New Estate Buildings Ideas

[Zakilevo]

It gives knights something to do. Also, help them familiarize building buildings once they become lords.

[Draco Tanos]

I'm personally a huyge fan of giving nobles a reason to become attached to their estates.  Right now, if you're removed by your lord or something else drives you from what SHOULD be considered your home, most just shrug it off.  If you've put time and investment into it, I believe most will actually do something about it.  Be it conflict between knights and lords or being more fervent in war.

[Zakilevo]

I'm personally a huyge fan of giving nobles a reason to become attached to their estates.  Right now, if you're removed by your lord or something else drives you from what SHOULD be considered your home, most just shrug it off.  If you've put time and investment into it, I believe most will actually do something about it.  Be it conflict between knights and lords or being more fervent in war.

Yes. Knights don't give a damn about losing their estates at the moment. It is not like they can't take it again :p. Give knights a way to invest in their regions will surely make them get attached more to their estates. They should act more desperately and feel frustrated when their regions are under assault, not shrug and get another estate to serve.

[Indirik]

IMO, the reason that knights shrug it off and leave is that getting kicked by your lord would suck. It would make you think your lord is an ass. And who wants to play a game as vassal to someone you think is an ass? I would much rather find a different lord that I think is fair and honest with me, and not likely to kick me out again at any time.

Let's face it, it's just gold. And who really cares about gold? Given the right reasons, you can get all the gold you really want just for the asking.

[Tom]

It's a balance. Yes, we want people to be attached to land, but not too strongly, because they also should be somewhat flexible and be able to move elsewhere instead of becoming frustrated.

So a bit of investment and attachment is a good thing. Too much is not.

[Indirik]

Yes, I agree that some attachment is good. But we also have to keep in mind that as far as knightts go, they are pretty powerless. They can be kicked out at any time with, essentially, no recourse. When the enemy comes to TO the region, they can't do anything to stop it. So losing it shouldn't be such a big deal that they get mad and quit.

[Zakilevo]

Yes, I agree that some attachment is good. But we also have to keep in mind that as far as knightts go, they are pretty powerless. They can be kicked out at any time with, essentially, no recourse. When the enemy comes to TO the region, they can't do anything to stop it. So losing it shouldn't be such a big deal that they get mad and quit.

Good point. That is exactly why these buildings should influence the region as a whole.

[Indirik]

There should be some purely selfish options. Some things that are bonuses for the knight, and do nothing for the region. We have also thought about options that could be detrimental to the region, as well. Knights of poor or unpopular lords could band together and build bandit hideouts or something to drop control and steal taxes.

[Zakilevo]

There should be some purely selfish options. Some things that are bonuses for the knight, and do nothing for the region. We have also thought about options that could be detrimental to the region, as well. Knights of poor or unpopular lords could band together and build bandit hideouts or something to drop control and steal taxes.

Remember that extra tax rate that used to exist? Why not give that option to the knights?

[Duvaille]

Zakilevo,

Now that is a brilliant idea! It could be so that the more estates had these bandit caves, the more efficient they would be overall. So angering one knight would be bad, but angering four would really cause some trouble.

Further, the effect should perhaps be impossible to observe directly by the lord. He would only see a drop in regions stats without a way for knowing for sure that one or more of his knights are grabbing gold for themselves.

[Velax]

The issue with these "Let's give knights a way to piss off/hurt/damage the income of their lord" is that there's currently no reason at all for a lord to take on knights, other than to help the realm. Having knights does nothing for a lord whatsoever, and in most cases actually reduces the amount of gold they get. So if knights start banding together to hurt their lord, he's just going to boot them all without a second thought.

[Zakilevo]

Remember, estates are given to knights for their service and loyalty. They should be able to do what they want in their own estates, like taxing for some extra cash and stuff.

[Duvaille]

Velax,

I beg to differ. The strength of a lord is quite a bit in the strength of his vassals, at least that is how I see it. But then again, there is no strength in vassals that are not loyal, but rather parasitic instead.

Was it not the case before the estate revamp that you needed knights to properly maintain your region? We are not going back there, but something similar in nature could be had with the estate buildings. If a lord needs knights to occupy his estates in order to have the buildings in the said estates to do any good, then there is balance there.

Just as an example you could have only one large building at your estate. A lord could have one large building at his own estate, but if he wanted more large buildings operational, he would need to have a knight for each. If some of the knights then choose to have little extra income on the side, they could do that and perhaps even get away with it, if it is more important for the lord to have the buildings doing whatever they do and if there is a shortage of knights.

As for right now, it would perhaps be silly to offer such options for knights if there is nothing to balance it.

[Foundation]

I see Velax's point.  Currently a lord earns as much without knights as the maximum he can earn with knights... which means if knights can damage his income, might as well not create any estates in the first place. :-/

[Indirik]

Knights = political power. If all you care about is gold, then sure, don't have knights. If, however, you want the attendant power and implicit political support, you need knights. And since you can get just as much gold with knights as you can without (if you set it up right), only the most greedy money-grubber who worships every last coin, and is completely blinded to the power advantages of having knights, will not have knights. Especially since gold to knights = more secure realm = more secure lordship = longer potential period of income.