Recent content by StaceMcGate

  1. StaceMcGate

    SP - General Clan/Kingdoms successors

    Clans should have designated successors. - Successors would be bloodline or family. - For the player's clan, this option would be available once a child is born. - If Clan leader dies before successor comes of age, a regent from within the clan would be chosen until the successor comes of age. -...
  2. StaceMcGate

    1.8.0 balance and stupid changes.

    Recent playthroughs
    - Sturgia, Batania, Western/Northern Empire are reduced to only a few holdings
    - Vlandia and Southern Empire usually top kingdoms
    - Aserai and Khuzait maintain starting strength

    We really need Kingdom mergings or destructions as we have same old issue of Kingdom remains just ruling clan
    and 3 mercenary companies they somehow maintain despite having no holdings.

    Defensive alliances between weaker kingdoms be nice as well.
  3. StaceMcGate

    1.80 Beta issues and suggestions

    How about Influence drift when over (X high amount) of Influence? E.g. when a clan (player or AI) has over 1000 influence, they lose 10 per day until they are at/under 1000?

    That way influence isn't "hard capped", but it is reduced from getting too excessive.

    Yes. I proposed six different policies, and out of them: all lords voted the same way for all of them, except one of them where nobody but me and Derthert voted, and War Tax which had 2 lords in favour and 6 against. It seems the only factor significantly affecting votes right now is whether they are a vassal or ruler.

    I think this is best solved in the following way:

    Personality Traits make nobles like or dislike certain policies more. For example;

    Lords' Privy Council - Liked by Closefisted, Disliked by Generous.
    Military Coronae - Liked by Daring, Disliked by Closefisted.
    Serfdom - Liked by Cruel, Disliked by Merciful.
    Bailiffs - Liked by Honest, Disliked by Closefisted.
    Declare War - Liked by Daring, Disliked by Cautious.
    Declare Peace - Liked by Cautious, Disliked by Daring.

    A formula determines how much nobles will support or oppose a policy, based on three factors - relations, personality, and ruler/vassal status - which increase or decrease their "support strength".
    If they have under -30 relations with the policy proposer, -1 support strength.
    If they have over +30 relations with the policy proposer, +1 support strength.
    If they have over +50 relations with the policy proposer, +2 support strength.
    If they have under -50 relations with the policy proposer, -2 support strength.
    If they like the policy due to a Personality Trait, +1 support strength.
    If they dislike the policy due to a Personality Trait, -1 support strength.
    If they like the policy due to being a Ruler/Vassal, +1 support strength.
    If they dislike the policy due to being a Ruler/Vassal, -1 support strength.

    Add up the support strength, and the total determines how much influence they will be willing to spend on a policy. 0 support strength means they will abstain. 1 support strength means they will spend 20 influence in favour. 3+ support strength means they will spend 150 influence in favour. -2 support strength means they will spend 60 influence in opposition. Etc.

    For example, if a clan leader has +50 relations with his ruler (+2 support), and his ruler proposes the Sacred Majesty policy (-1 support for being a vassal), that clan leader will give +1 support to the policy.

    In the current system, if I vote on Military Coronae, 9 lords will support me for 20-40 and none will support the ruler, who opposes it. I can reduce my relation with all lords to 0, and the result is the same, I still get 9 supporters for the vote; only reducing my relations to -100 with someone makes them merely abstain (not even oppose me), so apparently relations makes only a small impact and traits mean nothing. But if I voted with the system shown above:

    Aldric is Closefisted (-1) with 87 relation with me (+2), so he would spend 20i in favour.
    Calatild is Closefisted (-1) with 100 relation with me (+2), so she would spend 20i in favour.
    Ingalther is Closefisted (-1) and Daring (+1) with 39 relation with me (+1), so he would spend 20i in favour.
    Varmunt is Daring (+1) with 0 relation with me, so he would spend 20i in favour.
    Eleduran has 36 relation with me, so he would spend 20i in favour.
    Hecard is Daring (+1) with 58 relation with me (+2), so he would spend 150i in favour.
    Vartin is Closefisted (-1) with 28 relation with me, so he would spend 20i against.
    Ecarand is Closefisted (-1) with 51 relation with me (+2), so he would spend 20i in favour.
    Voleric is Closefisted (-1) with 0 relation with me, so he would spend 20i against.
    The vote would be 270i in favour and 40i against.

    If I had 0 relations with everyone and proposed it:
    Aldric is Closefisted (-1), so he would spend 20i against.
    Calatild is Closefisted (-1), so she would spend 20i against.
    Ingalther is Closefisted (-1) and Daring (+1), so he would abstain.
    Varmunt is Daring (+1), so he would spend 20i in favour.
    Eleduran would abstain.
    Hecard is Daring (+1), so he would spend 20i in favour.
    Vartin is Closefisted (-1), so he would spend 20i against.
    Ecarand is Closefisted (-1), so he would spend 20i against.
    Voleric is Closefisted (-1), so he would spend 20i against.
    There would be 100i against, and 40i in favour; the player would be able to sway the vote by spending 150 influence.

    This system means the player can get consistently good outcomes on votes if they have high relations with many lords; variable but influencable results if they have mixed relations with lords, and unwinnable votes if many lords hate them. Making relations, and personality traits, important; and introducing skill to politics, as the player can know that certain combinations of traits and relations will make lords vote certain ways.
    Yeah this is stuff I was proposing over a year ago, actually using traits + culture + relations to determine voting favorability
    Problem is we are 2 years into early access and policy voting has not changed whatsoever
    Every Kingdom and vassal are still eager beavers to vote for debasing their currency.
    At this point I just want simple additions to voting before some true complexity to show that
    TW wants to do ANYTHING about how stale voting is.
  4. StaceMcGate

    1.80 Beta issues and suggestions

    So update regarding prisoners from what I've seen
    1) Nobles do not ever store hero prisoners in castles or keeps regardless of whether or not in army in 1.80 beta.
    2) When a settlement is taken, the AI stores prisoners way past the settlements capacity. I see things like -200/20 prisoners when I take over a settlement.
    3) AI do not use the ransom broker whatsoever in any capacity at the moment.


    Obviously this needs to be corrected in next beta hotfix.
    - AI behavior should have no behavior priority towards donating regular troop prisoners to settlements.
    -- If this is something that is wished to be continued, capacity for prisoners needs to be greatly increased.
    - AI should prioritize donating hero prisoners at nearest settlement when not in an army.
    - If in an army, they should donate whenever they enter an allied settlement.
    - Random broker should be utilized whenever normal troops are prisoners in party.
  5. StaceMcGate

    Skills 1.80 and Onwards

    +1

    1) Makes roguery companions mostly useless

    It´s a big issue for me, every time I encounter a companion with high roguery I check his perks and notice that like all of them won´t help my party at all.

    So if you want to make something out of roguery you need to take it yourself, it´s stupid in my opinion. And you also don´t want a party leader with high roquery because most of the time they lack the other more useful skills as party leader (scouting, stewardship and so on).

    Most useless skilltree for the player AND the companions in my opinion.
    Yeah I don't see Roguery ever becoming a party role
    hence why I suggested cumulative buff as opposed to party leader one, as rogue leaders
    like you said lack the essentially skills.

    More than likely it was originally stated to be like a gang leader for settlements, but that seems like a previous design idea
    that has been pushed to side as TW realized the amount of feature creep already in the game.


    Currently at least it's useful for various quests to send companions on.
  6. StaceMcGate

    Skills 1.80 and Onwards

    Thoughts and discussion on how skills are currently implemented and suggestions for future changes. Gonna just focus on Stewardship, Roguery, and Trade; feel free to add in own thoughts if ya want. Stewardship This is the big one I think needs an overhaul. Currently feels redundant and...
  7. StaceMcGate

    Economy Changes with 1.8 and onwards

    Salutations merchants of Calradia


    We have been working on some changes regarding the economy of Calradia for some time. With the new patch we can finally share those changes with you.

    So we wanted to take this opportunity to share the changes as well as the reasons, rationale and limitations behind them.


    To properly explain where the changes came from we need to start with the existing problems.

    First of all `economy` in this sense is about trade goods, caravans and workshops so mostly trade. Equipment wages and loot values are a separate topic. Surely it is still related but they are sequestered enough to be handled separately to a decent degree.

    So what are the primary issues we thought we should prioritize?

    • Over stocking of trade goods in towns. This is the mother of all problems. Its causes are many but its effects are more.
      • With abundance of trade goods in town markets, price index drops to very low.
      • Its not only about a single trade good being in stock in huge quantities, but also every trade good being available in pretty much every town in about 5 years.
    • Low profit margins. Low price index means profit margins are low as well.
    • Caravans and workshops have limited potential profits.
    • Workshop variety has limited effect.
    • Variety between town markets is not high, making the game world less interesting.
    • Market homogeneity limiting trade opportunities, limiting how much profit player can make as the games goes on.
    • With limited profits Trade skill xp gain is also curbed severely, making it harder than intended to increase trade skill.
    • Trade gameplay in general is less rewarding even for making money compared to more mainstream methods.
    Just went through two quick play throughs of 1.8 and these issues are still quite prevalent.
    While companions assigned to trade caravans do acquire more trade SP than before, the world economy becomes stale after roughly
    the first year of gameplay and trade no longer becomes a truly viable means of income.
    Even with all the perks I could give them, workshops would not go above 450 income and they would erratically lose all value
    fast, leading to constantly changing what type of shop they were in the hopes of making profit.

    Some questions/suggestions I have about trade

    1) Would it be possible to have events that introduce scarcity or demand of goods? Like droughts that significantly reduce the amount of crops produced, luxury goods becoming in demand within certain cultures for certain period, or seasons having more profound effects on good productions?
    I ask because unless the world is introduced to devastation via raids or sieges, the economy becomes stagnant and the value of goods remains the same across the map. If random events were a new variable, I wonder if that could add spice to trade.

    2) Workshops have had a level indicator next to them for the entirety of EA, wondering what is planned to do with that or if that is just a placeholder text.

    3) Is the amount of caravans an issue in maintaining variety in town goods? Each town seems to have at least 3 caravans, and within the first few weeks the value of goods drops dramatically. Sounds extremely basic, but have you considered limiting the amount of npc traders to help out with variety?

    4) Caravans simply aren't worth your time later in game as they are immediately destroyed while at war or by bandit parties. Unless caravans are made neutral parties that are only attacked by bandits or have an option to have an even larger caravan party, this will remain true as even bandit parties will have around 25-50 troops.

    5) The main character and companions need more methods of receiving trade SP in the games current state. Owning profitable caravans/workshops, being a governor and having caravans/villagers enter settlements, or just boost the amount of SP earned. Trade growth currently caps around 150-180, and unless you make it your primary objective to further boost it, it just plateaus.
  8. StaceMcGate

    1.80 Beta issues and suggestions

    Hmmmm the problem is TW has said these kinds of things are wired to the player too (I guess meaning to much resources to make separate changes or just not wanted), 200 influence is not enough for being vassals and getting your way consistently (plus is can be really good to just donate for charm skill) and spending more on policies will be very very very annoying when you are a ruler and need to pass like 10 of them to make you kingdom happy n healthy before you start making/taking vassals. I think other solutions to influence bloat could be making AI need better troops before being summoned to an army (so less constant armies) and "no repeated propositions, war requests" cutting down having vassals propose the same things too often. Of course if they made it vassals pay more but not ruler (Yes I mean even more of a difference then now) that could work too.
    - 200 per tier is more than enough, that would be a cap of 400 by Tier 1 (minimum to join a kingdom) and 1200 by Tier 6.

    - Also the policy issues to make your Kingdom actually thrive would not be so much of an issue if the policies had cultural traits like I mentioned to make voting for proposals to increase loyalty actually viable. Currently all voting goes the same way, making over half the policies impossible unless starting a kingdom and having sole sway.

    - Influence bloat needs to be countered by making armies actually cost significant influence, making voting meaningful with its required influence, and to use influence currency for other things besides armies/voting. Having a cap on the amount of influence possible and increasing its value will also cut down on non-stop wars and policy declarations.
  9. StaceMcGate

    1.80 Beta issues and suggestions

    Bugs - Character world map portraits either have glowing red eyes or their eyes are closed - Clan parties told to disband do not immediately do so, and may continue onwards for some time. - Spouses do not have access to trainer skill reallocation. - Army members do not purchase food while in...
  10. StaceMcGate

    Lords not dying on patch 1.7

    Lords and Companion Deaths are possible, but much rarer then before. I think it's at a good level at the moment in terms of the % chance. What I saw in a 400 day campaign was around 8 noble deaths.
  11. StaceMcGate

    Kingdom Relations/Voting 1.70

    1) Donating noble prisoners still generates relation gains with clans. -- This leads to cheese tactics in which the player can generate hundreds of points of relation gains with clans, far outpacing any other method of gaining relations with clans. Donating noble prisoners should only...
  12. StaceMcGate

    Lord defections still make no sense

    Does seceding or defecting increase depending on relative power compared to other kingdoms as a rubberband mechanic to prevent Kingdoms dominating one another?
  13. StaceMcGate

    What 1.66 Needs

    Took some feedback from previous thread and played the beta to get a better sense of what is being worked on. Here's my copium and venting method in ways I think the game could be drastically improved without major overhauls. Don't expect folks to read the whole thing, just pick a topic and...
  14. StaceMcGate

    Clan Rank & Renown

    In this thread I'll talk about the following issues I see regarding Clan tiers and renown, and what I feel needs to be implemented to flush out these mechanics. 1) The unbalanced rate at which the player accumulates renown 2) Introducing a new stat for measuring nobility/right to rule 3)...
  15. StaceMcGate

    What the next patch needs

    Came back to check out the game after nearly 6 months, here's what I believe needs to be prioritized in future patches (feel free to disagree in comments) All of these I've mentioned before, but trying to maintain a glimmer of hope these get addressed. 1) Give Lords unique battle behaviors...
Back
Top Bottom