About the number of joining clans (late game problem)

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 2 (members: 0, guests: 2)
iRkshz

iRkshz

Regular
I already wrote about the late game problem - this is the unlimited joining of clans. As a result, the player does not need to do anything, he just watches how his clans take over the whole world - and this is boring.

Victory in a large (global) war should depend on the decisions and participation of the King, and not on the number of clans. Historically, if a clan gained many victories without the participation of the King, this clan gained authority and influence - and, as a result, betrayed the King. A passive king is a weak king (the history of Ancient Rome is a perfect example).

And so about the problem:
I suggested limiting the number of clans that can join a player, depending on the difficulty level of the game. But as a result of the discussion, we came to the conclusion that this is a bad idea.
I think this idea is bad because as a result the player will have only one choice - to execute the rest of the clans. AI has too low a chance to execute the player (or you may not be captured). This is a dead end.
The problem is not solved.

So I started testing new ideas on how to make the late game interesting - and I found a solution that would make the game more realistic and balanced.
The more fiefs a player has, the more power he gets. Accordingly, after the player has invited 5 (?) clans, all subsequent clans must claim a fief for themselves to join.

For example, I conducted an experiment - how many clans can I join to my kingdom as long as they do not have fiefs (if I do not give the clans a fiefs and if I do not allow them to take over the fiefs) - the result surprised me, the clans do not leave me, even if there are 20+ of them and they have not had a fiefs for 5+ years.
Then where do they get the money? Why do they have T5-T6 troops? What should they protect? Why are they true to me? Because I have a relationship with them 90+, really?!?!?!?!?!

Clans must want a fiefs to join the player - I think this is a good decision, it is real - because I put myself from clans side and said to myself - I will not join you if you don’t give me a home - I believe in that.
Home is the main reason a clan has to be loyal, and it is a way to gain gold and influence - home is the link between the clan and the king.
Moreover, I think that if a clan is left without a fief for a long time, it should leave. The king must take care of his clans, the king must ensure that the clans have a home.

btw, Loyalty is an important aspect. Marriage between clans should be important, like home.

What do you think about this?
 
Last edited:
Apocal said:
1) Loot payments.
2) why wouldn't they have T5 or T6 troops?
Click to expand...
I'm tired of explaining this - please turn on the logic and mathematics
200 T5 troops is 2400 gold per day
a noble with 200 troops will have a speed of 4.0-4.2 (on average)
on foot bandits speed 3.9 (groups of 15-20 units)
it usually takes 12-24 hours to catch up with the bandits
= well now count, turn on your genius, how many bandits per day one noble can kill
or do as I do, watch the noble, how often they catch bandits and complete quests
any more questions or suggestions?
I repeat for the 10th time, AI takes money out of thin air, stop repeating your nonsense
 
Apocal said:
I've never seen a defeated faction (zero fiefs) show up with 200 T5 troops.
Click to expand...
we probably play different games :wink:

hey @Apocal I understand, you don't like me and I annoy you, but show respect for the issue I raise, because these are important aspects
you cannot shut me up - I will write further, I will discuss problems, I will look for solutions to problems
no one and nothing on this forum can stop me (except for moderators) - this is fate, so the gods decided

you have a choice (like others), whether to continue trolling or arguing with me about unimportant aspects, or help in solving main problems
 
iRkshz said:
hey @Apocal I understand, you don't like me and annoy, but show respect for the issue I raise
you cannot shut me up - I will write further, I will discuss problems, I will look for solutions to problems
no one and nothing on this forum can stop me
Click to expand...
Can't blame Apocal for his conservative approach and he can be inquisitive as hell (you'd know after some time spent reading his posts :wink:) - I believe there are good reasons behind that. So there was a time the opposite trend was at the table where clans didn't want to stay long with your kingdom. TW worked hard to balance this issue, they might have gone to the other extreme, but it is far more acceptable this time. They sometimes left even having the same amount of fiefs as the player (!). Here you can see some examples if you don't mind reading and learning from 'the history':


iRkshz said:
I'm tired of explaining this - please turn on the logic and mathematics
Click to expand...
Btw. that is a good example of showing respect bro :grin:

All in all, I believe your motifs for having a more challenging end game are good but some features and mechanics were already changed therefore it might not be instantly replied to and implemented.
 
Nodice83 said:
Click to expand...
that's right, clans should leave if the relationship is -100
if it was fixed then this is a mistake
Nodice83 said:
Click to expand...
clans with no homes are leaving a weak kingdom - that's fine, this is real
Nodice83 said:
Click to expand...
this is a bug
Nodice83 said:
Click to expand...
this is a bug
Nodice83 said:
Click to expand...
this is a bug - it was fixed
Nodice83 said:
Click to expand...
this is a bug

I am not a TW dev, but this is my IMHO.
But I studied in detail your links, developer reviews, and they fixed it.

The examples you gave are bugs.
The examples that I gave are a solution to the late game problem.

I am not suggesting that this is the only one solution.
Therefore, I asked what everyone thinks about it. Preferably with examples and arguments.
 
Last edited:
@iRkshz

Can you send me your save file ([email protected]) where you have 20 clans and they have no fief for 5+ years. Normally they have to defect and have financial problems. I can examine how they still stand.

fyi. If you get high tribute payments (fe. 10K from all kingdoms daily this is also distributed to each clan, about 10K / 20 denars in your example where you have 20 clans)

It also become perfect if you send me 2 files. One from 5 years back and one from current. If you do not have both sending only second is ok too.

Thanks,
 
Last edited:
I wanted to say those were examples of a opposite trend and player's kingdom wasn't playable at all in the late game. I myself felt it was almost like being a hostage to your clans when you have had to decide if you want to improve your economy or give away another bribe. Not all were reported back but i am sure they balanced it. Sorry for not bringing patch notes, examples, etc.

Good job mate. Stay passionate (y)

P. S. If you trully want to support effectively my advice would be to take some criticism easy and cooperate with other influencers :wink:
 
Nodice83 said:
Good job mate. Stay passionate (y)
Click to expand...
thx (y)

mexxico said:
@iRkshz

Can you send me your save file ([email protected]) where you have 20 clans and they have no fief for 5+ years. Normally they have to defect and have financial problems. I can examine how they still stand.

fyi. If you get high tribute payments (fe. 10K from all kingdoms daily this is also distributed to each clan, about 10K / 20 denars in your example where you have 20 clans)

It also become perfect if you send me 2 files. One from 5 years back and one from current. If you do not have both sending only second is ok too.

Thanks,
Click to expand...
this is no longer possible, I did not save each stage or each experiment (saves and the game have already been deleted) - but you can simulate this situation yourself using the console and see the result (an important condition, you must have 90+ relationships with your clans)

during the last game (where I experimented a lot and observed the behavior of the AI), I wrote everything down in a document, lately I've been structuring everything and writing about it on the forum

therefore, unfortunately, I can not provide anything
but I am sure that you have no reason to doubt my honesty, because all my previous posts had video and save confirmation
 
iRkshz said:
we probably play different games :wink:
Click to expand...
Every party of a broke clan belonging to a dead faction I could find after ten minutes. Very few T5 troops. Very few troops in general; in fact a lot of them have almost nothing more than the troops they spawn with because they keep getting caught and wiped out by late-game bandits and/or other lords. No money, no troops. No money, no upgrades.

They stay weak unless they can grab some loot.

The reason their parties can exist with more troops is because low-tier troops are dirt cheap. You beat up 30 looters and can fund a party for like ten days if you stick with mostly T1/T2 troops. If you catch better bandits, they might be able to pay their party wages for a year (84 days) from just one fight. Obviously if you dump 90,000+ denars in their laps to join your faction, that's a lot of troops for a really long time -- and the AI can't/won't keep high-tier parties so they'll be able to fund themselves basically forever (assuming they fight regularly, ofc) once they get money to join your kingdom.
iRkshz said:
hey @Apocal I understand, you don't like me and I annoy you, but show respect for the issue I raise, because these are important aspects
Click to expand...
Like I said before the last time you raised this issue: this is endgame. For a player to recruit twenty clans and have those clans eventually take over the continent, they probably made around 6-12 million denars, raised relations up above 20-30 for those clans, have a powerful kingdom behind them and destroyed any meaningful opposition. They won. Game over, except for grinding all fifty-three towns and sixty-seven castles.

Yes, it is boring but making that part take even longer isn't going to add any excitement, it will just be boring for for more real life hours.
 
Last edited:
Apocal said:
Every party of a broke clan belonging to a dead faction I could find after ten minutes. Very few T5 troops. Very few troops in general; in fact a lot of them have almost nothing more than the troops they spawn with because they keep getting caught and wiped out by late-game bandits and/or other lords. No money, no troops. No money, no upgrades.

They stay weak unless they can grab some loot.

The reason their parties can exist with more troops is because low-tier troops are dirt cheap. You beat up 30 looters and can fund a party for like ten days if you stick with mostly T1/T2 troops. If you catch better bandits, they might be able to pay their party wages for a year (84 days) from just one fight. Obviously if you dump 90,000+ denars in their laps to join your faction, that's a lot of troops for a really long time -- and the AI can't/won't keep high-tier parties so they'll be able to fund themselves basically forever (assuming they fight regularly, ofc) once they get money to join your kingdom.
Click to expand...
OK, I see that you and I are playing different games
next time when I play (and it will not be soon), I will make a compilation especially for you by years, and I will make saves by years

Apocal said:
Like I said before the last time you raised this issue: this is endgame. For a player to recruit twenty clans and have those clans eventually take over the continent, they probably made around 6-12 million denars, raised relations up above 20-30 for those clans, have a powerful kingdom behind them and destroyed any meaningful opposition. They won. Game over, except for grinding all fifty-three towns and sixty-seven castles.

Yes, it is boring but making that part take even longer isn't going to add any excitement, it will just be boring for for more real life hours.
Click to expand...
you manipulate
when a player is ready to start inviting clans, this is a mid game - before the late game, player will pass at least another 10 in-game years
I propose a solution that is balanced, logical, realistic, atmospheric

answer the question - will you serve the king if you do not have a home? or are you happy to be homeless?
 
Last edited:
iRkshz said:
OK, I see that you and I are playing different games
next time when I play (and it will not be soon), I will make a compilation especially for you by years, and I will make saves by years

answer the question - how many hours have you played? and how many complete games have you played? and also, how many years of gaming have you been playing games? I'm just wondering how much time you spent observing the AI


you manipulate
when a player is ready to start inviting clans, this is a mid game - before the late game, player will pass at least another 10 in-game years
I propose a solution that is balanced, logical, realistic, atmospheric

answer the question - will you serve the king if you do not have a home? or are you happy to be homeless?
Click to expand...
I appreciate your passion but you have a bad habit of getting extremely defensive when someone disagrees with you and you come off as hostile. Instead of making a compilation you should save your game file and send it to mexxxico so he can see first hand the issues that you brought up. How many hours do YOU have played? since you're out here asking that question to others.
 
Ling* said:
I appreciate your passion but you have a bad habit of getting extremely defensive when someone disagrees with you and you come off as hostile. Instead of making a compilation you should save your game file and send it to mexxxico so he can see first hand the issues that you brought up. How many hours do YOU have played? since you're out here asking that question to others.
Click to expand...
I am defensive because they answer me WITHOUT arguments - they write only an opinion that is not confirmed by anything - you can easily check it by opening any of my posts.

You are right, I didn’t make saves, I can’t prove my case regarding AI bankruptcy.
BUT, this topic is NOT about AI bankruptcy. This is another reason why I am aggressive - because they write to me NOT on the main topic.

I played 1500+ hours, 100 hours in the last game (where I watched the AI and experimented with bugs and exploits) - I don't consider the number of hours in the game an argument and authority, I just wondered how much time he spent watching the AI, if he is so sure.
N9IpXit.jpg
 
iRkshz said:
I am defensive because they answer me WITHOUT arguments - they write only an opinion that is not confirmed by anything - you can easily check it by opening any of my posts.

You are right, I didn’t make saves, I can’t prove my case regarding AI bankruptcy.
BUT, this topic is NOT about AI bankruptcy. This is another reason why I am aggressive - because they write to me NOT on the main topic.

I played 1500+ hours, 100 hours in the last game (where I watched the AI and experimented with bugs and exploits) - I don't consider the number of hours in the game an argument and authority, I just wondered how much time he spent watching the AI, if he is so sure.
N9IpXit.jpg
Click to expand...

Solution of problems you mentioned is not so hard. If you spent hundreds of hours at game and 100 hours at last game normally you should have save files where problems you mentioned are visible. Creating same situation with cheats are not healthy. So lets close discussion. I am ready to examine situation if you send me save file. Otherwise there is nothing we can do.
 
mexxico said:
Solution of problems you mentioned is not so hard. If you spent hundreds of hours at game and 100 hours at last game normally you should have save files where problems you mentioned are visible. Creating same situation with cheats are not healthy. So lets close discussion. I am ready to examine situation if you send me save file. Otherwise there is nothing we can do.
Click to expand...
this is no longer possible, I did not save each stage of each experiment (saves and the game have already been deleted)

in fact, I am not interested in the topic of bankruptcy - this is the reason why I did not create such topics, because I understand how difficult it is to do well, and I have no idea how to do it well

but I will be VERY grateful if you answer of the main topic - late game is boring because there is no control over the number of clans, I spent a lot of time and brains trying to figure out how to balance this aspect - but everyone who comments is ignoring it ... I will cry :cry:
 
Don't they also value the power of you faction? Could it be you're faction is so much stronger then the alternatives that it's never in thier favor to leave even if you gave them no fief? I've never not given a clan a fiefs (as it easy for me to do so) but I've never had one leave me either, despite many with only 0-30 range relations.

iRkshz said:
late game is boring because there is no control over the number of clans, I spent a lot of time and brains trying to figure out how to balance this aspect - but everyone who comments is ignoring it ... I will cry
Click to expand...
It's boring because it's boring. Don't cry!
There may be some fine tuning needed to clans staying/leaving but in general uniting the entire map under you is the honorable endgame, as opposed to mass executions. It's expected once you pass a threshold of power you're going to take the map and nothing at that point can stop you.
If they try to limit or control how many clans you can have (to prolong the end game)then they need to create many many more types of gameplay to do in the game as it goes on longer. It doesn't seem like this is the path they're on.
 
iRkshz said:
they write only an opinion that is not confirmed by anything - you can easily check it by opening any of my posts.
Click to expand...
I mean it's opinion not facts so you have an opinion and others have an opinion. It's fine to be passionate but at least respect others opinions which means at least listen to them without getting upset if they disagree. If no one ever listens to each other then it's not a discussion it's just a bunch of people shouting back and forth, food for thought. :wink:
 
black_bulldog said:
I mean it's opinion not facts so you have an opinion and others have an opinion. It's fine to be passionate but at least respect others opinions which means at least listen to them without getting upset if they disagree. If no one ever listens to each other then it's not a discussion it's just a bunch of people shouting back and forth, food for thought. :wink:
Click to expand...
I mean, his idea is effectively what already happens: once you have more than three homeless clans, they always fill the ballot for a new fief because of the way Merit Score works. As long as you conquer anything, it will go to one of your homeless clans.
 
iRkshz said:
I already wrote about the late game problem - this is the unlimited joining of clans. As a result, the player does not need to do anything, he just watches how his clans take over the whole world - and this is boring.

Victory in a large (global) war should depend on the decisions and participation of the King, and not on the number of clans. Historically, if a clan gained many victories without the participation of the King, this clan gained authority and influence - and, as a result, betrayed the King. A passive king is a weak king (the history of Ancient Rome is a perfect example).

And so about the problem:
I suggested limiting the number of clans that can join a player, depending on the difficulty level of the game. But as a result of the discussion, we came to the conclusion that this is a bad idea.
I think this idea is bad because as a result the player will have only one choice - to execute the rest of the clans. AI has too low a chance to execute the player (or you may not be captured). This is a dead end.
The problem is not solved.

So I started testing new ideas on how to make the late game interesting - and I found a solution that would make the game more realistic and balanced.
The more fiefs a player has, the more power he gets. Accordingly, after the player has invited 5 (?) clans, all subsequent clans must claim a fief for themselves to join.

For example, I conducted an experiment - how many clans can I join to my kingdom as long as they do not have fiefs (if I do not give the clans a fiefs and if I do not allow them to take over the fiefs) - the result surprised me, the clans do not leave me, even if there are 20+ of them and they have not had a fiefs for 5+ years.
Then where do they get the money? Why do they have T5-T6 troops? What should they protect? Why are they true to me? Because I have a relationship with them 90+, really?!?!?!?!?!

Clans must want a fiefs to join the player - I think this is a good decision, it is real - because I put myself from clans side and said to myself - I will not join you if you don’t give me a home - I believe in that.
Home is the main reason a clan has to be loyal, and it is a way to gain gold and influence - home is the link between the clan and the king.
Moreover, I think that if a clan is left without a fief for a long time, it should leave. The king must take care of his clans, the king must ensure that the clans have a home.

btw, Loyalty is an important aspect. Marriage between clans should be important, like home.

What do you think about this?
Click to expand...
If your Faction is the most powerful Faction in Calradia, all clans stay in your Faction because there is no alternative.
For clans defection chances:
Power of current Faction vs. other Factions + Personal Money of Clan Leader + Relation to the Faction Leader.

And while should a clan leave a powerful faction and join a weaker faction?
They have nothing to win.

And limiting the number of clans only for the player kingdom is a stupid idea, it should be for everyone and not with difficult setting.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

How to temo
Replies
1
Views
144
Hero07911010
Hero07911010
LDominating
Rant about game design
Replies
2
Views
301
LDominating
LDominating
Current playthrough
Replies
2
Views
210
Winter1
Back
Top Bottom