Guardian

[Seravy]

Is it possible to expand guardian to all 'defending' battles regardless of location? (this may need careful thought)

Possible but I don't think I want to do that.

[Catwalk]

I vote for "when defending a node you own". Unless it's easier to code it for all node defense, in which case that's fine too. I still prefer removing the retort altogether, though.

[Nelphine]

I'm actually getting to the point I want to give guardian (as is) to all AI on expert and master, or maybe just master, and give lunatic guardian+ (no idea what that would be). 

Then just drop the retort.

However, as some people play defensively and use this as a human, I don't think that's a valid option. 

(Also note, this is based on my non bezerker games; obviously on my bezerker games, I don't care, as they just destroy the enemy and even guardian doesn't change anything in my gameplay.)

[Arnuz]

I feel that the most intuitive option for the bonus is when fighting (both attack or defense, as for node countermagic mechanic) under the effect of a node that you merged, as per INFO button.

I would make it cost 1 and nerf it (stats rather than bonus) but the proposal means also a slight buff as it'd work on many more map tiles. I would thus make it +2/+1.

[Azvael]

My 2 cents.

I want to really like Guardian.  I never use it, as it's too expensive for what it offers (and warlord is a better pick for troop strength).  Seravy could drop it to 1 pick, but I agree that seems overpowered, plus more work for him to balance out the AI wizards.  So no.

What about an across-the-board boost to the defensive properties of all normal units controlled by the wizard, not just garrisons?

One of these, perhaps: +1 to defend, +2 armor, +2 health, +1 armor and health, or something?  The idea being to boost defensive, but not offensive power.

This puts it in competition (or maybe somewhat better) with warlord.  But I'd argue that maybe that's not a bad thing given how OP rush strategies are right now.  This could possibly help make defensive strategies more viable.

If this is too OP, then keep the original stats for Guardian, but expand it to include not just garrisons, but whenever a unit is in a node.

EDIT: though personally, I'd prefer to see a general, defensive bonus rather than limiting it to a garrison.

[Seravy]

I already decided to avoid nodes due to how counterintuitive that is (the defender and the owner of the node can be different people) and boosting stats everywhere would just make it a copy of Tactician and Warlord (and I'm already thinking those two stacking is bad for the game - not because it's too powerful but because it's a far too trivial choice, I don't think I'd ever play warlord without tactician. Once I already commited 2 or 3 (with alchemy) picks to a military strategy, spending one more on it is the obvious choice.)

Defense IS the best offense. A single unit that cannot be killed by the enemy is as good as an entire army and every point of defensive stat you can gain gets you closer to it.

[Nelphine]

eh, tactician is the 3rd pick for retorts to pair with alchemy/warlord. which means its the 4th pick to pair with warlord. so you have to be willing to spend a total of 7 picks on retorts before you include it with warlord.

[Seravy]

I don't understand your math.

Alchemy is 1, Warlord is 2, Tactician is 1, for a total of 4 picks. I don't think there is any other military purpose retort in the game to stack with these.

[Nelphine]

If you're using warlord, you're using city troops. If you're using city troops, you WILL lose to summons without a lot of buffs (including warlord or alchemy or levels or adamamtium).

If you're going to use buffed city troops, you still need quantity. Spellweaver is more important than tactician any day, despite taking 2 picks. Specialist isn't as good as soellweavwr, but it both protects your spell buffs, and let's you cast more buffs. Specialist is more important than tactician. On any node centric strategy, astrologer is more important than tactician.

You can take tacrician first, but you're wrong if you do so, and you WILL do worse. (Unless you're doing a 100% spellless draconian bowmen strategy )

In relation to the number of picks a retort takes, the following equation holds for city troops:

Warlord >= Alchemy > Spellweaver > Specialist > Tactician


Tactician is actually more important WITHOUT warlord, because it helps summons. And there are very few things that buff summons.

For my lunatic strategy, if I want to play on myrror, I drop tactician. I also am continually experimenting with other retorts instead of tactician because of how weak it is for city troops.

[teelaurila]

Before reading this I never got the point of Guardian. It seems very expensive for something really marginal, because very rarely I defend a city. When the AI does attack, he has massive advantage. So instead of attacking my cities, stacks roam about my territory, looking for and zooming in on targets. This forces me to tie down forces, and eventually this means I lose. So I have to concentrate forces to stacks that can take the roaming enemy stacks, and attack.

Now I understand what Guardian does. With it you can make it seem to the AI you are weak enough and have them attack, and then trounce him. Which just feels deplorable AI abuse, any non-moronic attacker should be able to compute the Guardian buff into the attack decision. At least after losing one army.

I've been playing on Expert and Small maps, so maybe this changes with these. Particularly larger maps could overhaul territory defense.