Problem is you would not live that long if a loosing lord has 20% deathrisk at age 33 They will be dead at 23 if they has fallen 20 times by then. Just count, age - (15 + 18 ) + 20. You can have 5% death at age 18 if you are unlucky/enter a loosing/falling streak. For AI I guess its not uncommon to loose or at least fall in 20 battles/year. Considering they fall in >95% of their "real" battle, whether winning or loosing. I don't know if their statistics are as bad in simulated battles. But if we make a system att allows at least 60% of band-leading lords to live untill they are 55, I would like a system like you propose here. They retire from warlording and settle down as a steward. I like your suggestion with tutoring youngsters but I don't want to see 18 your old monsters, who are as good as their mentor Onther issue here is that alot of the lords has a starting age of ~50. This means you will likely not encounter the "old foxes" on the field but only their younger relatives and sons.
Players can certainly die in battle (I've had it happen to me) I believe the game will only cold clock you if your clan is too large though. You take over whoever would be second in command (Usually your wife) As for death and birth rates, Birth rates are incredibly easy to modify. I'd rather create the outline for death rates and simply modify birthrates around that instead since that seems significantly easier. Part of the problem I see with not having a chance to kill lords immediately is that it's very immersion breaking that for the first couple years lords simply don't die then all the sudden they start falling left and right as kids come into fruition. I think the chance of killing older lords in battle can provide it's own merits even early in the game but we'd need to actually provide AI lords with some personality so players care about them in the first place since it should only take 1 interaction to build a basic idea of a character through their first impression.I think we should seperate the player out of the equation for now. The players should not risk death in battle really(I have fallen too many times to count and yet never died from it so I guess that is the case already). But for other charachters - in what scale do we want them to die? I say maximum in same scale that a new noble comes to age. if we had a situation (globaly in Calradia) where 10 nobles comes of age each year, then an avarage of 10 nobles should die(in total, battle and age). Othervice the world would either depopulate or overpoulate - both bad! I suggest a global death-risk multiplayer depending on this statistics. Then we multiply a very low base deathrisk with this multiplier to calculate the actual deatrisk.
I think part of the problem with this method would be that every lord would be absolutely destroyed incredibly quickly from battle, and it'd significantly slow the actual gameplay part of the game down which would end up not being very fun for the player who wants to fight battles or in the opposite direction, this system could be abused very easily by decimating enemy armies and taking them out of the game for longer causing heavier snowballing from the lack of response these newly wounded lords can't muster causing the player to steamroll entire kingdoms by themselves. The concept of a temporary wounded state could have a lot of merit for lord personality, quest purposes, and relation purposes but you'd need to be incredibly careful when affecting how it impacts battles since that's a very delicate scale.I would like a very low death-risk and introduce a "wounded" charachter-state. While "wounded", charachter suffer an lower HP regen, increased deathrisk and require additional HP to enter battles.
Base Death-risk variables:
AGE = charachter age
BM = Base modifier(15 default)
AM = Age midifier(18 default - adult age)
FM = Fallen Modifier(0-20 number of times a charachter has fallen)
ARM = Armour modifier(1-6 avarage armortier)
Base death-risk: My edited OP proposal (AGE - ( BM + AM) + FM) / ARM / 10
I can see at least 4 wounded states
- 40 year old, never fallen charachter with T3 armour: 0,7%
- 50 year old, 20 times fallen charachter with T5 armour : 0,74%
- 22 year old, 15 times fallen charachter with T2 armour: 0,2%
- 60 year old, 20 times fallen charachter with T2 armour: 2,35%
Injury Battleready at HP Effects Removed by Deathrisk modifier Removal effect None(as is) 20 Base(see above) Wounded 30 HP regen x 0,75 HP = 50 Low(Base x 5) FM = 0**** Badly Wounded 50 HP regen x 0,5 * Medium(Base x 20) FM - 5**** Severly Injured 75 HP regen x 0,25 ** High(Base x 50) None Maimed*** Never HP regen x 0,1 Never N/A N/A
* At HP 75: Removed and sets HP = 30
** At HP 100: Downgrades to Badly Wounded and sets HP = 40
*** Even a maimed charachter can still do anything but participate in battles without any malus but they will die earlier from age
**** By resetting/reducing Fallen Modifier when removing wounds, we give the player some additional control over the deathrisk. Given time to recover injuries, all characters benefits. Ignoring them sets them at additional risk. And yes, charachters rarely will reach a high FM - score
When falling in battle, wound trait has a big risk(75%?) of beeing added or upgraded (if falling with one active). The player does not get them by default(can be a setting ofc but playing as maimed sounds... boring!) this would force AI lords to stay out of battle. It could be used as an AI anti-snowballing thing as well. A Badly Wounded lord leaves an offensive army for example while only a Severly injured lord leaves a defensive army.
They don't die, but they are fighting alot less! This would give battles more meaning, give lords more personality and preserve the gamestate abit longer(less snowballing without player influence).
This Wounded traits would provide AI writers with a great opportunity to solve alot of AI related issues in the game.
I believe wounded AI lords attempt to seek shelter and recover. I could be wrong but I remember it in one of the patch notes.Of cause, but 20 HP AI lords in battle is not much better, if they risk dying when falling. Default it to 50% for participating in simulated battles however makes more sense. If they don't enter battle, they don't die, though being among the prisoners if loosing.
Nah, your OP-suggestion would give a lord who has fallen 20+ times and is 53 years old a death-risk of freaking high 40%. Current flat 10% is insane and what everyone votes against Nobody wants a situation where all AI lords are statistically dead after 10 times fallnig in battle It needs to go down quite alot. Very few lords would have any "protecten" from that suggestion, most would be far more fragile(All charachters starting at 43+ to be specific).
It gives you a good reason to take care of them and equip them well as it makes quite big differense. And the purpuse of armour is to save life after all.
It´s an issue that AI has the same armour at all time. I think they should at minimum have a risk to lose a random armourpart when loosing a battle, replacing it with a T3 noble armour-part and some mechanic for them to get them upgraded as well.
It could even be turn into a boost for charachters in a winning party. I mean, it could range from 20 to -20%. instead of from 20 to 0%.
I should have been clearer, I meant no increased death chance on being wounded not the ability to enter battle wounded. 1HP AI lords in battle would be pretty goofy.Haha! No, it would rather save them from death, they would constantly be below 20% health and not participate in many battles....
Jokes aside, they could have a 50% health threshold for participating in battles instead of the around 20% for players. Especially in simulated battles, a wounded lord(below 50% health) could use the "send troops" - option as deafult.
Age - 33(15+18 ) can alone be a very high death-rate when looking closer. A 53 year old lord would suffer a 20% death-risk if falling in battle. IE, there would hardly be any charachters 40+. I think there needs to be another parameter as well. How about dividing with the characher median armour-tier? That means the same 53 year old lord that has fallen i battle 20+ times but have an insane T6 armourwould land a deathrisk slightly above 6%? For your 40 year old companion with lootergear but who has never fallen before its 7% too((7+0)/1).
And there could be some kind of mechanic to reduce the "death-count malus" - maybe keep count of no of battles without falling and after each battle subtract that number for the "death-count malus" - number. This can ofc be cheased by a player but a companion can fall even against 5 looters
On one hand a universal system like that would be good for immersion in the world, but the AI might need a little buff behind the scenes (no wounded penalty maybe?) since AI lords get knocked out so often they'd all be at the 20% cap before the first year and that'd probably result in a massive swathe of deaths.This is an easy and rather nice "shortcut" compared to how it is now. At least if OP means for it work for AI and for simulated AI battles as well as for player and their familly
The issue isn't actually solved, the other poster just said how a player could manually fix the bug on their end by editing the xml file but it is still a bug that should be fixed officially (And shouldn't be too difficult to fix either since it's a simple labeling problem)Glad to hear, have fun!