Rebellions are shallow and break immersion.

[stevehoos]

Just as the title says:

In my first hour of gameplay (why am I even playing this game?) there have been 5 rebellions in major cities in the game, not sure how immersive it is to see Sargot and other major towns owned by rebels in the first 15 minutes. There's no rhyme or reason to why any of this happens. Battania takes a Vlandian city, then rebels take it, and Vlandia is just fine with the rebals owning their town. This is shallow, logic lazy, half assed work, every modder in this forum knows this. Make a real feature and give people the game we paid 40 dollars for instead of this crap.

@TW leadership

Stop fiddling with your space game alpha and make some content.

And for the love of God... I wanted a 900 man battle size because it worked well with my PC. Stop taking options away from the player. Just because some dope can't figure out how to read an options tab is not our fault. You all have done this countless times in this EA.

 

[Ananda_The_Destroyer]

Lol it's pretty funny though when they rebel over and over. Okay fine you want to take the town I will. AAww you **** didn't build a orchards or grainers and you're gonna rebel cuz no food? Serially, the AI should be instructed to build orchard and granaries first. Even Chaikand at day 400 didn't have them when I took it.

 

[FizCap]

The rebel idea seems half baked, there should be different kind of rebellions like a roaming rebellion that sieges castles as well, I know there was this one warband mod that did that, it was pretty cool

 

[stevehoos]

Lol it's pretty funny though when they rebel over and over. Okay fine you want to take the town I will. AAww you **** didn't build a orchards or grainers and you're gonna rebel cuz no food? Serially, the AI should be instructed to build orchard and granaries first. Even Chaikand at day 400 didn't have them when I took it.

That is terrible coding, the rebellions seem infinite. I am calling these people out for this stuff. Add in the fact that we have endless battles that mean nothing and you have one hell of a stink burger game.

 

[Ananda_The_Destroyer]

That is terrible coding, the rebellions seem infinite. I am calling these people out for this stuff.

They can be unless the player intervenes and makes the upgrades to the food.
I'm a little worried too because I saw "maybe rebels shouldn't have rebellions" as a possible fix, but that just make a big crap fest for the player or just postpones the problem.
As it is now the only way to deal with them is to jump on and take the town as soon as a 'new' rebellion has on off, so you can use the boosted loyalty to build food upgrades and stabilize. But if the rebels can't have rebels, then the town just sits thier with no loyalty and if the player takes it, it's un-fixable and if they join a new faction they will just rebel right away too, effectively generating a new NPC clan every time the cycle goes through.

They need to ease off of the food situation and related mechanics IMO, it's just causing problems and annoyance to players.

 

[AndrewArt]

I mentioned that too many rebellions at the start of the game break immersion as well. I got 7 or 8 rebellions in my first year. Mexxico agreed that it's not ideal atm and will look into it. As for the shallowness of the mechanic, give some suggestions too. Just saying it's shallow doesn't help much. What can be changed/added to make rebellions better?

 

[stevehoos]

I mentioned that too many rebellions at the start of the game break immersion as well. I got 7 or 8 rebellions in my first year. Mexxico agreed that it's not ideal atm and will look into it. As for the shallowness of the mechanic, give some suggestions too. Just saying it's shallow doesn't help much. What can be changed/added to make rebellions better?

I would, but I am done giving suggestions. After seeing this and the prison break feature this company has thrown in the towel. They don't give a rat's patoot what we think.

 

[Ananda_The_Destroyer]

I mentioned that too many rebellions at the start of the game break immersion as well. I got 7 or 8 rebellions in my first year. Mexxico agreed that it's not ideal atm and will look into it. As for the shallowness of the mechanic, give some suggestions too. Just saying it's shallow doesn't help much. What can be changed/added to make rebellions better?

I think it would be cool of the rebels spawned 1st as a neutral faction and the player could have a chance to talk to them about what the problems of the town are and works as a guide to fix them, but ignoring them would result in a full rebellion of the town. maybe if it was resolved peacefully the rebels could become a proper clan and join a faction if there are below a certain amount of clan in the game, or become wanderers or notables otherwise.

Oh and if you attacked the rebel clan your town would rebel immediately and ever stronger then a normal rebellion, like they're really mad at you.
And if it wasn't your town, it wouldn't prevent it from rebelling, but more hostile player hunting clans would soon spawn to seek revenge on you for killing the rebels. If you keep doing this stuff, you get a lot of people interested in destroying your clan.

 

[Dabos37]

Rebellions were ok in 1.5.9 IMO. Yes, it was a rare event but it worked as it should. Helping rebel clans to keep them alive increasing their survivability is ok, but increasing rebellions chance a lot is a really bad idea. I do agree with it totally breaks immersion.

 

[Antaeus]

I would, but I am done giving suggestions. After seeing this and the prison break feature this company has thrown in the towel. They don't give a rat's patoot what we think.

So you're just here for a moan then?

 

[Death2Tyrants]

I mentioned that too many rebellions at the start of the game break immersion as well. I got 7 or 8 rebellions in my first year. Mexxico agreed that it's not ideal atm and will look into it. As for the shallowness of the mechanic, give some suggestions too. Just saying it's shallow doesn't help much. What can be changed/added to make rebellions better?

Here you go:

https://forums.taleworlds.com/index...ng-to-add-a-major-feature.442958/post-9693420

Rebellion is poorly thought out. The player can capture a town without forming a kingdom. This then gives complete immunity from encroachment. Taken to the extreme, a player could slowly capture the whole of Calradia without ever having to defend.

A more complete version would include more consequences. For e.g on capturing a town, the player could be confronted by representatives from the neighbouring kingdoms along the lines of "Hey that's a nice town you have there. A pity if someone were to ransack it".Or "Thanks for liberating MY town. I'd like to have it back."

And refusal will naturally lead to war. That'd force the player to either sell the town, give it up, join them or go to war.

 

[AndrewArt]

I think it would be cool of the rebels spawned 1st as a neutral faction and the player could have a chance to talk to them about what the problems of the town are and works as a guide to fix them, but ignoring them would result in a full rebellion of the town. maybe if it was resolved peacefully the rebels could become a proper clan and join a faction if there are below a certain amount of clan in the game, or become wanderers or notables otherwise.

Oh and if you attacked the rebel clan your town would rebel immediately and ever stronger then a normal rebellion, like they're really mad at you.
And if it wasn't your town, it wouldn't prevent it from rebelling, but more hostile player hunting clans would soon spawn to seek revenge on you for killing the rebels. If you keep doing this stuff, you get a lot of people interested in destroying your clan.

I like the suggestions. So have issues/quests designed specifically for rebellions. TW seems to love creating new quests and fixing quest-related stuff so I truly hope they will look into this option for rebellions as well. The same way we can have special quests for owning a town - like people mentioned before: Have townspeople come with "complaints" or certain needs, and again taking care of these issues would increase loyalty and decrease the likelihood of rebellions, and if not - the opposite happens: more rebellions.

So some kind of "stage" system would be really cool.
Stage 1: normal rebellion risk - issues present. If you keep ignoring issues it goes to
Stage 2: "rebellion neutral faction spawns - rebellion is brewing, more demanding/difficult issues". If you ignore those issues as well then
Stage 3: Full on rebellion, here you either take the town by force or respond to heavy demands, including tons of denars, materials, difficult quests.

The progression (speed) of those stages would also depend on town prosperity, loyalty, projects etc.

Here you go:

https://forums.taleworlds.com/index...ng-to-add-a-major-feature.442958/post-9693420

good, the more suggestions the better. I do agree that taking a rebelled town shouldn't be without any sort of consequence. It should at least decrease relationship with the previous original owner and relations should play a bigger part in AI's declaring war on you as well. I wish more minor factions declared war on our upcoming clan as well, but the opposite happens, you attack them and then they immediately declare peace...

 

[xeroctr]

every mechanic in the game is shallow...

 

[danEN]

It's effectively just become a bandage fix for snowballing with a pretty name, it really doesn't add any long lasting effects to the campaign map nor does it add any kind of story arc

 

[Antaeus]

It's effectively just become a bandage fix for snowballing with a pretty name, it really doesn't add any long lasting effects to the campaign map nor does it add any kind of story arc

Snowballing had already been dealt with a couple of iterations previously. And castles can't rebel. So while it would slow a snowball, and does hamper faction expansion, it seems unlikely that it was intended to specifically address it.

This mechanic adds more risk to the player as much as anything. It is now very difficult for the player to manage more than 3 or 4 foreign culture cities personally. Once you have more than that, you have to spend all of your time addressing city issues or risk losing a city. As well as that, it encourages a player to become more involved with the management of a city - which is a good thing.

So while I think it probably needs a little tweaking, I think it is more directed towards the player than it is stymieing other faction's growth

 

[Calabanar]

I am more concerned by the state of courting... it’s uninteresting and feels degrading.

Though yeah, obviously there needs to be more ways to interact with rebellions.

 

[danEN]

Snowballing had already been dealt with a couple of iterations previously. And castles can't rebel. So while it would slow a snowball, and does hamper faction expansion, it seems unlikely that it was intended to specifically address it.

This mechanic adds more risk to the player as much as anything. It is now very difficult for the player to manage more than 3 or 4 foreign culture cities personally. Once you have more than that, you have to spend all of your time addressing city issues or risk losing a city. As well as that, it encourages a player to become more involved with the management of a city - which is a good thing.

So while I think it probably needs a little tweaking, I think it is more directed towards the player than it is stymieing other faction's growth

It's effectively just become a bandage fix

They definitely had plans for it, but what I'm saying is all it's turned out as is another way to stop snowballing. What they could've done was have rebellions and civil wars for a more fleshed out system or at least allow the rebelling City to form a new faction indefinitely.

 

[ShakenSpeare]

I am more concerned by the state of courting... it’s uninteresting and feels degrading.

When Warband's courting feels advanced compared to Bannerlord's, you know this game is downgraded.

 

[Csatádi]

I also find them too frequent.
Halving the frequency would be a good baseline.
Higher prosperity loss would be a far better consequence of repeated sieges and occupations.

 

[Vekar]

I have had almost no rebellions, so far... Three? Thats the grand total and only one of which turned into a rival force. What I see as being shattering is that they get cut down so fast! It would be nice if the rebellions actually became a true force of their own and held their ground instead of just getting steam rolled which is what happened the three times I saw it take place. I could not even get across the map in time to see what was going on before they got butchered in a short siege. It would be nice to make them more viable, some city rebels (or castle defects?) and they rise up with enough of an army to actually give the player or AI kingdoms pause so it becomes a concerted effort to take control again because as it is now... Steamroller. Not a chance.

Let the peasants revolt now and then but just make them viable as an independent faction to add spice to things.