Disbanding mercenaries should have consequences

[Daevyll]

Personally I think Mercenaries are a bit too powerful at the moment. You can stamp out entire armies that are instantly usable, throw them at the enemy heedless of losses, then disband them immediately after use to keep the cost down.

Historically however, disbanding mercenaries was not something to be done lightly. At best they would pillage your lands while dispersing, at worst they might mutiny.

What I'd like to see in MTW is that disbanding a mercenary unit can have consequences:

a) a chance of losing a certain building/cash to simulate the mercenaries pillaging the land. Much like the event that takes place after conquering a province, but less serious.

b) a chance of bandits appearing, similar to what can now happen if you have less than 100 men & no fort.


I've not looked into modding MTW at all to be honest, and I suspect this to be beyond modding.... but if it's possible, I think it would improve the gameplay.

[PseRamesses]

I absolute agree with you regarding this. If you disband an entire army it has to get home, work for someone else so a "pillage-notification" from the release-province would be more accurate AND if you disband them in very rebellious provinces the rebs should be bolstered into a higher chance for starting a rebellion within the first couple of years.

[Brutal DLX]

Nice idea, Daevyll

Additionally, you could also have a conversation with the mercenary captain (similar to the bribing units message), to set the hiring contract's length (say, if you recruit more than one unit of mercenaries in the same turn) and, if you choose to disband the army before it expired, the mercenary captain would ask you for compensation based on the number/quality of troops.
If you decline to pay, the stack could turn rebel and pillaging could happen.

Perhaps this or something similar could be included for RTW.

[Hetman_Koronny]

*bows*

M:TW lacking micromanagement for you? http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/gc-dizzy2.gif http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/gc-wink2.gif

Well, ok while I actually agree with you that from historical point of view it should be that way (disbanded mercs pillaging and/or mutinying) I wouldn’t like to have it as a game feature.

M:TW being a great game for hardcore, strategy games freaks (like me http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/gc-beam.gif) is still one of the more playable games in its genre. For me mercs are one of many, let’s call them, ‘casual player user friendly features’. Complicating it would not be the best idea.

*bows*

[fruitfly]

If there was a penalty imposed on the player for disbanding mercs, most people would probably send them to their deaths instead.

In terms of historical accuracy it'd be worth implementing, but in terms of gameplay, why give yourself a problem when you can weaken an enemy instead?

[Ja'chyra]

I like the idea of agreeing contract lengths with mercs, this seems much more realistic.

On cancelling a contract that hasn't yet expired I think you should have to pay a hefty penalty with the cahnce that they then turn round and attack you. I don't like the idea of them destorying buildings as you wouldn't disband them in the middle of your city.

I also think you should be able nationalise mercs, but this should come at a price with a payoff, so to speak, and higher upkeep costs. This would enable you to give a particularly adept general command of a province which must have some, lots of, precedent in history.

Just a thought http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/gc-grin2.gif

My edit

I also think there should be greater risks of mercs rebelling or deserting when they are sent to face unbeatable odds, lets face it someone being paid £2.99 isn't going to stand for odds of 100-1 against, they should also take a portion of any florins pillaged, 50%?, as I'm sure this would have been part of any contract.