Looting Suggestion II

[PhroX]

Regardless of which option for revamping it is taken, fundamentally, looting needs to be something that the player actively does. That was why removing the old system was such a bad decision. Simply rebalancing it, reducing the income or similar, wouldn't have bothered me. But taking it out removed gameplay. There is less for me, the player, to do in the game. Previously, you actually had to do something to get the money - you had to engage with the game, control your troops, manage them. It added variety to how wars were fought, it kept the player occupied. Right now, you just get a bit of extra money for doing exactly what you would normally do.

 

[AchedTeacher]

Regardless of which option for revamping it is taken, fundamentally, looting needs to be something that the player actively does.

I kind of disagree. Looting was done by soldiers regardless. Now, if discipline plays a role in how much of that loot the treasury sees returning, I can get behind that.

 

[spinoza013]

I kind of disagree. Looting was done by soldiers regardless. Now, if discipline plays a role in how much of that loot the treasury sees returning, I can get behind that.

My other suggestion was by using the scorched earth button in enemy territory you can put an army group into looting mode. Previous looting mechanic would apply. However as with all good gaming decisions each bonus should come with a calculated risk. I propose the risks to restore the balance somewhat would be as follows.

Once the Loot button has been activated

-it cannot be switched off until you are in friendly territory.
-the army group designated as looters lose 50% discipline
-you can only loot provinces equal to 2x your number of regiments in base tax ( i.e. 2 regiment could loot a base tax 4 province or lower)
-you can't merge looting stacks
- a possible MP cost per province?

 

[zdlugasz]

My other suggestion was by using the scorched earth button in enemy territory you can put an army group into looting mode. Previous looting mechanic would apply. However as with all good gaming decisions each bonus should come with a calculated risk. I propose the risks to restore the balance somewhat would be as follows.

Once the Loot button has been activated

-it cannot be switched off until you are in friendly territory.
-the army group designated as looters lose 50% discipline
-you can only loot provinces equal to 2x your number of regiments in base tax ( i.e. 2 regiment could loot a base tax 4 province or lower)
-you can't merge looting stacks
- a possible MP cost per province?

I am afraid that AI would be unable to cope with it and would lose a lot of battles because of it

 

[Wizzington]

"look captain! Thats seems to be a rich estate! Can we search it for riches?"

"No men, thats impossible....We first gotta occupy the fort 50 miles from here, and THEN we might be able to loot it. I know, I know, but thats the way it is."

So I hope it changes too

"Look, captain! That seems to be a rich estate! Can we search it for riches?"

"No men, that's impossible, because we control a city 100 miles away, and therefore are in supply. We have to go deeper into enemy territory, where the estates refill their treasuries every 6 months."

(The old system didn't make a terrible amount of sense either.)

 

[spinoza013]

I am afraid that AI would be unable to cope with it and would lose a lot of battles because of it

This is on the understanding that the AI previously didn't use the looting mechanic. It was one of the reasons looting was changed as it was deemed it caused AI/player inbalance. This was just a suggestion for those that argued that looting should still be an option.

 

[Florryworry]

"Look, captain! That seems to be a rich estate! Can we search it for riches?"

"No men, that's impossible, because we control a city 100 miles away, and therefore are in supply. We have to go deeper into enemy territory, where the estates refill their treasuries every 6 months."

(The old system didn't make a terrible amount of sense either.)

Agreed, on the topic of suggestions, allowing the AI to sally forth makes me shiver in fear.
I love fear and it would make looting 'abuse' harder if you ever go back to a non-full-occupy looting system.

 

[PhroX]

"Look, captain! That seems to be a rich estate! Can we search it for riches?"

"No men, that's impossible, because we control a city 100 miles away, and therefore are in supply. We have to go deeper into enemy territory, where the estates refill their treasuries every 6 months."

(The old system didn't make a terrible amount of sense either.)

It might not have made sense, but at least it was fun. Now it's nonsensical and boring...

(sorry, I should probably stop going on about my dislike for this change, shouldn't I? )

 

[AchedTeacher]

"Look, captain! That seems to be a rich estate! Can we search it for riches?"

"No men, that's impossible, because we control a city 100 miles away, and therefore are in supply. We have to go deeper into enemy territory, where the estates refill their treasuries every 6 months."

(The old system didn't make a terrible amount of sense either.)

Nobody was implying we go back to that, I don't think.

 

[PhroX]

Nobody was implying we go back to that, I don't think.

Well, there's certainly a few of us who would rather go back to that (along with all the other quirks an "imbalances" we had before) than keep the current system.

 

[hwoosh]

Regardless of which option for revamping it is taken, fundamentally, looting needs to be something that the player actively does. That was why removing the old system was such a bad decision. Simply rebalancing it, reducing the income or similar, wouldn't have bothered me. But taking it out removed gameplay. There is less for me, the player, to do in the game. Previously, you actually had to do something to get the money - you had to engage with the game, control your troops, manage them. It added variety to how wars were fought, it kept the player occupied. Right now, you just get a bit of extra money for doing exactly what you would normally do.

A lot of people don't seem to realize that this was, de facto, pretty much how the old system worked, if you were carpet sieging. Provinces under siege simply got re-looted every six months automatically, as long as they were eligible for looting. Before and after the change, the dynamic of "shatter enemy army -> prevent him from spawning new troops -> carpet siege" hasn't really changed. The change didn't add or subtract any strategic choices, at least for my playstyle—it just tweaked how profitable they were, in the long run.

 

[PhroX]

A lot of people don't seem to realize that this was, de facto, pretty much how the old system worked, if you were carpet sieging. Provinces under siege simply got re-looted every six months automatically, as long as they were eligible for looting. Before and after the change, the dynamic of "shatter enemy army -> prevent him from spawning new troops -> carpet siege" hasn't really changed. The change didn't add or subtract any strategic choices, at least for my playstyle—it just tweaked how profitable they were, in the long run.

So you never actually went looting with small units of troops behind enemy lines? Because, before that change, that was a viable, enjoyable tactic that rewarded clever play and micromanagement, that has been completely removed from the game.

 

[Cymsdale]

Regardless of which option for revamping it is taken, fundamentally, looting needs to be something that the player actively does.

Ew, no. That causes AI issues and adds micromanagement.

So you never actually went looting with small units of troops behind enemy lines? Because, before that change, that was a viable, enjoyable tactic that rewarded clever play and micromanagement, that has been completely removed from the game.

"clever"...

 

[spinoza013]

You could have a sanction looting button similar to raising war taxes which reduces army maintenance by 20% but increases AE in the peace deal.

Granted it doesn't deepen tactical strategy on a skill level.

 

[loveactually]

So you never actually went looting with small units of troops behind enemy lines? Because, before that change, that was a viable, enjoyable tactic that rewarded clever play and micromanagement, that has been completely removed from the game.

you only need space button to pause and 1 mercs regiment (or maybe more if you are looting russia/ming) to loot enemy countries. it was hardly a micromanagement skill in single player game.
in multi player game, it was a challenging thing to do. constantly playing at speed 2/3, no pause and not versus stupid AI really tested your clicking and micro management skills

 

[hwoosh]

So you never actually went looting with small units of troops behind enemy lines? Because, before that change, that was a viable, enjoyable tactic that rewarded clever play and micromanagement, that has been completely removed from the game.

Sure, I always micromanaged a few small stacks (2-6, typically, depending on how huge an enemy I was dealing with) to loot and, more importantly, prevent the enemy from recruiting. But as soon as enough provinces fell that I could carpet the rest of them, I stopped doing that, because I didn't have to.

And guess what? I still do exactly the same thing, because it's an effective tactic. Like I said, the dynamic hasn't changed.

 

[Arumba]

I'd like to see looting somehow damage the autonomy slider. The peasants don't feel protected by their liege, so they are more autonomous and pay fewer taxes and manpower to their liege. Something to represent their suffering.

 

[Vlorious]

One is forced to wonder if looting your own provinces could/should be added in exchange for unrest. Mercenaries typically weren't overly picky about how their bonuses came in.

 

[Wizzington]

I'd like to see looting somehow damage the autonomy slider. The peasants don't feel protected by their liege, so they are more autonomous and pay fewer taxes and manpower to their liege. Something to represent their suffering.

This was tried in the first iteration of autonomy, but it created a death spiral for any country that lost a war and so was axed.

 

[atwix]

"Look, captain! That seems to be a rich estate! Can we search it for riches?"

"No men, that's impossible, because we control a city 100 miles away, and therefore are in supply. We have to go deeper into enemy territory, where the estates refill their treasuries every 6 months."

(The old system didn't make a terrible amount of sense either.)

you stole and adapted my joke! Preposterous!


Sidenote: provinces harvested all year long, filled granaries and barns all year long. So a refill of all riches in 6 months isn't unheard of.

Maybe the looting interval should have been 2 years or so, instead of 6 months.

It still feels like the current change is to prevent micromanaging fetishists like me to loot behind enemy lines

But I DO acknowledge most players don't like it, and that some sort of change was needed.

Can I do a suggestion Wiz? KEEP the old system, but enable looting ONLY for provinces that are NEXT to an occupied province, or occupied provinces itself (they are being loted automatically) It would be good fix, and actually historically accurate.

And for hordes, keep the old system entirely, but change the looting interval to 2 years or more

I think that would be good compromise. If you are interested in negotiations