Search results for query: *

Wait, execution between lords isn't a vanilla feature? I swear I had a lord execute another character in my 1.7.2 playthrough and I thought to myself at the time, wow this is cool.

idk but the captain of my personal guard and right hand man whom i had just spent 300,000 denars on armor and weapons for decided to die of "old age" at 54.

MRay said:

---

I also want to make this clear, we don't have any plans to bring the old system back for the reasons I've mentioned before in this thread and other threads. We're planning improvements on the current system like "being able to assign heroes as troops to formations" and "a new filter that prefers low-high level troops". If you have any suggestions on how we can improve the current system, I would love to hear it both here or in the UI feedback subforum.

Click to expand...

Would it be possible for us to select specific troop types to add to a formation, rather than using sliders? For example if I wanted to make a group of just crossbowmen, It is not possible with the current slider system as it identifies any ranged unit as "archers" and so you end up with a mixed bag. In the old system we were able to assign specific troops in the party menu to a numbered formation I,II,III,IV, V, VI, etc. I would like to see that functionality return where I could say for example: assign my mercenary cavalary to one formation, and another formation where I have all my aserai caravan guards, and not a combination of both. Another example would be to assign all my spear infantry to one formation, and all my sword infantry to another, allowing me to have more control over the positioning of these troop types on the field of battle where they would be most beneficial.

Just let us add the Lords on discord so we can conference call them

HugoTheFrenchMan said:

Might reduce it by a very small amount.

War with the Southern Empire done, Sturgia declares war on you, you peace out after winning for a bit your truce with the Empire is up and right back to fighting them it is.

Unless the truces were like 2 years long it wouldn't do much since every faction borders at minimum 2 to 3 other factions.

Click to expand...

You could make X any number and balance it to taste. X could be 5 years for example, the devs would just have to play around with the number until they hit the sweet spot of peace vs war.

It is usually other factions declaring war on them.

Click to expand...

@Apocal True, but atleast this would prevent the same faction from making peace and then immediately going to war with your faction again. Vlandia can't just spam wars against Sturgia in this case for example, and vise versa. And if the peace treaty timer is long enough, you can have this effect overlap with other factions you have recently gone to war with. For example: Sturgia declares war on Vlandia - They fight - They sign a peace Treaty for 5 years - Southern Empire declares war on Vlandia - They fight for 2 years - They sign a peace treaty for 5 years - Neither Sturgia nor Southern Empire can declare war against Vlandia for another remaining 3-5 years, and Vlandia can't declare war against them.

azakhi said:

I get Duh's response there. I was testing some stuff and recording war declarations. Seems like there are more than 10 wars declared in a single game year. The pace is very crazy to have feasts at the moment. First that needs to change.

Click to expand...

My suggestion would be to add enforced Peace Treaties where if a faction makes peace and signs the treaty they are prevented from declaring war or attacking the other faction for X number of days/years. This could bring up an interesting mechanic to work alongside defection/rebellion because some lords may feel resentment towards making peace, or their desire for personal revenge against the enemy faction with whom they have made peace outweighs their loyalty to the faction causing them to declare war independently and be expelled from their faction for breaking the treaty.

At any rate this peace treaty system would greatly reduce the frequency of wars.

My opinion on the matter is you just shouldn't be able to sell player-crafted weapons. You make them for yourself, and for your companions. That instantly removes any ridiculous 50,000 denar profit weapons that breaks the games economy.

I support this message, OCE and SA communities have the potential for a huge influx of players if they get dedicated servers or even custom server files.

Aliaksandr said:

Hey @badbuckle, how about you immediately show your character and cut this nightmare out of the change log?

Here's why it should be done:

Go to hell with your scalpel, I have my scimitar... or Rambo nerfing from TW

Strange, but it seems to me that the worst moments (in my opinion) in the development of the MP are connected: 1) Leaving @mexxico with the addition of perks to MP 2) @NIN3 departure with hard Rambo nerfing And if the departure of these wonderful people from the team is definitely bad, then we...

forums.taleworlds.com

Click to expand...

I still think the Leash is going to have an overall positive impact. Rambo needed to go, and im glad to see its finally gone, now we can actually host season 3 of the league, the one gameplay mechanic holding us back is now gone. No more parking your units, no more 1v30, just pure focus on battles. Keep the leash, keep the players.

Outstanding changes for captain mode! The day of the Rambo has come to an end at long last and I couldn't be more excited. Really looking forward to playing on Pendaric it looks absolutely fantastic.

+1 the old feature was quite useful for creating custom "squads" of units that allowed the player to have better control over the positioning of troops on the battlefield. For example I could have a squad of just levy crossbowman, and another squad of just archers and have them positioned on separate locations on the battlefield for crossfire. Overall the new system is great, but restoring this particular functionality is a must have.

I agree, being able to create custom "Squads" or groups of troops using the I, II, III, VI formations as templates was a good system. This should be integrated into the current pre-battle phase and allow players the functionality to create these custom groups while also maintaining this new great gameplay change.

Really looking forward to the mechanical changes to tackle the Rambo issue. Excited to see what the team comes up with as a solution, while keeping in mind the recommendations from the community in previous discussions.

Younes said:

Couldn't be bothered to download and be wrong but i figured it out anyhow.

ignore the same numbers kill etc, i was just experimenting with it
Will post how to do it tomorrow though bcs im tired

Click to expand...

Awesome! Great work my dude, thanks for your efforts.

Younes said:

Do you know when the last version was with losses?

Click to expand...

I can't remember to be honest, it's been a while now and they never mentioned the change in the patch notes. I do know that atleast it was still present in version 1.4.3 I think? If that helps at all.

StaceMcGate said:

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

In almost every skirmish, AI party leaders will charge full speed ahead of all other troops into enemy formations ensuring
they are the first casualty of the battle.

Lords/Mercenary party leaders should be designated a unique formation that keeps them in the back row, hopefully
guarded by troops similarly to Battian Archers.


8 ) Vassals should vote on policies based on cultural presets

Every Kingdom is too uniform and homogenous. Every policy is unanimously loved or hated regardless of personality or culture.

Having a cultural bias to policies would add some level of uniqueness in a horribly bland mechanic.

Click to expand...

Yes! I am a big advocate for these changes to be made in particular. It would add a lot of spice and variety and actually make the NPCs feel more alive, and not just a random assortment of stats and dice rolls who min-max and all use the same tactics. They currently just feel like carbon copies of each other without being unique.

Can this be done for Game Losses on the player profile as well?

Well I think this all goes back to when they removed Losses from our player profiles and just show wins. It's the same exact logic, they only want you to focus on the positive aspects of your progress without having to worry about hurting little billy's feelings when he realizes that he has a 15% win-rate or a kill/death ratio of 1:100. It's to make casuals not feel bad about being bad, simply put.

I would personally love to have these features in vanilla, if not well I suppose we can always use these mods instead.

Is this a political thread or a thread about books?

I can't say I have ever had a life changing or altering experience from anything in particular that I have ever read personally, but it's interesting to hear what others have experienced.