Kam Battle system.
Hi,
who I am doesn't matter, but I would like to use this guest-nick to give a clear oppinion, where I won't be juged because of who I am.
So people won't like it because they like me, and not dislike it either because they dislike me. That's the idea.
There are a lot of dicussions going around about the kam battle balance, about some claiming pike to be op, lances to be op, and the only way to fix this is by focussing on the 'rock-paper-scissors' system. I don't think that should be it. Kam is realy not about swordfighters running after pikemen who are running after knights, while they on their turn are running after swordfighters. It looks ridiculous to say it this way, but in the end it's what some people claim to balance to game.
I won't argument against it why especialy not, but I'll just give my clear oppinion how it should be instead.
The idea that we should all have in mind if we want to balance the game. Balancing the game while focussing on this system will make it IMO work.
1. Army composition.
Main army:
Axefighters + Swordfighters
Supportive army:
Bowmen + Crossbowmen
Offensive army:
Scouts + Knights
Defensive army:
Lance carriers + Pikemen
Sabotage army:
Militia
2. Army roles.
Main army:
Their role is simple: defeating the enemy's main army. This is the most important part of your army, without them you have no chance of surviving.
Once somebody's main army is defeated, the enemy's army is very vulnerable, their only chance of surviving is hiding behind the towers, and hold of long enough until they have recovered.
Supportive army:
The role of the supportive army is, as it's name says, supporting the main army.
Without the supportive army the main army has no chance of defeating the enemy's main army.
Offensive army
The role of the offensive army is to chase down the supporitve army.
If they can manage to kill the supportive army, the enemy's main army is very vulnerable,
and won't stand long against your main + supportive army.
Defensive army
The role of the defensive army is to defend the supportive army.
They are the only one who can hold off the supportive army, without them the offensive army can easily take out the supportive army.
Sabotaging army
The role of the sabotaging army is to slow down the enemy army, to empty enemy towers, trying to sneak into the enemy's base to sabotage his economy.
3. Army strentches.
Main army:
The main army is composed of very strong and high armored soldiers. They can stand a long time in battle, even while being shotted by enemy range.
In return for their high armor they are a little bit slower than other soldiers,
wich means they can't be used to hunt down soldiers of other armies.
Supportive army:
The supportive army deals a very high amount of damage from distance, but in return it's very vulnerable against direct attack. Because of their light equipement they are slightly faster, wich makes it possible for them to retreat after the main army is defeated, and try to hold of behind the towers while the main army recovers.
Offensive army:
The offensive army is composed of the fastests solsiers in the game. They use their speed to pass trough enemy forces avoiding enemy arrows, trying to reach the supportive army, while avoiding the defensive army. Once reached the supportive army, they use their high strentch to easily kill them. When the supportive army tries to flee, they use their speed to keep chasing them.
Defensive army:
The defensive army has a light armor. It doesn't fit as main soldier, since they can't resist against enemy arrows.
They have to stay behind the main army, while their long weapons makes them increadibly powerful against mounted units.
They are the only soldiers who can efficiëntly defend the supportive army against the offensive army.
Sabotaging army:
The sabotaging army is made of very weak soldiers, with no armor and a very weak attack, wich is still strong enough to kill enemy citizens.
Even in masses they won't be able to realy weaken an army, but when used wisely they can make you win just enough time to let your army arrive or escape. Since they are so easily trainded in masses, they are useful against enemy towers.
4. Army costs, quantities and importance.
Main army:
The main army is composed of average costed soldiers, but since they are the most important part of the army they are needed in big amounts.
Supportive army:
The supportive army is composed of cheaper soldiers, they are the seconds most important part of the army and also need to be in big amounts.
Offensive army:
The offensive army has the most expensive soldiers. They require a lot of resources and time to be builded, wich makes it impossible to train them in big amounts. They aren't the most important piece of an army, but when used correctly they can make an enourmous difference in the amount of looses the army will take, wich makes it worth to build them.
Defensive army:
The deffensive army is composed of rather cheap but also very weak units. They are still very important since they are the best unit to intercept enemy cavaliry, trying to chase down archers. They funtion is to prevent a disaster from happening.
Sabotaging army:
They may be the weakest unit in the game, but they are also the cheapest unit in the game. Other units shouldn't be sacrificed to build them, but they are a suplementary unit used to increase the difference between 2 player's economy.
5. Unit changes.
Main army:
This should be the main army, only good as main army unit. For that I sugested to actualy decrease their speed by 10%. Why?
Soldiers will need to use storm attack to reach the enemy as fast as possible, so defending doesn't give a too big advantage,
since the attacking player will recieve the first arrows. If they would be as fast as archers and lances/pikemen,
they can just perform storm attack to chase those units. Making them slower will prevent them from being the only melee a player needs,
since now you will realy need faster soldiers to chase down enemy range.
To make them more resistant in battle I would sugest +1lp or +1 armor, test should show what's best.
Since you also need other soldiers, I think it would be good to make the production of shields 30% faster and those of armors 10% faster.
With axefighters and swordfighters as mean units, you would need way more armory workshops and armor smithies than weapon workshops, weapon smithies to be able to hold on production. This would allow you to have a good production with 2 weapon smithies and 2 armory smithies, for iron, and 5 weapon, 5 armor workshops for leather.
Supporting army
Would it be possible give them a relative damage? This would give range a more supportive role, instead of using them as killers and melee as meat. For example: Damage attack = ((Target's remaining lp) x 200)/ distance.
Why also including distance? This could resolve the problem of having only range inflicting damage. The more range you have, the lower their average damage they deal will become, while having more range still means more damage.
I would also make them about maybe 5% faster, making knights and scouts more necesary to train since they would be the only unit who can chase them.
This 5% bonus will not realy make them more powerful, but more increase the need of horses.
Offensive army
I think the production rate of horses should be slightly faster, like George said, maybe 15%?
Also every change about strentch/endurance given to a footman with the same equipement, should also be given to them.
Defensive army
I think this is about the only unit that's good the way it is. But if cavaliry gets additional defense, that percentage should be added to their anti-horse bonus.
Sabotaging army
I realy think militia have a too high attack rate, even if they have no armor.
In my system it would make them too powerful against lances/pikemen.
So resumed this would mean:
If you judge this topic, don't judge on everything at the same time.
My idea is an evolved version of the 'rock paper scissors' balance wich I think won't work for the simply reason that in kam you can't move your units once they're attacking, making knights useless in core combat and too easy to be killed by pikemen. So if you don't use knights in core combat, the 'rock paper scissors' is already broken.
In this idea knights will still be stronger than swordfighters, but since it doesn't matter in the game I don't think about that while trying to balance the game.
The reason that I wrote everything in parts is not because I liked it, but because you could be able to analyse every part at once.
You can agree for 1 think, without agreeing for another thing I wrote, so please be clear in what I wrote you mean.
who I am doesn't matter, but I would like to use this guest-nick to give a clear oppinion, where I won't be juged because of who I am.
So people won't like it because they like me, and not dislike it either because they dislike me. That's the idea.
There are a lot of dicussions going around about the kam battle balance, about some claiming pike to be op, lances to be op, and the only way to fix this is by focussing on the 'rock-paper-scissors' system. I don't think that should be it. Kam is realy not about swordfighters running after pikemen who are running after knights, while they on their turn are running after swordfighters. It looks ridiculous to say it this way, but in the end it's what some people claim to balance to game.
I won't argument against it why especialy not, but I'll just give my clear oppinion how it should be instead.
The idea that we should all have in mind if we want to balance the game. Balancing the game while focussing on this system will make it IMO work.
1. Army composition.
Main army:
Axefighters + Swordfighters
Supportive army:
Bowmen + Crossbowmen
Offensive army:
Scouts + Knights
Defensive army:
Lance carriers + Pikemen
Sabotage army:
Militia
2. Army roles.
Main army:
Their role is simple: defeating the enemy's main army. This is the most important part of your army, without them you have no chance of surviving.
Once somebody's main army is defeated, the enemy's army is very vulnerable, their only chance of surviving is hiding behind the towers, and hold of long enough until they have recovered.
Supportive army:
The role of the supportive army is, as it's name says, supporting the main army.
Without the supportive army the main army has no chance of defeating the enemy's main army.
Offensive army
The role of the offensive army is to chase down the supporitve army.
If they can manage to kill the supportive army, the enemy's main army is very vulnerable,
and won't stand long against your main + supportive army.
Defensive army
The role of the defensive army is to defend the supportive army.
They are the only one who can hold off the supportive army, without them the offensive army can easily take out the supportive army.
Sabotaging army
The role of the sabotaging army is to slow down the enemy army, to empty enemy towers, trying to sneak into the enemy's base to sabotage his economy.
3. Army strentches.
Main army:
The main army is composed of very strong and high armored soldiers. They can stand a long time in battle, even while being shotted by enemy range.
In return for their high armor they are a little bit slower than other soldiers,
wich means they can't be used to hunt down soldiers of other armies.
Supportive army:
The supportive army deals a very high amount of damage from distance, but in return it's very vulnerable against direct attack. Because of their light equipement they are slightly faster, wich makes it possible for them to retreat after the main army is defeated, and try to hold of behind the towers while the main army recovers.
Offensive army:
The offensive army is composed of the fastests solsiers in the game. They use their speed to pass trough enemy forces avoiding enemy arrows, trying to reach the supportive army, while avoiding the defensive army. Once reached the supportive army, they use their high strentch to easily kill them. When the supportive army tries to flee, they use their speed to keep chasing them.
Defensive army:
The defensive army has a light armor. It doesn't fit as main soldier, since they can't resist against enemy arrows.
They have to stay behind the main army, while their long weapons makes them increadibly powerful against mounted units.
They are the only soldiers who can efficiëntly defend the supportive army against the offensive army.
Sabotaging army:
The sabotaging army is made of very weak soldiers, with no armor and a very weak attack, wich is still strong enough to kill enemy citizens.
Even in masses they won't be able to realy weaken an army, but when used wisely they can make you win just enough time to let your army arrive or escape. Since they are so easily trainded in masses, they are useful against enemy towers.
4. Army costs, quantities and importance.
Main army:
The main army is composed of average costed soldiers, but since they are the most important part of the army they are needed in big amounts.
Supportive army:
The supportive army is composed of cheaper soldiers, they are the seconds most important part of the army and also need to be in big amounts.
Offensive army:
The offensive army has the most expensive soldiers. They require a lot of resources and time to be builded, wich makes it impossible to train them in big amounts. They aren't the most important piece of an army, but when used correctly they can make an enourmous difference in the amount of looses the army will take, wich makes it worth to build them.
Defensive army:
The deffensive army is composed of rather cheap but also very weak units. They are still very important since they are the best unit to intercept enemy cavaliry, trying to chase down archers. They funtion is to prevent a disaster from happening.
Sabotaging army:
They may be the weakest unit in the game, but they are also the cheapest unit in the game. Other units shouldn't be sacrificed to build them, but they are a suplementary unit used to increase the difference between 2 player's economy.
5. Unit changes.
Main army:
This should be the main army, only good as main army unit. For that I sugested to actualy decrease their speed by 10%. Why?
Soldiers will need to use storm attack to reach the enemy as fast as possible, so defending doesn't give a too big advantage,
since the attacking player will recieve the first arrows. If they would be as fast as archers and lances/pikemen,
they can just perform storm attack to chase those units. Making them slower will prevent them from being the only melee a player needs,
since now you will realy need faster soldiers to chase down enemy range.
To make them more resistant in battle I would sugest +1lp or +1 armor, test should show what's best.
Since you also need other soldiers, I think it would be good to make the production of shields 30% faster and those of armors 10% faster.
With axefighters and swordfighters as mean units, you would need way more armory workshops and armor smithies than weapon workshops, weapon smithies to be able to hold on production. This would allow you to have a good production with 2 weapon smithies and 2 armory smithies, for iron, and 5 weapon, 5 armor workshops for leather.
Supporting army
Would it be possible give them a relative damage? This would give range a more supportive role, instead of using them as killers and melee as meat. For example: Damage attack = ((Target's remaining lp) x 200)/ distance.
Why also including distance? This could resolve the problem of having only range inflicting damage. The more range you have, the lower their average damage they deal will become, while having more range still means more damage.
I would also make them about maybe 5% faster, making knights and scouts more necesary to train since they would be the only unit who can chase them.
This 5% bonus will not realy make them more powerful, but more increase the need of horses.
Offensive army
I think the production rate of horses should be slightly faster, like George said, maybe 15%?
Also every change about strentch/endurance given to a footman with the same equipement, should also be given to them.
Defensive army
I think this is about the only unit that's good the way it is. But if cavaliry gets additional defense, that percentage should be added to their anti-horse bonus.
Sabotaging army
I realy think militia have a too high attack rate, even if they have no armor.
In my system it would make them too powerful against lances/pikemen.
So resumed this would mean:
If you judge this topic, don't judge on everything at the same time.
My idea is an evolved version of the 'rock paper scissors' balance wich I think won't work for the simply reason that in kam you can't move your units once they're attacking, making knights useless in core combat and too easy to be killed by pikemen. So if you don't use knights in core combat, the 'rock paper scissors' is already broken.
In this idea knights will still be stronger than swordfighters, but since it doesn't matter in the game I don't think about that while trying to balance the game.
The reason that I wrote everything in parts is not because I liked it, but because you could be able to analyse every part at once.
You can agree for 1 think, without agreeing for another thing I wrote, so please be clear in what I wrote you mean.
If we keep messing with shields in public releases I think the game will feel inconsistent, and people will wonder "so what will they change with shields NEXT update...".
