Raiding is not meant to be a primary way of making large amounts of money. It's meant to be a form of economic warfare. If you kill the villages, the town/castle relying on it suffers in the form of reduced food (leading to reduced prosperity, garrison, and militia) and reduced goods (leading to further reduced prosperity). Reduced prosperity has a direct effect on the amount of money a castle/town provides to the owning lord.
-
If you are reporting a bug, please head over to our Technical Support section for Bannerlord.
Raiding is not viable due to massive relations penalty
- 主题发起人 durbal
- 开始时间
正在查看此主题的用户
Raiding is not meant to be a primary way of making large amounts of money. It's meant to be a form of economic warfare. If you kill the villages, the town/castle relying on it suffers in the form of reduced food (leading to reduced prosperity, garrison, and militia) and reduced goods (leading to further reduced prosperity). Reduced prosperity has a direct effect on the amount of money a castle/town provides to the owning lord.
I agree that the way relations and recruiting interact with questing and raiding needs reviewing. It's not fair to put raids and failed quests in the same category in what concerns recruiting.
Here's my opinion:
- Raiding should prevent voluntary recruiting for a long time for all raiders (not only army commanders - I like it that I'm prompted to leave my army when it's about to initiate a raid - I always leave). That's in addition to a heavy (at least -20, though that is still low IMO) relation penalty. Wanna play grownup? Then you gotta play grownup. Can't switch to child's play on demand. You raided a village. Wanna recruit from it? Then you'll have to do it by force. That's regardless of relation even if extreme (100). You're not recruiting the notables, but the people whose homes your raided and whose women you might've physically violated.
- Negative relation alone should not prevent voluntary recruiting, unless extreme IMO. I do think, though, that high relation should allow recruitment of more troops just like how it works now.
- Failed quests should penalize less. You were trying to help, after all (unless you deliberately choose to not fulfill your end of the bargain - in which case there should be a heavy penalty (-10 or higher).
- Sucessful quests should reward more. I got a +1 from a successful daughter rescue (successful persuasion) the other day FFS. Relation rewards should be streamlined and be less affected by Charm from what I've seen and been told. And while we're at daughter rescuing, the whole persuasion system feels wild and random to me. I always feel like it's purely "random" regardless of personality traits, skills, dialog choices or whatever else. It might be just because I don't understand it, but I always save scum everything.
最后编辑:
durbal
Sergeant
@mexxico has said that they feel it's important to keep the settlement economy and the effects from raiding an important aspect, and balancing the settlement economy has always kept that in mind. And I wholeheartedly agree with that approach since I think Bannerlord does raiding an economic warfare better than most games, plus raiding is one of the few things a smaller clan or party can do at the moment besides farm looters endlessly. It would be nice to engage in a small battle vs. militia every once in a while without them just being the fodder that gets chewed up by late game armies just by happenstance.
Even aside from the risk/reward ratio being way too large in terms of personal economic boon (this is due mostly to equipment loot and plunder from battles being wayyyyyyy too lucrative), even if I just want to raid to help the allied war effort I still have no incentive to do it since the relations hits are so incredibly punitive. And that's a real shame -- and the reason I made this thread -- because the bandit playstyle, roguery actions, small elite warband-type gameplay is basically not viable because of how punitive and inescapable the penalties are.
I'll put it this way: if the AI followed the same rules as the player for raiding, no AI lord would be able to recruit after a couple years in the game. That alone shows that there's a huge problem.
Yes, currently raids have huge relation penalties. Especially in case of duplicate penalties (when you stop raiding and restart again you get additional penalty) are not intended. We will remove duplicate penalties and think about reducing all these penalties by 25% or 50%.
Also we need new ways to increase lost relation somehow. Currently there are less ways / solutions for player to gain relations especially from a notable with -20 relation. This is another problem. When war ends player should be able to recover lost relation. These features are currently missing in game. I am not dealing with relationship issues I will inform people responsible.
Also we need new ways to increase lost relation somehow. Currently there are less ways / solutions for player to gain relations especially from a notable with -20 relation. This is another problem. When war ends player should be able to recover lost relation. These features are currently missing in game. I am not dealing with relationship issues I will inform people responsible.
durbal
Sergeant
On the one hand, I agree that raiding a village should have positives and negatives. One of the positives is weakening the castle/town these villages are connected to. The negative is of course not being able to recruit from that village ever again.
This especially becomes a problem when you're trying to reconquer a town that was taken by an enemy faction. The town only gets stronger and stronger, and you can't really raid from that village because that would make it impossible to recruit from those villagers ever again.
This especially becomes a problem when you're trying to reconquer a town that was taken by an enemy faction. The town only gets stronger and stronger, and you can't really raid from that village because that would make it impossible to recruit from those villagers ever again.
You make excellent points on how well Bannerlord implements the economy and raiding. That's why I like it and that's also why I think raiding should not be the norm. Don't get me wrong, though, because, though I haven't yet, I still have plans to start a long term, serious bandit (or "evil" king) game - recruiting and obtaining resources (food, equipment and money) always by force. Raiding is an interesting, essential mechanism that should not only stay, but maybe even be expanded upon. It should represent a big, serious tradeoff with consequences for the long term, though possibly even implying in the automatic earning of the "cruel" trait if it doesn't already. My point is that it should not be an "everybody does it" thing.
I noticed, however, that you seem to not take much into consideration the possibility (which works quite well from my experience) of recruiting by force. It's just like raiding for supplies, but for troops, and you're never locked out of that. The only problem is that it becomes the only option once you go that way, and I believe you'd agree it's fair. If the AI followed the same rules, which I hope they will, "good" leaders would not raid villages but siege cities and keeps (taking on somebody their size) instead, also breaking supply lines, but without the robbing and raping), while "evil" leaders would still be able to recruit by force and continue to enjoy their favorite warfare tactics without a worry in the world.
最后编辑:
durbal
Sergeant
If your faction captures the settlement you are 100% locked out of that. The option disappears. Also, likewise, if the settlement becomes neutral to you either through peace or a faction neutral to you capturing it, taking hostile actions will provoke war (and I don't know what happens in that case when you're playing as a vassal).
There are two valid ways of implementing raids in what concerns the game world's culture and, consequently, its implications to relations. It's either "evil" or "it's just war". Both are absolutely, perfectly valid. In real life, earlier cultures probably tended more to "it's just war". Nowadays it's definitely, absolutely "evil". That's why I really think it's just a matter of choice in regards to game world culture.
The gameplay (not moral) reason why I think raiding should be "evil" is because that could not only make it more interesting, but also add to the complexity of other parts of the game itself, like the personality traits system, in offering two ways of dealing with the same "problem": cutting enemy supply lines and/or damaging the enemy's economy. You can do it quickly and cheaply by raiding villages, though that also damages the whole region's economy as a whole (the more villages you raid). As a bonus (?) you even get more popular with likeminded "evil" people. Or you can do it honorably by sieging the destination: the big guy who is more your size. You don't damage the economy that way. When you capture the desired fief, people might even like you more than the previous guy, be more loyal and feel more secure, and the economy will still be pristine. You also get more popular with the "good" guys.
If you just reduce relation penalties from raiding and leave everything else as is, effectively allowing raiding without much consequences, you're opting for the "it's just war" culture for the game world (which, once again, is perfectly valid), where the raided village and its residents don't take it personal, because they know it's an integral part of war, after all the troops need the supplies and either don't have the money or need it for more pressing matters, maybe even the forced banging of their women is necessary in order to raise the troops morale so they can conquer whatever they wanna conquer and then, once it's theirs, protect the girls and treat everybody better than the previous ruler (!?). The problem with this "neutral" approach to raiding is that it takes from the complexity of the game. Everybody behaves the same. There is no separation between cruel and merciful lords.
Whatever the chosen path, the other can always be modded, but I'd really rather have, for the aforementioned reasons, the richer path (which is the "raids are evil" path) be the standard in the game.
EDIT: While at it, though I think the double penalty (from resuming a raid) is a bug, I don't think the relation penalty is too big. I think it's actually too small. If it's decided that raiding a village shouldn't damage the ability of building relations with its notables, maybe "evil" (or bandit) notables (like the ones in the cities) with whose relation raids would not interfere as much could serve as "bridges" and offer quests whose completion would reward relation bonuses with all the village's notables (rescue parters/people from bandit hideouts), effectively solving the problem with more finesse.
EDIT 2: A good way, in my opinion, of solving the extreme negative relation problem is allowing the player to simply gift things to anybody, notables and nobles and, through gifting, reduce the negative relation just enough to be able to receive quests from that person again.
最后编辑:
I should have mentioned that my part about raiding not being financially rewarding was made in comparison to raiding in Warband. In that game, it was a good way to get a few thousand denars for a player who was past the starting phase but not quite ready to be a full-time vassal. Or an out-of-work mercenary during a rare outbreak of sustained peace across Calradia (I really liked that because it was realistic) just to keep up with their party's wages.
Mind you, it was still a pretty bad idea overall, but you could at least see where it could be an option under some limited circumstances.
Oh, believe me, I am very aware of this. That's exactly why I said to @durbal that I am completely fine with most never raiding. Having to nearly physically squat my party on my villages to keep them from being continuously raided is one of the unfun aspects of campaign play in Bannerlord. And yeah, it can be used to degrade my defenses and hurt my economy (I don't care, none of the fiefs produce enough taxes to give a **** about*), but the AI doesn't actually appear to do that. They'll raid my village and leave the town (with 0 garrison in it) unmolested, wandering off to raid another village instead.
As for economic warfare, you can do funny stuff like buying the (hostile) villager party's food to deny it to a town that way (lol). Or you can simply put your party at the town gate, since parties in Bannerlord only go through gates it will naturally drive off villagers without having to take a relations penalty of any kind. Neither of these are as directly and immediately effective as raiding the village (AFAICT) but they definitely work, there is effectively less risk and you can still get quests and recruit from those same villages.
*And the big reason they don't give enough money is because they are constantly raided without player intervention, unless you spend in-game years babysitting them. A single successful raid sets you back at least 30 days of effort, probably more, while even bandits can drain prosperity and hearths from a village by constantly harrassing and capturing the villagers.
最后编辑:
You got me there. I hadn't thought about having the village on the same team. It is an issue that needs to be addressed, however not by simply going the "raiding is not so bad - wrist slap for doing it" way like I explained in my previous comment, but through other possibilities like maybe gifting, for example.
I might screencapture this and put it in my signature. Regardless of bonuses or penalties from raiding, it's a pain that's everywhere and cities are always "poor" because of it.
Some quality comedy videos on Reddit the last 24 hours on these subjects:
Conversation system
Consequences of raiding
make it into a money sink... Allow the player to pay some wergild for the griefing he's done to the village, resetting relations 0. I see no harm in that, scale it as you feel is good, and that's done, such a move can also gobble up the AI Lords, so they get punished, like us, and then they pay the money sink to be able to recruit from that village again, done and done. Can go even further and add demands like sending them villagers form your own village, bringing them recruits to man their militia, idk, just create some simple gold sink, slap in whatever you think is good, and make it reset or nearly reset relations, also, it should be clear that this should be only available to restore relations, not to increase them.
