-
If you are reporting a bug, please head over to our Technical Support section for Bannerlord.
Do we know anything about how diplomacy will work
- Thread starter lukkyb
- Start date
Users who are viewing this thread
I'm going to take an assumption it will just be a built-up warband system - personally I'd like to see a sort of Europa Universalis IV system so another rsction cannot practically wipe another one out - I think it'll make the game more challenging and not discredit a faction just from one war.
To your question, I think it'll be just how warband was done where they'd declare war to curb the realms power.
To your question, I think it'll be just how warband was done where they'd declare war to curb the realms power.
reasonably if a a very strong faction rose up & tried to eat everyone, yes the other factions would stood together for their survival
so the survival threat should have the highest VARIABLE when calculating.
-i think diplomacy should work with a lot of variables:
1-survival & diplomatic threat values: (forming an alliance against the dominating faction to survive).
2-relation values:
a- personal lord to lord relation
b- cultures relations
c- treaties relation
3- militarist & glory seekers values: they prefer war than peace
4-Communists values: villages and common people prefer peace
5- goods & food traders values: prefer peace
6- weapons traders values: prefer war
7- traits system for lords and court people should play roll in this also
the people in the court should resemble the diplomacy, how many communist lord, how many trader lord, how many warlord
and what kind of people have the high court positions and how much authority they have,
do they own castles, or peaceful villages
i don't think the ai can work with this, but in theory it could be done
so the survival threat should have the highest VARIABLE when calculating.
-i think diplomacy should work with a lot of variables:
1-survival & diplomatic threat values: (forming an alliance against the dominating faction to survive).
2-relation values:
a- personal lord to lord relation
b- cultures relations
c- treaties relation
3- militarist & glory seekers values: they prefer war than peace
4-Communists values: villages and common people prefer peace
5- goods & food traders values: prefer peace
6- weapons traders values: prefer war
7- traits system for lords and court people should play roll in this also
the people in the court should resemble the diplomacy, how many communist lord, how many trader lord, how many warlord
and what kind of people have the high court positions and how much authority they have,
do they own castles, or peaceful villages
i don't think the ai can work with this, but in theory it could be done
We know absolutely nothing about it, however they insist on talking to us about the band that has composed the ambient themes...
Why communist,peasant values.Peasant is not communist,you know,peasant is Christian.shatti said:
vicwiz007 said:
Firstly ffs that joke is both amazing and terrible at the same time xd
Secondly, I'd personally like to hear a guy this barter system, especially as this is the first I've heard of such.
Well here you go, wish granted. Hope you like info from 2015! https://www.taleworlds.com/en/Games/Bannerlord/Blog/12Captain Obvious said:vicwiz007 said:
Firstly ffs that joke is both amazing and terrible at the same time xd
Secondly, I'd personally like to hear a guy this barter system, especially as this is the first I've heard of such.
I remember seeing it at a later stage than this around 2016, but I can't be bothered to find where. I mean, what difference does it make? Nearly 4 years since then so the info is no more relevant than 2015.
And yes, I was going to just say "its desssipicable" but i feared people wouldnt get the reference without the other part... Why i use references in such strange ways, who knows?
viocult
Regular
GreenLight7 said:
Communism is just a violent form of Christianity. If you believe it is easier for a camel to go through an eye of a needle than a rich person to get into heaven, it is no great leap in ethics to have a view that a brotherhood of man can be established by destroying the upper class. Its shallow atheism is much the same as some that view the placebo effect as some form of faith healing (versus some test subjects being so agreeable that they tell the researchers what they want to hear).
Blacksmiths should be neutral: whether they are hammering swords into plowshares or plowshares into swords, they get paid either way.
Landed nobles with just one living adult child would prefer peace. Knights bachelors would see war as their chance to get land and want that. Knights bachelors that are the children of knights bachelors would have friends across all the nations (as their parent would move to the highest bidder) would be fine with peace, but international price of mercenaries would prevent them from staying in a peaceful kingdom for too long. Outlaw nobility (people displaced by the new hegemon in their nation) would want war just to volunteer for the opposition (I guess this won't be part of the diplomacy score, but it means as the invading army loses people from desertion and disease, reinforcements would be available).
Well, we know there will be internal kingdom politics mainly revolving around the Policies and Influence system. The Policy system allowing you to give more or less control to your vassals and setting the general laws of the land. Influence, on the other hand, will allow you to use a influence resource to raise armies, revoke fiefs, persuade your king to revoke a fief or convince your other lords to support you to receive a recently captured fief. As for inter-kingdom diplomacy, I have yet to hear anything. I would imagine we would have the basic war, peace, and non-aggression pacts, maybe some temporary alliances and defense pacts. As to whether any of this will be in the base game or if it will run of the same influence or maybe even the persuasion system I have no idea. Hopefully, we will get another developer blog on Kingdom Management that will enlighten us.
TLDR we don't have much to go on. Unless there is something somewhere I haven't read yet that explains more.
TLDR we don't have much to go on. Unless there is something somewhere I haven't read yet that explains more.
Communism if form of Christianity?I hear such stupidity first in my life,i heard much,but such?viocult said:
Communism is ideology,Chrisitanity is religion,religion is saint,sacred,holy. ideology-not.
Communism says that people can go to store buy what they needed,and go,without robing,stealing,or taking more.In Holy Bible there are examples of prophet,king,Bishop,who sin.If even prophet be,who sin,not do what God said,than what communism?
communism if form of Christianity,he,what,coomunism is not faith.They persecuted bishops,priests,believers,saints.
viocult
Regular
GreenLight7 said:
You have very successfully argued why religion should not be included in Mount & Blade, but this is the wrong thread
.Since you have never heard of North Korea (who are certainly unable to buy what they need in a store), you might not be too aware of communism as a religion (or Slavoj Zizek saying that Capitalism is a religion), but I'll make more plain the only difference I'll put between ideology and religion. Human beings are fully aware of the inevitability of their death (I'm plagarizing Ecclesiastics here) and the fact that when their brain rots that all their memories, good and bad, rot away with their brain. When a religion gives a person a way out of this overwhelming fear, people grab onto all the superstitions associated with it even if it is silly. As adherents spread, and some of this happens from children being born, one could be raised in an environment where you only interact with people that only have the same superstitious beliefs that you have. These beliefs become common sense (racism is an ideology that requires an insane amount of faith, and it helps if you don't have a member of the "other" "race" around to convince you how silly this belief is). Even Descartes trying to go back to the basics of "I think therefore I am" to deal the overwhelming ignorance we all are raised in, still arrived at assumptions those of us in the twenty-first century would not have arrived at (side note: I like Albert Einstein, but the amount of discoveries since his death, let alone since he publish the general and specific theories of relativity, means he is so much more in the dark then current scientists...but I suppose even science needs its prophets).
In Culture (hopefully, this example is less explosive than politics) , for a Christian writer (or a shallow atheist raised in a Christian society), a character arc is very important, because sin and redemption is a big part of the religion. Jewish writers could make a character like Jack Benny (who even stays 39) who remains the same so that audiences could guess his reactions to the various situations he encountered (because he is stingy, when encountering a robber: "Your money or your life...I said your money or your life." "I'm thinking it over." The audience laughed after the first life and after his response since they get to know the character very well), since redemption (I think it is called something else, but I am not Jewish) is something they do every Yom Kippur and is too "meh" to apply to literature.
Just as religion affects the template of literary works, it also affects one's worldview.
I am very confused by your "they" in your final sentence (I am even worse at pronouns, so I try not to use them except in first and second person). If "they" refers to Christians, obviously during the Protestant Revolution (and especially the Thirty Years War), both sides persecuted bishops, priest, believers, and saints (the First Crusaders slaughter of everyone in Jerusalem, Christian or otherwise, would also include people on this list, and can I just say "Ireland"). In the Russia revolutions (if "they" refers to communist), Bolshevik slaughtered Menshevik (and the favor was returned) with at least Trotsky changing sides (there was less of a difference in ideology between the two groups than many other "faiths", and mostly it was an interpretation of their prophets, Marx and Engels). I believe both sides attacked Anarchist, but only the victorious Bolsheviks had the power to persecute everyone else.
Don't feel you have to apologize to me because of the malice of your statement. A far worse moment was in my youth I sought to read Arnold Toynbee's Study of History. I got to his book on Religion (about 5000 pages in since it is a multi-volume work, but it has been a long time, so I hope that is hyperbole) and he came to the conclusion that though he was an atheist, he thought Christianity was the greatest religion ever. This guy, who was raised Christian and lived in a Christian society, thought he was making an intellectual leap through this decision, and I had wasted a month reading what he had to say. I have only recently ran across Slavoj Zizek on youtube and had to endure his compliment of Christianity, which is not a great intellectual leap for a communist to say (to be clear it is the ignorance of the intellectual that bothers me: Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. and my parents were great people, while being Christian was an important aspect of their character).
Hopefully this was long enough to address your concerns and short enough to not irritate others, but if I need to provide footnotes or Cliff's Notes let me know
.
FBohler said:They don't want to spoil your discoveries in the game!
Yeah, they're very considerate.
you speak very much and i do not so understand what you say,words many,but sense/meaning,less.European (.... ) propaganda.
bolsheviks and mensheviks fought war,saints,priests,Christians in ------many------ nations,Not.And been persecuted.
Communism is ideology,Christianity is religion,In Christianity we worship God ,try to not die by sin,try to be by Jesus Christ ,in communism communists think about material life.And i can say you,Christianity,my faith,my faith-Christianity do not forbid communism,just who read Holy Bible,Holy Scriptures see,that it is impossible hard to be,Heaven on earth,where also,before punishment,present evil.And about salvation of rich, camel through needle,that things that are impossible in people,are possible for God ,and who gave anything to HIM in first,to demand?Can only supplicate,ask. Religion is saint,even paganism is saint for pagan,do not speak about it as to your street gate,garbage,can,and.....like that,that is insulting.
I suggest in diplomacy,alliance leagues,three side alliances,four side,aaa and to be concluded emissaries must sign,on paper,also can be undercover agreements.Can be signed and not.
bolsheviks and mensheviks fought war,saints,priests,Christians in ------many------ nations,Not.And been persecuted.
Communism is ideology,Christianity is religion,In Christianity we worship God ,try to not die by sin,try to be by Jesus Christ ,in communism communists think about material life.And i can say you,Christianity,my faith,my faith-Christianity do not forbid communism,just who read Holy Bible,Holy Scriptures see,that it is impossible hard to be,Heaven on earth,where also,before punishment,present evil.And about salvation of rich, camel through needle,that things that are impossible in people,are possible for God ,and who gave anything to HIM in first,to demand?Can only supplicate,ask. Religion is saint,even paganism is saint for pagan,do not speak about it as to your street gate,garbage,can,and.....like that,that is insulting.
I suggest in diplomacy,alliance leagues,three side alliances,four side,aaa and to be concluded emissaries must sign,on paper,also can be undercover agreements.Can be signed and not.
One thing I know; there will be neither communism nor Christianity in the game.
Be Happy , we are not unthinkable robots.Gab said:
viocult
Regular
To continue Shatti's list of how class would determine one's desire to go to war:
Outlaw middle class: procurers of female companionship for the purpose of financial benefit in towns near the front lines of the war will be very happy about having new customers in all the soldiers that arrive in their proximity, while the others will be opposed to the war because of the lose of customers.
I like the idea of secret agreements, but I hope they would have a really good plan of how to deal with betrayals (it shouldn't be every time). Alliance votes (including new members joining) are in other games, so it does seem like a decent addition.
As an American, I can't but help jump in every quagmire, whether it is Vietnam, Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, or this conversation (it is so Meta that it is under the thread of how diplomacy will work that if you are a performance artist, you are brilliant).
Now that I have a better idea where you are coming from so I don't offend: Since Buddhism started after Hinduism and shares with it reincarnation, it would be easy to see Buddhism as descended from Hinduism. Of course, knowing the Buddha lived in India helps, but neither of us because of our common origin find comfort from our existential angst or stay up at night worrying from the endless transmigration of souls. The Buddha, because he was raised in a Hindu society, did. One can be an atheist and still be a Buddhist (since one still finds oneself trying to escape reincarnation) which means the line between religion and ideology is not as clear as your argument insists.
Jesus could have said that it was easier for a camel to go through an eye of a needle than anyone to go to heaven. He did not. This does not discount your interpretation, but rich man was used in the statement. Surely you can see how someone in the billions of Christians that have been on the planet might think this means that the rich may not be the best people of the earth. Engels was raised in a home Christian enough that he was disowned when he became an atheist. Marx's family was more secular Christian. They could be responsible for this "misinterpretation" or any of the billions of Christians almost two millennium since the death of Jesus.
I will stand by my statement that communism is a violent form of Christianity and we will have to agree to disagree. Not to single you out, but many times people make so short of statements on the Forum that I find it confusing to figure out where they stand. Eighty percent of me thought you were a communist that felt insulted Marx did not form his ideas on his own (and did the human thing of requisitioning the ideas around him). I'm glad I can be both verbose and confusing.
Outlaw middle class: procurers of female companionship for the purpose of financial benefit in towns near the front lines of the war will be very happy about having new customers in all the soldiers that arrive in their proximity, while the others will be opposed to the war because of the lose of customers.
GreenLight7 said:
I like the idea of secret agreements, but I hope they would have a really good plan of how to deal with betrayals (it shouldn't be every time). Alliance votes (including new members joining) are in other games, so it does seem like a decent addition.
As an American, I can't but help jump in every quagmire, whether it is Vietnam, Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, or this conversation (it is so Meta that it is under the thread of how diplomacy will work that if you are a performance artist, you are brilliant).
Now that I have a better idea where you are coming from so I don't offend: Since Buddhism started after Hinduism and shares with it reincarnation, it would be easy to see Buddhism as descended from Hinduism. Of course, knowing the Buddha lived in India helps, but neither of us because of our common origin find comfort from our existential angst or stay up at night worrying from the endless transmigration of souls. The Buddha, because he was raised in a Hindu society, did. One can be an atheist and still be a Buddhist (since one still finds oneself trying to escape reincarnation) which means the line between religion and ideology is not as clear as your argument insists.
Jesus could have said that it was easier for a camel to go through an eye of a needle than anyone to go to heaven. He did not. This does not discount your interpretation, but rich man was used in the statement. Surely you can see how someone in the billions of Christians that have been on the planet might think this means that the rich may not be the best people of the earth. Engels was raised in a home Christian enough that he was disowned when he became an atheist. Marx's family was more secular Christian. They could be responsible for this "misinterpretation" or any of the billions of Christians almost two millennium since the death of Jesus.
I will stand by my statement that communism is a violent form of Christianity and we will have to agree to disagree. Not to single you out, but many times people make so short of statements on the Forum that I find it confusing to figure out where they stand. Eighty percent of me thought you were a communist that felt insulted Marx did not form his ideas on his own (and did the human thing of requisitioning the ideas around him). I'm glad I can be both verbose and confusing.
