Taking new regions becoming historically harder

[Phellan]

It's important to make sure that people who micromanage don't get too much for their effort.  If it's enough to confer a solid advantage, it will be seen as necessary.

Could some of these micromanaging bonuses be given to the character, instead of all the bonuses conveying to the Region (and hence the Realm which can make it seem "necessary").  Beyond the additional honour and prestige.   Improved ability to do do courtier work, additional gold or goods given to them by appreciative minor-nobles for their work, etc.   Bonuses that are applied to the character (or Lord) for their efforts.

[Indirik]

Could some of these micromanaging bonuses be given to the character, instead of all the bonuses conveying to the Region (and hence the Realm which can make it seem "necessary").  Beyond the additional honour and prestige. Improved ability to do do courtier work, additional gold or goods given to them by appreciative minor-nobles for their work, etc.   Bonuses that are applied to the character (or Lord) for their efforts.

Almost any bonus you can give to the character will benefit the realm. Either that or the "benefit" really isn't worth it. The main benefit of micromanagement is improved income. You do buro work to improve the region so you make more gold. Shortcutting that to make buro work directly produce gold for the lord doesn't seem like it would really have much effect. You're still generating more gold for putting in more time.

[Phellan]

I think that depends on what you define as a benefit.   I think it would be nice to see that a courtier who spends a LOT of time maintaining the regions of a realm should be more effective at doing work - but only in those regions.  They know the region, what's going on, and who to talk too.    If they take some time off from that - the locals change, new minor nobles take over positions and so they return to normal abilities.

The gold/produce suggestion is more like how you can gain honour and prestige from doing this work - if you bring a region up 20% as a courtier you yourself may not see any benefit (its probably not your region).   Maybe unique items specific to doing courtier/lord work?  Like a ledger, syllabus, book of law, etc - it provides bonuses to your ability to do the work but it suffers wear and tear (or fills up) and eventually you'll need a new one.  The only way to get another one is to be rewarded one for your work or efforts.

Obviously I'm just tossing out random suggests here, but there are ways to "reward" a character - items, skill improvements, volunteers to the unit (or improvements to the captain), etc.   They may indirectly benefit the Realm (but, all courtier work does) - but they could be specific things you get for those actions that help you preform them later on (lilke combat helps improve your leadership, which helps your unit later on).

[Perth]

I think one of the issues with dropping production values to mid-low levels as "normal" is that the game play already established relies on regions being able to provide the 100% levels for food / gold production.

This again falls under the punishment idea - it doesn't matter if you reduce the normal gold output or not.   You're fundamentally altering the game play because of the changes to food and gold incomes from regions and cities.

I still think there should be a variety of estate types and that these should provide minimal bonuses to the regions in different areas - production, maximum tax level, travel speed, loyalty, food output, cost to repair, cost to train (effectiveness of training), or religious conversion / happiness.   There could be all sorts of secondary bonuses for fielding different combinations of estates as well.   It provides a larger set of "options" for players, can make each region unique (a city with say estates that boosts training effectiveness for a unit type and decreased repair costs would make for a more military oriented city, then one which had estates that provided a small bonus to tax collection unhappiness levels and production facilities and focused on making money.

Small, beneficial effects to the region that provide incentive to have estates - INCENTIVES.

None of this "well just take stuff away and make it normalized".   That's the same idea that was running around when estates first went into the game.    Put benefits in to estates - rather than taking away things and make estates readjust them to the way they were previously.   Its not a benefit if it just makes up for something we reduced that was there previously.

Sure - make 80% a normal - but maybe then there should be a 25% increase to gold and food productions for all regions?  THAT makes it equal and normalizes the game play - that way if you get to a 100% there actually is some positive effect on the net outcome as it stands now, rather than just having the net outcome of reducing all food and gold supplies by 20% as it stands proposed.

+1

Need to listen to this guy, people.

[Indirik]

I still think there should be a variety of estate types and that these should provide minimal bonuses to the regions in different areas - production, maximum tax level, travel speed, loyalty, food output, cost to repair, cost to train (effectiveness of training), or religious conversion / happiness.

All of this stuff, and more, is already planned for estates. Eventually. It won't be in the first release of the estate revamp, which will set up the framework for a completely revised method of assigning estates and collecting taxes. Once that is done and functional, then there are plans to allow nobles to buy buildings for their estates, each with different effects. Some buildings will have beneficial effects on the region, some will have direct benefit, financial or otherwise, for the knight. It is even possible that there may be some buildings that may benefit the knight, but have slight negative effects on the region overall. Hooks should also be in place to extend estates easily into the New Economy, whenever that comes around.

[Phellan]

All of this stuff, and more, is already planned for estates. Eventually. It won't be in the first release of the estate revamp, which will set up the framework for a completely revised method of assigning estates and collecting taxes. Once that is done and functional, then there are plans to allow nobles to buy buildings for their estates, each with different effects. Some buildings will have beneficial effects on the region, some will have direct benefit, financial or otherwise, for the knight. It is even possible that there may be some buildings that may benefit the knight, but have slight negative effects on the region overall. Hooks should also be in place to extend estates easily into the New Economy, whenever that comes around.

Awesome.   Sounds like a good and interesting change

[Bluelake]

All of this stuff, and more, is already planned for estates. Eventually. It won't be in the first release of the estate revamp, which will set up the framework for a completely revised method of assigning estates and collecting taxes. Once that is done and functional, then there are plans to allow nobles to buy buildings for their estates, each with different effects. Some buildings will have beneficial effects on the region, some will have direct benefit, financial or otherwise, for the knight. It is even possible that there may be some buildings that may benefit the knight, but have slight negative effects on the region overall. Hooks should also be in place to extend estates easily into the New Economy, whenever that comes around.

Which makes me think:
1. people will be much more attached to their estates than they are today (which I think is great, improves roleplay, loyalty, etc)
2. when a knight leaves the service of the lord, what happens to the buildings? one way to put it, rp-wise, would be to say the estate in abandoned, and the next knight instead of building new stuff actually finds old buildings and gives them a purpose (this is only a text/rp suggestion)
3. will any of this show anywhere? will lords or anyone be able to know? theoretically, it should be quite easy to see what's built in a noble's estate (if anything with a scout report), and it would provide good RP material, but it can also provide micromanagement material and I don't see how to get the rp benefits while countering this effect.

But, this is off topic. Did the discussion about taking new regions already give everything it could give?

[Indirik]

Which makes me think:
1. people will be much more attached to their estates than they are today (which I think is great, improves roleplay, loyalty, etc)
2. when a knight leaves the service of the lord, what happens to the buildings? one way to put it, rp-wise, would be to say the estate in abandoned, and the next knight instead of building new stuff actually finds old buildings and gives them a purpose (this is only a text/rp suggestion)
3. will any of this show anywhere? will lords or anyone be able to know? theoretically, it should be quite easy to see what's built in a noble's estate (if anything with a scout report), and it would provide good RP material, but it can also provide micromanagement material and I don't see how to get the rp benefits while countering this effect.

But, this is off topic. Did the discussion about taking new regions already give everything it could give?

• I agree. Attachment to the land is a good thing. Buildings would allow the knight to customize their estate, and perhaps increase its income potential.
• I'm in favor of leaving the buildings on the estate for the next knight. One possibility is that the chance of the buildings being there depends on how long the estate has been abandoned. The faster w new knight is given the estate, the more likely the buildings are to still be there.
• This has, so far as I'm aware, not yet been determined. Yes, some buildings, such as a mill or blacksmith shop, should be obvious. But some things, like a private chapel, would not be so obvious.

Of course, we need to actually get the revised estates put in and working before any of this building stuff can be added.

[Chenier]

What's the ETA to not having any knights not ruin your hopes of your region ever quickly recovering anymore?

[Anaris]

What's the ETA to not having any knights not ruin your hopes of your region ever quickly recovering anymore?

New estates. We're working on it, but no ETA.

[Chenier]

New estates. We're working on it, but no ETA.

Blizzard-style? I guess BT will be back in shape in '17, then.

[Stue (DC)]

Peasant Revolt   (2 hours, 37 minutes ago)
The people in XXX are revolting!
The revolting peasants have kicked the local lord and his court out, and demand that a more capable leader be put in his place!
Getting rid of their old, disliked lord results in the peasants being more hopeful and content with their lot. Morale rises 9% and independence falls.


This happens on turn change, after lord took command of the region, before any sensible work could be accomplished. Few days ago, peasants also got rid of other lord, hating him, being a little more happy when he is ousted.

At the same time, those two nobles are the only ones with sensible claims, so appointing someone else creates even more dissent.


Sometimes I think situation is nearing absurd... What was discusses in some other thread as cumulation of punishment seems to be visible in this case too.

After 2,5 years of play I had enough opportunity to learn how to deal with stubborn regions, but these days it seems there is no way to accomplish things. We had one region where several courtiers plus lord made attempts for about month and a half, and whatever, really whatever we do makes no any change: estate coverage 300-400%, taxes lowered to bare minimum, and tons of courtier, priest, diplomat work, royal presence - and region of 1000 population cannot move from very bottom in month and a half.

This is not fun at all, and I am becoming to believe that tweaks made some things unplayable.

I myself have record of bringing very hard regions to great stability, not once, when many did not believe it is possible, but let us assume i am still not competent enough... who is competent, than? if other nobles have the same problem, also lords with much experience, is it really possible that all of us are completely incapable? i doubt so.

[Anaris]

Translation:

"I'm having trouble with this one region.  Therefore, the entire game sucks and is unplayable."

If you can't get a region to stability with "several courtiers plus lord...estate coverage 300-400%, taxes lowered to bare minimum, and tons of courtier, priest, diplomat work, royal presence", then you're obviously doing something wrong, because I've seen dozens of regions brought from absolute rock bottom to full stats with way less than that.

[Telrunya]

Just got Enubec patched up and ready to go with just a few Nobles, so yes it's still very much possible. Of course it's getting looted to the ground now, yet again, but the point remains. My main tip is to use your diplomats / Priests before you TO the region, it will make a huge difference. If you do have a destroyed region, make sure to keep control up with Police Work.

[Stue (DC)]

as i mentioned it can be up to me and others who make efforts.

and i also mention that, though possible, I do not believe that. it is neither issue of one region nor even one continent, that is what i currently see in these times in many regions on many continents.

i think key point was in reducing courtier effectiveness.

before, when region was at bottom, army normally took care of control. civil work in such regions is mostly limited because of low population. so good number of courtiers that would work very hard while region is on low could raise region from very bottom, and than lot of additional effort would further improve the region in days to come.

currently, it seems courtier effectiveness is largely reduced, so they never raise region so much to at least overcome what falls back at next turn change, and region remains to endlessly perpetuate at the very bottom.

and i admit to not understand some daily reports any more - if estate coverage is reported as excellent, if people enjoy low tax rates, if there is no mention of independence on that turn, no mention of distance from capital, no mention of majority religion issues, than why the heck morale is falling 11%, which is in contradiction with the rest of report and has no any conceivable explanation?