Election system still ruins the game. Please delete, let player run own faction, please make strategy game!

[Nalgasucia507]

Love the detail account of all this @Ananda_The_Destroyer. Hopefully @Duh_TaleWorlds is taking a look at this. I understand not all game mechanics have been implemented Duh, so the cake is not fully "baked" and we get situations like these, but please consider this type of input.

 

[R1919]

Btw, that's why I used to save my game a couple of times per in-game day, before they've broken daily fee payment time.

 

[Apocal]

I spend it all ASAP to make more clans.

Nah, even before you could elevate clans, you'd always have low as hell influence, like less than 2500.

 

[LuciusDomitiusAurelianus]

Definitely need Government systems and clan tiering / influence to mean more than it does. I don't mind a Diplomatic micro, and it's not like it would ever be intensive. Definitely hate having the war yanked out from under my feet.

At the very least I wouldn't mind paying off whoever called the vote to delay, sort of Pay-to-Win'ish, but a 2 day abstaining bribe would go a long way to crush one last field army or take on last castle

 

[Ananda_The_Destroyer]

Nah, even before you could elevate clans, you'd always have low as hell influence, like less than 2500.

It's because my character is a woman, SEXISM Wooo woooo wooo wooo!
I don't know what you're fishing for to excuse the horrible game mechanic but what you're saying isn't the truth.
2.6K Influence, Not a Kingdom just a clan


5.9K, not a kingdom just a clan


1.7k not a kingdom just a clan


91 Mutha-hug'n-thousand influence. A Kingdom.

3.1K influence, not a kingdom, just a clan


500 influence, not kingdom just a clan


1.5k influence Kingdom

In short, I don't usually make a kingdom and some versions allowed an accumulation of influence from fiefs (but not from battle) and some didn't in this state, or did so in a diminished way do to tinkering. The most common things I can say is that the more and earlier in a game (or rather for longer) I hold more fiefs, the more influence I had. In the last image, I have every fiefs, but not an single tick has passed since I gain all but 1, so my influence is very low.

I must also say I view not being able to spend a resource as bad game design and not spending all of your resources to progress is playing poorly.

 

[R1919]

nerf Ananda snowballing!!!

 

[Apocal]

I don't know what you're fishing for to excuse the horrible game mechanic but what you're saying isn't the truth.

I was just wondering wtf you do with all of it. Obviously the times when you were a kingdom, not just a clan. I don't think it is even possible to get rid of influence as a clan.

I've already said elsewhere that I don't like the way voting and influence works.

 

[HugoTheFrenchMan]

If the AI didn't have the thought process of a horse with 4 broken legs, the system of boting could make a little sense.

 

[Ananda_The_Destroyer]

I was just wondering wtf you do with all of it. Obviously the times when you were a kingdom, not just a clan. I don't think it is even possible to get rid of influence as a clan.

No I've only made a real kingdom 3 times (meaning recruiting vassals, not AFTER killing everyone) and the first 2 I can't find the saves. Both times I reached the conclusion the vassals hurt more then help, compared to solo clan pseudo faction that can stay on 1 war at a time.

In my current game I find the ability to make clans makes early kingdom (as soon as tier 4 with first fief solo, no vassal ship)viable. Although being a vassal or obtaining multiple fiefs first is easier, doing it this way is important to test the feature because I know full well this is how many players expect to start a kingdom. I find being able to quickly amass field power with wanderer clans is a great improvement, but sadly you still run into the problems caused by a "powerful" faction when you many vassals have a lot of influence and can vote constantly

 

[Earth Dragon]

I’m honestly tired of coming back to the forums during breaks and seeing these type of “make the game ‘baby’s first’” suggestions.

The whole idea that a game isn’t a “strategy” game in any way unless you have complete and utter control with complete and utter compliance is so flawed it’s not even worth getting into. I can only hope the devs ignore threads like this one, as there are already functions in game for a ruler to throw their weight around. They may need to be improved and adjusted, but they don’t need to be thrown out because of the simpletons wanting Bannerlord to be something it’s not and never meant to be

 

[R1919]

Concept of crown authority and some mechanism of it's raising like in CK3 could help.

No I've only made a real kingdom 3 times (meaning recruiting vassals, not AFTER killing everyone) and the first 2 I can't find the saves. Both times I reached the conclusion the vassals hurt more then help, compared to solo clan pseudo faction that can stay on 1 war at a time.

In my current game I find the ability to make clans makes early kingdom (as soon as tier 4 with first fief solo, no vassal ship)viable. Although being a vassal or obtaining multiple fiefs first is easier, doing it this way is important to test the feature because I know full well this is how many players expect to start a kingdom. I find being able to quickly amass field power with wanderer clans is a great improvement, but sadly you still run into the problems caused by a "powerful" faction when you many vassals have a lot of influence and can vote constantly

The game starts in 1084, you have 1092 on your screenshots.
Nobody heard about your character just 8 years ago while the lords and their families ruled their lands for centuries.
Ofc your vassals will sabotage every decision of such parvenu - pure human psychology!

 

[Reften]

I don't want to see peace votes when I'm in the middle of a siege. I don't want to be forced to vote before I can send troops to finish a siege or to sell my ENTIRE FACTION OF PRISONERS. I don't want to waste influence to block peace. I JUST WANT TO PROGRESS THE GAME MY WAY, with my plan,
MY WAY! ME, THE PLAYER! THE CUSTOMER! I don't want to use the stupid, nonsense logic you programed the AI to use for voting!

It doesn't matter what the power/fief ratio is if I have the entire enemy faction poisoner, the vassals can do whatever they need to to build up with no threat, but they want to vote for peace because they don't know that. You should just delete this system, they don't need to vote for peace!

You made them stupid on purpose to prevent them from snowballing, but you need to make the PLAYER's system 100% separate because we DO NO WANT to use the same stupid reasoning the AI bots do! I don't need to be artificially sandbagged! I do not want it!

Have any Devs ever even played an actual game this far?

Is that how it works? Lots of caps and different colors to get noticed more? lol, I like playing the game the game designers designed. As soon as you allow all kinds of options for changing the rules, it no longer becomes a game. Sliders ruin survival games....maybe Im just old school. Just...play.

 

[DrDragonlance]

This is hilarious to me because I love this mechanic.

Twice, I have had the great benefit of starting a siege, see the notification come up to vote for peace, then I ignore it for 48 hours and finish my siege.

Then vote and get peace with a new poorly defended city/castle.

I think Ananda's issue is he didn't actually get 48 hours. Everyone voted, then he had to vote. The game should also give him 48 hours to decide.

 

[Ananda_The_Destroyer]

I’m honestly tired of coming back to the forums during breaks and seeing these type of “make the game ‘baby’s first’” suggestions.

The whole idea that a game isn’t a “strategy” game in any way unless you have complete and utter control with complete and utter compliance is so flawed it’s not even worth getting into. I can only hope the devs ignore threads like this one, as there are already functions in game for a ruler to throw their weight around. They may need to be improved and adjusted, but they don’t need to be thrown out because of the simpletons wanting Bannerlord to be something it’s not and never meant to be

Show me your screen shots of some completed maps if you're not full of hot air. I bet you tinker around with a dozen mods and have never even experienced the late game in it's natural state, or at all.

If you think I'm a simpleton I can only apologize. How can the truly stupid ever know that they are so?

Spoiler

I can only hope the devs ignore threads like this one

Hope you little heart out?, I've made dozens of threads and reports and dozens of fixes and improvements to the game have resulted.

there are already functions in game for a ruler to throw their weight around

Demonstrate it. Show, don't tell. Open your game and show me a superior play.
----
This goes for anyone wanting to defend these mechanics, show your late game maps or your non-opinion speculation is just hot air.
If you haven't experienced the system then why should anyone care what you think about it?

What was you positive experience in the late game regarding vassals voting for peace or war in rapid succession?

Was there a time when you felt the game was better because you couldn't set a target for your vassals to siege?

Is there a time the game was more rewarding and interesting because you vetoed a vassal proposal only to have them make the same proposal in a short time anyways and/or contrary proposals such as wanting both peace and new wars?

Have you used the new Clan creation system and did you find it useful compared to vetoing vassal proposals with your influence?

When/if you reach the power threshold where all factions will declare war on you, did you like that vassals will still calculate to vote for peace and release all prisoners, even though this peace is only a few days and dramatically benefits the other factions over their own?

Is that how it works? Lots of caps and different colors to get noticed more? lol, I like playing the game the game designers designed. As soon as you allow all kinds of options for changing the rules, it no longer becomes a game. Sliders ruin survival games....maybe Im just old school. Just...play.

???????
Nobody mentioned sliders. I want GOOD RULES, I don't think what we currently have is good, I think it's bad. I can show what I think is bad, can you show what you think is GOOD?

I think Ananda's issue is he didn't actually get 48 hours. Everyone voted, then he had to vote. The game should also give him 48 hours to decide.

.....actually it did but I wanted 1 more siege to achieve my geographical goal for that war.

 

[Earth Dragon]

I don’t have to demonstrate anything. If you play the game you know how influence works by sheer concept.

YOU are the one saying you want to have complete and utter say on want all your vassals do and how they participate and they somehow lose autonomy because it inconvenienced you. That is simpleton to its core. Could votes use more time? Yes. Could there be more ways to influence how lords vote on particular matters? Yes. Should the AI also be able to undercut the player and have minds of their own trying to displace you just like you displaced who was there before? Yes.

The game you want is one where the player has access to influence things that the game can’t push back against. That’s what you were outlining. Why shouldn’t lords be able to say “we aren’t supporting this war anymore”? They do that to the other factions, so they should be able to do that to you.

My point is the systems should be improved, not scrapped. This is also a show that it’s been on EA too long. Every MMO goes through this evolution of the people enjoying the process and the struggle, but once they’ve done it, they now want easy road and then ask to have the game dummied down so they don’t have to work through the process anymore.

That’s how you come across. A person who’s played, doesn’t respect the uniqueness of the process, and then wants it reduced to the same reductive “do exactly as I say since I’m the player” as that’s how every other game works. Bannerlord wasn’t intended to work that way, and I appreciate it wasn’t meant to work that way, and I’d appreciate it if it continued to improve in what’s its trying to do and go the same delusional route that players expect their power fantasies to play out where there is no chance of push back.

Is that how it works? Lots of caps and different colors to get noticed more? lol, I like playing the game the game designers designed. As soon as you allow all kinds of options for changing the rules, it no longer becomes a game. Sliders ruin survival games....maybe Im just old school. Just...play.

Too many sliders and options absolutely ruin games, and shows a lack of pride in one’s product. Just look at how much of this EA has been about trying to balance the economy to sustain itself and not form death spirals and/or unending escaltors. Throwing sliders to allow players to mess with these sorts of things can easily push it over the edge.

2 day voting periods is a problem. But I got bored with how the game was bugged and I could swindle the map to be “all mine” in just a couple years when the game first launched. I wanted these systems to get better, not get thrown out because of how “they” want to play the game as a tyrant that everyone magically and blindly follows. It’s a major draw to this game that that isn’t the way it works

 

[Ser Jon]

I’m honestly tired of coming back to the forums during breaks and seeing these type of “make the game ‘baby’s first’” suggestions.

The whole idea that a game isn’t a “strategy” game in any way unless you have complete and utter control with complete and utter compliance is so flawed it’s not even worth getting into. I can only hope the devs ignore threads like this one, as there are already functions in game for a ruler to throw their weight around. They may need to be improved and adjusted, but they don’t need to be thrown out because of the simpletons wanting Bannerlord to be something it’s not and never meant to be

You don't have to hope on that too much. They ignore threads all of the time and disregard the customer opinion constantly. Just look at how bad MP is, a direct show of how little customer threads are considered! It's a disrespect you pay for!

Regardless, it's always a riot when someone comes in and whines about others providing suggestions on improving **** mechanics or implementing new features that could save the game and offer dozens of hours worth of replayability (not that I necessarily agree with or disagree with total system wipe + redo). It says a lot about those kinds of customers.

I don’t have to demonstrate anything. If you play the game you know how influence works by sheer concept.

You insist upon him x exists but you refuse to prove how x exists. I'm sorry, but this is too good to be true.

 

[FizCap]

I'm no mere lord I'm the maker of Lords! I have raised up 26 strong brave Female headed clans by my own hand! I crushed the Khuzait into the dirt and dug them all out again under my wing! I made them all and I can un-make them if I need to! I retain 1 fief for the storage and prison functions, but make no mistake, the whole map is mine! vassal or enemy, they only posses what I'm allowing them!

Sorry, every medieval kingdom was a democracy, the history books were wrong.

Agreed.

So, you had a bad gaming session in Bannerlord ... and something really annoying and frustrating happened. Yeah well - welcome to early access Bannerlord!

There are SO many fundamental things in this game that need fixing. This needs a few tweaks and adjustments... but it's not major. Not in comparison to so many other Bannerlord problems.

Yea they need to fix bigger issues than the election system atm.

Unless as is happening to Ananda, you are a powerful lord or king of your realm, and it presents an insurmountable problem.

Ya but no King rules alone, every king needed the backing of nobles to do anything or they would be deposed.

 

[Emperor1997]

Sorry, every medieval kingdom was a democracy, the history books were wrong.

Yea they need to fix bigger issues than the election system atm.

Ya but no King rules alone, every king needed the backing of nobles to do anything or they would be deposed.

Sorry but you are wrong.
Kingdoms are not a democracy.
The King has the power and the vassals not.
But Vassals prefer weak kings and hate strong kings, because a weak king can be controlled, but a strong king not.

And Kings who have the power can do anything alone without a risk for a rebellion.

Have you ever played CK3, this game is absolute correct how to simulate a kingdom.

 

[Apocal]

The King has the power and the vassals not.
But Vassals prefer weak kings and hate strong kings, because a weak king can be controlled, but a strong king not.

Absolute monarchy ("king has the power and the vassals not") is a Renaissance thing.

Have you ever played CK3, this game is absolute correct how to simulate a kingdom.

In CK3, vassals can and do tell rulers to **** off. That would be awful for Bannerlord because the game isn't built with that in mind and it would become an exercise in pure frustration.

 

[niekdegrijze]

I support the notion to not get rid of the system but improve upon it.
- logical peace/war declarations
- ways to influence the vote of others
- as a king being able to prospone the vote or to veto it, both with different relationship penalties.

I understand the frustration about the peace declarations. As a merc for NE we where defending against battania. We made peace while we had most of their nobles in prison. We finally had the chance to go on the offensive. But choose to release everyone and declare war on the khuzait?. Short time later battania declared war again with al the recently released nobles happily raiding again.