Let me give my story on vassal defection, I was at day 1100, 6 companion clans, 5 AI vassals, so 11 clans. We has 1 fief, I had 1 town. Was max relation with everyone. Money was amazing as I had over 10 million and gave some to clans so they could put in the guild stash. And after 250 days, making it day 1350, I did nothing to help anyone, no one would leave me. Do I think the code was changed, yes I do. However, after I released my "why vassals leave you" video which stated money is the key, I have run 3 separate tests and I can't get anyone to leave me. If anyone else has ideas on what I missed, let me know since I am trying to test. I will even take save files so test. But to this point I cant get anyone to leave my crummy kingdom.
You must have at least the fiefs of 3 factions or more and you will see, your vassals will leave without any reasons.
I tested it myself and as long, you have normal fiefs amount, nobody is leaving you, but as soon you have the fiefs of over 3 factions, they will start leaving you.
I haven't done a full playthrough yet to really confirm, but it seems like this hotfix put Medicine XP gain at an alright place.
In a single battle with 6 INT and 5 Focus Points, I had 48 troops wounded (mostly T5) and went from 88 Medicine to 94.
Following this, I healed those troops by waiting in a village, and got to 96 Medicine from that.
What are other people's thoughts on this? Good enough that we can call it mostly fixed? I know you supported strong buffs for Medicine as a skill @Ananda_The_Destroyer
You must have at least the fiefs of 3 factions or more and you will see, your vassals will leave without any reasons.
I tested it myself and as long, you have normal fiefs amount, nobody is leaving you, but as soon you have the fiefs of over 3 factions, they will start leaving you.
I mean if you have, the amount of fiefs of 3 factions at the start of the game.
As an example, if your faction controls all starting fiefs of Vlandia, Battania and Sturgia, then your vassals will defect at random, at least for me always, at this stage.
Was the armor damage reduction tweaked again in this hotfix? I didn't see it in the notes, but I started a new campaign and noticed that I'm one-shotting tier 4+ troops in tournaments which I definitely wasn't in my last save that I was playing up to yesterday. If so, I really hope this isn't...
forums.taleworlds.com
Anyone else noticing armour becoming weak to melee damage again in the hotfix?
No opinion yet, not touching the base game until they fix the vassal defection but, I have 2 paused campaigns waiting to return to. It took me all day yo get the mod I was playing to work after the hotfix so I barely have played since. *If* you get medicine from knocked out enemies when you have the doctors oath perk, then that's a big improvement. If not then "That's neat" because more skill per tier is good but you'll still barely get any units downed once you know how to play.
Started a new game off the hotfix, not far enough along for testing defection but does anyone else notice that the Workshop algorithm is not working as intended? Looking at towns like Poros or Lycaron with Sheep they still go with things like Velvet Weaver and Silversmiths versus a Wool Weaver. Same in grain-heavy towns not having Breweries or Grape-heavy towns not having Wineries.
Also, there are absolutely massive bandit parties at the start - did the scaling equation change? At the start I'm seeing regular groups of 15-25 and doom stacks of 50-80 bandits right away.
Going to start another to confirm but I don't mind it really, better than the 4000000 sea raider party bug.
Vassal defection update: It appears certain fiefs react bad to certain clans. I can give a fief to a clan and they get a 2%-3% chance to defect, take it away and give to someone else and 0%. I get a different fief and give it to the first clan that wanted to defect and they would have 0% this time. I even tried to give a sturgian lord a sturgian town right next to theirs and they werent happy. gave it to a non sturgian and they were happy. Something in the code is causing clans to react bad to some fiefs. Once I get them happy with all fiefs, and at this point I owned half the map. I ran the game for 300 years and not once did anyone have any chance to defect. As I checked the encyclopedia extender often. So for people playing vanilla, your screwed till hotfix, however, Lesser scholars encyclopedia extender is updated to 1.8 and so is the mod required to run it. If you get fief work around to get it to someone who will show 0% defection and U got no worries. I have been testing all day and this is what ive come up with. I am still running the game but I still havent had anyone leave for any reason because as soon as I give a fief and see that 2%-3% defection chance I take it away and give to someone that wants it. So TW use Lessers mod so you can see right away when the issue happens and can examine the code before the gifting of a fief and after to see what the problem is so we can get it fixed sooner as I think your having issues for it to take a month to fix.
Vassal defection update: It appears certain fiefs react bad to certain clans. I can give a fief to a clan and they get a 2%-3% chance to defect, take it away and give to someone else and 0%. I get a different fief and give it to the first clan that wanted to defect and they would have 0% this time. I even tried to give a sturgian lord a sturgian town right next to theirs and they werent happy. gave it to a non sturgian and they were happy. Something in the code is causing clans to react bad to some fiefs. Once I get them happy with all fiefs, and at this point I owned half the map. I ran the game for 300 years and not once did anyone have any chance to defect. As I checked the encyclopedia extender often. So for people playing vanilla, your screwed till hotfix, however, Lesser scholars encyclopedia extender is updated to 1.8 and so is the mod required to run it. If you get fief work around to get it to someone who will show 0% defection and U got no worries. I have been testing all day and this is what ive come up with. I am still running the game but I still havent had anyone leave for any reason because as soon as I give a fief and see that 2%-3% defection chance I take it away and give to someone that wants it. So TW use Lessers mod so you can see right away when the issue happens and can examine the code before the gifting of a fief and after to see what the problem is so we can get it fixed sooner as I think your having issues for it to take a month to fix.
If you would like to further test this, there is a part in code that checks settlement values for factions. While doing that, it calculates a midpoint for the faction and compares how far away that midpoint is from the settlement to how far away closest non-ally settlement is. And when code is comparing factions for a clan's own interest, it calculates settlement values for the factions using the settlements the clan owns. Which means, in theory since I haven't tested, if you give a clan settlements all close to another faction, that other faction will become better in their eyes.
If you would like to further test this, there is a part in code that checks settlement values for factions. While doing that, it calculates a midpoint for the faction and compares how far away that midpoint is from the settlement to how far away closest non-ally settlement is. And when code is comparing factions for a clan's own interest, it calculates settlement values for the factions using the settlements the clan owns. Which means, in theory since I haven't tested, if you give a clan settlements all close to another faction, that other faction will become better in their eyes.
I tried giving a sturgian Barlgard who owned Omar and he had 3% defection, I took it away and gave to an empire culture who owns Phycaon and no defection chance,
I tried giving a sturgian Barlgard who owned Omar and he had 3% defection, I took it away and gave to an empire culture who owns Phycaon and no defection chance,
middle of the map, but why would the empire clan on the opposite side of the kingdom wants it but the sturgian who owns one next to it want to defect, I was going to make a video but my mind is so spaghetti I don't even now who to explain this. Want to hear something funny, a buddy of mine and I did so much testing, he changed the traits of a dead clan member and that changed the defection chance. With obscure code like that how can you explain anything
middle of the map, but why would the empire clan on the opposite side of the kingdom wants it but the sturgian who owns one next to it want to defect, I was going to make a video but my mind is so spaghetti I don't even now who to explain this. Want to hear something funny, a buddy of mine and I did so much testing, he changed the traits of a dead clan member and that changed the defection chance. With obscure code like that how can you explain anything
Because if you give that clan Balgard, more of their settlements are closer to other factions. Think of it like this, you are an empire clan but all of your settlements are on Battania border. So Battania becomes better for you cause they can come protect you faster. At least I believe this is the idea behind that part of the code. Which in my opinion is not good because then you have to give clans settlements from opposite sides of your faction. One settlement from West, one from East etc.
Because if you give that clan Balgard, more of their settlements are closer to other factions. Think of it like this, you are an empire clan but all of your settlements are on Battania border. So Battania becomes better for you cause they can come protect you faster. At least I believe this is the idea behind that part of the code. Which in my opinion is not good because then you have to give clans settlements from opposite sides of your faction. One settlement from West, one from East etc.
I am just explaining how code works. There are multiple factors and army strength is one but settlement locations are in that calculation too. Regardless of army strengths, giving clans settlements on opposite sides of your kingdom makes it less likely for them to defect compared to giving them settlements all on the border and close to each other. You would want to make the calculated mid point close to your own mid point.
I am just explaining how code works. There are multiple factors and army strength is one but settlement locations are in that calculation too. Regardless of army strengths, giving clans settlements on opposite sides of your kingdom makes it less likely for them to defect compared to giving them settlements all on the border and close to each other. You would want to make the calculated mid point close to your own mid point.
is there any confirmation/proof on this?
because even if it is true, it wouldnt really fit as long as the same lords show up in the settlemenet voting anyway. on top of that somebody has to get the border settlement by expanding. that would mean that the clans are destined to leave as soon as the kingdom reaches a certain size and they get a border settlement. crazy. on top of that, clan defection is ONLY happening to the player in that way. no other factions are loosing lords when they expand.
on top wouldnt that have been a thing before 1.8.0 already or has that been implemented just yet without letting us know?
Why would a former Taleworlds Developer need to prove to you what he's reading in the game's code? I'm glad that he's now exploring code in areas he didn't work on and publishing mods to help us.
Why would a former Taleworlds Developer need to prove to you what he's reading in the game's code? I'm glad that he's now exploring code in areas he didn't work on and publishing mods to help us.
neither i know that he is a former developer of bannerlord, nor i know if that is fitting to the defection case according to my explanation. thats why i would like to have a further explanation to relate to.
is there any confirmation/proof on this?
because even if it is true, it wouldnt really fit as long as the same lords show up in the settlemenet voting anyway. on top of that somebody has to get the border settlement by expanding. that would mean that the clans are destined to leave as soon as the kingdom reaches a certain size and they get a border settlement. crazy. on top of that, clan defection is ONLY happening to the player in that way. no other factions are loosing lords when they expand.
on top wouldnt that have been a thing before 1.8.0 already or has that been implemented just yet without letting us know?
As I said, it is not the only factor there but one of them. I didn't claim this is the cause of defection bug. Flesson said clans get different defection chances when you give different settlements to them, I checked the code why.
Here is how game calculates geographical advantage of a settlement for a faction
This calculation is used for every settlement the clan owns when game is calculating which faction is better for the clan. For the relevant code, you can check DefaultDiplomacyModel class, specifically GetScoreOfClanToJoinKingdom, GetScoreOfClanToLeaveKingdom and GetScoreOfKingdomToGetClan methods.
To further explain this part while at it, game basically checks how far away the settlement is from faction's middle settlement. So when you give a clan settlements all on Battania border lets say, you have higher chances that Battania's value will be higher for that clan. This becomes even more significant as your size grows. If you give clans settlements on the opposite sides of your kingdom, your faction's score will stay roughly same for the clan but no other faction will get much better scores than you either if any better.
Speaking of this being changed, in fact it is different from 1.7.2. I don't know if it was mentioned in patch notes as I started playing again after beta 1.8.0 was released, I didn't read patch notes.
Quite a bit different calculation but to me most important part seems that "six nearest settlement distance with same faction" is gone. (Speculation) This is probably what was helping huge kingdoms. Although new fief is quite far away from midpoint, it can still have close 6 other settlements.
There are some other changes in other factors as well. For example having same original map faction and culture has less effect on 1.8.0 compared to 1.7.2
And while talking about this, I couldn't check it since it is on the engine side (C++) but I really hope distances between settlements calculated considering factors like forests/snow etc. cause otherwise factions like Aserai that has pretty big but empty lands will innately be in disadvantage because settlements will be calculated too far away while in reality forest/snow etc. makes it similar times to travel between factions in other parts of the world.
EDIT: I should have paid more attention to 1.7.2 code before making speculations `num5` will always be 1 because `num4` is guaranteed to be higher than `Campaign.AverageDistanceBetweenTwoTowns` (uhm, maybe it was a bug?) removing six nearest settlement calculation from equation completely. Considering this new discovery, old code used to compare every faction to map size BUT thanks to that power to tiny tiny 0.1, the difference between a faction half the size of map and only 1/10th of the map will only be 0.1 While in new code the difference can be as high as 3-4 it seems. There you go, there is your big difference.
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.
`num5` will always be 1 because `num4` is guaranteed to be higher than `Campaign.AverageDistanceBetweenTwoTowns` (uhm, maybe it was a bug?) removing six nearest settlement calculation from equation completely. Considering this new discovery, old code used to compare every faction to map size BUT thanks to that power to tiny tiny 0.1, the difference between a faction half the size of map and only 1/10th of the map will only be 0.1 
While in new code the difference can be as high as 3-4 it seems. There you go, there is your big difference.
