Goblin Squad Member
|
..............
In a game where they stated it should take years for the first official player settlements to spring up. It needs to be a long involved process to take them over.
That's why big NPC armies that can go from map edge to map edge is a bad thing. There must be difficulty's and a tough process to go to war. Nothing you can do to seamlessly just because you have much gold.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
That's why big NPC armies that can go from map edge to map edge is a bad thing. There must be difficulty's and a tough process to go to war. Nothing you can do to seamlessly just because you have much gold...............
In a game where they stated it should take years for the first official player settlements to spring up. It needs to be a long involved process to take them over.
As far as I know, nobody I have heard anyway has been calling for either
1. Soldiers of unlimited quality that are purchased with pure gold
2. Soldiers that actually are able to win a battle without the aid of PCs.I can't speak for everyone, but the gist of the NPC soldiers idea I get is not a direct product of gold, it is a product of a kingdoms infrastructure. IE a town to have an NPC army needs not just gold, but a housing infrastructure, military baracks of some sort, a steady food supply etc...
Secondly not something that is likely to take out any player settlements on their own at all, More like something that is around 25% of a guilds effective power. IE not something that is going to go in and whipe out a 100 player kingdom, but something that a 75 man kingdom with a NPC army will be close to even matched against a 100 man kingdom without. Say the 100 man kingdom sent the largest army it's territory could handle against a 75 man kingdom, but did not bother to send the actual players into battle, those NPCs should barely scratch the walls before getting massacred.
Not particularly different then if one kingdom has more money and thus all of their members have massively better gear than the other, it is pretty much the same thing. At least from every post I have seen in favor of them, nobody is even slightly condoning the idea of soldiers being good enough to replace players, simply as an added means to enhance and add an extra layer of strategy, as the attackers have to plan out where to send their soldiers, and the defenders where to optimally place their guards, in addition to the PCs that are a much larger contributor to the action.