• If you are reporting a bug, please head over to our Technical Support section for Bannerlord.
  • Please note that the developer team will be on leave until 26th of July. All technical support tickets will be handled when we're back in action. Thank you for understanding.

-3 Owner Culture Penalty is Too High!

Currently viewing this thread:

anoddhermit

Sergeant
Hey, I would like to ask about a possible feature we are thinking about, would it be too much micromanagement if we had an option to exempt towns from taxation to reduce the loyalty penalty.

The main problems with this feature are that currently, you require to go to the settlement to actually manage them. Maybe we can order it through the fiefs menu, but I am not sure. Also if we enable this for the AI as well, since AI tends to have more resources than the player and this can put the player at an economical disadvantage.

Also, reducing loyalty penalty from cultural differences is something we can add, but it is already simulated a bit through the notables changing their allegiance and also increase the possibility of large snowballing empires (if they can manage to hold out for a year or two for example)

As always thank you for your feedback and discussion.

Not having to travel to settlements to manage them would be a major quality of life change.

I think over time somehow the loyalty penalty should decline if you manage a town well.

When conquering places, some prioritized more extraction of resources, while others prioritized more stabilization and assimilation.

Exempting from taxation would be great as one way to represent the latter approach, especially for the initial rocky period.

Another feature could be a path to changing the culture itself which I've heard other suggest, but that should be extremely difficult and take time.
 

Zorion_no

Regular
Hey, I would like to ask about a possible feature we are thinking about, would it be too much micromanagement if we had an option to exempt towns from taxation to reduce the loyalty penalty.

The main problems with this feature are that currently, you require to go to the settlement to actually manage them. Maybe we can order it through the fiefs menu, but I am not sure. Also if we enable this for the AI as well, since AI tends to have more resources than the player and this can put the player at an economical disadvantage.

Also, reducing loyalty penalty from cultural differences is something we can add, but it is already simulated a bit through the notables changing their allegiance and also increase the possibility of large snowballing empires (if they can manage to hold out for a year or two for example)

As always thank you for your feedback and discussion.

The issue isnt as much for the players to manage the fiefs of different culture from my experience, but that the lords of my factions seems more intrested in increasing the prosperity than to put on the "festival & games" to counter the issue until higher etc --> Rebellion.

I find as a player that its not that hard to deal with it, but you kind of have to be "locked" to the town for abit, and well micromanage its needs and the needs of the villages(I think this is good).
But again the npc's dont do that, and well -> Rebellion.

But overall though the number is "too high" I think a small adjustment would fix alot, you dont have to dial it down by 1 so its 2, but try in increments like 0,5 to see how it unfolds.
I think if you lower it too much you'd not see rebellions at all.

But its the issue of the cumulative negatives that is "too high" overall with the -3 -1 for looted village - 1 for governor for npc's thus you end up with -5 loyalty and thats kind of hard for the npc to push around even with the festival & games.

Although the concept of lower taxes to ensure loyalty though is a good idea, I would def want to test how it works out.

As for how to manage it, I'd love if we could manage the fiefes in the menu and not have to travel there.
As others pointed out that would be a huge Qol for us players.
 
Hey, I would like to ask about a possible feature we are thinking about, would it be too much micromanagement if we had an option to exempt towns from taxation to reduce the loyalty penalty.
Personally I would love it!! it is the type of feature that make you feel that you have some kind of control over the world you live which something that some of us actually miss in the current stage of the game.

I hope you finally implement it. Such kind of improvements are absolutely welcome.
 

Blood Gryphon

Master Knight
WBVC
@SadShogun No it wouldn't be too much micromanagement, please add this.

Also maybe there could be a bonus to loyalty if you show the city/castle you take mercy. I think it makes sense that the city/castle would have more loyalty to a conqueror that shows mercy, right?

Also just curious how do AI lords choose between the choices of devastate, pillage, and show mercy?
 

SadShogun

A Furtherer of the Calradic Cause
Developer
@SadShogun No it wouldn't be too much micromanagement, please add this.

Also maybe there could be a bonus to loyalty if you show the city/castle you take mercy. I think it makes sense that the city/castle would have more loyalty to a conqueror that shows mercy, right?

Also just curious how do AI lords choose between the choices of devastate, pillage, and show mercy?
Yes, there is a loyalty bonus if you show mercy and a loyalty penalty if you devastate or pillage.

When choosing between devastate, pillage, and showing mercy the AI lords mainly decide based on their traits (cruel, merciful) however other situations such as whether they can afford the influence cost for giving that order also affect their decision.
 

guiskj

Squire
@SadShogun I like the idea. More ways to interact with the world is always better in my eyes.

Two things I would suggest be part of this implementation:
  1. The player should have to go to the town to manage it. Unless TW has fully jumped onto classifying this game as an Action game first and foremost, at some point you have to ask yourself if QoL features you add to your game are actually hurting the game's internal in-world consistency and believability. Allowing the player to have instant access to things across the world map goes against the idea that the game is about the player character and not some overlord moving pieces in a Calradia chessboard.
    1. Plus, this game is in desperate need of things to do during peace time. Although managing towns is not terribly fun for most of us, it is something, I guess
  2. Please do not let the fact that "the player would be at an disadvantage compared to the AI" be a serious consideration on whether ideas for features are implemented. The player, by just being the player, is already in an incredible advantageous position versus the AI. THERE IS NO CHALLENGE IN THIS GAME.
    1. I know I will win 99% of all battles I enter.
    2. I know that I WILL conquer Calradia. It is only a matter of time.
    3. Well, that is it for the this game, no? What else is there in term of gameplay... But I digress.
 

madnessario

Squire
Hey, I would like to ask about a possible feature we are thinking about, would it be too much micromanagement if we had an option to exempt towns from taxation to reduce the loyalty penalty.

The main problems with this feature are that currently, you require to go to the settlement to actually manage them. Maybe we can order it through the fiefs menu, but I am not sure. Also if we enable this for the AI as well, since AI tends to have more resources than the player and this can put the player at an economical disadvantage.
Great though, give me meaningful options all day! I like the fact that you need to visit the town to take care of business, but in late game this may become too much in some cases (edit: I agree with @guiskj ). I am fine either way though. My suggestion in regards to the AI would be to tie this in the campaign difficulty (start options) somehow. If this gives an AI advantage, the better for people who want a more difficult experience.

Also, reducing loyalty penalty from cultural differences is something we can add, but it is already simulated a bit through the notables changing their allegiance and also increase the possibility of large snowballing empires (if they can manage to hold out for a year or two for example)

As always thank you for your feedback and discussion.

I am not sure of the latest balance/meta but the loyalty penalty is something that can be counteracted from the player. Perhaps it could diminish after some time (e.g. 10-20 years); but not to 0.
 

murtega

Knight
The main problems with this feature are that currently, you require to go to the settlement to actually manage them. Maybe we can order it through the fiefs menu, but I am not sure.

Just my humble opinion but with each update, there seems to be less and less things to do in the game apart of combat because everything sooner or later becomes menu based. I can assign a governor remotely who also increases my relation with notables, I can change shops remotely, garrison recruits on it's own despite there's also militia doing the same, now also being able to manage the town remotely? Why would anyone go to his town apart of recruiting and whenever it's besieged? Yes, I know nothing is stopping me from actually going to the town to do all these things, which I weirdly do anyway, but fiefs should become a little more meaningful than some icons on the map with player's banner on them. I'd say the actual problem isn't that you have to go to your fief to manage it but there's not really enough valid reason to go there. Not sure if that's your field of development but had to chant anyway. Cheers.
 

Zorion_no

Regular
Just my humble opinion but with each update, there seems to be less and less things to do in the game apart of combat because everything sooner or later becomes menu based. I can assign a governor remotely who also increases my relation with notables, I can change shops remotely, garrison recruits on it's own despite there's also militia doing the same, now also being able to manage the town remotely? Why would anyone go to his town apart of recruiting and whenever it's besieged? Yes, I know nothing is stopping me from actually going to the town to do all these things, which I weirdly do anyway, but fiefs should become a little more meaningful than some icons on the map with player's banner on them. I'd say the actual problem isn't that you have to go to your fief to manage it but there's not really enough valid reason to go there. Not sure if that's your field of development but had to chant anyway. Cheers.
Cough cough just because you have the option to do what you say, dont mean you have to do it though.

So if you want to do it manually there isnt anyone stopping you from doing so.

By giveing the "OPTION" to do stuff from afar etc it gives the people who dont want to do all things manually an option to do so.

Yes you point it out, but there is players who dont share your "enthusiasme" for that kind of micro-manageing as much, not to mention players like me who dont have "downtime from" peace more or less due to our "playstyle" dont really fit well with how the game is made(aka we are on the frontlines pushing all the time, which results in the 0% intrest in peace once you hit a certain point).

Thus not haveing to travel 1-2 weeks from the battlelines and back and see all progress crumble in a swoop, cause we can't change the production of festival & games into focus on milita or other is abit "ehem" annoying.

The way I see it with options to direct micromanage it from menu's is that we use "couriers" that deliver the messages, while in reality it wouldnt be instant, it would atleast instead of that 1-2 weeks of travel take 2-3 days instead.

I sort of agree wtih the sentiment about besides the manageing of the fiefs, there isnt "much to do there" though, could add in some more stuff perhaps, but hey there is mods already that do that (I dont play with mods during EA but got several tracked for when the games live).
 

Blood Gryphon

Master Knight
WBVC
Cough cough just because you have the option to do what you say, dont mean you have to do it though.

So if you want to do it manually there isnt anyone stopping you from doing so.

By giveing the "OPTION" to do stuff from afar etc it gives the people who dont want to do all things manually an option to do so.

Yes you point it out, but there is players who dont share your "enthusiasme" for that kind of micro-manageing as much, not to mention players like me who dont have "downtime from" peace more or less due to our "playstyle" dont really fit well with how the game is made(aka we are on the frontlines pushing all the time, which results in the 0% intrest in peace once you hit a certain point).

Thus not haveing to travel 1-2 weeks from the battlelines and back and see all progress crumble in a swoop, cause we can't change the production of festival & games into focus on milita or other is abit "ehem" annoying.

The way I see it with options to direct micromanage it from menu's is that we use "couriers" that deliver the messages, while in reality it wouldnt be instant, it would atleast instead of that 1-2 weeks of travel take 2-3 days instead.

I sort of agree wtih the sentiment about besides the manageing of the fiefs, there isnt "much to do there" though, could add in some more stuff perhaps, but hey there is mods already that do that (I dont play with mods during EA but got several tracked for when the games live).
+1 I was basically typing up the same thing. Once you hit late game and have a sizable kingdom, all of the in person things become detrimental to your kingdom.
 
Hey, I would like to ask about a possible feature we are thinking about, would it be too much micromanagement if we had an option to exempt towns from taxation to reduce the loyalty penalty.

The main problems with this feature are that currently, you require to go to the settlement to actually manage them. Maybe we can order it through the fiefs menu, but I am not sure. Also if we enable this for the AI as well, since AI tends to have more resources than the player and this can put the player at an economical disadvantage.

Also, reducing loyalty penalty from cultural differences is something we can add, but it is already simulated a bit through the notables changing their allegiance and also increase the possibility of large snowballing empires (if they can manage to hold out for a year or two for example)

As always thank you for your feedback and discussion.

Yes please! I think most players would like to actually manage a fief (and not just quests). Anything that increases player agency is welcome.

Edit:

Actually, if we're on the topic of reducing micromanagement - the one thing that could really make life easier if you could add a "While trader has money, sell from cheapest unchecked item to most expensive" to the auto sell function.

Often times, after a big battle, we'd have so much loot that no 1 town can buy it all and it's a huge pain to manually sell.
 
Last edited:

murtega

Knight
Cough cough just because you have the option to do what you say, dont mean you have to do it though.

So if you want to do it manually there isnt anyone stopping you from doing so.

By giveing the "OPTION" to do stuff from afar etc it gives the people who dont want to do all things manually an option to do so.

Yes you point it out, but there is players who dont share your "enthusiasme" for that kind of micro-manageing as much, not to mention players like me who dont have "downtime from" peace more or less due to our "playstyle" dont really fit well with how the game is made(aka we are on the frontlines pushing all the time, which results in the 0% intrest in peace once you hit a certain point).

Thus not haveing to travel 1-2 weeks from the battlelines and back and see all progress crumble in a swoop, cause we can't change the production of festival & games into focus on milita or other is abit "ehem" annoying.

The way I see it with options to direct micromanage it from menu's is that we use "couriers" that deliver the messages, while in reality it wouldnt be instant, it would atleast instead of that 1-2 weeks of travel take 2-3 days instead.

I sort of agree wtih the sentiment about besides the manageing of the fiefs, there isnt "much to do there" though, could add in some more stuff perhaps, but hey there is mods already that do that (I dont play with mods during EA but got several tracked for when the games live).
My point isn't that players should be forced to do these things manually, it's rather how much effort is spent to ease all the grind from the game apart of combat and conquer, next they may decide to combine "custom battle" mode with campaign map because everything else is a burden for the player.
 

anoddhermit

Sergeant
@SadShogun I like the idea. More ways to interact with the world is always better in my eyes.

Two things I would suggest be part of this implementation:
  1. The player should have to go to the town to manage it. Unless TW has fully jumped onto classifying this game as an Action game first and foremost, at some point you have to ask yourself if QoL features you add to your game are actually hurting the game's internal in-world consistency and believability. Allowing the player to have instant access to things across the world map goes against the idea that the game is about the player character and not some overlord moving pieces in a Calradia chessboard.
    1. Plus, this game is in desperate need of things to do during peace time. Although managing towns is not terribly fun for most of us, it is something, I guess
  2. Please do not let the fact that "the player would be at an disadvantage compared to the AI" be a serious consideration on whether ideas for features are implemented. The player, by just being the player, is already in an incredible advantageous position versus the AI. THERE IS NO CHALLENGE IN THIS GAME.
    1. I know I will win 99% of all battles I enter.
    2. I know that I WILL conquer Calradia. It is only a matter of time.
    3. Well, that is it for the this game, no? What else is there in term of gameplay... But I digress.

Pretty sure not all town management occurred by personal visitation even around the time of Rome.

Introduce a delay, have it involve sending a few troops or having a companion leave and return. (Player has sent a messenger to the town.)

Functionally I'm not sure this is worth adding but it's certainly something that could be a matter of delegation.

The way the whole map works is like having instant news of many goings-on already that would have to involve something like messengers.

Some forms of 'realism' and consistency are good for gameplay, others are not, ideally a happy medium is found where it feels good to play but also not so gamey as to be uninteresting or too easy.
 
Hey, I would like to ask about a possible feature we are thinking about, would it be too much micromanagement if we had an option to exempt towns from taxation to reduce the loyalty penalty.
No. The loyalty penalty is not unsurmountable, but it does require some town management, which the slash-amd-burn crowd don;t want to bother with.

Adding this tax reduction option just lets people click a button and move blithely on without having to tend to their subjects.

Town management in Bannerlord is one thing that sets it apart from Warband, where you could conquer a town, then bim-bam-thank-you-ma'am, ride off in search of more lands to conquer.
 

Apocal

Master Knight
Setting a same culture governor. Dealing with issues as they pop, both in the town and the bound settlements. Making sure security stays high. If you have the Parade perk, popping in yourself every so often for that sweet, sweet +5 loyalty boost.

I don't agree with him (I think players should have the option of forgoing income in favor of loyalty) but he's right that you have to tend to towns in BL moreso than WB.
 
Last edited:
Setting a same culture governor. Dealing with issues as they pop, both in the town and the bound settlements. Making sure security stays high. If you have the Parade perk, popping in yourself every so often for that sweet, sweet +5 loyalty boost.

That doesn't feel like town management to me. Just doing more quests. The game play between owning a fief and being a random is no different.
I can do caravan ambush or any of the other quests without owning a fief.

Setting up a same culture governor is also a fire and forget...not quite management. Security will be ezpz once they fix garrison recruitment and donations. Also not quite management.

The only real town management is building stuff and the daily projects. Which is nice in a way but non repeatable.

I like that they're being careful not to increase micromanagement (you could reduce micromanagement by getting governors to handle some issues) however, I would like to make some non micromanagement type of decisions that would improve town loyalty.

For example, reducing taxes, trade policies, patrols, organising events (tournaments/festivals - without the shopping please, I like the idea of feasts but I disliked having to shop for food).
 

Antaeus

Sergeant
I think over time somehow the loyalty penalty should decline if you manage a town well.

I agree with you, but is this covered in one of the existing loyalty factors (cant remember them all off the top of my head)?

Perhaps the loyalty drift (the loyalty return-to-the-mean mechanism) should ease off as a town's prosperity increases (The town's description changes over time to reflect it's prosperity - it seems odd to read that there are no complaints and see loyalty drift forcing loyalty downwards).

That said, I don't actually have any problems in 1.5.10. I find it relatively easy to hold my own Empire cities at 100% and foreign cities just above 50 indefinitely with the right governors.
 

Apocal

Master Knight
I agree with you, but is this covered in one of the existing loyalty factors (cant remember them all off the top of my head)
With a governor? Effectively, yes.

Your governor acts as an emissary, which means constantly increasing relations until you get new supporters. Each supporter gives a +0.5 bonus to Loyalty, which is stronger than it sounds when it comes to counteracting Loyalty Drift.

Prospering towns pop new notables and they are (IIRC) a blank slate as far as support goes.
 

Bjorn The Hound

Grandmaster Knight
WBVCNWWF&SM&B
would it be too much micromanagement
Too much micro management, what is that. Pleas add it.

I am not quite sure about managing towns remotely. As someone said, there is too much remote control in this game. However, when you become king and your faction grows too much, doing everything in person is also something boring. Messengers is good solution here. It can be like assigning one of your cavs or even inf as messenger.
 
Top Bottom