A Couple Issues & Suggestions

[spinocus]

Hey Guys,

Loving the game so far! I'm still on my first campaign, Rome 1.05 patch. The ability to import battles into Field of Glory II is AMAZING!

Anyway a couple things popped up that I thought were odd or unbalanced...

1) Factions that are in a client state, allied, or successful, cooperative relationship should not be able to take each other's regions that have been recently conquered by enemy/neutral factions. The Just Conquered flag should prevent this behavior and transfer ownership to the previous owner. The Under Occupation flag should do the same but modify the likelihood of this happening. If this is not a binary decision then the chance of success should be modified by the type of relationship or degree of cooperation in place. If there is a chance of success can we please have the methodology for determining the outcome?

Some context, I was allied with Massalia and at war with the Boii who were sieging my ally's capitol. My army was marching to their aid but was two turns away. The Boii assaulted & took Massalia before I arrived and on the next turn I attacked and destroyed that army. However, the region was transferred to me instead of my ally! This is a huge exploit that can make the game much easier versus the AI.

2) Instant allied transfer of conquered regions to province owner?!? Playing as Rome I previously activated the Transalpine province (I own all but two of the regions) and am currently allied with the Helvetii who are at war with the Venetii (however, for some reason I am not). The Helvetii attacked an isolated Venetii region in Transalpine (whose name escapes me, it starts with an H?) neighboring two of my regions, beat their army, took the city and poof, I get a free region?!? I assume the game is taking into consideration our allied status and the fact that I activated the Transalpine province? To be honest I didn't want that region (at least not yet) so I could empower the Helvetii to be a buffer between Rome and the other factions in Gaul and northern Iberia. It's odd to see the AI do all the work and dying for a region that it had nothing to gain from. Sure, it helps with roleplaying and adds some spice but is this a binary decision or is it based on a percentage roll? If percentage then I would also like to get an explanation for what is going on under the hood.

Thanks!

[loki100]

regions will be transferred from a client state, if:

a) its one of your objectives (& remember this can alter over time) and is adjacent to a region you own
b) if you hold 3 or more adjacent regions

So from your description this transfer sounds WAD

Your first instance sounds right in that Massilia had lost the region and your army took it off the Boii. I don't think there is any attempt to remember who owned a region before so yes, this can allow you to expand. But as you note you pick up the just conquered malus.

[Morbio]

regions will be transferred from a client state, if:

a) its one of your objectives (& remember this can alter over time) and is adjacent to a region you own
b) if you hold 3 or more adjacent regions

So from your description this transfer sounds WAD

Your first instance sounds right in that Massilia had lost the region and your army took it off the Boii. I don't think there is any attempt to remember who owned a region before so yes, this can allow you to expand. But as you note you pick up the just conquered malus.

WAD, but is the design right? In the first instance I think not.

[loki100]

its deliberate - it came up a bit in the beta that you had a client who took a target region. If I recall was a regular problem with Ptolemy and the Nabatenes. So it was one way to transfer that region to you without forcing you to a war you didn't want.

Now like a lot of the diplo mechanisms this was a bit of a work around. And its got less essential now that objectives shift around, you can always wait till it is re-assigned as opposed to it being fixed.

so I'd guess its something that may be redundant come the next patch since that is meant to be focussed on diplomacy?

[spinocus]

regions will be transferred from a client state, if:

a) its one of your objectives (& remember this can alter over time) and is adjacent to a region you own
b) if you hold 3 or more adjacent regions

So from your description this transfer sounds WAD

Your first instance sounds right in that Massilia had lost the region and your army took it off the Boii. I don't think there is any attempt to remember who owned a region before so yes, this can allow you to expand. But as you note you pick up the just conquered malus.

Thanks for the explanation! I can definitely understand a client state handing over a region based on those criteria but I'm not sure how I feel about an ally doing the same. It is especially odd if the majority ethnicity of the region is the same as the conquering faction and completely different from my own. It's a curious concession for non-client state allies and I look forward to hearing the developer's reasoning behind it.

I hope future patches can address the 'region ninja' exploit by allies/client/protectorates by allowing the game to track recent ownership of a region.