Welcome

Please register for Total War Access to use the forums. If you're an existing user, your forum details will be merged with Total War Access if you register with the same email or username. For more information please read our FAQ’s here.

Categories

Let's Get Rid of Garrisons and the 3 Building Slot Meta

lordsoaplordsoap Registered Users Posts: 5
Keeping it short.

I think something that could make the game feel more unique from previous titles and focus more on city management - something basically all TW games seem to lack these days - is changing up the way we form defenses and garrisons in cities.

So if you want walls and extra troops in a city (minus ze Lady's people and my guys up in da norf) you play the level-up-this-city game, hit tier 2, get the garrison boost, and then play the level up game again and finally you have walls and a city with only 3 more building options left.

I feel like this really is a bad way to go about that. Offense/Defense is the name of the game in TW, buildings and managing them are mostly restricted to unlocking units, buffing towns, etc. So instead of "forcing" the walled settlement that renders most minor towns into 3 building slots, let's make defending cities something you can actively manage - or ignore - based on your needs.

I'm suggesting that the original garrison building be removed, as well as any units provided, and instead add a new UI which has the sole purpose of allowing you to choose what you'd like to recruit to "garrison" or build defenses for the city/village.

Let's say you are the Empire and you want to manage Altdorf's defenses. You pop up the Garrison UI. You can choose which units or heroes to recruit, build up your defenses, add towers, add cannons to the ramparts, even add additional layers to the cities defense (think Castles in Medieval II). You choose what the Garrison army consists of, how the defenses are prepared, and if you like you can even transfer units from your Army to serve in the Garrison. The Garrison force will level up from battles, training (which you'd pay for), etc and you could also choose to pull out any unit and add it to your own army.

Each unit recruited and every defense option chosen has a monetary cost which is deducted from the provinces tax and possibly other resources. Another point is cities or villages that are far from the front will likely be less manned than those that share borders with other factions, which in my opinion would make for some epic Skaven/Beastmen ambushes catching you unaware.

As a side note, I think this could also be a really great way to incorporate Resources into actual use and not just something you build for more Trade Money. For instance, you own the lumber resource - excellent! - whatever defense that requires Lumber is now cheaper since you won't have to import it.

This is WARHAMMER! Choosing your troops is key - so why is nearly every single 1 of my settlements defended by the same clone army? Let's make it so when you take losses to a Garrison that you actually feel the sting from losing a unit you've been training for X amount of turns, or that satisfaction when your custom Garrison army successfully defends against a much superior force.

TL;DR
Remove all garrison stuff, no more forced garrison building for walls/defense. New UI "button" to recruit your own custom garrison, build defenses, add artillery/firepower, even expand the map based on your choices. Garrison units level up just like any normal unit and can even be plucked and placed in your own army. No more clone garrisons. No more 3 building slots cuz muh walls.

Comments

  • Ol_NessieOl_Nessie Registered Users Posts: 4,303
    An idea I had awhile back was kinda similar. Essentially, the garrison building would still be cut but then garrison units would come from all of the other buildings in the settlement. Some, like recruitment buildings, might provide a few higher tier units while economic buildings would provide lower tier troops.

    Ancillary bonuses that the garrison building provides now could be parsed out to some of those other buildings and walls might be added by splitting the main settlement chain into a tree where you'd have a more martial focus on the one hand, which would add walls and such, and an economic focus on the other which would boost your economic buildings.

    This would result in more varied garrisons and would add another dimension to your decision making when you're trying to determine which buildings you put in each settlement.
    Build a Slayer Hero and make Miners, Rangers, and Irondrakes great again! Thorek Ironbrow 2020

  • KuntingWarriorKuntingWarrior Registered Users Posts: 937
    I like this, I am all for more options when it comes to defending sieges and garrison improvements. Some good ideas here.



  • SchwarzhelmSchwarzhelm Registered Users Posts: 1,431
    I can't see CA doing this but I really like your Idea.
    It would be awesome to customize your defence and bring more depth to the game.

    You would have to balance between money and security. If the settlement is on the frontline you would invest in the garrison and if not you want to make money. If suddenly Beastman appear and attack your weak settlements you will have to pay. :-D
    It would also make attacking settlements more fun because you would not have to fight the same troops all the time.

    The next step would be to give the attacker more options.^^

    The only thing I could see as a problem would be that the AI Doomstacks the garrison in a ridiculous way like 2 Heroes and the rest dragons... But CA could adjust the recruiting AI for that.
  • lordsoaplordsoap Registered Users Posts: 5
    edited October 7
    Ol_Nessie said:

    Ancillary bonuses that the garrison building provides now could be parsed out to some of those other buildings and walls might be added by splitting the main settlement chain into a tree where you'd have a more martial focus on the one hand, which would add walls and such, and an economic focus on the other which would boost your economic buildings.

    I like that idea as well, adding ancillary's for the actual city itself. Not like those don't end up accumulating in a pile later on as the campaign progresses.

    I like this, I am all for more options when it comes to defending sieges and garrison improvements. Some good ideas here.

    Exactly my feelings on it.

    I can't see CA doing this but I really like your Idea.
    It would be awesome to customize your defence and bring more depth to the game.

    Yeah I wish they would change up their Empire Management formula. It's very boring after a while.


    You would have to balance between money and security. If the settlement is on the frontline you would invest in the garrison and if not you want to make money. If suddenly Beastman appear and attack your weak settlements you will have to pay. :-D
    It would also make attacking settlements more fun because you would not have to fight the same troops all the time.

    The next step would be to give the attacker more options.^^

    The only thing I could see as a problem would be that the AI Doomstacks the garrison in a ridiculous way like 2 Heroes and the rest dragons... But CA could adjust the recruiting AI for that.

    Yes, exactly! Especially with the way you can just steam roll anything after a while, having to actually manage - or not! - certain key settlements while not having the funds to defend the interior as well could have some interesting gameplay changes in campaign.

    And absolutely more options for the attacker. Sieges could definitely use some love, and I would say that to counter doom stack issues could be done with increasingly higher rates of upkeep for special/rare units such as dragons, or even making them cause issues with the settlement like hurting Public Order, growth, etc - not sure I'd feel safe if the my city was being "guarded" by 20 giant, meat-eating, flying lizards, lol.
  • ERICdbsERICdbs Registered Users Posts: 431
    I like the idea of having a new window/panel where you manage your city's defenses. Upgrading walls and defensive structures, and choosing exactly which garrison you prefer, seems like it would empower the user in a meaningful way. After all, most battles are siege battles.

    Maybe we could go even further, and customize the city's layout based off of some predefined city sections. Let's say a city has more slots the higher level it is, and then you fill such slots with the available city districts as you see fit.
    Ol_Nessie said:

    An idea I had awhile back was kinda similar. Essentially, the garrison building would still be cut but then garrison units would come from all of the other buildings in the settlement. Some, like recruitment buildings, might provide a few higher tier units while economic buildings would provide lower tier troops.

    Ancillary bonuses that the garrison building provides now could be parsed out to some of those other buildings and walls might be added by splitting the main settlement chain into a tree where you'd have a more martial focus on the one hand, which would add walls and such, and an economic focus on the other which would boost your economic buildings.

    This would result in more varied garrisons and would add another dimension to your decision making when you're trying to determine which buildings you put in each settlement.

    Some mods already do that, and it's an ok way to make garrisons feel more unique. Investing in recruitment bonuses makes for stronger garrisons, which helps differentiating such regions from economic focused ones.

  • ArboschArbosch Junior Member Registered Users Posts: 10
    The sense behind garnisions was that they have a less complex AI to build. The problem is, that it make the game very simple when the AI not defend the towns or very passiv when they do it. What sound simple is really complex. If you remove the garnisions you have to replace it with a way smarter AI.
  • Ol_NessieOl_Nessie Registered Users Posts: 4,303
    ERICdbs said:

    I like the idea of having a new window/panel where you manage your city's defenses. Upgrading walls and defensive structures, and choosing exactly which garrison you prefer, seems like it would empower the user in a meaningful way. After all, most battles are siege battles.

    Maybe we could go even further, and customize the city's layout based off of some predefined city sections. Let's say a city has more slots the higher level it is, and then you fill such slots with the available city districts as you see fit.

    Ol_Nessie said:

    An idea I had awhile back was kinda similar. Essentially, the garrison building would still be cut but then garrison units would come from all of the other buildings in the settlement. Some, like recruitment buildings, might provide a few higher tier units while economic buildings would provide lower tier troops.

    Ancillary bonuses that the garrison building provides now could be parsed out to some of those other buildings and walls might be added by splitting the main settlement chain into a tree where you'd have a more martial focus on the one hand, which would add walls and such, and an economic focus on the other which would boost your economic buildings.

    This would result in more varied garrisons and would add another dimension to your decision making when you're trying to determine which buildings you put in each settlement.

    Some mods already do that, and it's an ok way to make garrisons feel more unique. Investing in recruitment bonuses makes for stronger garrisons, which helps differentiating such regions from economic focused ones.

    Could you link a few? I'd like to check them out.
    Build a Slayer Hero and make Miners, Rangers, and Irondrakes great again! Thorek Ironbrow 2020

  • SultschiemSultschiem Registered Users Posts: 2,475
    Individual recruitment of garisson: no.... its not that fun.
    Having the garisson depend on buildings inside? Sure, SFO does that and its really nice.

    The only exceptions could be capitals, that they are bound to the main building chain for balance purposes (to always make them a challenge).
  • Ol_NessieOl_Nessie Registered Users Posts: 4,303

    Individual recruitment of garisson: no.... its not that fun.
    Having the garisson depend on buildings inside? Sure, SFO does that and its really nice.

    The only exceptions could be capitals, that they are bound to the main building chain for balance purposes (to always make them a challenge).

    Those capitals being 10 slot cities and thus providing an additional 2 buildings worth of garrison units would still make those garrisons more of a challenge than normal province capitals though.
    Build a Slayer Hero and make Miners, Rangers, and Irondrakes great again! Thorek Ironbrow 2020

  • BlacksphemyBlacksphemy Registered Users Posts: 436
    Lots of good ideas OP and ol nessie! I don't know how much time I want to spend managing each and every cities defense unit by unit but lots of good ideas worth play testing to me.

    I've always wished we had a preattack map showing north south east and west of the city in 2D that would let you decide where to station troops and towers generally. Then if the attacker picked another wall, some of your towers or seige defenses would not have a chance to help, and your troops from the other walls would have to trickle in as reinforcements.

    Attackers would position their seige equipment on the map too which would be visible to the defender and either use them properly or use them as distractions to decoy the defenders troop placement.

    Different races could have special variations like skaven warp grinders not showing up on pre-game map, dwarf seige units being "hidden" underground unit battle start, Brettonia getting extra towers, fortresses only having 1 or 2 possible walls to defend letting you consolidate your defenses to one wall.

    Agents could also have a use in scouting out your opponent now too
  • Pr4vdaPr4vda Senior Member Registered Users Posts: 1,176
    Great ideas here. I would love a more in depth towns management too.

    What I do not like right now is that 99% of the time, you build the garrison building to get access to walls, and then, you're too limited with only 2 other buildings choice.

    Imo every town should be able to grow to level 5 and maybe get more building slots. And more specific buildings depending on the race and the region or ressource.

    Also, I think the non capital cities should not be able to get access to walls (or at a high cost and investment). However, depending on the race, you could get something in between : take the empire for instance. You could get a fortified tower protecting a village with the possibility to garrison a unit inside, and get a cannon shooting at 360° range. Some barricades could be deployable at the start of a game.

    For the dwarfs, a fortified mine or beer crafting village, with chocke points, some cannons, etc.
    Team Dawis

    Dawis shall purge all their fallen Karaks, with the blood of the Greeskins and the skavens !
  • Giveaway412Giveaway412 Registered Users Posts: 463
    These ideas are all fantastic. I love what OP suggests but I think it's more likely they'd go with @Ol_Nessie 's suggestion, seems like less work load and as others have said they wouldn't have to fool around with the AI as much.

    Also love what @Pr4vda says, I hope that the final battle of W&P was only a preview of what's to come, with every faction eventually getting unique defensive siege mechanics.
  • RomeoRejectRomeoReject Registered Users Posts: 1,561
    I don't want to see CA do this (Personally), but good news for you is, there's a mod that does exactly what you're looking for:
    https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=2111089058
  • lordsoaplordsoap Registered Users Posts: 5
    What I think could be done for the AI side of things is just creating a template for the AI to go off, just like how they set priority for how the AI builds buildings.

    Also, I realize this seems like it could add more complexity, longer turns, and maybe just another system that eventually you just get tired of managing, so I think an auto-garrison option should be included (like if this would ever happen XD), allowing you to set garrison recruitment/defenses on a low, medium, high priority that auto-manages itself.

    As far as buildings giving units, I personally would prefer that but my intention is to get rid of the need to have the garrison building in general. It creates the 3 building slot meta because 1 slot most likely will be used for the garrison building just for the walls.
  • Ol_NessieOl_Nessie Registered Users Posts: 4,303
    lordsoap said:

    As far as buildings giving units, I personally would prefer that but my intention is to get rid of the need to have the garrison building in general. It creates the 3 building slot meta because 1 slot most likely will be used for the garrison building just for the walls.

    Well that's the advantage of my idea. It scraps the garrison buildings altogether so you have an additional slot. BTW, here's the thread I made for it. https://forums.totalwar.com/discussion/262412/garrison-system-re-imagined-though-more-likely-a-mod-idea
    Build a Slayer Hero and make Miners, Rangers, and Irondrakes great again! Thorek Ironbrow 2020

  • CaesarSahlertzCaesarSahlertz Registered Users Posts: 3,273
    I was unaware that we were forced to build the garrison buildings..
  • lordsoaplordsoap Registered Users Posts: 5

    I was unaware that we were forced to build the garrison buildings..

    You might as well be unless you enjoy having to back cap unprotected T3 settlements with a measly 7 units. I usually prefer not shoot myself in the foot if I can help it.
Sign In or Register to comment.