搜索结果: alliance

Qwezz 说:

Shouldn't the focus be diplomacy now that snowballing is fixed instead of notables? I'd be nice to get trade agreements, alliances, non-agression pacts and maybe some other treaties. Or is diplomacy not mexxico's responsibility?

点击展开...

I am not responsible from diplomacy elements of game. I just wanted to help war / peace calculations since 1.4s because it had problems and get involved in these stuff then also tried to make world more balanced (snowballing problem).

I already have these responsible areas such as economy (villager, caravan), determining prices and transfer of trade items, campaign ai (army ai, party ai), determining / balancing formulas for settlement variables such as hearth, militia, prosperity, food... Item production / consumption mechanics, npc's horse / food buying systems, upgrading troop mechanics, determining loots after battles, recruitment systems for parties, npc clan's finance managements, npc clan's garrison management, raid / siege process at campaign map, bandit & infested hideout distribution, defections / changing faction of mercenary / noble clans, desertions from parties... In summary I am responsible from sandbox world generally but it does not include diplomacy.

Now currently adding wage limit slider & ai behavior selection dropbox for each clan party (including garrison parties), unfortunately it will be ready at 1.5.10 not 1.5.9 because final design decided and UI was ready after 1.5.9 tests started. So I could start this feature new.

Thats why I focused on how we can improve recruitment in last week. It can effect gameplay positively and its my area.

So if there will be diplomacy developments you need to wait it from first approved from top and then implemented by other devs.

Yes, game needs alliances. This was obvious and most of us come to this conclusion at diplomacy developments thread.

I offered alliances idea to armagan too. It is “partly accepted” but we will talk about details at October. I offered when there is an alliance 2+ allied factions should be able to make a siege to a fortification together or they should join battles on map when allied kingdom party is attacked or they can defend allied settlements or they can get more open slots at settlements of allied kingdom + we should find negative side effect(s).

This feature will probably increase battle variety on game which will result in better gameplay experience and it will be slow down snowballing (if nobody make alliance with most powerful factions) which again results in better and more balanced gameplay experience.

Imo biggest problem of alliances feature will be “what will be its negative effect?” What will stop factions making alliances all the time? There should be a cost or some other negative effect. Otherwise making alliances will be always logical. One possible solution is there can be a cost which both allied factions pay and it can be more expensive when factions are stronger. There can be more side effects.

Bannerman Man 说:

@mexxico Have alliances not been brought up by the team in the past (that you are aware of)? There are blocks of code that deal with alliances that have been in the code since release, so I had assumed they were at least considered previously. Or were they just put in as more of a preemptive "just in case" type situation?

Here are some of the bits I'm referring to:

隐藏: Alliance Code

]

点击展开...

Yes I see these codes too. I am not sure but they seem “just in case”. There is currently no design for alliances (which I know at least)

Thanks @Blood Gryphon I will examine mod you shared.

About critisisms :

Yes it is late for deciding adding that big features. Sometimes I think how we can add alliances feature and I realize different problems. Thats why I cannot join discussions for now. I need to think all problems all together. For example : what will be side effects or costs of announcing a new alliance, what will happen if one alliance is ended - suddenly war peace calculation scores will change and this will trigger new wars to start, so there will be more war peace declerations (which is not good for stability of game / bad for gameplay). How will be diplomacy screen ui for allied factions? What will happen when alliance is declared if there are existing wars or tribute payments including factions which declared alliance. There are tons of different problems and we need to find answers to them before start coding. Also if we can not solve these problems in a good way we cannot add this feature thats why I cannot give 100% guarentee for adding alliances feature for now.

I wish we had all game design 8 years ago (when we start this project) and we follow that design document. Probably we could finish game sooner if that kind of development is followed. If this was the case all these problems would be already solved. We are trying to add features one by one and this is not best way to create a detailed game like Bannerlord because all different features are connected each other and we should think all together not one by one. Adding features one by one is dangerous (can broke existing mechanics). However Warband is also developed that way too and be a great game. But even Warband example I think this is hard way to develop a game.

Actually I am not diplomacy guy also, my responsible areas are generally campaign ai, army and party ai, economy / trade, recruit systems, food / money management of parties / clans. I did not worked at diplomacy features for Warband also. It was obvious diplomacy side of Bannerlord was very weak and players want developments at diplomacy so I wanted to help development at August started examining these parts. However I am not real owner of these parts. Critisisms are right but they are not helping our current situation.

It seems nobody is sleeping today

I am thinking all these stuff for a while too. Instead of nerfing Khuzait bonuses it seems real solution to all these problems can be alliances. Let leave game start unbalanced and if one faction start to be a problem for others (capture their settlements) they (at least two factions) should move together to stop this enemy and after they succeed this they can end their alliance and continue game individual (normal).

However problem is this solution has really work load and need good ai stuff even in map and deciding alliances. Different faction armies and parties will think together and join their map events / sieges / raids they will take war / peace decleration decisions together. However this will be a masterclass solution to all problems and if implemented good game can be even 90+ rating and this will be the real diplomacy game needs.

I do not know what will be decided for next and I will be away for a time (I know this is not a right way of development we should already need to know this) However everybody in company should read this post and all ideas and found results here before deciding next step.

Anyway good night.

Flesson19 说:

thats why i save after every episode saved, so i can backtrack if there is a corruption\
Also I got a message from @mexxico , he is very busy dealing with policy issues that are needing his full attention for atleast 1 month so we can keep getting issues documented that come up and I will document them all and can present them when he messages me that he is free again to work on economy

点击展开...

Economy issues / problems are minor compared to other problems currently, these problems mentioned only effect small player groups. There is nothing new in 1.5s for economy. If there is anything urgent which effects most players badly I can look at however if problems are not urgent or only effects trader players these problems should wait. We need to spend time for designing and implementing first rebellions (100%) then alliances (not 100% decided yet) in next months. I do not want to lose focus thats why I prefer focusing diplomacy for a time period.

guiskj 说:

Well deserved break! I'll symbolically drink a beer with you today. What is the default beach beer there? Corona (the beer, not the virus) is trying to brain wash America here

点击展开...

Thank you all for nice comments.

Efes Pilsen and Tuborg are most common beers here. I like Corona also. However its rare.

By the way hotfix can come today with 80%. They collected what hotfix includes.

Also for ones who wants more at diplomacy - I see their comments at other posts. We are aware these developments are not enough they are only a small step. Game needs alliances and rebellion system also faction balancing especially Khuzait nerf, I am not sure how many of these will be scheduled but most probably. Everybody thinks same about these.

SomeWeirdSins 说:

Have you considered allowing factions to ally with each other? If the N/S Empire were able to ally against the Khuzait at some point that may help quite a bit.

点击展开...

Sometimes both SE and NE be in war with Khuzait. It is similar to alliance but of course not completely. They do not help each other's sieges or battles. It is one of possible new feature for future but I do not know it will be scheduled or not until end of EA. It has more work compared to rebellions. I am not owner of final decision on this. However of course that kind of feature can add game a lot of gameplay.

Sgtskywalk 说:

@mexxico Any news on the ETA of today's hot-fix??

点击展开...

I have no info. Here is a bit busy these days because of Gamescom.

Stromming 说:

Mexxico, any plans to implement proper diplomacy features in game like i listed previously?

点击展开...

I am aganist placing strict rules currently. I was fan of 25 days strict truce period previously because in these times there was no tribute system, player was paying a kingdom 100K to make truce then just 1-2 days later same kingdom was declaring war again so these times strict rules were needed. Now we have tribute system and if a kingdom break truce they lose tribute income. So we can get rid of strict rules like forcing kingdoms X days of truce after peace. Its better to balance things naturally if possible. So if we determine tribute amounts carefully kingdoms will not break truce just after war is declared except some special situations I mentioned before.

About alliances feature I have no information about this. We need to first implement revolts / rebellions. Currently loyality variable of settlements are nearly useless.

drallim33 说:

Sorry I don't have earlier save that the screenshots were taken from. This save is from much later, many years, but they are still raiding Tevea.

Whole world has an alliance against Khuzaits, and it's been a stalemate for a couple of years, fighting over the middle of the map.

If you watch Mesui's army, she is starving and heading to Myzea, but the army will break up on the way, and some of the lords will head to Tevea. Sometimes only one or two, sometimes five or more of them.

https://mega.nz/file/6P4zUAob#SrE9UyJ3vFcbzfV6WmTxP2iWLM2CIcNOkNXzHBhiuQo

点击展开...

Good thanks. I will examine and return you with numbers why they do this behavior.

Also I will examine all posts and pictures here. We will fix this issue today and tomorrow. This is an important problem and reported before too but there were tons of issues these days.

I will go step by step. Examine formulas and will try to find out problems and explain you what is happening.

For example Argoron case :


Buying Item Formula (1)
foreach item category
(prosperity x item demand constant) gold is spent for buying that item.

I examined formula and every town spend (prosperity x 0.04) + if prospeirty > 3000 then ((prosperity - 3000) x 0.04) for buying fish every day.
Argoron's prosperity is 369 so Argoron will spend 369 x 0.04 = 14.76 for buying fish (fish cost is 5 so town buy 2 fish)

Similarly for buying grain they spend (prosperity x 0.12) + if prospeirty > 3000 then ((prosperity - 3000) x 0.03)
Argoron's prosperity is 369 so Argoron will spend 369 x 0.12 = 44.28 for buying grain (grain cost is 9 so town buy 4 grain)

Previously there were additional 10 food bonus for towns and 5 food bonus for castles named "lands around town" this is removed and a project is added for this, I see Argoron has not gotr this project so Argoron's expected change is not much even it has cheap foods. If we look formulas because demand is directly effected from prosperity if prosperity is low then town buys less food. This make surplus food less and town cannot grow if it lose its prosperity once. At least it cannot get surplus food bonus even food is cheap.

Currently surplus food bonus is :
surplus food amount / 20

In Argoron example daily prosperity change from surplus food is only 4 / 20 = 0.2

We cannot make it x / 5 or x / 10 otherwise some towns get huge prosperity increase like 5-10 daily from only surplus food
5 x 82 = 410 in one year
10 x 82 = 820 in one year

But you are right this town has cheap food and less prosperity so it should grow fast at least it should grow fast until some point. Actually every town with less prosperity (like < 1500) should grow fast for the health & balance of game.

Problem is every town has 100-200-300-400 garrison inside. So they consume food too. It is fixed consumption and there is fixed food addition from villages. In terms lets assume these two balance themselves. We can take these two out of formula. However if prosperity is less surplus food become less and if prosperity drop 0 then there is no consumption at all no surplus food. Thats why current design has problems. If prosperity drops once it is so hard to get it back without projects.

What I see in first look is :
-Removing lands around castle / town make things worse because when town has low prosperity somehow surplus food should increase to balance things. Of course this is not only problem. Even food is cheap it is bought less because buying item formula(1) is directly effected by prosperity.