Beta Patch Notes e1.5.4

[argon45]

Yes, it would stink to have a spouse whose gear I couldn't change. Maybe they're geared as lancers and I want to train them to be archers. Maybe they have lame gear and I want to give them better stuff (not all nobles have the best stuff, lots of them have crap gear). Stealing their things isn't the only reason a player would want control over it. Personally, I never steal gear from any of my companions. I'll let them have better gear than me if that's what they came with, and I only change it when I can improve it. I'd hate to not have that control.

And here is your answer:

If you want to give better weapon/armor ect to your spouse, it can be made like this: players can inspect equipments of wife/husband, choose the item wanted to give and simply add it to npc's "inventory". With this, ai automatically equip it since its better than what he/she owns, and players can't loot their spouses.

Again, that will not stink. Also you wanting to train archer npc don't make a good excuse about this, because you can do it with a lot of companions already. You are still missing my main point, it is about "looting" spouses, easy weapon/armor ect. gain; this is nearly some kind of "legal cheat" This is what I'm trying to say.

 

[danEN]

This is where the immersion breaks. There's no cultural differences in this game at all, which is part of the vast lack of detail.

I agree, in a game like this even the smallest crossover can effect the entire immersion if it.

Priority™ though.

 

[Lord Irontoe]

And here is your answer:

Again, that will not stink. Also you wanting to train archer npc don't make a good excuse about this, because you can do it with a lot of companions already. You are still missing my main point, it is about "looting" spouses, easy weapon/armor ect. gain; this is nearly some kind of "legal cheat" This is what I'm trying to say.

No, your solution isn't a good one. For one thing, the game doesn't always know which piece of gear is better than another one, so there's no guarantee they'll equip the best one. Just look at the crafting components and see how many low tier components have better stats than high tier ones. Also, if I want to train my spouse as an archer, its not necessarily because I need an archer, but because I believe they'll be safer as an archer than a melee cavalry, and that's my prerogative. But if, say, they have higher skills in throwing weapons and polearms, they won't equip the bow I give them.

I don't know why you're so concerned about stealing spouse gear in the first place, tbh. Its your spouse. Your stuff is theirs and their stuff is yours. I don't see the problem here.

 

[tlowey]

No, your solution isn't a good one. For one thing, the game doesn't always know which piece of gear is better than another one, so there's no guarantee they'll equip the best one. Just look at the crafting components and see how many low tier components have better stats than high tier ones. Also, if I want to train my spouse as an archer, its not necessarily because I need an archer, but because I believe they'll be safer as an archer than a melee cavalry, and that's my prerogative. But if, say, they have higher skills in throwing weapons and polearms, they won't equip the bow I give them.

I don't know why you're so concerned about stealing spouse gear in the first place, tbh. Its your spouse. Your stuff is theirs and their stuff is yours. I don't see the problem here.

I don`t know my wife finds it strange when I wear her clothes.

 

[argon45]

@Lord Irontoe
They will also be safe within your castle/cities as governors.
Because marriage itself is pretty dumb right know. Because spouse equipments nearly always much more better than player owned equipments.. Even they add those items in merchants this will not change because marriage itself is pretty easy and players easily obtain top tier armors in game very early without paying nearly anything.. If that solution not good one,then just equip your spouse whatever you want just like currently but the items your spouse owns should be disappear (not added your inventory) after this. This way you can equip them whatever you want, there will be no easy gear gaining, everyone be happy.

 

[Lord Irontoe]

@Lord Irontoe
They will also be safe within your castle/cities as governors.
Because marriage itself is pretty dumb right know. Because spouse equipments nearly always much more better than player owned equipments.. Even they add those items in merchants this will not change because marriage itself is pretty easy and players easily obtain top tier armors in game very early without paying nearly anything.. If that solution not good one,then just equip your spouse whatever you want just like currently but the items your spouse owns should be disappear (not added your inventory) after this. This way you can equip them whatever you want, there will be no easy gear gaining, everyone be happy.

Why don't we just eliminate marriage from the game altogether. Then nobody will be able to steal anything at all.

 

[argon45]

Why don't we just eliminate marriage from the game altogether. Then nobody will be able to steal anything at all.

Incredible idea. I'm fully supporting this, thanks for your cooperation! (You're still not getting my main point but nevermind. Yes, you're right. Everything perfect right now, except for merchants who don't have better equipment than lords.)

 

[Akka]

That's the problem, i don't think this should be the only way to get good gear. Also in the last patch TW took some of this good armors from some lords.

The problem comes from the completely absurd way the price is calculated (exponential increase with quality), which lead to ridiculous numbers. Despite how much of the game is broken by this calculation (smithing, economy, gear scarcity are all affected and all of them break down entirely due to this), TW seems to have a problem with dropping exponential increase. Don't know why, it doesn't make any sense, and it's painfully obvious why and how it is a problem. I guess it must be a pet formula or whatever.

I also don't understand why people in this thread try to find weird ways to limit the player so he can't abuse the system or imagine convoluted methods to corral the problem, when the system itself is so much easier and more logical to fix (by fixing price calculation).

 

[Ananda_The_Destroyer]

Players will always do this kind of thing, since the marriage itself is pretty easy; just load&save until you "persuade" your so called spouse

Just get the 75 athletics having going perk and you never need to re-load any dialouge checks again. Everyone agrees with you and your fit sexy body!

If they lock out spouse looting before they "add stuff to stores" I will marry and get my MC executed to take over as spouse with end game gear.
Or Akshually it would be fine to just knock out spouse and pick up their Bow too, since that's the only important gear.
Devs I dare you to stop me from playing the game wrong and winning! ?

 

[khuzait haircut]

Understood, I sort of lumped you in with the other posts. Must be some kind of bug, not sure how a Vlandian garrison could end up with Khuzait's Khan troops. I do Wish they would make a reason to visit cities.

In their promotional videos going around town would lead you to events that you would otherwise not see. I guess that got dropped.

 

[CrazyElf]

Any non-player hero that gets "kiled" in battle has a 10% chance to die iirc. It's not weighed for or against any particular clan.

I think that this is one area that may need changes.

Blunt weapons for example should have a lower probability of death. One other may be that younger people should be more likely to survive than older people from injuries.

 

[Apocal]

I think that this is one area that may need changes.

Blunt weapons for example should have a lower probability of death.

It accounts for blunt damage only wounding.

 

[Lesbosisles]

younger people should be more likely to survive than older people from injuries.

Well, that's controvesial. Not every youngster has a decent health and not every old man is a rusty clank I think the death probability should depend both on character's age and the surgery level.

 

[Pizi_G]

i do not mind dieing of heroes normally
but after i have lost 7 and a wife in 8 years my opinion is the 10% is way to high
at that rate half the time you running around getting married again and chasing companions

 

[Lord Irontoe]

i do not mind dieing of heroes normally
but after i have lost 7 and a wife in 8 years my opinion is the 10% is way to high
at that rate half the time you running around getting married again and chasing companions

10% does seem pretty high. Its made me very cautious about going into fights with any low health companions, so I wind up sitting in towns for days and days until they're healthy before setting out again. Its not what I usually want to be doing.

 

[Pizi_G]

10% does seem pretty high. Its made me very cautious about going into fights with any low health companions, so I wind up sitting in towns for days and days until they're healthy before setting out again. Its not what I usually want to be doing.

yes .. it forces bad and not fun gameplay
hope they change it

 

[PeteSKTemplar]

Though perhaps it was not typical case in Asia Minor and Middle East fights as in Europe but nobles expected to be ransomed instead of killed so mechanics to increasing survival chance for noble line troops might be implemented not just lords.

 

[helari]

Wounded/utility companions should be able to be benched to avoid them dying in combat (In warband you could move them down the unit priority list and order them to stand back but I think some companions could be designated as non combatants).

Wounded Lords should also not take part in combat. The AI should weigh in the advantage they can bring to their side with their perks etc and their traits and such so that they don't put their side at a disadvantage. Maybe even incorporate wounded Lords hanging back on the battlefield and avoiding direct combat (Lords who engage with the enemy and lose most of their health could also benefit from this so that they don't engage again and get themselves killed/knocked out).

Also depending on traits for example honorable lords should tend to lead personally in combat unless very heavily wounded.) Other lords might be more inclined to stay off the battlefield unless absolutely necessary.

 

[Akka]

Though perhaps it was not typical case in Asia Minor and Middle East fights as in Europe but nobles expected to be ransomed instead of killed so mechanics to increasing survival chance for noble line troops might be implemented not just lords.

More importantly, real battles in the real world had MASSIVELY lower casualties than in games.
Even crushing defeats usually meant about one third to one fourth losses, not 95 %. It means that a character had much less statistical chances to be wounded per battle to begin with.

 

[PeteSKTemplar]

Well we fortunately do not have plagues, bacterias from wounds etc killing ppl no matter of armor they wore but gameplay wise I too think that casualties are too high. I remember back when thinking about that when reading about campaings of Alexander that on average in big battles the losses were about 12 percent (all included - straight killed or after fighting was over but wounds etc). Perhaps that is why Greeks and later Romans developed relatively good health care for soldiers (Arabs too ofc.)