Punishments

[Stue (DC)]

For some time I had idea to open such threads, where all those punishments in-game are listed.

These are options that are sometimes looks as if they lack logic, or it is hard to find some backing to them, or it is unclear how they contribute to gameplay at all, but as a common trait, they cased more or less annoyance without anything positive to be ever expected.

To avoid forum clogging, my idea is that all such punishment be listed here, message by message, and when someone wants to comment specific punishment, he/she can use quotes.

I will begin with some current punishment I found, which finally triggered this whole thread:

currently, during appointing some lord, I found that all eligible candidates have the same claim strength. when i appointed one of them, locals protested "as they were other nobles with the same claim." i mean LOL  is there any opportunity that appointment will not cause additional punishment?

if you appoint someone with weaker claim, locals protest. if you appoint someone with equal claim, locals protest again. and, as currently one noble with strongest claim is appointed, i learned what happen than. nothing.


would it not be common sense that lord with weaker claim causes protest, lord with equal claim causes no effect, and lord with stronger claim causes some small, no matter how tiny, benefit?!

i mean we are human beings here, if we receive some punishment we expect some rewards as well, to have emotions in balance "punishment-or-nothing" is very, very negative message sent to us. why? someone hates us because we are playing bm at all?

[Fleugs]

No. The idea that the one with the strongest claim has... the strongest claim. So anything less (normal, weak, very weak) is ... less. And will trigger protest. Sounds *very* logical to me.

[fodder]

i think the problem might well be "equal" claims aren't equal, but haven't figured out how to distinguish them.

[jaune]

Eh, ofcourse if there is equal claims, supporters of those who have equal climes will protest.

[Chenier]

currently, during appointing some lord, I found that all eligible candidates have the same claim strength. when i appointed one of them, locals protested "as they were other nobles with the same claim." i mean LOL  is there any opportunity that appointment will not cause additional punishment?

*Seriously*? This is really lame. I don't care how realistic it is, that's just another example of penalties being thrown on people for no good reason where there weren't any before. See thread: Acquiring new regions becoming historically harder.

There's no fun in that at all.

Give the region a stat *boost* if the one with the strongest claim is appointed, no change if one of equal claim is appointed, and whatever if the strongest claim(s) are ignored (as long as its reasonable). Penalties no matter what (or almost) just suck.

[Bedwyr]

This is almost creepily mirroring a discussion the devs had yesterday about the claims system.  It's a known annoyance, and once the rest of the "immediate" stuff is done I'm hoping to get this changed.

[Stue (DC)]

As idea was to present as much such things as possible, here it is number 2:

Picking up volunteers

As this option appears now and than, is rare and you can get just one or two men too often, why even more often you cannot find a single volunteer?

couple of days ago, i was using offered option to pick volunteers three turns in a row, but did not find one single soldier. i experience that as some slap in my face    Finding one single volunteer means almost nothing in strategical respect, but gives you at least feeling that you are doing something.

if there are no volunteers to be found, is it not logical that such option should not be offered, and if option is offered, than at least one single men should be gained instead of feeling like someone is telling you "haha, once more you spend all your hours for nothing". in academy you at least "keep your skills sharp" but with volunteers you receive absolutely nothing, and with such prospect, the expected tendency is to avoid using option at all.

[Indirik]

The fact that you can do something does not mean you will be successful at doing it. You use your hours, you take your chances. Like telling tales, recruiting volunteers is not supposed to be something on which you can rely on a regular basis.

And, as always, if the abilities of a particular class/subclass don't suit you, then don't be that class/subclass. That's why we have several different ones from which you ca choose.

[De-Legro]

As idea was to present as much such things as possible, here it is number 2:

Picking up volunteers

As this option appears now and than, is rare and you can get just one or two men too often, why even more often you cannot find a single volunteer?

couple of days ago, i was using offered option to pick volunteers three turns in a row, but did not find one single soldier. i experience that as some slap in my face    Finding one single volunteer means almost nothing in strategical respect, but gives you at least feeling that you are doing something.

if there are no volunteers to be found, is it not logical that such option should not be offered, and if option is offered, than at least one single men should be gained instead of feeling like someone is telling you "haha, once more you spend all your hours for nothing". in academy you at least "keep your skills sharp" but with volunteers you receive absolutely nothing, and with such prospect, the expected tendency is to avoid using option at all.

Just means your Hero hasn't been Heroic enough. I don't get the option much but generally manage to pick up 3+ men when I do

[Geronus]

Just means your Hero hasn't been Heroic enough. I don't get the option much but generally manage to pick up 3+ men when I do

It also matters what region you're in. Well populated city/townsland? They'll be beating down your door. Half devastated woodland? Crickets.

[psymann]

currently, during appointing some lord, I found that all eligible candidates have the same claim strength. when i appointed one of them, locals protested "as they were other nobles with the same claim." i mean LOL  is there any opportunity that appointment will not cause additional punishment?

Odd, the other day I saw a lord elected who had no claim on the region at all (and was a knight of a neighbouring duchy under the same realm).
There was also a knight of the region for which the lordship was open, who was therefore already a member of the region and the duchy, and also had a weak claim on the region.

Yet despite the claim of the local knight being ignored, and despite a slight reduction in estate coverage soon after as well, the stats appear to have either remained in mid 90s or risen from mid 90s to 100.  There was certainly no protesting and no penalty that I can see.

[Stue (DC)]

The fact that you can do something does not mean you will be successful at doing it. You use your hours, you take your chances. Like telling tales, recruiting volunteers is not supposed to be something on which you can rely on a regular basis.

And, as always, if the abilities of a particular class/subclass don't suit you, then don't be that class/subclass. That's why we have several different ones from which you ca choose.

I opened this thread in attempt to some general "punishments" spread game-wide, so it is not an issue of some particular option that annoys me and which should therefore be avoided.

I am just pointing to "double punishment" as I feel it - if there are no volunteers to pick, option should not appear; if option appears, at least some volunteers should be picked. One or two men mean nothing from "strategic" point of view, but unnecessary slap is avoided.

Or - that option should be open all the time, than picking none would make more sense.

[fodder]

elections don't give a toss about claims. and no protest either

[Stue (DC)]

Number 3 - wounds worsening.

After some weeks of looking at that, it is hard to feel anything but annoyance. Older characters (which means everyone over 35) can only expect wound to worsen and worsen, probably in 9 out of 10 cases.

I truly do not see how that can contribute to the game in any way. would anyone ever be amused with wounds worsening experience? i doubt so. Can some roleplay be created around that? Hardly, who would be inspired by permanent annoyance...

I believe most if not all players would easier accept to be notified at once that they will be wounded for five days instead of experiencing that endless worsening and "conditions unchanged".

That looks like one more feature made with assumpition that bm is overly dynamic game, which needs to be slowed down by such things... As far as  know bm is slow-paced game and such things slow everything to state of apathy.

[Indirik]

Wounds do not always worsen. I know from personal experience that they sometimes get better immediately, without you losing any playing time at all. And I see enough complaining from infiltrators about wounds never lasting long that I know that your claims simply are not true.