under the sun I would ever marry off a princess as it provides little benefit (better relation and maybe an alliance) and huge drawbacks as it exposes part of your kingdom to being taken from you.
Historically accurate, but boring gameplay.
Any thoughts on making princesses more useful?
In Medieval II: Total War, they acted as diplomats. I would like to see more use from princesses other than as liabilities.
-
2
-
-
I do like the idea of a province switching allegiances. Very Civ VI (and other iterations).
I don't know how a Diplomat would be able to do that since they work with the Court, but I understand your thinking.
I certainly would like to see more thought into this. The idea is interesting.
-
1
-
-
48 minutes ago, Carl Lucas said:
I have been playing KoH 1 lately and one of the things that is very annoying is the constant barrage of Rebels towards the endgame. If if your provinces are pretty happy they will still produces Rebels.
They need to be happy and of the same religion.
In late game, you need to watch out for war weariness. That will spark rebellions.
Other than that, make sure they are of the same religion. Different religions will spark rebellions.
-
Challenging, but I would become very bored waiting for the proper events to fire off.
But hey, it's a challenge. You do you!
-
4 hours ago, Carl Lucas said:
You can't insert politics and religion into your game and expect people to not talk about it. Especially because game-era related topics haves consequences for today.
Of course you can. We don't want to see modern day issues brought to this board. Keep politics and religion limited to how it affects the game and that is it.
-
2
-
-
4 hours ago, Carl Lucas said:
Will there be a way for Spies to actively weasel their way into the enemy court?
I think there should be. But how would a spy do that without "eliminating" the competition.
If you want to do a "pacifist" run, then part of that is playing the waiting game.
-
13 hours ago, frujin said:
Don't you think that if we do this - instead of more difficult, the conquest will become more "boring/tedious"? Because it is just "more of the same" ...?
I agree with you. I saw this thread and thought, "So we have to attack four places instead of one to conquer a province?"
No. Please no.
If we want to make a province harder to conquer, make the main castle harder. Don't make me have to take out the main castle and three other nuisance castles as well.
-
1
-
-
As long as systems are being added, let's revisit the Season thing.
I'd like to see it added.
Units have more stamina in the Spring/Fall than in the hot summer/cold winter.
Northern units have a stamina bonus for fighting in the north during the winter. Southern units have more stamina fighting in the south during the summer.
Adds an element of strategy as to when to attack.
-
1
-
-
47 minutes ago, Bassilisk said:
I was wondering if creators could make an option to turn settings on or off and include a lot of options. That way people can customize their games, and could work well for multiplayer. I mean to the fact of turning on and off rebellions, on or off opinions, on or off religion, and so forth
I think that would be a great idea, but would require more coding. Not quite sure they are interested in that at this point.
-
5 hours ago, Ivory Knight said:
1. It is arguably closer to historical accuracy.
Sometimes you need to sacrifice accuracy for fun game-play. I'm okay with a "military" class. It differentiates it from the commoner class.
-
8 hours ago, DoVlaLegend said:
I am intresting if spies actions will also have an effect on any of the classes. For example: killing king/prince would either anger or make nobility happy (depends on relations with that kingdom), your spy getting uncovered in other kingdoms would anger merchants since that kingdom broke trade arrangments with you because of it, etc.
Well, if your spy assassinates someone, in theory no one should know it was you otherwise what was the point of using a spy? So it should not affect the opinion of everyone.
Even failures are not necessarily tied to who did it. Again, the whole "spy" thing.
I get what you're trying to say. I just think it works against the whole idea of spies.
-
This is a great idea and something that really excites me!
Rather than calling it "Opinion," I think "Stability" is more apt. After all, the lower the opinion, the less stable the kingdom is and more likely for revolt.
My one concern is how many tools will a player have to indirectly cause a war, since declaring war yourself is such a negative influence.
As a player, I don't want to sit around for tons of time waiting for some other kingdom to go to war with me on their own. Give me some way to...ahem..."influence" them to go to war on me so I can avoid the penalty.
-
4 hours ago, Michael Gladius said:
I don't like all-or-nothing choices, particularly in a Medieval game. In that time, power and sovereignty were highly decentralized, and centralized control was really more of a post-Medieval/early Renaissance thing. Having a Royal court, which has all sorts of bonuses, feels incomplete without the ability to assign lower nobility to govern an unimportant city and increase its revenues.
Well, remember there has to be sacrifices between absolute reality and compelling gameplay.
-
1
-
-
21 hours ago, Michael Gladius said:
Shield Wall- this would be a modified line that has a stronger defense and resistance to arrows, in exchange for a slower speed.
Stronger defense in exchange for slower speed. I can see this being the go-to formation. Too OP.
21 hours ago, Michael Gladius said:Phalanx- This would be a modified box formation with similar enhancements and penalties as the shield wall.
Ditto.
21 hours ago, Michael Gladius said:Schiltron- This would be a circular formation with men facing out in all directions. Large units only. Only level-3 units can move.
Stakes/Mantlets- These would be available to archers and crossbowmen. Stakes protect against melee units, while mantlets protect from ranged attacks. Units are immobile while using them.
Skirmish formation- This would be a thin/loose offensive line formation that enhances projectile units' attack and speed, at a cost to their defense stats.
Okay, now you're thinking. Niche formations used in special circumstances or formations that have a good cost/benefit to them.
I could definitely go with more formations. More formations, however, make it harder to balance. We may be asking too much at this point in development.
-
On 11/11/2020 at 5:33 PM, Michael Gladius said:
I'd like to propose a minor class that would be weaker than the royal court, but still useful.
No. The whole point of a limited Royal Court is to force you to make strategic decisions, including making sacrifices. Adding this minor class removes a major part of that.
-
1
-
-
3 hours ago, ahmetol said:
Gerçekten videolara çok ihtiyacımız var
Translation: We really need videos
Yeah, I would definitely like to see more of those.
Tercüme: Evet, kesinlikle daha fazlasını görmek isterim.
-
1
-
-
21 hours ago, William Blake said:
Between them everything is "right and legal", yet France and England and everyone else do not accept all this and still support that all of the Poland should be back to what it was.
Again, that really doesn't matter when the ultimate goal is to conquer the world.
I like your idea, but it goes against the goal of the game.
Defensive Fortifications Concept from History
in General Discussion
Posted
Okay, so how would this work, since the only armies we have are with Knights. Would they be additional troops that only man the fortifications? Wouldn't that be too easy? Build a fort, man it, forget about it?