Change of leadership per level formula

[ender]

When level up, leadership=level_of_hero * (60,50,40)
Now until level ~15 is better not to chose leadership upgrade (chose between 1 attack and 200 leadership?)
After level ~15 leadership is best (1000 leadership better than 1 attack)

Maybe if hero can have another atribute (like attack, def, int), call it commander_stars (and a title like 5 stars=colonel, 9=general, 12=marshal, from army command structure)
When level_up you can get one commander_star (like you get 1 attack, 6mana, 6 rage)

total leadership=level_of_hero*command_stars*(60,50,40)+ leadership_from_items_flags_skills

in this mode, a star=200 leadership at lvl 4, and same star taken at level 4 is 1000 leadership when hero is at level 20 and is not useless.

[Lari]

It's a nice idea, however you'll end up taking ldrs just from the beginning instead of taking it from lv 15, cause ldrs is definetely the most important thing , unless you want to play "only dd mage" .
I like very much the ideas of titles anyway.

IMO leadership should level naturally EACH level, so you have just to worry wich "other" stat lo level up.

Also i don't like the "flags" idea, cause make almost mandatory to sneak everywhere to take a big advantage, and then go all the way back to pawn everything. Even tho i have to recognize that it gives a little bit of variety to the game, that should be a little bit too boring to play "straightforward"

I also don't like the fact that there is no bonus/malus for killing an army that is not the same strenght as you are, but i am going offtopic here

[Gatts]

Well - SOME kind of change would be appreciated - even as the game takes care for standard Leadership increase - STILL for the reason that players know that they can exchagne +1 ATT for 120 Leadership on low levels but for 1200 Leadership on higher levels, they take always +1 ATT on first 10~15 levels - so basicaly they always have only the GAME bonuses for Leadership... what was always quite good IMHO - still I would make it more interesting in some very crazy way:

a.) get +2% of Leadership each level, based on your actual Leadership (players would consider Leadership level ups much more interesting - make warrior / Princess warior's way little bit more worthy again)

b.) Get Leadership not only in special quests - but even as reward for extraordinary battle results - like beating huge army with minimum loses etc. (Valor)

c.) add in level up screen new 2 "secondary" options - where in this secondary part what you will chose will not have direct impact - but it will increase the chance of next level up pop-up - so If I chose INT in this secondary option - I will much likely get INT in next level - so I can direct the game to give me more appropriate choices, less random and have higher control about my charakter level up (it is really bothersome to have mage who did not get INT proposal for 15 levels...)

[Smash]

Originally Posted by Lari

It's a nice idea, however you'll end up taking ldrs just from the beginning instead of taking it from lv 15, cause ldrs is definetely the most important thing , unless you want to play "only dd mage" .
I like very much the ideas of titles anyway.

IMO leadership should level naturally EACH level, so you have just to worry wich "other" stat lo level up.

Also i don't like the "flags" idea, cause make almost mandatory to sneak everywhere to take a big advantage, and then go all the way back to pawn everything. Even tho i have to recognize that it gives a little bit of variety to the game, that should be a little bit too boring to play "straightforward"

I also don't like the fact that there is no bonus/malus for killing an army that is not the same strenght as you are, but i am going offtopic here

Agree, ldr should go passively per level.

[CurtisJasper]

Originally Posted by Lari

IMO leadership should level naturally EACH level, so you have just to worry wich "other" stat lo level up.

Also i don't like the "flags" idea, cause make almost mandatory to sneak everywhere to take a big advantage, and then go all the way back to pawn everything. Even tho i have to recognize that it gives a little bit of variety to the game, that should be a little bit too boring to play "straightforward"

Agree with these completely.

1) There are plenty of decisions to make when levelling even when leadership is not on the table.

2) I initially enjoyed the collection first, then monster slaying, approach of both the original KB and KB: The Legend. However, it seems a bit silly that someone can acquire leadership by sneaking around and stealing treasure or flags from really slow (both physically and mentally ) patrols. Maybe it would be more appropriate for certain "chieftain" enemy troops to be holding the flags on the overworld, requiring the hero to slay them to gain the requisite leadership. Obviously these could be slightly more difficult than other non-hero monsters on the map. (Or it could be that defeating enemy heros gives you a small bonus to leadership.)