for a game like this game to work, i basically want to enjoy trying to play optimally/strategically (without exploits) instead of trying to play badly on purpose (i.e. building something that isn't a paladin) to make things more "fun". like if i want to use archers, they basically do 0 damage unless i lower the difficulty
as long as variety in tactics is encouraged through the game balance, i think it can work. the stuff about making units/cities more interesting sounds like a step in that direction.
Outposts and resources can't be destroyed so the SK doesn't bother attacking them.
my concern is that it's way too easy to grab land without having to escort a pioneer or defend those holdings
like i can literally take all the territory with 0 units (until i run into a chokepoint) because cloud-walking pioneers to the frontlines and pushing outposts forward cannot be stopped
i'd be able to claim the best city locations (if that ever becomes important), without actually having to fight anything along the way.
the only thing i can't grab without an army is resources that have monster lairs on an adjacent tile. but all the stuff that's 2 tiles away becomes my territory very easily
I agree with you regarding the early game units. I'll have to put some thought on how best to address that. I don't think I can do much for 1.0 but I think units going up levels should unlock special abilities and such for them in a future update. Thus, that level 10 soldier is way better than a level 1 paladin.
something like that might work. it is kind of redundant to use the same vanilla abilities every single battle with every single paladin against every single enemy. keep in mind though that a new paladin will gain levels faster than a veteran soldier so after 10 battles (or whatever the number is) they'll only be a couple levels apart.
i think the #1 thing missing from the game is a reason to use different units/spells, or at least diversify the army and battles a bit
figuring out how to balance a party is where most of the strategy comes from in some RPGs or tactical games. i'm not saying I expect exactly that in a strategy game, but the game gives me 0 reason to not fill my army with whatever the strongest unit is (paladins).
most strategy games have some kind of balancing to encourage mixed armies. a lot of that comes with counterplay and rock-paper-scissors combat, but relying on the AI to counter whatever tactic i'm using seems unrealistic for this game.
if that happens, it would fix some of the issues with equipment as well since it wouldn't be as boring to spam 10 identical upgrades across 20 identical paladins. maybe with different types of units there would be a reason to use different types of equipment.
also i'm almost never using any variety of spells in battle because taking up an action is too precious
maybe if the weaker spells (usually buff/debuff) cost more mana but didn't take up a turn for some of the mage-type units, then both the spells and the mages would be useful