Proposal

[Trot]

Replacing Stability
As many of you know I have been very vocal about stability being a very useless mechanic. And As Bone Rightly pointed out all it really does is preventing levies from being raised permanently. However it does not do a good job of it as stability only applies to LP’s so a minor lord can do whatever he wants with his levies. To replace stability I am proposing desertion. After you have raised your levies for two consecutive years than the mods will roll a d-20 to decide what percentage of your army deserts. The max would be 20% of your army. So 1 would be 1% 2 would be 2% and so on and so forth. Now you ask “What can I do to keep my army from deserting me.” Well first there is the loyalty trait. As is it only affects purchased troops.
Loyalty (Tiered)
Tier 1: 1 point. Men will accept half pay for one year
Tier 2: 3 points. Men will accept no pay for a single year
Tier 3: 5 points. Men will fight for no pay for two years
However this would adjust the loyalty trait to also do this
Loyalty (Tiered)
Tier 1: 1 point. Men will accept half pay for one year; only half your levies will desert you for one year
Tier 2: 3 points. Men will accept no pay for a single year; no levies will desert you for an additional year
Tier 3: 5 points. Men will fight for no pay for two years; no levies will desert you for an additional 2 years
Now you say well that still isn’t good enough. Soldiers on a successful campaign are less likely to desert resulting in negative modifiers to the roll while soldiers that are losing the campaign are more likely to desert resulting in positive modifiers to the roll.
Now you are asking “won’t the Reach and Crownlands be screwed over by this. What happens to their trade resources?”
The Reaches Stability bonus would be replaced with this
Fruits from the Reach give the soldiers variety in their diet raising moral -2 to all desertion rolls
The Crownlands
Oils and spices from Essos intrigue thw soldiers and raise moral. -4 to desertion rolls




Now your asking how will we be able to represent how stable a region is. Well rp should make it obvious. If it comes to a rebellion mods will roll a D-20 to decide whether or not npcs join your rebellion. The chances of someone joining your cause originally are 1/20. However modifiers are placed on the roll paced on the political situation in the given area the number of players supporting you and the validity of your rebellion. So if you rebel for no good reason with no player support your chances are 1/20 of getting other lords support. For each player supporting the rebels it adds +2 to your chances of getting a npc lord to your side. For each player supported lord it is -1 to your chances. Mods rate reason for rebellion and how well you plotted. Look over some of the rp. Did they make preparation did they have a solid reason to rebel. Was it planned well? Did they try for npc support? Modifiers can be added or subtracted based on this. Basically you leave it to the mods to figure out who supports you. Modifiers can cause the amount to go anywhere from 1/20 to 19/20

[Trot]

Anyone have anything to say on this positive or negative suggestions questions whatever

[Wheatley]

I'm aladeen to this.

[Trot]

Aladeen?

[Xion]

Don't like it.

[Wheatley]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gmkIOSNoEBY


I'm just kidding, I am ok with this.

[Nesimî]

I don't like it either.

[Shankbot de Bodemloze]

This could be used alongside stability for minor houses?

[Honors Bastion]

After thinking about this proposal for a few days, I have to say that I don't like it.

It just doesn't seem finished enough or that it appears to be missing something.

Maybe if this proposal is somehow combined with the other stability method, then I might support it. The other proposal doesn't seem completely finished either but it looks more fleshed out and appears to be more functional than this one.

[Pontifex Maximus]

We already have desertion happen for not paying the army. All this proposal does is remove stability, not replace it. It also underscored your massive misunderstanding of the point of stability. It doesn't just pertain to military aspect. It also has economic aspects which you failed to address entirely. The roll system is completely arbitrary and based far too much on random chance. Obviously opposed.

[Ori]

It would suck for a seemingly healthy army to lose a fifth of its men while another loses far less simply because of a roll. You're pretty mcuh destined to lose a large chunk of your army every time you need a desertion roll, too.

[Trot]

Anyone with suggestions on how to improve this is welcome to.

It would suck for a seemingly healthy army to lose a fifth of its men while another loses far less simply because of a roll. You're pretty mcuh destined to lose a large chunk of your army every time you need a desertion roll, too.

We could reduce it to 10%

[Pontifex Maximus]

Its like trying to salvage the site of a nuclear blast: there's nothing worthwhile to take away from it. It isn't well presented or imagined and makes every other area it touches, namely resources, clunky and simplistically worthless.