Oh gnarly, Duh replied here.
For auto-resolve, we want to explore topics like terrain, combat type and captain perk boni/mali. Ideally, this will provide players with greater agency over the outcome of such battles. We are also looking at a greater effect of the medicine skill effect for the survivability of higher tier troops. (It already has a bias towards them now.)
Ok, very cool. Making Medicine more useful is good as it is a slight noob trap atm.
The focus here is on better availability for a greater variety of wanderer types. AFAIK the spawns are not increased in count but in frequency.
So if I understand right, wanderers will replenish faster? That is an improvement if so.
Currently, they are intentionally low level to allow players to customize / develop them to their needs. Personally, I would love seeing a few higher level/skill companions dotted in between.
Letting players customise them is fantastic in theory but Bannerlord's leveling is so slow and arduous that it can take many hours of tedious grind in bandit hideouts (they die too quickly in actual battles) to get your companions to a useful level.
Perhaps a better solution would be to make wanderers
and newly born clan members start with a bit more unallocated attribute points and focus points. That way, you get to build them to your liking, but with less grind (obviously some should remain for a sense of progression).
Yes, that is the intention of these tweaks.
Wunderbar. Thank you!
This bit referenced the adjustment we made in the last patch to have longer diplomatic states (less switching between war / peace). There will likely be further tweaks, but I can't say whether the raid valuation specifically will see a change (undediced).
Ok, thank you for the clarification.
The voting system may see changes as well, but currently there is greater focus on reviewing the economy of influence.
Well that's a start but won't really come close to fixing the problem with voting, as I can have an enormous amount of influence and the AI vassals can have a tiny trickle, and they will still be able to block me in votes by collectively spending the minimum of 20 influence and voting as a hivemind, which they usually do. Eight lords spending just 20 influence is enough to outweigh my 150.
If this is not fixed, by either letting the player spend more influence, or making nobles pick different sides of an issue more often (ideally based on personality traits and a stronger effect of relation) then voting will continue to be nigh-pointless 70% of the time, despite being one of the most central game mechanics.
And another highly central game mechanic, relations with AI lords, does very little. I've heard a guy say he had -100 relation with a lord and convinced them to join him, I've tested having +100 relation with all clans myself and it barely changed the outcome of any votes when I had 0 relation. Strat says that having 100 relation with a clan head makes it only 5% cheaper to bribe them.
I don't know the formula for AI that determines their vote, but surely it should be a matter of just increasing a number to increase the weighting of relation and make it more influential in vote calculations? That would make a big immediate improvement to both of these mechanics. Am I wrong about this and it wouldn't be that easy?
That is the intention, yes. One of the big topics is "how exactly should clans / kingdoms be discontinued?" (but it's not the only one).
Excellent. Thanks again for all the information!