Board Thread:Suggestions forum/@comment-26274215-20160628105745/@comment-26274215-20160704144752

AlteOgre wrote:

Legoarmy505 wrote: Wait... I am confused, we put food and stuff in a special chest for our units then they take it and they don't desert? I think that is the basic point... Alternatively: Poorly fed/maintained troops could be weak troops instead of deserting ...

@NASI: What do you think of that?

I figure people would find it utterly annoying to find troops deserting just because of poor upkeep. It may be more acceptable if the penalty of poor upkeep would be less dramatic. On the other hand: Hiring new troops isn't exactly a very laborious challenge and one could easily imagine the act of paying for replacent troops being the equivalent of paying off for poor upkeep of ones hired troops. Bottom line of this suggestion thread is that a troop commander should take care of the upkeep for a standing army anyway. Just thinking out loud here.

Edit: The result of too low upkeep could also be that troops fall into some passive mode instead of deserting. Reactivation could be done through paying them some reactivation fee and resuming their upkeep. Both could be done via that 'hired unit upkeep chest'. I figure this mechanism will be less annoying but still meet the suggestions objectives. hmmm, maybe thats a better idea. but eventually, after a long time of not having food (4-6 days?) troops will begin to dessert, they cant run on low forever. and the poor upkeep effect should also depend on the troops themselves. Rangers and most evil factions, are used to not having food for a long time, so they are better resistant to it. loyalty with the good factions to their "lord" is also alot higher than with orcs.