Author Topic: Dukes and Duchies  (Read 11507 times)

Chenier

  • Exalted Emperor
  • ******
  • Posts: 8120
    • View Profile
Re: Dukes and Duchies
« Reply #15: October 06, 2017, 04:03:29 AM »
Nope. Many suggestions came up over the years. None went through. You are free it give it another try though like many others have before.

None went through, but I also don't recall seeing any that were quite satisfactory. If you can think of any feel free to link me to it or recap it.

Seems to me that it would require a significant structural changes that are not, of themselves, really positive.
Dit donc camarade soleil / Ne trouves-tu ça pas plutôt con / De donner une journée pareil / À un patron

Zakky

  • Guest
Re: Dukes and Duchies
« Reply #16: October 06, 2017, 07:36:42 AM »
In most cases, the ducal capital idea posed too much problems with balancing. Even if it was balanced, it would not provide enough incentives to justify the amount of work it required. So pretty much the reason to change it could not out weigh keeping the status quo.

Wimpie

  • Developer
  • Mighty Duke
  • ****
  • Posts: 1777
    • View Profile
Re: Dukes and Duchies
« Reply #17: October 06, 2017, 09:21:45 AM »
Well ducal capitals have a number of problems, namely that there isn't, currently, any such thing. You need a city or stronghold to create a duchy, but you do not need to have either of these for a duchy to continue existing. These region types are currently the only ones that can be capitals, and thus allow recruiting (and banking), making them extra valuable. And even when a duchy has at least one, it can have more, and it doesn't mean the duke has any such regions, if any region at all.

I don't think those issues have ever been properly addressed in any feature request. If someone can flesh out a system that would make ducal recruitment sensible, I'm sure it would warrant at least a discussion.

I do believe even Townslands are available to start a Duchy with.

For a long time I have even believed that duchy capitals actually were a thing (had a conversation with Delvin about this many weeks ago), just because of the fact that you need to have this 1 starting city/stronghold/townsland. And I could have sworn that this starting region was somehow highlighted (bold, italic) on some pages.


Never was so wrong in my life.
Osgar (Thalmarkin, BT), Jeames (Perleone, EC)
PAUSED: Nasgar (Avernus, DWI), Jari (Outer Tilog, COL)

Chenier

  • Exalted Emperor
  • ******
  • Posts: 8120
    • View Profile
Re: Dukes and Duchies
« Reply #18: October 06, 2017, 01:16:23 PM »
Haha. :P

Main issues I can think of, off the top of my head:

Are ducal capital extra recruitment slots? Or do they replace capital recruitment altogether?

What about duchies without cities or strongholds, can recruitment be implemented in other region types? Let's also not forget that strongholds don't actually offer banks unless they are a realm's capital.

What region is the capital? What if the duke doesn't have a lord? What if he's a rural lord?

Could this incite realms to create a million duchies? One noble One Duke?

Probably some others but duty calls and I gotta rush out.
Dit donc camarade soleil / Ne trouves-tu ça pas plutôt con / De donner une journée pareil / À un patron

Wimpie

  • Developer
  • Mighty Duke
  • ****
  • Posts: 1777
    • View Profile
Re: Dukes and Duchies
« Reply #19: October 06, 2017, 01:34:29 PM »
Haha. :P

Main issues I can think of, off the top of my head:

Are ducal capital extra recruitment slots? Or do they replace capital recruitment altogether?

What about duchies without cities or strongholds, can recruitment be implemented in other region types? Let's also not forget that strongholds don't actually offer banks unless they are a realm's capital.

What region is the capital? What if the duke doesn't have a lord? What if he's a rural lord?

Could this incite realms to create a million duchies? One noble One Duke?

Probably some others but duty calls and I gotta rush out.

I think you made it quite obvious why such a system will never be implemented  :P
Osgar (Thalmarkin, BT), Jeames (Perleone, EC)
PAUSED: Nasgar (Avernus, DWI), Jari (Outer Tilog, COL)

Chenier

  • Exalted Emperor
  • ******
  • Posts: 8120
    • View Profile
Re: Dukes and Duchies
« Reply #20: October 06, 2017, 02:13:56 PM »
I'm not excluding the possibility of someone getting creative and offering a reasonable answer  to those. ;)

I mean, heck, the game used to run: 1 city/stronghold, 1 duchy, and those titles WERE tied together. Reverting to that would fix a lot of these issues if not all of them, though could certainly feel like a step back for many.

Adding ducal seats as optional, so that some duchies with cities offer local recruitment while the rest centralize it in the realm's capital, would probably be a much better fit, and would also address a lot of these issues.


Because I don't think we should start allowing recruitment in non-city/strongholds. I also don't think any given RC should make troops available at more than one location (probably easier to manage at duchy level than RC level), to make sure that decentralization has a proper cost. But I also do like the general idea of greater decentralization, so that a lot of currently non-viable realms could simply be annexed into larger realms where they would be exposed to more other players to collaborate with, and that successful and dynamic realms are not stopped dead in their tracks by mere distance issues. Realms have few enough neighbors as it is and we've greatly incentivized super-realms over the years, which was fine when stale super realms would snuff out dynamic smaller realms, but it increasingly feels like dynamic realms are being mechanically held back into staleness while less successful stale realms enforce their stale status quo.

If realms could expand, and expand, and expand, well, then maybe the stronger realms would do so, and we'd finally see more wars, more border changes, and eventually new blocs rise to oppose them. On Dwi, this could mean: Astrum would have more ability to project some power in the east and in the west simultaneously. Swordfell for north towards Astrum, Morek, and HD and south towards D'Hara and Luria, D'Hara towards east and west, Luria towards north, west, and south, etc. It would mostly mean more realms would have more options and more capacities to do more stuff. And this is better than everyone being holed up.
Dit donc camarade soleil / Ne trouves-tu ça pas plutôt con / De donner une journée pareil / À un patron

Chenier

  • Exalted Emperor
  • ******
  • Posts: 8120
    • View Profile
Re: Dukes and Duchies
« Reply #21: October 06, 2017, 03:43:35 PM »
Alright, here's to an idea that is perhaps more fleshed out than previous requests...

  • Add a new rank, Archduke. This can only be given by the ruler to a duke that has at least a city in their duchy (strongholds and townslands are not admissible, at least unless you want to start giving banks to strongholds). This creates an Archduchy. Optionally, give realms a few options: Archduke/Archduchy, Viceroy/Vicroyalty, Governor/Dominion. Optional: allow it to be done in strongholds, which automatically gives them banks.
  • The duke has up to 5 days to accept his archduke nomination.
  • Once promoted to archduke, the archduchy has a grace period of 5 days for an archduchal capital to be chosen, after which region stat penalties start accumulating until he chooses one.
  • All recruitment centers in archduchies cease to be available for recruitment in the realm's capital
  • Nobles are allowed to recruit from both their archduchy capital and realm capital, but only from the each's respective lists accordingly
  • Region distance from capital penalties in archduchies are calculated off of their distance from their archducal capital.
  • Archdukes are not an intermediate rank between dukes and rulers, but a privileged duke rank. In other words, archdukes cannot have other dukes below them, cannot create other duchies themselves.
  • Alternatively, archdukes are an intermediate rank between dukes and rulers, making duchies optionally a part of archduchies, where archdukes that have multiple cities in their domains can delegate powers to subordinate duke, but without the power to make additional archdukes themselves. Probably more work to code than the former option, the tradeoff being potentially more complex (and thus engaging) feudal structures between players
  • Choosing an archduchal capital costs gold. It can later be moved for gold. Perhaps 75% of the cost of moving a realm's capital.
  • If an archduchy loses its capital, it suffers the same penalties as a realm without a capital does. Namely, it no longer has region from which people can recruit from its recruitment centers.
  • If the lord of the archduchy's capital changes allegiance to another (arch)duchy, a h/p penalty is inflicted. Similarly, this should apply to lords of a realm's capital that switch to another realm.
  • For the purposes of distance from the capital penalties, when the capital is lost, the game will assume the capital is in the same spot until a new one is selected (as I think it does with realm capitals that are lost). The region doesn't grant any other capital benefits however.
  • If an archduchy has been without a capital for a month, it is dissolved.
  • When an archduchy hasn't had a capital for over a week, the ruler can dissolve it.
  • When an archduchy doesn't have an archduke, the ruler can dissolve it.
  • Dissolution of an archduchy reverts it to a regular duchy.
  • When an archduchy doesn't have an archduke, the ruler can appoint a noble that belongs to it as new archduke.
  • Optional/Debatable: Under some circumstances (tied with government setting or as an option to rulers), archdukes can be an elected position
  • There is an in-realm archduke message group, but not an inter-realm "to peers" type one.
  • Archdukes have no more powers than regular dukes do, save for the ability to build and then move their capital. Under the intermediate rank system, this also implies taxation over dukes.
  • Rulers would be able to set a different tax rate on duchies below them and archduchies below them.
  • Archduchies have no diplomacy and cannot fight each other
  • Optional: enable archduchal rebellions, where nobles of an archduchy can try to overthrow their archduke, recycling much of the current rebellion mechanics. During this archduchal rebellion, the realm's judge cannot ban any of the nobles belonging to that archuchy until a week after the rebellion is resolved. A defeated archduke loses all feudal titles but is not automatically banned. Unsuccessful rebels get their automatic ban, though the realm's judge can choose to absolve them.
  • Archdukes get royal status after having had the title for over a month.

I think this is a fairly exhaustive layout of how it *could* work.

Main disadvantage: the work required to code and debug it, obviously. To consider the potential of superpowers crushing everyone else, I guess, but I don't think we have the demographics for that anymore, nor that it makes it really much more of a threat than a coalition of allied realms.

Advantages: More interplayer interactions, break realms' isolation, enable/structure/support the more colonial and imperial setups many realms have  tried over the years and for which there is an obvious player desire. This system could actually help fix a lot of the structural problems that dynamic demographics would target. For example, say Madina decides their spot is boring and they want to move elsewhere, well they could go takeover Golden Farrow, or Shinnen, and start building up infrastructure there. But instead of ditching all of their assets to make it their capital right away, or splitting up their handful of nobles to make a new realm in paralel to eventually ditch their homeland, they could take it over, make it an archduchy, and then keep both their homeland and their new acquisition. Then, gradually, their homeland could amass funds to build up the new archduchy, with nobles going back and forth between the two as needed, until the new archduchy starts having walls, recruitment centers, taxes. Gradually, nobles could swear fealty to regions of the new archduchy, recruit from there, and less and less nobles will need to make the trip between it and the homeland. And since they aren't gaining a million new nobles and the monster code still applies, the more they expand to this new destination, the more they are likely to lose regions in their homeland, until it's just relics left. This not only makes the move possible, but also tempting, even if in a purely colonial and non-migratory manner. If Madina, or Astrum, or D'Hara, or anyone else decides "Hey, Golden Farrow looks nice, maybe I should settle it", they are no longer bound by distance if they make it an archduchy.  But say D'Hara decides to build it up, pump lots of gold into it... then that's a somewhat alluring prize for other realms to try to take from them. Similarly, it also exposes the rest of their regions. After all, troops take time to march, there's no way D'Hara can defend Golden Farrow, Port Raviel, and Sallowtown simultaneously. Plus the costs of sea travel...

Furthermore, it would finally disincentivize single-duchy realms. As it is, the game actively punishes realms that choose to delegate powers by creating multiple duchies. If at least it would add some benefits, realms would be more likely to spread the power around.
Dit donc camarade soleil / Ne trouves-tu ça pas plutôt con / De donner une journée pareil / À un patron

Zakky

  • Guest
Re: Dukes and Duchies
« Reply #22: October 06, 2017, 03:56:46 PM »
Nope. Doubt this will get through. The very idea of allowing people to recruit in pretty much a second capital is not going to fly as long as we have the 'no tactical relocation of your capital' rule. Your idea pretty much goes straight against that rule.

Chenier

  • Exalted Emperor
  • ******
  • Posts: 8120
    • View Profile
Re: Dukes and Duchies
« Reply #23: October 06, 2017, 05:30:10 PM »
Nope. Doubt this will get through. The very idea of allowing people to recruit in pretty much a second capital is not going to fly as long as we have the 'no tactical relocation of your capital' rule. Your idea pretty much goes straight against that rule.

Honestly, I dislike that rule. It's a rule based on intent, and that kind of rules are terrible. It's the kind of rule that means that a less rules-savy player who does a capital move for legit reasons but accidentally mentions the recruitment benefit can suffer the wrath of the titans, while a more rules-savy player who does a capital move for uniquely tactical reasons can pull it off without any sanctions. Titans aren't mind readers, and there have been at least a handful of cases where rulers were given the benefit of the doubt for otherwise extremely sketchy and convenient capital moves.

Same is to be said of strategic secession.

And realm mergers.

All of these policies... they are still there on paper, but there have been just so many cases of them happening without any divine sanction. Heck, friendly secessions used to be illegal, but it was conceded that we can't really fairly police attitudes. The rise of individualism and frenemies made all of these things pretty moot. Rules can evolve, and I think it would be fair to strike these out. With the game as it is today, and how it is likely to be for years to come, these behaviors are only problematic in the sense of unpredictable enforcement, of not knowing who will get away with what.

I mean, so what if people bring their capitals to the front? MORE WAR. Back when these rules were made, the distance from capital penalties were lesser, we had way more nobles, way more wars, colony takeovers were a fairly common thing (do they still even EXIST?). This ain't 2009 anymore.

More than being of the opinion of "you are right, this would break those rules, it's not workable", I'm more of the opinion of "you are right, this is incompatible with those rules, it's about time we scrap them". We've been struggling with "too much peace" for ages, all the meanwhile it's become harder and less rewarding to actually wage wars. Growth was penalized by shrinking the distance from capital limit, it's desincentivized by density mechanics, all on top of a declining player base.

We need more wars, not less. If it means people create mini-capitals at the border to more effectively go to war with their neighbors? Why the hell not.

That said, these archduchal capitals are not the same as moving the realm's capital. For example, if Astrum were to move its capital to Unterstrom, then it could immediately have access to 100% of its RCs to push the war against Swordfell (fictional example), and quickly massively renew their army within moments. If Unterstrom was made an archduchy, then only the nobles aligned to it could recruit there, and only from the RCs of regions that belong to it. This is, at most, a handful of nobles choosing from, at most, a handful of RCs. There may not even be all unit types, and many of these could suck. There would not be the same drastic effect of a strategic capital move, which' largest issue was the RAPID relocalization of power. After all, even with the no strategic capital move rule, Astrum would only need to take a few more regions east to justify "a more central capital". And, I mean, look at D'Hara, it's flopped its capital left and right while rarely having a really central one and never getting a warning.

It would imply, however, that Astrum would be able to expand into Swordfell. Not that handful of nobles with that handful of RCs isn't going to obliterate Swordfell, but it does add the possibility of taking a region or two. Astrum could grow. But... how is this bad? Given how we want more wars? The more Astrum expands, the more likely other realms are to react, as well. And these realms would also be able to prop up archduchies along the Astrum border to carve out some spaces there. Remember, please, that these are all fictional examples, I'm not a part of Astrum and I cannot say what they want to do or what they would do, I'm just creating fictional possibilities.

While at it, we could also scrap the realm merger ban. I mean, it used to do big controversies, but we've pretty much given up on it by now. Fact is, sometimes, a realm has no future. Either because it will collapse due to hostile realms, due to starvation, due to rogues, or plainly due to inactivity. The archduchy system would grant a framework for which to codify realm mergers. Rulers could surrender their realms to another, transforming it into an archduchy (make the process take long enough that if the ruler has gone rogue, players can rebel to make it abort, preferably with various mechanics favoring the rebels over loyalists).

If one is afraid of it being "overpowered", then bonuses can be given to realm capitals versus archduchal capitals, or building archduchal capitals can be more expensive rather than cheaper than regular capitals, or other such balancing mechanics. But while keeping cautious to not overly penalize successful realms. Because as it is, we have serious structural problems with this game. The continents are too sparsely populated, the maps have too many geographic barriers, and there are too many mechanics crushing both the means and the will to go to war. Archduchies would not really do anything direct for the first of these problems (unless they make things dynamic again, allowing player attraction growth), but it would certainly address the other two, by allowing realms to set up limited recruitment capacities beyond geographic barriers and by re-enabling the existence of vast realms.
« Last Edit: October 06, 2017, 05:38:51 PM by Chenier »
Dit donc camarade soleil / Ne trouves-tu ça pas plutôt con / De donner une journée pareil / À un patron

Zakky

  • Guest
Re: Dukes and Duchies
« Reply #24: October 06, 2017, 09:25:33 PM »
Realm merger + second capital + no strategic relocation sound like a disaster. More wars are good but that's not the way the devs want to go. They want smaller realms which I am actually against with the current density since the game simply cannot support so many small realms like they have envisioned. A bunch of small 5-10 people realms will just fall into inactivity and kill the game faster than other changes can probably be capable with. I mean there were definitely some realm merger cases like Solaria joining LN but some cases are exempt for special reasons. So if you want a second capital for now, just break your realm in 2. Just make a guild to connect two realms and play like that.

Unfortunately, rules won't change because you simply do not like them. Many rules of course were established during the time when the game had at least three times as many players but the reason why they were created still stands. Although the game seems to simply introduce more rules to force players to play in a certain way envisioned by the devs.
« Last Edit: October 06, 2017, 09:27:58 PM by Zakky »

Chenier

  • Exalted Emperor
  • ******
  • Posts: 8120
    • View Profile
Re: Dukes and Duchies
« Reply #25: October 06, 2017, 09:56:20 PM »
Realm merger + second capital + no strategic relocation sound like a disaster. More wars are good but that's not the way the devs want to go. They want smaller realms which I am actually against with the current density since the game simply cannot support so many small realms like they have envisioned. A bunch of small 5-10 people realms will just fall into inactivity and kill the game faster than other changes can probably be capable with. I mean there were definitely some realm merger cases like Solaria joining LN but some cases are exempt for special reasons. So if you want a second capital for now, just break your realm in 2. Just make a guild to connect two realms and play like that.

Unfortunately, rules won't change because you simply do not like them. Many rules of course were established during the time when the game had at least three times as many players but the reason why they were created still stands. Although the game seems to simply introduce more rules to force players to play in a certain way envisioned by the devs.

I don't really agree, and I'm not saying this for personal gain.  I don't really want my realm to be split  and we don't really need a second recruiting location. Westgard's always had things to do since I joined it and I don't expect it to change, I don't feel such changes would be good because my own realm would benefit from it, but because, from the outside, it looks like a lot of those other realms really need something to change.

I joined this game over 10 years ago, the rules aren't immutable. There are staples, sure, but those policies we speak of, they weren't even on the wiki before 2009, and only as "policies", the first iterations didn't mention them, and the last 5 years of gameplay strongly suggest they are no longer being applied in any noticeable way. Rules are there to make sure the game remains fun. If they make the game less fun, then they don't have a purpose anymore.

The dev team have encourage denser realms. I'm not opposed to this, heck I was greatly in favor, I'm just also gradually increasingly seeing risks and downsides to these measures. Decentralizing recruitment could potentially lower the impacts of some of the pro-density mechanics, but it mostly just gives more flexibility, especially to realms with screwed up geography. It's not about making realms larger at no cost or making them equally powerful everywhere, but allowing greater dispersal of resources in order to facilitate taking advantage of opportunities, and creating unprecedented ones. It'd allow a middle ground position between "allow realms to send 100% of their might anywhere to be able to crush enemies in all corners of the map" and "allow realms to spread out their abilities a bit so that they aren't left without options if there's no one near them on the map".
Dit donc camarade soleil / Ne trouves-tu ça pas plutôt con / De donner une journée pareil / À un patron

Antonine

  • Mighty Duke
  • ****
  • Posts: 542
  • Current family: Sussex. Old family: Octavius.
    • View Profile
Re: Dukes and Duchies
« Reply #26: October 07, 2017, 01:05:06 AM »
So, I'd like to try and narrow this down to some more easily implementable proposals:

Give the option to create a ducal capital from a city or stronghold (or maybe townsland?) - either the ruler or duke could create one and the cost of doing so would be 75% of the cost of creating a realm capital.

Creating a ducal capital would have the benefits of either:

OPTION A

Allow recruitment from RCs in that duchy at the ducal capital with the trade-off that those recruits are also no longer available at the realm capital. It could also be the case that only nobles of that duchy could recruit at the ducal capital.

OPTION B

Adds an extra region's distance from the ducal capital before the "distance from capital" penalty starts to reduce region stats.

***

To me the advantages of this are that it creates an incentive for realms to create duchies to combat limits on expansion. The price of doing so, however, is creating powerful dukes who can break away any time. It would allow the realm to improve its military capabilities in a particular area, but at the price of weakening its military abilities everywhere else. So you have a choice to make between a single, unified administration of your realm in a smaller area or a disunited administration of your realm in a larger area.

This would mean that realms were able to get bigger than they are currently able to but it would also make it more likely that conflicts within a realm would result in a powerful duke seceding to create his own realm. So, rather than realm reaching the current mechanic enforced limit of "you've expanded too far so your region stats are going to tank and there's nothing you can do about it", your realm would be able to grow bigger but at the price of creating powerful dukes which means that, sooner or later, one of them is going to declare independence.

So there'd still be a limit on realms growing too big but that limit would be enforced by internal conflict and secessions. This, to my mind, would be a big improvement on the current "grow to 14 regions with a single duchy then stagnate" model of realm evolution.

Chenier

  • Exalted Emperor
  • ******
  • Posts: 8120
    • View Profile
Re: Dukes and Duchies
« Reply #27: October 07, 2017, 01:52:04 AM »
Honestly, I think I'd add option B right away, as a passive feature.

"Every duchy that contains at least one city or stronghold increases the allowed distance from the capital before anarchists become an issue and increase the tax tolerance".

No need to build anything, just have it auto apply. It feels fundamentally wrong how the game discourages realms from having more than one duchy. And the newish size limit feels too small, there needs to be a way to increase it to what it used to be.
Dit donc camarade soleil / Ne trouves-tu ça pas plutôt con / De donner une journée pareil / À un patron

Nosferatus

  • Testers
  • Mighty Duke
  • *
  • Posts: 1093
  • Too weird to live, too rare to die
    • View Profile
Re: Dukes and Duchies
« Reply #28: October 07, 2017, 08:31:29 AM »
Even without applying all of this, what would be much easier to change is the current realm size penalty bonus into a duchy size bonus.
The more regions are part of the duchy, from a certain amount onward(like 4 or 5), the bigger the realm penalty.
Realms that ignore duchies and maintain a single large duchy get more penalized then realms with many smaller duchies.
This would already make dukes more important, increase their role and increase their numbers.

This wont effect the core of the game radically as the ideas suggested earlier.
Allthough i do really like the ideas of duchal capitals.
Formerly playing the Nosferatus and Bhrantan Family.
Currently playing the Polytus Family in: Gotland, Madina, Astrum, Outer Tilog

Antonine

  • Mighty Duke
  • ****
  • Posts: 542
  • Current family: Sussex. Old family: Octavius.
    • View Profile
Re: Dukes and Duchies
« Reply #29: October 07, 2017, 10:15:42 AM »
Even without applying all of this, what would be much easier to change is the current realm size penalty bonus into a duchy size bonus.
The more regions are part of the duchy, from a certain amount onward(like 4 or 5), the bigger the realm penalty.
Realms that ignore duchies and maintain a single large duchy get more penalized then realms with many smaller duchies.
This would already make dukes more important, increase their role and increase their numbers.

This actually sounds like a really good first step, and it would be pretty straightforward to implement too.