Suggestions

[Twitchx3]

Incite a riot or rebellion in an enemy  faction land-subverting them....(possibly based on relationship with you versus their king or the vassal that owns them) could be influenced by you buying goods from them or freeing them from bandit troubles.


Create and use seige engines - with that- damages to castles would have to be repaired by holding party or wall breaches could be used by following attacks....Job for the engineers...

 

[user1324865215]

Diplomacy is the Best Warband Mod, IMHO. 

However, it is missing one thing.... a custom Troop Tree for the Player's Faction. Your own troops, recruitable only by you when you make your own Kingdom.

That's my suggestion.

Use this  http://forums.taleworlds.com/index.php?topic=105928.0

 

[Mihanu]

As King:  When giving fiefs to vassals, you get to see how many people support the person for that fief.
              Your own nation troop tree or at least chance the name of an existing kingdom troop tree.
              Have your wife gather up all the things you need a feast.

As Vassal:  If not marry, then you can hire(like a villager or companion) you will do everything your wife does.
                Have your wife gather up all the things you need a feast.

 

[Tripida]

About the lords support, just wait for consuel and ask chancellor what are lords votes when spies give him report.

 

[PrinceMakii]

First Wahiti,

U RULE for this mod. I spent more time playing Diplomacy then Native. Awesome job!

My suggestion is to implement a functional medieval hierarchy. As in when ur pc is given a village, ur title would be Baron, or Oren, or Don. When u are given a castle ur title can be Lord, and when ur given towns

1 town = count
2 towns = Viscount
3 towns = Duke
2+ towns = a military rank that increases ur soldier cap

Ur npcs would be the same.

 

[PrinceMakii]

As a preamble, as far as I now the development of this mod has ended, mostly. It's still possible though that the two develpers will start working on it again, as I hope

Your questions touch a very important point (for me). The nobility-possession-vassallage thing in M&B (and every mod I've seen so far) is very very limited.

I'm trying to change that. So far, there are a few scripted things, like the "original home" of some of the lords (Haringoth castle, for example). They can be seen in the module_scripts.py file, in the script "game_start".

The effect of this thing is not very high, but if I remember well you cannot use the "exchange fief" option with these lords with a "home", and there should be a penalty when you ask them to join your kingdom if you own or have assigned to other lords their "homes".

I would like to implement an hereditary system and a more realistic vassallage. In the middle age "lord" and "vassal" where realative terms, not absolute: you are a lord of something, and if somebody swear an oath of homage to you, he becomes your vassal. Doesn't matter if you are the lord of the stables and your vassals have just to clean horses' waste

In the system I'm implementing, dukes are vassals of the king and own towns (one and only one), counts are vassals of the dukes and own castles (only one too), barons are vassals of the counts and own villages (from 1 to 3). They have to pay a little part of their taxes to the "upper-level" lord, and are normally bound to him (if a lord decides to follow the marshall, all his vassals and vassals of vassals will do the same unless they plan to betray him or the relation with him is very bad).

Knights, instead, are also of noble birth but are landless: they can become vassals of barons, counts, dukes or directly of the king, with increasing difficulty to be accepted and different duties (can be to manage their lord's fiefs, to protect them while they are at war, to follow them, to send messages for them (not like the stupid quest, but with a meaning, to have back a conquered fief for a great sum or to end a war). They get renown and sometimes some money, but do not have an income: being a knight was a difficult job.

I'm using the svn version of diplomacy, whouse sources you can browse here: http://www.assembla.com/code/diplomacy/subversion/nodes/trunk/src?rev=85

Sadly, nobody can follow you through the sources and explain how things work, but there are plenty of topics in the "Forge" subforum on how to change things and understand what's going on.

If you find that you have the will to spend some good hours playing around the sources, you'll eventually, in a few days, start to modify things and try them loading the game...and it's amazing, I can tell you

If you decide to do this and have some precise questions that are not clearly answered in the topics in the "Forge", you can PM me and I'll be happy to reply.

I don't mean to come off wrong but your medieval hierarchy is just a little off. Knights were the elite warrior class. It is from here that the other nobility came from. Traditionally, knights were given land in exchange for military service. their armies were lesser warrior classes and serfs. But the land most often given to knights were castles. Especially in the early medieval period. This changed as the knights won titles in valor, bribery or tournaments and more people moved to be near the successful lord of the castle. That is why towns formed around castles. I do agree that a functional medieval hierarchy should be implemented.

This opens up more political intrigue which in turn, effects battles as do you really know who your allies are?

My suggestion is to implement a functional medieval hierarchy. As in when ur pc is given a village, ur title would be Baron, or Oren, or Don. When u are given a castle ur title can be Lord, and when ur given towns

1 village = Oren (name of village)
2 villages = Baron (name of village)

1 castle = Knighthood / Sir or Lady (name of castle)

1 town = count (name of first town)
2 towns = Viscount
3+ towns = Duke (name of richest town)

2+ castles = a military rank that increases ur soldier cap

 

[koteko]

I'm sorry but you are, in general sense, wrong. The point is that every country had its own nobility system, that often changed between regions and was dynamic, not static.

I've been studying this book to get a bit more the grip of only one example of medieval nobility, the french one:

http://www.amazon.com/Strong-Body-Brave-Noble-Chivalry/dp/0801485487

Its 20 pages of scientific bibliography and the personal history of the author herself make it appealing enough for me: I'm no historian, so I have to rely on good historians' books.

Now, I've only described what I like, not what was actually historically accurate (even though the lord and vassal thing HOLDS they were used in a less strict way compared to now).

Knights, actually, in the early period, were just warriors who sweared homage to a lord..but they weren't noble, and in Germany especially they were often unfree (Ministerialis). Later, nobles started to imitate knights in their military braveness as much as knights were imitating nobles in their courtly manners.

So it became common for nobles to train as hell to become elite mounted warriors..and there started the real "knighthood" thing. As you said, in addition, some of the non-noble knights of the beginning were given land and they "became" noble in a way or another (fake ancestors, marrying noble woman so the children will be nobles and so on).

Now, the castles. Castellans developed the so-called "Banal lordship". They weren't supposed, traditionally, to be lords and to command (judge crimes etc), but they neverthless did and the counts or dukes that commanded that area often couldn't do anything about that. Sometimes castellans were more powerful than the lords themselves.

I supposed most castellans had in some way noble blood, but they weren't necessarily knights and absolutely not related to the upper nobility.

Now, all of this said: I don't want to implement a perfect french, english or german medieval hierarchy, I just want to pick up some ideas from all of them and make the system funny to play. So it's gonna be only half-or-less-accurate.

I do actually like the system you proposed, because it's simple (the test system I've already implemented give you the title of Baron if you own a village, Count for a castle and Duke for a town), but an hereditary one, with a complex vassallage system, would be much more enjoyable in my opinion. Let's see if I'll have the time and will to implement it.

 

[Madae]

I haven't played this yet, but it seems like it's exactly what I wanted in a mod. I do have a couple questions about marriage though.

Do marriages have any benefit other than affiliation? I don't know too much about it as I've never gotten married in the game. Is it just partly an alliance between noble families that adds to bonus troop commanding stuff - like they come to help you or whatever?

And also, are same sex relationships possible? I was thinking if you could do it, maybe keep marriage out of it, make it a simple "live-in" relationship that's kept on the down-low. They could live in your castle and all that, but no actual affiliation modifier with their family (or whatever it is you get from being married). You could maybe add 1 male lord and 1 female daughter/sister/whatever to each faction that could be a potential partner. I guess if you wanted to take it further, you could mix in some sort of thing like they are married, but they have that "secret" their husband/wife doesn't know about.

Anyway, just a thought. I don't mean to force this type of thing on anyone, but it's not like this type of thing was uncommon in the medieval era either. I think it would add a bit more realism to the game and broaden the possibilities. I can think of a few things that could be done to make it an interesting aspect.

 

[Lanistus]

Hi, just looked in the first and last few pages and didn't see this raised, so here we go. I'm wondering if a Diplomacy upgrade to be compatible with M&B:W 1.153 will ever happen? I tried to open a savefile with latest version of Diplomacy and the game crashed. I'd love to partake in this mod, especially since I hear (and what I read confirms it) that this makes the game a ton more fun, and makes reigning over your kingdom actually fun instead of just bland.

Any insight into this matter would be greatly appreciated! Really hoping we get an update whenever the mod-coders are able to make it happen

 

[Caba`drin]

Hi, just looked in the first and last few pages and didn't see this raised, so here we go. I'm wondering if a Diplomacy upgrade to be compatible with M&B:W 1.153 will ever happen? I tried to open a savefile with latest version of Diplomacy and the game crashed. I'd love to partake in this mod, especially since I hear (and what I read confirms it) that this makes the game a ton more fun, and makes reigning over your kingdom actually fun instead of just bland.

Any insight into this matter would be greatly appreciated! Really hoping we get an update whenever the mod-coders are able to make it happen

Native 1.153 adds 2 scenes, so taking a save from Native 1.153 to Diplomacy 4.2 (built on 1.143) will result in that error. Either start a new game in Diplomacy or open up your scenes.txt file, go to the bottom, copy the last line and paste it twice. Then go to the top and increment the number by 2 to trick the game into thinking there are 2 more scenes.

 

[Barnolo]

How difficult would it be to add hire-able independent mercenaries companies?


In the context of the game, if the player character can be an impoverished noble hiring himself out, why couldn't there be other such people out there.

These companies could be headed by a named character who the player could have a rivalry with, or who could be a friend and ally.

Any thoughts?

 

[Caba`drin]

How difficult would it be to add hire-able independent mercenaries companies?

Quite. Would need to write a whole set of AI and behaviors for them as they shouldn't behave like lords, solely, nor like bandits.

(Such things are in development though over at the Floris Mod Pack)

 

[Paradoxis]

Or you can stop em on the map and pay em enough money for specific actions like attacking a village or attacking a weakened lord.

 

[Jim3323]

A Judge to:

Listen to your subjects (Your people) dilemmas/questions/daily wishes/Erecting a building etc.
Ask for opinions regarding Economy (Includes trade, caravans, prosperity, kingdom's financial state)
Ask for opinions regarding Military (Includes patrols, campaigns, who to select as marshal, recruitment)
Ask for opinions regarding Diplomacy (Includes reaction to agreements, reaction to wars)
Ask for opinions regarding Domestic Policy
Hold trials on POW's

An Abbot to:

Donate to Orphans (Would result in higher renown and honour)
Donate to Religion (Would result in higher renown and honour)
Send missionary to town/village to spread the word (Convert to religion)
Ask for blessing (Higher party morale and honour)

 

[Ash Plissken]

Would it be possible to add the dialog options to ask an enemy king for a truce, or talk to a lord about joining your faction, when you talk to them as prisoners in your dungeon?  I always thought it was kind of silly that you couldn't do that.

 

[Tripida]

Actually you can ask king for truce if You free him personally with key, right after that(and get +5 relations with good lords instantly when doing that with them).

 

[Ash Plissken]

Actually you can ask king for truce if You free him personally with key, right after that(and get +5 relations with good lords instantly when doing that with them).

You mean I have to use the "I'm breaking you out of here" option?  I always assumed that would have negative repercussions with my faction (or at least the owner of the place where the prison is) if I did that.  And the point is that I want to be able to sue for peace in exchange for his freedom and keep holding him if he refuses, not risk setting him free and then having him refuse peace. 

 

[Tripida]

Breaking free, means hes not your prisoner, in this case you gain honour, +7 relation with character and +1 with his friends.
If you're at war and You free enemies, You will lose faction points with your supporters and *depending on their madness on this faction* other factions at war with them.
If Your faction don't hold any their inicial lands, and they are at least at 1 other war, they're pretty much likely to agree peace once set free.

 

[Ash Plissken]

If you're at war and You free enemies, You will lose faction points with your supporters

Right, that's what I thought, which is why I want to have that dialogue option while he's still my prisoner.  Then, when peace is declared, he would be automatically freed along with all the other prisoners of that faction.

 

[Tripida]

You will lose some faction points in freeing enemies during prison breaks, not your own prisoners.