When the kingdom in which you participate and you are not the leader begins to dominate a good portion of territory and other kingdoms begin to have more vassals than territory. One as a player naturally considers convincing enemy vassals to switch sides, mainly so as not to have allies with a lot of territory that he cannot protect.
Yesterday, in 2 hours of play, 3 clans that I recruited and were given territory changed sides in a matter of a few days, without justifiable reasons, completely random. The only thing that followed a pattern is that they were all from Battania, a kingdom that now has no territory and almost no ally.
It is insulting that you have the option of recruiting allies, pay him large sums of money, support him by giving him a territory and that in a few days he changes sides so that he loses it instantly because that city or castle has not yet recovered from the previous siege. One of the nobles who betrayed us was gallant, he was an enemy of our king, but also an enemy of the king who swore allegiance, what is the logic?
I think one of three things should be done:
- Lower the value of money they require to be recruited, especially when you recruit clans without territory or power.
- Establish a minimum time of presence in the kingdom, they demand a lot for loyalty but they do not fulfill their promise.
- Increase the difficulty of recruitment by requiring more attempts at persuasion, but also considerably decrease the possibility of disbandment. They demand money from you because of the great risk they commit but it is basically a fraud, if that option were to be had by the player it would be an infinite money exploit.
Enough with always being at war, always with rebellions, with allies with a potato mentality, you still have to face not being able to count on anyone's loyalty.
There is a fine margin between a difficult game and an unbearable game.
Yesterday, in 2 hours of play, 3 clans that I recruited and were given territory changed sides in a matter of a few days, without justifiable reasons, completely random. The only thing that followed a pattern is that they were all from Battania, a kingdom that now has no territory and almost no ally.
It is insulting that you have the option of recruiting allies, pay him large sums of money, support him by giving him a territory and that in a few days he changes sides so that he loses it instantly because that city or castle has not yet recovered from the previous siege. One of the nobles who betrayed us was gallant, he was an enemy of our king, but also an enemy of the king who swore allegiance, what is the logic?
I think one of three things should be done:
- Lower the value of money they require to be recruited, especially when you recruit clans without territory or power.
- Establish a minimum time of presence in the kingdom, they demand a lot for loyalty but they do not fulfill their promise.
- Increase the difficulty of recruitment by requiring more attempts at persuasion, but also considerably decrease the possibility of disbandment. They demand money from you because of the great risk they commit but it is basically a fraud, if that option were to be had by the player it would be an infinite money exploit.
Enough with always being at war, always with rebellions, with allies with a potato mentality, you still have to face not being able to count on anyone's loyalty.
There is a fine margin between a difficult game and an unbearable game.
