Bay 12 Games Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  
Pages: 1 ... 84 85 [86] 87 88 ... 96

Author Topic: Might and Fealty (Beyond Battlemaster: Sandbox Strategy-RPG Medieval RP)  (Read 129919 times)

wereboar

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: Might and Fealty (Beyond Battlemaster: Sandbox Strategy-RPG Medieval RP)
« Reply #1275 on: March 26, 2017, 09:15:28 am »

Don't think Hawks were ever a dominating power. Maybe they were comparing to your own realm, but I would say they have always been second/third raw power-wise.
Logged

SaintofWar

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: Might and Fealty (Beyond Battlemaster: Sandbox Strategy-RPG Medieval RP)
« Reply #1276 on: March 28, 2017, 12:06:25 am »

They definitely were #1 for a very long time.
Logged

wereboar

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: Might and Fealty (Beyond Battlemaster: Sandbox Strategy-RPG Medieval RP)
« Reply #1277 on: March 28, 2017, 02:15:47 am »

Pretty sure Rathgar would kick their ass. The Imperium as well.
Logged

Hanzoku

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: Might and Fealty (Beyond Battlemaster: Sandbox Strategy-RPG Medieval RP)
« Reply #1278 on: March 28, 2017, 02:38:48 am »

The problem is/was, they had control of the western islands, huge amounts of metal, and enough peace and time to train stupid amounts of heavy cavalry. In addition, their war-time players were very well coordinated, knew how to game the system, and were on at all hours of the day/night. One on one, the individual Hawks realms were tough to fight. The problem was, once things started going against one, they went sobbing to the rest of the alliance and you were forced to surrender or be swamped.
Logged

wereboar

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: Might and Fealty (Beyond Battlemaster: Sandbox Strategy-RPG Medieval RP)
« Reply #1279 on: March 28, 2017, 04:21:41 am »

The only relevant part is wartime coordination and mobility. Their armies are nothing a large realm like Archonian Dominate could not match. All their enemies just lacked dedication.
Logged

SaintofWar

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: Might and Fealty (Beyond Battlemaster: Sandbox Strategy-RPG Medieval RP)
« Reply #1280 on: March 28, 2017, 04:36:31 am »

Pretty sure none of that is really true, Hanzoku. I don't know where that opinion came from, but it is false. For one Hawks doesn't even train heavy cavalry. Horses are way too expensive to maintain. The Western Islands aren't even that rich in metal. They, and mostly everyone else, bruteforces chainmail with population and food. Only Elysium used to be active 24/7. Also, there is just one Hawks, and Elysium. A fight with one means a fight with the other, otherwise they'd be independent Realms. There is no such thing as a 'code of honor' or whatever that binds a large Realm to not send out all it's Subrealms in a war. That'd be just silly from a realism standpoint. And even so, it's not like it matters much. There's plenty of examples where a smaller force could defeat a much larger one.
Logged

Reelya

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: Might and Fealty (Beyond Battlemaster: Sandbox Strategy-RPG Medieval RP)
« Reply #1281 on: March 31, 2017, 09:06:50 pm »

A bandit just rocked up at my capital city as I was organizing my troops:



About half of these troops have 100+ XP as well. My guys are going to get about 600 shots in the ranged fire round. Most likely there will be a handful left on round 1, all dead by round 2.
« Last Edit: March 31, 2017, 09:12:47 pm by Reelya »
Logged

coleslaw35

  • Bay Watcher
  • A disgusting pile of slop.
    • View Profile
Re: Might and Fealty (Beyond Battlemaster: Sandbox Strategy-RPG Medieval RP)
« Reply #1282 on: March 31, 2017, 09:16:58 pm »

A bandit just rocked up at my capital city as I was organizing my troops:



About half of these troops have 100+ XP as well. My guys are going to get about 600 shots in the ranged fire round. Most likely there will be a handful left on round 1, all dead by round 2.

Jeez, that archer to infantry ratio. It seems like archers are kinda op given that you can just have a few hundred and immediately devastate the enemy, but I could be wrong. It just seems that way from what little combat I've participated in.
Logged

Reelya

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: Might and Fealty (Beyond Battlemaster: Sandbox Strategy-RPG Medieval RP)
« Reply #1283 on: March 31, 2017, 10:10:23 pm »

Oops I forgot to add the rest of the veterans to the fight. Might as well max this out:



Total troops on our side: 1416. A bandit does not simply rock up to the biggest fortress in Children of Armok lightly.
« Last Edit: March 31, 2017, 10:21:04 pm by Reelya »
Logged

Reelya

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: Might and Fealty (Beyond Battlemaster: Sandbox Strategy-RPG Medieval RP)
« Reply #1284 on: April 01, 2017, 11:01:54 am »

116 enemy deaths in the ranged combat phase. The guy had 115 troops.

Didn't even get to the first melee round.

Zaratin

  • Escaped Lunatic
    • View Profile
Re: Might and Fealty (Beyond Battlemaster: Sandbox Strategy-RPG Medieval RP)
« Reply #1285 on: April 01, 2017, 11:38:52 am »

It would be interesting to see the results if the other side had as many infantry as you had archers.  :-\
Logged

Masdus

  • Escaped Lunatic
    • View Profile
Re: Might and Fealty (Beyond Battlemaster: Sandbox Strategy-RPG Medieval RP)
« Reply #1286 on: April 13, 2017, 12:36:18 am »

The only relevant part is wartime coordination and mobility. Their armies are nothing a large realm like Archonian Dominate could not match. All their enemies just lacked dedication.

Hi there, as one of two active Developers, and the Leader of Hawks since the game inception the only realm that has ever given us pause was Rathgar right at the start, and to be honest that was due almost entirely to a single player whom was also once a frequent bay12er. The Archonian Dominate lost to a war party consisting of roughly 50% of Elysium standing army, which coincidentally was much smaller then it is now. A force using elements of Elysiums force and my own small holdings from the main Hawk Island warred against Stonelands, Ascalon and Grand Fate at the same time and won out in the end, though to be fair we supposedly had allies from Renais at the time.

The Imperium at its best would have been a great conflict, but that is hypothetical since I was one of the two main military players in the House of Order. The reality is we have never needed to mobilise Hawks as an empire since large scale conflict appears to bore pretty much anyone that isn't Hawks. Your are correct though activity is everything in warfare in M&F. Hawks consistently beats armies 3 or 4 times the size of the force we commit, simply because we can rely on our entire force to be where it needs to be when it needs to be, thus while our force is smaller in most conflicts we only fight battles where we dominate in numbers.

The problem is/was, they had control of the western islands, huge amounts of metal, and enough peace and time to train stupid amounts of heavy cavalry. In addition, their war-time players were very well coordinated, knew how to game the system, and were on at all hours of the day/night. One on one, the individual Hawks realms were tough to fight. The problem was, once things started going against one, they went sobbing to the rest of the alliance and you were forced to surrender or be swamped.

Before the South and Western lands were open, Hawks had control of a sizeable amount of metal in the game world. But this was way back before Elysium existed, before that land was even available to colonise. While we still have ample metal for our needs, we would no longer be a dominate metal source as we once were.

Pretty sure none of that is really true, Hanzoku. I don't know where that opinion came from, but it is false. For one Hawks doesn't even train heavy cavalry. Horses are way too expensive to maintain. The Western Islands aren't even that rich in metal. They, and mostly everyone else, bruteforces chainmail with population and food. Only Elysium used to be active 24/7. Also, there is just one Hawks, and Elysium. A fight with one means a fight with the other, otherwise they'd be independent Realms. There is no such thing as a 'code of honor' or whatever that binds a large Realm to not send out all it's Subrealms in a war. That'd be just silly from a realism standpoint. And even so, it's not like it matters much. There's plenty of examples where a smaller force could defeat a much larger one.

We have a large cavalry force actually, heavy cavalry and mounted archers, but it is entirely provided by a subset of Elysium. Our roman themed sub realm has been talking about fielding a small heavy cavalry group for some time, but they not particularly renown for offensive military actions, with the exception of their involvement in the Imperium's most recent civil war.

Hawks does have a 'code of honor' regarding things like sub realm conflicts, however it was modeled upon battletech Clan concepts, so I guess in the end might makes right.

Logged

JamesCorella

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
    • Youtube Account Lets Plays
Re: Might and Fealty (Beyond Battlemaster: Sandbox Strategy-RPG Medieval RP)
« Reply #1287 on: April 13, 2017, 01:20:01 pm »

Oops I forgot to add the rest of the veterans to the fight. Might as well max this out:



Total troops on our side: 1416. A bandit does not simply rock up to the biggest fortress in Children of Armok lightly.
ohh man thats a whole lot of archers also I wanted to thank you for helping out John Corella with everything!
Logged

coleslaw35

  • Bay Watcher
  • A disgusting pile of slop.
    • View Profile
Re: Might and Fealty (Beyond Battlemaster: Sandbox Strategy-RPG Medieval RP)
« Reply #1288 on: April 17, 2017, 05:30:58 am »

Okay, so.. Is there any particular reason for buildings breaking down? It's so obnoxious having to rebuild some of the more important buildings since they just get destroyed for absolutely no reason.
Logged

Reelya

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: Might and Fealty (Beyond Battlemaster: Sandbox Strategy-RPG Medieval RP)
« Reply #1289 on: April 17, 2017, 05:39:51 am »

Buildings break when the supporting population falls below 50% of the starter-cost of the building. e.g. Fairground increases food, needs 1200 pop, breaks < 600 pop. So when it breaks it's double-bad since you just lost a food-production building as well. Partial-decayed buildings only need the 50% pop to get working again, so you want to get things like Fairground rebooted fast, otherwise you'd need to boost pop all the way back to 1200 to recreate it.

One handy tip is that militia count as pop. So if you want the Fairground in a 1000-pop town just drop 200 militia in there, order the thing, then remove them again. As long as its 600+ it won't stop being built.
Pages: 1 ... 84 85 [86] 87 88 ... 96