Does distance matter anymore?

[unmerged(49150)]

Obviously distance to the capital used to be a big issue in determining weather or not a vassal would revolt, and be here on the forum still talk about it a lot, but my question is, since vassal revolts now take place through factions, does distance matter at all now? Faction joining/forming seems totally dependent on your relationship with them, and there is no modifier here for distance, so its hard for me to see were distance plays in now. Does it factor into when a faction leader tries to force the issue? And if so were is that information shown?

Thanks for any help.

 

[icon41gimp]

Distance is mentioned in the faction decision files, I don't remember if it pertains only to who starts the faction or to those that join as well.

I don't think it has any influence on when the ultimatum is put forward, but just on the creation side.

 

[telegraph]

I tried to increase distance modifier in defines.lua to obscure values (100.0, 1000.0 ...), but no distance-based revolts sparked.

 

[telegraph]

I just tried decreasing distances tenfold and increasing the modifiers tenfold in the faction decision file. I have not noticed any problems with independence factions though...

One more thing: after I changed the files my DLCs stopped working. Are they somehow bound to checksum?

 

[Kagernaut]

So no distance modifiers anymore for revolt risk? That would explain alot. I have been noticing that sometimes the AI takes over certain areas that are obviously well beyond its original territory and then hold it without much issue. England winning the crusade for the Holy Land, for example.

Honestly, while distance increasing revolt risk makes sense, it was always too much and just made it difficult to expand.

 

[telegraph]

I find terriotorial expansion to be a fun-breaker.

Anyway, does anyone knows how to bring distance between lord-vassal capitals into consideration once more?

Also, maybe this thread really belongs to modding subforum?

 

[Hootieleece]

I think the general distance modifier to revolts makes painting Map my color HARD whine.......influenced developers to nerf it in New patch 1.07.Without announcing it.

 

[unmerged(49150)]

I think the general distance modifier to revolts makes painting Map my color HARD whine.......influenced developers to nerf it in New patch 1.07.Without announcing it.

I dunno, seems odd that just a patch or two ago they upped the distance penalty, and then now they would take it totally away. I feel almost like that with 1.07 they took something away without maybe meaning too, like how the threat tab is now superfluous.

Overall what Im getting thought is that distance doesn't really seem to matter anymore when it comes to keeping your empire together, which matches my own observations and is pretty interesting.

 

[telegraph]

well, I managed to make it matter a bit. I had to reduce distances tenfold, and increase modifiers a hundred times, so every now and then every nation is undergoing a major fracturing due to independence factions.

It is quite impossible now to hold a large empire in peace for long. HRE have stopped blobbing, France is no longer in Iberia, Pagan states in Baltics survived first 50 years, Muslims took the Asia Minor. So it looks awesome.

If you want to try this coolness - open factions objectives file, search for word "distance" and decrease distances 10 times (200 -> 20, 300 -> 30, 400 -> 40), also increase associated factors 100 times (1.5 -> 150 ...).

 

[Zireael]

Cool, thanks!

 

[Yxklyx]

Yeah, I miss the distance penalty. It no longer matters where your capital is located - that used to be a major consideration with a large empire.

 

[monsterfurby]

Imho distance shouldn't modify the likelihood of vassals to join a faction per se, but it should impact a faction's likelyhood to revolt (and maybe it does).

For example, a faction containing 50% of their liege's manpower but sitting right in the middle of his core domain should be less likely to revolt than one on the fringes of the realm, where the royal troops might not reach in time.

 

[Kagernaut]

Yeah, I miss the distance penalty. It no longer matters where your capital is located - that used to be a major consideration with a large empire.

It was too strong. You couldn't keep a capital in Italy and win a Crusade without massive revolts. You should have to be at least in Spain for it to matter. That way, it will discourage people going for distant inheritances and make it harder for countries to exploit smaller ones across the glob---IE, some Italian Duchy holy warring Finland.

 

[NewbieOne]

I agree that distance revolt risk made expanding and holding on very difficult.

BUT it must be said that was quite realistic. You can't expect to have a far-off duke as a regular part of your kingdom.

What I didn't like was:
– the fact that rebellions would tend to happen upon succession, giving it a horde-ish flavour;
– the way positive opinion about the liege seemed to matter so little.

In practice, I suspect the problem would've been addressed by according the relevant vassal more autonomy than vassals had within the kingdom proper, especially as this would be necessary due to communication distance and other difficulties basically precluding any form of micromanagement.

 

[telegraph]

It was too strong. You couldn't keep a capital in Italy and win a Crusade without massive revolts. You should have to be at least in Spain for it to matter. That way, it will discourage people going for distant inheritances and make it harder for countries to exploit smaller ones across the glob---IE, some Italian Duchy holy warring Finland.

Well, due to other modifiers in factions objectives file vassals with opinion over 50 will not join independence faction, and vassals with opinion over 80 will leave it. Unless they were forced to join ofcourse...
This means that it would be pretty easy to hold k_jerusalem for the generation who won it, but things will get ugly when your ruler dies. And IMHO it should be that way. And, considering the easy with which you can invite rebellious vassals back - it is not much of an issue while you still hold the k_jerualem title for yourself - they are all your deJure vassals and if you was careful about their cultures - they will be glad to re-sign your contract.

as for distant inheritances - it is much more historical to put your kin to distant places, because your kin is always your ally, and it makes your dinasty more prominent and therefore pushes your score up. After all this is not EU3 + RPG elements. This game is not about WC.

 

[telegraph]

What I didn't like was:
– the fact that rebellions would tend to happen upon succession, giving it a horde-ish flavour;
– the way positive opinion about the liege seemed to matter so little.

Revolts should happen whenever they have a good chance of success. New ruler is not as strong as old one, and if vassals revolt en-masse - they will have better chance to overwhelm the liege. Or would you rather have late(when the ruler is strong and full of power) revolts with only one OPM-count revolting? WOuld that really be fun for you?

Right now positive opinion means a lot. if your vassals love(do not despise) you - they will accept the offer to become your vassals again right after the ultimatum - they have proven their power, but they still want your protection.

 

[NewbieOne]

Revolts should happen whenever they have a good chance of success. New ruler is not as strong as old one, and if vassals revolt en-masse - they will have better chance to overwhelm the liege. Or would you rather have late(when the ruler is strong and full of power) revolts with only one OPM-count revolting? WOuld that really be fun for you?

Perhaps I didn't make myself clear enough. Revolts should, obviously, happen when they have a good chance of success, but with two reservations: not "whenever", as in absolutely whenever there is a good chance of success, and they should sometimes happen when the chance is poor, e.g. due to despair or miscalculation or bad intelligence.

As for one OPM revolts, I believe that just shouldn't be happening without very good reasons, such as: reasonable hope to set your empire crumbling down, your tyranny being unbearable, OPM having good allies, OPM ruler being stupid.

Right now positive opinion means a lot. if your vassals love(do not despise) you - they will accept the offer to become your vassals again right after the ultimatum - they have proven their power, but they still want your protection.

Not the distant ones. You will get the distant realm penalty, as well as "not de iure liege". That's already practically too hard to beat, even before you add "small difference in rank". For example, if you're Poland, there's no way the Duke of Aswan or Gallecia will bend knee even if he's your total fan.

Speaking of which, people who are at 90-100 opinion, especially with Honest, Just, Kind etc. traits shouldn't be revolting against their lieges. If you're a law and order person and you're totally committed to your boss, you just don't rebel simply because the opportunity is good. That's nation-state thinking, which isn't really applicable to appointees from your own culture or even dynasty in far-off lands. It should probably take several generations before they become full of self-determination ideas.

That, and when they're surrounded by Muslim powers who will DoW them them the moment they DoW me, they really shouldn't rebel. If you're some European-born Duke of Aswan between the Caliph in the North and a united Abyssinia held by your European king's co-dynast in the south, then you really, really don't want to rebel if you're smart. The same goes when you're a duke of Gallecia or Portucale with emirs all around. You want to be on the best terms possible with your king and you want that king to be strong enough or else you'll end up paying the jizya tax at best.

 

[Malibu Stacey]

Right now positive opinion means a lot. if your vassals love(do not despise) you - they will accept the offer to become your vassals again right after the ultimatum - they have proven their power, but they still want your protection.

They'll get plenty of protection in the dungeon after I crush their revolt and revoke their titles. Maybe even a stay in the oubliette if I'm lucky (that event doesn't fire enough as I'd like TBH).

 

[telegraph]

Perhaps I didn't make myself clear enough. Revolts should, obviously, happen when they have a good chance of success, but with two reservations: not "whenever", as in absolutely whenever there is a good chance of success, and they should sometimes happen when the chance is poor, e.g. due to despair or miscalculation or bad intelligence.

I agree here, but it would be nice for such miscalculations to happen only for stupid guys. There is really no way I can believe that Genius Grey Eminence will miscalculate and revolt at desperate odds.

Not the distant ones. You will get the distant realm penalty, as well as "not de iure liege". That's already practically too hard to beat, even before you add "small difference in rank". For example, if you're Poland, there's no way the Duke of Aswan or Gallecia will bend knee even if he's your total fan.

They should also be of your culture to pull that off. Apparently every culture in CK2 have some very offensive behaviour for foreigners, like farting in fronmt of an envoy or puking on his shoes .

Speaking of which, people who are at 90-100 opinion, especially with Honest, Just, Kind etc. traits shouldn't be revolting against their lieges. If you're a law and order person and you're totally committed to your boss, you just don't rebel simply because the opportunity is good.

As a Honest person: My liege honestly sucks. he is deceitful and he tried to kill his wife. I'll honestly go and kill him in battle.
As a Just person: My liege's claim seems to be far-fetched to me. His brother has a much better claim. It will be just for my liege to step aside for his brother. I'll revolt right a way for this just cause.
As a Kind person: My liege imprisoned a poor Duke of ... and kep him in dungeons for last 15 years. No crime could be that bad. I'll revolt to free this poor Duke, because I am kind to people.

So the only traits that should really discourage revolts is craven and content. former is too afraid of losing and the later is pretty pleased to ave a

That's nation-state thinking, which isn't really applicable to appointees from your own culture or even dynasty in far-off lands. It should probably take several generations before they become full of self-determination ideas.

I think of an independence faction as of a failure to pay homage. Like :
you sit at your court and your vassals come every now and again and bend their knees and talk with you about this and that. Once you notice that you have not seen a few of them for quite some time(That is an ultimatum). So you have to decide: either to go and get your homage by force, as it is unacceptable for your subjects to linger at such matters(I will not be blackmailed option) or you will assume that they are otherwise engaged and ignore their absence(I have no choice option). Then you can send an envoy to them offering to prolong vassalage. Some will agree and join you, saying that they are sorry that they did not come to you earlier, others will not, saying that if they wanted to bend their knee - they would do it earlier.

So, in my opinion it is not a flaw in system, but rather wrong text

That, and when they're surrounded by Muslim powers who will DoW them them the moment they DoW me, they really shouldn't rebel. If you're some European-born Duke of Aswan between the Caliph in the North and a united Abyssinia held by your European king's co-dynast in the south, then you really, really don't want to rebel if you're smart. The same goes when you're a duke of Gallecia or Portucale with emirs all around. You want to be on the best terms possible with your king and you want that king to be strong enough or else you'll end up paying the jizya tax at best.

That is true. We really need AI improved quite a bit. Whenever I start as less then a King - I swear fealty every time things become complicated (like when I am a Duke of Brittany and King of England is sent his Chancelor to fabricate on me. Better to be in France then to be homeless ) Why are AI characters so keen on independence I have no idea.

 

[Zireael]

Speaking of which, people who are at 90-100 opinion, especially with Honest, Just, Kind etc. traits shouldn't be revolting against their lieges. If you're a law and order person and you're totally committed to your boss, you just don't rebel simply because the opportunity is good. That's nation-state thinking, which isn't really applicable to appointees from your own culture or even dynasty in far-off lands. It should probably take several generations before they become full of self-determination ideas.

That, and when they're surrounded by Muslim powers who will DoW them them the moment they DoW me, they really shouldn't rebel. If you're some European-born Duke of Aswan between the Caliph in the North and a united Abyssinia held by your European king's co-dynast in the south, then you really, really don't want to rebel if you're smart. The same goes when you're a duke of Gallecia or Portucale with emirs all around. You want to be on the best terms possible with your king and you want that king to be strong enough or else you'll end up paying the jizya tax at best.

Agree completely.

Imho distance shouldn't modify the likelihood of vassals to join a faction per se, but it should impact a faction's likelyhood to revolt (and maybe it does).

For example, a faction containing 50% of their liege's manpower but sitting right in the middle of his core domain should be less likely to revolt than one on the fringes of the realm, where the royal troops might not reach in time.

This is a good idea too.