Nerfing players Kingdom a thing? Please help

Users who are viewing this thread

I'm really bad at constantly restarting the game when it goes horribly wrong (I know, bad Daem). I love the M&B series but have never managed to "complete" one by ruling all of Calradia.

I've found recently that no matter what Kingdom I play, they always get absolutely demolished. I'll include a list below, but have the Devs added something where it nerfs the Kingdom a player joins to stop a power play - or am I doing something really wrong?

Campaigns, and losses
  • Southern Empire - lost to Vlandia, who wiped out Battania and took loads of Khuzait land
  • Vlandia - lost to Aserai, who wiped out Empire, and tore their way through Battania and Khuzait and also completely wiped out Western Empire
  • Aserai - Made progress against Empire, took most of Vlandia, but lost to Khuzait who just stormed through our entire lands.
 
I'm really bad at constantly restarting the game when it goes horribly wrong (I know, bad Daem). I love the M&B series but have never managed to "complete" one by ruling all of Calradia.
You're not missing anything.
I've found recently that no matter what Kingdom I play, they always get absolutely demolished. I'll include a list below, but have the Devs added something where it nerfs the Kingdom a player joins to stop a power play - or am I doing something really wrong?
Nothing comes to mind, unless you're participating in all the defensive sieges. Playing out a siege means things are ridiculously easy for the attacker in comparison to the autocalc sieges.
 
Sieges are too fast and easy for an attacker. Walls repaired too slowly. Zero starting militia. Inadequate garrisons left by AI. Even single warbands of landless kingdoms can take over castles. There is no defensive value to fortifications with the current play balance. Equally, AFAIK kingdoms are limited to a maximum of up to 4 armies. However, this doesn't decline with shrinking territory or grow with gaining territory, so, weak factions can still put out lots of magically funded armies to attack the player faction from multiple fronts. Hopefully, this will be revisited at some point, but is clearly designed to perpetuate the game rather than allow conquest.
It's sad that finally I've been forced to execute everyone. :smile:
 
Last edited:
I'm really bad at constantly restarting the game when it goes horribly wrong (I know, bad Daem). I love the M&B series but have never managed to "complete" one by ruling all of Calradia.

I've found recently that no matter what Kingdom I play, they always get absolutely demolished. I'll include a list below, but have the Devs added something where it nerfs the Kingdom a player joins to stop a power play - or am I doing something really wrong?
In order to know what you're doing wrong, I'll have to know what you're doing.

In short--probably. I united all Calradia during my first playthrough in December so it is very much possible but it requires a lot of prep work that you may or may not have done and then, once you've secured a country, gradual expansion until you reach a point of snowballing where you'll rapidly unite the continent.

So, in other to help you, I need to know what your playthroughs looked like because you either A; tried to establish a country too soon, too weak and poor to sustain it; B; established a country, but then tried to expand it too quickly; C; expanded, but in a bad spot that made you vulnerable; D; failed on a strategic level, causing a gradual recession that culminated in downfall; or E: inherited control of a broken country and lacked the ability to effect positive changes, and then proceeded to do the above mistakes without first restructuring and fixing the country you took over.

As for anti-unification roadblocks; in-game, there's a hidden threshold where, if you or an A.I. faction crosses it, every other faction will want to wage endless war with the hegemonist until its reduced to a relatively small size where it's no longer registered as a threat.

As for anti-player annoyances; when you take over a city/castle, NPC lords will typically donate "extra" troops from their retinues, but they're stingy when the fief counts as the player's, which makes conquest slower because NPC armies will likely leave an empty or mostly empty garrison unless you luck out and manage to assign the fief to an NPC clan before the army departs (in which case, it'll donate plenty of troops to tide it over). NPC rulers (including ones you serve) don't have this problem, even if you ultimately end up owning the fief, since it counts as the faction ruler's fief until its ownership is settled and when the faction ruler isn't you, NPCs are more generous in donating troops. There are several ways to counteract this annoyance; #1, bring your own extra troops to stuff the city/castle with (slow but steady); #2, wait until voting's done while in command of an army before entering/exiting the fief repeatedly (not as slow and steady); #3, conquer quicker than they can reconquer, eventually beating them through speed (fast and risky, but prone to turning it into a game of wack-a-mole unless you secure a corner, then a half, and basically make sure enemies/danger is in as concentrated a position as possible).

As for dealing with terrorism--as long as you never make peace with them, they'll never have enough Influence or money to retake lost territories but they will try to go for newly captured/highly vulnerable lands. Therefore, simply ignore them and never make peace and they're merely an annoyance that devastates the property values of their former faction capital. If you'd like to postpone dealing with terrorists as long as possible, a viable strategy is to leave factions with just one, isolated castle before ignoring them since they're totally helpless in that situation and, if you give broad policy orders to be Aggressive towards one other specific kingdom but be neutral/defensive with regards to this micro-state, they'll most likely ignore the micro-state and focus on the one you ordered an aggressive focus on. Note: it's better to order Aggressive on landless factions so that patrolling retinues will aggressively pursue them since the option also affects the rate at which your units pursue as opposed to ignore.

I think I've covered the most common problems/annoyances, if I've helped then let me know, and if you have something more specific that you can share it'd help me help you better.
 
It's sad that finally I've been forced to execute everyone. :smile:
You really don't have to lol, and I'd argue that just makes the game harder since having numerous clan vassals means having to do less yourself. Furthermore, while the system is designed to slow unification (and either make the player work harder or make it easier on the A.I.), it's very achievable.
 
Based on the experience of numerous playthroughs, I can report that the player’s nerf, if any, is not particularly felt.
Infinite money from blacksmithing skill.
Huge, actually free armies from rogeri, partners of crime.
Crowds of lords from charm, plus our clan limit plus politics plus steward plus max leadership. Three or four hundred fighters with them, about a thousand in the escort army.
Click the siege, wait on the accelerated time, start the fight and go drink tea. Five to ten minutes and any settlement is yours.
Enemies will not be able to capture faster than you.
And now, you have already captured everyone up to level 40-50.
 
In order to know what you're doing wrong, I'll have to know what you're doing.

Oh I'm trying to join a Kingdom for my first full playthrough (even though I've had since the EA launch!) I join a Kingdom, take part in battles etc - a couple of times the ruler has died and I've been voted leader and it all goes to sh** after that with everyone declaring war.

I'm an Imperial character this time, but have joined the Aserai. We're doing well against the Northern Empire, but the Vlandians' have taken several towns and castles in the middle of our territory - nowhere near the border with them which is bizarre.

It just seems that, even when we outnumber the enemy by several hundred, the game decides "Nope, you're going to lose".
 
Oh I'm trying to join a Kingdom for my first full playthrough (even though I've had since the EA launch!) I join a Kingdom, take part in battles etc - a couple of times the ruler has died and I've been voted leader and it all goes to sh** after that with everyone declaring war.
As I said, there's a point where, once crossed, everybody will declare war on you for being too big. This applies to the A.I. as well by the way; in my own example, the Western Empire united the middle of the map and dominated, so everybody declared war on them and contained them (my vassals repeatedly called for war with the justification being "too prevent them from overwhelming the continent" or something like that).


I'm an Imperial character this time, but have joined the Aserai. We're doing well against the Northern Empire, but the Vlandians' have taken several towns and castles in the middle of our territory - nowhere near the border with them which is bizarre.

It just seems that, even when we outnumber the enemy by several hundred, the game decides "Nope, you're going to lose".

Well, define "near the border" lol--there appears to be "invisible roads" that connects settlements you might not imagine as being adjacent but they are as far as the A.I. is concerned. Furthermore, they appear comfortable with one neutral city/castle being in the way so Jalmarys is practically adjacent to Sargot as far as the A.I. is concerned, for example, as is Quyaz to Charas or Ortysia to Senala/Askar.

I still need more details because I'm thinking your issue is largely skill based since there is no artificially created wall or punishment from god to impede you besides the "anti-hegemonist coalition" bit I described above. I'm happy to give advice on particulars but there's not much I can say other than to encourage more strategic thinking otherwise. For example, the Aserai, are well situated defensively but have a hard time expanding since Ortysia and Danustica are worlds apart and thus sustaining both fronts will generally be a losing effort if both are challenged simultaneously (and they will be, inevitably, once you are sufficiently powerful enough to scare the A.I. into temporary unity) and, even if those bridge-heads secured, you'll have to spread out your battle lines before you can close them since every city adjacent to them exposes you to more angles of attack until you conquer Western Calradia in the west or the Duzeg Steppe in the far east.
 
I don't know about joining a faction and if it gets worse, but in general I feel the AI parties are worse at defending their territory and land less clans seems to re-take things easier then in older versions. It effects all faction, but it's going to be more effective to player faction as it gets bigger.

If you're doing live battles with allies the often do worse when they out number the enemy (compared to auto calc)because they will rush in if you let them. If you are in control of the battle you can use better tactics and reduce the losses, but if you just captain a group it's probably going to be worse then letting the AI auto calc. It's better to just do your own thing (sieges/ battles) and let the AI do it's (even though it's worse now) then to get into large battles where they just waste their troops.

If feel though kingdom gameplay is in the toilet and it's just YOU doing sieges until the faction gets to a certain size and it become wack a mole. That doesn't feel like a kingdom at all and it's a shame.
 
Based on the experience of numerous playthroughs, I can report that the player’s nerf, if any, is not particularly felt.
Infinite money from blacksmithing skill.
Huge, actually free armies from rogeri, partners of crime.
Crowds of lords from charm, plus our clan limit plus politics plus steward plus max leadership. Three or four hundred fighters with them, about a thousand in the escort army.
Click the siege, wait on the accelerated time, start the fight and go drink tea. Five to ten minutes and any settlement is yours.
Enemies will not be able to capture faster than you.
And now, you have already captured everyone up to level 40-50.
This I Like
 
I'm really bad at constantly restarting the game when it goes horribly wrong (I know, bad Daem). I love the M&B series but have never managed to "complete" one by ruling all of Calradia.
Brother you have to scum save just to get the right gender or culture for your clan babies restarting is just apart of the game. My "role-playing" aspect got interrupted many times because I didn't have a true grasp of the game. Ive made it to being ruler of my land and the A.I being successful at doing its own thing to having all factions with castles or none to wage a coalition war and execute me. And it all started because I didnt realize that no matter how many children I had they would always take my culture and not their mothers (unlike my siblings). I eventually just had to do more research and just to start back at the save where I made my first 30k.
Oh I'm trying to join a Kingdom for my first full playthrough (even though I've had since the EA launch!) I join a Kingdom, take part in battles etc - a couple of times the ruler has died and I've been voted leader and it all goes to sh** after that with everyone declaring war.

I'm an Imperial character this time, but have joined the Aserai. We're doing well against the Northern Empire, but the Vlandians' have taken several towns and castles in the middle of our territory - nowhere near the border with them which is bizarre.

It just seems that, even when we outnumber the enemy by several hundred, the game decides "Nope, you're going to lose".

Even when your outnumbered you can still win, simulated or you directly being on the battlefield. I could be wrong but based on my experience, my tactics skill of my character and my companions /clan members, and troop tier/type play a factor in not only you taking on armies larger than you but your troop loss as well. For me once I learned how to land my name on the ballot consistently for fiefs and castles I quickly became voted leader but I had no desire to take the throne so I gave the current ruler about half(if nor close to all) of my current earnings to circumvent that. At this point I'm currently trying to stash away enough food and gold (other miscellaneous items) to leave my current kingdom and maintain my lands but also sue for peace with whomever and whenever. In my play through the aserai lords are mainly poor excluding one or two clans. I eventually helped them by not only donating troops to their castles but giving their clan leaders massive amounts of money when I can especially if they are poor. In the early game I did participate in battles but I made sure to try and save clan leaders when I could not only to gain relations with their clan but to become a "close friend" and gain their support on ballots. Castles I did not need in my...grand scheme I held for a time only to garrison them and build them up if need be until a castle or town I want is conquered. Then I give that town to a fief thats on the ballot that would benefit the most from it and normally am auto voted for the next one. I also donated a bunch of money to Unqid this time around and ever since then they have for the most part successfully held their own while I plot and plan to create my own kingdom. In game time due to role play reasons Ill most likely make a move when my Valandian and Aserian grandkids are grown. As soon as I take Galend I shall bide my time and.....wait
 
Back
Top Bottom