Death Rate needs to be fixed

[dannazgu]

Come on, Taleworlds...

Seriously, the death rate for battles on lords are too low, 2% and whatever other things you guys did that give more survival chance in battles for lords.

I trying kill the king of vlandia in battle, but I have to keep save scumming and fighting over and over and over again just to try get that chance to kill the guy.

This's very frustrating, @Dejan @Duh_TaleWorlds @AcG

And not fun at all

I understand some people love the low rate, because they want play immortals but there are people that enjoy seen death on battle and gives satisfaction against the rival clan who beat you when you're low noble.

If you guys don't want rise the death rate for everyone, at least makes a option and UI that we can customize that

Please

 

[RozBritanicus]

too saves having to execute everyone like a god that only has that ability. If a lord goes down in battle there should be a option to finish them. Stand over there body press a button and get a cutscene or a kill animation ( stabbing through there body) get a negative relation with just that clan as it was in battle. But there is an increased chance the clan will do it back. That would be better.

 

[dannazgu]

too saves having to execute everyone like a god that only has that ability. If a lord goes down in battle there should be a option to finish them. Stand over there body press a button and get a cutscene or a kill animation ( stabbing through there body) get a negative relation with just that clan as it was in battle. But there is an increased chance the clan will do it back. That would be better.

The problem is that TW made 2% of chance to death and between that they placed thousands other protections against death because some people can't stand have dangeorus fight (death chances), they placed the medicine skill that helps to survive 1% and plus the armor effect (higher tier more difficult to kill)

They should allows to customize that, hard difficulty and very hard should increase the death chances

 

[Duh_TaleWorlds]

I think 2 of the most important aspects to this discussion are

• There is a single death chance on knock out that is shared between mission and simulation.
  • Currently, one side is always annihilated and thus entirely knocked out in simulation battles.
• That death chance calculation is also shared between player and NPC.
  • This includes the armor and (medicine) skill effects that grant players control over their (and their clan members') mortality.

 

[dannazgu]

I think 2 of the most important aspects to this discussion are

• There is a single death chance on knock out that is shared between mission and simulation.
  • Currently, one side is always annihilated and thus entirely knocked out in simulation battles.
• That death chance calculation is also shared between player and NPC.
  • This includes the armor and (medicine) skill effects that grant players control over their (and their clan members') mortality.

Yes, but currently the values are too low for the amount of protection made with medicine skills and armor

It's too rare, depending on the level of medicine the chance of death fall below 1% and amounting the high tiers armor that just makes impossible.

So, basically if you want chance to die or you use lower tier armor or fight naked? Because preventing medicine skill to level up is also impossible.

Can't you guys give us the ability to customize this on a slider for death rate on game play settings? on options?

Seriously, man

almost 2 hours trying to kill the guy in battle and nothing

We have to agree that the values now are too low for the amount of protection you guys tweaked there. Before was high, yes

But the lowered to 2% and then you guys decidided to give even more protection against it. So, I think would be fair to those who enjoy a higher and risky gameplay to increase those numbers without need to mod.

Because I understand **** of those values and codes.

Pretty please?

 

[Duh_TaleWorlds]

Yes, but currently the values are too low for the amount of protection made with medicine skills and armor

What I was trying to convey is that - with the current shared system - even a slight change to the probability can drastically diminish the population of AI lords in the campaign since that affects all simulation battles.

Similarly, if armor and medicine are to have less effect, players would have much less control over their own risk as well.

If this is primarily about "targeted" killing of your favorite lord, I believe the better solution would be to make executions more viable - which to me is at least half-way about better defining "friends" (which may currently be overly broad with a value of 10+ relation between executed and other lords contributing to the broad application of consequences).

 

[dannazgu]

What I was trying to convey is that - with the current shared system - even a slight change to the probability can drastically diminish the population of AI lords in the campaign since that affects all simulation battles.

Similarly, if armor and medicine are to have less effect, players would have much less control over their own risk as well.

I understand your point, but what i'm suggesting here is some kind of slider so that each player can change for themselves

That take away the responsibility of TW to increase something that people will dislike and to those who enjoy a high riskier game would do so on their own accord.

I just feeling virtually impossible to see death in battle to occur. 5 years in game and 3 lords died of old age and 1 in battle.

Also the AI takes too long to marry, so maybe if adjust this as well to single lords feel the need to marry the pop problem wouldn't be a issue, right?

Idk, I just asking for you guys to consider we have this management. If player increases the slider (supposedly) that's not TW fault.

or at least

find a middle ground for ppl who wants riskier choices?

 

[STcloz]

Even 5% death rate would make the game collapse. That has been proved by early version.

 

[black_bulldog]

Even 5% death rate would make the game collapse. That has been proved by early version.

But he's not asking for 5% he's asking that Taleworlds let the player decide how high they want it with a slider, that's completely different.

 

[Duh_TaleWorlds]

That take away the responsibility of TW to increase something that people will dislike and to those who enjoy a high riskier game would do so on their own accord.

That's not really an argument that will work the solution should not allow players to break the game - especially unintentionally.

 

[dannazgu]

That's not really an argument that will work the solution should not allow players to break the game - especially unintentionally.

Idk, man, i'm too tired after full week work. My ability to persuasion went all to drain with investment capitals firms

I just asking you guys consider something that allow we increase the death rate at the player own peril

i don't know nothing about mod and right now the impossibility to kill rivals and enemies lords in battles and even die myself, makes the system a bit pointless

Seriously, I don't how long you played but you probably noticed how hard it's to see any death in battle

 

[dannazgu]

But he's not asking for 5% he's asking that Taleworlds let the player decide how high they want it with a slider, that's completely different.

Yes, that's exactly what I'm asking.

I understand some people enjoy the Immortal Hero, but with dynasties, birth and death a lower rate those system is kinda pointless

 

[Duh_TaleWorlds]

I just asking you guys consider something that allow we increase the death rate

I mean, personally, I would just distinguish between simulations and missions (player experience). But that's not my call

 

[dannazgu]

I mean, personally, I would just distinguish between simulations and missions (player experience). But that's not my call

Well, if you can at least try to get that to the table, I appreciate

It's frustrating have so many protection against death now

I personally believe the slider or options to increase or not would be the best call or just like we have on the battle size, like

10%
20%
30% (higher)

Also, while we're on the topic of population.... The Ai takes too long for look for marriage maybe ad some weight and urgency on it when they get older, I believe a higher urgency when above 25. maybe?

Also prioritize inside the kingdom or only those they're at peace with

 

[dannazgu]

LET ME BE CLEAR HERE TO THOSE NOT UNDERSTANDING

I'M NOT ASKING TO INCREASE FOR EVERYONE, JUST THAT WE HAVE OPTIONS TO INCREASE IF THE PLAYER CHOOSES TOO, THE SAME WAY WE CAN DISABLE BIRTH AND DEATH

In caps so that capture everyone attention

 

[STcloz]

But he's not asking for 5% he's asking that Taleworlds let the player decide how high they want it with a slider, that's completely different.

Oh, that's my fault. I only read half of his post.

 

[AcG]

The campaign simulation has many parameters constantly tweaked to try and keep a healthy state of the game world as the game is developed. Giving the player easy access to tweaking these values to game-breaking levels pushes the boundaries of sandbox freedom. Still, we provide the freedom for modders to tweak these to their heart's content. You can override PartyHealingModel's GetSurvivalChance method in a simple mod to change how agent death/knockout chances are calculated.

 

[Allias]

@Duh_TaleWorlds The problem is not at the base percentage, the problem is that the chance is true random instead of pseudo-random.
True Random : Flat value per every occurrence where a defined statement happens or not.
Pseudo-Random : An increasing chance of a statement happening for every other occurrence where it did not.
Example: If we have 100 battles going on around the whole map, with true random there may be 0 instances of a lord dying, while with pseudo-random, there will be at LEAST 1 death (taking the death variable as a global, not a character variable, in which case a single character would have to be downed around 50 times for an almost certain chance of death). Now this is a method used in competitive gaming, I know singleplayer isnt competitive, but it still holds the randomness of chance while also allowing the player to have some sort of control on what happens. And Id suggest it rather being a character variable like "health" for example, which diminishes with each lost battle and resets after some amount of time not fighting.

 

[Totalgarbage]

@Duh_TaleWorlds I agree with what you're saying. Having a very high global death chance would cause a very unstable sandbox.

I think that an implementation of an option for higher death rates (which in my experience, 5% was the sweet spot, but the death occurrence calculation may have changed since the Early Access) should only be an option for either missions or battles only the player is part of; both missions and simulations that the player is party to, would be the ideal scenario. Also if possible to implement, I think that friendly fire kills in missions should have a much higher (maybe between 20-33%) chance to kill hero characters, which should result in negative honour trait points & and a large amount of relationship loss with every present lord/clan (enemy & allied) if friendly fire indeed resulted in a death.

 

[dannazgu]

The campaign simulation has many parameters constantly tweaked to try and keep a healthy state of the game world as the game is developed. Giving the player easy access to tweaking these values to game-breaking levels pushes the boundaries of sandbox freedom. Still, we provide the freedom for modders to tweak these to their heart's content. You can override PartyHealingModel's GetSurvivalChance method in a simple mod to change how agent death/knockout chances are calculated.

yes, AcG, but like i said i have 0 knowledge on this or how and what, what numbers put where, etc.

All I ask is that bring to the table to discuss