SP - World Map My thoughts on the Faction Snowball effect. Campaigns should go on forever!

[Pejot]

Thanks for provinding this valuable insight. I mentioned earlier, that there might be unforessen side effects by using CWA, and it is good to some specific details on that.

I noticed the constant peace/war declarations which is why i mentioned that it might be immersion breaking and annoying. The upside is a more stable map.

The issue with factions declaring war on you was present in version 0.1.0a can confirm. But i did not have the issue when doing simulations on version 0.2.1. So it may have been fixed, but unsure.

I see your point regarding bandits taken out by lords. But it could also be argued as as an upside to using the mod. In unmodded games i rarely see bandits getting chased because factions are constantly at war. If lords attack bandits more, it could indicate that they now have more breathing room to protect their own existing instead of only conquering new ones. What do you think?

Yes i'm not telling that it's bad they taking them out. It just makes it harder to start your game cause there are no opponents weak enough for You to fight and the ones that can run away from lords are small groups with ****ty loot.

More concerning for me is that economy is starting to break and it's really hard for trader character to find decent trade routes cause most of the cities start to have enough of needed resources to the point where it's cheaper than in villages.

P.S.

One more thing to notice is that cause of lords killing bandits their hideouts massively decreased in number of bandits inside. Found about 50 hideouts so far and they never had more than 20 bandits inside.

 

[dykjozo]

Repost of a post i made in this topic by DEM1L1CH found here: LINK

I tried a simulation of with the new version of CWA, version 0.2.1 with the default parameter values.
However, i was unfortunately not able to replicate the results from the linked topic.
I made a single simulation and the result was slightly better than running the game without CWA, but it did not make a huge difference:

Map after 5 years (CWA default values)

Map after 10 years (CWA default values)

Notice that after 10 years Northern Empire is wiped, while Sturgia and Southern Empire are almost wiped. Its almost the same as in unmodded game, although more time passes before factions are wiped / almost wiped.
If a very dynamic map if what you are looking for, then it seems both unmodded patch 1.05 and CWA are good choices currently.
However if you prefer a more stable map for 10+ ingame years then that still seems hard to achieve, although the linked topic OP does indeed show it.

I tried to tinker a bit with the parameter values in CWA version 0.2.1, to give a higher chance of peace between factions. It did create a more stable map for a longer time. The downside was, that wars were often very short, which may be immersion breaking and not as fun. Also the map is less dynamic.

Map after 5 years (CWA modified values)

Map after 10 years (CWA modified values)

The modified parameter values used were:
RaidImpact = 0.05
SiegeImpact = 0.35
CasualtyImpact = 300
DailyCheckChance = 0.75
AttritionNecessary = 0.45
SuperiorMultiplier = 1.5
InferiorMultiplier = 0.75


Ind the end it is probably an individual preference which is better - a more dynamic map, or a more stable map.

To me even the default values looks ok, It's civil war after all.. Not 100% familiar with history, but I would say that in real world history there were times, when countries in matter of few years were wiped out from the map. And like that the game progesses even without player, but would welcome some option for static wars in game, or free for all since not all players like the same level of progression. Also would be nice if there was chance for defeated factions come back (if we can count Viking conquest as test for this, if there were bigger culture penalties, lets say if loyalty of few settlements would go down, then there might emerge clan of defeated faction, or lords might defect the faction if he has low relation with ruler, or majority of other vassals)

In conclusion I think that mod patches it for now, maybe devs are already working to implement it, or if not, then nevermind. Let them work first on crashes and gamebreaking bugs, since the snowballing is not a huge problem with mods at this moment.. They might start working on more complex solutions later, but as I said they can focus on other bugs, who knows the snowballing effect might be reduced by fixing other bugs, like problems with pathfinding on world map.

 

[Lucius Confucius]

One way for players struggling right now, would be to put allies and yourself on super easy mode, and put your enemies on realistic mode. Not ideal, but it is one way to balance the scales back in your favour.

Yes, but the problem of snowballing will still remain, only, you will be the one snowballing. Giving your heirs nothing to do! But, yeah, if a player wants to maintain balance they could always swap factions to the smallest one all the time and bring them back up. I still have hopes for a better solution from the devs though.

It’s also not clear to me why the “swamp rats” clans were added, etc. They just run around the map aimlessly

Those factions are much like the player clan, they can work as mercenaries for different factions. I like em.

 

[KidKiedis]

Agreed with OP. Devs can always go Civ's way where taking one city is a reason to make a truth and then peace. Can't remember any Civ session where civilizations were viped out after midgame.

 

[Jhaerik]

People are pointing out here days are too fast, I think sieges are too fast yes it should take more than a couple days, it's so fast AI doesn't get reinforcements in quick enough. The pacing of the game is pretty weird now some things happen too quickly and some things take too long. Hopefully after this crash patch week we will see some real balance changes to the game take effect.

Like how it's faster to siege a castle than make a bag of charcoal?

 

[Gguy]

I havent really delved into the Leader personalities effecting world decisions thing but would like to know that is having some sort of effect. Meaning if you have a War drunk maniac as a leader, certain elements would try to undermine him to keep society peaceful etc..

A leader's personality affecting their decision making would be a cool feature. But it's also one that would take a lot of work to implement.

 

[Kus06]

could it be because, Noble surrender too fast against bigger opponent? instead of keep fighting?
in my game khuzait took over half of the world, half of their noble are sturgia, Aserai ect..

 

[velimirius]

im using that war attrition mod + tweaks mod (only longer sieges setup and better garrisons) and holy crap! Taking things is tough and it resulted in huge field battles, its epic, im loving it.

 

[Marcery]

Not 100% familiar with history, but I would say that in real world history there were times, when countries in matter of few years were wiped out from the map. .

Its actually really common before the medieval ages. Roman Empire took most of modern day Spain in 11 years, most of Gaul in 5. Alexander the Great took all of Persia, Egypt and Anatolia in 10 years. Even happened during medieval ages. Norman’s conquered England in 5 years, Charlemagne conquered most of Germany and Northern Italy in 12 years. In 50 years, Mongols conquered a majority of Eurasia. Rashidaun Caliphate conquered Egypt, Persia and the Arabian peninsula in 30 years.

 

[Pejot]

Hmm strange i did not notice it to this extent that you are reporting.
Yesterday i started an actual game (not simulation) with CWA 0.2.1 and played for around 60 ingame days. I actually spent a lot of time fighting bandits - usually groups of 5-25 bandits. It felt just like an unmodded game.
Are you using other mods that could effect this?

Situasion back to normal after another 2 years game time. Now bandits ale all around but still bandit camps don't fill up like in native.

Is this significantly different from unmodded game? Im asking because i have not traded a lot, so i am not familiar with the economics to this extent.

Most of the basic resources in cities are below village prices.
Grain in every city for 9-10 denars in most villages producing it it's 11-12
Olives in every city for 13-15 denars in villages producing it price starts at 15 and goes up
Clay for 10-11 denars in cities and 12-15 in villages producing it.

That causes the drop of goods produced like pottery oil etc. Possibly cause caravans have no problem reaching cities.

Another funny thing is that this mod uncovers that currently there is no diplomacy/politics system in the game cause wars are totaly randomly declared between kingdoms on the edges of map resulting in Sargoth being taken by Khuzaits. Other than that map is stable with only few castles tossed around by kingodms.

 

[Sidhwen_Khorest]

Its actually really common before the medieval ages.

I honestly wouldn't mind if empires fell in the matter of tens of years, but the problem is, they need to also rise in that same amount of time. a constantly shifting calradia with rebellions and wars and empires then broken empires old and new kingdoms would be amazing.

 

[Pejot]

Interesting. How much worse is it compared to unmodded?

On Native I could buy clay for 9 debars in village and sell it in sargoth for 40.

 

[Sidhwen_Khorest]

In that case it really does seem like the CWA mods has unintended influence on the economy, unless there is some other unconsidered reason. Maybe due to villagers and caravans being left alone too much like you mentioned.

I mean, if you think about it, its obvious that CWA cranked up to have lots of peace time would result in an economy where supply is super high. clearly the game needs war for things to remain fluid. I've seen way bigger armies all over the place as well, some reaching 1000 soldiers. during all this peace time the huge lord armies clearing bandits and no foriegn raiders means an overly stable economy.

So war is probably pretty essential to make the markets not stagnate, a dynamic solution to snowballing is needed where war can still happen but doesn't result in extreme superpowers. For me, I'm cool with using CWA since I'm not a trader, I've noticed my workshops took a hit but oh well. I think this was always just going to be a band aid until taleworlds eventually puts enough real systems in place to stop snowballing.

 

[diablojob]

Exactly. While prolonging from 2 in-game years to 6 or 10 is definitely a step in the right direction, if after 6-10 years, you are left with 2 factions this isn't necessarily progress as let's say you start your character with the intention of wanting to support Sturgia. Oops, Sturgia was wiped in the first 90 days, pick someone else. Oh, you want to start a trading/smithing empire and transition into a fief? Set up all your businesses and are ready to participate? Sorry, the Western Empire already won the game. Want to go through all the steps to forge your own path? Whoops, the Khuzaits already have the entire map or nearly, by the time you have your first fief, and they just declared war on you, because...well? Just because! And now you get to face the full force of the horde with their 20 settlements, have fun!

This game needs to decide whether it wants to be a sandbox or have a campaign, where the latter is 1) you get on your feet, 2) you merc for someone, 3) you form the banner and forge your path or vassal up, 4) you win the map, 5) game over. If it's the latter, they should have advertised it as such and should obviously get rid of children and marriage, since that's pointless in a 20 hour campaign, get rid of smithing fatigue, get rid of slow skill gain, as none of these make sense in this context. If its the former, then it should be, as you say, in essentially a holding pattern allowing the player to play his/her way.

I've had about 5 playthroughs thus far, 3 ended pre-maturely due to snowballing, and the other 2 a single faction still conquered, but I played through to the end regardless. I'm now burned out and have little desire to create another playthrough because when I go in with an idea of who I want to be and what I want to do, it gets upended in the endless warfare and my plans get ended far earlier than I want them to and it's taking the fun out of the game.

It's important to mention that while the last two patches still prolong things a bit which shows progress, the underlying issue and the consequences of having essentially nothing but 2 factions 6 years into the game is not a legitimate fix at all.

100% agree, couldn't have said it better myself as I am in your current situation as well

 

[Kentucky 『 ＨＥＩＧＵＩ 』 James]

Like how it's faster to siege a castle than make a bag of charcoal?

> put a few logs on the fire
Damn, that's me done for the day. I'm exhausted.

 

[velimirius]

I had not considered the tweaks to sieges and settlements from the tweaks mod.
Could you share what parameter settings your are using specifically or is it the default ones?

I would like to make a simulation combined with the CWA mod.

using default ones, seems like it works great like that.

 

[almightycricket]

I dont know much about that sort of thing, but if you're loading them manually atm try using the Vortex Client on Nexusmods.



You could try setting them to true and zero, rather than false if that's not working for you. Regarding other mods I have about 6 others I'm using and all seem to be compatible.

I'll try this, thanks for the suggestion.

 

[somaholiday]

If you are encountering the 'crash on startup' issue with mods, just use the nexus vortex mod manager, and after you install the mods, click 'elevate' in the top right corner, this unblocks the DLL. I've never encountered the launch crash since I started using vortex.

 

[Brynjahr]

But does this mean a never ending campaign because I’d like a dominant faction after a long term

 

[ShepherdBoy]

I think it actually makes sense for 2 of the 3 empire factions to fall considering they're 3 splinter factions that are in an on and off again civil war. It would make the most sense for 1 to eventually overcome the other 2.