It's been months - Why is death in battle STILL only enabled in player battles? It ultimately ruins every playthrough.

Currently viewing this thread:

I've made an account just to ask this question as it absolutely baffles me that the devs still haven't dealt with such an objectively bad game design decision after all this time.

For months now, death in battle has been enabled (at 10% chance for non blunt weapons?), but it's ONLY in battles that the player is in. It was clear as day from day 1 that it would need to be reduced to ~2%, and the consequences of it only being enabled in player battles was obvious as well. The consequences of this decision is that every lengthy playthrough is ultimately completely ruined: The faction that the player belongs to, and to a lesser extent the factions that you fight end up losing many lords over time while the other factions that you don't fight stay fine and grow in numbers. It creates a downward spiral of far off factions being able to field multiple good sized armies or a huge army, while your faction and neighboring factions struggle with depleted lord numbers.

IIRC, I *think* I remember a dev basically saying "it's so they can collect data". Sorry, but that's a weak excuse that doesn't stand up to scrutiny. Why? You can reduce the death % chance and still collect data. You can enable death in AI vs AI in sim'd battles and still collect data. I really can't see any valid excuse for the devs not putting more priority on fixing this issue considering that it literally ruins every campaign in the long run and it's been this way for months now.

Can we please get an update on when deaths will be enabled in AI battles? I've had three campaigns destroyed by this current poor implementation and feel no desire to start another one until this is rectified.

**UPDATE**
In another thread, Duh has replied to say:-
There is an open ticket for it. I suspect it will be part of either 1.6.1 or 1.6.2. Of course, the only true and reliable answer is SoonTM.
 
Last edited:

BigFat

Regular
I wonder if it ever crosses your fellow lord's minds why after years of war as sport they only start dropping like flies when you're around.
 
I've made an account just to ask this question as it absolutely baffles me that the devs still haven't dealt with such an objectively bad game design decision after all this time.
you-must-be-new-here-willy-wonka.jpg


Not dealing with things is how they deal with things here.

On topic though: Its a valid point, been pointed out a couple of times, but still valid.
But as with many things: Things left broken quickly become features.
 

froggyluv

Grandmaster Knight
NW
Yeah I don't understand why this is taking so long to do.

Because this game is built on a house of cards -that is you pull or adjust one card the whole thing comes crashing down. Its pretty shocking that they seem to be just now trying to figure out all of these features that were made public years ago as if they could finish the 2nd half of their Doctorate dissertation over one last weekend of late night cramming
 
Because this game is built on a house of cards -that is you pull or adjust one card the whole thing comes crashing down. Its pretty shocking that they seem to be just now trying to figure out all of these features that were made public years ago as if they could finish the 2nd half of their Doctorate dissertation over one last weekend of late night cramming
Only this time they got their doctorate right at the start and were then politely asked if they could please perhaps possible prove that they've earned the title.
 

vito397

Knight at Arms
WBWF&SNWVC
Yeah I've also asked this myself. Completely agreed on everything. Making the death chance really really low is the only way.
 

Rbtparker13

Regular
I wonder if it ever crosses your fellow lord's minds why after years of war as sport they only start dropping like flies when you're around.
"Hey guys in my last battle my brother got a javelin to the head and was fine. But with this battle where, LORD FLUFFY, was leading. My brother got hit by a club and died immediately. What's up with that"

In all seriousness, the other lords in the other kingdoms must be looking at our kingdom in horror as everyone dies.
 

madnessario

Sergeant at Arms
The lords should fear you. They lived their whole life knowing that they cant die in battle. Until you come into the picture.....
 
Because this game is built on a house of cards -that is you pull or adjust one card the whole thing comes crashing down.
That actually means it makes even less sense to keep trying to balance the game around and collect data from a system which is going to be changed anyway. Why not just implement death for all battles and drop the rate to 1%, then tweak that rate however they want. What is so useful about 10% death in player battle data? Makes zero sense to me.
 

madnessario

Sergeant at Arms
That actually means it makes even less sense to keep trying to balance the game around and collect data from a system which is going to be changed anyway. Why not just implement death for all battles and drop the rate to 1%, then tweak that rate however they want. What is so useful about 10% death in player battle data? Makes zero sense to me.
I suppose the cascading effects are more narrow; if lords died in every battle in the world then you can see other problems. Minor clans disappearing, clans having less than optimal parties which in turn affects snowballing, etc (I am not saying that this does not happen already).
 
I suppose the cascading effects are more narrow; if lords died in every battle in the world then you can see other problems. Minor clans disappearing, clans having less than optimal parties which in turn affects snowballing, etc (I am not saying that this does not happen already).
You'd think all that would be obvious by now though. And if lords being able to die in battle caused other problems wouldn't it make sense to just allow those to arise and fix them rather than trying to sort of infer what they could be from a narrower perspective? And yeah, all of the same problems arise with the current system anyway, they just feel way more stupid.

AI Values Life/Heroes Must Die mods have been updated anyway so I'm less annoyed about this atm lol
 
I asked the same thing in the beta patch thread and the answer was that they have this issue as 'pending task' due that the current status is helping to identify issues in the death/birth mechanic.
 
I asked the same thing in the beta patch thread and the answer was that they have this issue as 'pending task' due that the current status is helping to identify issues in the death/birth mechanic.
They have months worth of data already. I don't think they actually use it.
And the current status is NOT helping them find a good death rate balance for the release version, and they need months of feedback there.
 
Making the death chance really really low is the only way.
It needs to be lower (~2%) AND more importantly enabled in AI vs AI battles - having it only enabled in player battles completely ruins the sandbox/simulation nature of the game over time - unless the player purposely avoids entering battles (which is ridiculous!).

I asked the same thing in the beta patch thread and the answer was that they have this issue as 'pending task' due that the current status is helping to identify issues in the death/birth mechanic.
There's no reason why they couldn't reduce the death chance and still collect data. They could enable death in simulated battles and still collect data. Hell, make it a toggle option in the game menu for new campaigns so people can test it and give feedback. Leaving it as it is, is as close to "game breaking" as a feature can be without actually being game breaking. Yeah, you can still play the game in late game, but it's clearly not how things are supposed to be when your faction and neighbor factions are losing lords like flies, struggling to field one good army while factions you don't fight against are growing in numbers and have lords and armies everywhere.

I've previously worked in the games industry and just can't wrap my head around how someone actually thought this was OK to implement in it's current form when it has such obvious, objectively bad effects on the gameplay. There's no ifs or buts about this, it's just plain bad for the health of the campaigns.
 

murtega

Squire
unless the player purposely avoids entering battles (which is ridiculous!).

I started doing this after losing an ally lord or two in every battle/siege and figured out my campaign is doomed. Now I roam around Calradia with my party like a plague, picking up single enemy lords raiding villages and some of them die every now and then. I eliminated two enemy clans already. Entire Calradia shall learn to fear my clan's curse or we'll be the only ones remaining eventually.
 

ShakenSpeare

Sergeant at Arms
M&BWBWF&SNWVC
If the lords had any sense they would purposefully avoid you at all costs, as you always spell a bad omen on the eve of battle. They call you the widowmaker, not because of your mettle in battle, but because everyone around you, is constantly dying, the moment you pop your head out. It is so bad, that you give the likes of both Hamlet and Rick Grimes a run for their money.
 

Rbtparker13

Regular
It needs to be lower (~2%) AND more importantly enabled in AI vs AI battles - having it only enabled in player battles completely ruins the sandbox/simulation nature of the game over time - unless the player purposely avoids entering battles (which is ridiculous!).


There's no reason why they couldn't reduce the death chance and still collect data. They could enable death in simulated battles and still collect data. Hell, make it a toggle option in the game menu for new campaigns so people can test it and give feedback. Leaving it as it is, is as close to "game breaking" as a feature can be without actually being game breaking. Yeah, you can still play the game in late game, but it's clearly not how things are supposed to be when your faction and neighbor factions are losing lords like flies, struggling to field one good army while factions you don't fight against are growing in numbers and have lords and armies everywhere.

I've previously worked in the games industry and just can't wrap my head around how someone actually thought this was OK to implement in it's current form when it has such obvious, objectively bad effects on the gameplay. There's no ifs or buts about this, it's just plain bad for the health of the campaigns.
It affects the late game so much, it gives you even less desire to play the game. Which in turn makes children even more useless
 
Top Bottom