Balance of game mechanics in 2.0.1 - what are YOUR concerns?

[Todie]

2.0.1 is nice. Nice enough that many players are discovering or rediscovering the game. There are layers of depth to discover and engage with - or so it appears.

However, I know im not alone as an experienced player, in being able to look through and past many aspects of how the game works now, and disregard many of the gameplay choices presented as more or less “false”... it seems, even some newbies are succeeding with ambitious expansionism in their very first play-throughs.

My question to you all:
In your personal opinion - what is the most pressing concern regarding mechanical game balance in the 2.0.1 patch ? Why?

Proposed thread format: one post = one separate concern. Use agree / disagree / upvote to highlight pressing concerns!
(This is not a suggestion thread - complex suggestions can be neat, but elsewhere?)

Try to keep comments / discussion of others raised concerns separate from posts with your own concerns.

Thank you for your contribution!

 

[Vernichtere]

Integration should have a cost.

Integeration has a cost. Its a heavy stability hit until its done.

 

[Iosue Yu]

Mercenaries still cost $100 to hire, even if it's just 4 Units. The Disband cost is like $21. The hardcoded $100 is yet another obstacle for smaller countries.

It is the same in the past. But then you rarely needed them. Now it's almost a requirement if you play a small country because the bar for having the 5th Unit is 40 Pops, and Chariots are "Advanced" Unit instead of getting a Heavy Infantry.

 

[Todie]

Integeration has a cost. Its a heavy stability hit until its done.

Given context of the posts above, i think he means vassal-integation.

 

[Todie]

On the wider point of the manpower resource and its abundance:

- Manpower in the late game is really too much, I think there is more rebalancing required to solve that - maybe even include navies to manpower (ship crew) alongside other manpower balance changes.

Ship crew is a good idea, though I think naval utility in peacetime needs some deeper game design done before this can become a good fit. (I bet there will be time to look closer at this in some months?)

I've been talking about manpower forever and ya its still not in a great place.

Quick thought for Manpower: we now have a variable renew time for Levies based on manpower losses; would it be worthwhile keeping the manpower losses as if levied until the levy can be raised again.
Doesn't fix the Legion issue, but maybe they should have an ongoing Manpower cost anyway.

2. Manpower is not a real issue, thats the main difference to pre-2.0 in terms of conquering.

As I see it, the changes to manpower in 2.0 were threefold:

• Decreased manpower cap
• Increased manpower regeneration significantly
• Added universal ability to raise troops without up-front cost in manpower

The increase in manpower regen is VAST - this, combined with levy-functionality has made the mechanic much less punishing to small countries / early in the game.

However, when countries reach regional power+ and say 500+ pops
Manpower becomes less of a concern than ever before - certainly for players in singleplayer that aren't recklessly throwing their levies and legions around constantly, or going out of their way to use as many light troops as possible and as many assaults as possible to utilize an abundant resource.

Though undeniable, the matter of manpower becoming a quickly irrelevant stat doesn't have to be the biggest of concerns, as the pops that produce it can also contribute to levy and legion-size.

... However, the game still props up so many related concepts in inventions, laws, deities, heritages, missions, buildings, wonders, offices, Event outcomes(!) .....

• Manpower
• Manpower recovery
• Freemen & tribesmen output (and happiness)
• X manpower costs (event outcomes)

Its been made clear that we're not getting rid of manpower as a concept any time soon, but there are clearly more and better ways in reach to balance the resource and make it scale better as the game goes on. (I think we should make distinct suggestions about this, but not in this thread?)

 

[Hannibal_theCannibal]

Large AIs being stingy with forts is a problem, I'm not saying that every single province should have a fort but the AI should put some major consideration at the very least into fortifying the provinces which directly border a neighbour especially if those provinces have wealthy cities in.

On a related note I feel that forts are overpriced and now that there's a soft cap on how many forts you can put in a small area I'd suggest that they could be made cheaper both in build cost and maintenance.

I think they did reduce fort maintenance from 1.5.3 to 2.0 if I'm not mistaken. Also, something that occurred to me recently is that garrisons should use manpower. And not just manpower, they should directly reduce the maximum manpower cap by the size of the garrison. Those troops are there and aren't in your armies.

There have already been a ton of threads and comments that say "Manpower is just a number after a certain point". I think that as the game progress and as greater fort levels become a necessity, fort garrison sizes naturally increase and should have a corresponding drain on manpower.

 

[Akbar The Great]

Help the AI with forts, just assign them a free fort level in province capitals that can't be removed, and doesn't take a building slot, the AL cannot handle forts, this has been proven time and time again, so let's do the AI#s job for it, it can then choose whether or not to build elsewhere, but won#t be able to delete every fort in a mad manic.

Help the AI.

 

[Bovrick]

I think they did reduce fort maintenance from 1.5.3 to 2.0 if I'm not mistaken. Also, something that occurred to me recently is that garrisons should use manpower. And not just manpower, they should directly reduce the maximum manpower cap by the size of the garrison. Those troops are there and aren't in your armies.

There have already been a ton of threads and comments that say "Manpower is just a number after a certain point". I think that as the game progress and as greater fort levels become a necessity, fort garrison sizes naturally increase and should have a corresponding drain on manpower.

They even acknowledged this idea that has floated around for a while on the forum with the building changes. Forts do decrease Manpower generation, the issue is the effect is within the territory, so its magnitude is comically small.

Instead we got the conceptually gamey mechanic of Provincial Fort Capacity that the AI is struggling with... at least the cap is soft.

 

[Herennius]

Help the AI with forts, just assign them a free fort level in province capitals that can't be removed, and doesn't take a building slot, the AL cannot handle forts, this has been proven time and time again, so let's do the AI#s job for it, it can then choose whether or not to build elsewhere, but won#t be able to delete every fort in a mad manic.

Help the AI.

I'm all for a change making the AI building more forts or keeping them around - but please not by any special AI-only-boni/rules and even less on normal difficulty. Code them the behaviour to built and maintain such a forum in any case, but now magical free-be please - with one exception: Since every tag starts with a fort in the nations capital territory, it would by logically to give that one out to the rebels in case of a provincial rebellion as well...they are considered to have formed a new tag, so it is fine they get a kind of head quarter (and immersionwise, they simply have "prepared" their rebellion enough to start out fortified). Even that fort though should eat up a building slot and cost maintenance.

 

[Iosue Yu]

Can we restart this thread? I don't think it is doing what it was supposed to do.

Let the candidate posts all look like

Title Sentence

Description

Example

It'd be easier to actually vote the balance issues. But I have no idea how to handle branching out discussions though.

 

[stratigo]

Wonders are Incredibly Overpowered when compared to the 7 Wonders of the World.

Now, I thought this might be something that would be universally agreed upon, but I have seen people say they prefer it this way or that it's perfectly fine for it to be this way... but I think it is absolutely ridiculous, and utterly baffling, that the Wonders that you can construct can give bonus' that are so, so, so objectively much more powerful than the 7 wonders of the world.

Take any of the wonders of the world in game right now, you can both copy their bonus' onto some crappy little wooden mausoleum, and add extra bonus' ontop of those, and just through the advent of time, that trashy little wooden hut can give you modifiers that make the pyramids of giza look like a waste of stone (which, if you dont care much for vassal play, they objectively are)

Proposed Solution: buff the 7 Wonders of the Ancient World. Let them have a 5th prestige level that the constructable wonders cannot attain, and give them 3 bonus' instead of just 1, just like all the wonders you can create get. Or make our own constructed wonders be limited to only a single selectable bonus.

I have yet to budget actually building a wonder in any of my games. So, what I am getting here is that... I really should? XD

 

[Llort_7991]

These are some changes I would like to see:


----------For “civilized” nations in IR-------------


POP RATIO: DEVELOPMENT & BUILDINGS

Decouple from courthouse, academy, forum. Introduce a 'development' system akin to that of EU4; more or less.

Development in 5 types:

- 'Noble' Quarter
- 'Citizen' Quarter
- 'Freeman' Quarter
- "Others" Quarter
- ‘Industria’ Area (Pre-Cursor for Foundries, Mills. Workshops & Ports)

Better quarter descriptions off course

Development gives + to ratio & tiny + to POP type happiness.

To balance that there should be a mechanic like ‘Public Health’ (PH), or something like that.
Is PH too low first noble, then citizen, then freeman POPs should receive a big migration (speed) modifier.
New POPs will not migrate to the city, etc. Eventually should also die if nothing is done.


PUBLIC HEALTH (PH) & SANITATION (SN)

PH can be improved by SN. Think probably everyone has an idea how the basis would work.

Should be able to invest in:

[ DEVELOPMENT BASED ]
- Aqueduct System, Sewer Systems, Public Latrines, Water Supply System (noble POP type)

[ STRUCTURE OR BUILDING BASED ]
- Water Reservoirs (also for siege), Fountains, Public Well (most basic building), Public Bathhouses & Grande Public Baths, ‘Hospitals’ etc.

These would not only provide PH but can also provide other bonusses like happiness off course.



----------For tribal nations in IR-------------



Similar but distinctly different system for Tribals.

Outside of that; complete overhaul. I think Tribal Nations lend themselves well for a more CK style of family based, more intrigue style of gameplay. Play not as a nation but as a tribal family and/or group.

Also, route to civilized should off course be possible but tribes also have a satisfactory and gameplay valid alternative based on their way of life and culture.

 

[Akbar The Great]

I'm all for a change making the AI building more forts or keeping them around - but please not by any special AI-only-boni/rules and even less on normal difficulty. Code them the behaviour to built and maintain such a forum in any case, but now magical free-be please - with one exception: Since every tag starts with a fort in the nations capital territory, it would by logically to give that one out to the rebels in case of a provincial rebellion as well...they are considered to have formed a new tag, so it is fine they get a kind of head quarter (and immersionwise, they simply have "prepared" their rebellion enough to start out fortified). Even that fort though should eat up a building slot and cost maintenance.

Ideally, yes. But they have tried for years to get AI forts right and it hasn't happened. It would only be level 1 without further investment anyway, cost-free and would not take up a building slot, then that gives the AI a chance against the human player because without forts you can just roll over vast swathees of territiry and it's too easy, the AI needs help against human players.

 

[Todie]

Regarding food:

I find the circumstances where provincial food supply is a matter of interest or concern is much too rare.

The basic mechanic of provincial food supply that grant bonii to growth and defensiveness based on how many years worth of food are stored is a pretty good one.

However, the food consumed by even the citizens and nobles is not high enough to strain the food supply - even many events that are supposed to simulate shortages often have outcomes that end up mathematically irrelevant - presenting false choices.

... As with manpower, a lot of systems in the game present interaction with food at the expense of other options. Dieties, inventions and ideas come to mind. +% Food production in particular, is only useful in very nieche circumstances.

New / returning players will often not consider how the system works and assume “more food = more better”, when it in fact makes 0 difference until a province is about to starve. (I saw twitch streamer Cringer insist on food production inventions in this way - in front of 1000~ viewers)

 

[Backstab]

Tried a couple games, but it seems like AI is just unable to keep up with tech and the difference in tech is just massive. Only small and culturally unified countries are able to somewhat keep up, but all the big republics/kingodms are about 5 tech behind in the mid game. To me it seems like the AI doesn't go over roughly 150% tech efficiency, maybe because they spam levies, even if they have legions. At this point I'm not really opposed some flat 50%+ buff to AI tech speed, but it would be better to have an overall rework of how technology works. Namely, I would like to remove most of the gradual bonuses and use it only as means of buying inventions. After all, the time of IR is a time when the most advanced weapon was a pointy stick, so there shouldn't be such massive difference in combat ability between two nations just because of technology. If anything, there should be a distinction in units based on government types that could also be bought with inventions. So e.g. civilized can have HI right away, while tribes would have access to chariots. LI or HA.

Furthermore, the rework of inventions was good in concept, but they seem a bit WIP. Various categories have different sizes with different amount of inventions and the trees are a bit of a mess to navigate. I would like to see a significant reduction of inventions, so bonuses would be consolidated into a few inventions that would cost far more. This way you can have about two trees in each category and have a couple of exclusive choices in each.

A lot was said about manpower, so I can only agree that it should be nerfed, because it is basically useless stat after first 50 years. I would also like to see legions and fort garrisons reduce the manpower cap.

On a side note, the missions seems like they were left as is. So there are a lot of missions that e.g. require player to build forts in all port provinces, which always far exceeds the fort limit and makes no sense.

 

[Akbar The Great]

Regarding food:

I find the circumstances where provincial food supply is a matter of interest or concern is much too rare.

The basic mechanic of provincial food supply that grant bonii to growth and defensiveness based on how many years worth of food are stored is a pretty good one.

However, the food consumed by even the citizens and nobles is not high enough to strain the food supply - even many events that are supposed to simulate shortages often have outcomes that end up mathematically irrelevant - presenting false choices.

... As with manpower, a lot of systems in the game present interaction with food at the expense of other options. Dieties, inventions and ideas come to mind. +% Food production in particular, is only useful in very nieche circumstances.

New / returning players will often not consider how the system works and assume “more food = more better”, when it in fact makes 0 difference until a province is about to starve. (I saw twitch streamer Cringer insist on food production inventions in this way - in front of 1000~ viewers)

Hmmm, I never expected food to be an issue as I was playing as Egypt, but it ought to be elsewhere.

 

[klopkr]

Minimum levy size and minimum siege size need to be reexamined.

Since 2k is the minimum levy and minimum siege and attrition tends to hit your stack before the end of a siege this means the AI can't win a war with no allies and only a 2k stack and they also can't even siege themselves back down without having their pops killed. Sure a better fortress could lead to the same issues but since this is the starting default for most nations it's actually the norm for most tribes across the map.

The AI can't handle this and it makes eliminating tiny nations too easy.

A bandaid might be to decrease the minimum siege to 1.5k instead of 2k. Another solution would be to raise the minimum levies to 2.5k.

You could also remove the minimums for each and tie it completely to pops but that would weaken most nations into irrelevancy.

 

[Baldamundo]

Biggest problem for me is boring & unhistorical blobbing. Although obviously it's tricky to balance this against having a challenging AI.

What I think it needs are:

• distance-from-capital loyalty penalties for provinces & governors to make it much harder to hold together a large empire - and especially for exclaves
• more chances for vassals & governors to attempt to break away - especially during civil wars (i think at present it's literally impossible for AI vassals to break away?)
• rebalance of AE costs & AI to encourage more vassalisation and less annexation
• probably some tweaks to the culture/integration system (but that's a complex one that whole threads have been devoted too)