What happened to banishment? Am I missing something?

[Beholder]

Before I begin let me say you can skip to last paragraph for short story. What follows is a tragic tail...

Ok so I decided to play in the late middle age on ironman starting as a count. I rolled a militaristic leader, so I thought perfect all I need is to get rid of my worthless scum vassals to organize the good old army the way I like it; the levies you own are increased by your score not your vassals so if you're militaristic and they are not you've just de facto increased your possible troop count by relieving them of their post. I banish them but something seemed off: I did not receive any gold and the thieving scum escaped with almost 400g and 800g loot respectively; this boiled my noble blood but I had an incompetent duke liege to depose and I levied my new forces after declaring war intent on gaining independence and serving my noble king (he had imposters to whos land I had rightful claims and I could not wage war outside of my dukes territory until my independence). I moved in for the kill but my forces were caught off guard in a mountain pass by a treacherous band intent on supporting my dukes cause(he had allies and many of them but I just didn't think they would strike so quickly). With my forces bogged down and exhausted the yellow coward that the duke was moved in with his forces and slaughtered my unprepared army. No matter I thought my reinforcements should be ready by now and began reviewing my levies. To my surprise the levies where nonexistent all but my original county forces where included in the tally, my former vassals forces cap was at nothing meaning there were no more troops to come in the near future. This happened after the patch and has been the case since. I have adapted and see that nobles aren't to be treated frivolously anymore the game itself is now just a long stare at the espionage screen with nobles still being as useless as rocks when it comes to military support. After the war a failure by all accounts I was left destitute and forced to give back my territories to some new vassals. Sitting back almost afk nursing my wounds I stared at the espionage screen for 10 years of truce(of course after finally getting out of debt in the 2nd year I started hosting feasts and welcoming the nobles as friends. 7 years later my nobles loved me and actually I was best friends with both of them. The long truce had finally expired and it was once again time for war. It had taken all this time because the old duke eluded all attempts at assassination and continued to live as if to spite me well past the ripe old age of 60 whilst the plague to which I lost my only son ravaged our lands claiming many noble lives but sparing his wretchedness. Thinking the nobles were on my side I decided to review my levies once more, to my dismay they had increased negligibly! I was forced to sit several more years saving up money for mercinaries. The mercs available in my area were very expencive(200g with upkeep higher than 20g per month) and I began to feel the sting of not having that 1200 gold whilst throatily cursing the new banishment system so that my cat nearly did a back-flip and glared at me in the most unkind manner. Having realized this game now sucks I resigned with a mere 200 prestige. "Having accomplished nothing nothing of note" after several grueling hours of "play" I quit to complain here...

So there are huge problems problems with post patch banishment: no gold, no levies, and all of the old drawbacks. In other words has banishment been been nerfed to in favor of the long since stale espionage screen? Or am I missing something? Crown laws? Please tell me I am wrong and I can once more conquer the world in the most evil manner possible with my cat sitting comfortably by my side purring instead of disaproving.

PS: I dont have a cat irl.

[aaronmv]

You know I thought that I had hit the wrong button when attempting to steal over 1,000 gold from a count vassal as King of Sicily, because I didn't get any of her money.

So - was this an intended change mentioned in the patch notes?

[Beholder]

I've tested it consistently and am starting to think it is intended but I really really hope its not.

[Beholder]

Originally posted by duhsveti:

They changed banishment so it doesn't give any gold. Meaning the old imprison all my barons and kick them out strategy, will not work anymore.

Yes what about troops... thats what really matters. Seems they did away with that also so it pretty much hey look you can banish him but you get nothing at all accept getting ♥♥♥♥♥♥ by your vassals and hated by your court which makes it not an option even its an option which is the problem with this game its full of "options" that are effectively not options.

[Nimja]

Game getting to hard for you guys?

[leo81792]

Did you increase the feudal Levies law? How about the church and town Levi law?

[aaronmv]

Originally posted by Nimja:

Game getting to hard for you guys?

No...but it is getting stupid. Confiscation of land and property was quite common back then. I was never one to abuse this feature in the way duhsveti mentioned. I would use it when revoking a county and the person decided to fight me instead of capitulating.

This is completely retarded...people who are imprisoned are never given access to their money.

What they should have done is perhaps tie the feature to crown authority - instead of removing it entirely. This is another thing that pisses me off...this entire patch is full of removal of features without any suitable replacement option.

Yes, there are people who gamed the system and did what duhsveti suggested - but they almost always paid for it when the rest of their vassals rose up against them. The only rulers who could feasibly due this were counts - a king or emperor would never be able to pull this off without risking several rebellions due to tyranny. They even tied it so that there was a heavier opinion penalty if this tactic was used with people who held high ranks or multiple titles.

It was fine before...did they even give a reason for why they removed this feature, or was it just "herp-derp we don't like that people are able to enrich themselves off of their vassals, even though this happened plenty of times historically?"

[Theodamus]

Originally posted by aaronmv:

Originally posted by Nimja:

Game getting to hard for you guys?

No...but it is getting stupid. Confiscation of land and property was quite common back then. I was never one to abuse this feature in the way duhsveti mentioned. I would use it when revoking a county and the person decided to fight me instead of capitulating.

This is completely retarded...people who are imprisoned are never given access to their money.

What they should have done is perhaps tie the feature to crown authority - instead of removing it entirely. This is another thing that pisses me off...this entire patch is full of removal of features without any suitable replacement option.

Yes, there are people who gamed the system and did what duhsveti suggested - but they almost always paid for it when the rest of their vassals rose up against them. The only rulers who could feasibly due this were counts - a king or emperor would never be able to pull this off without risking several rebellions due to tyranny. They even tied it so that there was a heavier opinion penalty if this tactic was used with people who held high ranks or multiple titles.

It was fine before...did they even give a reason for why they removed this feature, or was it just "herp-derp we don't like that people are able to enrich themselves off of their vassals, even though this happened plenty of times historically?"

Correct!

[Beholder]

Conversely having lost the war my character has sat in prison now for over 10 years as we speak. I have tried everything and sucked up to the liege's son, the old duke has since died and been replaced by him. His son and I are at a mutual 100 favor and he wont ransom me for the life of me no matter how much gold i throw at him. At this point I am picturing my once gallant character to be the equivalent of Theon Greyjoy having given away several small fortunes as well as had my diplomats massage his ego my game is running at full speed while I am taking a nap...

To make matters more spiteful my new liege is kind :) and so am I, but I mean kill me banish me or do something but this is just bs.

Also its not about asking the game to be easy or hard but about having options to do something about your situation, otherwise its not a game. Options should be options not a facade. Did they also strip this game of assassination via gold?

Update: I checked out a banish option for none vassal was it said I could get his gold, so apparently its not limited 100% to what extent is it limited is what I'd like to know exactly...

[Hegemon de frontier]

I just tested it and i got 500g from banishment so it still works (i'm on 2.2.0.9 beta of course) Funny thing was once when i banish some guy imprisioned because of stealing money from church by me (debt event) and i don't get his money because.. he run to my court hehe after second imprision and banish he give it. But that was testing, making money this way is not worthy imo this game is eazy anyway even if you start in worst ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥ (maybe expect as nubian jew).

[Evil Crusader]

Yes, I too think there is some kind of bug involved. I've double checked all the logs since 2.0, and there's no mention of it...

And about the 'gameyness' and 'choices': let's face it, choices are OP in that any human can not only make them when they make sense, but also abuse them. You could seize tons of gold, crush any rebellion that would follow using only a third of said gold (or your god-mode retinues) and call it a day. That's why there are no replacement options. Unless you are aggressively seeking a challenge, like a Paradoxian who started as Roman Hellenic Asturies in 769 (with the preventivable results), it's not difficult to bounce back on the top. That said by a guy who rushes battles and loses all of his armies, has to pay monstruos reparations, yet in 20-30 years manages to be back full-force and kicking.

[pilgrimroadhome]

Is there a huge multiplayer competition crowd for CK2? Because it seems most recent changes are bad for single players like me. I played the Banish like the guy above that only resorted to it when a vassal was ambitious and would not submit. But, what would I care if another player wants to exploit everything because it's his/her idea of FUN? After-all, It is a game that S/he bought for that purpose. The same situation was true with the kill-for gold button. I never used it but if someone else hit it like there was no end...so what.

[Evil Crusader]

Originally posted by pilgrimroadhome:

Is there a huge multiplayer competition crowd for CK2? Because it seems most recent changes are bad for single players like me. I played the Banish like the guy above that only resorted to it when a vassal was ambitious and would not submit. But, what would I care if another player wants to exploit everything because it's his/her idea of FUN? After-all, It is a game that S/he bought for that purpose. The same situation was true with the kill-for gold button. I never used it but if someone else hit it like there was no end...so what.

Because then these people would clamor that the game is easy as pie, that it lacks depth, that there is nothing to do but blob.
Also, limitations breed creativity: the more you are forced to be adventurous in fighting your own problems, the more epic is the resulting story and the overall enjoyment can only benefit, in the long term, from that.
It's one thing to say 'spam the button', another to devise creative and cruel strategies involving a last stand over a strait crossing while bribing the allies into participating.

[turtles and frogs]

Originally posted by pilgrimroadhome:

Is there a huge multiplayer competition crowd for CK2? Because it seems most recent changes are bad for single players like me. I played the Banish like the guy above that only resorted to it when a vassal was ambitious and would not submit. But, what would I care if another player wants to exploit everything because it's his/her idea of FUN? After-all, It is a game that S/he bought for that purpose. The same situation was true with the kill-for gold button. I never used it but if someone else hit it like there was no end...so what.

I've played 500+ hours of single player and have only banished someone once, just to see what happens. It's much more effective to keep troublesome characters in jail (or even better, the oubliette), since it's a lot harder to prevent characters from scheming when they're in a foreign court, and their new liege might be willing to press any claims they still have.

You can still banish people, if that's your preferred method of dealing with unrest. But if it's just the gold you want, there's always the console...

[aaronmv]

Originally posted by turtles and frogs:

You can still banish people, if that's your preferred method of dealing with unrest. But if it's just the gold you want, there's always the console...

Really? This is my problem with this crap. Paradox happily takes away options so the suggested solution is to just cheat and use the console to give yourself money? Isn't that WORSE than abusing the system? I mean - at least when you abuse the system, you're still incurring a tyranny penalty with your other vassals and the people in your court, who could then plot against you.

When did I ever say that I was banishing them purely to take their gold? I said I do so when people rise up against me and I am able to handle the tyranny penalty. I am playing a character who is a king...why would my character want to have a pissed off vassal, whose children would also probably be pissed off at me and would potentially plot against me? Just confiscate their lands and then dole out the proceeds as bribes to your other lords to keep them happy. That is actually what was done historically.

Originally posted by Evil Crusader:

Also, limitations breed creativity: the more you are forced to be adventurous in fighting your own problems, the more epic is the resulting story and the overall enjoyment can only benefit, in the long term, from that.
It's one thing to say 'spam the button', another to devise creative and cruel strategies involving a last stand over a strait crossing while bribing the allies into participating.

btw I highly disagree that it induces creativity...maybe in the real world where we aren't truely bound by anything besides the laws of physics. However, in a closed environment such as a game like CK2, giving the player options is what induces creativity because you have more than one way to deal with a problem.

For example - right now there is ONLY one way to kill someone...if you want someone dead, you can only plot against them (unless they're in your court, in which case you could imprison and execute them which have huge repercussions). Where is the "creative" method you're talking about? There is none.

[Peahatche]

I hope this is wrong - i didnt really abuse the banishment system but banishing an adventurer for the 500 gold was the pay off reward.