This popped into my head, when the last fief of a faction is taken, the faction immediately gets destroyed. However, clans that belonged to the kingdom still remain in the game for 30 days iirc continue to be at war with the same factions they were at war with. Has anyone tested to see what happens if a clan of a destroyed kingdom manages to take a fief? Do they bring back the kingdom that was destroyed? Do they become a clan with a fief and then get removed from the game in 30 days? Do they create a new kingdom? Or do the clans of destroyed kingdoms not attempt to siege at all so that this never happens?
This popped into my head, when the last fief of a faction is taken, the faction immediately gets destroyed. However, clans that belonged to the kingdom still remain in the game for 30 days iirc continue to be at war with the same factions they were at war with. Has anyone tested to see what happens if a clan of a destroyed kingdom manages to take a fief? Do they bring back the kingdom that was destroyed? Do they become a clan with a fief and then get removed from the game in 30 days? Do they create a new kingdom? Or do the clans of destroyed kingdoms not attempt to siege at all so that this never happens?
I have never ever in my plays seen a failed kingdomes clans tried to siege.
Mostly because they typically in the endphases are so poor that the parties is 15-30 units - which then with TW brilliance(read sarcasme) made it so that a party that is below 40% cant join armies - and thus they cant form an army.
Highly unlikely that they can manage to take a fief with 100's of units on defense with a mere 15-30 troops to put it that way.
Again I havent seen it, that dont mean it cant happend by all means, I'm just provideing some context to why this "may never happend" due to the game mechanics.
In modded play however this can actually potentially happend if the clan hires several or 1 "strong" merc faction, where the mercs have 100-150 units in their parties, and with the mods it allows the merc-clans to siege on their own(forming armies).
(player can do this solo as a merc clan, but we cant form armies, but even with 150 units in some cases you can take on light defended fiefs with ease).
The kingdome destruction they went with, isnt the one alot of players wanted - read just look at how most other mods deal with it - like they join other factions instead.
So to the answer its in the last line you wrote - they dont siege in vanilla from my experience as they are typically so broke by that time they cant form "real warparties anymore".
Yeah technically when you take out a faction, most of the time they don't have enough money remaining to put up a fight. But have you or anyone else seen kingdomless clans attempt to siege even if they have money & men? I would try to do it with console commands by taking all the fiefs from a kingdom at war while they are in the middle of a siege attack if my GPU wasn't busted and let me play BL.
Yeah technically when you take out a faction, most of the time they don't have enough money remaining to put up a fight. But have you or anyone else seen kingdomless clans attempt to siege even if they have money & men? I would try to do it with console commands by taking all the fiefs from a kingdom at war while they are in the middle of a siege attack if my GPU wasn't busted and let me play BL.
Unmodded - no.
Technically - yes.
Read if you start out your kingdome from nothing as in declare war upon one of the kingdomes and you arent part of one - you can still solo capture that fief, and you will then be a kingdomeless clan with a fief, until you decide to become a kingdome.
So I doubt that it would crash the game if a former clan of a faction would crash the game.
I just think that they wouldnt be able to deal with the attackers, when they come to the doorsteps with 1k army or more.
Honestly wouldn't be surprised at all. I hope that the devs make it so that a factionless clan that manages to capture a fief declares a new kingdom - for example, it the clan dey Tihr or whatever managed to capture Ostican, they should remain in the game as part of the kingdom of "dey Tihr" (or a randomly generated culture appropriate kingdom name) after the clan destruction timer is up.
Unmodded - no.
Technically - yes.
Read if you start out your kingdome from nothing as in declare war upon one of the kingdomes and you arent part of one - you can still solo capture that fief, and you will then be a kingdomeless clan with a fief, until you decide to become a kingdome.
So I doubt that it would crash the game if a former clan of a faction would crash the game.
I just think that they wouldnt be able to deal with the attackers, when they come to the doorsteps with 1k army or more.
I know that you can capture settlements as a solo clan and peace out with a kingdom immediately after, which feels less like an intended feature and more like an exploit, because no one declares war on you despite effectively being a faction with only a single clan.
The devs should make it so that factions invite you to be a vassal or declare war on you when they see you as weak just like a regular kingdom. Not declaring a kingdom would therefore only hinder you due to not being able to pass any policies (the settlement should either keep the policies of their previous owner or always have the 2 default policies of their culture).
Or, preferably, the devs should add a simple system of de-facto and de-jure ownership of fiefs; the de-jure ownership of fiefs would update after each peace declaration, so if you capture a fief from Battania as Vlandia, Battania would still be the rightful owner of that town until a peace is declared between the two. Say the player captured a town from rebels, the de-jure owner would still be the last owner of the town, while the de-facto owner would be the player, and therefore upon capturing a rebel town, the de-jure owner would near automatically send an offer of vassalship to the player (give it a 2-3 days cooldown after conquest for a bit of immersion). If the player accepts the offer, they become the de-jure owner of the fief as a vassal of the kingdom, and if the player rejects it, the de-jure owner would immediately declare war on the player and treat them as rebels (and would execute them upon capture unless captured by an honourable lord).
@Dejan@Piconi@Duh_TaleWorlds relatively simple-ish additions to the game would add a lot of value to the gameplay loop. Tagging you so that you can hopefully bring it up (if its as feasible and simple as I think it is to add it to the game) in a meeting.
if clans of a destroyed kingdom manage that ( iv seen in my games at least twice , no other occurance since ) remnant of northern empire managed to siege somehow and conquer epicrotea, but it seems the game crashes shortly after ( next day tick OR when the city is/was in this case twice besieged so hard that it runs out of food and it crashes anyway @ next day tick if said fief is taken with 0 food remaining by former clans that belonged to a kingdom , not sure wich causes the crash anyway )
so ..it seems its not supposed to happen, really sad that its not supposed to happen...
independent clans that were part of a kingdom should be able to reform another kingdom...or join other kingdoms...asap or in 30 days or so...perhaps in next patch?
if clans of a destroyed kingdom manage that ( iv seen in my games at least twice , no other occurance since ) remnant of northern empire managed to siege somehow and conquer epicrotea, but it seems the game crashes shortly after ( next day tick OR when the city is/was in this case twice besieged so hard that it runs out of food and it crashes anyway @ next day tick if said fief is taken with 0 food remaining by former clans that belonged to a kingdom , not sure wich causes the crash anyway )
so ..it seems its not supposed to happen, really sad that its not supposed to happen...
That's sad to hear, but about what I expected would happen. Hopefully the devs can fix this issue to enable lone clans forming new kingdoms. This game really needs emergent gameplay stuff like new kingdoms forming, civil wars, being able to marry companions (and maybe promoting soldiers into companions), player and/or companions dying due to higher death chance, time passing faster so that we can play as our offspring or spouse, etc.
Or at least be able to count as a "rebelling" 1-city minor kingdom thing like we currently have. I like a lot of the ideas you suggest, but a lot of them seem like pretty big changes that need to be left to modders . I enjoyed warband mods like Pendor and Perisno that allowed the player to create new kingdoms with new cultures that were for the most part unrepresented beforehand.
Civil wars were basically in warband in the form of "supporting a claimant" but they could only occur at the player's choice.
When you say "civil war" I imagine the computer AI initiating it on their own. I would have preferred that as an anti-snowballing mechanism to the currently illogical "have all the weak kingdoms try to attack the giant strong one" mechanic without official alliances being possible between the small guys.
I think it would be much more challenging if a group of your own lords tried to break away and reform an old kingdom that used to exist apart from your new empire.
I suppose it could also be the result of a vote, like new ruling clan after the king/queen's death being split fairly evenly between two clans in a geographic manner.
I was always disappointed in the Perisno warband mod when I could take a fief and declare independence from my king when he refused to grant it to me, but then no lords would ever naturally follow me to be the new king (even when I had more properties than the rest of the kingdom combined and they liked me more than the old king, etc.). That is the sort of thing that should naturally split some lords into "following the other guy" and starting a civil war.
I did like the lords coming to your hall and asking to join you mechanic in warband (mods only?) more than the current bannerlord I have to go around begging-people-to-join-me mechanic. There should definitely be some other methods for this to occur, and civil wars are a good way for this to be possible. Several rebelling Battanian clans breaking off, and then months later joining the Sturgians? Why not!
If there are lone clans in my prisoner train I can no longer convince them to join my kingdom as the "current dialogue would not work" as they have no king to "betray." I think that should be changed too. It should be way easier to convince lords to join after their kingdom is no more, or maybe even have them asking me if they may join .
I was honestly surprised the first time a ruler died and I discovered a different clan can be voted into being the new ruling clan (and equally surprised to later learn this is standard and it is rare for a clan to keep the ruling position even amongst the AI). Mostly this caught me off guard because I was voted into being the new king and I was trying to be a vassal on that playthrough . It was not possible for me to vote someone else into winning. I honestly checked.
Or at least be able to count as a "rebelling" 1-city minor kingdom thing like we currently have. I like a lot of the ideas you suggest, but a lot of them seem like pretty big changes that need to be left to modders . I enjoyed warband mods like Pendor and Perisno that allowed the player to create new kingdoms with new cultures that were for the most part unrepresented beforehand.
Civil wars were basically in warband in the form of "supporting a claimant" but they could only occur at the player's choice.
When you say "civil war" I imagine the computer AI initiating it on their own. I would have preferred that as an anti-snowballing mechanism to the currently illogical "have all the weak kingdoms try to attack the giant strong one" mechanic without official alliances being possible between the small guys.
I think it would be much more challenging if a group of your own lords tried to break away and reform an old kingdom that used to exist apart from your new empire.
I suppose it could also be the result of a vote, like new ruling clan after the king/queen's death being split fairly evenly between two clans in a geographic manner.
I was always disappointed in the Perisno warband mod when I could take a fief and declare independence from my king when he refused to grant it to me, but then no lords would ever naturally follow me to be the new king (even when I had more properties than the rest of the kingdom combined and they liked me more than the old king, etc.). That is the sort of thing that should naturally split some lords into "following the other guy" and starting a civil war.
I did like the lords coming to your hall and asking to join you mechanic in warband (mods only?) more than the current bannerlord I have to go around begging-people-to-join-me mechanic. There should definitely be some other methods for this to occur, and civil wars are a good way for this to be possible. Several rebelling Battanian clans breaking off, and then months later joining the Sturgians? Why not!
If there are lone clans in my prisoner train I can no longer convince them to join my kingdom as the "current dialogue would not work" as they have no king to "betray." I think that should be changed too. It should be way easier to convince lords to join after their kingdom is no more, or maybe even have them asking me if they may join .
I was honestly surprised the first time a ruler died and I discovered a different clan can be voted into being the new ruling clan (and equally surprised to later learn this is standard and it is rare for a clan to keep the ruling position even amongst the AI). Mostly this caught me off guard because I was voted into being the new king and I was trying to be a vassal on that playthrough . It was not possible for me to vote someone else into winning. I honestly checked.
I think other than the time passing faster stuff, all my suggestions are rather feasible to add to the game (we know that civil wars will be coming to the game through the addition of claimants, though I hope that they can happen without player intervention, maybe at a rate of 1-2 civil wars per playthrough). Even the "faster time" can be added rather easily if it is simple to change the number of days in a year from 84 to 40 days, unless TW were to take the effort and make it so that all daily ticks happened once every 2 or 3 days (if the days were to pass 2x or 3x faster respectively).
The foundation for new kingdoms as a mechanic already exists in the form of; a)Factionless clans being able to capture fiefs (but they need some help from the devs to make this happen more often), b)The player can form their kingdom by leaving an existing kingdom & keeping their fiefs - this ability can be extended to the AI if the clan leader is very unhappy with their ruler and has negative traits, c)Rebellions are a thing already, and if a town rebels while surrounded by the kingdom they rebelled against, they should form their own kingdom after 30 days to the rebellion (and adopt the default laws of the culture of the town).
Also, I forgot to mention about clan leaders visiting you in one of your fiefs to ask you to join you, that mechanic from Warband would be a great addition in making the late game less grindy (also messenger to be able to talk to clan leaders to ask them to join/ ask minor factions to hire them as mercenaries).
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
. I enjoyed warband mods like Pendor and Perisno that allowed the player to create new kingdoms with new cultures that were for the most part unrepresented beforehand. 
