My sentiments exactly. The mechanics are good but if you are not actually fighting then it feels empty with no diplomacy or other role playing elements.
...... and to give the player / NPC time to put some counter measures in place.
I would support 2 as well but I also like the idea of paying reparations either from the previous owner if the player decides to return the town or from the player to the NPC if the player decides to keep the town. If payment is made and accepted then there should be no relation loss.
That answered my question as well. I was concerned that my Loyalty before the update was 100 and then it started to fall and I was concerned about how far it was going to fall but if the Target Loyalty is 50 then anything over 50 is good. I assume then at 50 loyalty there are no positive or negative factors applied to the settlement output and taxes.
My opinion is there should be some dialogue between the previous owner and the new owner. For example the previous owner could offer money or horses to have it back and if the new owner refuses then the options would be either a large hit to the relations between the two or possibly war.
It does make it difficult to make a plan on how to keep a settlement when you don't know what are the factors being taken into account. Different culture, we can all understand, different culture of the Governor is straight forward but what drives Loyalty drift? For me that is a problem as I don't understand what is driving Loyalty drift. We don't actually know what factors affect it. Yesterday I watched Loyalty drift fall to zero in my two towns and now 1 town it is back up to 1.5 and the other to 0.9 for no obvious reasons. Is it just a variable number that changes over time or is there some way where I can influence it?
Have you thought that maybe the problem is you?