Simple way to reduce the power of Loyal in long campaigns

[Invisible Philosopher]

It has generally been observed that using lots of non-Loyal level 3 units is devastating to your gold, especially over the course of many scenarios. I propose maximum upkeep per unit = 2.

[Darth Fool]

or use EPs suggestion of making upkeep for all units 1 and make loyal reduce the cost of recalling units.

[Elvish_Pillager]

and make loyal reduce the cost of recalling units.

Btw, that wasn't actually part of my suggestion.
I like the idea, though.
Invisible Philosopher's idea is quite good too, if we're not keen to make huge changes. It solves the problem of level 2->3 becoming worse, and 1->2 isn't as much of a problem because you can just recruit instead of recalling.

[AkitoScorpio]

Granted I mostly play Skirmish with friends..... But I can see how this would be a good way to solve the issue actually.

[Darth Fool]

and make loyal reduce the cost of recalling units.

Btw, that wasn't actually part of my suggestion.
I like the idea, though.

Ah yes, I should have said "Make loyal reduce the cost of recalling the units and use EP's suggestion of making all upkeep 1."

[Invisible Philosopher]

That suggestion has two problems. I'm not directly opposed to it, but I don't want this thread taken over by that related suggestion.

1) It is a big change and entirely modifies the function of Loyal, making it useless in multiplayer for one thing. Likely enough to seriously unbalance the game that it will probably not be implemented.

2) It makes units cheaper on average when recalling levelled units. Much less upkeep, and less cost to recall. This is likely to make currently balanced campaigns too easy.

So, start another thread about it if you want, but please don't hijack one which has an idea I want discussed on its own merits so that it has a decent chance of implementation.

[ott]

Regarding the original suggestion of standardizing all level 2 and higher upkeep at 2 gold per turn: this would be worth trying. Right now, I avoid recalling level 3 units unless they joined of their own volition (and thus cost no upkeep at all), are Loyal, or I absolutely have to considering the alternatives. Usually the level 2 versions are almost as powerful, without the extra 20+ gold per scenario cost, and they have a chance to advance-heal which can be a huge advantage over the level 3's.

Regarding reducing the 20 recall cost: this would completely change many of the existing campaigns, and I think such a drastic change needs to wait until after 1.0. Ditto for making all units have 1 upkeep per turn. In contrast, capping upkeep at 2 gold would be a relatively small change that would help make level 3 units more powerful, addressing a valid concern of expert players like EP.

[Shade]

Why not just make loyal units cost -1 gold upkeep to a minimum of 0 (in case a level zero unit scores loyal as a trait)?

[Invisible Philosopher]

Why not just make loyal units cost -1 gold upkeep to a minimum of 0 (in case a level zero unit scores loyal as a trait)?

When recruiting level 1's, your upkeep would be on average 3/5 of what it is now (unless you're undead). Potentially unbalancing.
It also doesn't exactly solve the high-level-unit problem; instead, it changes it: you ALWAYS lose lots of gold for using level 3 units, because the loyal ones cost 2 instead of 1. I don't want to be that monetarily discouraged from using my powerful units; the wasted experience is bad enough. I am not so sure of the validity of this objection though.

The thinking behind the max 2 upkeep idea is that it's the only thing that makes upkeep sane for high level units without seriously disrupting anything else, like the loyal trait having an effect, or upkeep for level 1 units. Of course I'd like to be proven wrong, but there aren't that many simple things that can be done to upkeep.

[Simons Mith]

Aha, found the right thread. Loyal/upkeep tweak: 1) loyal reduces the effective /level/ of a loyal unit by one for upkeep costs, combined with 2) one village supports /one or two/ levels worth of units. i.e. ten first level units need ten villages to support them, as now, but so too would ten second level units. Ten third or fourth level units take two villages apiece to support them. However, if you recruit more units than you have villages, the gold cost remains the same. so as a rule of thumb you need to pay a bit more attention to how many villages you currently own, because supporting high-level units with gold is still expensive.

[quartex]

Why not just make loyal units cost -1 gold upkeep to a minimum of 0 (in case a level zero unit scores loyal as a trait)?

Becuase personally I don't want more 0 cost units. That breaks the whole idea of upkeep, that units should cost something after you buy them, so that a huge army has economic restraints. IP's idea of limiting the max to 2 is simple and easy to implement and keeps loyal being useful.

[Shade]

Why not just make loyal units cost -1 gold upkeep to a minimum of 0 (in case a level zero unit scores loyal as a trait)?

Becuase personally I don't want more 0 cost units. That breaks the whole idea of upkeep, that units should cost something after you buy them, so that a huge army has economic restraints. IP's idea of limiting the max to 2 is simple and easy to implement and keeps loyal being useful.

I think that's fair on second though. But I'll just say, 'divide upkeep by two and always round up.' Identical, but it scales better in my head. Even if it gets coded your way. [Arbitrary caps bug me for some reason so let me live in my fairy land, just in case they add another 3 levels of units ]

[ott]

But I'll just say, 'divide upkeep by two and always round up.' Identical, but it scales better in my head.

Agree with the general sentiment, but the specifics need work: your proposal would make level 1 and 2 units have 1 upkeep and level 3 and 4 have 2 upkeep. This would not address the current disincentive in advancing level 2 units.

[Simons Mith]

Perhaps:

Level 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 ...
Loyal 0 1 1 1 2 2 2 ...
Standard 0 1 2 2 3 3 4 ...

That addresses the disincentive for standard units advancing from 2 to 3 but does slightly raise the cost of the highest-level loyals.

The algorithm would be 1/3 round up for loyals, 1/2 round down for standard troops.

[Simons Mith]

Oops, I'm cross-eyed. Adjust 'standard' formula to actually match the table. Previewing didn't help ...