seanw3 seanw3

City Defense

City Defense

Preventing the Rush

City Defense

Preventing the Rush



I have been testing out some of the core strategic elements and one particular aspect still receives a low mark. City defense is just not up to where it should be. It feels too much like token resistance and not enough like people defending their territory. On an immersion level poor city defense battles leave cities without character. There is no struggle to defend a city or capture one. They just feel like stepping stones, even in the earliest portions of gameplay. From a game balance or strategic perspective, city defense is simply not a factor. At no point have I ever questioned whether or not I can take a city. I only ever question what to do with it after I reach it. In fact, I would be so bold to say that never have I ever lost a city battle at any point in the game, unless I was defending.

In my latest .983 playthrough, my good Lady Irane walked over to the nearest city, declared war, attacked the same turn, easily defeated an archer and clubsman from a level 2 city and had a late breakfast. It was not just easy, it was sad. This is supposed to be the capital of Resoln and yet it fought like a retarded duckling. From a balance perspective, the early game needs to prevent the rush. Rushing should be a viable tactic, but it should take an actual early game army, not a level 1 Sov with a crude shortbow and some wild gumption. I didn't kite or use spells, I just hit them first and never missed. They were slow and easy to kill. This can't be aloud early in the game. The player should not have to stack his cities with wage taking troops to prevent the rush. It almost goes without saying that each faction should be protected until the midgame to a reasonable extent. Allowing rushing earlier than that needs to take up a nations entire build queue and force some losses in economy. That is the only way taking over a new city can be anything less than a game ending victory.

I think a good way to balance this is to set a time in the game where capturing cities makes sense. On season 25 with one level 1 unit, is not it. I would say around turn 100 with at least 4 units is a good starting point for capturing a level 1 city. The next step is to make sure that with no special buildings, this attack provides some semblance of a challenge. Since the early game has no armor and only clubs, it makes sense to have alot of units of reasonable level protecting cities. If the enemy has 4, the defender needs at least 5; 2 archers and 3 melee of level 3. Even this as a starting point for city defense, is fairly easy for attackers to overcome. But at least one low level unit could never manage it and you have to admit that the reward of taking a city far and away constitutes a staunch challenge.

That would just be a level 1 city. Level 2 is where things should get interesting. I added in a special way for each city to defend in my latest mod and it did add some really nice flavor to city defense. I don't think that is something likely for the devs to choose, but even so, there are ways to make city specialization affect defense. Basically it seems that Fortress is set to be the only defender city. If that is the goal, fine. Make sure though that even choosing a Fortress adds defenders of decent level. Building a Fort and then a Castle should make a city nigh impenetrable. The labor costs are so high, choosing them needs to feel more significant and really protect a city from all but the most deadly attacks. I even took to giving these defenders set armor, traits, and items to make sure they held their own regardless of tech level. Having defender knights on call is a great way to protect from most armies.

After the midgame mark, we need a clear focus in siege specialization. If I want to build a force capable of taking down multiple cities, that needs to cost me something. I should need at least the Catapult tech. I should need to have good armor to take on the superior numbers of a city. I should need magics like Fireball and Blizzard. These things must be the necessities of siege. Choosing them should have a specifically different feeling than a player who focuses on defending territory with fast troops or the guerrilla fighter, who simply uses light infantry to attack weak points. Fleshing these things out is easy. You just play test each strategy and add some costs and benefits to each type. 

43,109 views 67 replies
Reply #26 Top

Quoting Poko8, reply 25
I had made a post on this a while back, my idea was that buildings add something to the defense of the town. Something like:

I like your ideas because it would make a really flavourful city defense mechanic :)

Sincerely
~ Kongdej

Reply #27 Top

Quoting JMiddleton, reply 26
though I like the idea of allowing the defeated faction to choose who they surrender to - as in GalCiv II - that can really shake up the balance of power

I did not play galactiv civ alot, but I remember in Moo2 when you had conquered 70% of a civilization, they would usually surrender... To someone else!

This really helped alleviate steamrolling, since you got your fair share of new colonies, but some random opponent also got beefed up just a tiny bit.

Sincerely
~ Kongdej

Reply #28 Top

Quoting Kongdej, reply 26
I like your ideas because it would make a really flavourful city defense mechanic

My mod ran with that idea and it is alot of fun. The only thing is that adding defense into some already powerful economic buildings makes them too good. Generally a new upgrade line of defense based on city type is a good way to go.

Reply #29 Top

Quoting seanw3, reply 28
The only thing is that adding defense into some already powerful economic buildings makes them too good.

I figured that would happen, but that was not the part I liked ^_^.

Quoting seanw3, reply 28
Generally a new upgrade line of defense based on city type is a good way to go.

Probably right, either that or just have some special stages off the other buildings work well, so the building adding defense gives little bonus otherhow.

Say its "Merchant +2 gildar"
"Market +3 gildar, +1 defensive mercenary"
"very very big market +6 gildar, +1 defensive mercenary"
So the building that gives the defense gives only a slight bonus to the focus of the upgrade line.
The reason I suggest this is I usually ignore defense buildings, because right now they are totally useless, until you stacked them all up AND is keeping units for garrison.

Sincerely
~ Kongdej

Reply #30 Top

As a baby step I modded in leather armor on city militia. Testing it now, looks promising for early game rush and monster defense.

Reply #31 Top

I am totally open to any improvement. I have had a few good conversations with the devs about this over the betas, but I think now that the game is settling into a permanent balance, the issue remains and needs to be addressed before release. However they want to do it. And I'll even let up about it right now since they probably just got out of the Monday morning meeting and have a ton of stuff to do. Let's hope we hear from them today though!  ^_^

Reply #32 Top

My personal opinion on this is that total Militia should be based upon city level, which it may be already but I have not checked.  After this you should be able to through tech upgrade the base equipment to be about half or tech -2 level of armor.  So research Leather they wear nothing, then research chain still nothing, research plat they upgrade to leather or even a half upgrade. So the best Militia member would be able to wear as "free" troops would be chain thereabout.

Reply #33 Top

A question to the modders out there.

Which of these are possible with the current engine?

1. Modifying the equipment of militia units depending on available techs (i.e. Civ got leather, so does militia)

2. Modifying the equipment of militia units depending on city level/type (i.e. The fortress got spears to spare)

3. Modifying the equipment of militia units depending on buildings (i.e. The merchants gave the watch some shields)

4. Modifying the equipment of militia units depending on quests (i.e. Lizbeth the Light found a cash of braided belts)

5. Modifying the equipment of militia units depending on garrisoned heroes (i.e. Naressa crafted some Ignys shortbows)

In case it's still unclear to anyone, I see nothing wrong with militia being able to fend off an ogre or two on their own.

 

 

Reply #34 Top

@Tuidgy - I know #1 is possible. I'll defer to our 2 resident jedi masters for the others. :digichet:

Reply #35 Top

Really only 1 is possible. The other could be done by adding a specific unit to city defense with the desired equipment and traits.

Reply #36 Top

lot's of good suggestions here.

Reply #37 Top

Is it possible to create / addto a tech so that a new building can be built onto an existing city like an Armory.  First level armory would upgrade City Defenders to Leather and so on?

Reply #38 Top

Ya, you can do that. You can add something like the Castle improvement and make a tech require it. 

Reply #39 Top

Sounds like a really good idea to add to the game.  If not something that will likely be modded in very quickly.

Reply #40 Top

Quoting parrottmath, reply 17

I think maybe adding a special skill / spell to the city archer militia to be town volley. Where the town fires a volley of arrows that hits every opposing unit in the stack. Have a cool down of 1 or 2 turns for balance. Also, I don't know if the city bonus to defense is working appropriately right now. I notice if I auto resolve some attacks I have a great chance of winning (or losing troops), but if I tatically fight the battle there is no contest. Something is fishy with the tatical battle.

 

That there is a cool idea.  Seriously!  And pretty easy to implement I would think.  The arrows in the last builds would come from the side of the map anyway.  Why not have a Town Archer Volley that comes from the town.  I mean, the poor militia have open ability slots.  Make use of them.  An arrow volley at lvl 1, A catapult shot added at lvl 2, then a Flaming Catapult shot at lvl 3 and on and on.  At lvl 3 you have 3 "spells" that the town can use in case no champs are available.  All are on cool down timers to different extents.  That would be a good start.

The arrows shoot at everyone, and the catapult has a random target tile(maybe even an empty one).

 

Is that possible to mod sean?

Reply #41 Top


These are all good ideas in this thread , I really hope atleast one of them makes it into the game. 

Reply #42 Top

Quoting mfrast, reply 41
Is that possible to mod sean?

I'm not sean, but it is possible to give traits to these units, and it is possible to make spells. Not sure about making the graphics look right, but this is doable at least.

Reply #43 Top

I have this current mechanic for level 5 Fortresses where they fire a volley of arrows at the beginning of a battle. I use the auto-cast function like Pariden blood does. Fires a ranged attack that will do light damage. It's a nice addition to city defense and requires no special units or things that the AI might not be able to use. Of course, I also added some mage towers that cast a spell on a city at the beginning of combat and we have some vanilla enchantments that do this too. I would frame any idea like this to use the auto-cast function to make sure the AI uses it and its power can be tightly balanced. 

Reply #44 Top

nice idea

but i still think 1 of the main role of fortress has to be giving troops and eventually towers/bonuses to OTHER cities, way lower than the bonuses to his own defense ofc but they should improve others first of all

there is too much difference and its too easy for a player move the army to the right place while its way harder for ai

 

maybe some lvl 5 bonus could be a strategic attack similar to civ 5 cities, so its harder to go around fortresses and attack low def cities

Reply #45 Top


While I don't want cities to be an easy pushover, you have to be careful about making them too autonomous. The last time we had this discussion, my stance was that there is already too little impetus to build your own troops in this game, and cities with strong self-defense will only further deflate the need to build troops. I haven't seen anything to massively change that paradigm in the last few betas and I stand by it. Sure, I think a city shouldn't be able to be knocked over by a lone sov on turn 15, but they shouldn't be self defending against troll armies on turn 120 either.

Reply #46 Top

I do not know if this is possible i do not do any modding but how about just make taking over a city trigger three tactical battles. First battle for the walls second battle for the courtyard third for the keep that must be run right in a row and if you do not make it through any part of the 3 you fail at taking the city. The defending city would only have the troops in the first two battles that you research through a tech items but the last battle would be with any troops that the defender either had in place or could rush to the city before the battle/siege started.

Reply #47 Top

Quoting Darksomen, reply 47
I do not know if this is possible i do not do any modding but how about just make taking over a city trigger three tactical battles. First battle for the walls second battle for the courtyard third for the keep that must be run right in a row and if you do not make it through any part of the 3 you fail at taking the city. The defending city would only have the troops in the first two battles that you research through a tech items but the last battle would be with any troops that the defender either had in place or could rush to the city before the battle/siege started.

 

this is very complicated imo but i like it

i dont think its moddable for now though

Reply #48 Top

 

Quoting Wizard1200, reply 14



Quoting Tuidjy,
reply 13
It will not work. Until city defense is equipped with at least the second best gear available to the nation, it will be irrelevant.

Rushing a side should not work.  And the AI is terrible at using low end units.  Even at ridiculous, it is not until turns 60-70 that the AI has a prayer of stopping a well crafted fighting sovereign.  A prayer, not an actually chance, mind you.  That never really happens (at least not in .982)


That is the reason why i suggested a catapult as a city defender. It has a range attack with a radius of 1 tile and it is already possible to add a catapult to the city defenses. The city defense should work like this:

Level 1 - 2 city: 1 crude catapult (lower defense, lower attack)

Level 3 - 4 city: 1 catapult (standard defense, standard attack)

Level 5 city: 1 ironwood catapult (higher defense, higher attack)

Hedge Wall / Wooden Wall: + 5 initiative for defending units

Castle / Fort: + 5 attack for defending units

Watchtower: + 10 accuracy for defending units

It's the reason why I suggested a city guardian. And they have one now within the statue! Sadly, I've never seen it in operation yet...so I can't comment as to it's balance. X(

Reply #49 Top

Quoting GFireflyE, reply 49
 

It's the reason why I suggested a city guardian. And they have one now within the statue! Sadly, I've never seen it in operation yet...so I can't comment as to it's balance.

It is very very poor. I would not for a second hesitate or change the way I made my sov/army composistion knowing it was there. They should atleast lose the first level statue and make them all guardian idols. Atlest the AI could cast spells each battle.

Quoting CogBurn, reply 46

While I don't want cities to be an easy pushover, you have to be careful about making them too autonomous. The last time we had this discussion, my stance was that there is already too little impetus to build your own troops in this game, and cities with strong self-defense will only further deflate the need to build troops. I haven't seen anything to massively change that paradigm in the last few betas and I stand by it. Sure, I think a city shouldn't be able to be knocked over by a lone sov on turn 15, but they shouldn't be self defending against troll armies on turn 120 either.

I see what you are saying but I must disagree. The reason why there is few troops is that Hero are so much better at every occasion. You cant solve that problem by making cities weak, in fact I argue you exacerbate it. Want better defence for

A. I hate monsters killing my cities early to mid game. It feels weak that a few spiders/wolves/bears can kill my city. It frustrates me and even if I try and put a troop or two in a city it usually dies anyway, no real difference, but a big cost.

Current Answer: Rely on heros to clear area. Too bad so sad if you say, made them govenor or otherwise tried to mix up your playstyle.

B. I hate wondering super monsters - Dragons, Hoarderspiders, etc Taking out my city at any time. Troops will not stop these without huge investment if at all. This I think is a monster rules/AI issue, not a city defence issue

Current Answer: Do your best with your heros to stop them. Or better yet, get attacking the much easier to kill AI and make sure you have plenty of cities to spare!!!!

C. Steamrolling AI. AI for whatever reason often has little city defence/junk. I go from city to city (often within a turn or two) with my heros taking out his cities.

Current ANswer: None, use willpower  to not crunch AI

In all three cases the answer is never build more troops dont use heros. Its get your heros going as early as possible.

Giving cities a massive boost that the AI cant take away or mismange and doesnt require huge changes to the game is the goal. If done right it would make it necessary to perhaps atleast REST between city assaults, ideally, even having to gett some troops to help out my heros.

So I dont see extra city defence in any way encourages heros.

 

Reply #50 Top

I have mixed feelings about the sentiments of this thread.

Having good support troops (militia) can help turn the tide of a battle, but they shouldn't be able to save your butt if you decide to not properly defend your cities with trained troops or heroes. Making the militia too powerful would make the game bland, imo.

I personally feel like the current implementation is good enough and pretty well balanced for my tastes, but if the devs feel that some balance needs to be done, then I'm all for trying it out.