Age of Strategy Forums

No clue why people play Yes(?) upgrade games, but I dismantle them. You just use effects with strategy (my favorite is to convert enemies and capture undefended Towns) and protect yourself - build cheap units and don't leave unoccupied towns.

Yes, but super-units are quite helpful for sieges and defending against large hosts.

I used the tie fighter most notably on the fiction map "Castle Defense".

You made COOLGuy's point though. Three godly units are no match for three convert effects and one pikeman.

I think this is a great idea! Loads of thoughts on how it should be done.

Im with Hardeep, I think it should be a tech that needs to be "invented".

As for all the rest, theyd all work for me So who's choosing? lol

Probably COOLGuy/Daniel shall implement the version they deem best, should the idea get voted in

*bump*

nah, lets not copy battle for Wesnoth

It's been a long time this was talked about here, but this would be a great addition to the game.

In my opinion, it should be kept simple and not give an "over the top" advantage, but a fair distinctive one.

Also, I think the promotions should be based in solid numbers instead of percentage. The percentage method would lead to great imbalances to stronger units in my opinion.

Also, promotion should be given for participating in a fight, independently of damage dealt or received. So, for example, if a unit is attacked with an arrow, that should count as battle experience.

Also, the promotions should not affect HP, but only power and armor.

So, a fair model could be this one, with 3 levels:
Recruit: Base units.
Veteran: +1 armor / +1 pierce armor / + 1 power (Promoted after 5 battle experiences)
Expert: +3 armor / +3 pierce armor / +3 power (Promoted after 10 battle experiences)

I think this model is what resembles most what actually happens in the battlefield. Experienced soldiers are game changers, yes, and it shows in how they engage and protect themselves. But experience doesn't change their health (HP). An experienced soldier dies from a head shot the same way a recruit does.

I hope it gets picked up and the dev finds time to implement a promotion system.

I commend you for searching correct topic, instead of creating new.
But what you propose here is exactly over the top.
Armor is most often twice as useful as power and 4x as hp.
Especially p.armor as archers have lower power.
You are also mistaken about ingame stats armor and hp.
Ingame hp can represent armor too - it's just indicator of overall residence on the battlefield, while ingame armor stat represents stable, hardly removable damage reduction (it can come from armor, agility, training ).
It is like that because armor in most cases is not something indestructible, unremovable, thus e.g. medium infantry like swordsmen have 0/0 armor stat, while clearly being clad in armor.
They just have around 2-2.5 times more hp than unarmored units.
So hp is better indicator and more safe for game balance.
Also most games use a system of diminishing returns not without reason - when few stats are increased linearly overall fighting ability increased exponentially, so diminishing is a must.
In other words - higher level should require much more xp/kills or whatever and give the same boost or each level giving lower boost.

Well, not that this proposition has very high chance to be implemented. It would require quite a lot of coding and the dev was not really interested in the topic that much.

Hey, no problem.

Yeah, true, it would take work. Well, if the dev dismisses a promotion system, I won't dwell on it then.

You seem more knowledgeable about the mechanics of the game, so I won't argue.

Thanks for replying.