Another quick patch has been pushed to Beta branch

[Kniggit]

So you don't have to sift through the thread to find it.

We just put out another hotfix to the beta branch. Part of this hotfix is to test a fix for a critical bug that is currently preventing us from moving the beta branch to main and releasing our next beta update.

• Fixed an issue where newly created characters and other objects could get mixed up with each other. This created instability & possibly crashes. It was also responsible for broken companions and encyclopedia problems. The fix does not recover broken beta save games, but it should resolve the issue for new games. You can test this by checking if newly created characters or other objects have their own appropriate encyclopedia pages instead of another character’s or object's page.
• Fixed a rare crash that occurred when initialising the final phase of the main storyline for Imperial supporters.
• Fixed a crash that occurred when choosing the "Try to get away" option in an encounter.
• Fixed a Save & Load related crash that occurred when entering the training field with a companion.
• Some lords were losing all their money and then starving. This was due to fortification taxes being too low, they have been increased by 25%. Also, NPC clan leaders now react faster to losing money and reduce their garrison sizes before going bankrupt.
• Council of Commons policy effect was 1 influence per notable in the settlement, it is now 0.1 influence per notable. Also, +1 militia effect per notable is removed.
• There was no waiting time after captured lords were released; they were spawning at the next daily tick, now they spawn at least 2 days later.
• Lords spawn with 10% of their party size filled instead of 25%
• Owners now calculate their settlements' values more conservatively. If there was any hostile action to their fiefs their defence score grew significantly and they and they would go directly there to help. This negatively affected all AI score calculation systems. Additionally, there were other mechanics using this value that were also affected negatively.
• There was a relation penalty if a settlement was lost between the owner of that settlement and their king. It was settlement value / 20K, now it is square root value of settlement value / 100K, (nearly 10x reduced). For example, for losing a castle with an estimated value of 600K, the lost relation was 30 previously, now it is 3. This was causing big relation drops when a settlement was lost and which in turn caused clans to defect because of this loss in relation.
• An influence penalty has been added for if a settlement is lost (25 for a castle, 50 for a town).
• Fixed a bug that prevented the player from receiving a relation benefit after helping a lord they had met previously.
• Cavalry advantage in simulations is reduced to 20% from 30%
• Mercenary groups in taverns have increased in size (2x) and their average level has increased.
• When a smelted item had a modifier, the wrong item could be removed from the inventory. It could also create instability in the inventory. This was fixed.

 

[Nalgasucia507]

Thanks man!

 

[luisedgm]

"Council of Commons policy effect was 1 influence per notable in the settlement, it is now 0.1 influence per notable. Also, +1 militia effect per notable is removed. "
Ouch, it was a very strong policy, but now it is basically useless...

 

[stevepine]

Nice. Yeah it took me a while to find. Good idea.

 

[avenger1024]

That looks like a bunch of goodness. I'm guessing that first item is the critical bug they've mentioned.

 

[stevepine]

"Council of Commons policy effect was 1 influence per notable in the settlement, it is now 0.1 influence per notable. Also, +1 militia effect per notable is removed. "
Ouch, it was a very strong policy, but now it is basically useless...

Yeah, seems a little bit extreme. O.5 per notable maybe? A middle ground would be better?

 

[avenger1024]

"Council of Commons policy effect was 1 influence per notable in the settlement, it is now 0.1 influence per notable. Also, +1 militia effect per notable is removed. "
Ouch, it was a very strong policy, but now it is basically useless...

The problem was that it was so strong that it broke the entire influence system. Council of Commons was a large part of the reason why AI kings could always override votes. It was a snowball of king has most settlements -> king has by far most notables -> king overrides votes to take fiefs -> king's settlement and notable count grow -> king has even easier time overriding future votes.

edit: I could easily see it being tweaked back up in the future (maybe 0.2 influence and 0.2 militia per notable?), but a hard nerf was definitely needed now.

 

[luisedgm]

I know, but they could leave the militia part at least...

 

[Apocal]

"Council of Commons policy effect was 1 influence per notable in the settlement, it is now 0.1 influence per notable. Also, +1 militia effect per notable is removed. "
Ouch, it was a very strong policy, but now it is basically useless...

With three fiefs, you still generate 2.5 to 3.5 influence (roughly), so it remains strong among kingdom policies but not overwhelming.

 

[durbal]

Finally a CotC hard nerf.

I'd like to see more cost/benefit on a lot of policies overall. So many are pure bonuses yet the AI won't support them. It makes no sense.

 

[mexxico]

Finally a CotC hard nerf.

I'd like to see more cost/benefit on a lot of policies overall. So many are pure bonuses yet the AI won't support them. It makes no sense.

Yes there should not be any policy with only positives. All should have positives and negatives. I informed people who are responsible about problems at policies. Many of them are still very weak and incompleted / unbalanced like perks.

Previously 50% of all influence gains in world were because of this policy. It was insane. Influence inflation was also causing king to override all decisions also.

You can see how previously influence inflation was (starting with 80 average and goes to 200+ by time) (increase at influence gain mostly come from "Council of Commons" policy and buildings)

 

[UnderachievingPotato]

Even a king had to use influence to override decisions? I didn't even notice this, too much influence lol.

 

[Pejot]

Even a king had to use influence to override decisions? I didn't even notice this, too much influence lol.

Yep they do but when they swim in something like 40k influence they won't feel that. It was bothering me a lot cause at some point of the game 5 clans had so much influence that when they raised an army they could go with it forever filling cohession with influence over and over.

 

[Bibito]

Thanks for posting the hotfixes man!

 

[durbal]

I've been playing with a mod that removes all influence boosts from CotC and there's still way too much influence in the game. After 500 days or so influence is as meaningless as gold.

 

[Bannerman Man]

Yes there should not be any policy with only positives. All should have positives and negatives. I informed people who are responsible about problems at policies. Many of them are still very weak and incompleted / unbalanced like perks.

Previously 50% of all influence gains in world were because of this policy. It was insane. Influence inflation was also causing king to override all decisions also.

You can see how previously influence inflation was (starting with 80 average and goes to 200+ by time) (increase at influence gain mostly come from "Council of Commons" policy and buildings)

I love the graphs and charts you post mexxico! They're really insightful, and they help us understand what sorts of things you guys take into account when studying a problem.

Do you happen to know if the negative "Issues" Prosperity modifier for the "Notable Has a Problem With Bandits" quest will be tweaked at all? At [-5] it currently dominates the Prosperity change modifiers while it is present (which can be for quite awhile sometimes).

 

[mexxico]

Do you happen to know if the negative "Issues" Prosperity modifier for the "Notable Has a Problem With Bandits" quest will be tweaked at all? At [-5] it currently dominates the Prosperity change modifiers while it is present (which can be for quite awhile sometimes).

Thanks for information. I will examine it also.

 

[Blood Gryphon]

I love the graphs and charts you post mexxico! They're really insightful, and they help us understand what sorts of things you guys take into account when studying a problem.

I agree, as someone with a degree in data science a graph/picture is worth a thousand words.

Also well done on the CotC change Mexxico, much needed and I definitely felt it was way too much compared to other bonuses.

 

[zenDzee]

Previously 50% of all influence gains in world were because of this policy. It was insane. Influence inflation was also causing king to override all decisions also.

Lords can spend their Influence only in elections. Forming an army is cheep, so it doesn't counts. When there will be nothing to elect for, Influence will start to grow again. So, it does not matters how slowly Influence grows, the fact that there are not enough ways to spend Influence means that the Influence will always grow.

 

[Pejot]

Lords can spend their Influence only in elections. Forming an army is cheep, so it doesn't counts. When there will be nothing to elect for, Influence will start to grow again. So, it does not matters how slowly Influence grows, the fact that there are not enough ways to spend Influence means that the Influence will always grow.

The slower growth rate of influence means slower pace of activating policies (less influence to use on votes since start) means slower pace of raising how fast will influence passively grow. Influence used to raise an army is not cheap at all. It seems like it cause before the hotfix everyboy easily swimmed in influence. For me it was not a problem to replenish cohession spending 40 influence a day on it since i had 50+ passive influence gain and additional from battles.