First of, who say you can't, I'm not your mom..That's just incoherent. To say that you can't complain about the lack of speed on anything is absurd. For example: you order a pizza. They say the delivery will take 30 mins. It shows up 3 hours later. Then you complain and your mom says "Well, you're arguing about something that should have happened but it turns out in another way? There are a lot of historical forums where such a discussion would fit better..."
So we are arguing about something that should have happened but it turns out in another way? There are a lot of historical forums where such a discussion would fit better...Nobody expected the Early Access to be good or complete. The point is that it shouldn't be in early access, or if it is, it should have been a decade ago. The fact that the game has been in development since 2010 and is still in "early access" and the early access moves at a snail's pace is the issue, not that we spent money on EA and are disappointed. You are missing the entire argument.
Replace by execution with a relation hit to the former supported clan... sounds somewhat good.Why can't we have a system where notables who don't support you lose power over time and are replaced, but the player always has the option to replace the notable if they don't want to wait. It would be faster but it would make it so you can't recruit from that village for a certain amount of time (maybe a week, maybe few days?).
It makes it so the system will correct itself without player intervention but it also makes it so players can micromange if they want. That way it's not overly complicated for new players but if someone wants that complexity it's there.
Here our little conversation started, but it can be that @Dabos37 found some new parameters(look at site 5 till 6)Yea the vanilla xbows reloads too fast, it's like a machine gun lol. You mod looks more realistic. Link? Lol
Or just open the monster.xml look by the id"human" and change the "absorbeddamageratio" from 1.0 to 0.5 to half the dmg. Since we know that the dmg will be multiplied with this variable(return num*absorbedDamageratio). Just for those who don't wanna work with dnspy.I'm not saying I agree that a blanket damage nerf is the best option, but it's something that can easily be tested (with dnSpy) to see how it would affect battles and different troop types in order to know for sure how it would feel.
In the method CalculateRawDamageNew there is a value you could simply change from 100 to 50 to halve damage from all sources (or to 70 for a 30% reduction, etc):
You can see how that change affects the curves for damage inflicted after armor reduction here. Or if you prefer to see it presented as a percentage of overall damage absorbed by armor, here.
Some of the results might be counter intuitive to what you would expect because of the way armor can negate some amount of cut and pierce damage that falls below a threshold. For instance, just from a quick test, 150 Elite Menavliatons absolutely murdered 150 Palatines because the Palatines couldn't dish out enough damage on the approach.
Unfortunately, I think this change also reduces the amount of XP you'll get from combat, since the damage you inflict serves as the basis for XP gains.