Clan tiers are pain in the... when You want to build a trade empire

Currently viewing this thread:

Sapakosa

Recruit
Just like in the title - there should be renown buffs when You get rich, for example: You have 10 000 denars? + 10 renown, 20 000? + 10... + 50 000 + 10 +10% of Your own. You know, you are getting rich in Calradia and people should know who is the richest man on the earth when You are a billionaire, also - You should lose this buffs when You go bankrupt. Also - when You own fine workshops people will talk about it and You should get renown daily when Your workshops daily income is above a certain treshold. Don't You think this will be immersive and trader gameplay would be more revarding? Another solution for this may be abillity to buy expensive permit from lords. The permit paper will allow You to open new workshop even when Your clan tier limit is exceeded. At least; the clan tiers milestones should be smaller. Why this is a pain in the...? It's a pain because You can't open new workshops and new caravans, from the other hand I don't want to get involved in process of conquest right now, I'd rather build myself up and then start my own faction; I have another character made up for conquest gameplay. Anyone agrees? Maybe there is something I'm missing? Due to my calculations I need to win 150 tournaments for 3 renown each to gain next clan tier.
 

Beau Vine

Recruit
M&BWBWF&SVC
My Ibrahim ibn Jakub inspired traders would disagree.

When you have a rough understanding of the map, you can go kinda atta way, and corner the plumpest and most penisula loving groups of looters and bandits. Meanwhile, you have an ever fresh supply of tier 1 recruits 20g a pop to not cry over a lost Mameluke of Buccanari to a group of 20 sea raiders.You also can fit a lot of questing in, particularly train my troops, gangwars etc - stuff that will not interrupt your route.
And if you've done a few runs and have a solid stable going, fixed rates at villages start looking like a nice bonus to this more engaged trading. If anything, it makes it so that Merchants can actually get involved, instead of clicking two towns and zooming out.

And by the time you're tier 3, there will have already been some border conflicts, you'll have built up some good relations for fast re-supply, and you'll have a better idea where you can plant your Banner.

And tourneys are not for fame, they're for fun. Dear lord, fighting a tourney for 3 rep? It's nice the bonus is there, and maybe it really could be higher, but you can get that with a single solid sea raider wipe.
 

Sapakosa

Recruit
My problem is getting enough reputation to suit my gameplay style, the one that would give me the most fun. I'm trying something different than I've been doing in warband for thousands of hours. In the very begining I was fighting looters to get money for wares, but as a rich Calradian should I still worry about building my reputation fighting criminals? I should be ale to buy a residence and sit watching my recenzje growth, I may be asking for too much but establishing a trade guild and competing with other traders would be sweet.
 

Niomedes

Regular
in the middle ages coin was irrelevant. LAND, and title. THAT was what was important

That's neither fully correct, not universal. The medieval ages had a lot of traders with very little land and a lot of coin be very important. The Hanseatic League and the Italian trade cities for example had little land and no titles, but still wielded enourmous influence due to their wealth. Aside of that, many nobles and even some Monarchs had to regularily kow tow to rich traders and burghers because they needed their money to finance armies.
 

Niomedes

Regular
Just like in the title - there should be renown buffs when You get rich, for example: You have 10 000 denars? + 10 renown, 20 000? + 10... + 50 000 + 10 +10% of Your own. You know, you are getting rich in Calradia and people should know who is the richest man on the earth when You are a billionaire, also - You should lose this buffs when You go bankrupt. Also - when You own fine workshops people will talk about it and You should get renown daily when Your workshops daily income is above a certain treshold. Don't You think this will be immersive and trader gameplay would be more revarding? Another solution for this may be abillity to buy expensive permit from lords. The permit paper will allow You to open new workshop even when Your clan tier limit is exceeded. At least; the clan tiers milestones should be smaller. Why this is a pain in the...? It's a pain because You can't open new workshops and new caravans, from the other hand I don't want to get involved in process of conquest right now, I'd rather build myself up and then start my own faction; I have another character made up for conquest gameplay. Anyone agrees? Maybe there is something I'm missing? Due to my calculations I need to win 150 tournaments for 3 renown each to gain next clan tier.

Caravans need to be slower so that they're actually a risk reward thing lol.
 
Yes money in this game is a strange concept; I would argue that it goes from the biggest problem you have early game to being completly irrelevant in an instant.
Basically when you hit the 12000-15000 denars threshold that allows you to buy a shop or sponsor a caravan you are set. You don't really need to trade anymore, even though I like how the trade skill functions and you could still level up form it.

Money should enable you to "buy" more interesting gameplay mechanics.
 

Sapakosa

Recruit
So, I can have 5 workshops, lots of gold but I can't buy more workshops, so I can finally afford this super tier 6 weapons for 60k... because I can't realy increase my revenue from passive income. To make real profit from manual trading I need to travel across the whole country to sell tons of wares for good prices (because my supply is much greater than single city demand) and repeat this 30-60 minutes process 3 times to get one piece of equipement whinch can be stolen from me after losing battle. The problem is - I can't build up my revenue so I can really afford these items; it's different when You grind for something You don't really need (cool expensive sword for swag xD) and can be taken from You in a moment due to lost battle and You will need to grind for it all again; instead of being rich enough to be able buy it in a moment. Money should give ability to make even more money! Anyway, I've came up with idea with buying items that will increase rep; paintings for example (something like in good oldie Scarface game) :smile: + money can generate interesting sidequest with local gangs. I definetly could put my money on the table right now for dlc whinch would enchance moneymaker and criminal gameplay.
 

Beau Vine

Recruit
M&BWBWF&SVC
That's neither fully correct, not universal. The medieval ages had a lot of traders with very little land and a lot of coin be very important. The Hanseatic League and the Italian trade cities for example had little land and no titles, but still wielded enourmous influence due to their wealth. Aside of that, many nobles and even some Monarchs had to regularily kow tow to rich traders and burghers because they needed their money to finance armies.
For history of medieval Poland, Germany, Prussia, Pomerania, Czechia and many many more, most wars have a bit that goes "and when the king has everything planned out, city A B and Z said "nah, we're good"" Breslau, Stettin, Cracov, Prague and Danzig were particularly repeat offenders, if they joined a war **** was getting real. As Niomedes mentioned, these are all either Hanzeatic or Bishop cities, thus financially independant.

The Teuton order was entirely dependant on coin. Good thing for them, so was Sigismund Luxembourg (known as the baddie from Kingdom Come) who ie took 300k guldens for striking Poland from south when war broke out. What war? Contination of the war everyone knew would re-start when Wencislav IV of Prague (and also KCD fame) took 60k guldens from Teutons for arbitraging the peace in their favour, which everyone expected would lead to war.
Then, in battle of Grunwald/Tannenberg in 1410, infantry got to knights first, and only ~300 hospitalers got out alive (typically, even people who eventually died because of the battle, got out, if wounded and with x days to live). But the costs of their ransoms were such a burden on the teutonic knights, that it crippled their ability to challenge borders and raid across them for decades to come.

To defend OP, he has a point, and it is reflected in early-game mechanics.
Look at how well Templars would fit here.
Templars operated a simple scheme: they'd get donated lands in Europe someone didn't want, usually, because that land was not controlled by them in the first place. Robber barons were both real, and sometimes made up by their enemies (raubritters on castle Książ can act as a good study of how hard it was to tell). Sometimes ownership was contested between to regular knights, many famous knights ie Zawisza the Black started out with rights to half a castle. Here's the kicker though: if you donated land to a church organization, and templars were technically monks (their ruleset was just copy-paste of Cistercians, order formed by nephew of one of founders of Templar), Vatican issued a papal bulla. A special document listing A as original owner who donates the land, so if the order were to be (cough spoileralert cough) disbanded, that family would have a much stronger and most recent claim on that land.
But the reason Templars story ends as it does is because king of France was desperate for coin to mess with Vatican. And got away with nothing, because Templars weren't hoarding the coin, they were blowing it all an continuous flow of fully equipped and trained knights ready to patrol and skirmish in Middle East. By which time they were both bringing Arabian knowledge back to Europe , as well as reintroducing Greek works on mathematics, medicine - as they only survived in Alexandria at a certain point. So that bakfired terribly for them personally. If you don't know specifics, typically 1-3 local commandorie leaders were executed, and most joined other orders or downsized to monks as beside the combat training, they were already basically Cistercians.

But yeah, coin was a BIG dealbreaker at times in Europe. Other times, yeah, Augsburgs in XVI century one time spent iirc 60k guldens, legit a war-worth on a horse and rider armour that they then promptly misplaced (lost a ship, should've spent some more on corsairs I guess). It can be seen in Dresden museum, as a proof that yeah, at times it was not a limiting factor at all.
 
Last edited:

Cèsar de Quart

Master Knight
in the middle ages coin was irrelevant. LAND, and title. THAT was what was important

Undoubtedly, land was the main source of wealth, and much of what was traded came from that land (or went to towns to be transformed into manufactured goods). I think that the main proof of that is that when a trader got rich enough, he would buy land, and set his family up to become landed gentry, to, eventually, never have to oversee a trade again. Later on, well into the 16th Century, this would begin to change, but trade, while it could be obscenely lucrative (a couple of successful shipments could mean the difference between living as an opulent oligarch, or being Antonio from the Merchant of Venice), also required constant consideration and hands-on control of ships, prices... and everything anyone who's ever played Patrician III knows about. Owning land is much more hands-off (or this is what was thought at the time, and how property was generally administered).

I think that owning villages should give you products, not money. The way feudalism worked, you didn't pay your conscripted soldiers a penny (but you had to train and equip them for free if you wanted them to be efficient), and not even your vassals or knights required money in payment, they required land grants to earn a living for themselves and pay for their war gear (and their own troops)

If you want to make money out of that, you need to promote trade. You would forego part of your production in exchange for traders' selling it at a profit, or just sell it to the traders and forget about seeing any possible increment in your investment.

But would this be fun? I don't know.

I agree with op, more ways to gain renown and influence would be great

Agreed.
 

Niomedes

Regular
Yes money in this game is a strange concept; I would argue that it goes from the biggest problem you have early game to being completly irrelevant in an instant.
Basically when you hit the 12000-15000 denars threshold that allows you to buy a shop or sponsor a caravan you are set. You don't really need to trade anymore, even though I like how the trade skill functions and you could still level up form it.

Money should enable you to "buy" more interesting gameplay mechanics.

Yes please. And money should be able to buy relations. i want to bribe notables for soldiers, even if it costs much more if they don't like me.
 

Hoshiqua

Regular
WB
A better idea than giving renown just because you have money (because that sounds a bit OP), how about getting renown whenever you or one of your caravans sell or buy things in town ? With a minimum amount to get any renown and then a linear amount depending on the worth of what gets sold & bought, it would make it so that if you're an important part of the economy (because you make goods flow), you get renown. Sounds a lot more logical to me anyways.
 

Beau Vine

Recruit
M&BWBWF&SVC
I think that owning villages should give you products, not money. The way feudalism worked, you didn't pay your conscripted soldiers a penny (but you had to train and equip them for free if you wanted them to be efficient), and not even your vassals or knights required money in payment, they required land grants to earn a living for themselves and pay for their war gear (and their own troops)

If you want to make money out of that, you need to promote trade. You would forego part of your production in exchange for traders' selling it at a profit, or just sell it to the traders and forget about seeing any possible increment in your investment.

But would this be fun? I don't know.

I already try to do this to my fiefdom - but I'm not sure if my actions affect anything, but I'm sure this is a matter of altering existing interactions.

Peasants try to transport your tithe in produce to your castle/city. If they cannot because of brigands, wars and looting, you do not get your produce. But it may be available in the villages. As it accumulates, it could adjust price down, so if you go out, you can get much needed pre-inflation products and fresh recruits as you're feeling enemy movements out. Not all mechanic seems to be reinforcing this now, but all the gears are there.

Some of quests (Caravan, Herd) already reinforce prizes for such approach, because the quest will send you where there is demand for it's product.
While Daughter and Family Feud are more of a "throw a dart on a ma" kinds of fetch :razz:
And since there is already strong price adjustment mechanic, I'm sure it's more of a matter of when than if. Like the paviss, hopefully :razz:

Gold can also be spent on boosting building Forums I-III for a steady renown bonus. And spending gold on good garrison will make sure you get to keep that bonus next time neighbours come knocking.
 

Sapakosa

Recruit
A better idea than giving renown just because you have money (because that sounds a bit OP), how about getting renown whenever you or one of your caravans sell or buy things in town ? With a minimum amount to get any renown and then a linear amount depending on the worth of what gets sold & bought, it would make it so that if you're an important part of the economy (because you make goods flow), you get renown. Sounds a lot more logical to me anyways.
I meant the buff that You can easily get when You have money and easily lose when You spend them. Anyway - it's silly when filly armored lord comes to recruit soldiers and peasants treat him like equal one :grin: Your idea sonds good too, I hope devs will read this and come with an reasonable idea to make moneymaker gameplay smoother :smile:
 
Top Bottom