Bütün geliştiricilere saygılar. Geri bildirim yapmazsak oyun nasıl gelişecek, bu biz oyuncuların işi. Şimdi İngilizce yazmaya kalksam 3 saat sürecek, ayrıca İngilizce kelime haznem detaylı yazı yazacak kadar da iyi değil o yüzden merak ettiklerimi, kuşatmalar ve şehir yönetimi ile ilgili birkaç tavsiyemi Türkçe yazacağım. Umarım sorun olmaz. Sorun olur derseniz de yorumu silebilirsiniz.
Geri bildirim için teşekkürler, ben moderatör değilim ancak sorun olacağını düşünmüyorum. En iyi ifade edebildiğin dilde yazman bizim içinde faydalı olur tabii. Elimden geldiğince çevirip cevaplayacağım, anlam kayıpları ve hatalar olabilir, kusura bakmazsın umarım.
I am translating his feedbacks/questions into English and try to answer some of them. Please excuse me as some idioms and expressions might not be preserved completely and thank you for your understanding.
1. Does siege engines work in simulations. For example I have a ram and 2 siege towers, normally these are life savers would make the siege easier in the mission. It seems like, currently they're not affecting the siege at all. This should not be the case and they should affect both attackers and defenders in the simulation.
Basically yes, currently the attacker siege engines and defender wall level affects the simulation advantage of the defender side. There are some irregularities that need to be fixed, such as the defender siege engine not being considered and a small amount of general imbalance. I believe this is fixable, we are currently working on an updated battle simulation currently.
SadShogun: This one is largely translated by Google Translate because of its length, it might contain some errors.
2. Secondly, it has nothing to do with the siege exactly, but I have a suggestion regarding the fortress and the city garrison, they are not too far from each other and I'm sure most other players would like that too. If the kingdom I am in belongs to me, and if I set up an army and bought a city or fortress, members of other clans don't reinforce the garrison in it, since the conquered place belonged to me first. If I get the city myself, they don't reinforce it. Only my own clan members are reinforcing, but their military is usually very few. When I say I will reinforce a city, that city is taken back by the enemy because it is too weak. A fix comes to this, and it would be great if they support our castles and cities with their men as other clans garrison each other. Or, if there is a governor in the city, we can allocate a budget to him and ask him to recruit the recruits who come to the city as garrison or to recruit people from the connected villages. This automatic recruitment may be limited, for example. Collect 20-30-50 or 100 men for you (depending on budget), you and your clan members reinforce the rest. You can even support it with perks. If you say that lords will have trouble finding men if every city and castle collects men from the surrounding area, an extra pool for garrison can be set up. The part where the lords take soldiers is untouched. Or you increase the number of important people in the cities and villages (I think they were called notables), there are more volunteer soldiers, or you expand the soldier slots of notables by 2 each. Or we can hire a garrison commander with money. It stays in our palace. We give money to that commander, he sends an experienced person to recruit soldiers for us, and he brings volunteers from all the surrounding villages to the garrison. In addition, this Castle commander can give various bonuses to the garrison in defensive battles. For example, if the defenders are dying too quickly, they will escape from a more difficult battle, pushing the boundaries and fighting, so we did not focus on fleeing and defend the quirk of kendolay. Of course, this makes it difficult for the attacker. Whenever I siege, at least 50 100 people are fleeing war. If 100 people stay and fight, those who attack will wear out even more. Even if they lose, it will be harder for them to defend their new location as the attacker wears out.
For the first part of the question about who reinforces our garrisons,
@mexxico can give a more detailed answer. For the second part about automatic garrison recruitment. We are working on testing some of the ideas here, while I cannot guarantee anything, recruitment without player involvement can be available in the future patches. The main reason why automatic recruitment can break the game is that it diminished the values of the clan parties. For example, if the garrisons could automatically recruit people through the town all the time, a lot of settlements being attacked would have full garrisons most of the time. In the current system, field battles also make sense because it cripples enemies garrison refreshment rates. Auto recruitment similar suggested by you but uses clan parties to recruit makes sense to me and there are several designs we are testing.
3 Towns and castles should definelty be harder to conquer, or there will be no basis in reality. Also easier sieges blow up the existing snowballing problem. Thatb being said, for situations such as 1441 vs 450 (80% militia), I believe more merciful calculation should take place. If it was 800 vs 450 and I lost, I wouldn't have posted it here and I would accept it. I played the for a thousand hours,this is the first time a situation like this arose. I am not a person which creates posts for minor stuff.
Well, if this is an isolated case then it's good in terms of general game health, but I understand your frustration with the issue. Simulated battles while still provide some randomness maybe should not be full of surprises to the player (at least a better pre-combat chance display would help I believe) Still the number of the troops is more important than the quality of them in the simulations, this is also something we might tweak in the future.
4. NPC lords should have better AI, they should utilize siege engines more effectively, some should focus on breaching the walls not just put 2 ballistae and immediately jump in to the battle.
This is something our combat team is working on, though I am not in a position to give information on the progress of siege battle and AI improvements. However, it perfectly safe to assume that it will get better.
5. If I am a kingdom leader, any besieged settlement should send me a notification. As a king all settlements are my concern. When I am fighting a war on one side, I look and I lost two cities on the other side. I do not have enough time to defend because I have no idea about those sieges or I notice it too late. We keep conquering and reconquering the same settlements.
This is something I will bring to attention in one of our UX meetings. I understand your frustration with the matter but showering with notifications can be very tiring to some players as well. Also each non-important notification we add diminished the value of all notifications since we have limited attention span and patience.
Thank you if you read it. In a lot of places I deviated from the topic, but they are all connected to sieges in the end.
As always thank you for your feedback, I do not have any problems if it's in Turkish(as I am a Turkish speaker), but it makes it hard to read by many members of the community. That's why I appreciate your effort to make your initial post in English.
Out of curiosity, is your data based on telemetry, watching Streams, self-reporting or some combination of the above?
It is a combination of multiple sources, including our battle simulation tool and my own experience. Though, my own experience might not be perfectly up-to-date.