Should tournaments be based on squad size?

[DeletedUser5800]

@Sadalmelik I'm not saying it should give anything back, I'm just saying that when they dramatically alter a game metric and where it's possible, older players should at least have the option to eat the losses and adjust to the new metric. People that invested heavily in Crystal Lighthouses come to mind, they do at least have the option to eat the losses and sell it. So in regards to 'optional' SS tech. they should offer the same option, to 'sell' the tech back and eat the losses so they can at least stop being penalized for a 'mistake' made before it was a mistake.

 

[DeletedUser6260]

I'm just saying that when they dramatically alter a game metric and where it's possible, older players should at least have the option to eat the losses and adjust to the new metric.

I'm just saying which losses and which gains get balanced? Having a larger squad size for months has given us an advantage in the provinces that people who never took those squads didn't have.

 

[DeletedUser5800]

Having a larger squad size for months has given us an advantage in the provinces that people who never took those squads didn't have.

I'm missing where switching one for the other creates an imbalance. If it was intended to be a choice, then it should be one. If a person would like to sacrifice the 'advantage' you speak of for the other then the choice should be there for everyone, not just new players whom happen to stumble into a thread like this.

 

[SoggyShorts]

I'm just saying which losses and which gains get balanced? Having a larger squad size for months has given us an advantage in the provinces that people who never took those squads didn't have.

The whole issue is that for most players skipping would have been better. Yes you had a bigger SS on the world map, but you suffered higher losses in tournament, so no matter what you'll always be behind where you could have been, and letting you cancel a tech now wouldn't unbalance it.

Another option would be to simply reduce the squad sizes in tournaments a little bit for everyone, and at the same time change it so that your SS in tournaments is tied to your highest SS tech that you have unlocked.
Going forward there should be no optional techs since they can't actually balance them to make choices even.

 

[Mykan]

One way to balance this for Inno: tournament size is still tied to squad size. And there are still optional squad size techs. But the level of your barracks/camp/grounds sets a hard cap on your squad size.
This would result in some complicated mechanics.
But if its done right, Inno could force the tradeoff of: you can keep your squad size low to have easier tournaments, but you are limited in how quickly you can train up armies.

The simplest "quick fix" is to just use the highest researched squad size tech. It won't be 100% even but it uses the existing mechanic and balances out every now and then based on the tech tree.

Does it also undo any provinces you've won since you learned it and anything you've gotten from the buildings on those expansions, or just pay back the cost of troops used in those provinces and charge you goods (plus maybe coin and supplies) instead? How far back should they keep a record of what we've gotten as a result of each tech? One chapter? All the way to day one? If I made a mistake by building non-boosted factories, can I undo those and get back everything I input while giving back everything they made? Since my initial choice to play an elf turns out to be a bad choice for fighting (which wasn't explained to me before I chose it) can I undo everything since I chose to play an elf and have them re-play the game for me for the last few months as though I had picked human instead?

While I agree with your sentiment all of your examples are based on a person making a choice with all the information on hand. In this case the choice was made at the time and the rules changed later such that the original choice for many people would be different. This is also a mechanic that is not explained in-game and is completely opposite to common sense. Why would anyone expect that researching a technology would actually cause harm to one aspect of their game? The description on the techs do not explain the choice so there is no ability for a person to make a decision as to what is best for them.

 

[DeletedUser5800]

The whole issue is that for most players skipping would have been better. Yes you had a bigger SS on the world map, but you suffered higher losses in tournament, so no matter what you'll always be behind where you could have been

...and for the record I don't believe for minute this was well thought out intentional build option... I believe it was an ill thought out thrown in thing that created the unintended ripple of it being better to have not done the tech. I further believe that if they ever do anything to balance it, it will be a new metric that hurts those that didn't or do not do the research rather than helps the ones it hurt. BUT I propose that instead of eventually deciding to screw a new group coming up now, they could just embrace the 'build option theory' and make it one.

 

[DeletedUser9601]

The simplest "quick fix" is to just use the highest researched squad size tech. It won't be 100% even but it uses the existing mechanic and balances out every now and then based on the tech tree.

Agreed. I was aiming for something different. If there's some people that want easier tournaments, and we assume that we want to encourage this playstyle, my suggestion was trying to find an accommodation. By leaving troop buildings/armories in prior chapters, players can improve their tournament success, but also suffer the consequences of building armies more slowly (and producing orcs more slowly, as applicable).

 

[Heymrdiedier]

sorry might have been mentioned allready, but dindt read everything (just got directed here from beta forum).
But there is a expiring building in the game files called something like refundTech. I have no clue what it does, but i hope it allows you to unresearch optional techs. That would make it possible to level out tournament costs again at some point.

imo if the tournament should be based on something (does it really?), it should be based on your total expansions placed. More room = more production of everything = easier tournament.

basing it on partial optional techs isnt a good idea, i dont like it being based on main hall or barracks level either, since it ends the same as with optional techs. People will just no longer upgrade their main hall or barracks. Why would they, high barracks just means you need lots more armories to be able to keep your barracks running, so just keep it low. (and just max your merc camp or training grounds instead). upgrading main hall would also not be done anymore, the little extra it gives you, wouldnt be worth it, if your into tournaments.

 

[SoggyShorts]

it should be based on your total expansions placed. More room = more production of everything = easier tournament.

That is a very interesting idea, and certainly has my vote.

 

[Ashrem]

it should be based on your total expansions placed. More room = more production of everything = easier tournament.

My first thought is that a tournament penalty on the people who have spent the most money is probably not going to fly. If I'd spent hundreds of dollars getting all the possible expansions, I'm pretty sure being told it will make my tournaments harder would be annoying. Possibly if modified to provinces earned in the tech tree? Or some formula mixing tech expansions and scouting expansions?

 

[Heymrdiedier]

My first thought is that a tournament penalty on the people who have spent the most money is probably not going to fly. If I'd spent hundreds of dollars getting all the possible expansions, I'm pretty sure being told it will make my tournaments harder would be annoying. Possibly if modified to provinces earned in the tech tree? Or some formula mixing tech expansions and scouting expansions?

True, but that extra room makes you able to get more supplies (for training army) or more goods (for negotiating).
That feels like the only way to give small players a chance in tournament also (which was the point of basing it on SS).

it would also make people thing twice before placing an extra expansion. And if i hear QA and innotv right, they find we have too much expansions allready causing a lot of performance issues (is that why they keep making buildings bigger, so theres less lag?)

 

[Ashrem]

True, but that extra room makes you able to get more supplies (for training army) or more goods (for negotiating).
That feels like the only way to give small players a chance in tournament also (which was the point of basing it on SS).

it would also make people thing twice before placing an extra expansion. And if i hear QA and innotv right, they find we have too much expansions allready causing a lot of performance issues (is that why they keep making buildings bigger, so theres less lag?)

That's all valid, but at the end of the day, Inno is here to make money. I just don't think they are going to want to tell people that have paid for expansions they will be disadvantaged vs those who didn't pay.

 

[Heymrdiedier]

That's all valid, but at the end of the day, Inno is here to make money. I just don't think they are going to want to tell people that have paid for expansions they will be disadvantaged vs those who didn't pay.

who still pays for those highly overprizes expansions anyway. If you didnt buy them before they increased the prize hugely, your pretty much screwed anyway.

 

[Mykan]

That is where the original system of based on provinces had some merit. As expansions are a function of provinces so factors in the room but still allows a person who bought expansions to be better off than an equivalent person with the same provinces.

From the discussion on beta a year ago and the more recent one on EN forums it doesn't look like much will change anytime soon. It is also left to us as players to educate other players/new players about it if we feel so inclined to do so.