Rule Holding

[X-Points East]

OoC:

Is the cost to rule an holding now based on province level?

http://ruinsofempire.twilightpeaks.net/forums/index.php?topic=292.msg2475#msg2475

If so, does province level contribute to the DDC?

[DM B]

That remains to be seen - Chapters 4 & 5 are being reviewed ATM.

[X-Endier & KoH/GdN (Joe)]

Why not balance it in between both.  GB Cost = ProvLevel + HoldLevel /2

[DM B]

I think we'll try the following:

Cost: Province level 1-3 – 1GB; province level 4-6 – 2 GBs; province level 7-9 – 3 GBs; province level 10 or greater – 4 GBs.

In addition you must pay a number of GBs equal to the new (increased) holding level.

Example: It would cost you 3+6 = 9 GBs to increase a holding from 5 to 6 in a province of level 8.

It will cost slightly more to rule holdings in high-level provinces. Similar actions (Contest comes to mind) will have a similar change in cost.

Comments?

[X-Haelyn's Aegis/RK (Andy)]

Cost progression should slow down runaways at the top, although this happens to a degree with DC on actions already.  Arithmetic plus a multiplier is fairly innocuous - a more 'long term only' variant would be level squared as a base cost although this would need expenditure over many turns causing issues on success/failure rolls.

[DM B]

Cost progression should slow down runaways at the top, although this happens to a degree with DC on actions already.  Arithmetic plus a multiplier is fairly innocuous - a more 'long term only' variant would be level squared as a base cost although this would need expenditure over many turns causing issues on success/failure rolls.

Or rather new holding lvl * province level. From a mechanical point of view that should be the core function. But is it very playable? Sadly no...so we'll try something a little in between...and see how it feels.

We'll also see more difficulties based on both province and holding level, so there is a hidden extra cost there as well (to reduce the difficulty). So playtesting might reveal its become a bit too harsh. We'll see. It can be changed again if it works poorly in practice.

[X-Haelyn's Aegis/RK (Andy)]

Or rather new holding lvl * province level. From a mechanical point of view that should be the core function. But is it very playable? Sadly no...so we'll try something a little in between...and see how it feels.

Indeed - I was forgetting you scaled income by province level, a RP issue is also that some would argue (with good reason) that forming a L1 temple in a L10 domain should actually be easier than forming it in a L3-4 domain...

We'll see. It can be changed again if it works poorly in practice.

changing might require ret-conning levels - or constant monitoring of emergent trends which would be time consuming.  I've no problem with ret-conning, although I'd prefer GC/etc to reduce the excess levels to simply wishing them out of existence / transferring them to a rival.

[DM B]

From Brandon;

OoC:

[also to Jon & Even]

Bjørn,

Is the RoE II forum experiencing some difficulties?  At any rate, earlier, I read some of your Rule Holding comments.  Here follow some of mine (mostly in interrogative form). . . .

(1) What is the reasoning behind an increasing GB cost (based upon holding level) to Rule the same market share?

(2) Which rôle do you want Hardiness to play?  Assume a Province 6, in which two regents control law,—the one, a Law 4; the other, a Law 1,—and in which each of them is attempting to Rule Holding in a given turn; and assume other factors to be equal.  With an increasing GB cost (based upon holding level) to Rule, the action would be cheaper for the regent with the Law 1, although his DDC would be three points higher.  Alternatively, with an equal GB cost to Rule, the action would cost the same for each regent (obviously), yet the DDC would be three points higher for the regent with the Law 1.  Again, which rôle do you want Hardiness to play?

(3) If you go with the increasing GB cost (based upon holding level), in addition to an equal GB cost (based upon province level), to Rule,—as detailed in one of your forum posts,—would you consider setting a maximum cost, in GB, at the current level of the province (e.g., setting a maximum of 6 GB on Rule Holding actions in a Province 6)?

[X-Alamie (Alex)]

Just my two cents.

But unlike Andy's view, I would consider it harder to rule holding in a larger province since it would entail to invest more in order to have people, infrastructure, etc. etc.

Of course I agree with Andy that in a barren province it is harder to make things happen.

[X-Endier & KoH/GdN (Joe)]

It seems like the whole "barren province" = harder is covered by the "prosperity modifier".

That leaves then, the "scale of operations" to consider. I think the proposal above is reasonable, Cost =Holding level + a variable based on province size.

[DM B]

It's reasonable...but is it also neat?

And is the cost about right (remember that the vast majority of provinces will be in the 4-6 range)? Especially when you look at the final DDC - if that is very high, then you really need to use more resources to bring it down...which amounts to even higher cost...

I'm good at playing round with numbers in my head, but nothing beats playtesting...

[X-Osoerde (Alan)]

I think this only works if actions like Contest are also scaled to be more difficult, but I think this adds some additional complexity to the holding scheme as a whole.

In a sense, a level 8 holding in a level 8 province is very much entrenched in the province.  This entrechment, could also be seen as a significant boon to a particular regent: a monopoly in which the rules give significant advantage to the holding instead of player action.

There are also some interesting domain rules which could be added, like...

"Anuire is steeped in a deep tradition in which the faith of Haelyn rules the pantheon. As such, haelynic temples ignore province levels when contesting Non-haelynic temples."

Or...

"The Spider River Traders' strong alignment to the waterways of Roesone & Aerenwe, ignore province level for rule & contest actions within those domains, as long as the SRT remains a shining example of how guilders should work for the people (remain LG in alignment)."

There are a lot of possibilities to add additional flavor and potential conflict within domains.

[X-Endier & KoH/GdN (Joe)]

In a properly populated world, added costs wouldn't be necessary, because high-level provinces generate so much holding income, there should be frequent contests going on in them, whereas in the backwaters, its like a safe zone, who'd want to fight for what is essentially scraps.

I'd rather a system to encourage players to fight over holdings rather then one that simply increases the cost of competing against the environment.

(math follows)
For instance, a manor o to 1 in a province 1 used to take 5 turns to pay itself off(if you pay in GB to improve changes, 50 turns).  Now it would take 10.  A manor 7 to 8 in a province 8 used to take 5 turns to pay itself off.  Now it would take 6 and a half turns.

It only penalizes the smaller holdings really.

If you did it with plevel+hlevel then...

the manor 0 to 1 would cost 2gb and pay itself off in 10 turns
the manor 7 to 8 would cost 16 gb, and pay itself in 10 turns

So, if we really want to up cost for Rule holding, I'd suggest a steeper rule cost then just 1-3gbs

[DM B]

Hmm,

I think I'm leaning towards keeping GB = new holding lvl, and instead making a link to province lvl in DDC. This will drive the DDC up a number of steps, which will add (indirectly) to cost.

Incidentally this may solve the fact that with all the new modifiers available in RoE, some actions (rule included) were getting too low DDCs.

So for Rule holding we're looking at:

GB cost = new holding lvl (as before)
DDC = 10 + new holding lvl + province lvl

So for a very typical example, ruling up to lvl 4 in a province 6 = 4 GBs, DDC 20. No change in GB cost but +6 to DDC when compared to the old system.

It even looks neat!

[X-Endier & KoH/GdN (Joe)]

I like this change.  One reason is stability and continuity.  In standard BR rules, the whole of Cerilia can look completely different in 10 turns. This will slow things down, but not "gimp" any one type of ruler over another.