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

Unit caps won't solve crap and people will continue to cheese anyway.

elkappelkapp Registered Users Posts: 261
The problem with unit caps is that, even if you restrict it to +1 per T5 building, you can still make armies full of elite unit, which is just cheese.

The only solution here is to make that each elite unit can be recruited only a set number of times in a single campaign.
For example, you should not be able to get more that 5 dragons in a campaign, or 3 demigryph knights. Having more will just break the game and be unfair to the AI.

Also, this should apply to heroes and lords since they are broken as hell and can get insane once you level them up.
«1

Comments

  • Xenos7777Xenos7777 Registered Users Posts: 6,280
    Why is it cheese to concentrate your strongest units in a single army? Concentration of force is actually one of the basis of blitzkrieg, it was done in reality.
  • RebelPeasantRebelPeasant BretonniaRegistered Users Posts: 63
    Hard pass on this. Why force people to play a particular way. Right now you can cheese and play balanced. Leave the freedom for players to decide.

    PS. just because a unit is T5, doesn't mean it's good.
    “Things cannot go well in Bretonnia, nor ever will, until all goods are held in common, and until there will be neither peasants nor knights, and we shall be equal”
  • yolordmcswagyolordmcswag Registered Users Posts: 3,605
    There are countless ways to implement unit caps that could work well. For example, they could make it so that armies where 50% of the units were tier 3 or less did not count for supply lines. A very simple change that would make massed horde armies more viable compared to doomstacks. The options are plentiful for good unit cap solutions if you just think about for a little.
  • SecuterSecuter Senior Member Denmark, Aarhus.Registered Users Posts: 2,354
    Hard caps, of any kind, is usually a bad way to go. I don't like your idea of having only X number of units for each campaign.
    Xenos7777 said:

    Why is it cheese to concentrate your strongest units in a single army? Concentration of force is actually one of the basis of blitzkrieg, it was done in reality.

    Total War is not known for their modern era games, are they?
    Most armies consisted of a lot of different soldiers - depending on the time period they would consist of freemen, levies, professional soldiers, conscripts, mercenaries etc etc. Most of the time it would consist of a mixture of all. I'm not too knowledgeable of the WH lore, but the Reich armies didn't just consist of rocket-batteries, tanks or reichsguards. Their main troops were the swordsmen, spearmen, halberdiers, hand gunners and crossbowmen.


    The Grimhammer mods has a good approach to it; they use a system akin to that of the Tomb Kings where each building allows you to build more of that particular unit. That way you must fill some spots with non-elite units. It also helps the AI make better armies - though that is probably not down to the recruitment system and caps.
  • davedave1124davedave1124 Senior Member Registered Users Posts: 13,251
    I kind of like the way the unit cap for the DS worked. But I think it's fine sometimes, just not a general rule.
  • aMint1aMint1 Registered Users Posts: 616
    Personally I like the suggestion of having a replenishing pool of units you can recruit based on the buildings you have.

    E.g. If you have a dragon building, you can recruit one when it's complete, then after 8 (or whatever) turns you can recruit another.
  • ShiroAmakusa75ShiroAmakusa75 Senior Member Registered Users Posts: 30,867
    edited February 28
    elkapp said:

    The problem with unit caps is that, even if you restrict it to +1 per T5 building, you can still make armies full of elite unit, which is just cheese.

    The only solution here is to make that each elite unit can be recruited only a set number of times in a single campaign.
    For example, you should not be able to get more that 5 dragons in a campaign, or 3 demigryph knights. Having more will just break the game and be unfair to the AI.

    Also, this should apply to heroes and lords since they are broken as hell and can get insane once you level them up.

    The problem in this very game is that thanks to the stupid supply lines mechanic, elite spamming is in fact the most efficient and expected way of building armies, it's not cheese at all. The AI does the very same thing. It's just crap game design that removes a ton of variety from the game the longer the campaign goes.

  • Giveaway412Giveaway412 Registered Users Posts: 871
    What's wrong with having army caps? You can recruit as many T5 units as you want, but only, say, 2 per army.
  • PoorManatee6197PoorManatee6197 Registered Users Posts: 1,213

    Hard pass on this. Why force people to play a particular way. Right now you can cheese and play balanced. Leave the freedom for players to decide.

    PS. just because a unit is T5, doesn't mean it's good.

    Making it a option would make everyone happy.
    #MakeDwarfsGreatAgain Josef Bugman, Thorek Ironbrow, Alrik Ranulfsson, Grimm Burloksson, Kazador Thunderhorn, Byrrnoth Grundadrakk, Malakai Makaisson, Gotrek Gurnisson, Garagrim, Dragon slayer, Deamon slayer, Doomseekers, Brotherhood of Grimnir, Giant slayers, Thunderbarge, Shieldbearer mount, Master brewer, Goblin Hewer, Norse dwarf war mammoth, Tractator engine, Rune golem, Shard dragon, proper Anvil of Doom, Ulther's dragon company, Lond Drong's slayer pirates, Everguard, Karak Varn, Karag Agrilwutraz, Silver Pinacle, Karag Dum, Karak Vlag, Kraka Dorden, Kraka Ornsmotek, Kraka Ravnsvake, Karak Vrag, Karak Azorn, Karak Krakaten.


    All those missing things are grudges in the great book, is in your hand to settle them, CA. Khazukan kazakit-ha!
  • ShiroAmakusa75ShiroAmakusa75 Senior Member Registered Users Posts: 30,867

    Hard pass on this. Why force people to play a particular way. Right now you can cheese and play balanced. Leave the freedom for players to decide.

    PS. just because a unit is T5, doesn't mean it's good.

    I find it funny that you complain about people "forcing" you to play a certain way when the game already does so. Or do you have unlimited money, unlimited recruitment and unlimited movement in any campaign right away?

    Of course, the game also forces elite spamming via the idiotic supply lines mechanic, so you're already forcing your preferences on everyone else anyway.

  • saweendrasaweendra Registered Users Posts: 11,043
    soft caps are the way to go, a good population mechanic , and units tied to multiple resources.

    you wanna doom stack well than game away
    #givemoreunitsforbrettonia, my bret dlc
  • KrocodileKrew212KrocodileKrew212 Registered Users Posts: 226
    Yeah let's not make every army play kinda like the Tomb Kings. It's unnecessary.
    Team Ogre Kingdoms

    "We threatened to grind their bones up to make bread if they didn't pay. Course that's just a threat - it takes too long to grind 'em and most of this lot are just as 'appy to eat'em raw." -- Olag Skullcracker, Ogre Tyrant
  • kratostatickratostatic Registered Users Posts: 132
    I've thought about modifying supply lines to be based on Units rather than Armies. It could work across the whole faction or just within armies and the multipliers would be much harsher for higher tier units. It would depend on how they tune it but the idea is that a star dragon spam stack would be technically possible but very expensive to the point of not really being worth it.

    For an example, lets take a 5% compound upkeep increase.

    1 star dragon upkeep = 500 gold, 2 star dragons upkeep = 1050 gold (525 each). 3 star dragons upkeep = 1653 gold (551 each). 19 star dragons upkeep = 24000 gold (1263 each).

    Makes it better to actually mix your armies, making battles more interesting while still allowing you to doomstack if you actually want to do that. It also strikes me as a much more "loreful" way to do supply lines - it makes sense that taking care of 19 dragons is likely to be more than 19 times as hard as taking care of 1 because this doesn't seem like the kind of thing you could really have economies of scale on, particularly in a "pseudo-medieval" context.

    Note that this only really punishes Spam Stacks. Particularly if it's the "per army" version a "wholly elite" army is still very viable. To stay with the high elves you could have Phoenix Guard, Swordmasters, Sisters, Dragon Princes, Dragons and Pheonixes in the same stack which is more "balanced" and less obnoxious while being made up entirely of tier 4 and 5 units.

    Maybe they could also have the relevant recruitment buildings reset the cap but that gets quite close to the Tomb King approach imo.
  • RutgerhuerRutgerhuer Registered Users Posts: 175
    Did anyone play with a cost based unit cap for armies? Where each army has a cost cap like in multiplayer? How did that work out?
    TW:WH2 needs a playable Legendary Lord for every TW:WH1 race on Vortex before it can be considered complete.
  • kratostatickratostatic Registered Users Posts: 132
    Addendum - we should distinguish between "Doomstacks" and "Spam Stacks".

    A "Doomstack" is an army that can beat pretty much any other type of army sent at it, or in general a very strong army.

    A "Spam Stack" is an army made up entirely of 1 unit type, usually a very strong one (the obvious big exception is the vampire count Skelly-spam).

    Spam Stack play shouldn't really be encouraged IMO. Doomstacks aren't nearly so much of a problem, and are also much harder to stop overall.

    Take the "Skyre Doomstack". 2-3 Plagueclaws, 3-4 Ratling Guns, 3-4 Jezzails, 3-4 Poison Wind Mortars, a Warlock Master, and some combo of Plague Priests, Doomwheels, Hell Pits or Brood Horrors to make up a front line. A unit cap approach wouldn't really prevent this as it's isn't only one type of unit repeated (unless you cap "weapons teams" which for a Skyre playthrough feels obnoxious though maybe there's an argument for the other clans). The resulting army is a "Doomstack", and that's fine, because it's fun to play with rather than being a mindless point-and-click fest like most Spamstacks. It is also exactly the kind of army that Clan Skyre would field in the lore as well (albeit an elite one).
  • BayesBayes Senior Member Registered Users Posts: 1,256
    Population mechanics is the best way to solve this. Caps solve the issue, but they feel very forced imo. Maybe combining the two somehow. Building caps for monsters and population for units? Something like that.
  • FritzFritz Registered Users Posts: 49
    Sandbox experience doesn't mean your way or some other way. People can choose to play how they want. Simple. If I want to play a lore friendly army then I can.
  • ShiroAmakusa75ShiroAmakusa75 Senior Member Registered Users Posts: 30,867
    edited February 28
    Fritz said:

    Sandbox experience doesn't mean your way or some other way. People can choose to play how they want. Simple. If I want to play a lore friendly army then I can.

    On easy and normal, where supply lines isn't overblown, the AI barely resists your efforts and the game's boring right away, so it really doesn't matter what armies you build. On anything higher, supply lines means you get punished for "lore-friendly" armies unless those armies consist of elite spamming.

  • ThorrkThorrk Registered Users Posts: 99
    Too bad CA never managed to encourage loreful and balanced armies without having to put hard caps on recruitment...

    ...wait a second they actually did ....

    ...it's called MEDIEVAL II recrutment system!

    For people who never played it, it has recruitment limitation per building like the TK but instead of each building unlocking X number of unit, each building unlocks X number of unit every X turn. So you can technically recruit a full stack of elite unit with one building but it will take a very long time.
  • FritzFritz Registered Users Posts: 49

    Fritz said:

    Sandbox experience doesn't mean your way or some other way. People can choose to play how they want. Simple. If I want to play a lore friendly army then I can.

    On easy and normal, where supply lines isn't overblown, the AI barely resists your efforts and the game's boring right away, so it really doesn't matter what armies you build. On anything higher, supply lines means you get punished for "lore-friendly" armies unless those armies consist of elite spamming.
    I guess I don't find it to be the case for me and if I get punished, doesn't seem to bother me.
  • BayesBayes Senior Member Registered Users Posts: 1,256
    Fritz said:

    Sandbox experience doesn't mean your way or some other way. People can choose to play how they want. Simple. If I want to play a lore friendly army then I can.

    The game just is not a sandbox though. It has a ton of rules and limitations, we are just talking about altering them.
  • yolordmcswagyolordmcswag Registered Users Posts: 3,605

    I've thought about modifying supply lines to be based on Units rather than Armies. It could work across the whole faction or just within armies and the multipliers would be much harsher for higher tier units. It would depend on how they tune it but the idea is that a star dragon spam stack would be technically possible but very expensive to the point of not really being worth it.

    For an example, lets take a 5% compound upkeep increase.

    1 star dragon upkeep = 500 gold, 2 star dragons upkeep = 1050 gold (525 each). 3 star dragons upkeep = 1653 gold (551 each). 19 star dragons upkeep = 24000 gold (1263 each).

    Makes it better to actually mix your armies, making battles more interesting while still allowing you to doomstack if you actually want to do that. It also strikes me as a much more "loreful" way to do supply lines - it makes sense that taking care of 19 dragons is likely to be more than 19 times as hard as taking care of 1 because this doesn't seem like the kind of thing you could really have economies of scale on, particularly in a "pseudo-medieval" context.

    Note that this only really punishes Spam Stacks. Particularly if it's the "per army" version a "wholly elite" army is still very viable. To stay with the high elves you could have Phoenix Guard, Swordmasters, Sisters, Dragon Princes, Dragons and Pheonixes in the same stack which is more "balanced" and less obnoxious while being made up entirely of tier 4 and 5 units.

    Maybe they could also have the relevant recruitment buildings reset the cap but that gets quite close to the Tomb King approach imo.

    This is a good start, but I think there needs to be a soft cap on total elite units per army aswell. If it's only per unit type it will punish those with fewer high-tier options(greenskins come to mind) and every army will have the same combination of every elite. IMO it should reward having a decent chunk of lower tier units in every army, that way you have to be more strategic about your choice of elites and armies will look more different.

    For example, for a defensive line holder army you would use elite slots on Sisters of Avelorn, Phoenix guard etc, while if you were going to fight a horde infantry force you would instead use swordmasters, dragon princes and such. Having low-tier troops be relevant in the lategame would also be great for diversity, as currently half of every races roster becomes obselete after 50 turns.
  • Steph_F_DavidSteph_F_David Junior Member Registered Users Posts: 1,732
    My solution in SWO-RD

    - Per army unit cap based on TTC. Units can be core (unlimited), special or rare, and for special or rare they can weight from 1 to 3. The total number of special/rare you can have in an army is limited. default is 10 special and 5 rare. Meaning that for Star Dragons, weight 3, you can have only 1 in an army. But you could have 5 rare units weight 1. I have adjusted the concept in SWO-RD, where the rank of the lord determines the cap. A rank 1 lord can manage a lot less rare units than a rank 40.

    - Global capacity for every unit, based on the settlements, building and landmarks you control. Tier 1 units are given by settlements / barracks, in relatively large number. While rare specialized units would be much more limited, as only high level buildings can contribute to it.

    This way you can still increase your army to get a lot of rare units, but it requires focusing your building to that end.
  • EterlikEterlik Registered Users Posts: 266
    I like the Caps per army system like in multiplayer matches.
    Whatever you do you get balanced armys out of it.
  • Xenos7777Xenos7777 Registered Users Posts: 6,280
    Secuter said:

    Hard caps, of any kind, is usually a bad way to go. I don't like your idea of having only X number of units for each campaign.

    Xenos7777 said:

    Why is it cheese to concentrate your strongest units in a single army? Concentration of force is actually one of the basis of blitzkrieg, it was done in reality.

    Total War is not known for their modern era games, are they?
    Most armies consisted of a lot of different soldiers - depending on the time period they would consist of freemen, levies, professional soldiers, conscripts, mercenaries etc etc. Most of the time it would consist of a mixture of all. I'm not too knowledgeable of the WH lore, but the Reich armies didn't just consist of rocket-batteries, tanks or reichsguards. Their main troops were the swordsmen, spearmen, halberdiers, hand gunners and crossbowmen.


    The Grimhammer mods has a good approach to it; they use a system akin to that of the Tomb Kings where each building allows you to build more of that particular unit. That way you must fill some spots with non-elite units. It also helps the AI make better armies - though that is probably not down to the recruitment system and caps.
    But that is a factionwide cap, not a per-army cap. You can still concentrate stuff.
  • JadawinKhanidiJadawinKhanidi Registered Users Posts: 1,420

    Did anyone play with a cost based unit cap for armies? Where each army has a cost cap like in multiplayer? How did that work out?

    I've had very good results with the Cost-based Army Caps mod but I may be biased because I wrote it ;)

    Objectively though everyone who does not use a mod like that cheeses the game because the AI for the most part does NOT spam elite units. Yes it happens sometimes randomly, but the vast majority of AI stacks you will encounter in a campaign has a gold value of 10-17k. If you use more expensive armies than that, you play with a huge advantage over the AI. My mod displays the gold value of every army, so it's very easy to observe.

    For example, if you make a Dark Elf army using only elite units (Black Guard, Executioners, Shades, Dragons), you easily surpass 30k value and can go up to 40k.

    The AI does occasionally make more expensive armies, mostly when it recruits in a region where only a few unit types are available and they are all high-tier, like many mammoths or dragons. These armies can cost 25k or rarely even >30k. But that is still only what a typical doomstack player will bring in every single one of their armies. Only way to balance the game here and make the AI challenging is to limit your own armies down to the cost that AI armies typically reach.
  • obippoobippo Member Registered Users Posts: 2,449
    No to unit caps ever thanks.

    Feel free to mod your game if you want them (it can be done in literally 1 minute).
    Always be aware when a Content Refusing Troll Brigade (CRTB) representative is near. Contact your local Witch Hunter for further info.


  • mightygloinmightygloin Karaz-a-KarakRegistered Users Posts: 4,043
    edited March 1
    TT unit caps is the single smallest move that changes the game for better, adding strategy and lore in one swoop. Most people have prejudice towards it before even trying it out. It's just a missing WH feature waiting to happen.
    Post edited by mightygloin on
  • Giveaway412Giveaway412 Registered Users Posts: 871
    obippo said:

    No to unit caps ever thanks.

    Feel free to mod your game if you want them (it can be done in literally 1 minute).

    So why can't you get a mod that removes them if they're ever added? A mod that removes unit caps could be maintained far easier than a mod that adds them. And after all, it can be done in literally 1 minute.

    Mods should be used to break a balanced game, not to balance a broken one.
  • ShiroAmakusa75ShiroAmakusa75 Senior Member Registered Users Posts: 30,867
    edited March 1

    obippo said:

    No to unit caps ever thanks.

    Feel free to mod your game if you want them (it can be done in literally 1 minute).

    So why can't you get a mod that removes them if they're ever added? A mod that removes unit caps could be maintained far easier than a mod that adds them. And after all, it can be done in literally 1 minute.

    Mods should be used to break a balanced game, not to balance a broken one.
    Exactly. Why should mods be a crutch to provide basic balancing just because CA failed to do so?

Sign In or Register to comment.