recall cost

[brakett]

I'm not shure if this is a good idea, but don't it make sense to base the price for recalling a unit on its xp / level?

Maybe something like this?
1. lvl unit cost + 5
2. lvl unit cost + 15
3. lvl unit cost + 30

The reason I bring this up is that after playing a few scenarios of Son of the Black Eye I endend up with four troll warriors (3 normal + Gruu) . At the start of a scenario I could use 60 gold and count on my trolls to crush its way trough the opposing army. (Sure I recruited / recalled some other units altso )

With a system like this I would have to pay more to get these extra experienced and powerful units, witch seems reasonable.

On the other hand, high level units are really cool and I like to have as many as possible in my army at all time


Another thing, it think loyal units should be cheaper to recall

[Dave]

Higher level units already have a substantial disadvantage with respect to cost in that they have a higher upkeep once they are recalled. I'm not sure this really needs to be made any worse than it already is. This would also weaken units like Marshals, since on scenarios where you don't have many units to be led, they would be both expensive and not so good at fighting.

Loyal units already have lower upkeep too. It could be considered making them cheaper to recall, but it seems they have enough advantages already. Also, making loyal units cheaper to recall would make loyal seem even more useless in multiplayer games.

David

[Integral]

While it would put a dent in my campaign strategy, I think that loyal units should be more expensive to recall, if anything.

Daniel

[brakett]

While it would put a dent in my campaign strategy, I think that loyal units should be more expensive to recall, if anything.

Why? I was thinking they would be easier (demanding less money) to convince to come back to your army.

I'm sorry but i miss your point...

[Neoriceisgood]

Hah, I'd like to see you go to Iraq for a few months; and go back there for less.

[brakett]

Hah, I'd like to see you go to Iraq for a few months; and go back there for less.

im talking about price of recall for loyal vs noloyal unit. Both of them has been in Iraq for a few months.

[Integral]

While it would put a dent in my campaign strategy, I think that loyal units should be more expensive to recall, if anything.

Why? I was thinking they would be easier (demanding less money) to convince to come back to your army.

I'm sorry but i miss your point...

Because loyal units are already much more valuable (money-wise) than other units. For instance, if you have a loyal level 3 unit on a long (say, 40-turn) scenario, you'll save 80 gold versus the equivalent non-loyal unit. If you have five or six, you're talking hundreds of gold pieces. While I like my "hordes of cheap loyal level 3 units" strategy, this is almost too powerful IMO, particularly since most of the other traits aren't nearly as significant.


I don't think that loyal units should cost more to recall, but I think there's a much better justification for doing that than for giving them even more financial advantages.

Daniel

[Dave]

Because loyal units are already much more valuable (money-wise) than other units. For instance, if you have a loyal level 3 unit on a long (say, 40-turn) scenario, you'll save 80 gold versus the equivalent non-loyal unit. If you have five or six, you're talking hundreds of gold pieces. While I like my "hordes of cheap loyal level 3 units" strategy, this is almost too powerful IMO, particularly since most of the other traits aren't nearly as significant.

However, do note that,

(1) you've gone to the effort of levelling-up all these loyal units, which have sacrificed another valuable trait in exchange for being loyal.
(2) you don't always save that much money, since upkeep only bites you once it is over the villages limit.

David

[Integral]

Because loyal units are already much more valuable (money-wise) than other units. For instance, if you have a loyal level 3 unit on a long (say, 40-turn) scenario, you'll save 80 gold versus the equivalent non-loyal unit. If you have five or six, you're talking hundreds of gold pieces. While I like my "hordes of cheap loyal level 3 units" strategy, this is almost too powerful IMO, particularly since most of the other traits aren't nearly as significant.

However, do note that,

(1) you've gone to the effort of levelling-up all these loyal units, which have sacrificed another valuable trait in exchange for being loyal.

That's true; this is a strategy that's difficult at the beginning of the game, in particular. It tends to get easier and easier to win as the game goes on, of course.

(2) you don't always save that much money, since upkeep only bites you once it is over the villages limit.

Well, you don't have negative income, but you don't have as much positive income either.

[EDIT] I just want to re-iterate that I don't think "loyal" units are excessively valuable now; I just think that they don't need to be made any more valuable. [/EDIT]

Daniel

[fmunoz]

I think that "recall value" is already talked some time ago... IMHO fixed amount as it's now is a good choice (KISS)

[Jetrel]

SO THAT'S WHAT LOYAL DOES...

(It would be nice to get that included in the tooltip. It's in the wiki now, but it wasn't last time I checked.)

[Privan]

You can read the site to learn what loyalty does, so don't complain about a tooltip.

Also, Dave, DON'T CHANGE THE RECALL RATES PLEASE! I know you're not likely too based on your responses here, but the upkeep kills me as it is. With two full waves of level 3 troops (10-12) I usually don't recieve any return from my villages until half-way through the map. I'm fighiing a war of attrition now, I can't possibly regain my fortune by using villages with my huge upkeep costs (I decided to raise units that had traits like quick, strong, etc... over units with intelligence, loyalty, etc... Stuff that helps out in supportive ways) so I'm typically in a race to beat the map with enough time left over to break even at the start of the next scenario.

P.S.
I'd still recommend getting more beneficial traits in combat over the support traits. It may be a pain later on, but a few of my units can just roll through enemy units due to traits like strong over traits like intelligence & loyalty.

Edit:
You'll truly realize the full potential when you're GrandKnight kills the enemy general at full health (in the middle of the night) in one turn saving you're hero who got burned in the last round and ultimately saving you from having to start over.

[Sangel]

And you'll realise the potential of Loyal when you have a full mob of (10-12) level three units who cost next to nothing to upkeep.

[Dave]

Okay I've added in better descriptions of 'loyal' and 'strong' in the tooltips. For loyal it says "Never more than 1 upkeep", if anyone else has a better way to say it, let me know

Btw, I have suggested before making 'loyal' decrease a unit's upkeep by 1 -- this would make level 1 units have an upkeep of 0, but would make the effect substantially decreased at level 3, since you'd still have to pay 2 upkeep.

Of course, a disadvantage of this would be that it would take away the 'delayed gratification' strategy of trying to level up mostly loyal troops. In fact, many people might use loyal troops as 'cannon fodder' -- "it's nice of you to serve me for free, but I really want people who have good traits to be the ones to level-up, you go ahead and charge at the enemy and die..."

Still, it'll make loyal actually useful in multiplayer, and make it not so powerful to have 10 loyal level 3 units. Thoughts?

David

[fmunoz]

Maybe ->"Half upkeep rounded down"
So you get 1st-> 0, 2nd ->1, 3rd->1, 4th-> 2