"Himil of Tismil was lost." -- But why though?

[Dionaea]

Lets say I'm constantly sabotaging a gang leader by killing his thieves, building negative relation with him so I can get better relations with his enemies, eventually I would like this notable to disappear so a new one with normal relation can enter, but notables disappearing without you ever seeing them seems excessive to me

They don't really come back though do they? I liked exploiting the gang fights to level up my soldiers and level up my charm, but now when I defeat a gang leader he or she disappears and whatever backstreet/clearing/waterfront he or she was the owner of also disappears. It's a shame because you could smith, then when you deplete your smithing stamina you can start a gang fight and level some athletics (useful if you are a horse type player) and one handed and charm (gang fights increase relations with the gang leader's competition and with the owner of the city) and usually a few of your soldiers also gain a level.

As a bonus, since you wait during this process of gang fighting when the gang is gathering troops, you gain some smithing stamina and can smith after the gang fight and can rinse and repeat.

Also because there are 3 gang leaders who all own 1 gang location you always end up with positive relations with every gang leader if you take them out 1 by 1 in the same order. you always lose relations with the gang leader you attack at that moment but you gain relations twice from attacking the other 2 so it always ends up a net positive with everyone and these guys where the first to grant you the full recruitment in the city

It doesn't really work anymore now that 1 gang leader always disappears.



I really wish Taleworlds would stop removing the best exploits so fast all the time

 

[Medivhtratos]

Dont know if someone of you guys had this issue, but there is something wrong with the power level increase, decrease of notables

https://forums.taleworlds.com/index.php?threads/1-5-1-notable-power-still-decreasing.430141/#post-9525640

 

[Thoridon]

“Npc lords can also "complete" quests under certain conditions by entering a settlement that has an outstanding issue. The npc must be the leader of the clan that owns the settlement. Each time they enter, they have a 10% chance of completing a random quest in towns, and a 30% chance in villages. I don't believe they receive any rewards for this.”

Is this why we can go village to village in some areas not getting any quests as the lords automatically complete them all when going out en masse to recruit new troops after an army defeat?

 

[Apocal]

So with all that in mind, what are some other conditions that you guys can think of that should cause notables to gain or lose power without being too redundant?

Gains:

• Owner/Governor same culture, to make the settlement less militarily productive once conquered.
• High prosperity/hearths, to give benefits to raising prosperity in the face of increased risk of starvation.
• Excess town wealth, for merchants.
• Low security, for gang leaders.
• Every complete season (21 days) without a raid, for all village notables.
• Deliberate town/village policies to favor one or the other.

Losses:

• A recently conquered penalty that lasts for some length of time (season? year?) for towns.
• Recent raids on villages. (dur, already exists)
• High security, for gang leaders.
• Deliberate policies to stick it to one notable in particular.

edit: Just to expand on my thinking, conquered areas currently are nothing but a serious net gain for the conquering faction after what can be a very short time. But it shouldn't work that way and instead they should be an persistent drain for a long while -- potentially forever if the right steps aren't taken.

 

[Ferisko]

Honestly, notables disappear way to often just because they have unfinished quests, and the player isn't going to run around and quest all day, lets be honest. Either decrease how negatively an unfinished quest affects their power, or make it so AI lords also does quests to at least a small degree.

Also unfinished quests if I remember right, lowers town prosperity, making silversmiths not as good anymore since jewelry is a luxury trade good.

 

[NLCRich]

If a notable that you gain relationship with can later be lost forever because of power shifts, personally I am not a fan of this feature being in the game.I feel like it is already hard enough to get high relationship, with anyone (notables, lords, etc.). If it is a thing where they are just recycling notables that I've had no contact with, well then I guess I am ok with that. Or, if the relation points you earned carry on to the replacement (i.e. notable was lost, but relation transfers to inheriting son, daughter, or other associate).

 

[Blood Gryphon]

Alright, here are a bunch of details on how the notable power system works (as of beta 1.5.1) just to shine a light on it.

As always thanks for the break down

Gains:

• Owner/Governor same culture, to make the settlement less militarily productive once conquered.
• High prosperity/hearths, to give benefits to raising prosperity in the face of increased risk of starvation.
• Excess town wealth, for merchants.
• Low security, for gang leaders.
• Every complete season (21 days) without a raid, for all village notables.
• Deliberate town/village policies to favor one or the other.

Losses:

• A recently conquered penalty that lasts for some length of time (season? year?) for towns.
• Recent raids on villages.
• High security, for gang leaders.
• Deliberate policies to stick it to one notable in particular.

edit: Just to expand on my thinking, conquered areas currently are nothing but a serious net gain for the conquering faction after what can be a very short time. But it shouldn't work that way and instead they should be an persistent drain for a long while -- potentially forever if the right steps aren't taken.

I like these ideas a lot, i don't have much to add

 

[Dodgy]

I for one, like the system although it certainly need some tweaking.

You shouldn't be able to have high relations with every notable, in fact it should be the opposite, you should focus on a few, and ensure you actually bother to help them out with their issues and make them more powerful. As long as you help them out, they shouldn't disappear on you.

How quickly the power decay/gain happens, is a matter of balancing, and there's always ways of improving things and giving them more depth, but the whole idea behind it, I like it.

 

[Bannerman Man]

See this is what I mean when I say that Bannerlord has a lot of depth. It just needs to be communicated a bit better. I had zero idea about most of this.

How did you figure this all out? Did you just go into the inner workings of the code and decipher it all? However it was done, thanks for relaying it.

Yep, I looked at the code. I'm sure these things will be better communicated in time once they nail down all of the mechanics. There's already some code that deals with displaying the daily changes in the UI, but it's not implemented as of right now.

I believe I read earlier that Warband had patrols, but I cant remember if that was base game or a mod.

If bandit populations get too high around the area (Number of bandits equal or greater to x > Deploy Patrol) then the notable could "Pay" to send out a small patrol to help guard the village. Costing him both gold, and maybe village prosperity/militia.

This in turn could cause defeated militia parties to become deserters if the bandits end up defeating them. Either by spawning a duplicate party as deserters, or causing the bandits to "Hire" said prisoners instead of just faffing about with them till a lord rescues them. Since people have been asking for deserters anyway, it would give another option to spawn them. Though I read somewhere that mexxxico is working on rebellions and such.

There's actually a bunch of code dealing with settlements sending out militia patrols that has been there since release, but I don't know if they still plan on integrating it into the game or not. That's a nice idea to connect them with deserter parties though.

Rebellions are also in a semi-functional state, so hopefully they come sooner rather than later.

Is this why we can go village to village in some areas not getting any quests as the lords automatically complete them all when going out en masse to recruit new troops after an army defeat?

It might have had an effect on it, but there was another issue that had a bigger impact (that was fixed). Either way, it looks like they lowered the random chance for clan leaders to complete village quests down to 10% with today's hotfix, so they must have seen the feedback. Quests also expire after some time, which is something I forgot to mention in my original post. Their issue generation algorithm should keep numbers at roughly the same level over time though.

Gains:

• Owner/Governor same culture, to make the settlement less militarily productive once conquered.
• High prosperity/hearths, to give benefits to raising prosperity in the face of increased risk of starvation.
• Excess town wealth, for merchants.
• Low security, for gang leaders.
• Every complete season (21 days) without a raid, for all village notables.
• Deliberate town/village policies to favor one or the other.

Losses:

• A recently conquered penalty that lasts for some length of time (season? year?) for towns.
• Recent raids on villages. (dur, already exists)
• High security, for gang leaders.
• Deliberate policies to stick it to one notable in particular.

edit: Just to expand on my thinking, conquered areas currently are nothing but a serious net gain for the conquering faction after what can be a very short time. But it shouldn't work that way and instead they should be an persistent drain for a long while -- potentially forever if the right steps aren't taken.

Good thoughts . I especially like the ones that provide resistance to expansion like the culture one. Maybe there could be a chance for a newly spawned notable to have the same culture as the settlement owner so that they slowly transition over time.

Using excess town wealth for merchants seems like it would be highly exploitable to me.

 

[Blood Gryphon]

Maybe there could be a chance for a newly spawned notable to have the same culture as the settlement owner so that they slowly transition over time.

That is a good idea

 

[Dreed89]

The title of this thread is one of the best.

 

[Apocal]

Good thoughts . I especially like the ones that provide resistance to expansion like the culture one. Maybe there could be a chance for a newly spawned notable to have the same culture as the settlement owner so that they slowly transition over time.

Using excess town wealth for merchants seems like it would be highly exploitable to me.

I just realized that late game players could probably use their immense wealth to keep a city overstocked on denars and understocked on anything else the market should provide.

 

[paladinx333]

or does that mean any time they have a quest available and the player never comes by to take care of it? Because it would be pretty stupid if they're getting punished for every quest the player doesn't take, considering that the player is the only person in all of Calradia who can do those quests.

It's just silly, imho. Once you start amassing power you really don't have time to do quests. This is one of those ideas that should be left on the cutting room floor. I never cared for the notables system in the first place and this just made it so much worse.