This is a thread about snowballing
-
If you are reporting a bug, please head over to our Technical Support section for Bannerlord.
Information about developments at snowballing problem
- Thread starter mexxico
- Start date
Users who are viewing this thread
By having moving parts is pretty vague -how about tying up AI lords into their regions as they are actually interested and invested in that region as opposed to mindless Borg expansion -you really dont think that could help slow down an out of control land sweeping AI no...cant envision it....huh..
Now imagine building a moderate Casus Belli on top of the above...still cant see it ..no..?
Question: Any major consistent snowballing in your playthrus?
As it is now in BL Lords are just programmed to steamroll as they dont have much else to do, no feasts, No personality rivals or traits to slow them *(Peaceful/Tentative etc) within clan and def none of the above type harassments from the Sicily mod -is it really that much of a stretch that given that the above was added the world map would play out quite differently each playthrough?
If you gonna argue piece by piece "no this one thing here wont solve the big problem blah blah blah" -sure you can successfully argue way anything -but taken as a whole as this mod itself is historical precedent and Warband is precedent on more Lord Personality and a little Casus Belli than it should be considered as possible other solutions besides just "gutting khuzait strength numbers"
Obviously if universal auto calc bumps are not corrected and a more nuanced bonus system implemented -steamroll could still happen. So its many things -not just one. IMO this is just a far more interesting and rewarding avenue to take than "slash khuzait auto calc and speed by -10"
Marbles20
Regular
So with my current campaign I've run into a "fun" situation which really isn't unique and just kills gameplay/promotes steamrolling. See Below:
That's right 4 wars. Wars with Aserai and Battania were going on when Garios declared "More War!!" and declared on NE. Vlandia jumped in after that because 'why not?'. I haven't looked through the code, I'm not that motivated yet, but there HAS to be a check made: if a kingdom is at war, it should not be declaring wars.
I get that a negative tribute is what prompts a leader to declare war currently (I'm praying that is just a temporary system), but that crap is ridiculous.
I actually wanted to declare on Sturgia for giggles, but since we no longer share any borders there is 0% support, otherwise I'm sure there would have been some. That is also why they've been able to collect so much tribute. No borders = no wars = indefinite tribute.
I can move this into suggestions, but I wanted to point out that the nonsensical diplomacy is having an effect on snowballing (Vlandia and Khuzait are creeping into snowballin' territory at this point in this game, though it has taken a little longer for them than before). Their positions on the map really keep them out of trouble, even if they boneheadedly declare war while engaged in war they aren't actually fighting on all sides like other kingdoms.
There is honestly no way to fix snowballing until kingdom diplomacy is fixed.
That's right 4 wars. Wars with Aserai and Battania were going on when Garios declared "More War!!" and declared on NE. Vlandia jumped in after that because 'why not?'. I haven't looked through the code, I'm not that motivated yet, but there HAS to be a check made: if a kingdom is at war, it should not be declaring wars.
I get that a negative tribute is what prompts a leader to declare war currently (I'm praying that is just a temporary system), but that crap is ridiculous.
I actually wanted to declare on Sturgia for giggles, but since we no longer share any borders there is 0% support, otherwise I'm sure there would have been some. That is also why they've been able to collect so much tribute. No borders = no wars = indefinite tribute.
I can move this into suggestions, but I wanted to point out that the nonsensical diplomacy is having an effect on snowballing (Vlandia and Khuzait are creeping into snowballin' territory at this point in this game, though it has taken a little longer for them than before). Their positions on the map really keep them out of trouble, even if they boneheadedly declare war while engaged in war they aren't actually fighting on all sides like other kingdoms.
There is honestly no way to fix snowballing until kingdom diplomacy is fixed.
I think the only time the AI should declare war when at war is if they are winning by a significant margin (i.e. Khuzaits in most cases). This could also help save weaker kingdoms from getting obliterated and help curb the expansion of snowballing factionsSo with my current campaign I've run into a "fun" situation which really isn't unique and just kills gameplay/promotes steamrolling. See Below:
That's right 4 wars. Wars with Aserai and Battania were going on when Garios declared "More War!!" and declared on NE. Vlandia jumped in after that because 'why not?'. I haven't looked through the code, I'm not that motivated yet, but there HAS to be a check made: if a kingdom is at war, it should not be declaring wars.
I get that a negative tribute is what prompts a leader to declare war currently (I'm praying that is just a temporary system), but that crap is ridiculous.
I actually wanted to declare on Sturgia for giggles, but since we no longer share any borders there is 0% support, otherwise I'm sure there would have been some. That is also why they've been able to collect so much tribute. No borders = no wars = indefinite tribute.
I can move this into suggestions, but I wanted to point out that the nonsensical diplomacy is having an effect on snowballing (Vlandia and Khuzait are creeping into snowballin' territory at this point in this game, though it has taken a little longer for them than before). Their positions on the map really keep them out of trouble, even if they boneheadedly declare war while engaged in war they aren't actually fighting on all sides like other kingdoms.
There is honestly no way to fix snowballing until kingdom diplomacy is fixed.
Are you positive that Garios was the one to declare war? As in you voted on it and it wasn't an instant declaration from the other empires?So with my current campaign I've run into a "fun" situation which really isn't unique and just kills gameplay/promotes steamrolling. See Below:
That's right 4 wars. Wars with Aserai and Battania were going on when Garios declared "More War!!" and declared on NE. Vlandia jumped in after that because 'why not?'. I haven't looked through the code, I'm not that motivated yet, but there HAS to be a check made: if a kingdom is at war, it should not be declaring wars.
I get that a negative tribute is what prompts a leader to declare war currently (I'm praying that is just a temporary system), but that crap is ridiculous.
I actually wanted to declare on Sturgia for giggles, but since we no longer share any borders there is 0% support, otherwise I'm sure there would have been some. That is also why they've been able to collect so much tribute. No borders = no wars = indefinite tribute.
I can move this into suggestions, but I wanted to point out that the nonsensical diplomacy is having an effect on snowballing (Vlandia and Khuzait are creeping into snowballin' territory at this point in this game, though it has taken a little longer for them than before). Their positions on the map really keep them out of trouble, even if they boneheadedly declare war while engaged in war they aren't actually fighting on all sides like other kingdoms.
There is honestly no way to fix snowballing until kingdom diplomacy is fixed.
My assumption here is that some of these kingdoms actually declared war on you to renegotiate tributes, but because AI kingdoms can't actually make peace with your kingdom they are stuck in a war until your faction decides to make peace with them. Also because you are a vassal there is a reduced chance for your faction to vote for war decisions, so its best if you start the votes for peace rather than waiting.
I would be surprised if after a few days your clans didnt want to vote on peace with at least a few of those factions. Of course no one wants a war with sturgia at the moment because you are in 4 wars, it doesn't have much to do with not being bordered. You will see Aserai and Sturgia go to war even being across the map from each other with no close boundaries.
Marbles20
Regular
Yeah he personally started the vote and won, I think it was about 60/40 (I threw my 100 into 'No' to get it to 40 and took a nice hit to relations with his clan for nothing).
Yeah thats how the diplomacy/tribute system works but its horribly flawed. Most wars have either a 100% or 0% chance for peace. Getting a split where the player makes any real impact on the vote is rare. I've fought countless (continuous) wars at this point and there is little rhyme or reason for a kingdom's willingness for peace. I've taken half a kingdom and had to wait until 1-2 other wars start before getting any real support for peace with that kingdom. I've also fought defensive wars where I made sure we simply held our territory and destroyed their incoming armies, with little support for peace until 1-2 other wars start. I've tried biting off a small part of a kingdom (either 1-2 castles, or a castle and a town) and holding and still no support for peace until 1-2 wars start. Even if we get to 100% support the tribute is usually in the losing sides favor, which means WE will be declaring war on them once we cycle through the other kingdoms we owe tribute. Its absurd, its tiring, and its not fun.
It was about 2 days after Garios declared war that Vlandia declared. I'd have to look through the kingdoms and see who is at war with who currently. Its been 2-3 days since Vlandia declared. I'd have to check to see if our kingdom would even support peace with one of them. (We really need a kingdom diplomacy screen that shows who is at war, who declared, how long the war has been going, peace length, etc.)
The point is this shouldn't even be occurring. I'd understand if a few kingdoms declared at once on a kingdom that was snowballing, but the fact that Garios, already in 2 wars, declared another war is dumb.
(I also haven't seen Garios's army outside of a city in a couple years (or any kingdom leaders), so that may be either a bug or a temp fix to keep kingdom leaders from death in battle)
When I say moving parts I mean the variety of roles the AI fill, such as skirmishers, foragers, outriders, etc. There's nothing about the defensive skirmishers as they appear in that mod that makes them inherently more effective as enemy armies get more and more powerful. Larger offensive armies would have more individual parties that they can assign to those ancillary roles anyway, which would almost certainly help, not hurt them.
And I'm not saying any of those things are bad ideas and have no place in Bannerlord. I get the sense that you think I'm against any of those mechanics on principle or something. There are pros and cons to all ideas. Even if they aren't relevant to snowballing, there are other reasons why they might make good additions. My initial point was only that the developers are operating under constraints, might have reasons for going the route they did, and that the changes you were suggesting might not have been as trivial as you made them seem.
If you want to believe that the only reason why such things aren't being added is because the developers are incompetent or lazy or whatever, then fine. You do you. I'm not going to bring it up again.
At release, yes, definitely. But over the course of EA, it's improved significantly due to the collective effort of the community and mexxico (+ other devs) identifying, testing, and fixing/counterbalancing the various causes of faction strength spiralling out of control (aka snowballing). Mexxico's been on it since day 1.
Here's an 8 year map from the latest 1.5.7 patch showing a relatively stable map. And it's not as static as the image might make it seem. Settlements are being passed around through multiple factions and are able to be reclaimed by their original faction. Rebellions come and go etc.
Compare that to some past maps seen here and here, or apparently even this and this, which I never experienced myself.
And that's all been accomplished with hardly any changes made to autocalc.
I'm pretty sure he meant the mod...
It isn't a good comparison though. OG M&B had a balancing mechanic in the form of (effectively) random "defections" and 100% cheat troops for AI that would slowly pack into the last few settlements of a dying faction. Factions would still die, somehow, but the most dominant faction was (IME) never a threat of complete conquest. So you shouldn't see any snowballing in the mod unless something was seriously out of whack.
Almost nobody wants that fix in Bannerlord though.
Last edited:
Lol oh yeah that's probably right. The truth is that there's no way to tell because the mod always crashes after about the length of one campaign. The first video I posted came to an end because the game crashed.
But you're right. It's apples to oranges anyway. The version of the mod I played has no villagers, bandits, caravans, or any other supporting features. Each faction seems to only have enough members to fill one army at a time (that or they're limited to one army at a time), and there is no defensive coordination across a faction to speak of.
Sieges usually came to an end because the army leader would take their entire force from the siege camp and chase a skirmisher that they weren't even fast enough to catch, only to have the town levy pop out behind them and rout their camp. That's exactly what the developer described at the end of the storyline he posted, and it happened more often than not. Sieges were successful mostly when there was no levy in the town to bolster the defense, which would happen sometimes when the levy exited for a sortie at the wrong time and would continuosly flee from the siege party outside the town every time they tried to head back home.
ElCrisp
Sergeant at Arms
There is partial truth to that, however people keep suggesting a few of the large obvious solutions because they are exactly that.
Alliances and/or Civil Wars are needed not only to soft limit AI snow balling but also to limit player snowballing.
This games campaign currently has shallow game play loops. Some features have mechanical depth but none of that is connected up and felt at the player end in the form of game play. Are there things on the campaign map that I feel I can manage? Can I make optimal and sub optimal decisions? Or am I just grinding down an endless march of doom stacks until both their armies and garrisons are depleted and I or some other neighboring faction can counter attack them. Then I go about painting the map my colour with no new considerations or difficulties. Isnt this game multigenerational?
Dont get me wrong I love the mountain blade combat system its a fun dumb hack and slash, but what made that fun and not stale in previous instalements, was the story of development of my character and progress on the campaign map. Which made each battle feel like it was a part of the journey, or alteast gave a good feeling of progress.
People are crying out for something more than numerical back end changes, though it is important, hard and necessary work. Which in fact does yield results in game play in ways that players might not notice (i.e. players dont notice clans going broke but they will notice the collapse of a faction which results from it)
However many people are looking for a radical shift in their gameplay experience on the campaign map. Snowballing is a practical problem but with how stale the game feels particularly at late game, it seems like we are rearranging deck chairs on the Titanic. Not inttending for that metiphor to be so grave, but people want some damn ambition for the 11 years in the making sequel to Warband.
To whoever needs to read this message, tripple the team working the campaign side of the game and give them a project leader and coordinator.
Again thanks for all your work mexxico.
At 1.5.8 there will be several improvements at war / peace calculations. Yes there was a problem about a payed tribute remains for long years if kingdoms get apart somehow. If this scenario happens they do not want to declare war because their settlements are not close but there can still be a huge tribute payment between these kingdoms and this is frustrating. There will be developments about this problem. Also overall war-peace calculations will be better.
Last edited:
Marbles20
Regular
Okay thanks mexxico. I know you've been working on it. I just don't know the internal structure of the dev team so I don't know who 'owns' what code. Some of your previous posts indicated your hands were tied when dealing with changing certain systems, so I wanted to highlight the diplomacy issue in case you needed evidence to convince a colleague that a change needed to be made with their approval.
Time to get some 1.5.8 test going guys, will get one going after work.
HouseWinterfang
Banned
call me stupid but...we can go the midle way.add more activities during peace time incrase the tax and for the more oriented war boys add civil wars.the rebelion mechanic is from there you can go to the civil wars.like lets take vlandia.some of the lords are not in good terms with the king since dehert is more diplomatic and they belive that vlandia should have a more war oriented king.so during the long peace you should have a chance of starting a civil war.you as a player to have the option to recruit other lords to your claim to the throne.during feast and grand tournirs you should be able to invite clans from other kingdoms that are in peace with you.you could pull an kingdom alliance with this.take some exploration activities from viking coquest ruins of the old calradian empire or battania to find some "legendery"loot.add events during peace like the norse starting to send parties on the northen coast of sturgia and vlandia.yea it would mean to add some ship battles but hey.this are some ideeas.
Shillslayer
Banned
The fundamental underlying issue with snowballing is related to geography & cavalry-related bonuses. Without addressing these issues, any measures are just artificially delaying the inevitable snowballing effect which given enough time will occur as assuredly as it did prior to any measures being taken against the problem in the first place.
Dabos37
Sergeant Knight at Arms
Would love to see your results, I sadly won’t be able to play during some time (currently studying for a checkpoint certification).
No worries, best of luck!
