Musings and Metrics

[Planewalker 16]

As some of you may have observed, I have occasionally done some delving into the inner workings of Stronghold Legends over the past couple of years.

I know some of you, particularly @ Asophix  and @ Lord_Chris  are particularly experienced at SHL gameplay (especially in multiplayer).

I would like some input from the more experienced members of the community about the flow of the game, things like:
What's too weak/strong?
What's the most common problem with skirmish maps or custom scenarios?
What are noteworthy gameplay differences between singleplayer and multiplayer?
If you had the opportunity to redesign SHL, what would you change, and why?

In full disclosure, I am considering creating something like a standalone expansion mod which introduces new campaigns and a variety of improvements. I've had quite a lot of time to think about it (over 15 years). The discoveries made recently with modding tools like the AI editors may be a sign that it is time.

[Asophix 121]

An effort most welcome! 🙂

Well, there are quite a few points I can share, though I'm not experienced in all competitive match-ups. I won't go in exhaustive detail, rather I'll keep each point short.

Before I start, I'd bring to attention that there are a few initiatives brewing. @ Lord_Chris  in particular would like to see a random map generator and a faction redesign mod above all, with possibly others in the making. Some modder clubs were established to discuss and further these mods and their progress, so any ideas could go to their respective sections or you could join our collaborations, if you are interested! 😄 

On to your points:

43 minutes ago, Planewalker said:

What's too weak/strong?

The market - not the building, the interface - is way too strong. Since pop cap is easy to reach and is relatively constricting on big maps (about 120-128 on 4p maps), you want to squeeze efficiency out of every peasant you employ. This turns our attention to using our resources as efficiently as possible, and we'll find that weapon production is just weak. Products are so affordable and iron is so insanely valuable that you don't need weapon industries at all. I made an article about the math of trading weapons here.

There is simply no incentive to build weapon crafters, when you can just make money off of a theoretically infinite number of farms and iron mines. Even without automarket, you can just rake in thousands of gold and spend it by a mere few clicks of a button. There is a flow of: recruitment - sell goods - buy equipment, and when you're done, you can just micro troops and while you wait for another round of peasants, you can play the game. It's actually viable to rush Rank 9 in a 10pt game just to get the automarket.

1 hour ago, Planewalker said:

What's the most common problem with skirmish maps or custom scenarios?

I'd say that Skirmish maps aren't very AI friendly. Many stock Firefly maps are designed with humans in mind, and not the AI. Even with comparably small castle designs, the AI usually can't play the game properly due to buildings not fitting in. On top of that, there are a couple of weird AI quirks that just make no sense:

• The AI can't build ox tethers properly near iron mines, building either one, or none.
• The AI doesn't build attacking armies and omits some defenses in team multiplayer games.
• Only one type of tree will be considered by the AI for wood camp placement.
• The AI is horrible at controlling units, doing almost no micromanagement and rolling in siege engines well in range of defenders.

One noteworthy weakness for Custom Maps is that the scenario editor is way too primitive. True that SH2's map editor is really detailed, but that gives rather high customisation possibilities to designs. I found that the SHL editor is way too inflexible, such as sending custom text messages is still infeasible (can be done, but it's very cumbersome). Also, just adding Beowulf and Alfred the Great to the skirmish roster would have given a miles more diverse experience. I also haven't seen Skirmish lords sending messages other than those existing for triggers.

1 hour ago, Planewalker said:

What are noteworthy gameplay differences between singleplayer and multiplayer?

It is kind of obvious that singleplayer is played at a more relaxed pace, as well as custom scenarios allow for more creative missions that require problem-solving via disabled mechanics, random events and clever map design. While multiplayer is highly customisable too, eventually almost every game boils down to superior macro (economy) and micro (vigilant control of units). There are a lot of group-clearing / disabling abilities and attacks, which can quickly turn the tides, so it is way faster, action-demanding and requires good juggling between building, recruitment, trade and control. One aspect I could highlight is timing buying (royal food) so as to optimise honor generation for ranking up quickly.

Perhaps a more multiplayer-specific note would be the lesser touched custom game modes. While not popular, CTF and KotH are a breath of fresh air that allow for some creative and clever games, where the emphasis is not necessarily on this juggling only. In both modes, you are driven to contest a large area that rewards a presence on the battlefield, as well as how cleverly you can reinforce your positions. 

1 hour ago, Planewalker said:

If you had the opportunity to redesign SHL, what would you change, and why?

Kind of relatable to the previous question: I'd re-balance the factions. While the asymmetry is great and fun, Arthur is way undertuned, and Evil is way too strong. Almost all of Arthur's toolkit bottles him in a defensive, numbers-based playstyle, hinging his success way too much on the Round Table knight abilities, while his only flying unit is the Green Dragon that gets an appearance rarely in a game. Ice and moreso Evil get to lay their hands on different countermeasures, which can simply circumvent Arthur's positions and dismantle them in different ways. I wrote an article about these imbalances, but we can state that the economic advantage for Arthur is negligible to the flexibility the other two factions get.

Evil in particular has discounted units and very potent tools at the same time. The following four units are a staple and on their own game deciders:

• Stake Hurlers in numbers can blanket an area with a large barrage of spikes that can eventually one-hit kill sturdy stuff like Cats and Siege Towers. They also hit in a high arc, making them infinitely more useful compared to the Fire Ballista, which shoots a single-hit projectile, and cannot clear areas as well. The Stake Hurler also comes online fairly early in the ranks.
• Werewolves are very cheap brutes, whose only real weakness is crossbowmen. They are really affordable at 50 gold only, and they are fast, hit hard, and stand their own reasonably well in close combat. Not to mention, they are semi-amphibious by being catapulted via werewolf launchers, being able to drop in the enemy land and wreak havoc. Bad unit AI also works in their favor, constantly heading in front of their chasers by an inch.
• Demonic Bats are a one-hit demo squad that can instantly remove clumps of units, be them on a tower or out in the open. Knockback is devastatingly effective, since the enemy units don't fight during their knockout animation, and the impact with the unit displacement can instantly erase units falling in unpathable terrain. They also dismantle most siege engines in a few hits, making them one of the most cost-effective units in the game.
• The Sorcerer is a purely damage-oriented unique unit. While the Meteor Storm deals damage over time, there is simply no way of avoiding losing most of your army, since there is no Scatter command, and the ability hits right from the moment of casting. The Sorcerer can basically do Percival's job almost as well as him, for a fraction of the price.

I'd see that Arthur got Pictish boat warriors and Hobilars back on the menu, two unused units that could fulfill their purposes well, giving Arthur a regular amphibious unit and a quick raider. White Wolves and Hellhounds outrun Macemen, as well as both factions have a flying unit, so these troops would be a semi-effective bandaid for the Good faction's shortcomings.

I'd also nerf the Bat's divebomb effect, by the bat counting as a projectile during the dive. This would spare units covered by cats and mantlets, and it would be consistent with other displacement interactions in SHL, such as catapult rocks, hurler stakes and ballista bolts. 

---

This was kinda lengthy, but was worth the effort. 😄 Feel free to reflect on my remarks!

[Lord_Chris 270]

I used to love the Ice faction but ended up using evil more throughout the summer this year. The problem as @ Asophix  has already described, is that Evil is just too powerful especially on Stake Hurlers and bats and there is just almost nothing you can do against them especially in groups. Bats can destroy almost any defence in seconds while stake hurlers in groups, large groups especially create choke points or make it almost impossible for any army to bypass particularly behind cats. Unless bats are used - but the one game in particular I am thinking of, did not use fantasy units so in this case it was brutal. I’ll see if I can find the recording and upload it to YouTube.

I don’t find Werewolves too powerful but maybe that’s because I’ve never been on the receiving end of them in large numbers. I do tend to use them a lot myself though.

Frost giants are too strong against normal units but an easy counter discovered by Asophix is to use Knights who take care of them in seconds. In numbers there is basically no stopping them. I had a game recently where as soon as PT ended, he send a bunch of Frost giants over, dismantled my two walls and got into my castle. I still won, but I could easily have lost after that.

Another exploit or hack I’ve seen on ice is to recruit mass white witches, send them straight to the enemy lord and basically end the game. Percival’s power is very disproportionate too in my view causing way more damage than need be. It wipes out a whole bunch of troops at a time.

The sorcerer is by far the most powerful special unit (Merlin, Ice Queen, Sorcerer) just based in his special attack. It basically destroys large swathes of armies in seconds.

Arthur is useless to me or at least I never learned to play this faction well. When I was younger pretty much everything wiped it out, maybe it could be different now but I just don’t like it because the game mechanics feel off to me and there are just no fantasy troops.

The other hack as well,  to sure if this is related to Arthur or not but sieging towers (Lookout towers specifically here) cause troops to be thrown out of the tower. It is not fair and should not be happening. Stake hurlers can also attack troops in towers which seems like cheating because you just create a bunch of stake hurlers and take them out from afar.

Trebuchets are overpowered compared to catapults and quickly cause a lot of damage from estates as an example, if you are playing on a small map with estates over a mountain for instance, it’s easy to fire trees over the mountain and wipe out all the enemy buildings with little comeback. They are a nuisance and should either be disabled or made available to all factions. I also think a new game skirmish option to this effect may be useful.

One common request I see (or rather a demand) from multiplayer players is of “no fly “ - meaning no aerial units. I personally don’t have an issue with this and find it tends to be the wrong type of people who request this (ie the people who were never going to win anyway and try to stop other players having fun in the process because they don’t know how to handle aerial units). One such case was the first time I saw the white witch trick used, in retribution to a dragon attack or some other attack I made.

My only concern with aerial units is bat attacks in mass because they are so difficult to defend from, although there is a hack where for some reason crossbowmen in siege towers appear more immune and more easily shoot them down. In towers this is not the case.

Dragons seem ineffective on estates once you place several wells.

My favourite dragon is the Ice Dragon, I personally find the others are not effective at doing anything or very little at least. The evil dragon is also useless often getting killed without inflicting damage or very little. The damage is not effective enough, though granted it is cheaper than the other two, but I’m cheaper because it is worse. My concern with Bedivere is that his ability is too wide ranging, ie it has the possibility to tackle multiple layers of wall at once which I don’t think should be the case. But compared to Percival and other units from other factions this is a minor problem.

I’m currently in Edinburgh this week but I will reply properly later.

[Asophix 121]

Werewolves are really cheap - 50g, 5h? - for what they can do, with their immense movement speed and good melee damage. The werewolf launchers also create a "doom drop" opportunity by literally dropping them inside an enemy castle and let them run rampant. Neither other faction can have such a tactical move. Crossbowmen in a back line shred them though, as well as they can be knocked back by bolts or rocks. In any case, Saxon Warriors wish to do half as much as they can.

Frost giants fall short to any durable melee unit IMO, again with crossbowmen behind. Pikemen, swordsmen and knights basically shrug off any damage, even the bash. 😄 Mass stake hurlers or even enchanted orbs can burst them down, provided the giants don't outrun their projectiles.

White witches are in a good place right now. They are very fragile and costly to be mildly effective in numbers, as well as ground units get a hefty ranged bonus against them (at least in multiplayer). In most cases literally a few archers or preferably crossbowmen can repel them.

I also find Trebuchets to be less of an oppressive tool: they are available at rank 10, they cost 500 gold apiece, and they fire insanely slowly. In multiplayer, you never float more than a few thousand gold per cycle, which kind of restricts their creation. They are only really useful as long-ranged artillery, which is fairly inconsequential against Bats, and more annoying against Ice + Arthur maybe, however letting Arthur dig in needs time. Ice and Evil has really nice long-range options with Fire Ballistae & Stake Hurlers with Bats, direct counters to siege tower troops and defenseless stray units, respectively.

In terms of Dragons, Ice has the best in terms of utility via freeze, and the Green Dragon can potentially cause enough damage to keep an army constantly running - if you quickly reposition the Green Dragon after it starts breathing fire, you can restart the attack animation, stutter-stepping and annoying the hell out of the opponent. The Black Dragon's fire animation starts with a 2-3s delay however, which makes it fairly bad. This attack animation reset potentially makes all unique units and Stake Hurlers very troublesome.

---

I mained Arthur in most multiplayer games, and I definitely think the faction's weakness lies in its hinging on Round Table knight abilities, since it neither has oppressive tools, nor the mobility of the other factions:

• Enchanted orbs potentially deal friendly fire, need good prediction for leading their orbs, and their contact damage against siege engines is negligible.
• Trebuchets I already addressed, in my opinion they are very expensive and require a compromise between unit recruitment and setting them up. Both Ice and Evil can field a myriad of AoE to dismantle any protection and destroy them.
• Percival has a bat ability on steroids, however you cast it every other year. His ability is comparable to the Sorcerer or the Ice Queen, as the ice storm's freezing component hits instantly, and the meteor storm starts dealing damage the moment you cast it.
• Merlin is the primary anti-siege tool, balanced out by his long attack animation and ability cast delay. Provided he's under constant mantlet protection, he can do a lot to stall out the enemy.
• The other knights are way too situational or defensive to use. Gawain's shield can be cast very rarely, Lancelot's buff doesn't do much if you must constantly reposition your army, and the others are for sieges solely.

Basically you must play fair and square, the Green Dragon is your only way to meaningfully shake up the battlefield unless doing Merlin micro, and even then, your tactics can only come online once the enemy faces an honor or peasant shortage. @ Lord_Chris  consistently could come back from containments building up by just tossing a few bats at the problem. Bats in particular outrun almost all projectiles and only die if they approach a formation from directly ahead, not on the sides, as well as they one-hit kill trebuchets, and two-hit shields. Doing a multi-pronged assault is also hard, when your armies don't have time to form up and in multiplayer, you must consistently spawn shields, units and particularly with Arthur, choose the correct unique units or else your next few minutes will be relegated to barracks troops only, who aren't given much perks. 

Against Ice, it feels like it's more of a traditional setup, since as Arthur you only really need to pay attention to the fire ballistae and the Ice Queen, with the occasional White Wolf run-bys. Frost Giants and other tanky units need numbers and/or support to attack directly head on. By experience, Ice and Arthur fights basically the same way, with one side getting the upper hand after casting an AoE clear ability, and the other following up with their own shortly after, as well as large stationary groups tend to form picking away at each other. White Witches generally are a one-time tactic that quickly gets blunted after the enemy leaves a few ranged units at home. Since Ice doesn't have many tools to dismantle an army formation other than ballistae, the dragon and the Ice Queen, this matchup feels generally more balanced and it actually gives Arthur a lot more room to maneuvre.

I don't have much experience in mirror matchups, most Arthur players are generally a novice in terms of control and they're rare.

[Sir Windows 34]

On 13/10/2025 at 22:47, Planewalker said:

If you had the opportunity to redesign SHL, what would you change, and why?

Bigger maps like in Stronghold 2 and more AI lords. At least Beowulf and Alfred should be available by default. There's no third Ice lord in the game but Hildebrand, the dwarf king or Morgan le Fay could've been made into a skirmish opponent.

[Lord_Chris 270]

There’s always time to make new ones 😉 I was going to myself actually but only ever started work on an Ice Queen.

[Sir Windows 34]

I sometimes wish Alfred and Beowulf were available in custom skirmish just for the 3rd good/evil lord slot to put a custom lord in. 😅

[Lord_Chris 270]

Maybe something to consider in future in case any mods become available