Just checked my game started in 1.5.10 and 30 in game years in. In total there are 45 Very Poor clans, 23 Poor clans, 7 average clans, 2 rich clans (both aserai) and one very rich Me. So something is not balanced.
Not sure if this is beneficial but if you want I could give you a breakdown this was not a test but from an actual game.
Thanks and I think it’s at 30k that it starts, unless that has changed as well. Personally I think the very poor status should be raised to 30k (or whatever it’s been changed too) so we have an in game indication when a clan is going into that savings mode.
Yeah it was 30K. I can't find back that discussion we already had with mexxico.
But yeah we already mentioned about how more convenient for the player should it be to align a status (very poor or poor) with the "safe mode" threshold.
In a different thread there's a discussion about bandit troops and their scalability with the player level. I've noticed that in my playthrough there currently are bandit troops of 80+ running around while most lords are running around with 30 recruits.
I thought that lords are supposed to eradicate bandit parties to level their recruits, get loot and accumulate enough wealth to go to war.
Without enough low level bandit parties the lords keep running around with recruits, costing them coin and disabling them from going to war to earn more coin.
Could this be another factor contributing in the Great Depression most factions are going through right now or is it irrelevant?
In a different thread there's a discussion about bandit troops and their scalability with the player level. I've noticed that in my playthrough there currently are bandit troops of 80+ running around while most lords are running around with 30 recruits.
I thought that lords are supposed to eradicate bandit parties to level their recruits, get loot and accumulate enough wealth to go to war.
Without enough low level bandit parties the lords keep running around with recruits, costing them coin and disabling them from going to war to earn more coin.
Could this be another factor contributing in the Great Depression most factions are going through right now or is it irrelevant?
I want to give some information about upcoming developments about snowballing problem. All these developments are already done and will be ready at 1.5.6 beta. Unfortunately next beta 1.5.5 (which will be uploaded next monday or tuesday) will not have these changes.
Firstly lets determine problem :
In Bannerlord some kingdoms (usually Khuzait and Battania) get stronger and stronger each year and one or two factions can easily occupy 50% of map in late gameplay. In first 20 years usually 2 or 3 kingdoms be eliminated (usually N.Empire, S.Empire and Sturgia). It was worse in previous versions (1.5.0 and previous) and even in first 10 years 2 or 3 kingdoms were being eliminated. After developments at war / peace / tribute systems weakened factions can stay 10-15 years more by making more logical peaces and paying tributes to strong enemies and not facing with 2+ enemies mostly. However it was not enough to fix problem completely. 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.
When Bannerlord first released as EA late game was not well balanced. We and most players usually played first 10-20 years. However we have a feature in Bannerlord which you can continue playing from your adult children. So actually game should be balanced for centuries. We know 90% of players are playing at first 10-20 years but a good sandbox game could save its inside balance for 100+ years. There can be some surprising things like one faction getting half of world of course but they should be rare.
Secondly lets examine our current situation :
Last week several players (@Apocal, @Blood Gryphon) made their own tests to see situation at 1.5.4. They run game 20 years (without player interaction) and give us some tables. You can see these tables as below (here control points mean : 2 for town 1 for castle) :
In my tests I got similar results too. Khuzait and Battania got more than 60% of map at the end of first 20 years and 2-3 factions be eliminated or left with only 1-2 fiefs.
Then you can see 2 problems here. 1-There are so many defections. 2-Minor factions are not joining weakened factions as much as it should be. When a faction lost their territories they should offer higher amounts to mercenary minor factions and recruit them to take lost settlements back. However if weakened factions are having financial difficulties they cannot offer high amounts to mercenary minor faction leaders. Then I made a detailed clan by clan examination to see also financial situation of clans. Because financial difficulties are also one of the biggest reason of defections. Then here is the result :
Clan datas in first 20 years for 1.5.4 (before developments) : Every clan has 4 datas for each year : 1st data is leader gold as 1000 (if <15 it has red font)
2nd/3th datas : towns / castles clan have
4th data : party size usage ratio (how much full their parties are as %, as example if clan can has 3 parties with 100 party size limit but they have 2 parties on map with 75 men this ratio is 50% (75+75 / 100 x 3))) :
As you see some factions have lots of defected clans (background colors are indicating faction clan belong to, change of background color means defection). When we examine factions of these defected clans (w.empire, s.empire, n.empire, sturgia and vlandia) they generally have several clans having financial difficulties. Defections usually happen because of combination of 2 main reasons : 1-Low relation with king 2-Losing all fiefs and having financial difficulties
If you examine above tables you can see there are two problems related to financial situations of clans. First is cumulative total of money in all clans are getting more and more each year. There is a money inflation however even there is a money inflation some clans are so poor and they are having difficulties in even recruiting men to their parties (they have less party usage ratios). Also probably some clans even have problems at feeding their men. Finally these clans defect to another kingdom. Also even some clans have nearly no money some clans have 1M+ money in same kingdom. There is a huge difference between clans as terms of financial situation even inside same kingdom. This happens because of several reasons but main reason is some clans remain without fief / income and there is no mechanism / feature for fief redistirbution. This shows our first and biggest problem. Money should distributed more equally among clans in same kingdom. Then several developments are done to fix this issue. 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. Player is out of these calculations for now. Maybe later we can include player also. We are trying to create more balanced financial situations among clans in same kingdom. Also because there is a high money inflation loot gain of npc lords is decreased. For the ones who does not know they have a different mechanic, they are getting money rather than items when a battle ends. There were no trade penalty applied to these instant loot->money conversations. However as you know there is high trade penalty at weapons / armors, as player if you try to sell or buy same item you can see high price difference. When trade penalty added to this loot->money conversation money inflation is decreased and total clan leader money at mid/late game in all world is decreased. Unfortunately because of reduce in loot income of npc lords number of poor clans are increased first. With the help of kingdom budget addition I mentioned above these poor clans are then reduced. Then we get healthier and more balanced financial situations. Still of course we have poor clans but their number is decreased overall.
To make minor factions to join weaker factions more several formula changes are also applied. Now weak factions with less fiefs / lords / strength offer more money per influence compared to 1.5.4. So minor factions join weak factions more now. After first changes I collected data again to see effects of first developments, this time I made a 43 year test to see bigger picture with more data :
As you see from chart and graph Khuzait still get 40% of world at some point however they lost their areas after. Only 1 faction is eliminated at first 20 years. 2 factions are eliminated at first 43 years also 1 faction remained with only 1 fief. We still have one big problem. Weakened factions cannot make comebacks, you can see this from graph and datas. This make OP factions work easier when conquering half of world. When a faction go below 10 control points (something like 3 towns and 4 castles (3 x 2 + 4 x 1 = 10)) they cannot go up 15 again. This make game also a bit boring because you know that a weakened faction cannot save themselves from that bad situation. This is a bit related to financial problems they are having however when I deeply examined I see they also cannot form even armies. Because influence incomes are nearly all related to settlements they have. When a kingdom lose their settlements they also remain without influence. Then they cannot form even armies. To fix this problem I removed one condition at influence gain from supporter notables. Now supporter notables of a clan give influence to clans even owner of their settlement is another clan. So this is a good passive influence income for NPC clans. Even they lose their settlements they can gain influence from their supporters. After this change weakened factions become more resistant, they started to form armies and started to take get back their lost settlements.
Also some settlements were having prosperity penalties from issues not fixed. When I examine the code I see only npc clan leaders were solving issues with 10% probability when they enter settlements. However some clan leaders were not able to form a party for long times if they were get prisoned and released and if during that time another party is formed from that clan. Then clan leader wait any of these actual parties to be destroyed. During that time some unresolved issues were decreasing prosperity of some settlements to a very low level like 1000-. Especially negative effect of clear bandit hideout issue was very high. Owner of these towns cannot get enough tax and having also financial difficulties. These problems are also fixed. Now all npc lords can resolve issues when they enter a settlement with 5%. Also if a town has very less prosperity like 1000- now they get a small daily prosperity bonus. This helps balancing game a bit.
Then while testing situation after first developments I see another problem which usually weak factions suffer from. Some armies were not buying food even they are starving. After examining this problem I see this was happening when an army is far from all settlements they can buy food from. This problem also fixed. So even an army is far to all neutral towns they stop what they are doing and return one of closest town when they start to have foods problems. Also sometimes I see some lords in weak factions which are forming army even they have so less troops like 10-20 men and success ratio of these armies were low. As you know lords only join armies when they have at least 40% of their party size is full. This condition was not applied to army leaders. Now it is also applied (except player). These small fixes started to make thing better for weaker factions.
One more development is clans do not care only king relation now while defecting they also care how is their relation with other clans inside that kingdom.
After all these developments (actually there are more but I am not mentioning half of developments / bugfixes, next week I can add more changes) I got below results :
As you see from above data, any kingdom did not be eliminated in first 43 years. Also Vlandia goes below 10 control points at some years then they make a come back and reach 20 control points at the end of 43 years test. So there will be more surprise come backs when you play 1.5.6.
If you examine clan tables shared above you can see party usage ratio data (4th data for each clan) is getting less and less every year. Party usage ratio is 100 if all parties in a clan uses all party size limits completely (fe, if clan can have 3 party however if they have 2 party on map with 75% of party size usage clan's party size ratio become 50% because (75+75) / (3 x 100) is 0.5) This ratio starts with 70-80% average for all kingdoms and it become 50-60% average at 20th year of tests. I examined its reason and see that if a lord escape from prison as wounded they are not healed entire game (except player, because player get its party right after escaping). Healing system were only applied to heroes in parties. If a hero is even a prisoner in a dungeon healing is applied but if he escapes when he is wounded he cannot be healthy again. This bug was one reason of this party usage ratio reduce over years. Also new born heroes were not being active when they reach 18 years. They were not forming armies. This bug is also fixed. This problem also effect weak factions more. Because they lost more heroes compared to strong factions and after a point they have so less parties on map. Game should continue with same 70+% party size usage ratio all time. After fixing these bugs this problem is also fixed. You can compare before fixes and after fixes :
As you see after these 2 bug fixes we have higher party size usage ratio averages at late game. In this table there are datas (not per 1 year but per 5 years). I want to spend less time so collected data once per 5 years. Here are control point datas and graph after these bug fixes :
As summary :
There are much more bug fixes and developments to fix this issue but I could give details from some of them. Next week I can give more data and tables. This is a bit huge issue. Now kingdoms are more balanced, there are less poor clans, there are less defections, there is no big money inflation, even weak factions can make come backs and at late game there is not less parties on map. With more balanced kingdoms and even comebacks of weakened factions gameplay will be probably better. Also another team member is working on rebellions currently, we are in coordination with him. When rebellions are added game will be hopefully more balanced, because rebellions will happen in mostly captured towns with low loyality and new rebel clans will want to join previous kingdom (which has same culture with settlement) mostly.
Sorry for my English if I used wrong in some parts, because I am not good at English maybe I selected wrong words in some sentences. Again I need to underline that these developments will take place at 1.5.6 not one next one. Have a good weekend. I will answer all questions and discuss with you at a spare time in weekend. Now need to go dinner.
And here is world situation from final situation :
Clan datas in first 20 years for 1.5.6 (after all developments) : Every clan has 4 datas for each year :
1st data is leader gold as 1000 (if <15 it has red font)
2nd/3th datas : towns / castles clan have
4th data : party size usage ratio (how much full their parties are as %, as example if clan can has 3 parties with 100 party size limit but they have 2 parties on map with 75 men this ratio is 50% (75+75 / 100 x 3))) :
I have posted this in the 1.6.1 thread but maybe here is the best place to do it:
Well, I have been making some tests increasing taxes from 30% to 42% of the settlement prosperity amount, and it helps, but it will probably brings money inflation in the late game when prosperity gets increased (duplicated or triplicated) in most of towns.
Mexxico has mentioned that the reasoning behind the fiefs’ taxes nerf is the money inflation for some lords in late game, but what I have been noticing is that the money inflation is sometimes present in late game due to settlements increasing their prosperity considerably. On the other hand, the first campaign days the AI has a lot of issues trying to pay wages when having fiefs with low prosperity (even Derther who starts with two towns and one castle). Thinking about solutions for this:
- Increasing starting prosperity for some settlements.
- Changing the taxes calculation formula to reduce the gap between low and high prosperity fiefs. Instead of calculating taxes with a flat number depending on prosperity, creating a new formula for making prosperity less impactful as long as it starts getting too high. For example:
- Prosperity between 0-2000: taxes = prosperity x 0.40
- Prosperity between 2000-4000: taxes = prosperity x 0.30
- Prosperity between 2000-6000: taxes = prosperity x 0.20
- Prosperity > 6000: taxes = prosperity x 0.10
So if a town has 2500 prosperity, taxes would be calculated in the following way:
2000x0.4 + 500x0.3 = 950
(with the current formula, a town with 2500 prosperity = 2500x0.3 = 750)
Keep in mind that this is just an example, and the idea behind this suggestion is to making smaller the gab between low and high prosperity fiefs to help the AI in late game while avoiding money inflation in late game at the same time.
I have posted this in the 1.6.1 thread but maybe here is the best place to do it:
Well, I have been making some tests increasing taxes from 30% to 42% of the settlement prosperity amount, and it helps, but it will probably brings money inflation in the late game when prosperity gets increased (duplicated or triplicated) in most of towns.
Mexxico has mentioned that the reasoning behind the fiefs’ taxes nerf is the money inflation for some lords in late game, but what I have been noticing is that the money inflation is sometimes present in late game due to settlements increasing their prosperity considerably. On the other hand, the first campaign days the AI has a lot of issues trying to pay wages when having fiefs with low prosperity (even Derther who starts with two towns and one castle). Thinking about solutions for this:
- Increasing starting prosperity for some settlements.
- Changing the taxes calculation formula to reduce the gap between low and high prosperity fiefs. Instead of calculating taxes with a flat number depending on prosperity, creating a new formula for making prosperity less impactful as long as it starts getting too high. For example:
- Prosperity between 0-2000: taxes = prosperity x 0.40
- Prosperity between 2000-4000: taxes = prosperity x 0.30
- Prosperity between 2000-6000: taxes = prosperity x 0.20
- Prosperity > 6000: taxes = prosperity x 0.10
So if a town has 2500 prosperity, taxes would be calculated in the following way:
2000x0.4 + 500x0.3 = 950
(with the current formula, a town with 2500 prosperity = 2500x0.3 = 750)
Keep in mind that this is just an example, and the idea behind this suggestion is to making smaller the gab between low and high prosperity fiefs to help the AI in late game while avoiding money inflation in late game at the same time.
Reason behind nerf is not money inflation at some lords, there was a money inflation at sum of all lords money. For example lets say at early game average lord money is 50K at year 10-20-30 average lord money should not be 80K or 100K. We should keep average around 50K. I do not know how average lord money - time graph is at 1.6.1 but I think I left balanced - without inflation or deflation but not sure of course we need to see graph.
If some clans go bankrupt at initial years most of the games, devs can give 1-2 more fiefs to these economically weak clans taking from rich clans or they can give extra 1000 prosperity to towns they have if they want to balance but making all clans balanced is not something we need badly. Some clans can go bankrupt at early game 75% of games this is not that big major problem, I accept it is problem but minor. By the way if most clans labeled as poor in encylopedia maybe devs can change labeling limits like changing poor to average limit from 40K from 50K - not sure what were the limits at 1.6.1.
Real problem behind money inflation is total prosperity in game world starts with 180K (55 towns x 3200 average) but it rises to 270K (55 towns x 4800 average) in 20 years (because of surplus food effect + built projects, usually prosperity change is positive number - good for player to see progress at his towns bad for inflations) so total fief income become 1.5x in late game. So probably if you try to draw garph of sum of all lords money at first it will go a bit down then rise slowly, if lords have more money they spend also more so even prosperity is 1.5x in late game I do not think there will be huge increase at lord's money in 1.6.1 but if devs increase taxes there can be significant inflation. Prosperity increase can slow down somehow maybe devs can add some prosperity sinks, random events, some new quests can reduce prosperity if they are not solved etc.
I don't think it is a problem. A lot of player have money issues in the late game so they can't recruit clans with fiefs. If there are bankrupt clans around, they can easily be recruited to the player faction.
Taking the tangent here, I remind there was quite a few statements on the possibility to create more Vassals something along the line of this Mod : Make Companions Vassals
This is actually interesting because it allows the player the expand the possibilities of their playthrough on their own.
Actually I'm on the verge to write a detailed post about what I find very tedious on my game on the Suggestion Section but I have to admit I procrastinate a lot these days.
Basically my clan is filled with many of my children to the point that I don't know what to do with them ( they are all +18 ) slacking here and there ..
The game cap the number of parties we have, and I choosed not to conquer the entire map, so I just can't see how I should put more Governants.
In short, my adult children are useless, and I suspect few players reached that point of the game to begin with - I have yet to see anyone complaining about this.
If I understand the game correctly, if I choose to marry one of my daughter, she goes to another clan and potentially another Kingdom / Faction so it's a big no-no ( so my own problem is not entirely related to companions here )
Why am I putting this here ?
Because I suspect this should also break the game if it's not implemented correctly, letting the players creating X amount of Clans like it's free real estate is on paper overpowered, and that directly enhance the ability of my kingdom to raise armies or/and have stronger economy ( I have 9 children ready to go as we speak )
EDIT : it's worth noting that I'm willing to see any official TW response to this suggestion, given I'll post this to the related section instead of having to patch it via mods, hence possibly breaking the whole game.
Reason behind nerf is not money inflation at some lords, there was a money inflation at sum of all lords money. For example lets say at early game average lord money is 50K at year 10-20-30 average lord money should not be 80K or 100K. We should keep average around 50K. I do not know how average lord money - time graph is at 1.6.1 but I think I left balanced - without inflation or deflation but not sure of course we need to see graph.
If some clans go bankrupt at initial years most of the games, devs can give 1-2 more fiefs to these economically weak clans taking from rich clans or they can give extra 1000 prosperity to towns they have if they want to balance but making all clans balanced is not something we need badly. Some clans can go bankrupt at early game 75% of games this is not that big major problem, I accept it is problem but minor. By the way if most clans labeled as poor in encylopedia maybe devs can change labeling limits like changing poor to average limit from 40K from 50K - not sure what were the limits at 1.6.1.
Real problem behind money inflation is total prosperity in game world starts with 180K (55 towns x 3200 average) but it rises to 270K (55 towns x 4800 average) in 20 years (because of surplus food effect + built projects, usually prosperity change is positive number - good for player to see progress at his towns bad for inflations) so total fief income become 1.5x in late game. So probably if you try to draw garph of sum of all lords money at first it will go a bit down then rise slowly, if lords have more money they spend also more so even prosperity is 1.5x in late game I do not think there will be huge increase at lord's money in 1.6.1 but if devs increase taxes there can be significant inflation. Prosperity increase can slow down somehow maybe devs can add some prosperity sinks, random events, some new quests can reduce prosperity if they are not solved etc.
What I can tell for my current campaigns is that clans having 50K are still creating small parties. For example, Unquid is the Aserai king and just has 60K or so, and he is building a 120-140 men party as much, while his limit is 300 or so. This maybe could not look like an issue, but why should the player be the only one being able to build huge parties while not even the kings are? I mean, it feel weird that I at clan tier 4, I am able to build stronger parties than most of lords (kings included).
Talking specifically about money inflation, yes, I think we are both saying the same, and money inflation is happening due to prosperity going too high in late game. This is the reason because I am proposing a system for making prosperity less impactful when it is getting too high.
I don't think it is a problem. A lot of player have money issues in the late game so they can't recruit clans with fiefs. If there are bankrupt clans around, they can easily be recruited to the player faction.
I think it is a problem for players who like challenging games and do not want to see every clan being poor building weak parties. I have seen moments where Derthert is not even able to build a 100 men parties due to financial issues (having two towns and one castle).
These players having issues for recruiting clans in late game (which is actually not hard if you know what you are doing) just should have more options to decrease the game difficulty. Or wait for the new feature for creating new clans using companions.
If you think there is no any issue, I suggest you create a new campaign in 1.6.1 without any mod, wait until day 250 or so, check encyclopedy, and then go close kings to check their parties size. Plus the clan strength is going from 1200-1400 (day1) to 600-800 for most of ruler clans, even if they are not at war and not losing any men.
I think it is a problem for players who like challenging games and do not want to see every clan being poor building weak parties. I have seen moments where Derthert is not even able to build a 100 men parties due to financial issues (having two towns and one castle).
These players having issues for recruiting clans in late game (which is actually not hard if you know what you are doing) just should have more options to decrease the game difficulty. Or wait for the new feature for creating new clans using companions.
If you think there is no any issue, I suggest you create a new campaign in 1.6.1 without any mod, wait until day 250 or so, check encyclopedy, and then go close kings to check their parties size. Plus the clan strength is going from 1200-1400 (day1) to 600-800 for most of ruler clans, even if they are not at war and not losing any men.
Yup, alliances between kingdoms would be very valuable. Right know, you can kick 'em while they're down, without worrying about reprisals. If they were able to unite or partner up with eachother, you would have to strategize: Can I handle both of those kingdoms, what is their relationship with eachother, etc etc.
Poor kingdoms, right now, are stuck in the crab bucket.
So this was an interesting run. Even with the hotfix fixes we do see the majority of lords still slipping into the poor category. Something that puzzles me is the majority of Khuzait lords are very poor although their land has been almost untouched. I mean it makes sense because khuzaits new faction con is 20% less taxes, but i am surprised they are essentially as poor as factions that have lost but are still able to hold on to territory. Seems to certainly stop them from snowballing so maybe this is a good thing, just stuck out to me.
It is clear though that winning factions do start to get into the Rich category, so i don't think its fair to say that recent changes have sunk the world economy, even if it is true in the first 10 years.
I still hold the opinion that clans should only get very poor once their faction has been essentially defeated and they can't be carried by other lords funding them. A castle should be able to support a clan having poor wealth, A town should be able to support a clan having Average wealth, two towns should maintain a rich status for AI clans (most kings start with 2 towns).
I may be reading the stats wrong, but didn't they just recruit three poor clans, distorting the picture? They started with 9 clans and ended with 7 average or rich. EDIT - I was reading it wrong, looking at the Aserai.
Great post. It's interesting to see how versions play out over time.
I may be reading the stats wrong, but didn't they just recruit three poor clans, distorting the picture? They started with 9 clans and ended with 7 average or rich.
I think you may have misread it, Khuzaits at 20 years only had their original 9 clans of which 7 were very poor and 2 were poor. Were you looking at Aserai?
I think you may have misread it, Khuzaits at 20 years only had their original 9 clans of which 7 were very poor and 2 were poor. Were you looking at Aserai?
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
