No tribals?

[Achiles]

Why are the free folk not tribal government? What about sotheros or the other southern rim peoples, or the skagosi? Also, shouldn't Qarth be a republic, or a theocracy under the warlocks? Just curious if these were planned design features for future updates or if they were going to stay this way.

 

[blackninja9939]

There will never be tribal governments because they if the willdings or anyone else conquers a non tribal realm they would not be able to get any tax or men from the castle which just makes no sense. Qarth is ruled by the Pureborns not the Warlocks themselves

 

[Pokonic]

Why are the free folk not tribal government? What about sotheros or the other southern rim peoples, or the skagosi? Also, shouldn't Qarth be a republic, or a theocracy under the warlocks? Just curious if these were planned design features for future updates or if they were going to stay this way.

The Free Folk and other groups that are similar to how tribals work do get tribal councilor jobs (organize raid, ect), which is enough. Due to how buildings work in the mod, having tribal groups be, well, tribes would not and did not, in fact, work well. Out of your general concerns, I imagine that many of the nations in the general area of Faros would be next on the list for updates, but I don't imagine that they would be tribal.

Also, Qarth is ruled by the Pureborn, as they actually control the military and overall form the nobility of the city. Politics-wise, the city's military is under the control of the Pureborn, while the flow of wealth is mostly conducted by the three major trade guilds, who also fight amongst themselves. The Warlocks don't so much as rule the city as mumble in the corner and watch the other four factions stab each other.

 

[Achiles]

There will never be tribal governments because they if the willdings or anyone else conquers a non tribal realm they would not be able to get any tax or men from the castle which just makes no sense. Qarth is ruled by the Pureborns not the Warlocks themselves

They really need to add the ability for nomad and tribal governments to destroy non-nomad/tribal holdings...

They need to add the ability to destroy them, period! At least they need to add it for modders, for example through events.

 

[Necal]

They really need to add the ability for nomad and tribal governments to destroy non-nomad/tribal holdings...

They need to add the ability to destroy them, period! At least they need to add it for modders, for example through events.

Nomads can pillage it to destruction. Tribals don't have it natively, but it would be easy to modify the nomadic pillage decision to be used by tribals to remove castles and cities (leaving temples to avoid the AI destroying their own holy sites).

 

[Ols]

They really need to add the ability for nomad and tribal governments to destroy non-nomad/tribal holdings...

They need to add the ability to destroy them, period! At least they need to add it for modders, for example through events.

They already have that available as a mod, we include the ability to convert feudal holdings to tribes in the Winter King.

Nomads can pillage it to destruction. Tribals don't have it natively, but it would be easy to modify the nomadic pillage decision to be used by tribals to remove castles and cities (leaving temples to avoid the AI destroying their own holy sites).

Without removing the temple you don't get the instant cultural/religious conversion from emptying the province. You'd also need to add that in, otherwise the pillagers would rule other pockets of foreign culture in the places where they preserved the temples.

There will never be tribal governments because they if the willdings or anyone else conquers a non tribal realm they would not be able to get any tax or men from the castle which just makes no sense. Qarth is ruled by the Pureborns not the Warlocks themselves

It's possible to convert a successful King Beyond the Wall to feudalism by event without changing any of their holdings behind the Wall to feudalism. Your existing feudalism > republic decision for characters like Aegon I is a good example of this being done. The other option is to allow the wildlings to convert feudal holdings into tribal holdings over time via a combination of cultural change and neglect.

The Free Folk and other groups that are similar to how tribals work do get tribal councilor jobs (organize raid, ect), which is enough. Due to how buildings work in the mod, having tribal groups be, well, tribes would not and did not, in fact, work well. Out of your general concerns, I imagine that many of the nations in the general area of Faros would be next on the list for updates, but I don't imagine that they would be tribal.

Create a "Wildling Gathering" building with 6 levels and have each of them change into a corresponding fortress level when you convert the tribe?

 

[blackninja9939]

It's possible to convert a successful King Beyond the Wall to feudalism by event without changing any of their holdings behind the Wall to feudalism. Your existing feudalism > republic decision for characters like Aegon I is a good example of this being done. The other option is to allow the wildlings to convert feudal holdings into tribal holdings over time via a combination of cultural change and neglect.

I know it is possible to change their government but it still makes no sense to go through all of that when you can just as easily not have them be tribal, it really adds nothing to the game in the slightest compared to the annoyance it would bring

 

[Ols]

I know it is possible to change their government but it still makes no sense to go through all of that when you can just as easily not have them be tribal, it really adds nothing to the game in the slightest compared to the annoyance it would bring

To be honest "all of that" is just a single event, offset by the fact that it'd correctly remove feudal obligations from the non-kneeling Wildlings and allow them to ignore their liege's calls to war instead. There's also the cosmetic impact of having better looking buildings on the map and icons for their holdings, and the council actions that you can associate with tribal rule. It just seems like a shame to keep them feudal when tribes are a perfect fit for them.

 

[blackninja9939]

To be honest "all of that" is just a single event, offset by the fact that it'd correctly remove feudal obligations from the non-kneeling Wildlings and allow them to ignore their liege's calls to war instead. There's also the cosmetic impact of having better looking buildings on the map and icons for their holdings, and the council actions that you can associate with tribal rule. It just seems like a shame to keep them feudal when tribes are a perfect fit for them.

Having them as tribal then conquering south of the wall then making them feudal is pointless, just keep them feudal. The idea of changing the holding type is equally bad, the willdings would not go south of the wall and then just destroy a giant castle to build some dodgy little huts. It makes no sense

 

[Ols]

Having them as tribal then conquering south of the wall then making them feudal is pointless, just keep them feudal. The idea of changing the holding type is equally bad, the willdings would not go south of the wall and then just destroy a giant castle to build some dodgy little huts. It makes no sense

I'm not saying they'd erect huts in King's Landing, I'm suggesting that neglect by the Wildings of holdings they don't know how to maintain would see them fall apart and become a badly organised slum. That could be a progressive wave of decay moving south over time, but honesty the idea of them going feudal on arrival is better.

To be honest, arguing that having them tribal is pointless is the same as arguing that tribal government in vanilla is pointless too, given that the Wildlings represent a perfect example of tribal politics. Vanilla cultures can launch an invasion of a foreign feudal title and get upgraded to feudalism, so what's the issue? You're inventing a problem that doesn't exist.

 

[blackninja9939]

I'm not saying they'd erect huts in King's Landing, I'm suggesting that neglect by the Wildings of holdings they don't know how to maintain would see them fall apart and become a badly organised slum. That could be a progressive wave of decay moving south over time, but honesty the idea of them going feudal on arrival is better.

To be honest, arguing that having them tribal is pointless is the same as arguing that tribal government in vanilla is pointless too, given that the Wildlings represent a perfect example of tribal politics. Vanilla cultures can launch an invasion of a foreign feudal title and get upgraded to feudalism, so what's the issue? You're inventing a problem that doesn't exist.

Sure it could be a slum, that would not make it suddenly not have able to have tax taken from it or men made to fight. Having them go feudal once they go south of the wall is really not any better than just having them feudal,
An honestly I feel tribal in vanilla is slightly pointless in a few cases, not to the same extent of the willdings as I only really dislike the tribal ones in vanilla during the cases where you play as a nomad and can go to tribal which seems like a superfluous mid point as you can also choose to go feudal.
As much as you can keep arguing this point it is not going to make a difference as it will not be changed I am afraid

 

[Achiles]

...An honestly I feel tribal in vanilla is slightly pointless in a few cases, not to the same extent of the willdings as I only really dislike the tribal ones in vanilla during the cases where you play as a nomad and can go to tribal which seems like a superfluous mid point as you can also choose to go feudal.
As much as you can keep arguing this point it is not going to make a difference as it will not be changed I am afraid

This seems to be coming down to your personal preferences, rather than a clear cut design decision. I agree with you on tribal sucking, but that doesn't change its suitability for freefolk forms of governance. It also doesn't address why the tribal to feudal conversion in vanilla isn't such a big issue, but in AGOT it is a completely unworkable non-starter.

Of course I suppose that none of these arguments really matter because, as you said, you're not going to change your mind. Tribal is out in AGOT, period.

 

[Ols]

Sure it could be a slum, that would not make it suddenly not have able to have tax taken from it or men made to fight. Having them go feudal once they go south of the wall is really not any better than just having them feudal,
An honestly I feel tribal in vanilla is slightly pointless in a few cases, not to the same extent of the willdings as I only really dislike the tribal ones in vanilla during the cases where you play as a nomad and can go to tribal which seems like a superfluous mid point as you can also choose to go feudal.
As much as you can keep arguing this point it is not going to make a difference as it will not be changed I am afraid

You can already customise tribal government so that they can always call their feudal levies up, or so that they don't get wrong holding modifiers on castles. I'm not sure where you've got that idea from. Even vanilla allows you to pass clan organisation high enough to call up levies. That's besides the point though - it would be more logical to program it so any Emperor is automatically changed into a feudal ruler with a single short event, despite your protest that it's "too much work".

That's not how Nomad government conversion works. As a nomad you can either:

• Convert to a merchant republic via a coastal city, abandoning all nomad provinces and your primary title with it.
• Convert to a feudal kingdom via any castle, abandoning all nomad provinces and your primary title with it.
• Convert to a tribe through your Baghatur Council building (part of your Horde's main camp), spawning tribes in all nomad provinces (in a specific kingdom I think?) and settling your Horde where it is.

The tribal decision is superior if you've managed to move somewhere and cleared out a huge area for grazing, but now want to settle down. In exchange for the penalty of becoming a tribe you get to have a kingdom exclusively of your own culture. It's a vastly better option if you want to make a long term investment in how your kingdom is built up. The other two options convert local culture randomly, and makes you lose your main Horde to a probably hostile Khan, who will often respond by raiding or subjugating you again.

Given that the Wildlings are not and should never be nomads, it seems like a really odd excuse to give. Your team has gone to the trouble of creating custom republican government types, so it seems pretty logical to also create custom feudal/tribal government types to refine issues you see in them and add unique mechanics for particular cultures/regions. If it really bothers you then you can create a 'feudal' government type that uses tribes as its main holding and also allows you to hold castles. That rectifies the problem that the Wildlings are living in castles, which is really really weird.

@Achiles is pretty much on the money is saying that this is down almost entirely to your own personal preferences, not a rational argument for your point of view. I've learned to accept that my gut feeling in terms of Winter King design is often wrong, and that having a reasoned debate regarding game mechanics usually leads to a better outcome. You can arbitrarily brush off player suggestions as much as you want, but its a bit of a crap attitude to have if you're serious about developing an all-round fun mod.

 

[blackninja9939]

It is not just down to my personal preference in the slightest, it is the same answer the entire dev team gives to everyone when they ask about tribals.
If the rest of the team concludes to change this in the future I am all for it, I really do not mind to that extent either way but you seemt to for somre reason to the point where you seem to be starting to actually get annoyed with me personally as apprently I have slighted you by just saying we are not changing something at the moment.

 

[Ols]

It is not just down to my personal preference in the slightest, it is the same answer the entire dev team gives to everyone when they ask about tribals.

But its based either on people's personal preferences or a misunderstanding of how tribal government works. Neither of those are really good reasons. If the entire dev team is making a decision based on incorrect information then it seems obvious enough to start by telling people how tribals and nomads actually work (especially since there are really weird issues with how nomads behave at the moment with regards to pillaging, settlement, and colonisation). I get that modders specialise to particular roles within a team, and that not everyone can explain every feature, but surely you shouldn't be personally criticising people's proposals if you don't actually understand the mechanics behind what they're suggesting?

If the rest of the team concludes to change this in the future I am all for it, I really do not mind to that extent either way but you seemt to for somre reason to the point where you seem to be starting to actually get annoyed with me personally as apprently I have slighted you by just saying we are not changing something at the moment.

I was annoyed in the sense that I thought you were actually slightly rude in your response to @Achiles and I, especially since you were posting misleading information at the same time. If other members of the team want to read what I said and mull over a response, that'd be great. It's really easy to get an echo chamber going in a closed modding group where particular ideas or conceptions like "we can't have tribals ingame" go completely unchallenged.

 

[blackninja9939]

I was annoyed in the sense that I thought you were actually slightly rude in your response to @Achiles and I, especially since you were posting misleading information at the same time. If other members of the team want to read what I said and mull over a response, that'd be great. It's really easy to get an echo chamber going in a closed modding group where particular ideas or conceptions like "we can't have tribals ingame" go completely unchallenged.

I was not intending to be rude, all I did was say the same information any other member of the team would tell you, the rest of the dev team do also check the forums out but just respond less to people than I do.

EDIT: Actuslly saying that I just realised that I'm a mong and had totally forgotten you can change in a government what holdings they can hold without penalty.... I'm gonna go test this out now lol and see if it is alright and works nicely...

 

[Ols]

I was not intending to be rude, all I did was say the same information any other member of the team would tell you, the rest of the dev team do also check the forums out but just respond less to people than I do.

EDIT: Actuslly saying that I just realised that I'm a mong and had totally forgotten you can change in a government what holdings they can hold without penalty.... I'm gonna go test this out now lol and see if it is alright and works nicely...

I've already made the switch to tribal on my own copy of the mod, you can in fact raise levies and taxes as normal even if you have tribal government as the ruler of Westeros. It just looks a bit odd with the brown bands around your portrait, really. I also change the Skagosi and Hill Clansmen holdings to tribes to simulate their differences from the rest of the North, and that looks nice too. That's very much a preference change though, might be worth playtesting for a while to see how it behaves. What is useful about it is that you can use it to delete the "Lord" titles from the Hill Clansmen, which are non-canon. Instead, you can set them to simply have no title on the county level, like Vikings.

 

[Achiles]

The Warhammer mod has multiple different and unique government types. I see no reason why special government types couldn't be created for this mod to address the issues being raised while also adding to the realism. The clunky unrealistic system for pre-nomad Dothraki was one of the primary reasons I barely ever played this mod before. If vanilla feudal is going to remain the government type of the freefolk, skagosi, and others, then I will probably just play something else. The suspension of disbelief is already broken.

 

[blackninja9939]

The Warhammer mod has multiple different and unique government types. I see no reason why special government types couldn't be created for this mod to address the issues being raised while also adding to the realism. The clunky unrealistic system for pre-nomad Dothraki was one of the primary reasons I barely ever played this mod before. If vanilla feudal is going to remain the government type of the freefolk, skagosi, and others, then I will probably just play something else. The suspension of disbelief is already broken.

Well if you read my post above I just said I am gonna take a look as I had forgot government types could have allowed holdings edited. If you really cannot stand a few titles being feudal until then when it really has no major gameplay impact and want to completely stop playing the mod I can't stop you but that seems like a cut your nose off to spite your face style reaction

 

[Achiles]

...If you really cannot stand a few titles being feudal until then when it really has no major gameplay impact and want to completely stop playing the mod I can't stop you but that seems like a cut your nose off to spite your face style reaction

To me, it isn't a minor thing. It is a major inaccuracy that diminishes my ability to fully enjoy the mod. I'm not "cutting off my nose to spite my face." I'm choosing to play something else, which I will fully enjoy, until the things that I don't like are addressed. If they are never addressed, then i will just keep finding other games to enjoy, without any irritating idiosyncrasies.

Still, I really look forward to playing this mod as I think CK2 is the perfect platform to represent this world in a strategy game. I'll just wait until tribal governments are added in to better fully represent the varied and interesting setting.