Warlord Suggestions

[Schoulayer]

For those who have never been a warlord before:
You become a 'warlord' when you have no alliegance to a king and still hold land.

There's a few things that bother me about how the warlord system is setup at the moment.

First, I can see how kings won't deal with you when you're just starting out and you only have a few castles.  The kings see you as a mere lord and clearly not their equal.  That should change as you accumulate more castles/towns.  The kings in this game will refuse to even consider a peace treaty with you, even if you have 19 castles and they only have 1 left.  To the end they see you as a mere lord holding lands for yourself.

So my first suggestion would be to elevate your status to that of a king after you've taken something like ~5 castles for yourself with no alliegances.

The second problem I have with being a warlord is eventually you kind of max out.  You reach a point where you can't take anything else because the moment you try to siege a castle in the northwestern part of your lands you lose two castles in the south eastern part.  Once your empire grows large enough you simply can't be everywhere at once and sieges come from all sides.

The kings in this game defend their lands on all sides through their nobles.  They can have ~20+ armies patrolling their lands and defending against foreign threats.

So my second suggestion is, once you've gained 'king' status, you should be able to detach your heroes from your army and let them lead armies of their own.  Your heroes could eventually become your nobles and help defend the land!

 

[jeroen]

i think it would be 'usefull' to offer a vassalage to the owner of the conquered castle, he will act like normal but on your side killing their d00ds.
next to promoting companions to lords and giving them fiefs, who will be more loyal to your side.
after all, an intimitaded lord is a backstabbing lord, unless you keep growning your power till he will feel like your side is the right one.
and the reason to have such a lord still is because, even for a short to long time, he will fight for you and defend your lands.

In that thought a loyalty system would work with a large empire/ vassalages.

 

[duinnin]

When I captured my first castle I wanted to give it to one of my companions, but alas it wasn't an option and I was sorely disappointed.  On top of handing lands over to your heroes, it would be nice to also transfer lands between lords over time -- limited to once per month, the lord removed dislikes you, etc.

 

[Schoulayer]

It makes more sense when you think about it - what is the point of giving heroes charisma if they can't effectively use it?  Every other stat helps to a much larger degree.

Later on if you make them nobles charisma and leadership would be a great boon to their party size.

 

[QuailLover]

You give a hero, for example Marnid, charisma, so he could boost his trade skill.

 

[pesja]

i think it would be 'usefull' to offer a vassalage to the owner of the conquered castle, he will act like normal but on your side killing their d00ds.
next to promoting companions to lords and giving them fiefs, who will be more loyal to your side.
after all, an intimitaded lord is a backstabbing lord, unless you keep growning your power till he will feel like your side is the right one.
and the reason to have such a lord still is because, even for a short to long time, he will fight for you and defend your lands.

In that thought a loyalty system would work with a large empire/ vassalages.

The more power you grow the more will the intimitaded lords look for a way to backstab you. The key is to never give your lords enough power (fiefs and money) so that they are capable of doing anything.

Good suggestion, that feature would really improve the game. If you are having problems defending all your towns and castles, fill up with more garrison. Never tought of that?

 

[Schoulayer]

A garrison without you defending is still rather gimp unless you fill it up with over 100 soldiers.  Doing that for every single castle takes forever (and costs a ton when you start taking over the map)

Also, castles aren't the only thing that requires defense.  Player directed nobles would be invaluable for protecting villages from being raided/looted.

From a realistic standpoint I don't see why you can't begin appointing nobles to help shoulder the burden of a growing empire 

 

[pesja]

fill up with between 200 and 500 in each castle. Have most of them recruits and you should be just fine. The enemy wont attack unless they know they can win the battle. So a 150 size army will never attack a castle with more men

 

[Schoulayer]

Thanks for the tip, I've been putting high quality huscarls and marksmen in my castles.  I'll try filling them up with hordes of recruits to avoid conflict altogether.

I'd still like to see hero nobles in this though

 

[pesja]

i know, its something we all want i think. We just have too wait and see until m&b2 comes out, maybe we are lucky=) Until then, fill up those garrison with every whore son and bastard child you can find

 

[Nikola]

this is a very good idea, however insted of your men becoming vassels, it be better if other vassals from conquered kingdoms offer. Another good sugestion is after you help a claimant grab a nation the developers should make it that you can over throw them and take there spot and vassals seeing as they got no hier and your 2nd in charge, sadly seeing as this might be the final beta its 50 50 if yours and my idea will be implemented, but i pray it does