Title:
Optimal number of nobles per region
Summary: A lord cannot effectively govern a region all by himself. Regions should have a preset
optimal number of nobles in order to maintain good order, and achieve maximum production. The specific requirement would depend on the size and type of region. Let's say min. 4 nobles per city, 5 for large cities, 3 for townslands, 3 for rurals, and 1 for badlands.
Details: A region cannot achieve maximum production if it doesn't have enough nobles to manage it properly. (Note that I'm talking about
implied management, it doesn't require the nobles to actually do anything differently) If a region drops below the minimum, law & order, production, & morale drop proportionally. For example, if the
optimal number of nobles is 3 but the region has only 1 (a lord) then the maximum achievable production, loyalty, morale would be, let's say 50 or 60%. With a lord and 1 knight, the maximum rises to 75-80%, and with a lord and 2 knights (the optimal number) you can finally achieve 100%.
Optional feature: If a region goes rogue due to neglect, the same nobles are not immediately allowed back in, which means the duke needs to appoint somebody new. (I got this idea while reading about Tostig Godwinson, Earl of Northumbria who mismanaged his region so badly that the population revolted and refused to let him back in.)
Benefits:
- Increased density;
- Increased RP;
- Fealty, bargaining, and rewarding loyalty become much more important. If I need another knight to stabilise my region, I need to woo him and make it worth his while; I might also have to negotiate his release from his current liege by offering compensation or promises that I may (or may not) intend to keep; dukes and rulers can induce nobles to manage undesirable (but strategically important) regions by promising them a promotion, and if they fail to keep their promises, cheated nobles will have a good RP pretext to abandon the region and laugh an evil laugh while it descends into roguedom;
- Higher-ups will need to engage more with their vassals, which makes it more interesting for the knights, especially newbies who might be shy at first about initiating interactions with other players; dukes and lords can no longer just be drones.
- It's consistent with Tom's credo that every decision has a consequence. Realms can still choose to take as many regions as they are capable of, but there is a cost that goes along with spreading themselves too thinly. So Realm A with 30 nobles and 30 regions may look impressive on the map, but Realm B with 30 nobles and 15 regions will likely have more wealth and a stronger army.
- It fixes the anomaly in the current game in which it's actually better for lords if they have no knights, because knights cut into their tax revenue. This shouldn't be the case. It should be in the lord's interest to attract knights to his region. (I know even Anaris agrees with me about that)
Possible Downsides/Exploits: Nothing we can't handle. Shifting loyalties, hard-bargaining, back-stabbing, managed abandonment of regions