Beta Patch Notes e1.5.6

Currently viewing this thread:

Dabos37

Sergeant Knight
I have the feeling that the AI is maybe getting more income from fiefs than the player. I have noticed that because if you use cheats to give a town to the player, the first days income is pretty high but it decreases a when the fief is in player’s hands. Just tested and it looks like it only happens at the campaign beginning. I have got a fiefs using cheats at day 100 and income remains stable. SO probably the AI is not using any cheat concerning passive income.

Concerning players having issues with money, instead of making workshops and caravans OP, please increase fiefs income if necessary. A workshop giving 200-250 daily and caravan 400-500 is enough.
 
Last edited:

Pejot

Knight at Arms
WBVC
I have the feeling that the AI is maybe getting more income from fiefs than the player. I have noticed that because if you use cheats to give a town to the player, the first days income is pretty high but it decreases a when the fief is in player’s hands. Just tested and it looks like it only happens at the campaign beginning. I have got a fiefs using cheats at day 100 and income remains stable. SO probably the AI is not using any cheat concerning passive income.

Concerning players having issues with money, instead of making workshops and caravans OP, please increase fiefs income if necessary. A workshop giving 200-250 daily and caravan 400-500 is enough.

I think that they either have additional passive income that we cannot see or they have lower upkeep costs.
 
It could be intended as I joined the S Empire once when they were broke. So they just say in town unable to recruit as all their money went to tribute but they were so far behind I ended up paying 300k for them to get them out of debt so if they go broke then it is a snowball that can demolish a kingdom, just a guess that is why they did it
 

Pejot

Knight at Arms
WBVC
It could be intended as I joined the S Empire once when they were broke. So they just say in town unable to recruit as all their money went to tribute but they were so far behind I ended up paying 300k for them to get them out of debt so if they go broke then it is a snowball that can demolish a kingdom, just a guess that is why they did it

Yep I understand the reason behind it. The tribute mechanic has its own flaws like har to understand calculations mechanic where I'm winning a war but have to pay high tribute for peace. And tribute amount shouldn't exceed the kingdom total income but it does. It should be like they have to make a single big payment (that is taken from money poll of defeated faction lords and shared among winning faction lords) and additional smaller payments over time that won't exceed the income they get.
 
Yep I understand the reason behind it. The tribute mechanic has its own flaws like har to understand calculations mechanic where I'm winning a war but have to pay high tribute for peace. And tribute amount shouldn't exceed the kingdom total income but it does. It should be like they have to make a single big payment (that is taken from money poll of defeated faction lords and shared among winning faction lords) and additional smaller payments over time that won't exceed the income they get.
+1 exactly
 

lukkyb

Veteran
something i would like is having troops in garisons only cost half as much since there one job is to sit on there arse all day if in a castle or walk around abit in a town the only real threat is an attack at somepoint
 

Nawari

Regular
These to me are fundamental options in this game: You can't do jack right now.


Order them to go 'disband' to this specific garrison
Recruit/raise this type of unit
Don't go over this amount of cost for party
Stay near this fief
Patrol between these fiefs
Meet me now
Do this quest
It would also be necessary to be able to accept or not accept that they join another army.
 

Nawari

Regular
I would also like to better understand the mechanisms that cause war. To understand my questioning, I give an example:

Imagine, we are playing the Sturgians:

From the start, they are in conflict with the Vlandians and the Battanians. Because our sovereign has very bad relations with them, there is a perpetual war of "borders". How can we stop these conflicts? Is it possible ? How to create a lasting alliance? What are the means to form a coalition against the Empire if i wish? I find this part of the game very vague. Is it because it lacks diplomatic implementations? I can have good relations with the clans of an opposing faction but if my King has bad ones it is useless. Should I take his place to change things, but for that, the only solution is to wait until he dies with the hope of either becoming the new King of the faction or that the new King has different relationships with the other factions. In short, we have very few possibilities on this topic. Or else I don't know them.
Do weddings provide solutions? If so, which ones because I can't see?

And concerning this subject, I do not know what "feasible" proposals to make.
 

Nawari

Regular
It would also be good when we create a remote "party" with a companion, that this one starts his group with ten men in order to avoid these painful messages: "X was captured by brigands .. . ". He leaves from a castle or a town where he can immediately recruit, and yet he goes for a walk alone. That does not make any sense.
 

Fahai Nolove

Recruit
I wonder how is the outcome of death on the battlefield is determined. Ever since I used the cheat mode to equip the best armors for my NPCs, they never died in battle. Comparing to my previous games, NPC would be KIA no matter what my medical skill is.
 

Fahai Nolove

Recruit
The current casualty rate is absolutely out-grown by the birth rate, as all lords will have multiple children but rarely killed on the battleground.
To have the option of enabling KIA of all NPC is a great approach to balancing the population, and it offers more fun by adding weight to NPCs' lives. Therefore, I wonder if it is possible to add a "hardcore mode" that makes player, NPC companion, and NPC lords almost as fragile as any trivial recruited militia. (Not like now, NPCs will be chopped down way more times than a valentia militia)

Since all characters including the soldiers and NPC lords and players are using the same armor system, we can determine death using the damage overflows - for example, all characters will be KIA in battle if the damage received exceeds 150% of the maximum hitpoints. Because of the better armor quality, NPC lords would still survive more than a peasant militia, but not by much, which is more realistic. With the same mechanic, the player has to be more cautious early game as the inferior armor could cause more casualty, and the player can be more adventurous in the later game as being protected better.
 

Lesbosisles

Squire
I've noticed that leaving your companion in a village does not raise relations with local notable in time. It works only for towns. Is it intended or a bug?
 
It would also be good when we create a remote "party" with a companion, that this one starts his group with ten men in order to avoid these painful messages: "X was captured by brigands .. . ". He leaves from a castle or a town where he can immediately recruit, and yet he goes for a walk alone. That does not make any sense.

It was like that at release. It was removed because players created parties and immediately disbanded it for free troops.
 

Nawari

Regular
I've noticed that leaving your companion in a village does not raise relations with local notable in time. It works only for towns. Is it intended or a bug?
It's a perk, if you haven't the good perk, you can't raise the local relation in village. I think you have the perk for the town not for the village. If you have a companion with the good perk as "quartermaster", normaly, that workes. That workes with a "party companion" too. if the companion have the good perk. Each time he returns to a village he will raise the relations.

The current casualty rate is absolutely out-grown by the birth rate, as all lords will have multiple children but rarely killed on the battleground.
To have the option of enabling KIA of all NPC is a great approach to balancing the population, and it offers more fun by adding weight to NPCs' lives. Therefore, I wonder if it is possible to add a "hardcore mode" that makes player, NPC companion, and NPC lords almost as fragile as any trivial recruited militia. (Not like now, NPCs will be chopped down way more times than a valentia militia)

Since all characters including the soldiers and NPC lords and players are using the same armor system, we can determine death using the damage overflows - for example, all characters will be KIA in battle if the damage received exceeds 150% of the maximum hitpoints. Because of the better armor quality, NPC lords would still survive more than a peasant militia, but not by much, which is more realistic. With the same mechanic, the player has to be more cautious early game as the inferior armor could cause more casualty, and the player can be more adventurous in the later game as being protected better.
.
I propose (this is only a vague idea to develop) to solve the "overpopulation" problem and to make the game even more realistic would be to introduce the concept of an epidemic into the game. This great epidemic could be triggered automatically from the moment the population of the Lords reached a limit level. This would allow the game to restore a balance between Lords and it would be a major event in the game since all factions, all clans would lose Lords. Obviously, we could not simulate a real epidemic as there was in the Middle Ages, it could decimate up to 80% of the population, especially in times of war where populations were already suffering from famine.
This epidemic would only happen in the very long term, we would probably have already passed 1500 days, we would even be very close to 2000 days. A very long game.

This epidemic would only trigger once when we had reached level 5 and when the population of Lords reached a critical level X (to be defined) in order not to overload the game. The epidemic would kill an equal% of Lord in each clan,% defined by the developers in order to restore a population to a "playable" level. We could imagine that this epidemic lasts a number of days to define killing Lords by "wave". To see later, if our "hero" can himself be a victim or not, I think that it would create great frustrations among the players, so to be avoided. This would also pose the problem of marriage, if we have married Lords and their wives die, we would have less choice to remarry them. So we should not start the epidemic too early. It should be triggered when we reach a significant number of births of the third generation (after having married our children).

We could also imagine that the epidemic would claim more lives among the older Lords (> 50 years old) and newborn (babys). .

We could also imagine that this epidemic decimates the troops in the garrisons, makes the villages even more vulnerable ...

(Any resemblance to recent events is purely coincidental.)

It's a complicated calculation, but this epidemic would restore the game to a functional level and add a small "realistic" dimension.
 

Althix

Sergeant
as all lords will have multiple children but rarely killed on the battleground.
have you tried to drive Sturgian/Vlandian heavy lance through their faces? 1-4 lords often die in major engagements in my experience.
besides what does it mean "overpopulation" kids can't fight, which means you need to wait 18 years before lordly offsprings take the field if they even do that, cause not all lords lead armies, some of them are governors of castles or towns.
 

Lonewarrior

Sergeant
Are issues with the modding tools being investigated?

It still crashes for everyone when trying to use terrain paint in the main_map scene (even vanilla map) and any maps created before 1.5.5 spawn you under the map.
None of these issues are in the known issues or the fixed issues nor are they listed as being known.
Are they even being investigated?

I reported these bugs as did others two weeks ago.

There is nothing in the previous notes to suggest what caused the height issues.
At the very least it would be nice to know what you changed to affect the map height as nothing listed in the previous patch notes could have affected it.
I’ve noticed a few times changes not listed in the patch notes so it’s probably something like that where it wasn’t told in the patch notes.
 
Last edited:
Aside from the memory leak, are people getting a stutter on the main map every few seconds?
yes, memory leak, map stutter, bugged death, skills not working right after they said they are, the list goes on and on and nothing gets done
My apologies I shouldn't have brought up bugged death that was way back in 1.5.5 so not a part of this thread
 
Last edited:
Top Bottom