Faction Evolution

**Logue** · April 12, 2006, 08:17 PM

Had a bit of an idea and i wanted to ask just what you lot thought of it so here goes...

In light of the recent news about the merchants, if your faction started off poor in economic terms but then over the course of the game turned into an economic power house should the units change in appearance to have better amour and weapons. Or vice versa if you lost wealth the units would recive lesser equipment. Also if you were use a specific unit constantly should your faction be able to produce a more elite version of that unit or the unit were to gain extra stats?

This may not sit with those of you who want the more historically accurate but any time we start a new campaign we alter what did actually happen.

**HunKiller** · April 12, 2006, 08:21 PM

it sounds like a good idea and would certainly be handy for those all spartan hoplite greek armies but any ideas on how to implicate it?

**Logue** · April 12, 2006, 08:27 PM

mmm good point...

Maybe once your income or balance hits certain levels or your merchants trading skill gets to a certain level. As for the units it could be how many of that unit is at a certain rank/valour.

**HunKiller** · April 12, 2006, 08:32 PM

i assume your talking mtw2 and this woudl work especially well witha degree of hsitorical accuracy like smiths learning form theri mistakes and such... there could be say a new blacksmiths shop after 50 units of knights were trained that gave +2 valor to them or soemthing like that

**Logue** · April 12, 2006, 08:40 PM

Yeah its for mtwII, something along those lines with the blacksmith but no doubt there will be additional stats added as you go along the tech tree.

**HunKiller** · April 12, 2006, 08:42 PM

you should look into contacting CA with this it soudsn liek ti could change the gameplay

**Dirty Harry** · April 12, 2006, 08:53 PM

that is a really cool idea

**hsimoorb** · April 12, 2006, 09:57 PM

Somehow I doubt that CA is going to be up to modeling the complex changes in warfare brought about by the increasing wealth of an entire nation. It would involve a system to disperse the wealth of said nation amongst many different social strata, that are contributing differnt amounts and types of troops to thier government. Even Civ is nowhere near to handling something like that.

And besides, rich nations do not neccesarily produce rich troops. Look at carthage and the Ptolemaic empire, in RTW. Some of the richest two nations in the period. Of the two, Carthage did not produce any kind of troops, in fact, thier wealth meant they could hire plenty of poor people to fight for them. And the Ptolemies, while rich as hell, did not have hordes of native sons to lavish upon, they paid poor egyptians to fight...

Besides, they already hinted that building structures like blacksmiths will change the look of the troops that are produced. So if you build a large armourer in a castle, your basic footsoldiers might gain a shinier breastplate...stupid idea realy.

**iKossu** · April 13, 2006, 01:30 AM

The idea sounds great. But as has already been said, it will be hard to implement properly. I don't think we're gonna see this in M2TW.

I too have an idea regarding factions. It came to me a year ago or so. It's simply this: factions splitting up for political matter and perhaps getting into a civil war. This has same problem than in Logue's idea, right?

Originally Posted by hsimoorb

Besides, they already hinted that building structures like blacksmiths will change the look of the troops that are produced. So if you build a large armourer in a castle, your basic footsoldiers might gain a shinier breastplate...stupid idea realy.

Sounds cool to me but there should be some stat changes as well. For example, if these footsoldiers' armours were chain mails and they now have plate mails, their armour stat should raise and they might get some other bonuses too.

**Logue** · April 13, 2006, 08:18 AM

I honestly didnt think it would be that hard to introduce considering mtwII new random model generator, if you look at mtw when the era changed the royal knight unit changed also why couldn't the unit model be linked to the the income of the faction.

I see what you mean with carthage and that but to be honest even while playing rome etc i have never built a purely mercinary army when i was loaded.

And if they have introdruced something similar with the blacksmith then it sounds good.

**hsimoorb** · April 13, 2006, 01:51 PM

I honestly didnt think it would be that hard to introduce considering mtwII new random model generator, if you look at mtw when the era changed the royal knight unit changed also why couldn't the unit model be linked to the the income of the faction.

I don't disagree that it coulnd't be done how you are say. I bet RTW could handle a scripts that would give a faction different troops based on the total income of that faction. Easy. But That would be a total Historical/Realism/socioeconomic wuss out on the part of CA. Simply put, rich factions do not neccesarily fight in a rich manner. People in rich countries aren't neccesarily rich. It would be silly to have knights in shining armour come out of the Crimea just because some kingdom there is trading well.

I see what you mean with carthage and that but to be honest even while playing rome etc i have never built a purely mercinary army when i was loaded.

That's because RTWs recruitment was a poor poor representation of the Carthaginian Military. Carthage had frekin' PHOENI INFANTRY. This is from a state who's citizens were wholy exempt from military service! Thier main scource of troops were the Lybians, and in RTW Libyan infantry just plain sucked. Not to mention that you just counldnt' run a military on mercenaries in RTW.

I still think though, that the idea of making blacksmiths change the units around is silly. It's a breeding ground for historical innacuracy. Once you build such a thing then all of the sudden your kerns get to wear chainmaile and steel helms? It seems to me to be an attempt on CA's part to load up the game with more Knight-looking units.

**Logue** · April 13, 2006, 02:00 PM

But if the blacksmith in previous games added additional amour stats then why shouldn't the unit alter in appearance to show the better amrour and weapons? I mean why would shirtless celts have a +3 armour bounes over a unit of hoplites with +1 armour with nothing to show for it seems a bit daft to me.

**HunKiller** · April 13, 2006, 03:25 PM

i agree with logue that the naked dudes have an amror bonus but no armor. it would make the battle more realistic if the units with huge armor bonuses actually went into battle with soem form of armor on

**Ewan** · April 13, 2006, 04:07 PM

Im totally with hsimoorb and think this feature wouldnt be to well implemented.

amour stats then why shouldn't the unit alter in appearance

Because this would mean that every unit in game would have to be re-done more then once ( 2 or 3 times depending on the number of upgrades ) and i dont want to have to wait another 6 months for a feature thatmost likly not be implemented properly and is not entirly historical acurate.

Also i'd like to point out that a system like this is already in place ( but it doesnt change appearance ). when you have alot of spare cash you can decide in a settlement to buy the next building along that tech tree which would train more elite units, also the same can be done with buying a blacksmith.

I mean why would shirtless celts have a +3 armour bounes over a unit of hoplites with +1 armour

you should not consider this so literally, this is more to add balance to the game

**~~swabian~~** · April 13, 2006, 06:04 PM

well... if a nation can afford well equipped troops, then they can produce them. i don't know why their look has to be adjusted at all, since an unarmored knight connot be used as intended and for the game this means that such a unit of knights simply wouldn't exist as knights.