Information about developments at snowballing problem

[Dabos37]

I am interest to know the “new rebel clans” meaning. Will this mean that new clans pop up when a rebellion starts? What happens with these clans later?

 

[YouMoMCallME]

Thank you @mexxico

 

[caledoni]

Nice work and thanks for the detailed info!

 

[Lusitani 5th Empire]

Funny how a bug can have such impact, it shows how important it is to analyse the code.
This would be a great if it allowed the collection of important data to the development by the players, the more detail and information you can extract the better. We are talking about of orders of magnitude of more data. More data = faster, easier, better game development.

I also wanted to see this graph inside game (like age of empires do) not as strength but as fiefs and suggested one year ago before EA. It was not accepted these days. Maybe if community want this it can be reevaluated.

Something like this :

I know it is not good having AI only tricks but this addition can be applied to player also in future. I did not want to take risk. We can start with npc clans first. It can change in future. I can give you a list next week.

When you have the time, yes please.

You said that

Then with help of some of our players we realized problem is also related Khuzait's overpowered culture bonus. These upcoming developments for fixing snowball problem will not change faction bonuses. It is another issue. Even faction bonuses are still same and unbalanced after developments any kingdom cannot occupy 30-40% of map in first 40 years without player interaction.

What is the reason this bonus exists for Khuzaits? I would rather have it equal fair for all factions, unless there is a logical reason to have this.

There are ways to work around this hidden parameters, you could add "shallow" game mechanics, which if they prove effective can add depth to the overhaul gameplay if devs choose to extend it.

Suggestion 1: Could a system where factions have an advantage or bonus depending on their culture?
For example: Each culture is mainly the reflection of the geographical location/natural conditions that certain faction is in, their are perfectly adapted to their conditions.
Having speed, spotting, attrition bonus or penalties to each faction depending on their culture and what terrain they are in.

• Battanians should have affinity to wooded areas and at the same time other factions being not so well adapted.
• Taking the Khuzaits hidden bonus - instead of hidden, make it a present mechanic that, in the end, has the same kind of impact - they should be good and fast in plain areas, but they should get attrition when prolonged in snowy terrain (as do other factions except for sturgians)...

This could prevent strong factions conquering and maintaining foreign lands and help native factions survive if weak.

Attrition was confirmed some time ago I think. Presumably some factions have favored terrain.

But do they?

To give an idea of what I'm talking about: (It doesn't need to be a super complex mechanic, the idea is to introduce it in a simple and easy way so it has a minor but important impact on the game)
less speed;
less spotting range;;
Weather and Terrain features should affect parties as they move across the map;
Terrain is important - World Map vs Battle Terrain;
Deserts to be difficult to conquer and march through
Attrition for Campaign Map?
Adding Army attrition and exhaustion, improving the morale mechanic
Make war make more operational and strategic sense
Could more be done with seasons to help with dynasties?
Suggestions. Maths and Winter attrition for balance. Detailed explanation
a couple of suggestions to prevent snowballing

And also:

In history forming large armies wasn't the real struggle rather it was preserving their numbers as weather, infectious diseases, enemy raids, fights within the army, financial problems etc would constantly reduce their strength that you can find dozens of campaigns completely failed because of this!! So i think there should be a severe army attrition with options to lower it like hiring surgeons, buying more food, increasing salaries etc but im not sure AI could handle it..

On another topic:

But regarding your last data Sturgia seems to be on the loosing side

? Answer Below

On the other hand, it was obvious from day 1, at least to me, that there was severe problems with the map in regards to the Sturgia and Aserai areas. There just isn't enough access to either of them and because of that neither of them seem to try to expand that way other factions do. I think with both of those factions they get bogged down at the choke points.

This is not to mention how inconvenient it is for the player. It is a real chore to visit either Sturgia or Aseria. Also Sturgia appears to be a fairly large piece of land but it seems like 70% or more of it is unaccessable with only a couple narrow strips of land, call them valleys, that you or they can traverse. Aseria needs at least one more entry/exit point and Sturgia needs that as well and needs to be opened up quite a bit with more than one tiny little passage being all that is available to travel upon.

Like others have mentioned, Sturgia always loses AI vs. AI in even battles. They have a low amount of cavalry and their cavalry is terrible. Their infantry also sucks until you get to their most elite unit, which most lords don't have many of. Their tier 3 units, which are supposed to be their bread and butter (spearmen), have weak leather armor. Other factions infantry have way better armor, at the 3rd/4th tier, so they don't even have an infantry advantage. Their troop tree needs a rework. All of my workshops in their territories are about half as productive as other parts.

Why not an attrition mechanic? Adding more cities is all well and good, but northern wastelands don't traditionally have huge populations. They do however have a proud tradition of killing invaders as the winter snows set in. Give units varying degrees of weather resistance. Sturgians do well in snow, Aserai do well in heat, the kingdoms in the temperate region are somewhere in between. Waging war with Vlandian Knights in the middle of Summer in Aserai should cause attrition losses. Same goes for Winter in Sturgia. These types of regions historically have defended themselves with not just their people but their geography. There are ways to balance this while adding realism and without just slapping more cities into the mix I think.

It to some degree does make sense that these factions are weaker because their environments are so inhospitable so they find it harder to grow food. This however could be turned into an advantage if attrition was added for foreign armies that attack them. However for the Aserai Qasira and Husn Fulq would need to be further in for that to take effect. Or it could be a sort of, find you can take our outer territories but if you want to further you'll lose all your men to attrition and we can retake our lands.

Suggestion 2:

Also if a town has very less prosperity like 1000- now they get a small daily prosperity bonus. This helps balancing game a bit.

Is this another hidden bonus?
If so, why not having it shown to the player by adding a "shallow" mechanic? In a first step, it would serve just as an excuse of getting that bonus in.
(Pillars of Prosperity)
For example:

• Some private investment from a Lord/Clan/Kingdom -

Created a kingdom budget and any clan having 100K+ money start to give 0.5% of their (money - 100K) to kingdom wallet daily. For example if a clan leader has 200K he paid 500 denars daily to kingdom budget (200K - 100K) x 0.5 = 500. This collected money is used to help poor clans in same kingdom if any exists. Each day 500 gold money is given to any clan having less than 30K money, 1000 gold is given to any clan having less than 15K gold.

• Taking the system that already exists, apply the funds in that town to give a bigger boost, but also drain the money more quickly;
  • (Funds should have a direct effect on production increase, afaik)
• A new daily default that would give the bonus or an existing one that would have a greater effect in this situation.
• Another idea is to reduce the "damage" caused by bandits near poor towns (reducing their number and/or party sizes, but it needs some balance because it might lead to an opposite effect because Lords can't farm the loot).
• And maybe even a dynamic situation where bandits are more prevalent near prosperous places would make sense, but again, the way bandit parties spawn (loot) from literally nothing has it's problems, bandits should have a negative effect on economy not boost it...

Edit:

4. Form of Banking (for macro balance)
I think there should be some consideration here for the banks. As I understand it, the caravans and cities have money, and thus purchase/sell goods (i imagine there is some use to having a minimum amount of money as a rule, otherwise purchases cant happen.

• But what happens when a player sells all goods to city, and no more money is left for them to purchase goods?

Spoiler

I think some form of banking here should apply, perhaps by virtue of the cities notables, who have a stockpile of cash to lend etc, and bring in caravans of goods (since, if their city goes to ****, they risk losing everything they have/their workshops/physical holdings become at risk for pillaging/less food=less garrison/militia = more likely to get conquered)

• A Faction bank?

Spoiler

Of course this is not very realistic, I think the faction goods + a faction 'bank' (pool of money where taxes go from other clans + the ruling clans fiefs) can have a role or function here. IE when low on faction goods (which can include some global food modifier through this +1 food BS that needs to be averaged over time, instead of instant supply -> here the modifier acts as some instant supply or quasi instant (over a week period) to help stabilize things. The idea is, in a time of war and desperate need, a faction can use diplomacy and trade and resources to smooth out some of their problems, and actually incentivize them to peace / diplomacy, and even incentivize to war if they cannot get certain goods!!

This faction bank will be important to stock and by extension have peace and pursue peace if you cannot use your funds to fix your issues (and thus pursue some form of economic prosperity, either raiding others and selling or growing your fiefs for production / tax -> here, grown fiefs are a target for weak factions, and weak factions can alternatively grow their own fiefs instead. Giving multiple ways to stock the faction bank (passive/active), and so more control to react to changes in the game (for player and NPC)

 

[subway_addicted]

Thanks @mexxico for an in-depth report, that's very impressive.

 

[NPC99]

Thanks @mexxico keep up the good work

 

[five bucks]

Thank you for the update Mexxico! It's always great to hear the workings of the overworld balance and what you're doing.

I think it's actually good if the game is balanced so Battania and the Western Empire get eliminated after 100 years or so. That gives the player plenty of time to join those factions if they want. Once we have the rebellions and civil wars mechanic, overpowered factions will break up into smaller factions.

 

[Nalgasucia507]

Thank you for the update Mexxico! It's always great to hear the workings of the overworld balance and what you're doing.

I think it's actually good if the game is balanced so Battania and the Western Empire get eliminated after 100 years or so. That gives the player plenty of time to join those factions if they want. Once we have the rebellions and civil wars mechanic, overpowered factions will break up into smaller factions.

+1. I really wish that they add a semi "end-game" invasion, anywhere from 50 to around 100 years after start, like a Nord invasion, etc, that will give the player's kingdom (his/her own or the faction they choose to be part of) a big challenge, and would not be original character's challenge, but the original character's son/daughter challenge.

 

[Tlap]

This is rly huge. Rly glad to see so big change. NICE!

 

[black_bulldog]

There is also another mechanic maybe lots of players are unaware. If a clan’s all fiefs are surroundered by fiefs of another kingdom and if these fiefs are left a bit further to current kingdom’s other fiefs it is easier for that clan to defect to surroundering kingdom.

It's interesting and while I saw it happen more than once I never really thought about why it was happening. That's good to know, but it would be nice for the player to have this information beforehand instead of finding it out from a developer after 1K+ hours into the game.

 

[Tlap]

Funny how a bug can have such impact, it shows how important it is to analyse the code.
This would be a great if it allowed the collection of important data to the development by the players, the more detail and information you can extract the better. We are talking about of orders of magnitude of more data. More data = faster, easier, better game development.



When you have the time, yes please.

You said that

What is the reason this bonus exists for Khuzaits? I would rather have it equal fair for all factions, unless there is a logical reason to have this.

There are ways to work around this hidden parameters, you could add "shallow" game mechanics, which if they prove effective can add depth to the overhaul gameplay if devs choose to extend it.

Suggestion 1: Could a system where factions have an advantage or bonus depending on their culture?
For example: Each culture is mainly the reflection of the geographical location/natural conditions that certain faction is in, their are perfectly adapted to their conditions.
Having speed, spotting, attrition bonus or penalties to each faction depending on their culture and what terrain they are in.

• Battanians should have affinity to wooded areas and at the same time other factions being not so well adapted.
• Taking the Khuzaits hidden bonus - instead of hidden, make it a present mechanic that, in the end, has the same kind of impact - they should be good and fast in plain areas, but they should get attrition when prolonged in snowy terrain (as do other factions except for sturgians)...

This could prevent strong factions conquering and maintaining foreign lands and help native factions survive if weak.

But do they?

To give an idea of what I'm talking about: (It doesn't need to be a super complex mechanic, the idea is to introduce it in a simple and easy way so it has a minor but important impact on the game)
less speed;
less spotting range;;
Weather and Terrain features should affect parties as they move across the map;
Terrain is important - World Map vs Battle Terrain;
Deserts to be difficult to conquer and march through
Attrition for Campaign Map?
Adding Army attrition and exhaustion, improving the morale mechanic
Make war make more operational and strategic sense
Could more be done with seasons to help with dynasties?
Suggestions. Maths and Winter attrition for balance. Detailed explanation
a couple of suggestions to prevent snowballing

And also:



On another topic:

? Answer Below





Suggestion 2:


Is this another hidden bonus?
If so, why not having it shown to the player by adding a "shallow" mechanic? In a first step, it would serve just as an excuse of getting that bonus in.
(Pillars of Prosperity)
For example:

• Some private investment from a Lord/Clan/Kingdom -

• Taking the system that already exists, apply the funds in that town to give a bigger boost, but also drain the money more quickly;
  • (Funds should have a direct effect on production increase, afaik)
• A new daily default that would give the bonus or an existing one that would have a greater effect in this situation.
• Another idea is to reduce the "damage" caused by bandits near poor towns (reducing their number and/or party sizes, but it needs some balance because it might lead to an opposite effect because Lords can't farm the loot).
• And maybe even a dynamic situation where bandits are more prevalent near prosperous places would make sense, but again, the way bandit parties spawn (loot) from literally nothing has it's problems, bandits should have a negative effect on economy not boost it...

Edit:

I like this idea.

 

[Qwezz]

+1. I really wish that they add a semi "end-game" invasion, anywhere from 50 to around 100 years after start, like a Nord invasion, etc, that will give the player's kingdom (his/her own or the faction they choose to be part of) a big challenge, and would not be original character's challenge, but the original character's son/daughter challenge.

Stuff like that is more in line with mods and for good reason, it sets an arbitrary deadline that forces a player to build up his kingdom/army to weather the storm, instead of allowing him to do whatever he wants. A better resolution would be a Calradia alliance system, where once the player/ai faction takes over say 50% of the map the other factions stop fighting eachother and all declare war that goes on untill the leading faction or all the enemy ones are wiped out.

But I guess we need alliances in the game in the first place for that.

 

[Jason L.]

I also wanted to see this graph inside game (like age of empires do) not as strength but as fiefs and suggested one year ago before EA. It was not accepted these days. Maybe if community want this it can be reevaluated.

Something like this :

+1 Count me in.

 

[Darkath]

It is two way effect. Having negative relations with other clan members also push them out. However relations are only side effect now in defections. Real effect is financial situation of clan. If they have any fiefs defection of that clan is usually so rare. There is also another mechanic maybe lots of players are unaware. If a clan’s all fiefs are surroundered by fiefs of another kingdom and if these fiefs are left a bit further to current kingdom’s other fiefs it is easier for that clan to defect to surroundering kingdom.

We also have problems in relation mechanics. Currently relations between different faction’s clans 95% be worse and worse by time passes because we do not have any mechanics for giving positive relations to npc clans which are in different factions. So by time hostile actions happen and they have more and more enemies, I will focus on this problem in future to make relations more balanced over time.

Yes supporters mechanic is currently not known by lots of players and it is so hard to gain new supporters. Even you have 100 relation with a notable as you said you cannot get him as supporter. It is a known problem. We should do something there to make gaining supporter a bit easier however supporters of clans should not change too much also because they are passive influence income source and they are useful for comebacks of weakened factions left without fiefs.

You should remove the negative relation hit whenever you prevent someone from raiding a town, it doesn't make sense, and i think that's the main thing killing relation between clans, even for the player. Except the player will release NPCs to build up relations again, while the AI will not.

 

[sniparsexe]

I am interest to know the “new rebel clans” meaning. Will this mean that new clans pop up when a rebellion starts? What happens with these clans later?

Yeah, they just continue to exist or that's what I understood

 

[Urzahil]

Two questions: Will coalitions be possible for smaller kingdoms to oppose a single large kingdom - comparable to what was done in the Napoleonic Wars? And how do the changes affect mods that change kingdom strength?

 

[TheWigglyTapeworm]

Really really nice work. For me, one of the off-putting points for late game is that the game is pretty much over before my heir comes of age and that there are only 3/4 Kingdoms left on the map. Thank you for improving this. Hopefully with this and other new mechanics, games would last even longer.

Also new born heroes were not being active when they reach 18 years. They were not forming armies. This bug is also fixed.

Btw, does anyone see these new born heros running around with rags looking like peasants in the late game right now? In battle they are using their fists to fight. I don't think newborns are given armor and weapons for when they grow up. I'm assuming they are not given focus points/levels/skills either.

 

[Nalgasucia507]

Stuff like that is more in line with mods and for good reason, it sets an arbitrary deadline that forces a player to build up his kingdom/army to weather the storm, instead of allowing him to do whatever he wants. A better resolution would be a Calradia alliance system, where once the player/ai faction takes over say 50% of the map the other factions stop fighting eachother and all declare war that goes on untill the leading faction or all the enemy ones are wiped out.

But I guess we need alliances in the game in the first place for that.

Yea, I agree with your idea. Easy enough to put that invasion type stuff in mods I imagine.

 

[notric]

There is also another mechanic maybe lots of players are unaware. If a clan’s all fiefs are surroundered by fiefs of another kingdom and if these fiefs are left a bit further to current kingdom’s other fiefs it is easier for that clan to defect to surroundering kingdom.

before the clan flips, the player or AI should have the opportunity to either pay them not to flip or trade out holdings so they are not surrounded

 

[Bannerman Man]

I also wanted to see this graph inside game (like age of empires do) not as strength but as fiefs and suggested one year ago before EA. It was not accepted these days. Maybe if community want this it can be reevaluated.

Something like this :

I've been hoping for something like this since the game released. Would also be nice to have similar graphs over time for things like: individual village hearths, village production, # of nearby bandit parties, individual town prosperity, food stocks, tariff income, caravan and workshop income, quantities of specific resources in a town's market, etc. All of that would be useful information for the player to have.

Great write-up by the way!