To be perfectly blunt, I think BM should adopt the old adage, "If it isn't broken don't try to fix it".
The old estate system seemed fine to me. After the change we had tons of bugs going on which had a very negative impact on the game.
I didn't see anything wrong with the old takeover system and I never heard a single person complain about it in the four years I've been playing. Who knows what's going to go wrong now.
Instead of focusing on revamping old systems that work fine why not develop new ones to expand on aspects of the game that have limited possibilities.
Things 'broke' in the old TO system, 'fixed' in the new:
1. No more need for a single massive TO unit. Duke cant use 'TO unit' as the excuse for hoarding all the gold.
2. TO used to take just as long for a region with 5000 peasants, as for a region with 20. With the new system D'Hara did a TO in one day of Sallowwild.
3. A Friendly TO used to fail because of a single act of looting. Under the new system, the progress meter just slides towards fear.
4. Nobles used to just sit and wait, especially for a hostile TO; heroes and cavaliers couldn't do CW for friendly TO's, or looting for brutal TO's. Under the new TO everyone can participate.
As for estates, I think the fact that thanks to the new estate system, D'Hara has added 4 or 5 regions pretty much speaks for itself, doesn't it? Lots more lords and dukes running around now, and lots more space for additional nobles too. Under the old estate system we were stuck with certain requirements as far as nobles per region.
