Putting the 'role' back in role-playing games since 2002.
Donate to Codex
Good Old Games
  • Welcome to rpgcodex.net, a site dedicated to discussing computer based role-playing games in a free and open fashion. We're less strict than other forums, but please refer to the rules.

    "This message is awaiting moderator approval": All new users must pass through our moderation queue before they will be able to post normally. Until your account has "passed" your posts will only be visible to yourself (and moderators) until they are approved. Give us a week to get around to approving / deleting / ignoring your mundane opinion on crap before hassling us about it. Once you have passed the moderation period (think of it as a test), you will be able to post normally, just like all the other retards.

Game News Total War: Attila Red Horse trailer + New Civil War mechanics

Whisky

The Solution
Joined
Feb 22, 2012
Messages
8,555
Location
Banjoville, British Columbia
Divinity: Original Sin Project: Eternity Torment: Tides of Numenera
Tags: Creative Assembly; Sega; Total War; Total War: Attila



A new trailer for Total War: Attila has been released. Aside from the trailer, there has been talk of a revamped Civil War system where rebellious commanders can convince your loyal generals to defect. In return, you can implement the Roman military policy of Decimation, where you kill 1/10 men in an army to ensure order and loyalty.
 

Spectacle

Arcane
Patron
Joined
May 25, 2006
Messages
8,363
Preorder to play as
VIKINGS!!!!!
(Ahistorical as fuck, but it's a Total War game so it's a lost cause in that regard anyway, and Vikings are awesome in any game)
 

Forest Dweller

Smoking Dicks
Joined
Oct 29, 2008
Messages
12,210
How will they add a meaningful cost to the decimation action?

I don't see how losing 10 percent of an army is a meaningful penalty. Ever since CA added the auto reinforcing system casualties are not that serious a problem. Losing half your army isn't a serious problem because you will be full strength in a few turns. Equally causing massive casualties to an enemy force isn't as meaningful because even if you kill 5k out of an enemy army's 10k, they will get 2-4k more troops after just one turn making those casualties you caused them mostly pointless(only destroying units or armies completely matters for that).

It was better when an reinforcing took up a recruitment slot(whether through retraining or merging units and sending newly trained reinforcements) and you had to have them in cities(or at least friendly territory). I understand their desire to get rid of some micromanagement, but the system they implemented just makes attrition largely a non issue since you will mostly recover in a turn or two, and even battles where you take massive losses only take 2-4 turns to recover from. I believe part of it was the choice to only have armies exist under generals so you can no longer send small independent stacks of reinforcements to replace losses.

In the old system losing a lot of men in a battle(even if you won) had consequences. Now those consequences are greatly reduced.
An analogous dread/chivalry system from Medieval would do the trick, with decimation leading to a severe increase in dread or whatever it's equivalent would be.
 
Last edited:

Norfleet

Moderator
Joined
Jun 3, 2005
Messages
12,250
I don't see how losing 10 percent of an army is a meaningful penalty. Ever since CA added the auto reinforcing system casualties are not that serious a problem.
I think that's sort of the point. Decimation was always a means of making an object lesson WITHOUT destroying the fighting strength of a unit. That's sort of what it's for.
 

oscar

Arcane
Joined
Aug 30, 2008
Messages
8,038
Location
NZ
Auto reinforcement isn't terrible of itself but it should definitely cost money.
 

Shannow

Waster of Time
Joined
Sep 15, 2006
Messages
6,386
Location
Finnegan's Wake
Auto reinforcement isn't terrible of itself but it should definitely cost money.
Yeah. I love the mechanic itself, but I hate the way they implement it.
Stuff like this should affect it:
Player province? Yes/No
Ally province? Yes/No
Food shortage? Yes/No
Army moving that turn? Yes/No
Inside a town? Yes/No
Quality of buildings in the province owned by player/allies
Army traditions
General traits
Recent wins/losses
Season
Quality of units
Setting fast/slow reinforcement has influence on income, like in CK2

All of that should affect reinforcement. And it should go from ~30% of max unit health per turn on average under optimal conditions to -10% per turn under worst conditions.

IMO
 

Shannow

Waster of Time
Joined
Sep 15, 2006
Messages
6,386
Location
Finnegan's Wake
"A lot"? Like 3-5 points? :roll:
And it ends up being much too fast in most cases. (When I last played it went from ~20% to 60%. Don't know where you got your numbers from.)
Bad implementation of (in theory) good mechanic is bad implementation. No mater how well intentioned the devs might have been.
 

34scell

Augur
Joined
Apr 6, 2014
Messages
384
In Rome 1 you could fully replenish multiple units in a single city in one turn. You just had to keep them in rotation.
 

34scell

Augur
Joined
Apr 6, 2014
Messages
384
I think your recalling how it works in Medival 2. Rome 1 recruitment is one unit per turn (with some units taking longer), but retraining costs 0 turns, so in one turn you can replenish half a stack in one city. And they retain their experience bonus.
 

As an Amazon Associate, rpgcodex.net earns from qualifying purchases.
Back
Top Bottom