War of the Usurper submod poll Loyalist rebels
We have had a large discussion in the development group and we figured it would be best if the community gave its opinion. After all we're creating this submod for you.
We're arguing about the Loyalists rebels.
As we know several smaller houses from the Riverlands, the Vale and the Stromlands didn't want to rebel against the Targayens and instead raised their banners in rebellion against their liege lords.
The tree main loyalist rebel houses were Darry for the Riverlands, Grafton for the Vale and Connington for the Stormlands.
Should we merge them into one faction or let them be independent? Or do you have another idea?
Main arguments:
First Machoking, for one Loyalist faction, (several posts)
Spoiler Alert, click show to read::
I am not sold on three new factions to represent the loyalists. I understand why you guys like it, and want it, but I think the game balancing would suffer for the sake of the lore. What are the flaws already in the vanilla game? Balancing! Some factions start in such a bad position, that it is no fun to play them in hotseats, or the CPU acts like a fool with them. Take the Riverlands for example. In vanilla, it gets bull dozed by Lannisters 90% of the time. Why? Cause it is in a bad starting position with few settlements, and with what settlements it has, they are not very useful with the exception of Riverrun and the Twins, but even then you don't usually keep them long enough. They are badly balanced against other factions.
So then what is the end result of the River lords power in the mod? They have all the vanilla settlements, plus Stony Sep, and Harrenhal. Harrenhal is a huge plus, but your loyalists are going to need something, Went was with the Riverlords, so if you go by Lore, Harrenhal stays with Tulley. You can give over Maiden Pool, but what else? Stony Sep? Every other settlement in the game was clearly with House Tulley. Short of adding new settlements, what's the point of creating a one settlement faction at the risk of weakening an already weak faction? Have we even asked the question about what to do with The Twins? Frey's were neutral to the very end. Take the Twins away from the Riverlands, plus one or two settlements for the loyalists, and they won't have enough money to use Harrenhal past the first turn. Let alone defend it against Tyrell in the south, Targs in the east, and loyalists all around.
In the Vale, we would literally be creating a new Stannis with these loaylists. My understanding that the loyalists in the Vale were at Gulltown and the surrounding area. So that's two, to three settlements on a finger. So I guess that makes two Stannis like factions, and possibly making the Riverlands weaker than they already are.
It is in the Stormlands that we have the most information on what house did what during the war, and there it would almost be a full split in what Renly has in the vanilla game. It will completely change the game flow by taking the third strongest faction and turning it into a Riverlands.
What really happens is the game balancing becomes unblanced. With maybe the exception of the Storm loyalists, all three factions will start with near impossible situations. All three will be minor factions, and all three will weaken three other factions. The Riverlands which is already pretty minor, the Vale which isn't, but only has a handful of useful towns, one of which is a loyalists town. The Stormlands which is a major faction and will fall to a near minor faction if split in half.
Keeping in mind that the Targs will have everything Joffery has, plus Dragonstone and surrounding settlements plus having full alliance with Dorne and Tyrell makes them the mods version of the Lannisters in the Vanilla game, if not worse.
I think for the sake of balancing, we should seriously consider one loyalist faction. One faction that can minimize the amount of settlements taken from the other three, that can survive the loss of a settlement in one of the three areas, and has a much better chance of maintaining the ability to make money. Basically creating a average faction like the Riverlands without making the balancing worse than it already is.
I don't necessarily think it is impossible or improbable to do three factions. I just think it would take a lot of reworking of the vanilla game to effectively do it. Yes the starting positions of each faction suggest what the player will do at the start, but that won't necessarily always happen, and short of scripting them to just sit there, Dorne won't follow lore under the CPU or a human. I don't even want to think of the damage that Tyrell will do. They are a lot closer to the River Lands then you suggest, especially if the River Lords get Stony Sept and Tyrell are no longer at war with any faction that can rival them.
The Starks wont be much help at all either. As it is now in the game, they will stay in the North. If we script them to be aggressive, it would still be a good 15 turns before they produce anything worth using, and another 10 just to march down from the North to anywhere where there would be fighting.
meanwhile, Targs start with a lot of resources and two huge cities in KL and Dragonstone and the River Lords right next to them. Tyrell starts with everything it does in the vanilla but this time has no equal it is at war with and is right next to the River Lords. Drone is very much the same situation as Tyrell. Basically I see creating three factions as an advantage for the Targs, but in a minor way that they don't really need, all while significantly disadvantaging the rebel factions that they can't afford.
Then prophet counter arguments against Macho and for three independent factions:
Spoiler Alert, click show to read:Then if you use one faction for all the loyalists, what flags/badges/coat of arms do you use? Doesn't it seem a little weird to have Darry men fighting near Gulltown or Sisterton men fighting agains Robert in the Stormlands. You could by editing the family trees get some fairly realistic succession system, but you still have the eye candy issue plus were you place you capital? The Red Keep belongs to King's landing so that is off limits and where do you keep a capital in a kingdom which winds across Westeros.
If you want everything to be equal then just round up to 4-5 giant factions that would definitely fight against each other in the best way. You can have Targaryens (all the Crownlands and rebel lord territories) , Targaryen Loyalists ( Tyrell+Dorne) Baratheon (Stormlands +Tully) Usurper loyalists (Stark + Arryn) Neutral Houses (Greyjoy+Lannister). It would make the game more balanced, everyone would have clear borders and enemies, but it doesn't fit lore-wise and it doesn't leave a lot of room for diplomacy. It would basically become a tournament. In history not every country/kingdom/empire start in the perfect position.
Like in the main W:TW and pretty much all major mods, people strive to have factions that offer different challenges and playing styles. If all factions are the same then I guarantee that after 2-3 games it becomes repetitive.
Like I said before, didn't the W:TW team had similar issues with the Tully/Stark alliance? They could have made them one faction and have a good strong faction, but you'd mess up the lore. In the books the Tullys get kicked up fairly easy because they are weaker, they don't start as the equals of the Lannisters. Some factions are meant to be a challenge, rather than a full on conquering empire since the 6th-7th turn. The smaller rebels start out as supporters of the Targaryens, meant to offer support not to go out and conquer Westeros. In hotseats you could have them be used by the same player so they can be coordinated well or have them be used by unexperienced players to learn to play and help out the Targaryen player.
I'm not against the idea of having one rebel faction. It would fix allot of balancing issues but it will bring up new issues. You'd end up with a buffer zone faction which has to deal with 3 different factions (Arryn, Tully, Baratheon) Even if Dorne comes out of it's shell (unlike in the main mod) and the Tyrells will go out agains the Stormlands you still have to take care of the Tullys and Arryns (which are not small factions). You'd really need to coordinate your resources well to fight and hold basically a huge battle line of settlements across Westeros.
You said the Tullys get owned too much and they are too weak in the main mood. Well that's because it doesn't start as a powerhorse and are surounded by enemies. The Lannisters are the most powerful faction and they start with two stacks in Tully territory. Not to mention Joffrey goes after Maidenpool, they start hostile with the Ironborn and the Arryns who ain't allies stab their back, whilst in this mod they start out with allies on the north and east front. No Lannister enemies in their territory, no war with the Greyjoys. The Targaryens should start with virtually no armies except for some garrisons as it is specified it took time to mobilize them.
Then Macho's counter arguments on prophet:
Spoiler Alert, click show to read:I seee the issues prophet makes and I agree they arnt ideal, but compared to the alternative, I think one faction is the safer bet. Yes the Lannisters are not at war with anyone, but the Tyrells are, and while we can assume they would go to the Storm Lands, they dont need to because Dorne can. We would have to script Dorne to basically sit there if we want to to be close to lore. The River Lords are not a major faction in vanilla, I get that. But they are also pretty worthless in vanilla unless a human is playing them. My understanding of the River Lands back in the day was they were much stronger when Holster Tully was younger.
As for the logisitics of one faction. Thats pretty simple, yo allow the buildings they hold to recruit the type of unit for that area. You can also start them with Arryn units, River units, and Storm units in the stacks they start with. Have each area's Lord be the general of the starting stack. As Dux suggests Connington can be Faction Leader and be called Hand of the King. As for Capital....well, like I said it isnt perfect. Griffens Roost comes to mind at first. I agree the capital is a problem.
As for the purpose of factions and making each different. The three rebel factions if made seperate factions would almost all three be in the same situation. River Lands and Arryn will be versions of Stannis, and Storm Lands would be just a little bigger. Three small factions all facing similar situations with the only difference being who they are facing. From my point of view the game play is more uniqu as a single faction, where as the three small factions would be very similar to one another anyway. One faction can suvive losing Gulltown, it could even ship the starting Stack at Gulltown to the Storm lands. The player can consolidate and let some settlements go. Or he can try and hold them all. Its up to the player, and like prophet suggests, each faction doesnt have to be an all out invasion of westeros, but each faction should have to have a fighting chance. I see a much better chance as one faction, rather then 3.
As for banners, yep another problem, atleast on the campaign map. I dont have an answer for that yet.
So that is the problem I'm facingI'll let you decide.
Reply With Quote
Originally Posted by Korpskog
