Feature Cut: Takeovers

[Tom]

Now that has you alarmed there, hasn't it?  ;D

No, I don't want to remove takeovers. However, I would like to merge the different kinds of takeovers into one, and make the process more fluid. So instead of starting a kind of takeover, you would initiate a takeover, and get additional options that make it friendly or brutal. So there would be only one kind of takeover, but you would not just sit there while it happens, you would have the option of actually doing stuff, and what you do determines what kind of takeover it is. Basically, each turn, everyone gets the option to be brutal or friendly, or a mix. With the corresponding changes in region morale, loyalty, etc.

[Draco Tanos]

Doesn't sound bad at all.  Provided friendly takeovers won't rely on the region's population anymore as per civil work. :/

[Anaris]

I like this.

...Don't really have time right now for more cogent commentary ;)

[Velax]

More options to do stuff would be nice. Especially with hostile takeovers, I feel like I'm just sitting on my ass for days at a time, unable to do anything while the game decides if the takeover will work or not.

[Alpha]

After just sitting through two long takeovers this is a welcomed idea. 

[egamma]

I like this as well. But what happens if someone performs civil work, and some else loots? Will production go up and morale go down, but both move the process along?

[Revan]

So, one of the first things that comes to my head is that Hostile/Brutal colony takeover's would now be feasible (and thus, much more successful). That could make life much more interesting! Also, no more of this rubbish of a single renegade noble being able to fail a Friendly/Hostile takeover with a solitary act of looting. Likewise, the possibility we'll have more to do in brutal circumstances once a bare handful of occupying nobles have provoked the peasants and ensured all future looting attempts fail.

Change does sound really good to be honest. The only down side I can think of is if the decision is made to make successful takeover's dependent on widespread use of all these extra options. Just as takeovers can be immensely boring with nothing to do right now, it would be annoying if takeover's instead became a chore with so many nobles having to organise synchronised action for success.

[egamma]

"after sunset, order your men to loot! Loot the place to the ground!"

"after dawn, order your men to repair all the buildings that were mysteriously damaged in the night!"

Your men are confused and having to repair the damage they caused causes a morale drop of 10 points, on top of the 20 points from the civil work. Your men beat you up, take your gold, and go do some more looting on their way out of town.

[Bedwyr]

I like it.  Flexibility is always good.

[Perth]

Sounds like a pretty neat idea, I would definitely be supportive of hearing more about this and moving in this direction.

[Indirik]

The only down side I can think of is if the decision is made to make successful takeover's dependent on widespread use of all these extra options. Just as takeovers can be immensely boring with nothing to do right now, it would be annoying if takeover's instead became a chore with so many nobles having to organise synchronised action for success.

This is something I was thinking about, too, but couldn't think of a good way to say it.

I guess I'd be concerned that we could go too far with it, and TOs could only be successful if you had a lot of nobles clicking their "Be hostile" links every turn.

[vonGenf]

This is something I was thinking about, too, but couldn't think of a good way to say it.

I guess I'd be concerned that we could go too far with it, and TOs could only be successful if you had a lot of nobles clicking their "Be hostile" links every turn.

Wouldn't it be easier to coopt current mechanic rather than creating a new hostile button?

I was thinking along the line of

-If there is looting - the TO works as a BTO
-If there is civil work - the TO works as a FTO
-if no one does anything - the TO works as a HTO
-If people contradict each other, the TO doesn't work and you're wasting your time.

[Indirik]

So... if the region hates you, and some moron tries to do civil work, the TO fails because the game assumes you're trying to do an FTO?

[vonGenf]

So... if the region hates you, and some moron tries to do civil work, the TO fails because the game assumes you're trying to do an FTO?

Kind of, yes. Of course, if you have 15 nobles looting and one doing civil work, then the one doing civil work is getting drowned in the crowd. But if a good chunk of the nobles do civil work and there is not enough looting, then most likely the TO fails.

It's kind of like now: it is possible to make a mistake in how you do your TO. Except the mistake is not the sole decision of the one guy with the TO unit.

[Tom]

This is something I was thinking about, too, but couldn't think of a good way to say it.

I guess I'd be concerned that we could go too far with it, and TOs could only be successful if you had a lot of nobles clicking their "Be hostile" links every turn.

It won't be like that. As with most things in the game, the law of diminishing returns will be in effect, meaning that you will need a few nobles actually doing something for the TO to proceed nicely, but after the 3rd or so, the effects become smaller and smaller.