March of the Eagles Developer Diary 13: Technology & Ideas

[Publius Scipio]

You get far more from losing

And the ratio depends on how disastrous you lose.

When calculating how many Idea points are received by losing I would assume that it is the actual number of men lost in the battle that decides how disastrous the defeat was and then how many points are earned - Yes / No?

I hope that sacrificing 1 tiny army to get annilated (to get points quickly) will not work.

By the way I think this seems to be a great system for military improvement that suits the period and is simple as well without being arbitrary - those who do the fighting learn from it

 

[generalolaf]

Even if this has been said already:

The map looks awesome Aesthetics, province shapes, everything. It's all just so... awesome

 

[gabon100]

I translated this devdiary in french
http://www.begamer.be/?p=1459

Thank you !
J'organise un grand concours de Noël ! Participez-y !
http://www.begamer.be/?p=1420

 

[BelisariuS.F]

You get far more from losing

And the ratio depends on how disastrous you lose.

Yeah, finally a system where military progress is driven by war and especially by defeat.

 

[liamgamer55]

The "March to the Sound of Guns" idea enables a tactic that will let you enable/disable it for any army you have, so you can choose which armies should march to the sound of guns and which shouldn't. It can be found in the same row as the "Load the army into ships" button.

That's actually really really bad. There was a game called theocracy a while back that had an ability where you could pay to automanage things and all it served to do was annoy you. Any options to reduce micromanagement should be freely avaliable from the start or simply not there. Why should I feel like my options are to either play day by day (which may annoy players) or to pay to have the luxury of not doing that? That's just going to be annoying. I really hope this gets patched out.

[edit] mechanics misunderstood

 

[Birken]

When calculating how many Idea points are received by losing I would assume that it is the actual number of men lost in the battle that decides how disastrous the defeat was and then how many points are earned - Yes / No?

I hope that sacrificing 1 tiny army to get annilated (to get points quickly) will not work.

By the way I think this seems to be a great system for military improvement that suits the period and is simple as well without being arbitrary - those who do the fighting learn from it

It's relative to the number of soldiers lost in relation to your own size. Losing the battle also gives a slight bonus (which you of course can exploit by retreating from combats instead of winning them, but that might prove bad for your war and prestige...)

That's actually really really bad. There was a game called theocracy a while back that had an ability where you could pay to automanage things and all it served to do was annoy you. Any options to reduce micromanagement should be freely avaliable from the start or simply not there. Why should I feel like my options are to either play day by day (which may annoy players) or to pay to have the luxury of not doing that? That's just going to be annoying. I really hope this gets patched out.

I think there's a misunderstanding to what March to the Sound of the Guns actually does. It enables armies in provinces neighboring a combat to intervene in said combat. The benefit over just walking them there yourself is that through normal movement you'll be ready to fight at dawn, but through the March you can arrive after just a couple of hours of fighting. Most provinces also take more than one day to travel between, making your approach even swifter.
So it's not about micromanaging your troops, it's about having them being where you want them to be, while keeping your army from taking attrition damage due to being to big for one province to support them.

 

[liamgamer55]

I think there's a misunderstanding to what March to the Sound of the Guns actually does. It enables armies in provinces neighboring a combat to intervene in said combat. The benefit over just walking them there yourself is that through normal movement you'll be ready to fight at dawn, but through the March you can arrive after just a couple of hours of fighting. Most provinces also take more than one day to travel between, making your approach even swifter.
So it's not about micromanaging your troops, it's about having them being where you want them to be, while keeping your army from taking attrition damage due to being to big for one province to support them.

There was indeed. In that case my comment is withdrawn. Obviously allowing AI generals to activate mechanics that aren't a matter of being clicked quickly is completely different to what I thought it was (which was making generals automatically rally to the frontline provinces).