Diplomacy Developments

Currently Viewing (Users: 0, Guests: 1)

vonbalt

Squire
WBNWVCM&B
Best answers
0
Mexxico and Duh were already champ status in my book, but now the respect is real.

For others here, I hope it is not lost on you that this OP alone was a huge time investment paid by @mexxico 's free time in order to communicate to an often toxic community.

If I may make a suggestion, your post showed me how intricate the war decisions are. However, a vast part of that logic is completely invisible to the player.

Like the economy, which is intricate as well, this is very opaque. Without visibility into why things are happening, a complex system and a random one feel very similar.

In the future, please find ways to better inform the player how the decisions/economy is being affected, specially by their actions.

This, when everything happens behind the scenes without imput to the player it gets harder to diferentiate what's random or complex, many times i was left wondering "why the hell did the AI decided this or that?" regarding diplomacy.

it was very bare but in warband you atleast got reasons when someone declared war (curb other realm power/reclaim lost territory/border incident etc), talking to the king or other lords you could glimpse what they were thinking about the war, the outcome and their plans for it, it felt less random because of things like that. (oh i have to keep the war a bit longer for the sake of honor/the king wants peace since he is fighting in multiple fronts etc)
 

Slithy

Regular
Best answers
0
Like the economy, which is intricate as well, this is very opaque. Without visibility into why things are happening, a complex system and a random one feel very similar.
Agreed on this. The player doesn't need to know all the details of stuff, but some hints as to what are the driving forces would go a long way towards feeling like they can make decisions that impact the world.
 

AnandaShanti

Knight at Arms
Best answers
0
It is that the armies are still not calculating food properly, they start a siege and wait to run out of food before stopping it so when they stop they are starving and enemy forces are waiting for them to lower the amount of troops then attack and win. They should stop a siege and look for food earlier than the instant they run out.
I've come to like the stupid armies starving tbh :smile:
Whatever is done to help them supply themselves better it should also slow down the rate of their attacks equally. As in, they spend more time shopping for food so the enemy has more time so stop them or counter siege. If they just get more food or consume food less this will increase the problem of winning factions over expanding. I think the expanding/winning factions is a bigger problem then armies sometimes starving. Although I do also see lone lords starving. I think they fallow bandits to far away in certain map areas and can't get to food when they run out. I found Svana starving at a village just waiting for the food to refresh up in north Sturgia once.
 

Blood Gryphon

Knight at Arms
WBVC
Best answers
1
@guiskj @vonbalt

The thing is mexxico is in working on campaign AI, i don't believe he works on UI which is another part of the game that definitely needs improvements (considering he was surprised to find the Army flag on the campaign map like me). Maybe he could work with the UI team to help make the Kingdom Diplomacy screen a little more informative (pop up detailing why the tribute is the price it is and why is the peace percentage this way and how do all these war stats impact these things). Just remember that is time away from working on the campaign AI itself, as with all development its a balance.
 

Stromming

Veteran
WBWF&SNWVC
Best answers
0
Nice post @mexxico !

Are you working on kingdom diplomacy as well or is that someone else?
These are things that would help slow things down as well, and at least most of it already exists in a diplomacy mod that works great.

Truces after a war ends - time before you can declare war after making peace or ending NAP or alliance
Non aggression pacts - You can't attack each other
Alliances - You can call this ally to help when you declare war
Defensive alliances - Will only help when being declared on, not in aggressive war
Time limit after declaring a war before you can declare another war - so you don't look like a warmonger

The time how long these apply can be configurable by player in the mod to give the player a choice on how slow the gameplay should be which I think works great. I used to play with most things at 50-100 days and declare war time limit at 30 days

Penalties for breaking the time limits /restrictions should be severe relationship loss with factions / NPC's that don't want war
 

Blood Gryphon

Knight at Arms
WBVC
Best answers
1
So I made some graphs for us to discuss easier the war/peace data @mexxico so kindly posted. I defined each war as either a Attacker Win/Defender Loss or a Attacker Loss/Defender Win based on who initially declared the war and who pays the tribute when peace is declared.

A lot to take in from these graphs but my initial reaction:
  • Khuzait having a 96% win rate with 0 attacker losses i think is more proof to the obvious statement that Khuzaits are OP right now and need balancing, as Mexxico stated already.
  • The most successful kingdoms (Khuzait, Aseari, Vlandia all above 65% win rate) also had the least amount of wars and on average stayed in longer wars
  • South Empire got decimated by the Khuzaits and Aserai, combined they had 16 wars against SE averaging 34 days long. That means essentially SE was in a constant war with either KH or AS (two strongest factions) for essentially 4 years. RIP
  • Aserai/Khuzait only had a single 21 day war in 7 years (in which the khuzait started) and Vlandia/Khuzait had 0 wars, Sturgia was in wars with all 3 opposite edges, while Khuzait fought only sturgia and won 4 times. We need more aggression against Khuzait from Aserai.
  • West and North Empire are looking really good.
  • Sturgia is almost there with a little boost against Khuzait (or Khuzait nerf) they will probably be in a good place.
  • Cool to see the 77 day war between Batannia and Khuzait that Battannia actually won! It happened in spring 1090 and ended spring 1091 so close to the end of the data.
  • The average war length was 21 days including 0 day negotiation wars and 23 days not including them
  • There were eleven 0 day negotiation wars, with 4 of them resulting with the defender winning. The other 7 were either the attacker getting paid for peace or the defender paying for peace.
  • Over the 7 years there was an average of 4.5 active wars going on in the world, with each kingdom averaging 1.1 active wars at any time
  • The maximum war decs i saw on someone was Khuzait with 5 in 1090 (start of the Battannian 77 day war), but that quickly moved down to 2 wars. The changes definitely did the trick to lower the amount of wars in the world!
What do you guys think?

If you have any requests for certain ways to visualize the data let me know, a lot of different ways to show it.

Also remember this is one game worth of data that mexxico test on 1.5.1 with no player interaction. So take it with a grain of salt.
P.S. Detailed tables are hard to post on the form due to the character limit so if anyone actually wants the data for themselves let me know and I'll throw it in a google doc.







 
Last edited:

Dabos37

Knight
Best answers
0
As some of you know after your requests I have been working on war & peace votings for last one and half week. First 2-3 days I examined codes to understand what is going on then changed several parts and then tested new codes and changed again according to results of these tests. There will be several developments at these issues. I will give you some information about these. In several posts I already gave some information however it is better to collect all here now and give more details. All these developments will be ready at 1.5.1.

As you know we have several problems effecting gameplay negatively currently. These are :
1-Snowballing of some factions (especially Khuzait) and some factions being destroyed in first 1-2 years.
2-There is no comeback, if a faction is losing their settlements they cannot stop this generally and you do not see surprising results. If a faction did well in first years they 90% continue being better and better by time.
3-After some time world (which shared between 3-4 big kingdoms) can go into stable peace time for long years. If player do not make any interaction even 1 settlement do not change hands and even 1 settlement is not raided for years. (This do not happen 100%, only some games)

When I examine reasons of these problems it was obvious that general problem lays down on war / peace votings. Sometimes a weak faction face with 3 strong enemies and even in this scenario clans of this faction do not support making peace with any of these 3 kingdoms. Here is an example.

World situation :


In this situation if Western Empire does not make peace with at least 1 of enemies it is nearly certain they will lose some of their settlements. Lets look how support ratios at peace votings with 3 recent enemies (Note that 11% come from player) :


When player is member of these "usually" losing factions (Sturgia / Western Empire / Northern Empire) they become disturbed because of this situation. Player try to help his faction but it is nearly impossible. They need to go and help different fortifications in all borders facing with different enemies. Even some players made a video related to this :


Now after developments clans in our kingdom act more logical. If his faction have different enemies in diffewrent borders they now try to reduce number of enemies even by paying tributes. Paying tribute is not so big deal for a time until things get better. Now here are new supports in same situation after developments :



This is not only development. Also while peace or war votings clans now care what is the situation of garrisons / food stocks of fiefs (especially their own fiefs). Also they care how much % of party men limit are used in lord parties. For example if lots of villages are raided or lord parties are using less percentage of their party limits (if they need more men) they support peace more. They also care now how war is going. You see stats in diplomacy window. If enemy raided lots of villages and has lots of successful sieges in war clans tend to support peace by paying tribute. So all game elements are now connected better to each other and every action have a result even on these votings. Clans also now care location of their fiefs. For example if you are in war with Khuzait and clan X has settlements in border with Khuzait so "clan X" supports peace more than other clans.

I want to give you some numbers for comparing 1.5.0 situation (before developments) and 1.5.1 situation (after developments)

This table shows number of fortifications per faction before developments (1.5.0 run), as you see Western Empire is gone at 1086, Sturgia is gone at 1087, S.Empire and N.Empire is gone at 1092, after that time only 4 kingdoms are remained. And their owned settlements did not changed after 1092. Because they did not declare war aganist themselves. :



When I examine its (big kingdoms not declearing war aganist others) reason I see that some things were effecting war scores more than they need to do. For example if your kingdom have one settlement with less loyality (with lets say loyality is 0 and it has 5000 prosperity) declaring war score was getting -5000 x 65 x 0.1 = -32500 from only this factor. If kingdom gets bigger it was having more settlements which effects declearing war score negatively. For example if kingdom has 3 settlements with low loyality war score gets about -100K. This is only an example. There were more of them. Now all these effects are more balanced. If a kingdom has more settlements effects of these things are reduced now.

Now this is the same table for a run after developments. Here only Northern Empire is gone at 1092 and Western Empire is gone at 1091. However Western Empire make a comeback at 1093. Because even it is rare now kingdoms can make come backs, because weak kingdoms (which lost more than 75% of their starting settlements) were not forming armies this bug is also fixed during these developments. This area still needs work by the way. Even they make a comeback they cannot stay long. They again wiped out at 1096. Anyway even they are again wiped out it is a step forward for now also world did not be stable and snowballing is less after developments :



Another 9 year test results with developments. All war / peace declerations and map screenshots of this run is shared below this post :



Now what are new problems :
There are lots of different code changes in these areas so we can have another problems when 1.5.1 is out. For example now there happen 1-5 day small wars. I explained why they can happen yesterday in another post. I am making copy-paste it :

By the way you will see some short wars (1-5 days) because sometimes after a war is declared tribute is accepted by other faction. Or there are some cases “faction X” is paying too much to “faction Y“ because of a previous deal then “faction X“ does not want to pay that tribute at some point (because they get stronger or enemy get weaker or one of wars they are involved is ended) and to stop paying tribute “faction X” declare war. Then faction Y accepts getting less tribute then they make peace again. Or for another example “faction X” declare war aganist “faction Y“ then “faction Z“ declare war to “faction X”. Then X is facing two enemies then it accepts one peace offer. These are some scenarios creating short wars. Will try to make these short wars to happen less by time. Anyway I have control over these codes now and will follow your feedbacks. At first days when these new codes pass we can have some minor problems but they will be easy to fix.

Lets continue with more before / after tables; these are settlement variables :

Before developments, here as I mentioned above world goes into stable peace at some point so you see no raided villages after some time :



After developments :



Again another short 9 year run after developments :



Irrevelant : @Flesson19 you can compare food amounts in settlements before & after, there are developments at these too. Now settlements have 20% more food in average. Please do not compare before development table's food data after 1092, this game run went into world peace so foods were high after 1090s (because no raids no hostile actions safe world)

So still there can be problems of course. But these war & peace votings will be more logical with 1.5.1. This will slow down snowballing and will effect gameplay positively. I will continue giving information here time to time and will collect your feedbacks after 1.5.1 is out. Sorry for my English. Probably I did several mistakes.

Also bonus irrevelant information : By 1.5.1 AI armies which make siege will calculate player strength with less importance (they will take more risks) so you will be able to experience defender side sieges more frequently. As you know after you sneak in besieged settlement they mostly give up siege.

I want to thank also @Blood Gryphon he prepaired a table from data I shared yesterday. However in data there were some mistakes so he found some war counts as negative. I am giving a new data set (all peace war declerations) after developments. This time I collected them more carefully andbody interested can examine what is going on world after developments (w = war, p = peace, ne = northern empire, we = western empire, se = southern empire, kh = khuzait, st = sturgia, vl = vlandia, last value is tribute payed from faction1 to faction2) :

init, w, bt x we
init, w, kh x ne
init, w, as x se
init, w, vl x st

1084 :
sum09, w, st x ne
sum12, p, st x ne, -3290
aut08, p, bt x we, 250
aut17, w, bt x ne
aut17, p, kh, ne, -3850
aut17, w, we x ne
win01, w, kh x se
win01, p, as x se, 2050
win06, p, ne x bt, 1180
win08, w, bt x we
win16, w, as x vl
win16, p, st x vl, -3550
win18, p, as x vl, -540
win19, w, st x we
win20, p, ne x we, -3110
win20, p, st x we, -1940

1085 :
spr02, w, ne x st
spr10, w, as x se
spr12, p, kh x se, -4710
spr20, w, vl x as
spr20, p, vl x as, -1220
spr21, p, we x bt, 0
sum01, p, ne x st, 2660
sum06, w, we x as
sum08, w, vl x st
sum08, w, we x ne
sum09, w, kh x we
sum11, p, as x we
sum12, p, kh x we, -2260
sum14, w, bt x as
sum14, p, as x bt, 730
sum17, w, bt x se
sum17, w, bt x ne
sum18, p, as x se, -830
sum20, w, kh x se
sum20, w, as x vl
sum20, p, vl x as, 730
sum20, w, kh x ne
aut01, w, ne x we, 1360
aut03, w, kh x as
aut07, p, se x kh, 980
aut08, w, we x st
aut09, p, vl x st, -580
aut10, p, bt x se, 980
aut14, p, bt x ne, -340
win01, w, se x we
win03, p, st x we, -3070
win03, p, as x kh, 140
win04, w, as x we
win09, p, as x we, -370
win12, w, kh x se
win13, w, vl x as
win15, p, we x se, -2370
win16, w, bt x vl
win16, p, as x vl, -260
win19, w, we x bt


1086 :
spr01, p, vl x bt, -930
spr09, p, kh x se, -130
spr10, w, st x kh
spr11, p, kh x ne, -190
spr13, w, ne x bt
spr15, w, as x bt
spr16, p, bt x ne, 2230
spr20, w, ne x we
spr21, p, bt x we, 1160
sum02, w, se x we
sum03, w, ne x st
sum03, p, st x ne, -600
sum08, p, as x bt, -550
sum10, p, ne x we, 130
sum16, w, kh x se
sum18, w, bt x se
sum18, w, ne x se
sum19, w, vl x st
sum19, p, bt x se, -1820
sum19, p, we x se, -4720
aut01, p, st x kh, 1860
aut02, w, we x bt
aut02, w, as x se
aut15, w, kh x ne
aut17, p, ne x se, -2150
aut17, p, se x kh, 700


1087 :
spr11, w, se x we
spr11, p, we x se, -950
spr14, p, as x se, -1360
spr16, w, kh x se
spr20, w, as x bt
spr21, p, vl x st, -2150
sum01, p, bt x as, 1990
sum03, p, se x kh, 120
sum07, w, st x bt
sum09, p, bt x we, 560
sum11, w, se x ne
sum13, p, se, ne, -910
sum13, w, as x se
sum15, p, ne x kh, 740
sum16, w, we x st
sum16, p, bt x st, -1440
aut01, w, ne x we
aut04, w, kh x se
aut07, p, we x st, -3330
aut09, p, as x se, -720
aut12, w, bt x we
aut15, w, ne x se
aut17, p, se x ne, 1500
aut18, w, vl x as
win01, p, kh x st, -310
win02, w, st x bt
win04, p, as x vl, 520
win08, p, st, bt, -570
win08, w, st x vl
win09, p, we x ne, 980
win10, w, kh x ne
win11, w, st x we
win12, w, bt x ne
win12, p, ne x bt, -110
win16, p, we x st, -1400
win17, w, as x se


1088 :
spr04, w, kh x st
spr07, p, we x bt, 410
spr10, w, bt x as
spr10, p, as x se, -4060
sum01, p, vl x st, -820
sum02, p, se x kh, 590
sum04, p, as x bt, 0
sum15, w, bt x vl
sum18, p, ne x kh, 760
sum21, w, we x vl
aut02, p, kh x st, -1280
aut07, w, st x vl
aut07, w, ne x bt
aut08, p, vl x bt, -1090
aut10, w, as x bt
aut13, p, ne x bt, -2220
aut14, p, we x vl, -2420
aut16, w, kh x se
aut21, p, as x bt, -760
win01, w, ne x st
win05, p, st x ne, 1120
win05, w, as x vl
win07, w, ne x se
win09, w, bt x st
win13, w, bt x ne
win13, w, kh x st
win14, p, vl x st, -3940
win14, p, ne x se, -2100
win18, w, we x as
win19, p, vl x as, 2160
win21, p, ne x bt, -340


1089 :
spr07, w, ne x st
spr07, p, se x kh, 750
spr08, w, se x as
spr08, p, we x as, -870
spr09, p, bt x st, -2880
spr16, w, we x bt
spr19, p, st x ne, 1130
sum03, w, vl x we
sum06, w, kh x ne
sum06, p, vl x we, -2180
sum10, w, as x we
sum12, p, st x kh, 1860
sum14, p, as x we, -3470
aut03, w, st x ne
aut10, p, ne x st, 1050
aut13, w, kh x se
aut18, p, se x as, 4360
aut20, w, vl x we
aut20, w, st x vl
win06, p, bt x we, -7910
win09, w, as x ne
win11, p, we x vl, 2500
win12, w, as x we
win13, w, bt x ne
win13, w, kh x we
win17, p, as x ne, -1930
win21, p, ne x bt, 1900


1090 :
spr03, w, bt x we
spr10, w, kh x st
spr10, w, bt x kh
spr12, p, vl x st, -2870
spr12, p, kh x we, -3770
spr12, p, ne x kh, 850
spr16, w, st x we
spr16, p, st x we, -3360
spr16, p, st x kh, 570
spr21, w, ne x we
spr21, p, we x ne, 2880
sum10, w, st x vl
sum13, w, as x se
sum20, p, se x kh, 680
aut08, w, ne x st
aut10, p, we x as, 1920
aut14, p, bt x we, -3560
aut16, p, ne x st, -2540
aut18, w, kh x st
aut19, p, vl x st, -4210
win02, w, kh x se
win03, w, vl x as
win05, p, se x as, 2330
win17, p, vl x as, -390


1091 :
spr03, p, kh x bt, 2960
spr07, w, bt x vl
spr07, w, as x st
spr16, w, bt x st
spr17, w, as x se
sum07, p, st x kh, 2890
sum07, w, we x st
sum07, p, we x st, -2600
sum11, p, se x kh, 1960
sum13, w, we x vl
sum13, p, vl x we, -880
sum18, w, we x kh
aut01, p, vl x bt, 1820
aut01, w, kh x bt
aut02, p, bt x st, -2230
aut03, w, st x vl
aut05, p, as x st, -1160
aut06, p, vl x st, -1920
aut11, w, se x bt
aut13, w, se x ne
aut13, p, bt, se, -180
aut14, w, st x we
aut14, p, as x se, -410
aut17, w, bt x we
aut17, p, kh x we, -3750
aut17, p, st x we, -1360
win01, w, as x vl
win04, w, se x kh
win07, p, ne x se, -510
win11, w, ne x bt
win11, p, bt x ne, 380


As you see we still have snowballing. Problem is not completely solved but it will be better with 1.5.1.
Thank you really much for hard work and information. I am glad to see how the game will change in 1.5.1 and this looks like a huge step on the right direction.

On the other hand, I am reading some things which I think could be still improved and the result would be even better:

- After reading your information, it looks like there are still too much war declarations in 1.5.1 and they happen pretty often. Factions are still easily declaring wars when they are already involved on another one. I am not saying that this should never happen but I think that factions should be less likely to do it.
- Some factions which are involved in a 1v1 war are maybe asking for peace too soon. For example, Battania and Western Empire making peace pretty early when probably not much had happened before they decide to make peace.
- I personally dislike the constantly war/peace declarations and they make feel the game less immersive. I mean, it makes the game feels much more random and cahotic and I think it is not good for gameplay. This is the main reason because I removed diplomacy fixes mod after giving it a try.

I personally would like to see these changes:

- War/Peace declaration chance should be reduced.
- Factions fighting a 1v1 war where there is not a clear winner should keep fighting and do not make peace in a few days. This way we avoid some factions making peace too early and declaring war on other kingdoms which are already fighting other wars, forcing them to make peace too early.
- Kingdoms fighting one war should not declare new wars pretty often. This should still happen but it should be rare.

Not sure if what I am asking for is too hard to do or not, but the result would be probably pretty good in terms of avoiding this endless war/peace declaration loop which a lot of people dislike. Thanks!
 

mexxico

Developer
Best answers
0
@Blood Gryphon great work. Thanks for these graphs. I will examine all. War time averages seem a bit short. These things will be improved with adjustments in future.

About one of your question :
  • There were eleven 0 day negotiation wars, with oddly 4 of them resulting with the defender winning (meaning that a kingdom declared war on kingdom X and kingdom X immediately got the attacker to pay for peace). Which makes me wonder why in the world would a Kingdom declare war against a kingdom that is strong enough to immediately turn around and force the attacker to pay for peace (Instant losing a war and paying). The other 7 made sense with either the attacker getting paid for peace or the defender paying for peace.
Answer is in these situations one of factions lets say “Faction Y” is already paying high tribute to “Faction X”. They started war aganist “Faction X” to not to pay this. (we can need some another feature here like decided to stop paying tribute instead of declearing war) Just after this war declaration enemy accepts lower tribute payment and it is ok for “Faction Y” also. Then they make peace even still “Faction Y” still make (a lower) tribute payment.

@Dabos37 I agree war / peace decleration changes should be reduced. These changes should be 50% less compared to current situation, similarly war time averages should be about 50 days except 0-1 day negotiations (It is about 25 currently). These are first results after developments. I will continue working on these stuff to make it improved. After developments I will share you new data sets here for comparision.
 
Last edited:

Kenzo-0-

Veteran
Best answers
0
Legend says mexxico does not sleep. I wonder if it's right. Man posted a reply at 4am and 10am.

@Blood Gryphon great work. Thanks for these graphs. I will examine all. War time averages seem a bit short. These things will be improved with adjustments in future.

About one of your question :
  • There were eleven 0 day negotiation wars, with oddly 4 of them resulting with the defender winning (meaning that a kingdom declared war on kingdom X and kingdom X immediately got the attacker to pay for peace). Which makes me wonder why in the world would a Kingdom declare war against a kingdom that is strong enough to immediately turn around and force the attacker to pay for peace (Instant losing a war and paying). The other 7 made sense with either the attacker getting paid for peace or the defender paying for peace.
Answer is in these situations one of factions lets say “Faction Y” is already paying high tribute to “Faction X”. They started war aganist “Faction X” to not to pay this. (we can need some another feature here like decided to stop paying tribute instead of declearing war) Just after this war declaration enemy accepts lower tribute payment and it is ok for “Faction Y” also. Then they make peace even still “Faction Y” still make (a lower) tribute payment.

@Dabos37 I agree war / peace decleration changes should be reduced. These changes should be 50% less compared to current situation, similarly war time averages should be about 50 days except 0-1 day negotiations (It is about 25 currently). These are first results after developments. I will continue working on these stuff to make it improved. After developments I will share you new data sets here for comparision.
decided to stop paying tribute would be a nice to have in game.
 

Terco_Viejo

Spanish Gifquisition
Master Knight
Best answers
0
I wish we had this kind of complete threads on other subjects. I know you don't have any reason to make us aware of this; however, these details are greatly appreciated.

My respects Mr. Gümüş

 

Worlok

Sergeant
Best answers
0
It seems right now (patch 26/:cool: there is a difference of peace support in diplomacy view and actual voting. The first picture shows voting was suggested (without paying tribute) and the support was 75% against making peace. When I checked the same time in diplomacy view it showed support for peace 69%. So it should have succeeded...
 

Nodice83

Regular
WB
Best answers
0
As some of you know after your requests I have been working on war & peace votings for last one and half week. First 2-3 days I examined codes to understand what is going on then changed several parts and then tested new codes and changed again according to results of these tests. There will be several developments at these issues. I will give you some information about these. In several posts I already gave some information however it is better to collect all here now and give more details. All these developments will be ready at 1.5.1.

As you know we have several problems effecting gameplay negatively currently. These are :
1-Snowballing of some factions (especially Khuzait) and some factions being destroyed in first 1-2 years.
2-There is no comeback, if a faction is losing their settlements they cannot stop this generally and you do not see surprising results. If a faction did well in first years they 90% continue being better and better by time.
3-After some time world (which shared between 3-4 big kingdoms) can go into stable peace time for long years. If player do not make any interaction even 1 settlement do not change hands and even 1 settlement is not raided for years. (This do not happen 100%, only some games)

When I examine reasons of these problems it was obvious that general problem lays down on war / peace votings. Sometimes a weak faction face with 3 strong enemies and even in this scenario clans of this faction do not support making peace with any of these 3 kingdoms. Here is an example.
Hi @mexxico, great work there ! Love your reasons and conclusions. This thread is a proof the EA can work as intented with all the people invited for discussion.

And

Yes we should use revolts / rebellions to balance things. Currently still winning factions are getting constantly bigger (slower than 1.5.0). So this is a problem. These changes are only one step. More need to follow in future.
Great Idea. What would be the point in keeping towns and castles loyalty factor implemented if not because of that.

Are you working on kingdom diplomacy as well or is that someone else?
These are things that would help slow things down as well, and at least most of it already exists in a diplomacy mod that works great.

Truces after a war ends - time before you can declare war after making peace or ending NAP or alliance
Non aggression pacts - You can't attack each other
Alliances - You can call this ally to help when you declare war
Defensive alliances - Will only help when being declared on, not in aggressive war
Time limit after declaring a war before you can declare another war - so you don't look like a warmonger

The time how long these apply can be configurable by player in the mod to give the player a choice on how slow the gameplay should be which I think works great. I used to play with most things at 50-100 days and declare war time limit at 30 days

Penalties for breaking the time limits /restrictions should be severe relationship loss with factions / NPC's that don't want war
Do you think there is a good chance we will ever see those implemented in the game ?

Just one more thing i wanted to ask...

I know this may be a separate problem resulting from other issues but about what you called "a long peace time" (point 3. i presume) i observed some strange factions behaviour in what one would call an endgame. I have already described the situation in a separate post:


We all kind a feel "selling javelins" and buying fiefs technique (trade 225) makes the player of a "different universe" persona or OP to say the least - but the point is i have an impression other factions have freezed and don't know what to do with me. They do not consider me as a treat anymore, no single war was started against me and so on. How this is decided here ? Do you think it will be further adressed so we get more challenging game at its end ?

Thank You !
 
Last edited:

zedpaolo

Sergeant
Best answers
1
Great explanation!
Can’t you use some “fixes” like these?

- a faction can’t make peace before x days has passed since that war has started (as in warband)

-a faction will keep a forced period of not declaring war time after it made peace with whatever enemy (as in my warband mods)

- a faction being at peace for too long has a big bonus in deciding to start a war
 

Slithy

Regular
Best answers
0
It seems right now (patch 26/:cool: there is a difference of peace support in diplomacy view and actual voting.
I have noticed this before. I think the big difference is that the original number is the number of clans in the kingdom that support but the second number is adjusted by those willing to spend influence to vote and the amount of influence each spends. That being said, I've seen some pretty wild swings so I doubt it is working right anyway.
 

NPC99

Baron
M&BWBWF&SVC
Best answers
28
@mexxico thanks for taking the time to share your insights and objectives. We appreciate the time you take to communicate with us despite your heavy workload. :smile:
 

Kipsta

Squire
WB
Best answers
0
This is more of a gameplay proposal than anything, but have you considered that maybe the Empire factions should slightly prefer to go to war against each other (or rather capture the pre-civil war assets) to facilitate a winner at some point which would remove the three factions and replace them with a single empire faction? I am just thinking it would be cool to see a possible winner emerge during campaigns when an empire faction takes all related towns and castles.
 

mexxico

Developer
Best answers
0
It seems right now (patch 26/:cool: there is a difference of peace support in diplomacy view and actual voting. The first picture shows voting was suggested (without paying tribute) and the support was 75% against making peace. When I checked the same time in diplomacy view it showed support for peace 69%. So it should have succeeded...
It seems there is another bug related to another code parts there. This is a bit related to UI mechanics, probably they sometimes get support ratio wrong while showing player. Actually I am not the real owner of these UI codes but after a time (when these issues are done) I can look where this difference comes.
 
Last edited: