Number of turns

[ScionTheWorm]

Only for measuring opinions

[Bar Kochba]

12 would be cool but how would you implement the change of wheather

[GoreBag]

3 would be cool, representing the campaigning season, but that would leave an etra season out for purposes of construction and recruitment. Still, I guess that's nothing a little tweaking can't fix. 3 it is.

[Incongruous]

Four would be best I think, but if we have to cut it down three is the next best thing.

[Jarlabanke]

Is there anyway to make the seasons play more of a role than they do in the orginal R:TW, like making some waters unfareable during winter but making landtravelling speedier in frozen regions.

[King of Atlantis]

1 is best. It is already to easy to conquer the world in like 50 years, making more times a year just increase this inaccuracy.

[Rodion Romanovich]

2, but 4 would be nice to include in an addon IMO

[Incongruous]

Two is definatley not enough, four would be good.

[QuickDagger]

Hy everyone,

Maybe the maximum distance covered by a standard unit could answer the question. I mean, a group of 2000 foot soldiers can march-move-travel-etc 900 km in about 3 months (lets say 10 km a day on a standard terrain). As we already know the distances between the cities, this calculation becomes easy.


So be it !

[ScionTheWorm]

okay just some thoughts if four turns were implemented on realistic potencial expansion for factions:
each province filled up with units holding the cities if realistic, hard to conquer. ai won't go berserk and one faction won't own half the world in 5 years. vikings for instance can now conquer normandy or single provinces, but won't be able to conquer a lot in no time.

richer factions will of course be able to conquer, but it will take it's time. we would have to avoid that the player have to fight 10 battles a turn, as it will take ages to get some new technology and such - in fact I think, if we would implement more turns, the player should be able to just wait up to eight turns for instance, and not fall way back in factionscore.

On the other hand, he could travel realistic distances and manouver a lot more than if only two turns. Of course it will take a lot of turns to take out another faction, as they have garrisons. shit I don't know...

[skeletor]

To me, the numbers of turns doesn't really mather. If you have 6 turns in a year, you have to do all the same things for every turn that you do with the RTW system. The only advantage with more turns, is that we can specify more the relativeness between buildingtimes and unit movement.

You will experience as many battles every turn as you do with the original system (AI allso get "6" turns per year) so you wold probably end up with faster expantion of your, and AI empires compared to buildingtime.

I like the system of RTR mutch bether, were you get haltet by the lack of recruitable unit's in newly conquered provinces, so that you have to have the garison fixed before you can move on. And if you expand to fast, replacing your army will be a pain. This allso applies to the AI factions, so you won't get any überfactions around.

BUT wold i really like to see mutch larger traveldistances compared to RTW. Your army's should be able to cross europe in a year if they don't stumble across any other armys. This way, ambushes will probably occour mutch more often, and you as a player must play mutch more defencively.


-Skel-