Just sticking my head up in the clouds
I would love to speculate on what features could be put in the new TW game, but they have tread into an era that holds little interest for me.
Instead, I'll elaborate on how I think provences should be handled in terms of constructing buildings, farming, and unit recruitment.
A long time ago there was an excellent turn based strategy game called Lords of the Realm II. LoTR II had a few similarities to MTW.
[*] geographic regions are carved into provences.
[*] these provences are defended by a fortification ranging from a wooden palisade to a multi-turreted castle
[*] Each provence has its own "happiness" rating, much like the Stronghold series. In LoTR, the happiness is governed by several factors, just as MTW.
In LoTR II, there was a lot more work done on the strategic map in order for the player to successfully govern each county.
[*] Each county, depending upon its size and soil quality, had multiple fields which could be used to grow crops, graze cattle, or lie fallow.
[*] The county population was graphically represented. The player had to choose how to divide the work force. Workers could be assigned to work crops, tend cattle, gather resources (timber, iron, or stone), work in the blacksmith, or assist in constructing a castle if such a project was going on at the time.
[*] Rather than raising a unit of troops to be available the next year, there was an armory that is expanded by the blacksmiths, or equipment could be purchased by traveling merchants.
[*] In a time of need, a percentage of the local population could be drafted into the army. You trained troops based upon the equipment in your armory (again, much like Stronghold). - LoTR's system was flawed, since peasants who were given armor became full-fledged knights. This is essentially the way one raises an army for offense or defense.
[*] Performing such levies had a negative effect upon the happiness of your county. Also, this means that you must change the allocation of peasanst to ensure the fields are being looked after.
[*] Each county has a granery that is used to feed the local population. Depening upon the size of the population, and the army, a certain amount of grain is removed from the granery. Cattle feed population by their dairy byproducts, or can be slaughtered in times of great need.
[*] An enemy army can plunder fields, which are spread out in the county, thus denying a county of the food necessary to sustain its population. This is very much a tactic of the middle ages, but I imagine such tactics have been employed since the beginning of warfare.
[*] It is possible to ruin an enemy by simply marching a large army into a county and allowing said army to live off the land. This does not necessarily mean destroying crops, but the game counted all armies in a county when factoring how much grain/cattle is consumed per season.
I would have loved to see many of these ideas employed in the new MTW:
[*] By breaking down the population and its work role, larger provences could construct buildings faster since they would have a larger workforce.
[*] Food, such an important aspect in warfare, would again have its due place. - I must acknowledge that EB's "well supplies"/"rationing" attributes for FM's is a step in the correct direction.
[*] In times of need, units of levy units (such as spearmen, bowmen, and slingers) should be able to be drawn up in the same turn. If, however, the leve en masse occurs in the fall, then the player must choose between a large levy (and poor harvest), or only a small levy.
[*] All other units would be recruited based upon building types and availability, just as EB currently works.
Just my thoughts. What do you all think?
Reply With Quote
(I love all of them...)
Originally Posted by MarcAurel
Bookmarks