Imperial/Hinterland Regions

[Medron Pryde]

I propose that nations be allowed to Takeover regions that don't count towards the noble/region limit.

These Imperial or Hinterland Regions would eat half the food of normal regions since they are more self reliant.  They would also produce half the normal food and gold of normal regions since they keep them.  All gold would go directly to the ruler rather than a duke.  No region lord can be appointed.  Takeovers would go twice as fast since they are less loyal to "their" realm.  Less likely to go rogue since they don't pay as many taxes.  More likely to switch loyalties to other neighboring realms, especially if next to a Noble-Ruled Duchy Core region.

Exact ratios open to discussion.  I used half as a starting point that seemed good.

Basically looking for a way to allow realms to expand their influence beyond current borders but have that influence be very sketchy.  When frontiers meet, regions could flip back and forth depending on which nations they have favorable opinions of.  And of course having a tendency to prefer joining a more closely controlled Noble-Ruled Duchy Core region next to them.

Nobles could influence future turnover via doing some of the things we currently have that make citizens like nations more or less.  Could make for some interesting "non-combat wars for influence" on the edges of larger empires.

[Vita`]

Uumm...not sure if this is a joke or not?

[Anaris]

In case this is not a joke:

A version of this is already on our public Developer Roadmap for the near future. We're even calling it Hinterlands.

[Medron Pryde]

Not a joke.

The current hard cutoff on TOs based on player population is adversely affecting gameplay at this time.

Maybe consider it a reminder that this is something we need now much more than we needed it when TOing was more open.

Something like this is now becoming necessary as many realms are hitting the "maximum size" they can expand to.

[Anaris]

Not a joke.

The current hard cutoff on TOs based on player population is adversely affecting gameplay at this time.

Maybe consider it a reminder that this is something we need now much more than we needed it when TOing was more open.

Something like this is now becoming necessary as many realms are hitting the "maximum size" they can expand to.

It's not just "on my list," there is literally only one thing before it. Once I have the Compact Realms mini-project done, this is the next new feature I'll be implementing.

I'm not sure how much clearer I need to be at this point...?

[Nosferatus]

Was it a voluntary choice to implement the TO restrictions below a certain density, before implementing the hintherland feature?

[Anaris]

Was it a voluntary choice to implement the TO restrictions below a certain density, before implementing the hintherland feature?

......No, someone held a gun to our heads and forced us to implement that...?

Of course it was a voluntary choice. The TO restrictions are a band-aid that took all of a few minutes to implement; Hinterlands are a major feature branch that might take months, depending on how things go.

[Chenier]

I do feel like the density restrictions should have waited for hinterlands before going live. They are blocking various options on various islands. They do not help create conflict, they stifle it. Realms at war or wanting to go to war end up going "uh, I can't do a TO, can you? No, you? No, you? Uh, so... what do we do?" It's really starting to get utterly ridiculous.

[Zakky]

I think there needs to be more reason to fight other than just for lands.

Maybe once this game gets different resources, things might change. Lack of a certain resources hurting your realm will probably make realms force other realms trade with them by warring them.

[Chenier]

You can maybe get more war by adding things to fight over, but you certainly won't get more war by blocking things people were already going to war over.

[Stabbity]

You can maybe get more war by adding things to fight over, but you certainly won't get more war by blocking things people were already going to war over.

This.

[Anaris]

"More war" is not an end in itself. "More war" is a means to the end of "more fun."

It is our hope and intention that the changes we are making will lead to "more fun."

[Chenier]

"More war" is not an end in itself. "More war" is a means to the end of "more fun."

It is our hope and intention that the changes we are making will lead to "more fun."

True, I agree means should not be confused with ends.

But wars are the core of this game. BattleMaster is a game where you hang out with a bunch of other players to wage war on a bunch of other players. Over the years, it has evolved and become a lot more than just that. But we also can't just remove that from the game, it is the foundation upon which it rests, and without which the rest crumbles.

Wars give every character purpose. They provide stakes. They grant interaction, meetings between large quantities of players that could not otherwise speak to each other.

Extras should either enhance the war experience, or assist with the luls of between war periods. But any extra that cuts down on war is unlikely to have an overall positive effect on fun.

And just as we must remember that fun is the final goal, and not war, so must we do so with density. Density was historically correlated with fun. But that correlation weakens considerably once we enter forced density. Which is really forced partial density, since the underlying problem it seeks to address is that "everyone having a title tends to make realms passive", while only considering what is increasingly a smaller and smaller share of titles available. Bara'Khur, for example, is among the densest realms in the game. Possibly the densest realm in the game, with 3 nobles per region. Is the goal to make the whole game a bunch of Bara'Khurs? Because we've got 7 titles to share around those 3 folks, not to mention lesser titles like religious ranks or ambassadorship. That's over 3 titles per noble on average.

Compare with the most hollow realm I can think of, where there are regions without lords: Nivemus. They've got 19 regions for 15 nobles in 4 duchies. That's 29 titles. That's less than 2 titles per noble, or 66% of the title density BK has.

I've always agreed that realms with more nobles than regions was a problem, but I can't agree with solutions that put a huge block on wars.

[Abstract]

And just as we must remember that fun is the final goal, and not war, so must we do so with density. Density was historically correlated with fun. But that correlation weakens considerably once we enter forced density. Which is really forced partial density, since the underlying problem it seeks to address is that "everyone having a title tends to make realms passive", while only considering what is increasingly a smaller and smaller share of titles available. Bara'Khur, for example, is among the densest realms in the game. Possibly the densest realm in the game, with 3 nobles per region. Is the goal to make the whole game a bunch of Bara'Khurs? Because we've got 7 titles to share around those 3 folks, not to mention lesser titles like religious ranks or ambassadorship. That's over 3 titles per noble on average.

Compare with the most hollow realm I can think of, where there are regions without lords: Nivemus. They've got 19 regions for 15 nobles in 4 duchies. That's 29 titles. That's less than 2 titles per noble, or 66% of the title density BK has.

I've always agreed that realms with more nobles than regions was a problem, but I can't agree with solutions that put a huge block on wars.

Throw in the forced density limit for normal regions once hinterlands is finished and Nivemus will drop way down in titles. With the current limit, 1.7, they will be able to have 8 region lords. I assume duchies are only going to be possible with normal regions so that will drop. Since the regions will cut in half we'll go with cutting the duchies in half too for sake of argument. That is 10 titles plus the standard 6 titles (4 council and 2 military per army). That is 16 titles for the 15 nobles. Still not great but getting better. Now let's say the density limit is increased from this 1.7 mark, which is the plan. The plan I assume is to get the density limit to 3. This is where the warning first comes in so that is why I'm assuming the future limit will be three. That means the number of region titles will drop down from 8 to 5. That means a total of 13 titles (if they keep two duchies) for the 15 nobles. That leaves at least two people without a title. The only way they will get a title is to compete for it internally.

As for BK, density is not the only factor in the game, it is just one of them. BK doesn't have a density problem, they have a lack of nobles problem. You can say the same thing for many realms but BK is one of the worse realms in regards to noble count.

The only way I see the density limit working is either "sinking" a large portion of the islands in order to decrease the number of regions or hinterlands which lets realms take more regions but not have more titles. Since the former isn't happening all we can do is wait for the latter. I'm going to assume the justification for not removing the density limit until hinterlands is because it will be a step backwards. I doubt people would be happy to be able to increase in size just to be forced back down yet again. If not forced to lose the regions then forced to lose lordships. There will certainly be players that aren't happy with that. The alternative is grandfathering in the normal regions that have a lord. This would then lead back into the removal of the limit as a step backwards. Realms that currently meet the limit would be allowed to expand beyond the limit and those that are already bad would possibly get even worse. The point of density further decreasing also ties into the severity of any force used.

[Medron Pryde]

My suggestion would be to have two takeover options.

We used to have standard takeovers and colony takeovers.

In the same way, we could have standard takeovers and hinterland takeovers.

The first would simply not be an option if we are over the limit.

If this is how it gets handled, we would need a way to switch regions between core and hinterland.  Either a ruler or a duke I would say could do that.  Like handing a region to another realm though, I would say the one doing it would need to be in region.  And I would suggest that a region with a lord cannot be converted into a hinterland region.  A random chance for it to work would be interesting, modified by whether the region lord agreed or disagreed with doing it, but the easiest way to code it would be with a hard yes or no depending on if there is a region lord.