PvP recruitment mechanics poll

[AussieGiant]

I like the in game mercenary pool limitations.

Realistic, built in and will keep battles small, short, sweat and perhaps a little more decisive. Meaning one side wins rather than big battles with pyrrhic victories.

[OverKnight]

I like the in game mercenary pool limitations.

Realistic, built in and will keep battles small, short, sweat and perhaps a little more decisive. Meaning one side wins rather than big battles with pyrrhic victories.

I like using mercs in theory, it would be easier to demobilize them after a civil war, but I think the merc recruitment pools are just too shallow to fuel a civil war. There are usually only a few units available in each region.

[Ignoramus]

I'm still undecided.

Drafting does mean that it's a level playing field, and does allow for more units being raised.

Mercenary recruitment seems somehow more appropriate, and perhaps will cause wars to be shorter and sharper.

[econ21]

Fighting for Cecil and Ignoramus's vote:

I like the draft system because:

(a) they are YOUR troops: they come from your settlements, they are the type you are built training grounds for, with the armour upgrades, experience etc that you expect etc.

(b) you will have much more control over what kind of units you get

(c) you don't have to worry about your neighbours "pinching" your troops from the merc pool

(d) potentially you will get a lot more men, meaning the kingdom is less at risk from a coup

(e) it makes settlements really matter in a civil war - in a long war, people may fight for ground rather than just chasing the enemy army

(f) it makes civil wars very major events for the kingdom - potentially quickly draining its coffers. It will make people less willing to tolerate open conflict in the Kingdom and instead encourage a quick resolution.

[Cecil XIX]

(e) it makes settlements really matter in a civil war - in a long war, people may fight for ground rather than just chasing the enemy army

This sold me. My inner Edmund Becker is always for things that make settlements more valued!

[ULC]

This poll doesn't so much correctly model which system is better, so much as how people think when it comes to rules - between the MCIB and KISS methods.

[AussieGiant]

Compelling Econ.

I like all the points you mention.

[TinCow]

Fighting for Cecil and Ignoramus's vote:

I like the draft system because:

(a) they are YOUR troops: they come from your settlements, they are the type you are built training grounds for, with the armour upgrades, experience etc that you expect etc.

(b) you will have much more control over what kind of units you get

(c) you don't have to worry about your neighbours "pinching" your troops from the merc pool

(d) potentially you will get a lot more men, meaning the kingdom is less at risk from a coup

(e) it makes settlements really matter in a civil war - in a long war, people may fight for ground rather than just chasing the enemy army

(f) it makes civil wars very major events for the kingdom - potentially quickly draining its coffers. It will make people less willing to tolerate open conflict in the Kingdom and instead encourage a quick resolution.

Counterpoints for Mercs:

(a) they ARE'NT your troops: if you have a poor settlement and have been stiffed by the Seneschal (since you can't prioritize construction in KotF) then this will actually give you useful units rather than just loads of spear militia. Under the draft system, the people with castles will pretty much always wreck the people with cities. Mercs provide high quality units to everyone.

(b) you have just as much control over the units you get as in the draft system, if they're available, you can specify whatever you want, just like in settlements. Settlements provide greater reliability of units, not greater control

(c) but you do have to worry about them taking your settlement immediately, leaving you without any means of fighting back. with mercs, you could theoretically flee into other areas to recruit your mercs and then return a short while later to continue the war. this gives you a last ditch recruitment option which isn't present for settlements.

(d) this is only true in small, local wars. In wars over larger areas, you would actually get more units with mercs, as you can recruit them in provinces you don't own.

(e) settlements really matter in a civil war no matter what.

(f) since the draft system allows recruitment in all cities at once, instead of just one per person, it again buffs the person who is already stronger.

(g) the merc system only requires disbanding of surviving mercs at the end of the war. the draft system requires disbanding of an equal number of units recruited. Since most wars will certainly result in people losing units, both sides will emerge from the war with smaller armies than they had when they entered the war.

[Ignoramus]

Now I'm really torn. Econ's post really persuaded me, but now TC made an equally arguable case for mercenaries.

The biggest argument for mercenaries is TinCow's point (c). I love the thought of a defeated noble wandering around in exile, still at war with his enemy, biding his time to come back and reclaim his lands.

Edit: When exactly does the poll close?

[Cecil XIX]

The 15th, 10:44. I presume that's 15:44 GMT.

[Ituralde]

Me being me, I always like to pick the best of both worlds. What exactly hinders us from using a combination of the Draft and Mercenary system? You get as many mercenaries as your priorization limit AND as many recruited units as you have settlements MINUS any mercenaries you hired previously.

Choice is up to the player, everything's possible, problem solved!



I haven't read all the rules thouroughly so excuse any wrong assumptions I make. That being said, while the chance of going into exile and then returning with a host of mercenaries sounds intriguing, won't you only be able to hire as many mercenaries as you can prioritize? And I assume priorization is tied with rank, which is tied to land, which you no longer have, so how many mercenaries can you truly recruit in such a situation?

The point I really see for the Mercenaries is to balance out Castles vs. Cities, which would also be achieved by the combination I mentioned above.
And the thing I would not like to give up from the Draft is the added power it gives to your settlements in times of Civil War.

Cheers!

Ituralde