I was thinking about the utility of armies and with only 3 units in them (and no way to switch out units), they are not very effective.
Given that organized armies are the *only* way that warfare is fought between peer opponents (that is, those with roughly equal military capabilities), it seems short sighted to make armies this weak in the game. the way the game works, its simpler and more effective to send a maniple/squad/platoon (whatever) to do your fighting rather than combining in an army.
The solution I believe would be to allow armies to have 5 units, 10 with the Pentagon. And make them less rare!
In warfare situations, the game should focus on armies fighting armies, or armies attacking cities, rather than squads attacking squads. It wouldn't unbalance the game if everyone had them.
I just don't understand the thought that went into this. Here's great idea, but they give it to us in a half measure!
Given that organized armies are the *only* way that warfare is fought between peer opponents (that is, those with roughly equal military capabilities), it seems short sighted to make armies this weak in the game. the way the game works, its simpler and more effective to send a maniple/squad/platoon (whatever) to do your fighting rather than combining in an army.
The solution I believe would be to allow armies to have 5 units, 10 with the Pentagon. And make them less rare!
In warfare situations, the game should focus on armies fighting armies, or armies attacking cities, rather than squads attacking squads. It wouldn't unbalance the game if everyone had them.
I just don't understand the thought that went into this. Here's great idea, but they give it to us in a half measure!
Comment