Anychance they can code the winning two and put the option in at game start a bit like difficulty ?
May I suggest a "Bash the leader" mechanism, where honor cost for actions directed AGAINST someone who is about to win (say over 40%) are greatly reduced?
That would maybe induce all other clans to try to attack him, before he "usurps" the Shogun title.
True, there is little honor in attacking a little guy. But you also don't bring your clan honor by attacking the sea (attacking a larger enemy doesn't mean it is more honorable).Scale cost depending on relative size when declaring war, ie, don't hit the small guy
This is an ok idea in that honor should be based on actions, not just existing. Small clans should be just have similar capacity for peacefully gaining honor. However, this further reduces the value of buildings. On the other hand, there is opportunity cost in building buildings, you have a Master of XXX out in the field - takes much longer for larger clans - would this undermine this and maybe you'd find less people even bothering to upgrade?Scale gain from buildings by size of clan.
This is interesting idea but problematic. There is no difference in this game between a clan leader title that is 1 province versus a clan leader title that is 20 provinces.Scale cost of wars from possible title gain
Yuk. No way. Arbitrary to the max, only if there are equal events to raise honor but then it defeats the point.Event series to reduce honor.
This doesn't sound that attractive, it solves the problem created by buildings but I worry this opens up a new can of worms. Too arbitrary.Scale honor cost of actions depending on size of clan.
@Oddible: Yuk is a yes?
Scale cost depending on relative size when declaring war, ie, don't hit the small guy
Yes please if the opposite is also true, small guy declaring war on big guy is cheaper on honor. The biggest reason why plots against big clans fail is because co-conspirators never seem to have enough honor. If declaring war on big guys was cheaper the AI would be much more keen on ganking the big guy.
Hehe ugh... NOoooooo. Clarified in the post. Too arbitrary. Anything that happens by chance rather than choice reduces player agency and undermines meaningful responses to play choices, pulling players out of the flow - it isn't part of the challenge.
How about making it so the more honor you have, the harder it is to increase it even further? And/or the easier it is to lose it. You know, like when a nice guy does nice things people tend to take it for granted; but when a jerk does the same things it's usually quite shocking.
The amount of honor you earn for giving land to your vassals or donating money to the emperor could be inversely proportional to your current honor, and the peacetime gain could be reduced likewise. At the same time, the honor loss when declaring war could be bigger the more honor you have.
An influence system / coercion system where you can threaten / flatter small states into becoming your vassals or declaring war. This would have a honour cost too, but less than declaring war. Right now, Sengoku is all stick and no carrot. If I have 300,000 soldiers, would I really need to declare war on a lord with 5000 soliders?
This would just make it even easier for large clans to blob. Just check out the screenshots thread where someone exploited that clans already were too easy to subjugate. He took 100% of Japan before 1550...
Scale gain from buildings by size of clan.
Not really a problem. Shinto shrines gives honor just the right amount. The problem is that since honor gain from elsewhere is so out of control, belonging to shinto faction is pointless.