Renown Decay

[DrDragonlance]

In Warband there was renown decay, which eventually kept you at a specific level.

I play longer Bannerlord campaigns, and eventually ever Clan is going to be Tier 6.

I feel like there has to be a way to lose renown so that not every Clan is Tier 5 or 6.

Clans should lose renown daily if they don't have a Fief starting at Clan Tier 3. It should escalate to more lost renown the higher the Clan Tier.

This would help with the Fiefless Kingdoms running around, eventually they would only have 1 party per Clan.

Does anyone else want Clans to limit the number of Tier 6 Clans?

 

[Csatádi]

Good idea, but it shouldn't slow the progress of the player clan.
Anyway, there is a separate place for suggestions in the forum, that the devs sometimes really read.

 

[Lucius Confucius]

I don't like the idea of renown decay. Instead renown should be required for more things. Such as being clan tier 5 to own a city. And if you conquer a city as a free person of lower clan rank, you should lose relationship with specific nobles.

They should also add more clan levels, up to maybe ten, to truly make generational gameplay more interesting.

 

[xzangth]

I do know the diplomacy mod has influence balancing stuff like decay and corruption when you own too many big towns and stuff, so it is out there

 

[Kentucky 『 ＨＥＩＧＵＩ 』 James]

Renown should be tied to individual characters, and the clan renown should be the sum total. If a guy with high renown dies his contribution eventually drops to zero.

There should also be actions that reduce renown like getting captured, switching faction, going broke, or doing nothing during a war.

I think the clan tier system is stupid anyway. These things should be soft limits, not hard limits. The developers seriously couldn't think of any way to differentiate the mid and late game except with an arbitrary tier system like an MMO.

 

[DrDragonlance]

I don't like the idea of renown decay. Instead renown should be required for more things. Such as being clan tier 5 to own a city. And if you conquer a city as a free person of lower clan rank, you should lose relationship with specific nobles.

They should also add more clan levels, up to maybe ten, to truly make generational gameplay more interesting.

For my idea, Decay is the wrong word. I really just want conditions where Clans lose Renown.

Two examples.
If you go 7 days without gaining Renown, you lose 1 Renown. Since Renown is basically how famous you are, you are either getting more famous or less.

If Clan doesn't have a Fief, they lose Renown.
Clan Tier 3, -1 Renown per day
Clan Tier 4, -2 Renown per day
Clan Tier 5, -4 Renown per day
Clan Tier 6, -8 Renown per day

And then Clan Tier 6 would have a small Renown cap like 200 points. That way dropping back to Clan Tier 5 is always close.

Just for reference, I'm in year 52 or so of my game, and every Mercenary Clan is Clan Tier 6. The only Clans that are Tier 3 are Rebel Clans.

@Csatádi The reason I started here is because I wanted community input. If I was the only one that cares then its a bad suggestion.

 

[xzangth]

lets just be honest, most features of the game are and always have been half-baked and not thought through to their full potential. I think they've left too much of it to the modding community to make the game good. the community is full of good ideas but the devs don't listen and they haven't added any of the community's good ideas to the game. their features develop towards illogical conclusions (i.e, renown as we're saying here) and by the end of the mid/start of the end game (reaching clan tier 5 or 6/becoming ruler of a kingdom) all that's left to do is amass armies of 2-3 thousand and play cat-and-mouse with other factions' armies as you take castles/towns and they retake them. there's no balancing, there's no dynamism. You're just waiting for everything to max out essentially.

It would be great if we could see clans rise and fall, if the game had any actual politics other than spending influence like money. If individual clans in the same kingdom could go to war, if clans had visible ambition in the game and stomped on other clans if they were in the way of an aim. Highly ambitious lords wanting more fiefs and feeling they have the strength to take them by force. if they succeed, the clan they stomped on looses renown and vice versa. Having secret, behind closed doors alliances with other clans to join a side and protect their fiefs if this should arise.

There's a feature to kick clans from the kingdom and I have not seen any AI use that ONCE. Not a single time, because there's no ****ing reason to and like I said, most of the features are half-baked and not thought through to their logical conclusions or full potential. But no matter how many ideas we want added to the game, no matter how many improvements we propose, I guarantee not a single dev will read this thread and not a single idea will be listened to and implemented.

 

[JunKeteer]

Renown should be tied to individual characters, and the clan renown should be the sum total. If a guy with high renown dies his contribution eventually drops to zero.

Interesting idea to have it be an accumulation of the members in the clan and potential loss due to a member dying/leaving. Can also add some rp aspects seeing the potential renown of a particular AI noble elsewhere that somehow chance/manage to get a massive amount (via victories or tournament wins) or their clan grows through sheer quantity of offspring/parties out there or marriage ties.
They just have to remove the connection with caravans/workshop caps in the case someone ping pongs daily between two tiers.

There should also be actions that reduce renown like getting captured, switching faction, going broke, or doing nothing during a war.

I think the clan tier system is stupid anyway. These things should be soft limits, not hard limits. The developers seriously couldn't think of any way to differentiate the mid and late game except with an arbitrary tier system like an MMO.

Always hated the implementation of the clan tier, it's just a permanent gain stat to further reduce player freedom/agency - might as well just call it the 'hours-played' stat.