Feedback on the New Culture Bonuses.

Users who are viewing this thread

Apocal

Grandmaster Knight
Probably should've done this to begin with:

Revised cultural effects:
  • Aserai
    • [Pro] Caravans are 30% cheaper to build. 10% less trade penalty.
    • [Pro] No speed penalty in deserts.
    • [Con] Daily wages of troops in the party are increased by 5%.
  • Battania
    • [Pro] 50% less speed penalty and 15% sight range bonus in forests.
    • [Pro] Towns owned by Battanian rulers have +1 militia production.
    • [Con] 10% slower build rate for town projects in settlements.
  • Empire
    • [Pro] 20% less garrison troop wages.
    • [Pro] Being in an army brings 25% more influence.
    • [Con] Village hearths increase 20% less.
  • Khuzait
    • [Pro] Recruiting and upgrading mounted troops is 10% cheaper.
    • [Pro] 25% production bonus to horses, mules, cows and sheep in villages owned by Khuzait rulers.
    • [Con] 20% less tax income from towns.
  • Sturgia
    • [Pro] Recruiting and upgrading infantry troops is 25% cheaper.
    • [Pro] Armies lose 20% less daily cohesion.
    • [Con] 20% more relationship penalty from kingdom decisions.
  • Vlandia
    • [Pro] 5% more renown from battles. 15% more income while serving as a mercenary.
    • [Pro] 10% production bonus to villages that are bound to castles.
    • [Con] Recruiting lords to armies costs 20% more influence.

On the new Khuzait bonus:
A double nerf in the sense the move speed bonus was small but useful but replaced by a culture perk that is basically pointless. Since almost all the cost of training cavalry is in warhorses and recruiting/upgrading troops is so cheap the 10% discount is completely unnoticeable. The Khuzait's primary perk doesn't matter for 95% of a playthrough while its downside varies heavily based on playstyle. You can completely negate it if you don't care about fief income and make your money other ways (Khuzait trader run or raider/extortionist) but it hurts players a bit in terms who play the standard route while being ****ing brutal on the AI.
In bullet format:
1) The previous bonus (10% to Cavalry speed) was generally useful among a wide variety of playstyles.
2) The current bonus only matters very early in a playthrough and even then only a little bit since it is a minor reduction.
3) The penalty applied makes fief ownership -- one of the key elements of player progression in M&B -- less useful than it was before. And it wasn't particularly useful then.
4) The penalty only comes up if you own fiefs, other playstyles have no downside to deal with.
5) The second pro is wildly situational as well. You not only have to own a settlement, but own a settlement producing certain specific resources to see a modest (not really big) boost to production. Which may or may not do anything, depending on the arrangement of workshops in your town. In practice, a player gets maybe 1 or 2 extra warhorses out of the deal.

I haven't directly played as much with Battania but:
1) Vroom, vroom!
2) Second bonus is situational but an almost unmitigated good once you get your town's loyalty under control. +1 militia is strong as hell in terms of the protection it provides and feels like the kind of bonus someone made without realizing just how many more militia it would cause to appear.
3) Still fast as ****, boy!
4) The penalty is laughable. As in, literally, I laughed. It makes it take 33 days instead of 30 days to build Aqueducts? Oh no, anything but that! Meanwhile, I just took another town which had all its settlement options maxed out -- what penalty, lol.
5) Beep, beep mother****er!
 
Last edited:

Dabos37

Sergeant Knight at Arms
To be honest, I find brilliant the current Khuzaits bonuses in terms of campaign balancing and for making Khuzaits less OP. I personally find the map balancing much more relevant than some players being a bit “affected” for these changes.

On the other hand, I do not get why Battania has the greatest bonuses by far compared to other kingdoms, especially when this kingdom is usually OP in most of campaigns.

Anyway, while new cultural bonus are not perfect, I find the current situation much better than before.
 

Ananda_The_Destroyer

Master Knight
I think it would be cool to have bonuses just for the player and balance the AI's abilities separately, so the player can have a significant advantage of choice without if messing up game balance. Plus there's numerous bonuses that I just don't possibly helping the AI anyways.

To be honest, I find brilliant the current Khuzaits bonuses in terms of campaign balancing and for making Khuzaits less OP. I personally find the map balancing much more relevant than some players being a bit “affected” for these changes.
They seem to do pretty good still. I saw a vid somebody made of 100 years and the blue boys took 1/2 the map. Sure thta's just 1 game and 100 years though.

On the other hand, I do not get why Battania has the greatest bonuses by far compared to other kingdoms, especially when this kingdom is usually OP in most of campaigns.
Me neither but I'm glad for it. It's really good for the player! I love how there's even little forest areas in the steppe you chase or run into. Battania's weird because if left along they seem to do really well, but if you join a faction against them they seem kind easy in actual battle.
 

iRkshz

Regular
On the other hand, I do not get why Battania has the greatest bonuses by far compared to other kingdoms, especially when this kingdom is usually OP in most of campaigns.
Battania has the worst location on the map. In over 20 full games, Battania has dominated only twice. Therefore, the bonuses are quite reasonable.
 

Apocal

Grandmaster Knight
To be honest, I find brilliant the current Khuzaits bonuses in terms of campaign balancing and for making Khuzaits less OP. I personally find the map balancing much more relevant than some players being a bit “affected” for these changes.
Map balancing was fixed like six months ago though but the Khuzait advantage they still have (lots of cav in their troop tree). Their bonus wasn't very big.

Anyway, I'd suggest instead of cost of recruiting/upgrading troops, they decrease their wages by 10-25%. Or just revert back to move speed bonuses for Sturgia and Khuzaits.
 

KingEroc1st

Veteran
the devs actually did well imo on this. they caught on to the fact that cultural perks affect the ai and faction balance a lot more than the player.
 

Dabos37

Sergeant Knight at Arms
Map balancing was fixed like six months ago though but the Khuzait advantage they still have (lots of cav in their troop tree). Their bonus wasn't very big.

Anyway, I'd suggest instead of cost of recruiting/upgrading troops, they decrease their wages by 10-25%. Or just revert back to move speed bonuses for Sturgia and Khuzaits.

Not in my view, while snowballing was fixed 6 months ago, Khuzaits have been dominating every campaign I have played. Yes, they do not get huge like before but they bare always one of the strongest if not the strong kingdom.

I prefer to do not add anything which make Khuzaits AI stronger in campaign.
 

Apocal

Grandmaster Knight
Not in my view, while snowballing was fixed 6 months ago, Khuzaits have been dominating every campaign I have played. Yes, they do not get huge like before but they bare always one of the strongest if not the strong kingdom.

I prefer to do not add anything which make Khuzaits AI stronger in campaign.
Anyone bordering two Empire factions is going to get stronger, because those factions are so weak. That's part of why Battania keeps becoming strong. It is a strong faction (lots of cav) against Western and Northern Empire (less cav). Sturgia too, sometimes.

At any rate, the culture bonuses have nothing to do with faction performance on the map. You can easily disable them and see the same things happen in the campaign. The AI treats them like they don't exist and only players are smart enough to take advantage, if possible. For example, it is currently impossible for the AI to benefit from the Aserai bonus because they can't own caravans (except maybe notables pay less for their caravans, but that is a small thing).
 
Well, I think that battania has a good reason for those buffs.

=> autocalc
A mounted unit has a 20 %, higher value in autocalcs as a foot troop of the same tier. Battania itself has no mounted Nobel line troop.

=> battania lords always fight or run on foot => they will be always slower on campaign map, if you compare them to rest of the factions(they run only fast if the have a high cav ratio which just feels wrong for this faction)


The +1 military bonus is a thing we can talk about, maybe delete the 15% sight range in the first pro and add the sight range as second pro.


Khuzaits should maybe get a small bonus speed in steppe terrains. Or a overall increased sight range since "horse scouts" could look more far ahead
 

Apocal

Grandmaster Knight
Well, I think that battania has a good reason for those buffs.

=> autocalc
A mounted unit has a 20 %, higher value in autocalcs as a foot troop of the same tier. Battania itself has no mounted Nobel line troop.
Battania has more cav per party than any faction other than the Khuzaits...
 

LDominating

Regular
The Khuzait 10% bonus could've been kept with the new con they get.
However to say it offered a wide variety among "multiple" playstylrme is incorrect.
It offered only bonus to cavalry,not a lot of variety imo.

Anyway they're still balancing around,Oathsworn became from Heavy Skirmishers to best Infantry with the Armor changes.
Mercenary Armor offers 53 body armour,goddamn!In total they have 62 body armour with strong javelins and hooked spears.
Best infantry unit.

Also look how they massacred my Berserkers,Menavlions,Palatones and most importantly...R.I.P Shock Troops,always in our hearts!
 

Antaeus

Sergeant at Arms
I've been playing a Sturgian campaign...

Their new cohesion bonus is serious business. I seem to be able to keep large armies in the field indefinitely... AI nobles seem to have no problems either... They Still managed to lose Tyal before I could get there... But they've walked over Battania and are pushing into Vlandia.
 

Emperor1997

Squire
Anyone bordering two Empire factions is going to get stronger, because those factions are so weak. That's part of why Battania keeps becoming strong. It is a strong faction (lots of cav) against Western and Northern Empire (less cav). Sturgia too, sometimes.

At any rate, the culture bonuses have nothing to do with faction performance on the map. You can easily disable them and see the same things happen in the campaign. The AI treats them like they don't exist and only players are smart enough to take advantage, if possible. For example, it is currently impossible for the AI to benefit from the Aserai bonus because they can't own caravans (except maybe notables pay less for their caravans, but that is a small thing).
No, Battania is the weakest faction in the game.
They only have 5 towns and can not risk to lose any of them.

I always capture Marunath and Seonon and Battania can only lose, because if they lose two towns, they can no longer recruit a large army.
 

LDominating

Regular
No, Battania is the weakest faction in the game.
They only have 5 towns and can not risk to lose any of them.

I always capture Marunath and Seonon and Battania can only lose, because if they lose two towns, they can no longer recruit a large army.
They can.
Towns only provide recruits and tax income for A.I.
Just because you took some of their money doesn't mean you defeated them.

Battania might have low settlement count but they have lots of lords available.
They can walk with 3 armies easily and a few lords behind.
 

Apocal

Grandmaster Knight
Ive noticed that, but why though? kinda makes them lose their identity
That's because of the changes to A.I looking for cavalry and because A.I. usually goes for first row of units in upgrade,left to right.
It is because their troop tree has two cav lines in it. They were noted for having a high ratio of cav even before the upgrade changes. Before it was just random which upgrade path they took but in Battania's case that still meant a much higher chance of any given recruit becoming a mounted troop compared to other factions.
 
Last edited:

Dabos37

Sergeant Knight at Arms
Anyone bordering two Empire factions is going to get stronger, because those factions are so weak. That's part of why Battania keeps becoming strong. It is a strong faction (lots of cav) against Western and Northern Empire (less cav). Sturgia too, sometimes.

At any rate, the culture bonuses have nothing to do with faction performance on the map. You can easily disable them and see the same things happen in the campaign. The AI treats them like they don't exist and only players are smart enough to take advantage, if possible. For example, it is currently impossible for the AI to benefit from the Aserai bonus because they can't own caravans (except maybe notables pay less for their caravans, but that is a small thing).

Well, in my experience Battania is always able to defeat everyone in my campaigns. Battania easily win most of wars against Vlandia, and continuously defeat Vlandian armies.

Wstern Empire are also able to do it pretty good in most of my campaigns.

Concerning Khuzaits, they still have a huge advantage related horse speed bonuses, and I find pretty good that they get a debuff which hurts the AI in compensation. Taxes debuff hurts the AI a lot while it is not much noticeable for the player. Getting money in this game is extremely easy for the player.
 

Apocal

Grandmaster Knight
No, Battania is the weakest faction in the game.
They only have 5 towns and can not risk to lose any of them.

I always capture Marunath and Seonon and Battania can only lose, because if they lose two towns, they can no longer recruit a large army.
nf-lK.png
Obviously if you, as the player, go out of your way to beat them, they will always lose. But that doesn't make the faction itself weak, not by a long shot.

Concerning Khuzaits, they still have a huge advantage related horse speed bonuses, and I find pretty good that they get a debuff which hurts the AI in compensation. Taxes debuff hurts the AI a lot while it is not much noticeable for the player. Getting money in this game is extremely easy for the player.
Battania's advantages are horse speed too.

Tax penalties mean that players have less reason to care about fiefs (bad for progression feeling) and any change to nerf currently imbalanced player incomes (smithing, loot) means that it will start to hurt players. TW don't have to change anything, they can leave it as it is right now and the game will still be OK. But I think it is bad gameplay that players mostly fund everything with loot and have no big reason to care about fiefs.
 
While flavor/RP-wise the Khuzait culture stuff fits, I do agree they should keep the 10% bonus but on the steppes. Id argue their con should be the hearth debuff instead of the Empire.

Battania (and everyone) else do need a troop tree refresh, Battania has too much cav and not enough archers while the Empire has **** cav outside of Elite Cats (who still dont use Cat Lances...)
 
Top Bottom