Installer Steam
Logg inn
|
språk
简体中文 (forenklet kinesisk)
繁體中文 (tradisjonell kinesisk)
日本語 (japansk)
한국어 (koreansk)
ไทย (thai)
Български (bulgarsk)
Čeština (tsjekkisk)
Dansk (dansk)
Deutsch (tysk)
English (engelsk)
Español – España (spansk – Spania)
Español – Latinoamérica (spansk – Latin-Amerika)
Ελληνικά (gresk)
Français (fransk)
Italiano (italiensk)
Bahasa Indonesia (indonesisk)
Magyar (ungarsk)
Nederlands (nederlandsk)
Polski (polsk)
Português (portugisisk – Portugal)
Português – Brasil (portugisisk – Brasil)
Română (rumensk)
Русский (russisk)
Suomi (finsk)
Svenska (svensk)
Türkçe (tyrkisk)
Tiếng Việt (vietnamesisk)
Українська (ukrainsk)
Rapporter et problem med oversettelse
Diskusjonsregler og retningslinjer
4 
Rapporter dette innlegget
Now, considering that you start at 0 with House Azaro, that there's only maybe 20 decrees total *tops* which improve their opinion (by 1 point each), that half of these piss off common folks and/or impose red modifiers on your country, and that pretty much every single decree which addresses social issues is -1 penalty to opinion of the noble houses... oh, and that you'll only have time/resources to enact maybe 20-25 real decrees in total over the whole game... simply put, this is *rough*.
If that is the idea of "balanced check" i can only respectfully disagree and suggest rethinking it and lowering that threshold a bit. Or at the very least, maybe have the player's accomplishments in the game to also have *some* impact on these opinions. Because right now they seem to have none and the results can be rather absurd.
(it doesn't help that the game also appears to either be buggy or feed false information to the player, and some of these decrees with positive indicators don't actually improve opinions at all)
I imagine there's a possibility some of your checks may be done against things which already penalize the player with direct hits to house opinions, effectively intensifying the effects way beyond what in practice could be considered reasonable.
It's combination of conditions 2 & 7: Lucita has been arrested for her idiotic false flag operation i.e. before any marriage could happen, and the relationship with the House Azaro is below 9. I'll maintain my opinion that 9+ is unreasonably high threshold to meet, standings-wise. Similarly, i think that not taking into account the player's successes in running the country is also, imo, quite counter-intuitive and likely to sour a number of successful playthroughs with what feels like a very arbitrary "gotcha!". Is this good design? You tell me.
But more importantly, there's some bugs in code which is relevant to the situation.
This is the code for checking whether House Azaro is actually capable of staging a coup:
Unfortunately, there is a bug: Issuing the decree to "Remove Provincial Levies" doesn't reset the flag RiziaDLC.Policy_RD_Order_IncreaseProvincialLevies. And the Condition 3 only checks the latter. As a result, if the player issues decree to increase provincial levies, and then later issues order to remove provincial levies, the game still thinks the noble houses have increased forces and thus power to coup, even though they no longer should, having no actual force at their disposal.
This error is also present in Condition 2 for House Toras. As a result they'll be flagged as having power to coup even though (initially expanded) levies have been removed.
Wow, that’s impressive investigation work.
I think a similar conflict also happens if you legalize recreational drugs but also enacted an anti narcotics campaign, though it’s not as end breaking as the coups.
For better or worse, Suzerain has opaque mechanics. Even so, I think it's important to provide accurate feedback to the player in-game and point out mechanisms that let them adjust accordingly (either moving forward or on a subsequent playthrough). While arguing about threshold numbers in the code is all well and good, the truth is House Azaro only has two representatives in the game, Luctia, the council member, and her father. My character was married to the former and had the enthusiastic approval of the latter. That coupled with the report from the king's uncle made the ending a confused moment for me because it was so out of nowhere.
I think the dev team (in terms of medium to long term post-launch support) might want to re-evaluate the scripting as a whole rather than just tweaking a value in the programming.
I haven't had this issue happen in Rizia, but I had this happen in the base game. It was pretty bad in the early 2.0 days. I end up in nationwide unrest with a decent overview. So sadly I'm not surprised.
Also now I have an opposite problem where my Bludish opinion is always low during the review but always high in the end because the VP overview happens before the Minority Act.
There might be a systemic issue where your relationship values with certain groups are at a limit where a single nudge downward after the overview can cause it to spiral.