700 days test e1.0.4 (images) (snowballing)

Users who are viewing this thread

Yep there is still good problem of garrisons and armies. It seems lords never restock food and they fill up garrisons to the point where they starve and die (or whatever they do when food is at 0 and dropping). This needs some tweaking so first food production for cities should raise and lords should restock even simple grain. Most of the armies I joined where low on food and used mine. The biggest problem are castles cause they always have too little food from villages to have normal garrison and militia forces are pushovers. Maybe change militia to include some retired veteran soldiers.
 
Devs should make up their mind on what they want the game to be.

Either a sandbox like warband where each play though is 200+ hours if you want or more campaign oriented like total war with different unique starts 50 hours max play throughs but you would have to speed up ageing dramatically like 1 year every 15-30 minutes like in 3k for the heir/dynasty/clan system to really work along with skill/level up speed.
 
I would worry about most important things first. And balance seems to be important as crashes to me. Would not mind about crashing once a hour if the game would not be dominated by 2 or 3 factions by the time I get army strong enough to even get those 3 banner pieces on realistic settings...
Wanted to give banner to Southern empire, but by the time i got all pieces all empire factions were defeated (I got banner when southern had still 6 Cities, but by the time i found leader they were all taken)
Since the game would not get into later stages and we would not notice some buggs/ crashes that come after some time. It is sad when the game finishes itself before you even start playing without cheating or using easy mode. (Have played 43 hours since the launch.)
 
What needs to be done to prevent snowballing:

Internal struggles for bigger factions
- having more lords is bigger power struggle, less loyalty, less obedience, etc
- OR having more fiefs per lord makes them more occupied with ruling them, or fiefs gain more authority
- like this, even IF snowballing occurs, there is a chance the faction might collapse or break up, which should be a mechanic

Other factions should focus on snowballing faction with some eu4-like aggressive expansion relationship modifier.
 
like this, even IF snowballing occurs, there is a chance the faction might collapse or break up, which should be a mechanic
Can factions even break up? If they can't, they should. Would make the political landscape much more interesting if discontent clans could just form breakaway kingdoms, named after their capital, leader, or whatever.
 
Last edited:
I would worry about most important things first. And balance seems to be important as crashes to me. Would not mind about crashing once a hour if the game would not be dominated by 2 or 3 factions by the time I get army strong enough to even get those 3 banner pieces on realistic settings...
Wanted to give banner to Southern empire, but by the time i got all pieces all empire factions were defeated (I got banner when southern had still 6 Cities, but by the time i found leader they were all taken)
Since the game would not get into later stages and we would not notice some buggs/ crashes that come after some time. It is sad when the game finishes itself before you even start playing without cheating or using easy mode. (Have played 43 hours since the launch.)

Yeah, I get you, in my both serious saves it took me between 100 and 120 days to obtain my first town, for that time the Northern Empire was gone and Battania had expanded a lot... so what i did was importing my character to a clean game.
 
I don't think a lot of you realize that this is the campaign, and not the sandbox mode. Which devs have stated before. The point of the campaign is to conquer the entire map. Fulfill your destiny. Or someone else will. Sandbox mode is allegedly going to be a much different experience.
 
Again, please let the devs fix the core game first (crashes, people unable to play etc) then worry about game balance.
Crashes are rare enough, maybe 1-2 a day if you're unlucky for most players and the vast majority of the player base can load the game. They'll keep working on edge cases but this actually is the perfect time to hammer the balance issues.

I wonder if player owned farms could actually help. Personally I'd love to be able to have a country estate in my villages and take captured bandits to make them work my farms.
 
This is still a major improvement to my playthroughs, most of which had vlandia or southern empire taking over the map within the first 200 days.
 
That's not snowballing anymore. Any of it. It might need some balancing and tweaks, but it SHOULD be somewhat dynamic. I don't want a static world only *I* impact... I like to fight a tide and turn it, or gang up and end the world quickly.
What could possibly be less dynamic than a game ruled by one empire within a long weekend of gameplay? Why do we even have aging and children when the games ends itself long before then? I want a campaign I can sink a thousand hours into(ok a few hundred at least) and be playing my great great grand children. As it stands the game is effectively over in around 20-40 hours.
 
I did this test as well and my game didn't expand as much as fast as yours. Snowballing does seem to slow but i mean settlements are bound to be taken at some point.
 
That's not snowballing anymore. Any of it. It might need some balancing and tweaks, but it SHOULD be somewhat dynamic. I don't want a static world only *I* impact... I like to fight a tide and turn it, or gang up and end the world quickly.

The problem with what you are saying is that it negates a good portion of the game, i.e governing, building up infrastructure, inheritance, dynasty, etc. if the game is over in 5-7 years. Yes, pre 1.04 the game would be over in roughly two in-game years, now (as of last night I started a new save) and the game was over by 1090, stretching it to 5 years instead of 2, but the reality is the same. Having basically two factions clean up within 2-3 in-game years is still snowballing even if the snowballing is now happening by 2 factions instead of 1.
 
That's not snowballing anymore. Any of it. It might need some balancing and tweaks, but it SHOULD be somewhat dynamic. I don't want a static world only *I* impact... I like to fight a tide and turn it, or gang up and end the world quickly.
The problem is there is no chance for you to impact it. The entire map gets taken before you can get a foothold and a decent army together and by then it is too late. This snowballing thing is my biggest gripe on this game right now. I just joined vlandian empire and the king was just taken captives by looters 3 large towns over! Looters! and the battania snowball has already begun.
 
I am personally not gonna play until this is resolved, because I just started a new campaign and i feel like i have to rush and join a nation and help prevent the snowball instead of enjoying the early game. Totally ruins the experience for me.
 
I'm going through my second campaign and worst offender has 12 cities. I have 3 myself, sturgians and northern empire are down to 1 city each. I did execute roughly 20 sturgian nobles though.

West empire was killing Vlandians but I joined forces since my wife is their princess and it's under control after ten or so beheaded nobles.

We would need cross faction alliances though. It would fix most of this. Now it's a bit of mess to raid a willage to help someone in distress.
 
Back
Top Bottom