Vassal Pleased with Feudal Law event always fires for same province

[Owen]

[In the latest beta]

As mentioned briefly in this thread, the "Vassal Pleased with Feudal Law" event always appears to fire for the same vassal.

In my current game, I am the Leofricsons, Dukes of Cumberland become Kings of Scotland, and also Kings of about five other places, including England and France. This means I currently have between 100 and 110 vassals, though I'm trying to cut down a little. However, every time this event fires, it fires for the same vassal. When I still held Lothian as my capital, it always fired for the Duke of Galloway (in Galloway). Now I have moved, and my capital is in Brugge, it always fires for the Count of Breda. Last night, every time the event fired, I checked that the Count of Breda's loyalty, and it was always at 100%. Yet, at one stage, this event fired for him twice in one month.

What seems to be happening, is the listed vassal is always the vassal holding the county (or capital, it isn't obvious which) that is next down the county list. When my capital was in Lothian (province 48), the event always fired for Galloway (50), while Carrick (49) was part of my demesne, so not eligible. Now my capital is in Brugge (78), the event fires for Breda (92), but all the intervening provinces numbers are held by the King of Germany or his vassals.

One possibility is that the event is actually firing for the least loyal vassal, but isn't being reported correctly.

Anyway, I don't have the event file in front of me, so checking the commands in it will have to wait till later, unless someone feels like posting it.

 

[Grosshaus]

Sounds like either a mistyped command or a command that isn´t working properly.

Don´t know much about event scripting myself, could somebody with more experience look at this one?

 

[Owen]

OK, here are the relevant events, from law_events.txt:

#################################################################
#You are pleased with your liege’s ruling laws: Feudal Contract #
#################################################################

character_event = { #Your liege’s hands-off method of rule under feudal contract makes your rule easier.

	id = 6608
	picture = "event_default"

	trigger = {
		condition = { type = ruler }
		condition = { type = is_vassal }
		condition = {
			type = or
			condition = { type = religion value = catholic }
			condition = { type = religion value = orthodox }
		}
		condition = {
			type = liege
			condition = { type = has_law value = { feudal_contract_law = yes } }
		}
	}

	mean_time_to_happen = {
		years = 25

		modifier = {

<snip>

	}

	action_a = { # God bless my liege!
		effect = { type = loyalty value = 0.25 }
		effect = { type = trigger for = liege value = 6611 }
	}
}

Which fires:

############################################
# A vassal is pleased with our ruling laws #
############################################

character_event = { # A vassal is pleased with your wise and fair rule under feudal contract law.

	id = 6611
	picture = "event_default"

	#triggered by 6608

	action_a = { # Good
		effect = { type = prestige value = 25 }
		effect = {
			type = random
			chance = 10 # possibility that your vassals feel that you are very just
			effect = { type = add_trait value = just }
			effect = { type = loyalty for = worst_vassal value = 0.25 }
		}
	}
}

Even as written, it's a very strange event, improving vassal loyalty by 0.25 for the first character it fires for, but then it also triggers a loyalty change of 0.25 for the "worst vassal", which is presumably supposed to be the vassal with the lowest loyalty.

It strikes me that this event was either supposed to fire for the vassal and then just fire an even for the liege giving a prestige increase, or it was supposed to be a single event which only fired for the liege, giving a loyalty boost to the least loyal vassal. In the end, both seem to have been implemented, and it's a mess.

Of course, on top of that, it seems the code for "worst_vassal" in the .exe doesn't work properly and just fires for the vassal who is the holder of the first county on the province list after the liege's capital.

It would be nice to sort this out. Probably the best way is if the loyalty change is removed from the second event and the event text somehow finds a way to list the vassal whose loyalty changes.

 

[Veldmaarschalk]

The event seems to always give the same vassal the loyalty bonus. But in my games it isn't always the one with the next provincenumber.

King of Aragon, capital is Barcelona (204) and the event fires for the count of Foggia (348), a title held by the kings bastard son. While I also have vassals in 205, 206 and so on.

 

[Owen]

The event seems to always give the same vassal the loyalty bonus. But in my games it isn't always the one with the next provincenumber.

King of Aragon, capital is Barcelona (204) and the event fires for the count of Foggia (348), a title held by the kings bastard son. While I also have vassals in 205, 206 and so on.

Yes, I realised that in the second case I also had a vassal count in Holland or somewhere that comes before Breda in the list.

I'm also not convinced that it's actually firing for the vassal it says it is. I'm not certain, but I think it fired and had no effect. I must remember to check tomorrow night.

 

[unmerged(21937)]

I've assumed worst and best have a lot to do with stewardship, possibly other stats and / or prestige, instead of just loyalty.

 

[Owen]

I've assumed worst and best have a lot to do with stewardship, possibly other stats and / or prestige, instead of just loyalty.

Hmm. OK, but the fact it always fires for the same vassal is conceptually pretty silly now I'm up to 116 of them.

In any case, I think that the problem that the loyalty bonus fires for two different vassals within the same event chain is actually the bigger problem, considering that you can't even tell who the first vassal is.

What's needed is for the second event to only give a prestige gain to the liege and then tell you who the vassal is whose loyalty increased in the first event. The event chain is a mess, whichever way you look at it.

 

[unmerged(21937)]

Well, unfortunately there's currently no way to make a triggered event tell exactly where it triggered from and to be honest, I don't expect to see it in a patch.

The alternatives that would be possible, would be having the initial event only triggering for the liege, but that would mean it would trigger as often for a king with single vassal as for a king with a hundred; or alternatively ditching the loyalty part from the first event, but I'd think it would work even worse then.

 

[Owen]

Well, unfortunately there's currently no way to make a triggered event tell exactly where it triggered from and to be honest, I don't expect to see it in a patch.

The alternatives that would be possible, would be having the initial event only triggering for the liege, but that would mean it would trigger as often for a king with single vassal as for a king with a hundred; or alternatively ditching the loyalty part from the first event, but I'd think it would work even worse then.

Well, there are several events that fire for a vassal and don't tell you who it fired for, "vassal agrees/refuses to change his law to more closely match your own". I'm not sure it's that much of an issue. As it stands now, there's no mention of the first vassal at all in the liege's event, whereas if it only fires for the first one, you know it's fired, but just not for whom.

 

[unmerged(21937)]

Yes, but there is the underlying problem that in many cases, like with this event about vassal not changing his laws, we have to fire it for the vassal first as it is there where we check that the conditions are sound and sensible, which means that we can't actually go around the problem to let you see who is causing trouble, without having new coding done to reveal who the event was triggered from.

 

[Owen]

Yes, but there is the underlying problem that in many cases, like with this event about vassal not changing his laws, we have to fire it for the vassal first as it is there where we check that the conditions are sound and sensible, which means that we can't actually go around the problem to let you see who is causing trouble, without having new coding done to reveal who the event was triggered from.

Sure, I see that, but the second part of the event chain doesn't work the way it's intended to, and wouldn't make much sense even if it did.

 

[unmerged(21937)]

Sure, I see that, but the second part of the event chain doesn't work the way it's intended to, and wouldn't make much sense even if it did.

Possibly, though I'd think it should be working as it should, since it's only a small chance of possibly getting some good after the bad.

 

[Owen]

Possibly, though I'd think it should be working as it should, since it's only a small chance of possibly getting some good after the bad.

Hmm. Possibly.

I'm not convinced that I'm convinced.

 

[CatKnight]

Just confirming the initial complaint ('vassal is pleased' repeatedly firing for the same vassal.) Kingdom of Naples (player), Count/Duke of Leptis Magna (vassal), 8/15-17 beta