nijis said:
glad the buildings actually look a bit like Italy! I've never actually been to Sicily (although that will be rectified in a month or two, if I can help it) so I was pretty much going on photos and conjecture. The door is actually from Morocco, according to the texture bank from which I downloaded it. I was hoping that it would give the buildings something of a North African look, and had no idea that a similar design might still be in use.
Well, you see, Arabian and North African culture had its share of influence in Italy, especially in the south. Architecture, art, language, even cuisine, have been influenced by the Arabian presence (even in the north, thanks to trading; just take a look at some buildings in Venice); I think most Mediterranean regions are somewhat similar, anyway, from Northern Africa to Italy, to Spain...
nijis said:
For the player to sometimes get stuck with a financial drag of a village is to some extent intended. I want the system to create a natural antagonism between the player and his lord, and between the player and his tenants. However, I realize that it can be frustrating, particularly when all the player's options -- such as squeezing the tenants, or investing in infrastructure -- haven't been implemented yet. Keep in mind though that the penalties for not being able to pay your dues are fairly mild. You'll just annoy your lord a bit.
Likewise the issue of managing your estates directly. I want to give the player a sense that when he's away at the wars, things will start to fall apart at home. I intend to implement a feature wherein villages generate local disputes -- either internally between villagers, or with the neighboring village -- that a player has to sort out from time to time, or they will fester and cause unrest. But again, the penalty for ignoring them will not be that great.
Somehow, I suspected it was intentional. Is quite realistic, btw.
nijis said:
The feudal levy system was supposed to allow the player to have bases. It was actually quite difficult for medieval potentates to get troops to hang around in a place where they could easily be levied. Hence, the system of settling mercenaries.
Btw, any feudal troops that you disband, or mercenaries that you settle, will usually be ready for service again in a few days. The math is as follows: troops that are disbanded are added to a village "reserve." If the number of troops in the village is less than a pre-determined fraction of the reserve, then the troops will slowly move from the reserve to the village. Ie, if your reserve for Village X is 30 Lombard foot, then the number of troops in the village will slowly increase to one third of that total, which is 10. At least, that's how I recall it works....
It would make sense to allow a lord to store equipment in the village, however.
I have to say, the system works fine once you get the hang of it...
Once I understood I couldn't play the same way I did in the vanilla game (using only mounted troops, and leaving the other types in a castle, using them only when needed), i switched to a more... historically accurate strategy
That is, know I have a party of 30 or so knights; they are good for looting villages, raiding caravans, intercepting enemy parties (even a siege party is easy to crush, when you catch it in the open with a force of knights). When I want to siege, I use the levy system to strengthen my party with some sword fodder
One thing I have noticed, though: Norman Household Knights cost 91 per week, against 39 of a "normal" Landless Knight; still, after a lot of battles, Household Knights seem to be no stroger than the regular ones. At least, they doesn't seem to be so much stronger to justify their wages; right now I'm just giving them to city garrison, keeping only landless knights in my party
A thing I have noticed with caravans, btw:
When I rob them as an "indipendent" (not joined a faction), they give up quite easily: with just a dozen knights in the party the caravan will surrender and give you its goods. But after I joined a faction, enemy caravans *never* accept to hand over their goods: they always fight! Ok, they might hate you because now you are a declared enemy; but still... 10 footmen + a caravan master against 40 Norman Knights? Sounds like a suicide
nijis said:
Not being able to promote your peasants was a design decision.
I think that's quite accurate.
Of course, feudal lords needed manpower for their armies, but I think that's well reflected in the option for hiring peasants as recruits in the villages: as I see it, it represents you going in the villages, selecting young, fit and somewhat adventurous peasants who prefer the risks of warfare to being a farmer for all life
nijis said:
Re recruiting prisoners, as Maan points out, Muslims and Christians certainly fought on both sides of the period's "holy" wars (El Cid being a prime example, as were the Hauteville's Arab troops). I'm not sure how realistic it would be to recruit directly from the prisoners you've just captured in a battle. More likely, you'd try to ransom them. Medieval Spain actually had semi-professional ransom brokers. I should probably implement those first before moving on to prisoner recruiting.
That's something I had in mind to propose for the vanilla game.
It could be just a change of the slave merchant. Right now, he buys any prisoner for the same price; more realistically, he could offer different prices based on the troop you captured. A knight could be worth more, because his lord would be willing to ransom him (such a highly trained warrior would be very valuable); a simple peasant would probably not be worth ransoming, but still be worth something as a slave.
, or go to your vilalge and ask for tribute.
