[Discuss] Re: Proposed Marshal changes

[Christopher Subich]

Alex Davies wrote:
> Aside from the game being lightweight, the front page also says "you can 
> delve deeply into it and spend more time on it". So if you don't want to 
> spend more time, don't, but don't imply that it's the games fault you're 
> as addicted as the rest of us :-)

A normal noble can play the game in 15 minutes, sure.  The issue is that 
the recent changes make the game "heavyweight" for a larger class of people.

It's understandable if the ruler, Dukes, or other council members might 
have to spend a while playing, simply because of the diplomacy involved. 
  But the number of people that have to "get involved" is increasing 
with the "local power" changes, of which this (marshal settings) is just 
the latest.

Prior to local taxes and estates, a region lord was essentially as 
lightweight as everyone else.  Most of their time was spent with the 
main army, and there was an occasional court-holding.  Even the food 
was/is managed by the banker, mostly through automated transfers.

Now, local taxes mean that a region lord will have to do math.  Putting 
the wrong numbers into those little boxes mean that either the lord goes 
to the poorhouse or people up the chain yell at him for being stingy.

Taxes also have to be rebalanced every time a knight joins or leaves the 
region, as I can forsee many dukes saying "have 5 knights or send the 
equivalent in cash up to me, where I'll pay for them."  Indeed, that was 
the essence of the Feudal system after about 1200 or so -- the 
obligation of having men-at-arms was relieved if you paid the "knight's 
fee" to your lord, so that he might hire one.

Likewise, the estate change will make management more difficult.  Aside 
from the mentioned problems where even poor regions will require 2-3 
knights, estates will have to be managed every time a knight joins or 
leaves a region.  If a knight pauses while the army's away on campaign, 
it might be a week or more before the management can be fixed.  The 
same's currently true if a lord pauses, of course, but the set of "all 
knights" has cardinality much greater than the set of "all lords."

As I see it, the problem with the recent set of "local power" changes is 
that it makes playing the game more intense, for little real benefit.  I 
do like the ideal of local intrigue, but that doesn't mean it's 
acceptable to make normal, non-intrigue play challenging.  I like that a 
lord can be rebellious towards his duke, or that even a knight can 
undermine his lord -- but it shouldn't require active effort to /not/ be 
rebellious.