In more than one game, with different patches, I have had to have a city and I the more and more I play, I am sure that it becomes an experience that limits the game.
I mean, you usually end up having as your first city a space that, probably, is not of your culture. So you already have a lot to lose with loyalty. On top of that, the food issue is the biggest problem, it becomes a cycle;
Since it is your first city (even if you have a castle) you will probably leave most of your army on foot as garrisons to maintain some protection. Now, if you take even a little while to get those soldiers back, you're never going to catch a break with looting. So your game is reduced to protecting those small villages over and over again, without rest. If your kingdom decides to make peace, at most you last 4 days in tranquility and then you go back to having a war with a neighbor. If you are lucky this war is going to be far from the border of those cities and you can recover and stabilize the region, if not... then the cycle returns.
In my case I almost never have that luck. On top of that the food issue is crazy... Because of prosperity and garrison (and probably because before conquering it some ally must have stolen the towns) you are going to be in negative in food. That reduces prosperity and loyalty, so if you leave a very small garrison to not consume so much food... then there is a revolt. Leaving a small garrison, on the other hand, makes the AI even more aggressive with your city. But having a medium garrison plus your army makes the game a cycle of spending money. Even fighting those small armies that are made to attack you in the long run your funds are reduced. When I started this cycle I had about 400k. and now I have 80k. and I have a hard time keeping it around.
It becomes a circle where your world, even though the map is so big, is reduced to 2-3 villages and a city. With fights in the same villages and some siege.
As a solution I decided to push the border of the kingdom; I conquered some castles and alternate cities. Surprise... the AI decided they were for me (even things I didn't conquer) I decided to leave those areas to their own devices and try to keep the border in that area. But if I don't actively defend it after 3 days I go back to the same cycle and if I try to push further on that the AI conquers behind my back.
This is something that in forum is well known; I just destroyed an army of 600 men and imprisoned before other 4 that was looting in the dungeon. I move to another zone to get recruits and surprise! Two assaulted in my villages and an army of 1000 besieging the same city. An allied army arrives, we don't manage and in 2 days another similar army appears...
Now, war is obviously a problem, but I understand why it is so active. Few wars are boring because the game doesn't have a system for trading entertaining enough, many turn into the madness we all know.
I know I can give the city to someone else in my clan, try to push the border, etc... but I like to give some "realism" and do things gradually. My wife died before I had a child and now that I can only devote myself to taking care of my lands I don't have time to court anyone. I would like to keep the space in my "family" for a roleplaying matter. Of course it can be done in other ways and I just put those chains on myself. But still, the major problem is that the food system of the cities takes up a significant swing.
Maybe the player can have more input into it. Use his own money to maintain loyalty by paying "bribes" "bread and circuses" or buying food and that he can make a fund of, at most, two days so that the city does not starve. Hire patrols or "mini mercenaries" (Perisno style) to guard the surroundings or use their management. I think that the use of money is very limited and giving it a use in the late part of the game would be the most logical thing to do.
I don't want to sound like a hater either, I know that balance is difficult and pleasing everyone is complicated. I enjoy the game and I think they are doing a great job little by little, but there is still a long way to go in these details.
I mean, you usually end up having as your first city a space that, probably, is not of your culture. So you already have a lot to lose with loyalty. On top of that, the food issue is the biggest problem, it becomes a cycle;
Since it is your first city (even if you have a castle) you will probably leave most of your army on foot as garrisons to maintain some protection. Now, if you take even a little while to get those soldiers back, you're never going to catch a break with looting. So your game is reduced to protecting those small villages over and over again, without rest. If your kingdom decides to make peace, at most you last 4 days in tranquility and then you go back to having a war with a neighbor. If you are lucky this war is going to be far from the border of those cities and you can recover and stabilize the region, if not... then the cycle returns.
In my case I almost never have that luck. On top of that the food issue is crazy... Because of prosperity and garrison (and probably because before conquering it some ally must have stolen the towns) you are going to be in negative in food. That reduces prosperity and loyalty, so if you leave a very small garrison to not consume so much food... then there is a revolt. Leaving a small garrison, on the other hand, makes the AI even more aggressive with your city. But having a medium garrison plus your army makes the game a cycle of spending money. Even fighting those small armies that are made to attack you in the long run your funds are reduced. When I started this cycle I had about 400k. and now I have 80k. and I have a hard time keeping it around.
It becomes a circle where your world, even though the map is so big, is reduced to 2-3 villages and a city. With fights in the same villages and some siege.
As a solution I decided to push the border of the kingdom; I conquered some castles and alternate cities. Surprise... the AI decided they were for me (even things I didn't conquer) I decided to leave those areas to their own devices and try to keep the border in that area. But if I don't actively defend it after 3 days I go back to the same cycle and if I try to push further on that the AI conquers behind my back.
This is something that in forum is well known; I just destroyed an army of 600 men and imprisoned before other 4 that was looting in the dungeon. I move to another zone to get recruits and surprise! Two assaulted in my villages and an army of 1000 besieging the same city. An allied army arrives, we don't manage and in 2 days another similar army appears...
Now, war is obviously a problem, but I understand why it is so active. Few wars are boring because the game doesn't have a system for trading entertaining enough, many turn into the madness we all know.
I know I can give the city to someone else in my clan, try to push the border, etc... but I like to give some "realism" and do things gradually. My wife died before I had a child and now that I can only devote myself to taking care of my lands I don't have time to court anyone. I would like to keep the space in my "family" for a roleplaying matter. Of course it can be done in other ways and I just put those chains on myself. But still, the major problem is that the food system of the cities takes up a significant swing.
Maybe the player can have more input into it. Use his own money to maintain loyalty by paying "bribes" "bread and circuses" or buying food and that he can make a fund of, at most, two days so that the city does not starve. Hire patrols or "mini mercenaries" (Perisno style) to guard the surroundings or use their management. I think that the use of money is very limited and giving it a use in the late part of the game would be the most logical thing to do.
I don't want to sound like a hater either, I know that balance is difficult and pleasing everyone is complicated. I enjoy the game and I think they are doing a great job little by little, but there is still a long way to go in these details.