Rulers are even more greedy in 1.4.1

Currently viewing this thread:

Maximum997

Sergeant at Arms
Best answers
0
Look at my tests. It is 300 days 1.4.1 runs. As Bannerman Man noticed every single new town was owned by the ruler. Some of them have 7 towns.








They was greedy ****** before, but right now it is kinda absurd.
 

Bannerman Man

C# Sleuth
Knight
Best answers
0
Can confirm I'm seeing the same stuff. Derthert's not even the worst. Monchug just can't seem to help himself haha.

 

drallim33

Sergeant
Best answers
0
lol northern empire wrecked in every single one

I'm sticking to my theory of whoever kills northern empire first wins the game
 

Bannerman Man

C# Sleuth
Knight
Best answers
0
They do provide a soft target for Khuzait to gather power. I switched the starting wars around and matched Sturgia up with the N. E. and Khuzait against the S. E. and Khuzait had a much tougher time gaining ground. Sturgia still lost in 2/3 games but the N. E. lost in 3/3.
 

MinhTien

Veteran
WBVC
Best answers
0
I see this also. Before 1.4.1, Monchug was pretty fair and only take fiefs close to his own corner, but now he hoards ALL the towns, no matter how far and even if there are fiefless vassals. He does give out castles to landless lords, but if everyone already have some property, he would take the castles too.
 

Apocal

Sergeant Knight at Arms
Best answers
1
According to this mod's author, they implemented new overrule logic in 1.4.1:

Apparently it has gone sideways in some way.
 
Best answers
0
According to this mod's author, they implemented new overrule logic in 1.4.1:

Apparently it has gone sideways in some way.
Aye! I had to make a new version of the mod to work with beta 1.4.1. In that version, I disabled the part of my mod that affected that in case that the new logic they implemented was fairer, but it seems like I gotta start working on re-implementing that part.

The old logic was basically like this: If the winning result (highest %) isn't the result that the king likes, then first he checks how much influence it'd cost to overrule it (which depends on the difference between the highest %, and the % of the option that he likes), then it compares that to how much influence he currently has. It was a random roll, but the less influence it cost and the more influence he had, the higher the chance that the king overruled the council. My mod fixed this.

The new logic seemed much better, it instead does stuff like checking how much he likes the winning option vs the option that he liked the most (so he won't overrule if he barely even cares), among other things.

I'll start working on fixing the new logic, I'll probably have it up by wednesday saturday or something (uni's killing me).

For the people using my mod in 1.4.1, how greedy has your ruler been? (ie: has my mod been helping, despite disabling that bit in the beta version?) The candidate-logic fix should still prevent the king from getting the chance to go mad with fiefs, but that should only be a problem for the player's faction, yet in that screenshot there's several factions suffering from it.
 
Last edited:

Odeus

Recruit
Best answers
0
Yep, ruling clan will literally go into negative influence in order to get it. Is that supposed to happen?
 

Bjorn The Hound

Grandmaster Knight
WBVCNWWF&SM&B
Best answers
0
Monchug has 13 or 14 fiefs in my game right now. He is outvoting everything. He outvoted senate policy after that I checked influence of clans and found out that the clan of Monchug had -140ish influence.