SP - General my 1khrs suggestions

Users who are viewing this thread

Mahoney

Recruit
So, I hit 1000 hours and have some suggestions. I wanted to sweep the map a few times with all difficulties up before I felt qualified to say something productive for the developers and community. I know the threads are specific but organized by popularity, which backfires because the May threads by people with 5 hrs still show up first and the most recent and useful suggestions are barely read. Same issue exists with tutorials for new players, many of which were made in the May rush by inexperienced players. Anyway, rant-concluded, after 1000 hours, I am still learning new things all the time, loving the game, and enjoying the threads. I think I finally feel qualified to say something that might actually be helpful (if not, rip it to shreds or ignore until I break it up. Bolded for easy skimming).

Basic Quality of Life Suggestions:

When you hit tab during a battle, list the player’s party first in the list, not last.
It is hazardous to repeatedly have to scroll down while riding a horse in traffic during a huge battle to check if your wife is dead. It causes unecessary accidents.

For deliver herd quest, let us deliver more than one herd at once (maybe if you have over a certain # or certain skill?). If I am taking a herd of 75 sheep to Amprela, I shouldn’t be able to also pick up a herd of 50 horses also going to Amprela from another village and take them, not be told that it looks like my hands are full when they're not. In general, you need to allow players to multi-task more to cut down on the grind.

Put little arrow barrels behind the siege attack barricades so that attacking archers can reload. They have them on defense. Or am I missing them?

Stop peacetime armies from forming, taking your clan-members parties, and then just sitting in a city doing absolutely nothing. You can’t get your companions back, and the army is preventing the other parties in the army from maintaining their fiefs. Stop peace-time do-nothing armies.

Make the “Aserai Youth” look less like my 45-year-old Greek neighbor from when I was a little kid. Freaks me out sometimes, looks just like him.

As soldiers level up, try making them look stronger and buffer rather than fatter.
Sorry, I know this has been discussed at length in threads elsewhere.

News feed
: this may exist and has just alluded me, but there needs to be a button or place where you can see what news has been flashing in the lower left. It’s important info and flashes too fast to catch, and the black and dark purple fonts are barely readable.

Sieges: Devs could make a super easy and game-changing fix if they could program sieges so that when under ten players are left defending after one minutes with no kills on either side, the victory is triggered automatically (deals with game-killing issue of castle defenders spawning outside the walls in unkillable/unmovable places and preventing a victory for the attacker; I'm making a video on how to find and kill those guys with arrows from certain towers on some castles, actually, for those interested).

More, bigger, open maps: Armies would want to fight in the open as much as possible because maneuvering with obstacles is hard for both sides, and the game demonstrates this well. Create more, diverse, open and big maps. Build features and some obstacles into parts of big maps (river, trees), but if you have artists on the payroll, make maps players can use rather than clutter-fests. There are a few great maps, then a lot of clutterfests. Speaking of which...

Do not completely ditch the canyon maps: Just make them bigger. Right now it’s mind-boggling they haven’t been removed, because they are game killers as your horse archers spawn off a cliff and all die or your enemy’s soldiers spawn off the map in places where you can’t get them. Have maps that cannot be played once there are over, say, 400 soldiers fighting in a battle. I'll take an open empty field with rolling hills any day to fight in.
,
Fundamental Battle A/I Tweaks:

This has been needed for so long, is so obvious, and has been suggested so many times it is probably coming in the next update, but battles are dysfunctional unless players can tell their troops who to target. Players must be able to control who their groups target. This is a basic mechanic in most games like this. Currently, but worth reiterating because the message is apparently not getting through: cavalry ignore and are generally oblivious to archers; tey will only charge infantry, even if it means running through enemy cavalry or archers as they are killed by them. Horse archers, likewise, get too focused on a single target, making it impossible to get horsemen to even protect themselves from infantry and archers standing right next to them. As everyone who has led an attack on a castle has pointed out, when your troops initially take the wall, they just stand there and obviously get shot by enemy archers in the fort, not even bothering to protect themselves. Some suggestions and solutions:

Give units some sense of awareness of enemy units that are shooting them.

Another quick solution until it can get reworked:
Allow players to at least tell their soldiers which enemies to target so we can at least point our blind mice in the right direction.

(For players: some solutions: hit f3/f2 then f3/f2 again, again and again, for your horse archers. It sometimes works to reprogram who they are targeting, and sometimes will get them to shoot the guys 10 feet in front of them rather than the enemy horse archers 300 yards behind them. For your siege troops standing and getting shot on top of the wall during the siege, go back and forth between f1/f3 (charge) and f3/f4 (A/I) and they will sometimes wake up and remember they are in the middle of a battle and are being shot by archers standing right next to them and have to attack.)

Fix it so it does not revert to A/I once player is wounded: Such an easy fix, not sure why despite all the suggestions this has not been done. Not only does it not make any practical sense why your soldiers would stop following orders if you get injured (and if they somehow knew you were injured), but the A/I is so bad right now (it seemed much better, actually, in like June), that a few things currenly happen in big battles when you are injured: Your archers and horsemen spread out wildly and do not stay together; horse archers even with two full quivers charge headlong into infantry (probably because they have zero A/I awareness of enemy units and are blind to them); your cavalry will prematurely kamikaze into big packs of heavily armed infantry; your archers all fall back to the edge of the map where they can do nothing; your infantry huddle up and allow themselves to get ripped to pieces by the enemy archers; and nobody will attack or touch enemy archers until the last minute. For now, you don't even need to fix the A/I, just don’t revert to A/I when player is wonded, keep active orders.

Have default A/I for archers during siege be spread, f2/f3, not clump:
right now archers during a siege attack are set to stand so close that only the ones in front can even shoot, and the majority of your archers in default A/I during castle siege just stand there, completely unaware and unable to shoot, and get easily killed by enemy archers and ordinance.

(For players: easy solution is to just manually place your archers in spread formations (f2/f3) so they can all shoot on the enemy walls. This still only works if you don’t get injured. If you get injured, your archers, even if in the castle, will turn around and go back down the ladders and back to their little cluster of dysfunctional death).

Stop having A/I target the player instead of your soldiers: I think this was just designed to troll the player because it doesn’t make practical sense, and I think the joke is worn out. Most importantly, once you become aware of the enemy A/I always being aware of and targeting the player, it becomes very easy to manipulate. Try taking a whole steppe bandit base with only a shield because the defenders only shoot at you while your soldiers just tear them apart (the enemy bandits have A/I blinders only for you if you take the lead). This is also an issue during sieges where the defending siege weapons often somehow know who you are and target you, so you can run around drawing their fire away from your men and dodging the fire bombs while your men rip the defenders apart. Or you can lead 100 horse archers lagging way behind you into enemy archers while all enemy archers shoot at you and your horsemen just rip them to pieces (again, enemy A/I blinders only for you that you can easily manipulate. For players: this is the easiest way to wipe out big packs of 50+ enemy horse archers - use the current A/I back on them to make enemy horse archers unaware of the guys shooting them). But the idea of this A/I manipulation being the game is so silly, it has to get fixed. Not sure why A/I targeting the player was included other than to troll the player.

The above are really simple A/I fixes that would not require much work and would vastly improve the current system.

Some bigger suggestions:

Clarify kinship inconsistencies

The issue:
Family relations don’t seem as complicated as they should/could be. Many computer A/I marriages across cultural/military boundaries make no sense and create counter-intuitive conflicts between family members separated because of marriage that make no sense. Nobles should not be marrying their children to the children of the nobles they are at war with and then fighting battles against their kids. Not that it shouldn't be possible, just not as much as it is happening currently.

Solution: Greatly increase the price to marry, especially across cultural boundaries and across geographic distance (make marrying neighbors the norm), or make friendship/relation much more of a factor in determining how much a marriage will cost.

Also, computer marriage A/I should put an emphasis on trying to only marry people to one another if they are fighting for the same ruler and on the same side of the war. Cultural boundaries aren’t the issue so much as being on two sides of the war.

To add story, fun, and complexity for the player, build brideservice into the marriage equation (having to work for the family of the person you want to marry for a period of time, or make them a certain amount of money over time). This is more realistic, and you can still pay some up front and work off the rest as a mercenary to the family until you can go independent. If I want to marry Abagai, I should have to work for Tulag for a while to prove myself and make him enough money to compensate him for losing her from his household.

Give more options to use gifts to increase relationships with individuals (not necessarily just their clan, the individual), and especially as it relates to your own companions and family members to get them to like you more (they all start at zero - that also could be fixed).

Give a limited few fine item types like jewelry, fine scarfs, wine, etc an extra bonus to relationship when given as a gift. For example, if I give my wife 10 pieces of jewelry, she should at least like me a little more than 1. (Your relationship with her resets to zero after marriage, leading to many peoples’ impregnation problems - your wife won't get pregnant unless she has a positive relation with you, and this could be fixed by either not resetting her to 0 or by making it easier to make your own family/party members to like you more, at least enough to have your kids, in some way other than by saving them in battle).

Why not have your companions and family members like you more for equipping them with better equipment? Or like you less for taking away their good equipment? When I marry Abagai for her noble bow, she should probably disapprove until I can get her a war bow.

Why doesn't winning battles with your family members and companions in your party or army make them like you more?

Or, again, a simple system of giving certain items like jewelry or certain fine clothing or wine/beer or war horses or maybe cows that might trigger an immediate “thank you” increase would make a huge gameplay difference.

Beggars: Seen this suggested before and I greatly agree, you should be able to give things to beggars in the streets of your cities and have that impact city prosperity or loyalty.

Speaking to/giving gifts to prisoners: The logical inconsistency of being able to negotiate with a noble before a battle but not after you’ve defeated him/her and taken him/her prisoner is bad. Players must be able to speak and negotiate with prisoners. This would give the dungeons a function too beyond the planned breakout scenario, which seems like it's getting way ahead of more basic game elements that are missing (talking to prisoners).

You should also be able to give food or other goods to prisoners to get them to like you (in this case wine, beer should give good bonuses to relation), even if they aren’t your enemy and you’re just passing through a city and seeing whose favor you can win in the dungeon. I'd personally have a good time doing this early in the game.

Also, give an option to ransom a prisoner from another kingdom even if you are not at war – so if Karith has no fiefs and is then captured by the Khuzaits, and nobody from the Aserai is paying his ransom, after a day or two of him sitting in a Khuzait dungeon, I should be able to go to the dungeon and pay to release him, even if I am not at war. I want that increase in friendship so that I can get him to leave the Aserai and join me. This would make for great storylines and strategy.

If you cannot create an alliance with another faction because it’s a winner-takes-all civil war, you should at least be able to diplomatically pay another faction to attack or go to war with another faction. (sorry if this has been suggested for months, just wondering why it hasn't been considered - it was basic diplomacy in Civilization 20 years ago).

Make the map cultures/villagers/recruits change to correspond with the noble who controls the fief. In other words, and slowly over time, if Tulag controls Onira, Onira would start producing Khuzaiti recruits and goods, and you would start to see more Khuzaiti peasants on the streets. This might be tough to program, but would give the game life and make Calradia feel less like a place where humans sprout from the earth.

Building on the above, looting currently has little appeal or benefit: make it so that once a village has been burned out, it comes back as the culture of the lord who controls it.

Because the game needs a better endgame, and it is hard to stay focused once you’ve swept half the map and are rolling, you should inherit the ancestral enemies of the kingdoms you usurp (once you conquer the Aserai, for example, you have to permanently deal with the Beni Zilal and Jawwal as your sworn enemies, just as Unqid did before you).

Along those lines, and for a more challenging endgame, allow kingdom ruler clans to become mercenaries for other kingdoms fighting against you (but blood-sworn against you) – so the Urkhunait become the new Karakhergit once you’ve defeated all the Khuzaits but Monchug's/Chagan's clan (or they join against you for an extra challenge?). Same would go for Unqid and the Banu Hulyan once they've lost all their fiefdoms and allies - make them your sworn enemies or have them join the Jawwal and Beni Zilal against you).

Keep beheading as basically a fun non-option, but build assassination into the options (with type of rogue companion?).

Bandit bases: I love rippin’ through ‘em, having flashbacks to the original Mario level 2, and then selling the bosses as manual labors to make a small fortune. But could you please: 1) mix up the number of baddies so it doesn’t just always max at 17? I’m going to sell them anyway, so give me 30 raiders or highwaymen sometimes just to make it more challenging with difficulty all the way up. 2) Maybe just also on difficult, institute some fog of war for bandit bases so you can’t just hit tab at the beginning and know what types of baddies you’ve got coming.

Clarify the history: Self-explanatory, but build more history of Calradia and its people into the game. Speaking of things missing ...

Religion/temples/monks: The game is very noticeably lacking religion or a concept of God, which becomes contradictory when you consider the Sacred Majesty policy. Did the people of Calradia have no belief system until you declare yourself divine?

I would go with maybe a simple tension between a modern, Imperial, formal polytheistic religion with temples and priests in Imperial cities and then a pre-Imperial more animistic set of druid/steppe/desert monks who go back to the days before the empire and can tell us more about the past. I’d think this could intertwine nicely with the Arzagos vs Istiana conflict, and it would add more to gameplay and context as the player could negotiate with priests and monks and deal with religious interests of their citizens.

Big one here I was saving: Please do not buff cavalry or archers because some people want to play on foot like Braveheart and hate that horses and arrows were the dominant technology for thousands of years. Keep it consistent for players, nobles, companions, soldiers, on all sides, and make players figure out the strategy.

Keep the good stuff coming. Most of the new armor (as of late Nov beta update) is awesome. Love the recent Battanian and Sturgian armor. But the Kheshigs now look like clowns, and the old Khan’s guards were about the coolest units in the game imho and you killed them. The heavy archers now look like they are milk maids. I know you wanted to buff the Khuzaits, but those are some really tough new looks. Then again, I get the humor in what you did, I guess.

Getting-crazy suggestions: Okay, grab a coffee.

Create new cities, big ones, unable to conquer, with multiple fiefs out in the real far-off areas of the map
(maybe in an expansion in a few years). Players can take the time and resources to go out there for trade goods, recruit unique soldiers, unique and better equipment, better companions, possibly special mercenaries, etc. and get perspective on Calradia (again, religion). To deal with a lack of good or any current endgame, these outside powers can come invade Calradia once the player has conquered everything so it doesn’t just end with you dealing with lost daughters and family feuds ? You should have to face reprecussions from the ouside world for your conquest (and again, my suggestion would be to use religion as central to how this eventually plays out). And then your grandson can get all the blood enemies and clans of Calradia to unite with you against the new, outside invaders. ?

Boats: I’ve heard multiple times this is planned, at least for an expansion, and I love the idea and see where it’s already been planned. I’d go for viking galleys and fishing ships. Waterfront is already in most cities. My suggestion is you might find good inspiration from East African/Middle Eastern dhows that have been used for thousands of years as a simple way to move goods by small boat over long ocean distances. They don't look that different from what Egyptians use on the Nile, but they are different. From personal experience, dhows are very easy to sail and tack into the wind in shallow waters and open ocean. They would fit well in Calradia, artistically, historically, and functionally, as would more Swahili coast artistic influence (contact me for resources).

If you’ve read this far, you’re nuts. I'll have to break this up into parts, but I hope you enjoy the game as much as I do, and I sincerely apologize for writing so much (I write/edit/teach for a living, and this is a hell of a lot more fun than my work). Thanks to the development team for saving at least 1000 hours of my 2020!
 
I like all of the QoL suggestions, even if none of them were new :smile:

Clarify kinship inconsistencies

Here is so much potential to do something grand, ofc with it´s challenges!

First of all, I´m happy we have have a basic AI marriage feature(Of which I would like a lot more information!)

First 1 thing about player status - player is more a less a nobody, At best a child of a noble troop(Baron's retainer - Looking at the Vlandian "father", he looks like something between a Gallant and a Knight). Player start from nothing so from that to marry a princess or a daughter of a prominent lord during the first few years of gameplay is not very likely, even if player should have amassed an impressing prowerbase already by then.

There should be more parameters than just your Charm- score and determination(AKA save-scumming..) to a successfull marriage-bartering. Beeing of same faction should have a huge factor but same culture, clan level(The difference between the clans), influence etc... so yes. As an unaffiliated clanlevel 1 newbe marrying a noble lady should not be easy..

....And marriage is more important than ever before in a M&B title, as having children is of the essense for a continous gameplay - at least for us not wanting/beeing able to unite Calradia within the lifetime of the main charachter, but favouring other gamestyles such as intrigue, trade, bandit or mercenary or a mix.

... Therefore we need to bring life to the notables. Marrying a child of a notable should be a thing. At high relation, there should be quests involving the familly of the notable. His or here familly should be a potential source of relyable companions as well as a partner.

Make the map cultures/villagers/recruits change to correspond with the noble who controls the fief. In other words, and slowly over time, if Tulag controls Onira, Onira would start producing Khuzaiti recruits and goods, and you would start to see more Khuzaiti peasants on the streets. This might be tough to program, but would give the game life and make Calradia feel less like a place where humans sprout from the earth.

Building on the above, looting currently has little appeal or benefit: make it so that once a village has been burned out, it comes back as the culture of the lord who controls it.

Hmm.. I dont really understund ".... make Calradia feel less like a place where humans sprout from the earth."
The Village population does not stop beeing Battanian because the holding is ruled by a Vlandian lord.

... but there should be Assimilate/ incorporate a village into your culture but nothing that just happens "in time"... A serie of quests making alot of enemies for no reward other than ultimately changing the culture of 1 village.

On a slightly equivelant topic...

Getting holdings of your own culture is quite hard. I think after swearing fealty to king, player gets a few quests from the king, including cheating another lord of a fief of his - "The poorest Vlandian castle", to get a right culture holding and feel affiliated to the faction, not just get the next counquered foreign castle..

... And an ability decline a holding - IE add or remove yourself from the list of eligable to recieve votes.

Religion. See culture, I´d say. If Culture is more than biological etnicity, it´s very much connected to religion.
I actually feel the absence of religion in Calradia is a thrilling relief, religion beeing such a hot potato IRL...
I picture the cultures have their own semi-tolerant polytheistic pagansim's in an absence of any strong monotheistic religions with a single almighty god to rule them all condemning everything else.
 
All good points and advice, I hope they read this thoroughly!
My 1 and only contention is
Please do not buff cavalry
Cavalry (not horse archers) is very underperforming IMO and needs some buffs. However I think it would be good to have maybe a separate difficulty/damage option for archers, horse archer and Cav so that a player who wants to be Braveheart or barbarians and thinks "these archers cheat" can just turn their damage down and play the way they want.
 
Back
Top Bottom