Search results for query: *

Zorion_no said:

I have had similar issues in prior patches, how long is it since she disappeared - read in my case she didnt come back for like maybe 21 or more days.
In my case she was leading an party, and she was not my wife yet, I married her - and the party she lead was "far out", and she didnt appear again until the party arrived at the city(which at the whooping 1.0 speed took that long..)
That was the more extreme case, I suspected it was this as I had similar issue prior, and it was just a 2-3 days then.

Sometimes if she's been in a dungoen as captive I've seen like 14days and more after she escaped.

Click to expand...

I had placed her in my city to boost relations / keep her safe from battle so she wasn't captured. I've seen companions act weird after captivity for one reason or another but they usually end up where they need to after some time, but this was different... She was not even showing up on the clan info page to give commands to. Which made me think she was dead and I just missed the notification, but she was alive when I check the encyclopedia and last seen in the city I parked her.

I hope so. Battles that exceed the limit are currently the worst battles. The respawn system is still janky and an awful experience. The less I fight of them the better.

I disagree, whatever it’s at now is an improvement to the higher chances we dealt with previously. It was too high and made a bad experience to see everyone die the first few years.

The nobles are constantly at war at all times on the map, anything higher will result in too many deaths from the amount of sim battles that occur. The death rate appears to be coupled with the player battle death chance. So unless they can uncouple it (which I doubt they would).

Alternatively, I’m hoping the next major content update is the age system so a high number of deaths is offset by children taking their place. Children are currently largely irrelevant in a play through and by the time a campaign is over in the extreme late game they’re still not of age to do anything useful. Surely they intended them to play some part in the game with the emphasis on heirs. Either by updating the number of days in a season or having the days move quicker compared to what’s happening on the map.

I think that castle may be bugged, happened to me they just indefinitely siege it despite overwhelming numbers... Also on my campaign the siege equipment was shooting the water for some reason (may be related). I had to disband the ally army to get them to do something else.

Lucius Confucius said:

You make a fair point against this. I wonder how it could be implemented as to not make the player feel like their actions don't matter.
New clans could always start at low tier, so if you manage to kill off a few high tier clans from a kingdom, you may feel a sense of progress. But then again, as @Tryvenyal pointed out, high tier clans can be weak as well if they only have one or a few clan members left.

I guess my main point is that if we have death and dynasty, there needs to be some form of replenishment, otherwise a long game may end undramatically through clans just disappearing.

Click to expand...

New clans won’t appear for a kingdom if they do not have the fiefs to hand to them. So if you’re crushing a kingdom and they’re losing fiefs, new clans won’t appear because the remaining clans will have probably only have 1 each.

Ananda_The_Destroyer said:

It increases as they do stuff, I think they gain renown with same mechanics as player clan (not 100% sure). They have a starting level but by late game more are high tier. Wanderer clans made by the player level up too.

Click to expand...

Thanks, so if that's the case, a newly generated clan still represents a loss to the kingdom if the clan eliminated was higher than tier 3.

Does anyone know if AI clans have a static level or does it increase with time?

Yes I think they should be able to spawn new clans if they meet certain conditions: 1) one or more clan has died out in the kingdom and 2) they have additional fiefs to give to said new clan.

The birth system is just too slow to be impactful in generating new nobles and rebel clans rarely join a kingdom. They need something to balance out the high rate of death of nobles.

Beau Vine said:

If a country is constantly at war, and losing engagements, they should have losses instead of this eternal war of suicidal immortals who re-spawn immediately with 20 units including elites.

And this about time when kings and rebel leaders died of complications (Zizka), or ass wounds, or good old ****s.

The flat % on simulated losses is an issue, but I'd think more for elite units than for nobles. Silly deaths are likewise an issue, but more for infantry mobs spawning around cavalry that ostensibly has enemy cut-off from reinforcements.

Getting attached to NPCs is hopefully not something devs put as priority.

Click to expand...

Attrition in wars can easily be from capturing the nobles, so they don’t respawn. Reduce chance to escape instead of every noble being Houdini.

DB Coper said:

LOL, maybe they get that right in another six months, I am on the edge of my seat....

Click to expand...

Agreed, It’s taken a while. Death rates have been a major factor in my willingness to test out the game. It sucks when you look around the map and see a number of the clans dying out knowing they won’t be replaced. Hopefully it get adjusted sooner than later.

DB Coper said:

They tested this for over a year and it is too high lol.... Perhaps another year of testing and they will get it right....

Click to expand...

That’s not exactly accurate. They used a higher rate of death 5/10%? for over a year and refused to change it because they were working out a bug that occurred with noble deaths. Not the same as experimenting with death rates, which they only recently lowered to 2%/ enabled for npc vs npc battles.

2% is still too high, with the number of battles going on constantly across the map and no way to generate new nobles outside of the player-side promotion system (and rebel clans which rarely do anything and seem to have a much higher death rate than traditional clans). I'm optimistic this signals implementation of a similar system for NPC kingdoms.

The death rate has to be counteracted with new noble generation, the birth system is too slow for this. If the number of nobles killed in a faction exceeds a threshold, allow NPC kingdoms a chance to recruit a new clan.

ArturMorhghain said:

How does marriage work between companion clans and the player clan? Like, is it possible? If the player wants to marry the new companion-lord, does the fief revert back to the player? If a family member marries the new companion-lord, who switches to whose clan?

Click to expand...

If marriage is an option I’d assume they would join player clan and the remaining clan members will continue operating in the companion clan

I hope they add this feature for NPC kingdoms. It would go a long way in counteracting the dying off of clans in unlucky kingdoms.

I.e If a kingdom has excess fiefs and had clans die off they could generate new ones the same way a player can. Could even set a maximum of clans per kingdom to prevent over population.

Spinozart1 said:

• A system that approximates local superiority has now been implemented.
  • This helps AI agents to distinguish a nearby lone enemy that they can kill from a group of enemies. They can then choose to fight or move towards their assigned tactical position in hopes of better odds.
  • A minor random element was also introduced that slightly influences decision scores.

What I understand is that now enemies will not cross each other without fighting just because they were ordered to go to a specific position.
We see that during siege for exemple, when you are alone on the wall and a group of enemy just pass aside you just like if you were not existing.
Now they will evaluate the odds and attack you (or any other lone ennemy).
Though I may be wrong and also I'm wondering about about the "minor random element"...

Click to expand...

I think they’re addressing the issue of entire formations Bee-lining to a random strangler that got in close proximity when told to attack rather than the enemy unit.

In my last playthrough 1.6.3, my wife was governor of my settlement and was a beast in the tournaments. I would get notifications about her winning every week or so.

Jaang said:

Patents are invalidated by prior art. That is to say, if someone already dud it before the patent holder thought of it.


The Dragonborn expansion for Skyrim, featuring Solathiem island, had the Dragonborn opposed by the Dragon Priest Marduk, sending out Dragon cultists to kill the main character.


Also, in the base game of Skyrim, the Dragon/God Alduin resurrects dragons and sends them to attack the main character at frequent random intervals throughout the main campaign.


Prior art. Patent is invalid because it should never have been granted.

Click to expand...

That is a method used for defeating a patent infringement case, that's a question for a federal judge to decide.

There is an easier way, if I wanted to avoid costly litigation. If I were challenging the claims and looking to build a system around it, I would include in the system NPCs that can help the player or another feature that isn't expressly described in the claim, because in the independent claim it states: "...the second non-player character is controlled by the processor to respond to and automatically oppose avatars based on the second character parameters..."