RS2 - 1-Turn Version Discussion and Planning

[cherryfunk]

Roma Surrectum has always featured both 0-turn recruitment and 1-turn recruitment, and RS2 will continue to offer both. In this thread we'd like to hear from 1-turn players -- those RS players who value strategic thought and careful planning...

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

So if you're a 0-turn twitch player you can head on back to your current campaign, where no doubt you have fifteen full-stack battles waiting for you when you hit 'end turn'

Let's begin with 2 topics that impact 1-turn play:

1. The economy -- simply put, do you prefer a 'tight' economy, where you must carefully watch your balance sheet and weigh every purchase, or a 'loose' economy where you typically have plenty of money each turn to buy what needs to be bought?

2. Recruitment times -- should all units take 1 turn to recruit, or should some elite units take 2 or even 3 turns? Another idea -- what about cheap levy units that recruit in 0 turns, to represent a quickly-raised militia?

The floor is open to discussion -- let's hear what you guys want to see in RS2!

[Mulattothrasher]

I'm an avid 1-turn player because I value the results of battles/encounters where a few stacks determine so much. You have to actually plan better on a tactical and strategic level better; value your troops, and make sure you do not throw a stack away due to poor strategy because, as in history, losing an entire army or two should be a huge deal in the course of your empire, not a hiccup or speedbump like 0-turn.

I prefer a tight economy that mirrors what it was like to run an actual empire. I do not think all units need to be 1-turn, such as the militia and 'peasant' type troops called to arms. Then agian i am on the team so i think eveyone already knowns my alignment on the 1 vs. 0-turn issue. I've played both 1 and 0-turn in RS and I keep going back to 1-turn when the endless battles and stacks become a monotonous grind.

[DaddyPro]

1. IMO best would be if you would make enough money for construction cost and army upkeep, but not too much so you would still have to think what to build and how many stacks recruit.
2. As for recruitment times i prefer 0-turn recruitment with 1-turn recruitment economy, on RS 1.5c i just use buildings file for 1-turn recruitment and units file for 0-turn recruitment.

[Duffo]

1. Tihgt! More challenge


2.I would say for recruitment times that elite infantry 2 turns, elite cavalry/elephants 3 turns(I think that fearless horses takes more time to train), regular inf/cav/ele 1 turns, Militia 0 turns

[♔Icebear77♔]

1. Tihgt! More challenge]

2.I would say for recruitment times that elite infantry 2 turns, elite cavalry/elephants 3 turns(I think that fearless horses takes more time to train), regular inf/cav/ele 1 turns, Militia 0 turns

1.Yes, a would love a tight eco and not a 1-turn. They needed more time to built an Imp Palace as cav staples for example.

2.Agreed.

And this would be cool too:
If i would like to recruit two cohorts, the second should only cost the half (upkeep-cost would stay the same) but they can train togehter and if i order 100 weapons i get the next order of another 100 cheaper, isnt it?

[PurPul]

1. Tihgt! More challenge


2.I would say for recruitment times that elite infantry 2 turns, elite cavalry/elephants 3 turns(I think that fearless horses takes more time to train), regular inf/cav/ele 1 turns, Militia 0 turns

Exactly my feelings.

[cherryfunk]

I'm an avid 1-turn player because I value the results of battles/encounters where a few stacks determine so much. You have to actually plan better on a tactical and strategic level better; value your troops, and make sure you do not throw a stack away due to poor strategy because, as in history, losing an entire army or two should be a huge deal in the course of your empire, not a hiccup or speedbump like 0-turn.

But of course, which is why all true strategists play 1-turn

IMO best would be if you would make enough money for construction cost and army upkeep, but not too much so you would still have to think what to build and how many stacks recruit.

Would you prefer that you be able to build something in every one of your cities each turn, or that you have to pick and choose which cities to upgrade?

I would say for recruitment times that elite infantry 2 turns, elite cavalry/elephants 3 turns(I think that fearless horses takes more time to train), regular inf/cav/ele 1 turns, Militia 0 turns

3 turns for elephants and elite cavalry is an interesting idea we might try. My main concern about 0-turn militia is whether or not the AI will over-recruit them, but we can certainly test it.

[DaddyPro]

Would you prefer that you be able to build something in every one of your cities each turn, or that you have to pick and choose which cities to upgrade?

I'd like to be able keep construction going in every town at any given moment or atleast be able to keep up with my growing population and i'd like to be able upkeep 1 stack for every 4-5 cities.

[King Nud]

i have always played 1 turn as I believe it forces the player to choose their battles wisely...and it prevents countless full stack battles every turn. However I also would like to see a much tighter economy than in RS1.5 as it is too easy to raise those full armies.

but i'm on the team so what does it matter. RS2 will blow you away.

[cherryfunk]

Has anyone played Viking Invasion II? (If not, you should!) It has a very tight economy indeed -- too tight? Just right?

[apple]

I would love to see a tight economy, so tight that you must choose between War=nearly no money for buildings and Peace= no money for soldiers and there upkeep but money to upgrade your cities.

You shouldn't be able to do both.

[dvk901]

Be careful, people, what you say about 0-turn players....afterall, I'm the guy who has to make this 1-turn wheelchair-fest work.

But seriousness aside, RS2 will offer a modfoldered option to the Main Campaign that will be specifically tailored for the 1-turn player, and I made a committment with Cherryfunk that this will be different from how it was in RS1.5.....where I made some adjustments and basically no one ever provided any feedback as to whether it played well or not. I would like to create a 'vibrant' campaign for the 1-turn person that has just as much attention and TLC as the 0-turn is getting.

[mattfriend0]

i can only talk about romans so heres what i think for roman recruitment
0 turn for hastati (i might use them then)
1 turn for principes
1 turn for trinari

1 turn for equities
1 turn for velite

first cohort 2 turn
1 turn per cohort


i like the eco as it is

[thebull0425]

1 Turn recruitment is where it's at. I like that I have to choose between raising a whole host of legions, and leaving my cities without construction, or at least chosing which cities to build in. That makes the game for me. I have to be strategic with my troops and how I grow. If some of the units are more than one turn, that's fine, I have no problem with that. Economy tight, 1 turn recruitement, oh yeah!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[apple]

There is no Hastati or Principes, just trinarii and polybian chohorts.

[Ybbon]

scarily, I play on default (which I guess is 0-turn?) but the way it plays, with a tight economy and always choosing how much building to recruiting to trade-off makes it play like 1-turn as described above - which must mean I'm doing something wrong! Ho hum, back to killing Macedonians and their damned phalanxes.

[apple]

Nothing is wrong if you are enjoying yourself.

[Eric the Great]

I think 2+ turn at nessary for some elite units. i.e. Spartan Hoplites took years to train. While some of the poorly train troops of the time got little training. I wonder if it is possible to mix 0 turn and 1+ turns. I tried both, and I like the ability to quickly raise an army when I need it. Then you run into the problem with too many battles, and it becomes of pain if the computer creates an army of strong units in one turn.

[Broken Lance]

how about the size/quality of the settlement dictating it's recruitment times?

[chaplain118]

I enjoy the 1-turn recruitment, it makes blitzkrieg tactics so much harder to pull off and severely limits the player. What my suggestion would be to use a mix of 0 and 1, 2 turn recruitments for units. For example, levies such as peasants and hillmen should be 0-turn recruitment while elite units like Cataphracts and companion cavalry should be 2-turn recruitment. I know some people think that it's a good idea for 3-turn recruitment, but once the game gets far enough, each turn will feel extremely long and waiting two turns for one unit from ONE city will start to take its toll on the players. (I've been playing vanilla RTW and when the praetorians were being hired at 2-turns, I had to literally put my campaign on hiatus so I can invade with a praetorian legion. Fun, but very very tedious) The mixes of AOR will hamper where these elite units will be recruited, so there's the issue of the AI just spamming a ton of levies.

A solution to that would be making the recruitment cost and upkeep inverted. So basically, a unit of peasants might cost 500 denarii to recruit and then 480 denarii to upkeep while a unit of cataphracts would cost 200 to recruit and only 150 to upkeep. That way, the AI will see it worth more to recruit a bunch of elites rather than spam a ton of peasants.

Also, do the AI recruit based on upkeep or on recruitment cost? Because if it's based solely on one, then just raise the other one to prevent AI abuse... though the same can't be said about the players.
.