Animal level's and such

[spectacle]

Plenty of wars have been won by superior training.

[Potjeh]

Of command cadres, maybe.

[DigDog]

Plenty of wars have been won by superior training.

There's only so much you can do with your superior training when you're outnumbered or have inferior equipment. And it's not that much.

[Percival]

Plenty of wars have been won by superior training.

There's only so much you can do with your superior training when you're outnumbered or have inferior equipment. And it's not that much.

Only thing you CAN do is farm LP and pump all of it into your combat skills.

[Wolfang]

Animal level's could easily be raised if players could play as animals.

For example, you could play as wolf and work your way up the food chain until you can eat strong players level XVIII Wolf or something

[DatOneGuy]

Plenty of wars have been won by superior training.

There's only so much you can do with your superior training when you're outnumbered or have inferior equipment. And it's not that much.

You're purposefully creating the worst possible scenario in order to try and invalidate his statement.


With that said it's still off, superior training is what makes those ridiculously impossible scenarios, possible. No, you won't win 100% of the time because you know more, but you will have a better chance than the guy who doesn't know as much, and it can indeed decide the fate of whole nations at times.

There's probably some quote I could take from Sun Tzu on the matter, but I can't be arsed to look it up.

[Potjeh]

No, excellent commanders are what makes impossible odds beatable. Individual soldier's skill at arms (ie what combat skills in H&H represent) matters very little, the most important thing for a soldier is the ability to follow orders so that officers can use their tactical skills to win the battle. One on one, a Roman legionnaire was no match for barbarian warriors, but Romans regularly kicked their ass. The few times when they did lose was when they were led by bad commanders, or the barbarians had a competent leader for a change (such as Arminius at Teutoburg Forest, who had Roman officer training).

[Jackard]

agreed with potjeh, and would like to see more support for groups. fuck demigods

There's probably some quote I could take from Sun Tzu on the matter

by all means!! let us be as pretentious as possible

[spectacle]

No, excellent commanders are what makes impossible odds beatable. Individual soldier's skill at arms (ie what combat skills in H&H represent) matters very little, the most important thing for a soldier is the ability to follow orders so that officers can use their tactical skills to win the battle.

So I suppose all the effort modern armies spend on marksmanship training is pointless? You should tell them they only need to march the soldiers around a bit to get them used to following orders, then hand out rifles and send them into battle. Think of all the money that can be saved by not wasting ammunition on training!
Whether you're carrying a sword or a rifle, there is no substitute in combat for being able to actually hit your opponent. Unskilled fighters are merely taking up space on the battlefield.

[Jackard]

All of that is adequately covered by beliefs and the abilities given to you from learning combat skills. And if they aren't? Develop there. Don't fool yourself into thinking skill values are a necessity, they might as well be a placeholder for more interesting mechanics.