Garrisoning settlements in the SSHIP - ideas
This thread should deal with the issue of garrisons and would provide some thoughts for modding the buildings (to give or not to give free upkeep), the units (to give or not to give attributes „free_upkeep” and „is_peasant”), the prices of units (e.g. how expensive mercenaries should be), the rosters of the factions (what kind of units should be there and with what attributes).
By a „garrison” I mean units permanently stationing permanently in a city for some reason. This does not include either a general (he might be there for governing the city or educating himself or any other reason) or the troops gathering for an action in the field.
Technicalities:
- „free_upkeep”: if a unit with „free_upkeep” attribute stays in a settlement with a building providing the „free_upkeep”, the faction doesn’t pay upkeep. The number of such units may be higher than 1 – if the building is modded to has more „free_upkeep” slots, or there’re more buildings with such attribute.
- the effect how much unrest do the military units lower in a settlement is counted on the basis of the number of soldiers in a unit only,
- „is_peasant” attribute of a unit – the only effect of this attribute is that only half of the strength of this unit plays a role in negating the unrest.
Currently in the SSHIP:
- there’s no free upkeep (and Lifthrasir frequently argued against).
- some units have „is_peasant” attribute, but it has been applied rather erratically (and I have an impression that people equated the attribute with the understanding that it’s really a peasant while I understand it as a pure mechanical thing: how does it impacts the unrest).
- there’re peasant units (Peasants, Peasant Archers) which - I assume – will be eliminated in the next mod version. This will mean that the lowest tire of units will consist of Militias (like Spear Militia or Axe Militia or Crossbow Militia).
I can see three roles of the garrisons:
1) to prevent unrest in a settlement.
2) to defend a settlement if enemy attacks.
3) to serve as a reserve in case of a need.
Historicity:
a) it was very historical for every settlement to have a garrison (for those 3 reasons).
b) the garrisons were mixed: some militia would be accompanied by one or a few high-tire (even elite) units, and also some cavalry; sometimes also mercenaries performed this role.
c) units differed in their abilities to keep the order in the settlements: more professional were often much more effective than simple levies. However, one cannot equate battle professionalism of the troops with their abilities to keep the order. In some factions, there’re units more able to keep the orders but less able at the battle. In some other factions, we may think of these units as „standing army” – permanent troops able to fight wars.
d) not all lower-tire units were equal in ability to ensure public order in the settlements. Think of the Woodsmen unit in Poland: it would be unwise to keep guys from the woods to keep order among townsfolk. The result would be rather the opposite: angry citizens.
Game mechanics:
- the SSHIP ensures there’re garrisons through the public order mechanics: high unrest forces the player to keep many units in a settlement even paying their upkeep. This might be very high numbers - up to 19 units + the general. However, the player is still unlikely to keep high-tire units: it's too expensive and there're no incentives to do so. Of course, forget cavalry beside the genera’s companions.
- with the free_upkeep mechanics (present in the other mods) the player has a certains advantage over the AI. Knowing that the upkeep costs money he minimalizes the garrisons (even to 0 units) and is unlikely to keep high-tire units. At the same time the AI doesn’t discriminate between cheap and good troops as garrisons.
So, what can be done to match historicity and mechanics?
My idea would be:
- give a few free_upkeep slots to some buildings - very few, perhaps less than in the EBII; for instance, I’m thinking about 1 in a city, 2 in large city and 3 in a huge city; or 1 in a wooden castle, 2 in a castle, 3 in a fortress, 4 in a citadel)
- give free_upkeep attribute to the chosen better units - but not militia! They would be kept as garrisons on top of those better units – for the unrest reasons. And would be paid. (for this change one would need to go through all factions and choose the units - laborious and requering knowledge of all rosters, but can be done in stages). One may also consider the mercenaries in some instances.
- apply the „is_peasant” attribute to low-tire unit perceived to fulfill garrisoning in an inferior way;
- live with the fact that the AI won’t be able to handle that very efficiently. But this is a mechanics for the player to achieve historical feeling. The AI can be compensated in a different way, this is not going to be lots of money anyway.
The in-game result: the players garrisons will consist of very few better units (only those perceived fit for the garrisoning) and additional militias according the public unrest needs. Less strange units garrisoning the cities.
If automatic garrisons would ever be implemented, one needs to take attention to the potential rout bug CTD.
Edits - additional info gathered in this thread:
(Alavaria): very first soldier makes the difference between having the "No Garrison" penalty or not - perhaps 15% Public order.
Reply With Quote
Re: Garrisoning settlements in the SSHIP - ideas
Originally Posted by Lifthrasir
This was an Alavaria game, not a history game 
