Ideas to improve Garrisons - Custom Garrisons

Vanilla_Gorilla · January 11

Good morning one and all, I hope y'all are having a ball.

I'd like to have a discussion around Garrisons and how they can be improved. Right now they're pretty okay (within how the game works) but they can like all things (except the Mattock) be improved. Discussion of the ideas presented here are welcome, as are presentations of ideas, all opinions are welcome, just be civil yo.

I'd also like to see the player be able to choose their own Garrison. It'd be very simple; you get a set amount of funds to purchase units and you purchase them with limit being that the max tier of unit is the same tier as the city. It'd make me actually get involved in my cities and it'd allow for clever players to maximize the value of their garrisons by catering them to counter the enemies of that region.

This is roughly along the same lines, but if we can't customize them then I'd like this;
Make all garrisons roughly equal value. Compare Brettonia's top garrison to say the Dark Elves. the DE have far more expensive garrisons. The fix is easy; have a set value for Garrisons which is roughly stuck to. I say roughly because it's hard to be exact due to the nature of things and because values will change with balance passes, but within a couple hundred points.

Custom Garrisons would be awesome. It'd be a neat way to make individual settlements feel important as you decide who it's most likely to face and what the best lineup to face those opponents is.

Rikis · January 11

Custom garrisons would be great. Older TW games you had to make your garrisons. Well, basically they didn't have any, you had to guard it with armies but back then armies didn't need a general either.

Ephraim_Dalton · January 11

There's no point to restricted custom garissons when the doomstacking issue isn't solved at the same time. As long as the game pushes you towards doomstacking, garrisons are only very minor obstacles.

Itharus · January 11

Huh. Deja vu.

So... here I go again.

I miss the garrisons from older TW where you just hired units and left them in the city at a drastically reduced upkeep. I don't know why they ever got rid of that. This is basically how you "garrison" a black ark.

kgmi · January 11

Ephraim_Dalton said:
There's no point to restricted custom garissons when the doomstacking issue isn't solved at the same time. As long as the game pushes you towards doomstacking, garrisons are only very minor obstacles.

SFO2 has that option, it asks you at the start of the campaign about your preferred rules. I am with you though, about the "but what about sandbox" thing, they need to be some rules for vanilla, or else it just degenerates into mindless elite spam and tedious map painting. The reason why most people in TW and EU4 just quit their campaigns and rarely finish them, because tedium doesn't equal challenge.

More options for settlement fortifications would be nice. Investing into top tier garrisons for strategic positions would be sweet, I am tired of investing into garrison, which never stand a chance against any late game army anyway.
Like Itharus said, in Shogun 2 you could recruit units without a lord, allowing you the freedom to strengthen key locations the way you need. I dont want to recruit entire lords everytime I want to defend a region.

HorseWithNoName · January 11

I think it would be best if the TW series would adopt a hybrid system. Every settlement gets a basic militia as garrison but it is possible to upgrade the garrison by adding (higher tier) specialized military units to it. Depending on how the rest of the game works in terms of unit recruitment/mangement, those could be added by:

-just bulding military buildings in the settlement, probably with extra upkeep
-delegating those units from other settlements, extra upkeep depending on distance from origin settlement
-just by building special defensive structures/technologies (this I would like the least)

Boombastek91 · January 12

Garrisons don’t need to change.

Vanilla_Gorilla · January 12

Boombastek91 said:
Garrisons don’t need to change.

Why not? And are you saying there's no room for improvement or simply no need?

kgmi · January 12

My guess is, he wants to say that he doesn't want to fight a manual siege battle everytime, to win a minor settlement, which I'd agree with. But Garrison really do need improvements, but good improvements.

Schwarzhelm · January 12

I like the idea of choosing your own garrison quiet a lot.

You have to pay higher upkeep for better units so you can manage your defence according to the threads in the regions.

Of course, it would be great if they update the sieges as well. I don't hate them right now but I think they should be done more dynamic.

Michael4537 · January 12

Schwarzhelm said:

I like the idea of choosing your own garrison quiet a lot.

You have to pay higher upkeep for better units so you can manage your defence according to the threads in the regions.

Of course, it would be great if they update the sieges as well. I don't hate them right now but I think they should be done more dynamic.

Garrisons definitely need some work. The whole campaign aspect of Warhammer in general is pretty shallow.

Vanilla_Gorilla · January 12

Schwarzhelm said:
I like the idea of choosing your own garrison quiet a lot.

You have to pay higher upkeep for better units so you can manage your defence according to the threads in the regions.

Of course, it would be great if they update the sieges as well. I don't hate them right now but I think they should be done more dynamic.

Sieges as a whole could certainly use an update. I just really like the idea of customising your Garrison for the foes you face.

FYI Y'all, any discussion general Garrison / Siege idea is fine here. I'd consider that all in topic as long as it revolves around Garrisons.

Lucifer · January 12

Some extra buildings that give bonus's to defence and leadership while increasing garrison size with some later game units would help somewhat. Though, there are counters already in place to these so called doom-stacks. These are in the form of your provincial capital and its fort which is formidable at later levels with a well built army. The other mechanics in place are the lightning strike and ambush which effectively end multiple armies, which you can also weaken considerably with agents. Not to mention the building that increases attrition to enemy armies within the region. There are plenty of counters already in place. Maybe some here are not fully using them.

There's also many mods that cover these core ideas that are largely suggested. Personally, I have no problems late game by which time I have good armies, and I have good defences already built along with well trained agents. By late game, I find myself looking for mods that increase threats to my empire, rather than making it easier for me to defend it. More invasions, beastmen and harder chaos for example.

Canuovea · January 12

I think it might be nice to have level five troop buildings grant a unit to the garrison. Not necessary by any means, but could be neat. Shake things up.

Tennisgolfboll · January 12

The fact garrisons are so uneven is my main gripe with garrisons.

I also think that we should get more choie between larger garrisons or economy for minor settlements

daelin4 · January 12

Being able to choose what units is a good idea.
I can see it where regular garrisons exists as usual, but depending on factors like the tier of the settlement and/or province ownership, additional slots per settlement are made available to bulk them up. This way, a province capital with defense structure can have its remaining slots be filled with whatever units you consider desirable; the initial garrison units can be transferred to regular armies, but since they are level zero basic units this is usually not someting players would bother doing, plus it is only allowed once, so it is not some infinite supply of free noob troops.

The drawbacks are simple, they do not get typical army buffs the way they would under a Legendary Lord, so even if you manage to pump a settlement full of level 9 Ironbreakers they lack the bonuses from Red and Blue skills, so no additional leadership, or other things like replenishment or upkeep bonuses- you want all your settlements to have elite units fine, but the upkeep would be tremendous, so only the most strategic places get them, like troublesome spots like Sylvania, or magnets for Chaos doomstack spawns like Bjornlings Landing.

Accessibility can also be limited to local and global training, so not only do you require a Lord to actually provide additional garrison units to a settlement, but you'd need the requisite buildings to produce locally- just like raising an army- and while garrisons can train units from the Global recruitment this also has the penalty of double cost, time and hogging recruitment slots.

Boombastek91 · January 12

Vanilla_Gorilla said:

Boombastek91 said:
Garrisons don’t need to change.
Why not? And are you saying there's no room for improvement or simply no need?

Cos there ppl said for upkeep recruit units to add to garrison. And than what? You just delete them for no reason upkeep. You defended now okay i dont need more in them. That a trash.

Bretonia garrison had grail knight.
Grail knight as garrison are you serious? Plus you had a tons cava unit in garrison. From starting of siege defend you just rush cava outside gate and cycle charge enemy army while tower killing everything. Bretonia garrison not weaker than others, it AI problem, not garrison need to be changed.

All other race can moving Halberds units outside of gate (open it but not let enemy focus attack unit) behind Halberds move 2-3 archers in very narrow position. And you can hold 5-6 units with only 3. And never place archers on walls, only on gates, cos enemy infantry mostly climb on walls and would be stack in melee.
And if you had cava unit as garrison you can defend even vs doom stack.

Why change garrison? There no reason

chirishman343 · January 12

Since i started with TW Shogun 2, i'll say that i liked that system the best. use soldiers without a general, and have a garrison based on the city level. garrison structures adding troops is cool too, but i liked just putting w.e. troops i felt were necessary in the cities by myself.

EliacTheEmeraldTeeth · January 12

*laughs in Tomb Kings and free units*

Vanilla_Gorilla · January 12

Canuovea said:
I think it might be nice to have level five troop buildings grant a unit to the garrison. Not necessary by any means, but could be neat. Shake things up.

Some do as is. Problem is how often it exceeds the 20 cap. That would be much more useful if I could make my Garrison more elite and less numerous to fit them in.

And thank you.

johnheart · January 12

I highly doubt it woul change. Right now, the only reason for garrison is to delay the attacking army because of the wall for minor settlement until your effective army comes to relief it. Plus the whole always needing a general mechanic prevents it anyways and it doesn’t look like the engine itself is capable of it.

I do miss being reward a general though. To get a message saying one of your brave soldier or captain rally the army to defeat the enemy was so satisfying... I hope it returns to three kingdom but I always have my doubts.

jgmaster · January 12

Itharus said:
Huh. Deja vu.

So... here I go again.

I miss the garrisons from older TW where you just hired units and left them in the city at a drastically reduced upkeep. I don't know why they ever got rid of that. This is basically how you "garrison" a black ark.

I complained about that **** back in Rome 2 Total War and I still do that, I prefer the old way to.

Custom garrisons look like a nice idea

steph74 · January 12

I don't want them to change. I don't want to micromanage garrison everytime, and I like that you will always get some minimal defense in a city.

If I want to reinforce it with my own garrison, then I recruit a lord and stationned it in the settlements with the units I want inside.

Lucifer · January 12

steph74 said:
I don't want them to change. I don't want to micromanage garrison everytime, and I like that you will always get some minimal defense in a city.

If I want to reinforce it with my own garrison, then I recruit a lord and stationned it in the settlements with the units I want inside.

And this is all that's needed really, and it can be devastating if used with the right talents.

Itharus · January 12

steph74 said:
I don't want them to change. I don't want to micromanage garrison everytime, and I like that you will always get some minimal defense in a city.

If I want to reinforce it with my own garrison, then I recruit a lord and stationned it in the settlements with the units I want inside.

Maybe they should give warhammer the 3k treatment and add "Casual Mode" game play... *rimshot*

GingerRoeBro · January 12

Beefing up garrisons in any form is horrible
If they become any stronger then I will never lose a city
Its already easy enough
If yall need it any easier than it already is, just turn down the difficulty
or petition for a casual mode.

Better yet, use a mod

Vanilla_Gorilla · January 12

GingerRoeBro said:
Beefing up garrisons in any form is horrible
If they become any stronger then I will never lose a city
Its already easy enough
If yall need it any easier than it already is, just turn down the difficulty
or petition for a casual mode.

Better yet, use a mod

This has nothing to do with beefing them up.

It's about equalizing them, and allowing customization.

Lucifer · January 12

Vanilla_Gorilla said:

GingerRoeBro said:
Beefing up garrisons in any form is horrible
If they become any stronger then I will never lose a city
Its already easy enough
If yall need it any easier than it already is, just turn down the difficulty
or petition for a casual mode.

Better yet, use a mod
This has nothing to do with beefing them up.

It's about equalizing them, and allowing customization.

Why should they be equal when all are different. Give it a rest..

Itharus · January 12

GingerRoeBro said:

Better yet, use a mod

NO.

Telling someone to use a mod when they are complaining about the base game is just being a complete jerk and is NEVER the answer.

Modding is an optional thing for whatever purposes the modders made it.

When you're unhappy with the base game it is right and proper to communicate with the developers to see if they are willing to change it. If they respond in the negatory -- THEN, and ONLY THEN -- is it ok to tell someone to "use a mod", because AT THAT POINT it is clear that the devs will not do this thing.

The "use a mod" response tossed around **** me off so much. It's turned into a real pet peeve of mine.

I don't care how much you love a certain mod, or how much you love the base game yourself, people have the right to give their feedback to the devs without you* trying to shut them up or promote your favored mod.

GRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR.

*You in the general sense, as in all those who respond like this, not just you in particular, GingerRoeBro.

Vanilla_Gorilla · January 12

Lucifer said:

Vanilla_Gorilla said:

GingerRoeBro said:
Beefing up garrisons in any form is horrible
If they become any stronger then I will never lose a city
Its already easy enough
If yall need it any easier than it already is, just turn down the difficulty
or petition for a casual mode.

Better yet, use a mod
This has nothing to do with beefing them up.

It's about equalizing them, and allowing customization.
Why should they be equal when all are different. Give it a rest..

Because that's fair.

I see no reason for Garrisons to vary in strength between races which have walls.

GingerRoeBro · January 12

Itharus said:

GingerRoeBro said:

Better yet, use a mod
NO.

Telling someone to use a mod when they are complaining about the base game is just being a complete jerk and is NEVER the answer.

Modding is an optional thing for whatever purposes the modders made it.

When you're unhappy with the base game it is right and proper to communicate with the developers to see if they are willing to change it. If they respond in the negatory -- THEN, and ONLY THEN -- is it ok to tell someone to "use a mod", because AT THAT POINT it is clear that the devs will not do this thing.

The "use a mod" response tossed around **** me off so much. It's turned into a real pet peeve of mine.

I don't care how much you love a certain mod, or how much you love the base game yourself, people have the right to give their feedback to the devs without you* trying to shut them up or promote your favored mod.

GRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR.

*You in the general sense, as in all those who respond like this, not just you in particular, GingerRoeBro.

Well, alrighty. hopefully you are meaning no rudeness intended. Thanks, much appreciated.

The reason I used it, is due to the length in wait for updates and dlc.
Even if CA decides garrisons must be buffed and/or in need of an overhaul.
You will have to wait quite a while for your concern to be addressed. Probably 4-6 more months.
Luckily for you, there are already mods that may address your concern and it may not be the best, but its better than nothing until then. So, a temporary fix, can sometimes be the answer

For example. I wanted Island battles instead of auto resolve at sea, so I used the mod that provided island battles until CA decided to have them implemented or patched in through an update.

Welcome

Categories

Ideas to improve Garrisons - Custom Garrisons

Comments

Welcome

Quick Links

Categories

Ideas to improve Garrisons - Custom Garrisons

Comments