Should we just remove the ability to upgrade buildings?

[x4000]

I'm kind of thinking so.  All it does is add some health, and people complain about that.  I never use it, either.

The problem with the suggestions about adding new features to buildings based on upgrade level are basically:
1) That's unbalancing, and allows for too much density in cities.  We're already pushing it as it is in terms of the density that I'm looking for.
2) That's bloody complex for players to evaluate, so that really ups the complexity of the game in a negative way.
3) Also we don't really have time for it at the moment, but even if we did I think that 1 and 2 are substantial enough arguments that this bit of fat should be cut.

I'm even tempted to cut the ability to DIRECTLY upgrade your units.  That's another one of those fiddly things (see #2 above) that just makes for too many decision points.  But the placement of schools and other buildings and tokens that upgrade your units would obviously still all apply, so it's not like you couldn't have upgraded units.  You just couldn't choose to individually upgrade them one-by-one.  I think even giving that option at all, while it's perfectly functional and makes a lot of sense, adds a form of negative complexity that the game does not need.  Should I be upgrading units individually?  Should I be using my points and resources?  Should I be building schools instead?  Etc.

THAT said, the argument for being able to upgrade units directly is that on the battlefield when Dude A is about to get clobbered, you can just upgrade him to level 4 real quick and he can suddenly prevail.  But that again is a very micromangement-intensive thing, and seems really counter to the game flow in general.  If you're having to study unit stats in that depth after they have been created, I think that is less than ideal unless you are a super hardcore player of the game (then it's fine).

Thoughts?

[madcow]

Getting rid of upgrading buildings/units seems fine. If players really want to intervene in a fight we have our indirect methods.  Perhaps an ability to help heal (either over time or direct heal) would be nice though. Not sure honestly if it already exists. Not really played with much of the mythic stuffs yet.

[x4000]

I think it's a careful balance between not feeling like you have too much control, though -- when it comes to the healing effects, etc.  Basically once a battle is happening, nothing beyond god tokens or mythic tokens really has much chance of helping.  Beyond that it's all in how you prepare BEFORE the battle, and there you can definitely affect both health and heal rates.

[orzelek]

I would agree. Remove the upgrades for buildings.
I'm not sure about upgrades for units - does upgrade heal the unit in question?
We could replace this with a costly (3 actions?) heal if thats so so micro minded can still save their units in a pinch.

[PokerChen]

Getting rid of building upgrades is okay.

I'd like to keep the unit upgrading. It's a comparatively very cost-inefficient method to do what you want, and there are scenarios in which you want to do this - units in choke-points, and units who receive adamantine/pandora's box/ and are needed to fight off a military cataclysm.* After 1 or 2 games, the decision should be clear and precise: schools and centaurs for normal upgrading, divine light from heaven for special occasions.

*It will happen fairly often that a level 1 unit will pick up the upgrade you need instead of a lvl 3 next to the upgrade. Field promotion!

[Mick]

I think upgrades should come from schools and towers, and I'd dump the direct upgrade. (Small tangent, "School 2" really needs a better name)

A school/tower forces you to give up a "city-slot", and in the case of school especially, provides potential imbalance down the road.

Specific upgrades feels too micromangey to me, and makes things too easy if you abuse it (as most micromangey tactics tend to do).

[iozay]

I am alright with fully removing it to simplify things in favour for more important features

[x4000]

School 2 isn't the name, by the way -- it's just the shorthand.  It's actual name if you look in the tooltip is "Secondary School."

[Hearteater]

I'd remove both building and unit upgrades.  Focus on more important things.  If there is a compelling reason for them, they can come back at a later date.

[Greywolf22]

I'm also okay with not upgrading buildings (adding health never really seemed to be a huge concern of mine to the building anyway).  What about having a more fluid upgrade path for your units?  Such as when they win a battle they are upgraded to the next level as opposed to the player choosing who to upgrade?  That way it would be based on the experience of the unit rather then simply deciding which unit should be upgraded?  I know they can't be directly controlled anyway, but it would make some units that have won battles more "experienced" then others?

Just a thought.

[x4000]

@Greywolf22: I tend to like the veteran system sort of thing as well.  I think that would be unbalancing here... and so I love it even more.   I'd think this would go on medium and hard difficulty only.

@Hearteater: That's more or less my thinking, too. 

Though some folks have brought up reasons they want to keep the direct unit upgrades, is there any really compelling reason to do so?  I understand that it gives a bit more control, but I'm not sure that's a great thing and it seems to just complicate things.  Or -- I've got it! -- we could just make direct unit upgrades something that can be done on Hard difficulty.  That's what I'll do.

[Pepisolo]

Building upgrades can be removed, certainly. Not sure about units, I'll leave that discussion for the more experienced players.

Such as when they win a battle they are upgraded to the next level as opposed to the player choosing who to upgrade?

Brief, thoughts. This does sound interesting. Worthy of discussion. It would add a bit more randomness to the game. A dangerous military soldier might develop that might need extra thought/resources in how to take him/her down.

[Greywolf22]

It definitely could sway a balance one way or another by having a "champion" who is raging across the battlefield...while not as dangerous as gods, it would add even more chaos into the fray.

And I agree medium-hard difficulties would be my suggestion as well, as not to overwhelm new players or those starting out

Besides, history has taught us that what's more Greek/Norse then champions on the battlefield??

[Misery]

Hm, I'm thinking that without upgrades, particularly for units, there arent enough ways to have much influence on battles already started.   In my own strategies, I use unit upgrades to sorta give things a push when needed;  as with many things in the game it might help, it might not.... but it's a very useful tool. 

The problem is.... alot of the time, it's the *only* viable tool.  Everything else is expensive or very risky, or both.  Pretty much the least risky/pricey thing after that is dropping mythological things in there to shove the balance of battles around.  EDIT:  This is most true in the early game, or if I've already been using a number of bigger effects (and thus it's a bad idea to throw any more out), yet I might have to affect combat happening away from that stuff, or something like that.


Building upgrades I originally thought useless, but witht he changes to the ways cities work, I find myself using them to protect key buildings from bandits and such so they dont get locked up for 10 turns, screwing things over.   As best I can tell, building upgrades just improve the max health of the building, yes?   This actually seems almost necessary in some cases;  there are some units that can just clobber a building in a single monstrous blow (WITHOUT being a Trojan Horse), and I've had a few cases where I probably WOULD have been in trouble if I hadnt been able to use that to at least slow the rampaging enemy unit down so I could get guys in there to deal with it.


But yeah, that's my main problem, not enough low-level ways to influence things that are already out.  Buildings only help with FUTURE units, and that means it can be many turns before they really do something, and by then, the situation may have changed for the worse, to where now the building is hurting more than helping.   AKA, I find them to be useful tools, and I think they might be MORE useful and versatile once the cataclysm system is in.


Without those, all that's left is Smite (which really is a good tool), and Commandment (which is currently bloody useless, that might change with cataclysms but I still think it'll be a rare-use item)

[Mick]

  Or -- I've got it! -- we could just make direct unit upgrades something that can be done on Hard difficulty.  That's what I'll do.

I don't like that, because I think direct upgrades make things *less* hard.