New items into the economy?

[thunder]

TH on the original way is a balance breaker option for multiplayer games.
What if it would be art of the economy?
https://youtu.be/rsuEO5V1z4Y
Password is more type of units more fun.

[Ben]

Looks interesting. If I was a meme spammer, I'd submit the "shut up and take my money" meme

[thunder]

Looks interesting. If I was a meme spammer, I'd submit the "shut up and take my money" meme

[Esthlos]

Looks interesting.

It does, but it also does look like a lot of work if it was to be implemented... would it be worth it?
I mean: I would like it, but would a change like that be considered too much by other users?

@thunder Maybe you could add a poll?

[thunder]

It does, but it also does look like a lot of work if it was to be implemented... would it be worth it?

It is dynamic scripted. you can try it out yourself too. Script name: NM 3.2
This video is using the serfs with lance to animate this type of weapons. So no worry, it is not implemented;)

I mean: I would like it, but would a change like that be considered too much by other users?

It's only a dynamic script at this moment. Of course implementing these type of items would change the usual multiplay gameplay drasticaly-or not? I ' ve seen already TH units not offering enough strengh vs the regular Swordman+knight+bow strategies, but can give some new interesting army composition which can be frightening.

@thunder Maybe you could add a poll?
I don't need poll to see the real situation. Enough if read back some of the TH and siege topics...
It is all about the Townhall units for multiplayers. Lots of players want them, but can not find 2 players who would want to see on the same way. For example i disagree with the goldchest version of the TH. Somebody would separate these wares into the Townhall which would make more questions and would need more developements. To me total acceptable these items into the barracks. Lots of ideas are out there about it, but one thing is common in many case. Need delivery animations for serfs. One is ready.(we can say that.)
Somebody only wants to add TH (and siege too) to Single player games only.

There are many scripts for TH into MP games to test it out how would be nice to see them in multiplayer games. I tried out many of them.

-One townhall only with goldchest?
-Many TH with goldchest, abusing the gold?
-One tH only for enabling these troops in the barrack and in the economy system.
-Limitless TH only for decoration
-TH troops from barrack without townhall.
-TH troops from barrack with TH enabling it and can make many THs, and cost as with normal weapons.-It is something what I support personaly.
-New functions for TH-AS like retraining units, for example laburers etc..
-New function for TH-could by political weapons for goldchests, as like the 'woodworm-60Goldchest' or 'show one of the enemy player barrack-50Goldchest' etc...

CONs:
-In anycase TH troops would change multiplayer gameplay drastically, and oldschool guys would disagree to implement them.
-These units were not planned for barrack. Or maybe the warrior was? (Check his Images.)
-the singleplayer would need TH on original way but the multiplayer would use it differently?

Pros:
-More strategies, some of could offer enough power on any PT to beat the usual strongest army composition on the actual PT.
-The TH troops basically not stronger of faster than regular troops. For example the Rouge is not shuting fasrter than bowman, or the vagbond is not riding faster than scout. The warrior and the barbarian offers good hitting point but with low defense points.
-These units are paper because they are not shielded. Except Warrior which have one defence point.
-Zero PT game with not only milities, but with range and antimeele too? (with goldchest version would be the vagabond also there)
-Some strategies can offer scouts and vagabonds too.

So as you can see there were many ideas and solutions alreday and I'm sure there are even more. And there is not a common agreement about this. Polling would not really help as an average poll use to have maximum 20votes. But if you wish, then will look after good questions.

Anyway, This video and stuffs was created around 40minutes only. Made only for fun. Maybe will growing out something from this. Who knows

Cheers,
t

[MickeyMouseXD]

I would rather recommend to put that pitchfork to the place where it belongs - to the farm or stable or piggy wiggy YEAH!
It just dont fit here XD

[thunder]

See? Another opinion;P

[Esthlos]

I don't need poll to see the real situation.

Actually I wanted a poll to know how many people would not want this change vs how many would like it

New functions for TH-AS like retraining units, for example laburers etc..

I prefer this one - have the TH units be independent from the Town Hall, and make the Town Hall able to retrain civilians.

Imho it should also be able to train people for free (like the School, but slower and without the gold requirement - or maybe with a food requirement instead?) so that it can complete wood/leather warriors production by making the recruits trainable endlessly.
(This can be done with the Market at the moment btw, by simply selling the extra pigs)

[Ben]

Looks interesting.

It does, but it also does look like a lot of work if it was to be implemented... would it be worth it?

If I recall correctly, the largest obstacle to Krom and Lewin for implemented town hall units was the lack of production chain for them. Being able to transform gold into units seemed "against KaM spirit." Now, the biggest drawback to making town hall weapons craftable was the lack of artwork. That issue looks like it is getting worked out, so what's the holdup?

[Esthlos]

so what's the holdup?

I like this idea, but I'm worried about the oldest players opposing the change or it splitting the player base.

[thunder]

Well, some of the old players are also welcomed the idea. Maybe you can make a poll about with a question, do you want to changes the game? or something like this.

For example personaly I was really happy when the market was in the early game because that gave more strategy ways, but after it was nerfed for the lategames, nerfed until the market be a completly useless building in game. So now it is not really part of short PT games. Maybe only very few trades are used. It is not about the market, rather about the new implemented things. Players are afraid of changes. And the classical sentence 'because the Classical gameplay damaging'...It is already damaged with fisher with anykind of market and maybe this list could be longer...I just would say if there is a possibility then worth a try on few ways. If would be very IMBA or bad still can nerf or step back a version. etc...

[Stocky]

Lancers aren't cheap enough ? Imo only barbarians and warriors could be successfully usued in normal games, the rest is just useless paper. Consider that everybody have many range nowadays + strong mele like swords. TH units stand no chance against that.

[sado1]

Lancers aren't cheap enough ? Imo only barbarians and warriors could be successfully usued in normal games, the rest is just useless paper. Consider that everybody have many range nowadays + strong mele like swords. TH units stand no chance against that.

A voice of reason. That's why I'm indifferent about the townhall topic. On the other hand, those playing shorter peacetime will be glad to have this, so I can't see downsides until someone demands that we make armorless units useful (like some try with scout now)

[thunder]

Its all depends of the used prices. If we would stick to NM3.2 script values, then there are some good options for strategies with TH units. Yes,lots of depends from the campyfactor of the selected map.

Making mass warriors. It has the same costs as the swordsman but maybe shorter producing time because 2 swords +1armor.(3ironbars+3coal) Of course this weaponproducing time would have to be adjusted if there would be a bard carrier image for the serfs. So in this case if a player would have stable then have to think on knights differently in the production line. Thinking on knights as now we thinking on pikes and lances. Making only few of them. MAss Warriors would stick with mass bowmans. The few horses could be used with vagabonds or if the players has enough wood then maybe with scouts. I think this strategy could have huge hitting power with the mass warrirors. on open battlefield could work nicely.

Making mass barbarians. It would use leather jacket and 2swords (2ironbars+2coal). Well in this case there are several options. making the 40 barbarian with mass rouges and with few vagabonds. It need small economy but can produce 90++ at normal 60min PT. So only TH troops with paper defences but with big mass. Or next to the barbarians still can imagine few pikes or xbows too. Advantages of Producing barbarian would have making huge spam with low defence. Leather jacket would be used for making barbs and few bows?

Sticking with the original sword+knight builds with bows could offer few more paper TH units. And still this would stay the strongest composition as a classical because it would stay the most shielded one?

or Making mass pikes with Xbows army with axefighters and bows. In this case the scouts can be easy option too as on low iron resources maps or maps with 2ironmines only.(I think the only normal game mode where scout is a real PT option-but it is another topic )

Okay need to think on the other PTs too. The units possibilites are discribed in other topics.
Yes, definitely this would a little refreshment for the short PT games of course. Not only milites, but range and antihorse units would be avaiable too very early in the game.
I dont know but maybe could be very big mass on long PT games with the cheaper less defenced units.
Maybe trolling with producing mass milities with mass rouges. Mass rouge sound is quite friendly in any case as these units shouting only a tiny bit slower than bowmans.

I think to these would be the main points of the changes. I've seen some games with these already. Economicaly would looks out on very similar way. The main difference would be the created PT armies. (The Barbarian strategie would use very same size economy as now enough for making the swordman+knight+bow strat. )

Well, I'm looking ahead with this game. We could add these units to ECO multiplayer games even if these have Paper IMO.
Somebody told it, more options and possibilities means more fun!
I'm pretty sure there would be abusers

[MickeyMouseXD]

Its all depends of the used prices. If we would stick to NM3.2 script values, then there are some good options for strategies with TH units. Yes,lots of depends from the campyfactor of the selected map.

Making mass warriors. It has the same costs as the swordsman but maybe shorter producing time because 2 swords +1armor.(3ironbars+3coal) Of course this weaponproducing time would have to be adjusted if there would be a bard carrier image for the serfs. So in this case if a player would have stable then have to think on knights differently in the production line. Thinking on knights as now we thinking on pikes and lances. Making only few of them. MAss Warriors would stick with mass bowmans. The few horses could be used with vagabonds or if the players has enough wood then maybe with scouts. I think this strategy could have huge hitting power with the mass warrirors. on open battlefield could work nicely.

Making mass barbarians. It would use leather jacket and 2swords (2ironbars+2coal). Well in this case there are several options. making the 40 barbarian with mass rouges and with few vagabonds. It need small economy but can produce 90++ at normal 60min PT. So only TH troops with paper defences but with big mass. Or next to the barbarians still can imagine few pikes or xbows too. Advantages of Producing barbarian would have making huge spam with low defence. Leather jacket would be used for making barbs and few bows?

Maybe you dont know but barbarians and warriors have same statistics! It is illogical to create 2 additional units with same statistics, especialy when u propose 2 different ways of making them.
That is horrible idea XD