I think a lot of the Spanish unique tech Supremacy is lost due to the fact that villagers don´t attack nor retaliate on their own. Recently I’ve been caught up on making custom civilizations with the civ builder, and I made a very fun villager civilization for fighting with vils, but is very hard to play because of the lack of options for fighting vils.
I suggest that when supremacy is researched, villagers get the same stances military units have: passive, stand ground, defensive and agressive, so that they could effectively be used in battle and/or defend themselves from raids.
They would be broken, esp. if you get sappers and use them as siege.
I don’t think so, they cost more food than infantry with supplies, and the 20 additional gold ain’t hard to get. Their creation time is not fast at all, and you can only make them in town centers, which cost almost double the wood military buildings cost plus a hundred stone, and take much longer to build, so massing them is much harder. So hard, that most people usually finish their matches before getting to one hundred vils. Also, you get the tech in Imperial, so they wont be facing feudal units, they’ll probably face paladins or fully upgraded arbalesters and things like that.
Hotkey clashes with build and stances could be a problem. I also think Supremacy is meant to protect from raids, and maybe attack, not just be a Flemish Revolution where they stay as vils.
But how can it protect them from raids if they don’t even retaliate? I understand your point on them betting beefer so me (the responsable of taking them into the buildings so they don’t die) have more time to react and for them to get to safety. But then again if I can’t choose between those two what’s the point on adding more attack? I don’t think it would be such a real game-changer buff in pvp as you guys say, and flemish militia are much more overpowered since they are like a 50-50 longsword-pike crossover.
It protects them from raids because they die slower, giving you a lot more time for army to arrive. If you choose, you can also fight back.
Yes this is a good idea. It results in better gameplay experience. If it makes the tech too good, just nerf it appropriately. People tend to get used to the way things are and excuse bad design to maintain something they’ve grown to like.
On the other hand, there’s about a 0.1% chance of it actually changing… it is probably coded in such a way that would make it quite difficult to change for such a minor improvement, and definitely not worth it (from a developer perspective) for the initial pushback it would get.
(Side note: I think it was meant to do exactly what Flemish Revolution does now, but when it didn’t turn out how they wanted it to, it made more sense to create a different version in a new civ as opposed to make changes to an old civ)
something that ive always found hilarious… you arent creative enough to imagine how to balance something
so instead you curb features in order to control balance?
are you in the same camp that thinks poor path finding is part of the skill gap?
poor vil pathing is a feature right?
Im not sure if this is doable from that technical point too villagers and military are 2 different classes.
The game fundamentally works by swapping villager types. What if a new variant was created to be swapped in after supremacy with attack stances?
That’s an interesting idea,but it might make villagers stop what they are doing and attack every enemy going near them would that trade off be useful?
You could automatically switch vills into the ‘attack type’ when they’re attacked and when they’re tasked to attack something.
I think it’d be worth it.
I don’t know, I’m just saying that’s how it could be done from a game mechanics perspective.
I think this is a good mechanic. I mean, why u need to be a pro to micro the vils? This also happened with the autoscout option. I wouldn’t mind if they nerfed it a bit but i feel that it would make the game more balanced for low elo players.
I think you could add the same stance options as military units once supremacy is researched, just make them default passive so they run when under attack, if you want them to fight back use defensive stance, and when attacking use agressive stance, just as simple. Scout cavalry starts with passive as default, so that’s not something that hasn’t been done. I don’t think it would be as op, if a villager gets raided by a hussar it’ll die even if it fights back, this just gives out a little more value from lost villagers.
People say this, but IMO if you can’t deal with units that perform below Castle Age infantry by mid-Imp, you deserve to lose, Sappers and BBT notwithstanding. Worst case scenario, Spanish Supremacy rush is a significantly worse version of Flemish Revolution.
Quite common indeed.
Not sure about that. Between new unit functionalities and stuff like scn editor triggers that allow you to mass change stance it shouldn’t be that hard. Only snag I foresee is with space for the stance UI; what with vills being fairly full with the two building sets. Then again, this could just be sidestepped by defaulting vills to defensive stance after the tech - they’ll attack units close by, but won’t chase down across long distances. And by tasking them into enemy territory they would perform aggressively even on defensive stance.
IMO that only makes sense from a convenience standpoint (which I get can be an important factor). It leaves the old civs in a place that seems incomplete, even if people are accustomed to it.
Not sure if you even need to do that. The only role of the “villager” per se is to fight (any other role and it becomes builder/forager, etc), although the building UI is still necessary.
Just as a side note. Spanish vils fought against napoleons armies with guerrilla warfare. As a matter of fact thats where the word guerrilla originates from.
Not really the medieval time period but still spanish vils were pretty badass in history
Just mentioning that for anyone who was like me wondering why spanish vils in particular would be deserving of this tech over vils from anywhere else