Information about developments at snowballing problem

Users who are viewing this thread

Lol it looks like you tend to keep your dodgyness even when announcing a change. 🤭
So is it live or not?
I'm a bit lost. We moved 1.6.1 from beta to live today and released 1.6.2 to beta. The fixes are on the live 1.6.1 branch (and - since our versions are incremental - also on beta 1.6.2).
 

Blood Gryphon

Master Knight
WBVC
We release the patches pretty much as soon as they pass testing. As long as they haven't passed all required testing, the release is uncertain.


Anything included in live is also in beta.
I'm just surprised because normally changes don't get put in during testing. Good job on sneaking this one in 🤣

Anyways super glad we don't have to wait on these changes. I'll get a test rolling right now.

AI vs AI simulated battle death still looking on schedule for 1.6.3? This is the big one for me.
 

Blood Gryphon

Master Knight
WBVC
Depends. We don't introduce content, we do resolve bugs - if it can be done without undue risk. Testing is done for fixing after all.
Ah gotcha.

giphy.gif
 
I'm a bit lost. We moved 1.6.1 from beta to live today and released 1.6.2 to beta. The fixes are on the live 1.6.1 branch (and - since our versions are incremental - also on beta 1.6.2).
Yeah I can imagine how it could be difficult sometimes to confirm what went live or not.
Anyway cheers for the quick and efficient update.
 
Soon(TM) strikes again :sad: definitely need that sweet, sweet AI vs AI death since Minor Factions can now grow to be extremely large (which is welcome), gotta get those ****heads trimmed down.
 
A little notice.
I have created (with the great advice of @Blood Gryphon) a mod to easily extract data from BL.
It is far from being perfect but it is easier than checking all our tests manually using the encyclopedia (especially for the settlements :xf-eek:)
 

Dabos37

Sergeant Knight at Arms
The changes should be on live 1.6.1.

Nice thanks, it has been really fast.

A little notice.
I have created (with the great advice of @Blood Gryphon) a mod to easily extract data from BL.
It is far from being perfect but it is easier than checking all our tests manually using the encyclopedia (especially for the settlements :xf-eek:)

This looks great, going to check it when I come home in some days.

Please guys share data if you run some tests this weekend.
 

Blood Gryphon

Master Knight
WBVC
Ok got test 1 for 1.6.2. Changes definitely look like they are in, the very poor were essentially eliminated with the first one appearing in year 20 for the northern empire, the weakest kingdom. Honestly this was an extremely tame 20 years, snow ball score bounced from 3 to 12 back down to 2 then up to 13 in year 20 (this is a good sign that kingdoms are able to lose and bounce back). At the end of the game there was only 1 war going on.

Only 1 test so take it with a grain of salt, but good initial signs.

VmNCq.png
Test 1 1.6.2Year 5Year 10Year 15Year 20
Aserai
25​
25​
27​
27​
Battania
18​
22​
20​
19​
Khuzait
22​
26​
23​
23​
Northern
19​
13​
19​
12​
Southern
20​
18​
18​
16​
Western
23​
26​
24​
31​
Sturgia
21​
17​
20​
21​
Vlandia
25​
23​
22​
24​
Snowball score
3​
12​
2​
13​
oKYc6.jpg
i95Hr.jpg
 
Last edited:

Dabos37

Sergeant Knight at Arms
Ok got test 1 for 1.6.2. Changes definitely look like they are in, the very poor were essentially eliminated with the first one appearing in year 20 for the northern empire, the weakest kingdom. Honestly this was an extremely tame 20 years, snow ball score bounced from 3 to 12 back down to 2 then up to 13 in year 20 (this is a good sign that kingdoms are able to lose and bounce back). At the end of the game there was only 1 war going on.

Only 1 test so take it with a grain of salt, but good initial signs.

VmNCq.png
Test 1 1.6.2Year 5Year 10Year 15Year 20
Aserai
25​
25​
27​
27​
Battania
18​
22​
20​
19​
Khuzait
22​
26​
23​
23​
Northern
19​
13​
19​
12​
Southern
20​
18​
18​
16​
Western
23​
26​
24​
31​
Sturgia
21​
17​
20​
21​
Vlandia
25​
23​
22​
24​
Snowball score
3​
12​
2​
13​
oKYc6.jpg
i95Hr.jpg

Thanks for checking this. While it looks much better than before, I personally think that there is still too much poverty. Derthert, Ravangad, and Unquid are still poor during the first 500 campaign days or so, despite having a lot of fiefs.

I think that some clans being rich in late game (rich means > 275K or so) is not a problem at all, especially when the player is able to get this money in some few days. I do agree with clans having millions is a bad thing, but currently it looks still too good in terms of money inflation because it is almost nonexistent, while it is still bat at the same time when we see so many poor clans.

I have done a fast 200 days test in 1.6.2, and all Vlandia and Sturgia clans are poor, while other kingdoms have some average clans. Anyway, thanks for making changes for improving the poverty situation, and it would be nice if you could try to improve it a bit more. Suggestions:

- Increase starting prosperity for some settlements.
- Increase tax percent to 50% from 35%, and at the same time make prosperity less impactful as it gets higher (to avoid money inflation when towns get huge).
- Modify AI for making it less likely to upgrade units when in critical economy situation. Part of these upgraded units are probably getting disbanded some days ago anyway.

On the other hand, I am thinking that this economy issue has been present in the game since some patches ago, but we hadn’t detected it until 1.6.1 when things got worse. Maybe this is one of the reasons because snowballing score is now so low.
 

mexxico

Sergeant Knight
Ok got test 1 for 1.6.2. Changes definitely look like they are in, the very poor were essentially eliminated with the first one appearing in year 20 for the northern empire, the weakest kingdom. Honestly this was an extremely tame 20 years, snow ball score bounced from 3 to 12 back down to 2 then up to 13 in year 20 (this is a good sign that kingdoms are able to lose and bounce back). At the end of the game there was only 1 war going on.

Only 1 test so take it with a grain of salt, but good initial signs.

VmNCq.png
Test 1 1.6.2Year 5Year 10Year 15Year 20
Aserai
25​
25​
27​
27​
Battania
18​
22​
20​
19​
Khuzait
22​
26​
23​
23​
Northern
19​
13​
19​
12​
Southern
20​
18​
18​
16​
Western
23​
26​
24​
31​
Sturgia
21​
17​
20​
21​
Vlandia
25​
23​
22​
24​
Snowball score
3​
12​
2​
13​
oKYc6.jpg
i95Hr.jpg
After tax ratio is reverted to 0.36 from 0.30 and loot gains reverted what I see from your tests there seems money inflation again. In 1.6.1 both very poor clans and rich clans was increasing till 20th year now at 1.6.2 rich clans are increasing but there is nearly none very poor clans. If you continue your test till 40th year and make 2-3 more tests I think inflation will be more visible.

It seems even clans lose half of their settlements they do not be very poor now. This will create problems. As player it will be hard to harm kingdoms economically. Player’s hostile actions like raiding or capturing settlement destroying caravans / villagers will have less effect on rival’s economy and strength. They will still continue recruiting and normal development without problem. It will be hard to find very poor clans so recruiting clans to your kingdom will be hard and most clans will directly reject player’s offer. There will be more problems. Money inflation is dangerous and it will harm gameplay. This can even reduce number of active players at single player in long term because gameplay will be effected badly.

Best solution was not reverting changes but finding which clans always goes into povetry with a detailed analsys by running game 10-20 times and collecting money data for each clan and giving mostly poor clans at these sample runs 1 more settlement (taken from someone mostly have no money problem) or increasing prosperity of settlements of these poor clans. If these poor clans were mostly king clans there should be an examination why kings lose more money than others. It can be related to tributes etc. King clans have bigger expenses have bigger leader party and have more clan parties they pay more to tributes so they should start game with more settlements compared to others. Maybe still they start with more but not enough. Also giving kings extra 100-200k cash at game start can save them at early game financial problems this is another potential solution. If root of problem (why always same clans have financial problems) could not be understood even giving some small cheat money like 500/daily to king clans (if some kingdom’s kings always have financial problem) are ok imo but last choice solution.

Reverting is something easy but will not solve root of problem and will create new problems.
 
Last edited:

Blood Gryphon

Master Knight
WBVC
After tax ratio is reverted to 0.36 from 0.30 and loot gains reverted what I see from your tests there seems money inflation again. In 1.6.1 both very poor clans and rich clans was increasing till 20th year now at 1.6.2 rich clans are increasing but there is nearly none very poor clans. If you continue your test till 40th year and make 2-3 more tests I think inflation will be more visible.

It seems even clans lose half of their settlements they do not be very poor now. This will create problems. As player it will be hard to harm kingdoms economically. Player’s hostile actions like raiding or capturing settlement will have less effect on rival’s economy and strength. They will still continue recruiting and normal development without problem. It will be hard to find very poor clans so recruiting clans to your kingdom will be hard and most clans will directly reject player’s offer. There will be more problems. Money inflation is dangerous and it will harm gameplay.

Best solution was not reverting changes but finding which clans always goes into povetry every game and giving them 1 more settlement or increasing prosperity of their settlements. If these were king clans there should be an examination why kings lose more money than others. It can be related to tributes etc.

Reverting is something easy but will not solve root of problem and will create new problems.
I can't prove this, but the lack of action in my 1.6.2 test seemed to contribute as well to my results. With very little territory traded I think only a few clans were in positions to drastically lose their wealth. I would like to see more tests just incase the seemingly increase of peace in my game didn't skew the results of wealth (at the end of 20 years only 4 empire towns were not owned by their original clan).

Also here is some more specific data on kingdom wealth status
IMHRJ.png
TVXs9.png
VFCT9.png
VylO0.png
 

mexxico

Sergeant Knight
I can't prove this, but the lack of action in my 1.6.2 test seemed to contribute as well to my results. With very little territory traded I think only a few clans were in positions to drastically lose their wealth. I would like to see more tests just incase the seemingly increase of peace in my game didn't skew the results of wealth.

Also here is some more specific data on kingdom wealth status
IMHRJ.png
TVXs9.png
VFCT9.png
VylO0.png
For example in your tests Northern Empire time to time lost half of initial lands but even this they do not have very poor lords. Only 1.

Yes more and longer (if possible 30 or 40 years) tests are always better.
 
Top Bottom