Two sides of " enabled death "

[Eugene Shutto]

One side : things get spicy with enabled death option. Battles are no joke and someone can get killed, etc.

Another side : when you lead big army to fight another big army or besiege a castle and you participate in this battle - someone will die , like 1 or 2 lords per battle. 10 battles - 10-20 lords dead. 1 year of wars you participate - your kingdom gonna fall apart because only few lords alive and it means you can't gather big armies anymore.
Another kingdoms never have their lords die in the simulation battles, so they have their roster full and you don't.
Will we get any solution or death mechanic will stay like it is.
My opinion is to apply death chance to simulation battles but reduce possibility. Also add more clan members so they can replace fallen ones.
Your thoughts ?

 

[Bloc]

I think they can make it slightly more complicated which might bring a better flavour to the game.

They can add "command from distance" type of option to lords. Which is dependent to a possibility and this possibility value is tied to their perks. Meaning the following:
- Lord has some perks, a true commander, always joins his battles on his own = there is a slight extra chance that he is among one of the dead or wounded. In the simulation, this also brings some advantage for his army because he is leading them directly.
- Lord has some perks or lack of some perks, never joins battles. Even if you face him as the player he can choose not to involve in - until he is the last one he can always send others to frontline ( basically in order of spawn, he will be the last ) In simulation this brings disadvantage in terms of winning rate. If he is fighting with the player but not joined with his soldiers = less morale for their troops. No skill loss, only morale.

They also have to bring execution to each other based on their relationship with each other ( this actually what we have for player right now. If they truly hate you, they can execute you - although I saw that line in code and Im not sure if that even kicked in before for anyone so far )

 

[Eugene Shutto]

Lord has some perks, a true commander, always joins his battles on his own = there is a slight extra chance that he is among one of the dead or wounded. In the simulation, this also brings some advantage for his army because he is leading them directly.

Yep , or may be traits , so traits will mean something at last.

They also have to bring execution to each other based on their relationship with each other ( this actually what we have for player right now. If they truly hate you, they can execute you - although I saw that line in code and Im not sure if that even kicked in before for anyone so far )

Guess it still there but some bugs block it.
Also it will make relation system more matter.


Also would be nice to have a chance to kill gang leaders in the fight , so you can get rid of those who you don't like.

 

[Bloc]

They also have to enable some relationship penalty when opponent lord dies in the battle. Obviously it's an honourable death, but still, some family members should be affected at least.
I had a great relationship with one person once and his father died in a battle against me. We are still super cool with him. That's weird. (I'm not sure if this is added with new versions tho)

 

[vonbalt]

They just need to lower the base chance for a hero dying a bit and it'll be perfect for me since the current 10% chance that a fallen hero will die is a bit too much, maybe droping it to 8 or 5 and making it more affected by the medicine skill would be perfect.

Would also love if heroes could die in AIxAI battles and if the player could also die in battle, the dynastic system is there for exactly this reason so that when one lord falls his relatives will take his place and keep the clan alive

I for one would think 2 or 3 times before sucidely charging if my character could die in battle (a small chance would still be a chance) and this would improve things a lot to me, maybe for once i would use the retreat feature if things went bad since capture would be best than death lol

 

[Eugene Shutto]

They just need to lower the base chance for a hero dying a bit and it'll be perfect for me since the current 10% chance that a fallen hero will die is a bit too much, maybe droping it to 8 or 5 and making it more affected by the medicine skill would be perfect.

Would also love if heroes could die in AIxAI battles and if the player could also die in battle, the dynastic system is there for exactly this reason so that when one lord falls his relatives will take his place and keep the clan alive

I for one would think 2 or 3 times before sucidely charging if my character could die in battle (a small chance would still be a chance) and this would improve things a lot to me, maybe for once i would use the retreat feature if things went bad since capture would be best than death lol

Oh yeah , can you imagine this with iron man mode when you can't just load saved game ...
This will change gameplay.

 

[Dabos37]

I think that endless wars/battles and how much time we have to wait for kids being available is part of the problem.

 

[dannazgu]

I don't tthink hey they need to tone down the chance of death like @vonbalt said, they just need to make the enable deaths in battle that the player controlled hero are not in. C10 % is already too ****ing low, lower than that would be impossible to death happens

It not only would be much more immersive, but something that could change the world too without the player interfering all the time, we can't be at every battle, we can't join more than one faction or control more than one. So, why not put a mechanism the allows death in battles to AI lords without the player.

 

[Eugene Shutto]

I don't tthink hey they need to tone down the chance of death like @vonbalt said, they just need to make the enable deaths in battle that the player controlled hero are not in. C10 % is already too ****ing low, lower than that would be impossible to death happens

It not only would be much more immersive, but something that could change the world too without the player interfering all the time, we can't be at every battle, we can't join more than one faction or control more than one. So, why not put a mechanism the allows death in battles to AI lords without the player.

With current 10 % lords will murder each other at very first year. And some clans have only 3 members.
May be will be good lower the chance but increase only if player personally kills enemy lord.

 

[Marek15]

Some sort of scarring/injury system that tracks the number of defeats in battle is an idea.
Basically each hero, player included, has a set number of defeats they can survive with 100% chance. However after crossing the threshold they have a chance of dying, growing with each defeat.

 

[Bloc]

Basically each hero, player included, has a set number of defeats they can survive with 100% chance. However after crossing the threshold they have a chance of dying, growing with each defeat.

Why? If you are not injured or anything, your chance should be the same. I think what you mean would be more logical if the chance of dying increases based on your health at the start of the battle - i.e. if you are already severely injured, you are more likely to die after you are fallen

 

[dannazgu]

With current 10 % lords will murder each other at very first year. And some clans have only 3 members.
May be will be good lower the chance but increase only if player personally kills enemy lord.

I understand your point, it's just an opinion.. I think 10% is low, because you never get death at every battle you have, sometimes the lords are just wounded and get imprisioned.. but, death is still low on battles, you see more a wounded icon than death icons..

And that's the point of the Dynasty mechanism, right? Some clans must fall so another rises to power.. It's a game of thrones, literally speakin not mentioning anything

 

[Eugene Shutto]

I understand your point, it's just an opinion.. I think 10% is low, because you never get death at every battle you have, sometimes the lords are just wounded and get imprisioned.. but, death is still low on battles, you see more a wounded icon than death icons..

And that's the point of the Dynasty mechanism, right? Some clans must fall so another rises to power.. It's a game of thrones, literally speakin not mentioning anything

I think your option will be good if they stop cutting each other's throats 24/7. There should be more business that just war. ( as you wait in your settlement, your settlement get prosperity as some perks describe , but now lords don't do that )Also need more heirs in the clans who can replace fallen family members.

 

[vonbalt]

I think your option will be good if they stop cutting each other's throats 24/7. There should be more business that just war. ( as you wait in your settlement, your settlement get prosperity as some perks describe , but now lords don't do that )Also need more heirs in the clans who can replace fallen family members.

yeah when i said that 10% was too much was based on how the game right now is endless wars and battles one after the other, there is a major field battle or siege going anywhere on the map almost constantly and that would deplete the nobles pool a bit too fast in the current timescale.

I use a mod to accelerate the passing of time and it gets so much better for my tastes atleast, i get to see lords growing, fighting, dying and being replaced but still have time to play and build my character kinda like crusader kings, the default settings of it make each season last 7 in-game days (so 28-days a year) instead of vanilla 21 (that's 84-days a year) and you can change it to your hearts content.

Pacemaker mod by zijistark

 

[dannazgu]

I think your option will be good if they stop cutting each other's throats 24/7. There should be more business that just war. ( as you wait in your settlement, your settlement get prosperity as some perks describe , but now lords don't do that )Also need more heirs in the clans who can replace fallen family members.

I agree, there's a big road to go yet... They said in peace times lords would be more closer to their fiefs, castle and towns, so maybe a bit further down the road, along with the NPC marriages working *which now is my most expected feature to continue a game play, a serious one anyway)
I don't think need more heirs, to be honest goo portion of nobles and clan leaders are on their middle 30s, the old one can die after 2 years for all i care (LOL), they're old anyway. But, with NPC marriage these dead leafs would stop the problem, don't agree? Births will be more common

@vonbalt i didn't meant to disrepct, your comment was just a base, since i never saw some data or percentage about death rates

 

[vonbalt]

@vonbalt i didn't meant to disrepct, your comment was just a base, since i never saw some data or percentage about death rates

No disrespect taken my dude, we are all just passionately trying to make a game we like even better otherwise none would be in the forums talking about it and making suggestions

 

[dannazgu]

No disrespect taken my dude, we are all just passionately trying to make a game we like even better otherwise none would be in the forums talking about it and making suggestions

They need implement the basic of NPC marriage, so that we can see how far the dynasty feature can reach/become, so we can give a productive suggestion about death rates and stuff

 

[vonbalt]

They need implement the basic of NPC marriage, so that we can see how far the dynasty feature can reach/become, so we can give a productive suggestion about death rates and stuff

indeed, the mod Houses of Calradia implements it (except for player marrying off his clan members) and it works great, won't remove from my modlist until TW implements their own version.

 

[Eugene Shutto]

I don't think need more heirs, to be honest goo portion of nobles and clan leaders are on their middle 30s, the old one can die after 2 years for all i care (LOL), they're old anyway. But, with NPC marriage these dead leafs would stop the problem, don't agree? Births will be more common

I agree that ai marriages will fix problem with 2+ generations, but what about 1st generation? Some clans have only 3 members. And when player participates a battle there is 10 % change that npc lord will be stabbed with pitchfork by peasant and dies.

They need implement the basic of NPC marriage

the mod Houses of Calradia implements

Does it work on 1.5.4 ? So bride goes in her grooms clan?

 

[vonbalt]

Does it work on 1.5.4 ? So bride goes in her grooms clan?

Yes, it has been updated to 1.5.4 already (only pacemaker from the same author that you use to speed up the passage of time hasn't because it needs the MCM that still hasn't been updated for the beta version)

Houses of Calradia has lots of checks to see if it's advantageous for a clan to arrange a marriage like if they are low in numbers and need more heirs, same kingdom and culture preferences etc then it waits until the potential candidates are atleast 27 (to give the player time to arrange their favorite marriage before the AI) and make it with the bride joining the groom's clan just like when the player marries someone.