Age of Strategy Forums

On the contrary...
A peasant fight to defend his house and family, so i think he should have a 100% resistance...

I agree alexander. Peasant is not any mercenary.

On the contrary...
A peasant fight to defend his house and family, so i think he should have a 100% resistance...

I also agree with Alexander

Warriors fight to defend house and family too. I have a game Rome: Total War. On that, peasants are really easily scared and run off, so why not be converted easily? All peasants have to fight for is their work, their country (which has put them into hard labor so they hate) and possibly a family, although in that situation peasants wouldn't have died for their family. Warriors are VERY likely to have a close family, a richer, more enjoyable lifestyle and would be very loyal to their country. The only reason you think peasants that way is because of stories, hollywood and fairy tales. The truth is far different...

They are scared because they are not trained... i don't think they are easily converted...

Peasants would definitely be immune to conversion, if not that would mean that they are destroying there own stuff, and kkilling their own friends and family. Perhaps a successful conversion could cause "fear" instead. Making then unable to move or attack for 2 turns?

ejm29 wrote:Peasants would definitely be immune to conversion, if not that would mean that they are destroying there own stuff, and kkilling their own friends and family.

This argument would be the same for every other unit though, except even more so as they have more friends, family etc AND be loyal to country. To them, war was just another job, and what do they have to fight for that normal warriors do not?

We'll, for a peasant to fight for his home, business, family and life in the first place would be extremely terrifying for them. But to then have the courage to turn and fight there former friends and destroy everything they have become a custom to would probably be to nerve wrecking to bear. Soldiers, on the other hand are used to battle so would be much more likely to turn for religious reasons or for being mistreated (This is just my opinion though)

Alexander82 wrote:They are scared because they are not trained... i don't think they are easily converted...

I agree. The peasants are unused to war. The "conversion" is a political and 'religious' conversion. This explains some units' conversion resistance through religious fervor or nationalistic fanaticism. Peasants' religion and politics would be very much tied to their home and tradition. The idea that "professional warriors" had a better life and therefore more to fight for is absolute rubbish. Not only was the average knight less wealthy than say a merchant, they had no more political freedom than anybody (unlike nobles). Notice the infighting that happens among knights (according to tradition like King Arthur and the Hundred Years War). They probably had more political loyalty than a peasant but not more friends. Peasants would have no political reason to fight for either side (both would be bad to them).

A peasant was more likely to be attached to family and tied to location than a soldier (a soldier was more apt to be single). People fight for personal ties, religious ties, and then political ties. So I think all factors told (fear, loyalty, etc.) peasants are no more likely to be converted than any other unit.

OK, Thanks for explanation I didn't realize that as I was confused to what your points were. Anyway, looks like a 5v1 or so, so you win

Sorry I just want him implemented!!!

Alexander82 wrote:They are scared because they are not trained... i don't think they are easily converted...

So maybe peasants can get 'scared' and he will drop his weapon so his attack will turn lower by 2

We do need to weaken this unit, as it shouldn't be a commonly used unit, but only an emergency one.

We might make a trigger event... for example you can train peasants only if you have enemies near your base

getting over complicated, think of every unit to be as simple as they can.

Then i've got an idea Daniel... Why don't you make a chance that the unit dies/escap after any attack?
They aren't trained soldiers, just a certain % that the unit escapes even if it survives the attack.

We also might make a tech to lower the chance of peasant escaping (at the church we might research something about faith)

Then I've got an idea... Why not just a normal unit that costs 1 turn and is used in emergency because he is so weak anybody can kill him.

Sorry, but really - let's keep it simple.

Yes, and we also don't want to add more chance - its a strategy game...

Strategy should consider "chances"...
I don't think that a unit that is killed by a single attack would be that useful in defense... i would make a unit that cost 2 but can properly defend...
Maybe just lower the attack but let some life to that unit or it'll be useless...

Okay, seems good.
7 health
3 attack

Boom. Done. Implement?

please suggest a technology icon and naming too that will enable building peasants.
thanks!

(and also a summarized stat would help too - thanks!)

Fight for freedom?

"To Arms!" ?

Not bad
We might also make it to the church and call it "fight for your faith" or "jihad"

Alexander82 wrote:Not bad
We might also make it to the church and call it "fight for your faith" or "jihad"

No jihad please lol, as if we dont have enough terrorists in this world.

How about draft or something? or minute defenses or something.

Civil Defense unit, built in the town center ,1 to build , 2 movement ,attack at 3, no armour , 5 site

I'm confused - what is the tech for?

Maybe I'm confused, what do you mean )

A tech you need to build peasants like man at arms.

Call it conscription Is my idea