What do you think about current influence costs at proposals ?

Currently viewing this thread:

mexxico

Developer
Currently in proposals player and other clan leaders can spend 10 influence (slightly favor), 40 influence (strongly favor) or 100 influence (fully push) for favoring any outcome. However it seems in most cases player cannot change what will be chosed even he / she spends 100 influence because lowest & highest limits are so low (10 influence / 100 influence) and clans mostly vote on same outcome all together (another problem, we are trying to differentiate selections of npc clans more however in most cases this is hard to achieve). So this making proposal feature is mostly not used by player (because it is useless in %90 cases).

I think making these amounts higher (especially lowest one) can result in better gameplay because more clans will stay abstain and player will be able to spend higher influence if he / she really wants to change current situation. What do you think about this? It can be good to collect more feedback about this issue from you.

Here is an example for comparing 10 / 40 / 100 vs 20 / 60 / 180 vs 30 / 75 / 200 for same cases :

rwHQz.png
 
Last edited:

Terco_Viejo

Spanish Gifquisition
Grandmaster Knight
More valid people than me will give you a specialised answer and more complete feedback regarding this section of the game. The only reason I write now is to applaud this kind of initiatives/threads, being able to give solid feedback by "what the fan wants / thinks about".

Big hug mexxico! 💪 😊
 
Mine aren’t well-tested observation, just a few anecdotal thoughts.

It does feel like there is a wide gulf- I’ve used the 100 influence cost to just barely change a close vote for a city I captured in my favor. But many times the, as you note, the other lords will all closely align with each other and there is no chance. Although I do wonder if that’s a side effect of prioritizing fiefless clans which serves a real purpose, whether it frustrates a player or not. Increasing the three amounts sounds like a good way to implement it that doesn’t get overly complicated (like having sub options to influence individual lords towards the player’s choice).

I imagine some people would be interested in spending influence to have themselves be an option in the vote when they are otherwise left out. Not sure how I feel about it but I see it come up a lot.

What guides AI lords in abstaining right now?
 

AJAJP_Juan

Knight at Arms
This takes players influence on decisions early on and increases it later, right now the player scrambles for influence until it reaches a point were it stops being something players worry about. But overall I prefer this higher limits rather than the current ones.
 

Blood Gryphon

Master Knight
WBVC
@mexxico I'd be fine with increasing the amount to allow the player more opportunities to make a difference, but I feel like we will end up with the same root issue where the AI nobles still hivemind make the same choice (just less of them will have the influence to vote). Most choices for proposals the AI is 100% for or against, I'd be fine with the current influence amounts if the AI nobles were less one minded and the players vote had a impact because the AI votes are much closer. Breaking close votes will make the player feel more important. Also if there are some votes kingdoms are split on, it makes the votes where they aren't split seem more important.

So really either way will help the situation, increasing the influence seems like a good fix if working out the AI hivemind is low probability.
 

Apocal

Master Knight
Currently in proposals player and other clan leaders can spend 10 influence (slightly favor), 40 influence (strongly favor) or 100 influence (fully push) for favoring any outcome. However it seems in most cases player cannot change what will be chosed even he / she spends 100 influence because lowest & highest limits are so low (10 influence / 100 influence) and clans mostly vote on same outcome all together (another problem, we are trying to differentiate selections of npc clans more however in most cases this is hard to achieve). So this making proposal feature is mostly not used by player (because it is useless in %90 cases).

I think making these amounts higher (especially lowest one) can result in better gameplay because more clans will stay abstain and player will be able to spend higher influence if he / she really wants to change current situation. What do you think about this? It can be good to collect more feedback about this issue from you.

Here is an example for comparing 10 / 40 / 100 vs 20 / 60 / 180 vs 30 / 75 / 200 for same cases :

rwHQz.png
Yeah, it was 300 max at the the start of EA and for some reason was reduced to 100. Change it back or even bring in the hammer of 500 or 1000 influence power votes. With that said, we need more methods of burning down vassal's influence as the ruler. Right now AI vassal influence just accumulates unless you go out of your way to do weird stuff to make them spend it.

I have to keep calling for totally unpopular policies to get my vassals to vote away their influence. It works but it isn't really meant to be used that way...
 
Last edited:
However it seems in most cases player cannot change what will be chosed even he / she spends 100 influence because lowest & highest limits are so low (10 influence / 100 influence)
That´s what I´ve mostly experienced like, no matter how much I spend, it won´t change the decision at all.

So any improvement for this feature is welcome.

And as always, thanks for beeing so dedicated!
 
This is a workaround to the problem, to be honest I feel that some level of oligarchy is good due the game seems to be inspired more in early medieval times where absolute monarchies wasn't that abundant, so I am against giving a full power to the King/Queen ... But! this approach requires mechanisms to influence lords supporting one option or other, what we have now it is not enough ... as far as I understood they will be more likely support you in fief votes if you have good relationships with them, but it doesn't matter when you vote go war or not.

For me a good approach will be having a vote council where you can speak and spend influence with lords before the vote and then proceed, only lords assisting the council (or sending a representative like his wife) can vote. It will be immersive, will add some politics layer to the game, will give you a reason to enter into a scene, etc and ... it is not going to happen, anyway thks for reading and I really appreciate your effort to get feedback from the forums. :wink:
 
This is a workaround to the problem, to be honest I feel that some level of oligarchy is good due the game seems to be inspired more in early medieval times where absolute monarchies wasn't that abundant, so I am against giving a full power to the King/Queen ... But! this approach requires mechanisms to influence lords supporting one option or other, what we have now it is not enough ... as far as I understood they will be more likely support you in fief votes if you have good relationships with them, but it doesn't matter when you vote go war or not.

For me a good approach will be having a vote council where you can speak and spend influence with lords before the vote and then proceed, only lords assisting the council (or sending a representative like his wife) can vote. It will be immersive, will add some politics layer to the game, will give you a reason to enter into a scene, etc and ... it is not going to happen, anyway thks for reading and I really appreciate your effort to get feedback from the forums. :wink:
+1000
 
I think this would make voting feel much more meaningful. I tend to always abstain unless I'm trying to get a fief, since even if I have 10x the influence of other clans I'm not able to spend enough to make a difference. If you could actually use more of the Influence you accumulate it would actually feel as though you are an influential clan rather than just a council member casting a ballot.
 
For me a good approach will be having a vote council where you can speak and spend influence with lords before the vote and then proceed, only lords assisting the council (or sending a representative like his wife) can vote. It will be immersive, will add some politics layer to the game, will give you a reason to enter into a scene, etc and ... it is not going to happen, anyway thks for reading and I really appreciate your effort to get feedback from the forums. :wink:
A way to change the minds of other clan leaders would be great.
 

mexxico

Developer
This is a workaround to the problem, to be honest I feel that some level of oligarchy is good due the game seems to be inspired more in early medieval times where absolute monarchies wasn't that abundant, so I am against giving a full power to the King/Queen ... But! this approach requires mechanisms to influence lords supporting one option or other, what we have now it is not enough ... as far as I understood they will be more likely support you in fief votes if you have good relationships with them, but it doesn't matter when you vote go war or not.

For me a good approach will be having a vote council where you can speak and spend influence with lords before the vote and then proceed, only lords assisting the council (or sending a representative like his wife) can vote. It will be immersive, will add some politics layer to the game, will give you a reason to enter into a scene, etc and ... it is not going to happen, anyway thks for reading and I really appreciate your effort to get feedback from the forums. :wink:

Yes it is just a workaround. In future it is possible they can place a better / developed voting system (where you change other clan's ideas - I cannot guarentee this but I know there are some ideas for this, this was already an issue discussed - it has pros and cons). For now (till that day comes) lets make things better with small touches.

Also for additional information currently effects of 3 choices are 0.2x 0.5x 1.0x, this means when you spend 10 influence its effect become 0.2x, if you spend 40 influence its effect become 0.5x, if you spend 100 influence its effect is 1.0x. Actually ratios between 10 - 40 - 100 is a bit weird (4x / 2.5x). These three numbers should have same ratio all something like 20 - 60 - 180 (3x all). Effects can be 2x all (already close to this 0.2 - 0.5 - 1.0). So when you select lowest one effect per influence become highest (currently it is still like this, but I prefer something like 20 - 60 - 180 instead of 10 - 40 - 100 (2 reasons : ratios between 3 choices are all same (3x of previous one) + min / max amounts are higher)). As you see player's effect on game's decisions increases when we increase amounts.

Current system's biggest disadvantage is after you press proposal you have nothing to do even selecting max amount is not enough. Then best you can do is staying abstain to not lose relation also.

One more addition (even it is not 100% related) : At 1.5.10 npc clans will not propose same proposals several days after rejection. For example if clan X propose making war aganist Battania and it is rejected somehow clan X or another clan will not propose this same proposal again after a short time. There will be 15 days between same proposals. So as a king player will be able to prevent some war / peace decision to happen even other clans mostly favor of it. Previously even player reject it same proposal was proposed again and again.
 
Last edited:

Blood Gryphon

Master Knight
WBVC
Yeah, it was 300 max at the the start of EA and for some reason was reduced to 100. Change it back or even bring in the hammer of 500 or 1000 influence. With that said, we need more methods of burning down vassal's influence as the ruler. Right now AI vassal influence just accumulates unless you go out of your way to do weird stuff to make them spend it.

I have to keep calling for totally unpopular policies to get my vassals to vote away their influence. It works but it isn't really meant to be used that way...
Vassals accumulating a massive amount of influence is a great point. Once your kingdom gets a ton of policies and you stop voting on them its is ridiculous how high some clans can get. My vassals just end up in armies constantly which is a good and bad thing.

EcUoV.jpg
1p8rM.jpg
9E-H6.jpg
8YeTI.jpg
Pk_Jd.jpg

Sorry for the kinda off topic.

@mexxico I would definitely prefer something like 20 - 60 - 180, would also be fine with it being higher.

Then best you can do is staying abstain to not lose relation also.
Also losing/gaining relation still doesn't happen when voting, does it work on your internal version?
 

D0c1

Knight at Arms
can it be made into a slider instead of buttons?
a good approach will be having a vote council where you can speak and spend influence with lords before the vote and then proceed, only lords assisting the council (or sending a representative like his wife) can vote. It will be immersive, will add some politics layer to the game, will give you a reason to enter into a scene, etc
i agree with this great idea except for the representative part.
 

Stromming

Sergeant at Arms
WBWF&SNWVC
I think a raise would be really needed.
However as others have already commented, the probably is that all the AI think the same.

The lack of individual personalities is really showing the limits of Bannerlord AI.

Really good thread and initiative mexxico!
 
Player status should also play part.To put it more precicely i wouldnt like for example to be a commoner/lowborn/not a vassal/no holdings, yet i magicaly can just spend influence and then have a bigger say than a most trusted Vassal or King/Queen him/herself.

There should be some sort of differential category system where even if you spend huge amount of influence you still need to be in certain bracket/status lvl within the kingdom to be able to actualy make an important impact with certain amount of influence and relations on specific things.

At this point in time there is just no point in even giving any sort of suggestion bcs it will be rejected bcs it isnt oversimplified todler lvl system that can be made within 2-3 weeks of work.

So i personaly wont go any deeper into the system that i would like to be in place bcs that just wont be in the game.
 

Gerrodot

Veteran
I agree that when the function is practically useless, it is not very good, but we should not turn the game into a style - what the player chooses, then it will be, I even think that in principle it is fair that the player in most cases loses the vote, especially as it was said above until recently, the player was a nobody - why should he succeed in most cases? This shouldn't be happening.

The game should not be predictable, as well as voting, we can use some Administrative resource, influence-to increase the chances, but this does not mean that the vote should be in favor of the former tramp.
 
I agree that when the function is practically useless, it is not very good, but we should not turn the game into a style - what the player chooses, then it will be, I even think that in principle it is fair that the player in most cases loses the vote, especially as it was said above until recently, the player was a nobody - why should he succeed in most cases? This shouldn't be happening.

The game should not be predictable, as well as voting, we can use some Administrative resource, influence-to increase the chances, but this does not mean that the vote should be in favor of the former tramp.
Yes the player should not always get his way, but his station should matter. As a king your choice should matter more than when you are a small noble. Most nobles would try to get on their kings good side.
That said, the player should have options other than spending influence to change another nobles vote via the barter system, giving him money, threatening him, or promising to join armies organised by that noble etc...
 

Trend

mexxico RSPCT man!

I vote :grin: for the same ratio for all the choices and higher cap for example:
x3 for 20 - 60 - 180 or 30 - 90 - 270

or something similiar and balanced (not x5 for 50 - 250 - 1250)

I hope some day for slider - spend what you want from your own influence.

I'm not sure if the AI must have this ability, because they accumulate it slower than player and may cause mayhem in kingdom related stuff when they blow it up voting for a castle.

But for the player, I think it will contribute for the general feel of the game, making impact, changing course of the realm, high stake, risky, with good and bad consequences, etc. related stuff for better gameplay and immersion.

Gerrodot I don't think I'm nobdoy with 5k influence, the wealthiest 4 towns in my kingdom (6-7k) all maxed out with the largest garrisons in the kingdom, with most largest party with higher tier units, 3 milions denars, leader of the most powerfull clan, better equiped, some good skills, killed more enemies alone (with party) or with companion parties, then half of my kingdom, sieged every fortress and town from the steps to the great Sea, and so on....while the four clans behind me all together have 3k influence with 2 towns and 6 castles.... You got the idea - those are the rules of all Calradian kingdoms, not some deep highborn-background-immersive-social-thing. We made it for 4-5 years and the rest of the clans in the world are strugling decades to aconplish it. Just a shadow to us :grin:
 
Last edited:
Top Bottom