Town disparity based on village placement (Looters)

Users who are viewing this thread

Marbles20

Regular
Preface:
In my current playthrough I own two towns (Ortysia and Quyaz) and the nearby castles whose villagers run to those towns. I'm Imperial, in the Vlandian kingdom, but have governors from the Empire/Aserai in the respective towns/castles. They are all fully upgraded with good garrisons (250-400). The whole area has seen little of the constant wars we are in. Yet Ortysia is well over 6000 prosperity while Quyaz is barely 2000. So I decided to hang out around my areas and watch what was going on, since constant wars with 2-4 kingdoms gets boring. I noticed a lot of looter activity, despite town security in both places being at or near 100. Yet due to the placement of the villages the villagers heading to Ortysia made it to town quicker and more often than the spread out villages around Quyaz. The looters would constantly run Quyaz villagers off course or even catch and defeat them.

*So if villager trips to town impact the prosperity of the town, then towns with villages tight to them (like Marunath which as you might guess is well over 6000 prosperity) will always be better than those with spread out villages.

The Issue:
Due to village spacing and the way looters currently work, some fiefs will never even have a chance to grow, while others will almost automatically become rich. This may also affect the games ability or lack thereof to keep a good economy in peacetime.


So you might say, well just take care of the looters around Quyaz and it will grow. Yet with the mechanics the way they are now with looter spawns this doesn't work. The game will constantly respawn the looters, at levels high enough to distract or defeat the villagers. There is no mechanic available to even set a clan party (for you or the AI) to simply patrol their own lands (defensive party option doesn't keep them out of armies, and AI clans don't ensure they have a member staying back and defending their fiefs).

Potential Solutions:
Though there isn't much that can be done about village spacing, which will always give some towns an economic edge, one, two or all three of the following solutions might help with the games economic woes and gameplay especially for the typically poor towns.
1.) Use the security of the town/castle to determine if the path between the town and village is secure.
This might entail coding a line between the village and the town if there isn't one already and creating a buffer space if the town security hits certain thresholds:
So for example below 60% security would have no effect, 61-80% would have a slight buffer that would keep looters from crossing but may still knock villagers off course, and from 81-100% a larger buffer that would ensure they can make it safely to town. The buffer would work similar to how looters run from the town when they get too close. Lord's parties and caravans would be unaffected.

2.) Have a 'Defend Home' option for clan parties that keeps them from joining armies and only patrolling around the clan's fiefs.
This is a somewhat less useful option since it doesn't do much to ensure villagers aren't sidetracked, though it might help ensure villages also don't get raided. Its also probably the easier option. Would also make sure the AI always had a party from each clan in this mode as well.

3.) Rework the looter spawn system.
Looter parties tend to breed like rabbits in the game. I'd lower the number of overall looter parties, then add deserter parties for those areas that have had fights between armies, that last a set amount of time (3 days). This would actually liven up the low level fights, and only affect towns that have had fighting ravaging the countryside.
 

Oltopeteeh

Recruit
The logic of bandits is to rob the richest. It would be reasonable to tie the bandit multiplier to prosperity, security.

Also, bandits will migrate from poor lands to rich lands after spawning.

You can add a payoff for the peasants, and not just for the hero.
and a reduced reward for peasants robbed but not killed.
The main income of looters is reket, payment for "protection".
Only a stupid predator crap where he lives.

Alternatively, an ambush mechanic. Chance of encountering bandits halfway for everyone. Peasants, caravans, even lords with weak armies. Ransom for the nobles is a great income for bandits too :smile:

Looters have more bludgeoning damage. Killing is less profitable than robbing and selling into slavery. In life, and not like now in the game.
 

Ask

Sergeant
2.) Have a 'Defend Home' option for clan parties that keeps them from joining armies and only patrolling around the clan's fiefs.
This is a somewhat less useful option since it doesn't do much to ensure villagers aren't sidetracked, though it might help ensure villages also don't get raided. Its also probably the easier option. Would also make sure the AI always had a party from each clan in this mode as well.
This should already be in the game and it infuriates me that it isn't

3.) Rework the looter spawn system.
Looter parties tend to breed like rabbits in the game. I'd lower the number of overall looter parties, then add deserter parties for those areas that have had fights between armies, that last a set amount of time (3 days). This would actually liven up the low level fights, and only affect towns that have had fighting ravaging the countryside.
The deserter idea is pretty cool!
 
Top Bottom