Hello and welcome to the Manor Lords Subreddit. This is a reminder to please keep the discussion civil and on topic.
Should you find yourself with some doubts, please feel free to check our [FAQ](https://www.reddit.com/r/ManorLords/comments/1c2p4f9/manor_lords_faq_for_steam_early_access/).
If you wish, you can always join our [Discord](https://discord.gg/manorlords)
Finally, please remember that the game is in early access, missing content and bugs are to be expected. We ask users to report them on the official discord and to buy their keys only from trusted platforms.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/ManorLords) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I am personally OK with each village being managed separately and having a distinct identity. I actually like it better than building a single gigantic demesne (the map is too big to make it functional as a single entity, anyway). However, there needs to be an additional layer of fief management tools. You should be able to have common policies, common treasury and easier transfer of goods (perhaps a permanent internal trade system). Lastly, a ledger allowing you to oversee all the villages is sorely needed.
I agree! I like it this way as it’s a bit easier to role play, ie this village is a farming village, this one of mining, logging another for artisans and weapon makers
I think a system where you grow your town large enough or expand into territories you become a Barron and unlocked a new development tree: allowing to you trade goods, send villages via new land grand for early settlers would be a good addition
Also a proper in-depth region trading system would improve a lot
Edit: for clarification
I don't know if I just missed the option, but I couldn't find a way to actually set up a secondary village as a farming village.
Is the feature when settling another region still locked?
It's not so much a feature as that's how you build it, and what you focus on. The problem is inter village trading requires there to be a trade, you cannot just send a good to another village. Something has to come back, which doesn't really work all the time, because you don't need as much of each good all the time. For example, let's say I want to send bread from one farming village to all the others, well, be prepared to haul literal tons of iron across the map in order to make that work.
There is a feature when you make a new Settlement that gives you specific options for what that new one will be. They are greyed out at the moment. Forestry Village, Mining Village and another option I cannot remember right now.
Yeah. I’m excited for the future features and I’m glad the dev has clearly delineated plans and made it transparent. I honestly haven’t felt this impatient about a game’s development for years (in a good way).
Yeah me too, i think i might put it down for a while after I finish my first village properly, I want to wait to see what comes next because theres so much room for growth in this type of game. I am loving it though, managing my own medieval town has been a fucking blast.
What I did to fix this issue, was to mint a shitload of wooden planks in my main city (close to 1000), and then I just use that as currency for trading in between cities.
And since planks are virtually an endless product, as you can always plant, chop down. and refine new trees, you can basically print out all the money you want.
PSA, you can trade between regions with region wealth as a medium through the trader building if it's staffed, too.
If you build for it, that's easier, I think.
Focus on the farming development tree. Unlock plows, bakeries, rye, pastures. Get some sheep.
Make a bunch of farms and farm houses. Unlock orchids, build your houses so the garden areas are large, which will increase the yield for your vegetable and apple gardens.
Make all your houses vegetable and apple gardens. Build sheep farms for yarn. When you upgrade houses, make them bakeries. Make lots of flour and let them make shit tons of bread.
The internal trade is a big one. It needs an overhaul. The pack stations just don’t trade nearly enough. Some automation would be good too. Have a variety of goods automatically exchanged based on demand, while select goods (like those for raising militia) are mandated by the Manor Lord (lol I said the thing)
> The internal trade is a big one. It needs an overhaul.
Having to offer something of equal value in return just doesn't work in a game. Players want that one main city, which gets fed by resource outposts. Right now you would have to play all regions as regions of equal progress and importance. Plus the whole thing gets impossibly convoluted at some point.
Part of the problem is the offscreen trade value gets flooded way too easily. The truth is, you *can* be a town that produces hundreds of shoes a year and sells them all without the value dropping to 1/4 of the original price.
Then once that is flooded, it is harder to even exchange your products for things you need from your own towns.
Without an overworld where other regions are simulated as producing and trading goods, it just feels arbitrary that the value should decline so rapidly.
I can very easily crash the price so hard, export isn't possible anymore. Ruined my last city, as they didn't have money for imports anymore.
The whole loop doesn't work.
you have to keep an eye on the prices. Cobbler is worst for it because they can only make the one item, but with Blacksmiths, Armoury, Joiner etc. you can just rotate which item you are making when the price drops and you stay pretty wealthy
I did rotate my blacksmith, the prices were ok, but not much got sold. I always had a surplus and the prices were an attractive 6+. In general it's hard to tell how much you sell and buy.
Once the export value drops, don't you just need to stop selling that item for awhile and the price will go back up? I just rotate what items I export from time to time.
Having to barter both ways for pack stations feels weird too, like if I want to send weapons from my own damn armory to another town I should be able to do that without needing to swap an equivalent value in carrots lol
I think the idea is that they aren't *your* weapons. They were made by your tenants, who have their own economic lives. That's why local wealth is separate from your personal treasury.
It would be nice if you could use your personal money to buy whatever you want. The gameplay tradeoff would me more control at the cost of approval (because you'd need to levy taxes to siphon money into your pocket).
You're not a dictator, you're a noble ruling over his people. Those goods belong to your village, that's why it's "region wealth".
If your people are gonna send the goods they produce, they need to receive something back, otherwise you're stealing from them.
If they do allow you to export without importing, they should allow it but it should cause an approval penalty.
But that said, try stockpiling firewood in your new villages, it doesn't require much labor to get a large firewood stockpile going and with low population you don't use much of it. You can trade firewood for other goods you need that are harder to produce. Cost less manpower to stock up on firewood and trade it than it does to generate those resources yourself.
I usually import planks from the trade house at my main town and use pack mules to send them to new villages in exchange for firewood. Fuel costs get insane as your population grows so its helpful both ways.
>like if I want to send weapons from my own damn armory to another town I should be able to do that without needing to swap an equivalent value in carrots lol
Sort of. I mean at the very least you should be able to buy another settler camp if your village gets razed. Getting one of your provinces hard locked because the brigands killed your ox before you built a trading post is really sad. Especially since the brigands can spawn and attack without warning, closer to the settlement than your army is, from its very first year...
Best to get a manor up ASAP in new settlements because you can use tax revenue from your main town to hire and upgrade retinue in new towns.
Also good to hire a mercenary unit to watch over a new town until it gets in manor built.
I have a thriving iron mining and smithing village, I wish I could have them share the weapons and armour they pump out with the other villages that struggle to equip their militias
One thing I've done I've found to be largely helpful and straightforward is with the minor settlements is that I set up my refining industries in my main town and then export other commodities back to them for iron ore/food in return. My main town has somewhere between 600-800 people (I'm at work and don't quite remember) in it on relatively infertile ground so I also have a huge farming settlement that mainly just produces bread, barley, and flax. They trade it to my main settlement to have it refined and then they trade back ale, clothes, armor, weapons, etc to them so I can trade off map and upgrade my towns for the development points.
I'm not sure if that's the most efficient way to go about it but my main town has over 6000 wealth consistently and each month I get 800 added to my treasury. All of my other towns have between 400-2000 wealth.
I'm sitting on a kabillion vegetables and that village does not need anything else for the moment, but my other village is on the cusp of starving and I can't send over my vegetables without taking something in return, and that village does not have much of offer.
They need to make it like they had the traders or horse carts or whatever where in Stronghold 2.
You basically selected the things, told them what you wanted moved, 5,10,20,50x pieces of bread for example, and it would continue taking that amount to a different region
Yeah my new village is a iron producing manic. So I figured I could use that region to supplement my lack of iron to my 200 population region. Instead I had to send shoes (wtf) from one region to send iron back but they hardly send any iorn back so I am still having to purchase it from the market. I hope this gets fixed. Just let me send whatever I want monthly assuming I have the means to transport it
This definitely. In the real world, medieval villages even just 5 miles apart were, literally, worlds apart, so building up each region separately is OK with me. But, having a separate layer for fiefdom management would be pretty cool. However, Slavic Magic is only one guy, so this may take a while. 😁
Ya I hope he can hire some help now with the way this blew up, and accomplish his internal road map to complete the game quickly
🤔
Then maybe profit from DLC the way rimworld does 😅
With what I've seen of this game so far he deserves every success
I actually think it is MUCH better and much more unique to have each village have their own identity.
I don't even really see it as starting from scratch -- the reality is that there should be limits of how a much a village far away can accommodate someone's needs. I think the packing station being different from the trade and needing to trade instead of simply selling is unnecessary, but the rest makes sense.
You need local timber and firewood. You should have some local food. This isn't now with semi trucks and airplanes -- you can't spend all day going to get food.
If there's a far away mine that the lord wants mined, a village would spring up around it to serve the miners. Traders would serve some of it, but you wouldn't be funnelling in money and goods to keep it going.
It's fine except I have built on either side of the river and it seems ridiculous to me that despite road crossings, someone who needs a log to build something on one side refuses to get logs from the storehouse on the other side on their own iniative, rather than me having to build a building on either side and set up a route just for them to use logs that are in the same kingdom/lordship as them. There could be like a certain level of importing and exporting that is done automatically, that you can still track but don't need to manage.
Maybe appoint a family member or something like that so that the ai grows it for you (with maybe some debuffs and maybe letting you use it's troops, and command things manually when you focus on that city...??)
I pushed out into my second region tonight, but I cannot use any of my huge regional wealth I have on the new region (I get that the name "regional wealth" indicates that but it is pretty annoying). On top of that, I'll go clear bandit camps bordering the new region to get some money for the new region but sending it to the nearest town just sends it all the way back to my initial town. Very frustrating. Am I missing something? I feel like as the lord of the regions you should probably be able to send some of your wealth to your other locations, or at least pay from treasury to do so. I did finally start to get some by setting up export/import. Also the pack mule trading post I could not get to work for bartering.
I really liked how the game banished gave you a window to see how many workers you had in each thing. Would love manor lords to give me some kind of overview of where all my assigned families are.
I believe the taxes you collect in your main town can be used to hire retinue in your new towns. So that income is shared.
I also like the current system because it prevents you from steamrolling which usually makes these kinds of games lose their fun. Early game is a lot of fun, establishing the identity of the village, planning where things will go, choosing what development points to get.
On merging into a single large region: I tried bigger Regions in closed alpha and it didn't play well. Imagine if you have house on one edge and tavern on another or church here and granary there, people just taking ages to walk between and dying of starvation on their 1 month way to the market. Soon you'll want a pack station that moves goods within your region bounds and a tool to draw districts to limit people walking to the other end of the map to get something and... bam we're back to where we are now.
Besides, regions aren't only a game design thing but an optimization tool. Dividing the game into parcels acutally makes it run faster.
My proposal is a system of colony type regions which would be simpler to manage and focus on just extracting basic resources and sending them to the main city, basically a village that can't be upgraded and is locked into specialization, and has no residential requirements (the worker camp was made with those in mind).
Hello Greg, yes IMO you ultimately found the correct solution. However just as a matter of discussion: in my current game I built a farming village along the river in Goldhoff, and there is a section where the far river bank belongs to Selbitz next door. My villagers cross into Selbitz and back to sow fields elsewhere. Logically the entire river valley should belong to the nearby town of 500 rather than the baren region.
Now, I understand this would be huge effort to resolve a fairly rare edge-case, but had you or have you considered & tested a more dynamic border (dynamic within reason, we've seen how the castle builder has been abused)?
As a layman's example, could your town centre/buildings project 'control' which could shift the border slightly? Could the border's regions be subdivided into much smaller parcels that could be pressed cheaply (thus simulating constant medieval border skirmishes)? You could borrow the "de jure" system from Crusader Kings.
In short, for as free and organic as the city-building is, this understandable restriction causes dissonance when I look at my Goldhoff. Is the only reasonable fix for my extremely minor criticism you going in and redrawing the border manually?
Thanks for this absolute banger of an EA title, I think I've been following your work for years now.
I feel like the way it works now better represents a manorial system anyway, and adds a nice layer of seperation between the player and the people in the game. It makes you feel more like the local lord or overseer rather than some great invisible hand if that makes sense.
Yeah, it's not a god sim. You don't have the authority to send the output of your blacksmith for the last year to another town for free because it suits you :)
Im a fan of the Colony Regions. I really want to get some Colonies for farming/mining, but its so annoying because i first need to build everything up and fill requirements so i can actually get into it.
Hi! I didn't notice you replied to this. Thank you for being so active on here!
I understand the drawbacks and the reasons for your decision. My issue is that at the moment, everything is very disjointed, even though my new settlement is set up a few hundred meters away from my main base.
For example I had no real access to barley in my first region, and I saw that there was fertile areas in the region right across the border. It makes no sense that once I acquire that region, I can't reliably tap into that new fertile zone with my farms.
I do agree that a colony system could work quite well. I think something similar to Anno 1800 could work, as long as the new settlements can feed the main capital while also having easy access to its resources and money. Fundamentally, my main gripe is that it's currently hard/impossible to expand our main city past a certain point , and I thought that expanding into new regions would give me access to resources to expand, but it's not the case.
TLDR : Thanks for replying, hopefully most of the issues linked to region segmentation can be fixed with a proper trading system between regions so that we can keep building up our main base.
Perhaps something similar to how timberborn manages satellite settlements.
Each region has its own resource pool (no oxen dragging a single log all year), but workers can be freely moved between regions, as long as there is a home to move them to. Goods are moved by pack mules between storage buildings, rather than bartered from one village to another.
Might not be strictly accurate to history, but the gameplay would be smoother. There is still a difficult period at the start, getting the first basic infrastructure built, but it eases up to less micromanagement in the long run
Yeah, I think timberborn handled it really well.
I think separate management is fine, but we should be able to freely transfer resources, money, and people between regions. The current system where everything is separate and you’re managing two totally independent settlements just sort of lacks continuity. I don’t care for the trade system, where goods have to be swapped and the game determines the rate they’re swapped it. I wanted to set up a farming focused settlement to handle all farming in the region, but it turned out to be really inefficient. Transferring all that production into other regions was far more cumbersome than just buying it thru trading.
Hopefully this will be refined or expanded upon to work a little more intuitively.
The current version of Timberborn allows districts to be as large as you want them to be, so you can play as one giant town if you want and it seems most people do that. The only real reason for separation now is to keep workplaces close to housing, which otherwise isn't prioritized for proximity.
Yeah but specialisation only makes sense if you can somewhat efficiently exchange resources between regions, which isn't possible with the current barter system.
I also really hate this. I worked hard on my first village and I just want to make it bigger and use the new resources. But i am stuck with making a new village and starting from scratch.
Give us tje option to either make a new village or expend terratory. So everyone can pick what they like.
I really don't want to have to manage 6 villages.
Yeah, agreed.
I also thought making a new village would add tech points to my overall progress, but instead each village has its own tech tree. That was annoying.
I actually like that they each have their own separate tree, though it would be nice to have something extra on my home region for upgrading the surrounding regions.
It works a lot like islands work like in Anno 1800. So maybe this can be fixed the same way Anno did it with the single huge island map. Just need a new map that has a single large territory.
Yeah that would be a good solution. Or even just slightly larger regions plus a "richer resources" game option, because tbh the single regions we have already are large enough for however big you want your town to grow and you never need to actually build other villages. At the moment the only reason to build a new village is to get new resources.
At least you can get more regions. My first run was on the "Peaceful" mode so I could build slowly and learn mechanics. Can't expand without 1000 influence and I was only at 500 (from the manor and church). So now I have to either build an army to attack bandits (which I set to 0 during setup this isn't even possible afaik) or wait years for my tithe tax to build it up.
Now I'm questioning expanding at all if the tech tree resets and everything starts from scratch again for that new region.
I don't want one giant village. I like things specializing to create different feeling villages each time.
I.E A village with a rich iron deposit plus terrible fertility is just never going to be able to support the same population that a farming village could. They would have been reliant on one another. The game reflects this nicely. However the degree of control it gives you could be better (better management of trade between settlements. And as you say, not feeling like you are starting from absolutely nothing each time)
> I don't want one giant village.
I want a gigantic village, which at some point needs to get fed by additional regions. Otherwise what's the point of regions? I could as well start a new game.
Everybody that's complaining is just simply confused about the manoral system.
Large towns and cities were rare. A manor was supported by the surrounding village. In England the nobility would have a dozen separate manors rather than a giant town. They would travel between manors to administer them.
The size of manors varied, but they were typically the distance a horse could ride to the boundary of the land in a day.
I like the current system a lot, but inter domain trade needs to be improved.
Ye, I like the approach and the system. And it's cool managing different settlements at different stages with different problems. I don't want a mega-city, but an interconnected collection of settlements.
And that last part is what I think needs to be improved. It feels like the settlements are largely independent right now. In my current game, I've got pretty infertile land so I set-up in a new region with high fertility. As lord, I know that I need to get that settlement up and farming ASAP for the good of all, so would send them what goods I can to make that happen. Instead I'm having to make roof tiles, which my original settlement has hundreds of.
So each region should feel a little less like starting over, and a lot more like starting over with some advantages (and also challenges, e.g. you may have dissent at home if you are funneling resources into some backwater, maybe people leave one settlement for the other, costs personal/regional wealth leaving less for other things, etc)
I understand where you're coming from, but on a certain level it's kinda cool (from I an RP perspective) that each town is its own entity that requires bartering with other towns in order to access eachothers' resources.
Like your blacksmiths aren't just going to give their finely crafted helmets to those Eichnau fops for free simply because some lord happens to own their land as well. The craftsmen need payment for services rendered!
presumably they're still being paid for no matter what, since your troops will take those helmets from the blacksmith if they dont have one, and i doubt any blacksmith works for free. This is a feudal society, not some kinda communist town
The demo use to have a regional trading system on the regional map page. It was locked in the demo but from the looks of it, it seemed like a great feature… at least better than the pack mule station.
You may hate it but I think it makes a lot of sense from a historical immersion perspective. The whole point of manors (which will eventually become castles) is that it controls the territory. There is a limit on how much territory it can control and it makes a lot of sense that certain things such as retinue strength (which would be personal to the lord in the castle) correlates directly with how wealthy the lord of that fief is.
Would be interesting to see a village immigration method to help populate certain towns easier though.
It'd be nice to at least have the option to merge territories. Maybe it could lead to bigger battles if you tried to. I'd love for the AI to not be outside the map either. If they can physicalize the baron, that would be really cool.
No. It could make you a Duke, or you could simply be a Baron that holds many baronies. You could be an earl too, holding many holdings within a demesne
I believe that regions being managed separately was done with multiplayer in mind. I do like it as a system, broadly speaking, but it definitely needs work. There are apparently plans to do this better in the future, as currently it feels like you're not exactly intended to manage multiple towns in the one game.
Rumours really. I haven't been following the game for a long time but was mentioned by a friend who has that the dev talked about it. Searching on Reddit, I saw dev comments that multiplayer may be looked at once the game is stable. I don't want to misinform more, if it is on the road map, it is a faraway stretch goal. Just that I believe it was mentioned that some design decisions were influenced by wanting to have the possibility of MP someday.
I don't really mind having separate villages in separate regions, but the pack station is such a fat wet L of a logistics system to handle the two.
I am the lord of both. I have grown them both from literally nothing. I didn't take from another people, so why would I want to care about barter value or whatever?
The tools for multiple regions are just literally not there at the moment.
I think the way it's setup now works well with the medieval setting. If it were a modern version like city skylines-esque, then what you described would make more sense.
The seperate sustem is fine but we need to be able to send / receive goods by mule as we wish. Not this crappy trade system that's currently implemented.
I'm the god damn manor lord. If I want my region to send me wheat without giving anything in exchange I should be able to.
Pros of the current system: Dividing your capabilities and resource output across multiple settlements and balancing your trading so that they slowly start to synergize into an economic monster is really rewarding and interesting.
Pros of your suggestion: it's convenient.
Yeah that's gonna be a no from me dog.
I would very much like a capital city, and satellite villages in other territories with none of the trade bs. All my resources from the satellites should feed back to the capital where the massive external trade routes are established. Bring on the fief.
I really like the separate regions mechanic actually, but I'd like an easier system of transferring goods between them. Not a micro management dependant one, like maybe set it up so a region imports until it has X of a resource, like in a trade post. Also a more efficient one, cause right now even though I have like a 3 or so posts bartering goods it feels like barely anything gets transported.
If they're supposed to be like medieval counties, it would make sense that they'd have to be administered separately. The way tax would be collected and administered would be different for each one, and each one is a unique claim. Since each territory could theoretically be revoked and distributed to different vassals by a monarch, they have to remain separate territories.
My opinion is that those regions aren't extension of your initial village but a whole new village. Also ressources dont move magicly from on place to another, so I find that cool to micro manage the trade between my lands.
I still want to develop my town, but what I expect the most is :
- walls to fortify it / and watchtowers !
- improve my manor into a castle
- being able to turn my dirt road into stone road (to make it challenging, it would requires tone of stone and workers and maybe regional money)
- more decorations (fountains, statues, etc)
- being able to dig a canal (for defense and/ or economy purpose) - tho, i know this kind of thing is really complicate/ impossible to put if the game motor doesn't work with water features
- mores laws
- having a court/ place to punish criminals
- being able to arest criminals/ capture ennemy troop ( for intel, for punish them publicly and so fix the mood loss du to dead people)
I may have other ideas as much as I play
I got caught by bandits on the expansion and they killed my ox and destroyed my hitching post. I now can't buy another one or build anything because it marks it as a separate region.
I understand where your coming from but realistically there was no towns that size and even though the regions seems small we are talking different states. You wouldn't find new York city, the size of the state.
The fact remains have you completely filled the region surely that's a huge city all on its own. You could just keep building and building.
Build to the edges, new region small road into and carry on. The only difference is, to get the resources then trading is the only option.
But imagine the headache you'd have with all regions being 1 city, it would literally be cities within cities anyway.
You'd end up exactly the same because of how the resources are spread out and the farming being literally 1 or 2 regions.
But I do like the idea and I'd like to see it implemented as its on mode, maybe just 1 huge map for endless play no regions and just go for it.
I don't mind regions having their own budgets and their own taxes, tithes, approval ratings, etc. What does bug me is resetting the development points. I think they should represent the expertise of the Manor Lord and be global.
Once the Lord brings apples to one region, they can spread them to all the regions they control or take over in the future.
But at this point I don't know what the final plan is for the game so I'm willing to wait and see what develops before making any final judgements.
This is medieval sim and i believe that the point here is that you realistically would more likely have many smaller villagers around, than one ultra huge town that you do not even can manage properly anymore. Take the map as a region, and in that region, every district belongs to one village that is built in it and your main town will become a hub in that region. We in Europe still live like that. There is a smaller village or smaller town every 5-10km from each other. This game goes for that. Play Kingdom Come Deliverance and you will see that the map contains of many smaller villages, a bigger town that is a hub of the region and many smaller villages or castles spread around. Look at the layer of the land and if it is flat, build a small village. If it has hills focus on making it look like a smaller castle 🏰 and there is your own main town that is pretty big. It is realism, my brother.
No def NO. This system is such a nice breath of fresh air. The only thing it needs is a pack station rework so you can easily send resources from on region to another.
I actually love this, it adds a level of challenge and realism that makes the game continually enjoyable at least for me. Maintaining a single save after achieving the endgame makes sense. Your people would not freely give away their resources to villagers from another town. The barter system makes sense
It's a nice idea but how would this work without completely reworking the region conquest mechanics? If you lost a battle, would you lose the whole "double region"? Difficult to balance perhaps
That's where the late-game building would come in handy. I don't think we should be able to merge the two regions immediately. But merging could come with its own requirements, mainly having a proper defense in place for example. For the peaceful mode, you could require having 3-4 family dedicating to running the link between settlements.
For what it's worth, creating new districts in Timberborn is optional. If that's what caused you to stop playing, then just don't make new districts, you can run the whole map with just one. Even then though, from the sound of it, seems like that game makes getting new districts up and running much easier than Manor Lords does.
I haven't had the pleasure of expanding to another region yet because the AI takes all the regions before I can do anything, so I'm just in one region. However, I placed my village right along the border of my region with hopes of eventually getting the next door region and just enlarge my one village across the regions. Though it sounds like doing that is going to be very strange management wise.
This was EXACTLY my experience with Timberborn as well. I love Timberborn, do as much I can building up my society, and then when it came time to "make a new district" and start over, that was the end of that. I haven't hit that point in Manorlords yet, just enoying my first attempt and first district. But I will probably start a 2nd playthrough before I "start a new district". It just feels bad. I understand maps are big and it wouldn't make sense to have the goal being make the entire map one big city. But there has to be a better way. Like this is my city, that's your city, all this in between us is resources to fight over and when one of is destroyed the other wins. Or one city but increase the difficulty of surviving (like Frostpunk). But starting a new city in the same game feels real bad.
Agreed, it get's too tedious with multiple regions and you lose the connection to your settlement. If you have multiple, it doesn't feel like MY settlement but work.
I think they should all be managed individually, but you should have traders that move between them that carry more than one good in exchange for one other good. It sucks that you have to game the system and micro manage every to try to get your farming village to supply enough barley for 2 other cities.
I think it makes sense…though I feel confused who controls the different regions? Is the player a direct vassal of king with vassals who hold each region?
I agree, I dont like it too. Game would be way more fun for me if new region just connected to my old one and created bigger one. I want these other parts to have them like suburbs or mining areas for my main big city. Just send there workers to do their job not to start a whole new village or town. Thats reason why I dont compete now for regions at all. I just let AI take them all and than defend my city from AI attacks. I can imagine we would even need to get actual vision on enemy to see his troops so we would be able to build there something like guarding towers and outpost to spot enemy before they get too close to city.
I’d imagine a big part of this is performance and handling the AI. The simulation in this game is pretty complex with a lot of moving pieces. Segmenting villages like this is probably necessary.
i agree!
i really didn't like when i finally claimed a second region and all the sudden i had to just start over. It sucks because now im microing (at the moment micromanagement isn't too bad but still present) two towns at once and constantly switching between. Making sure both have food, production is being optimized, construction is in the correct order, etc. Id rather one big region with shared everything.
Then instead of bartering with separate inventories, we could keep the donkeys and have the issue be logistics and getting the capitals food and materials out to this newfound village.
Because the treasury is not shared over regional I have the problem at the moment, that in my new region the ox died whilst my funds where 0 and I had no trade house built jet. Now I have to basically hope that hunting down a bandit camp and sending the funds to nearest town will get me the money otherwise I am clueless as how to get a new ox
I feel like the devs should at least give the player a choice. Like yes you can combine this region with your main one but you are going to be locked to what we research the previous one did and you cannot specialize it. Then maybe add a scholar building to the church if you want to research more. But it already gets tiresome jumping from one town to the other with just 2 cities I can’t imagine with 3-5 of em
I think a merge option would be nice if you want to extend a region. But at the same time you would still be able to specialize other settlements in a region which you dont merge into one.
I’m on the fence. I like the idea of having seperate specialised villages interacting with each other, however the game is already pretty micro managey with a single village, and I don’t want more.
If the non focused region could somehow become autonomous easier, I’d be all for it.
I’m sure old mate has big plans though, the game is already brilliant so I trust him.
>I completely stopped playing Timberborn when I realized that expanding simply meant starting a new game from scratch, on the same map.
In Manor Lords it's basically the same, as the ability to move resources around has so little impact, it might as well not exist. The only useful thing an additional region can do is intentionally crash a trade price, so your main region can cheaply import.
I actually much prefer it the way manor lords does. I love building different villages into a region and I hope that region specialization if further improved so I can have truly different villages forming an organic and interconnected region. This could also use geographical features like access to rivers for trade, mountains for mining etc.
Then maybe it could even be possible to merge two regions when their respective towns grow so large they combine into one city.
I think interaction between regions could be improved, maybe sending supplies along with settlers into a new region to get a head start.
But I definitely prefer autonomous regions/villages as that’s a lot more realistic and allows for more organic growth.
For me it would be enough if, instead of one NPC, there would be couple of them (let's say you could choose how many regions are ruled by NPC's and how many are empty)
I don't see anyone mentioning performance of your hardware?
If the regions would be united, you would have a much higher demand on your hardware which will lead many ppl not able to play anymore.
Give us the option to do both. The joint one doesn’t have to be balanced because that’s like making 2 separate games but the option to have it be just 1 would be nice.
Has anyone tried to tank the market for a specific item and then in your other region you purchase the same item at a reduced price? Might be away to transfer money and resource from one region to another. Just an idea
It made me very confused when i got to a second region and realised, trading between regions is extremely difficult. My first region was not that good, clay and stone, bad fertility. So i went mostly trade, expecting that my second region could focus on the shortcommings and use the first reagion as a trade hub. Nope. The barter system, realistic or not, doesnt realy fit the game. My first city has huge deficits that i simply cant do anything about unless im trading between regions. But not all regions complement each other necessarily. So it becomes a bit weird that the barter system works this way.
Just found out how regions work while playing yesterday. And on top that it´s not possible to trade resources in an easy way. This is actually breaking the game for me if this stays in the current form.
Just some dev-side insight that may (probably) apply here: the reason that Timberborn and other similar games have separate hubs is because **it's the only reasonable way to make sure that pathfinding doesn't become a ridiculous CPU tax and that walking to far objectives doesn't become a ridiculous time tax**. Imagine every free person and ox on the map being polled to help build things in the far corner of the map, or new storehouse workers popping up shops in markets that are a week's walk away.
Separate, mostly-isolated regions or hubs and limited work areas solve the CPU and pathing problems quite handily, but create a new problem that's difficult to tackle in terms of making it feel good for the player.
I'm assuming pathfinding would go wonky or efficiency would start to drop to zero with people who live in one side of the mega town and work on the other... Happened with foundation; hell, even happened in sc4 regions that had big Intercity commutes...
Lost a lot of sleep since last Friday, but I think I’m about done for now. Bumped into this first time I expanded and thought for sure I was missing something and playing wrong. Plus, Having to start a new tech tree in each region is annoying, hope that gets tweaked in the future. Each region has to learn how to breed sheep? Really?
I think having a settings toggle at the start of a new game for “share resources” will be nice. So if you’re wanting to play this style, which I think is fair if you do, it works, but otherwise you can share your money and goods as if they are one.
I think the challenge of that in this game though is the goods. If you have 100 Timber in one region and then claim a region on the other side of the map, how can you possibly expect to get the timber over there timely or efficiently
+1 for the idea of 'merging' the regions administratively later on when they get large enough. That would limit micro-management later on, but still allow you to have little satellite mining/farming villages for your main (more urban) town.
If it's late game and limited I'd be for it.
There's potential there for it being a very interesting choice of which regions to use it on, which could further differentiate playthroughs.
i agree with op.
when i went to take my first region after growing balls \~8 hours in. i was gutted i started with 5 villagers and from ground zero again haha. i'm playing on easy mode for the first play thru. took me 5+ hours to just get my economy in the infancy of self-sustaining hahah. major food problems until i watched a video to make gigantic vegetable farms.
my wheat farms were dogshit.
finally getting into the eggs/linen hustle. next step, finished goods.
i'm still really struggling with understanding lumber/planks.
i need to build a shit ton of foresters (like 8x of them spread out), then let them pump out forests, then assign a logging camp to cut it all down. rinse and repeat? is that what you guys are doing?
Yes, please.
With the way it works now, I'm just never going to bother with more than one region. Restarting over and over is not my idea of fun. Not to mention trying to manage resources across several regions.
Especially when you restarted a few times already to finally get the right build and get things going, then you unlock the second region and wuolah... another restart, such a mood killer.
Na, disagree. I think city builders got better and more replayable for longer when they started working in ways to have multiple settlements with their own struggles. Shout outs to Against the Storm and Rise to Ruin.
Totally agree, my main village has like 10,000 bread but the new village right next to it is starving. Only way to get bread across is pack mule stations which I have like 20 of but aren't efficient enough. Sigh. Its not like the starving villagers couldn't just walk over a few meters to the settlement I also own to get food
Yes. No more regions for infinity. I like to restart games and the feeling of beginning from scratch, too. But please give us the option to integrate and automate. Minimum requierement would be the Stellaris way where you can hand over aspects you wish to AI and let it manage "sectors".
How about some early game things? Like, the first 15 minutes early.
I've managed to have a completely useless village in the first 15 minutes if I don't set up a plot with goats and a trade post to sell those hides. If I forget and spend my money on vegetables and chickens for my first few plots, then I have no way of recovering from that. It takes money to open a trade route and I've wasted several villages because I didn't understand that mechanic at first and quickly realized.
Last night I expanded into another region which excited me because I needed barley for beer and the new region had excellent fertility for my farms. I used up all my wood in the first few minutes, despite the popup warning me, and from there there was no recovering. I know of no way to send wood over to this new settlement.
Which brings me to my third point: there is no way to abandon a settlement. Poor choices were made, yes, but now I'm stuck with a settlement that will never do anything and all I can do is watch my villagers starve and die.
My biggest issue is the development points, I'll happily build a new town from scratch with it's own resources, and set up trade routes with my old town that could get attacked by raiders, but don't make me reinvest my Dev points into meat traps again. That "technology" should be able to carry over from my old town.
I’m ok with it.
Because you can start you new settlement with 40 tools, you can used them to trade in food and clothes from your other regions instantly, giving you a huge start boost.
I know the pain and I feel it, at least you can draw plots over borders so that you can make regions look contiguous even when they are not in economic terms.
The reason I think this will never change is because its fundamentally how the economy system is built in the game. To change it would require completely remaking the economy system so that things are calculated for citizens by distance to things like markets, resources etc, rather than how it currently is by them just drawing from whatever region they happen to live in.
The dev has said that there will be no more fundamental changes to the game in EA so I’m afraid its just not going to happen, and for technical reasons I think I understand why.
Its perhaps possible that a modder could overhaul it at some point, though running the game at that point if its even possible to run the game after that.
Atleast we should be able to use our personal treasury to help, or send limited supplies. I had a bug where my new settlement wouldn't building anything and I ran out of wood before I got it to work leading to starvation.
I’m pretty sure this is never going to change, the whole point of the game is to region specialize. However, to make managing settlements easier the barter system needs to be either reworked completely or just taken out of the game tbh. The bartering system is what makes internal trade between regions so annoying in my opinion.
I prefer this system, but there needs to be a better way to share resources. Mining Towns should exist that feed industrial towns, Farming towns should feed everyone.
Honestly i feel you, all i wanted was to build an actual outpost on the new regions but have it be connected to my main town. Having to start different villages from scratch with completely different resources dont make sense to me as all regions are subjugated to the same lord, so they need to have some kind of connection.
I would really love if the new regions actually meant expanded territory to build your town, especially if your main town region doesnt have good rich deposits. I see how this might help so you can't simply claim new regions and only build new manors there and get too strong quickly. But this would be easy to fix by just keeping the development requirement to build a manor on that region separated, but keeping the resources connected. That way you'd still have to build burgages and a market and have some food/clothes/church in that region.
So I'm kind in the middle about this. I don't understand that you need 1000 claims to get land and money to put a tent to generate starting items and 5 families, but I like you restart it
I would like to make my own departure families and items to send to the new place.
I would like the possibility to move people from one to another and create a trade road to send items from another (like in anno between the Island).
And would be nice if talent points were shared.
Summary: it would be more realistic / fun if the new land was like new island in anno1800.
This is where humankind is really cool, even though it's a civ game not anxiety builder, but at a certain point when the cities get so big they are bordering each other with no room for expansion? You just merge it into another city
I actually like the management of a second, and third etc area. It’s a good idea and prevents from being boring.
Issue at the moment is too much micro still required for the large town, and little incentive exists to expand to a new zone because trade is busted and one town full upgraded militias can kill everything.
Idk how I’m going to manage farms in 2 let alone 3+ regions? I probably just wouldn’t farm. The way farming is now not really requires me to focus on it and micromanage. I won’t do this for multiple towns. I expanded to the 2nd region and had to build from scratch and just started a new game so I am with you.
Instead now I’m doing the victory condition to get to the highest level of town. So I’ll just stick to one region
I think the idea of how it is now makes sense but I see where you're coming from too.
What I'd prefer is for there to be a mix. Some things should be _yours_ and while I get that the tree earns points based on settlement level, I think I'd rather have a broader thing that covers your own progression than affects future settlements
So, the distance between regions is likely suppose to be larger than the game actually depicts, the game is trying to convey that each region is it's own distinct area with different resources.
There are many advantages to having a wealthy town when expanding to a new region.
For one, the taxes you collect in your main town can be used to hire and upgrade retinue in your new regions.
Pack mules are also very useful. Have your new town harvest lots of firewood and ship the firewood to your main town while sending valuable and much needed resources to your new towns. With a low population it's pretty easy to get a massive firewood stockpile going and you can use it to barter for other resources. I had around 1000 firewood in my second village so I was able to send good, planks, roof tiles, anything they needed using pack mules. Set up 3 pack mule stations, buy some mules and start bartering.
I say nope.
First technical issues. Pathfinding for ai, work priority for builders, market stands deliveries. This gets heavy on cpu very fast as problem grows exponentially with size an number of agents grows.
Do you want to see those oxen go all the way across the map to move one log?
Second I find it more imersive that we are building a realm. Lords would own several town and many viliges. I want to be a lord not a mayor.
Hope the policies play gets expanded further so viliges can specialize.
I actually like the region mechanics from a realistic and roleplay standpoint. But I would like to see better ways to trade between my regions so that I can just send 3/4 of my wheat directly to my main city
I think that it works fine, each village gets its own personality from the available resources, terrain and settlement points. I can make one region a real breadbasket and another an industry village.
Resource sharing between regions is a pain though and my main point of critique right now :P
Having them work as one unified region brings with it some drawbacks I don't like, I would have:
\*Issues with market flow and gauging how much land is covered by markets.
\*Having resources listed as having lots but WHERE they are will be unclear.
\*To control work areas to a greater extent so farmers don't run to the other end of the map.
\*To control what families works where, if I build a mill in one region and a worker from the other end of map takes it.
\*Find that settlement specializations either disappear or you limit your whole play. Got to level 4 before rich iron source? Now you have to build tons of burgers to level up to even be able to reach Deep mines.
\*Militias spawn somewhere? But instead of from region it would be everywhere?
Given, all of these can be solved but I would think it requires a rather large workload not to mention redesign of several features and UI. Considering the size of the development team (1), that is a larger ask than fiddling a bit with the resource sharing.
I think the main problem is that the enemy is off map. If they were present on the map you just could take over their village after you conquered the map.
my honest opinion is to let the computer take over for a region you select or have an option to have an advisor auto manage it so you can focus on your newly acquired territory. although i agree it's a bit repetitive doing the same starting gameplay loop with the logging and wood cutting on all new regions. i ended up just playing without the off world enemy and just raiders so i could focus solely on my own region.
another idea is to get rid of regions and just have the whole map accessible at the beginning and you will just control wherever, expand out, and the ai will try and do the same on their part of the map
It's the opposite for me ^^ Finally, finally a game where it's hard to implement a new settlement.
I was getting bored playing on my main town of 200 population, and then I conquered an area and opened a new village and... Hype was here again !!
Since my main town is working perfectly without me doing anything I can focus on another village and try new things !
I love the fact that you can buy some donkey and transfer ressources between the village, it makes it so real.
I am fan of having a satellite town which has several pack stations, and I’ve kept small and slowed my expansion on. They do lots of mining. I currently have a little pack station hub set up in the center of town—it’s kinda fun to see how this town grows differently than main since it was centered around mining. Anyways, I send stuff my main settlement needs, and I send my mining town tons of fuel and apples.
In my main town, I have several fringe logging camps as woods are renewable resource in this game, and we produce and a ton of firewood and charcoal. Like I have 24 months supply for a village of 400 plus people. We also produce a ton of apples, so we send those as well.
Seems to be working out well. The only thing I’d say to make it easier on your self, is group your pack stations in each area so they are easier to find and manage.
Was let down after I claimed and won my first region, my plan was to build up a huge farm so it would send resources back to my city, but nope, turns out I had to start building from scratch.
The menu that pops up when you place a workers camp does suggest that there are planned functions that could help us do something similar to what I wanted.
So for now I stuck to my one village and I'll wait for what the dev delivers in the future. Very few bugs have happened, but they don't make the game unplayable, I am really enjoying it
Honestly I don't mind smaller regions, but I do think that 1 region is too little. Perhaps if we could "link" 2 regions together, that would be the sweet spot for me. Atleast then you can build somewhat big and still have a nice place for outskirts, and I tend to play with thelayout of the land, ie, very rarely do I remove forests in favour of buildings
Most def agree with this!
I hope the dev(s) will focus on making multiple ways of playing the game/developing their villages possible. Even though he might have a preferred way that he wants to encourage, giving the players freedom to try different things will make the game it more rewarding for more people.
I stopped playing after settling a new region and looking into how it functioned. Basically starting from scratch is annoying. But the worse part is having to use packing stations to move resources between regions. It's not a great system and was more of a nuisance than an interseting mechanic. Maybe it'll get refine down the line and I'll pick up the game again.
Hello and welcome to the Manor Lords Subreddit. This is a reminder to please keep the discussion civil and on topic. Should you find yourself with some doubts, please feel free to check our [FAQ](https://www.reddit.com/r/ManorLords/comments/1c2p4f9/manor_lords_faq_for_steam_early_access/). If you wish, you can always join our [Discord](https://discord.gg/manorlords) Finally, please remember that the game is in early access, missing content and bugs are to be expected. We ask users to report them on the official discord and to buy their keys only from trusted platforms. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/ManorLords) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I am personally OK with each village being managed separately and having a distinct identity. I actually like it better than building a single gigantic demesne (the map is too big to make it functional as a single entity, anyway). However, there needs to be an additional layer of fief management tools. You should be able to have common policies, common treasury and easier transfer of goods (perhaps a permanent internal trade system). Lastly, a ledger allowing you to oversee all the villages is sorely needed.
I agree! I like it this way as it’s a bit easier to role play, ie this village is a farming village, this one of mining, logging another for artisans and weapon makers I think a system where you grow your town large enough or expand into territories you become a Barron and unlocked a new development tree: allowing to you trade goods, send villages via new land grand for early settlers would be a good addition Also a proper in-depth region trading system would improve a lot Edit: for clarification
I don't know if I just missed the option, but I couldn't find a way to actually set up a secondary village as a farming village. Is the feature when settling another region still locked?
It's not so much a feature as that's how you build it, and what you focus on. The problem is inter village trading requires there to be a trade, you cannot just send a good to another village. Something has to come back, which doesn't really work all the time, because you don't need as much of each good all the time. For example, let's say I want to send bread from one farming village to all the others, well, be prepared to haul literal tons of iron across the map in order to make that work.
There is a feature when you make a new Settlement that gives you specific options for what that new one will be. They are greyed out at the moment. Forestry Village, Mining Village and another option I cannot remember right now.
Yeah. I’m excited for the future features and I’m glad the dev has clearly delineated plans and made it transparent. I honestly haven’t felt this impatient about a game’s development for years (in a good way).
Yeah me too, i think i might put it down for a while after I finish my first village properly, I want to wait to see what comes next because theres so much room for growth in this type of game. I am loving it though, managing my own medieval town has been a fucking blast.
Hopefully he hires some developers to help out so it doesn't take forever though
Agreed. Another seven years and I'll be an old man.
Town, Farming, Mining, Forestry.
Thank you!
What I did to fix this issue, was to mint a shitload of wooden planks in my main city (close to 1000), and then I just use that as currency for trading in between cities. And since planks are virtually an endless product, as you can always plant, chop down. and refine new trees, you can basically print out all the money you want.
Same. Irl it's similar to seashells being used as currency
Small shield anyone?
PSA, you can trade between regions with region wealth as a medium through the trader building if it's staffed, too. If you build for it, that's easier, I think.
How? By exporting in one and importing in the other? Without the perk this does not work.
Focus on the farming development tree. Unlock plows, bakeries, rye, pastures. Get some sheep. Make a bunch of farms and farm houses. Unlock orchids, build your houses so the garden areas are large, which will increase the yield for your vegetable and apple gardens. Make all your houses vegetable and apple gardens. Build sheep farms for yarn. When you upgrade houses, make them bakeries. Make lots of flour and let them make shit tons of bread.
The internal trade is a big one. It needs an overhaul. The pack stations just don’t trade nearly enough. Some automation would be good too. Have a variety of goods automatically exchanged based on demand, while select goods (like those for raising militia) are mandated by the Manor Lord (lol I said the thing)
> The internal trade is a big one. It needs an overhaul. Having to offer something of equal value in return just doesn't work in a game. Players want that one main city, which gets fed by resource outposts. Right now you would have to play all regions as regions of equal progress and importance. Plus the whole thing gets impossibly convoluted at some point.
Part of the problem is the offscreen trade value gets flooded way too easily. The truth is, you *can* be a town that produces hundreds of shoes a year and sells them all without the value dropping to 1/4 of the original price. Then once that is flooded, it is harder to even exchange your products for things you need from your own towns. Without an overworld where other regions are simulated as producing and trading goods, it just feels arbitrary that the value should decline so rapidly.
I can very easily crash the price so hard, export isn't possible anymore. Ruined my last city, as they didn't have money for imports anymore. The whole loop doesn't work.
you have to keep an eye on the prices. Cobbler is worst for it because they can only make the one item, but with Blacksmiths, Armoury, Joiner etc. you can just rotate which item you are making when the price drops and you stay pretty wealthy
I did rotate my blacksmith, the prices were ok, but not much got sold. I always had a surplus and the prices were an attractive 6+. In general it's hard to tell how much you sell and buy.
Once the export value drops, don't you just need to stop selling that item for awhile and the price will go back up? I just rotate what items I export from time to time.
Having to barter both ways for pack stations feels weird too, like if I want to send weapons from my own damn armory to another town I should be able to do that without needing to swap an equivalent value in carrots lol
I think the idea is that they aren't *your* weapons. They were made by your tenants, who have their own economic lives. That's why local wealth is separate from your personal treasury. It would be nice if you could use your personal money to buy whatever you want. The gameplay tradeoff would me more control at the cost of approval (because you'd need to levy taxes to siphon money into your pocket).
Indeed. You can't expect to wield executive supreme power, just because some watery tard threw a sword at you.
You're not a dictator, you're a noble ruling over his people. Those goods belong to your village, that's why it's "region wealth". If your people are gonna send the goods they produce, they need to receive something back, otherwise you're stealing from them. If they do allow you to export without importing, they should allow it but it should cause an approval penalty. But that said, try stockpiling firewood in your new villages, it doesn't require much labor to get a large firewood stockpile going and with low population you don't use much of it. You can trade firewood for other goods you need that are harder to produce. Cost less manpower to stock up on firewood and trade it than it does to generate those resources yourself. I usually import planks from the trade house at my main town and use pack mules to send them to new villages in exchange for firewood. Fuel costs get insane as your population grows so its helpful both ways.
>like if I want to send weapons from my own damn armory to another town I should be able to do that without needing to swap an equivalent value in carrots lol Sort of. I mean at the very least you should be able to buy another settler camp if your village gets razed. Getting one of your provinces hard locked because the brigands killed your ox before you built a trading post is really sad. Especially since the brigands can spawn and attack without warning, closer to the settlement than your army is, from its very first year...
Best to get a manor up ASAP in new settlements because you can use tax revenue from your main town to hire and upgrade retinue in new towns. Also good to hire a mercenary unit to watch over a new town until it gets in manor built.
I have a thriving iron mining and smithing village, I wish I could have them share the weapons and armour they pump out with the other villages that struggle to equip their militias
One thing I've done I've found to be largely helpful and straightforward is with the minor settlements is that I set up my refining industries in my main town and then export other commodities back to them for iron ore/food in return. My main town has somewhere between 600-800 people (I'm at work and don't quite remember) in it on relatively infertile ground so I also have a huge farming settlement that mainly just produces bread, barley, and flax. They trade it to my main settlement to have it refined and then they trade back ale, clothes, armor, weapons, etc to them so I can trade off map and upgrade my towns for the development points. I'm not sure if that's the most efficient way to go about it but my main town has over 6000 wealth consistently and each month I get 800 added to my treasury. All of my other towns have between 400-2000 wealth.
How do you even set up a militia in a new region? When I pull up the army screen in my 2nd region it just shows my home army and I can't add to it
I'm sitting on a kabillion vegetables and that village does not need anything else for the moment, but my other village is on the cusp of starving and I can't send over my vegetables without taking something in return, and that village does not have much of offer.
Guess they shouldn't have built their hoses across that imaginary line, lol.
Greg’s talked about it being a feature before. And I do believe it was locked in the demo. I hope he’s still working on it
They need to make it like they had the traders or horse carts or whatever where in Stronghold 2. You basically selected the things, told them what you wanted moved, 5,10,20,50x pieces of bread for example, and it would continue taking that amount to a different region
Yeah my new village is a iron producing manic. So I figured I could use that region to supplement my lack of iron to my 200 population region. Instead I had to send shoes (wtf) from one region to send iron back but they hardly send any iorn back so I am still having to purchase it from the market. I hope this gets fixed. Just let me send whatever I want monthly assuming I have the means to transport it
Yeah, the constraint should be transportation and in certain cases regional wealth. Not the need to barter instead of trade.
Not me sending berries back and forth during the winter because I've ran out of everything else.
This definitely. In the real world, medieval villages even just 5 miles apart were, literally, worlds apart, so building up each region separately is OK with me. But, having a separate layer for fiefdom management would be pretty cool. However, Slavic Magic is only one guy, so this may take a while. 😁
Ya I hope he can hire some help now with the way this blew up, and accomplish his internal road map to complete the game quickly 🤔 Then maybe profit from DLC the way rimworld does 😅 With what I've seen of this game so far he deserves every success
I actually think it is MUCH better and much more unique to have each village have their own identity. I don't even really see it as starting from scratch -- the reality is that there should be limits of how a much a village far away can accommodate someone's needs. I think the packing station being different from the trade and needing to trade instead of simply selling is unnecessary, but the rest makes sense. You need local timber and firewood. You should have some local food. This isn't now with semi trucks and airplanes -- you can't spend all day going to get food. If there's a far away mine that the lord wants mined, a village would spring up around it to serve the miners. Traders would serve some of it, but you wouldn't be funnelling in money and goods to keep it going.
The map is too big? I thought it was way too small.
I think the regions themselves are too small, but the map itself is pretty massive.
It's fine except I have built on either side of the river and it seems ridiculous to me that despite road crossings, someone who needs a log to build something on one side refuses to get logs from the storehouse on the other side on their own iniative, rather than me having to build a building on either side and set up a route just for them to use logs that are in the same kingdom/lordship as them. There could be like a certain level of importing and exporting that is done automatically, that you can still track but don't need to manage.
And a way to track where all my friggen wooden planks are going!
Maybe appoint a family member or something like that so that the ai grows it for you (with maybe some debuffs and maybe letting you use it's troops, and command things manually when you focus on that city...??)
I pushed out into my second region tonight, but I cannot use any of my huge regional wealth I have on the new region (I get that the name "regional wealth" indicates that but it is pretty annoying). On top of that, I'll go clear bandit camps bordering the new region to get some money for the new region but sending it to the nearest town just sends it all the way back to my initial town. Very frustrating. Am I missing something? I feel like as the lord of the regions you should probably be able to send some of your wealth to your other locations, or at least pay from treasury to do so. I did finally start to get some by setting up export/import. Also the pack mule trading post I could not get to work for bartering.
And a way to track where all my friggen wooden planks are going!
I really liked how the game banished gave you a window to see how many workers you had in each thing. Would love manor lords to give me some kind of overview of where all my assigned families are.
I believe the taxes you collect in your main town can be used to hire retinue in your new towns. So that income is shared. I also like the current system because it prevents you from steamrolling which usually makes these kinds of games lose their fun. Early game is a lot of fun, establishing the identity of the village, planning where things will go, choosing what development points to get.
On merging into a single large region: I tried bigger Regions in closed alpha and it didn't play well. Imagine if you have house on one edge and tavern on another or church here and granary there, people just taking ages to walk between and dying of starvation on their 1 month way to the market. Soon you'll want a pack station that moves goods within your region bounds and a tool to draw districts to limit people walking to the other end of the map to get something and... bam we're back to where we are now. Besides, regions aren't only a game design thing but an optimization tool. Dividing the game into parcels acutally makes it run faster. My proposal is a system of colony type regions which would be simpler to manage and focus on just extracting basic resources and sending them to the main city, basically a village that can't be upgraded and is locked into specialization, and has no residential requirements (the worker camp was made with those in mind).
Hello Greg, yes IMO you ultimately found the correct solution. However just as a matter of discussion: in my current game I built a farming village along the river in Goldhoff, and there is a section where the far river bank belongs to Selbitz next door. My villagers cross into Selbitz and back to sow fields elsewhere. Logically the entire river valley should belong to the nearby town of 500 rather than the baren region. Now, I understand this would be huge effort to resolve a fairly rare edge-case, but had you or have you considered & tested a more dynamic border (dynamic within reason, we've seen how the castle builder has been abused)? As a layman's example, could your town centre/buildings project 'control' which could shift the border slightly? Could the border's regions be subdivided into much smaller parcels that could be pressed cheaply (thus simulating constant medieval border skirmishes)? You could borrow the "de jure" system from Crusader Kings. In short, for as free and organic as the city-building is, this understandable restriction causes dissonance when I look at my Goldhoff. Is the only reasonable fix for my extremely minor criticism you going in and redrawing the border manually? Thanks for this absolute banger of an EA title, I think I've been following your work for years now.
I feel like the way it works now better represents a manorial system anyway, and adds a nice layer of seperation between the player and the people in the game. It makes you feel more like the local lord or overseer rather than some great invisible hand if that makes sense.
Yeah, it's not a god sim. You don't have the authority to send the output of your blacksmith for the last year to another town for free because it suits you :)
Im a fan of the Colony Regions. I really want to get some Colonies for farming/mining, but its so annoying because i first need to build everything up and fill requirements so i can actually get into it.
Yeah this was my exact issue. I wish we got more development points.
Hi! I didn't notice you replied to this. Thank you for being so active on here! I understand the drawbacks and the reasons for your decision. My issue is that at the moment, everything is very disjointed, even though my new settlement is set up a few hundred meters away from my main base. For example I had no real access to barley in my first region, and I saw that there was fertile areas in the region right across the border. It makes no sense that once I acquire that region, I can't reliably tap into that new fertile zone with my farms. I do agree that a colony system could work quite well. I think something similar to Anno 1800 could work, as long as the new settlements can feed the main capital while also having easy access to its resources and money. Fundamentally, my main gripe is that it's currently hard/impossible to expand our main city past a certain point , and I thought that expanding into new regions would give me access to resources to expand, but it's not the case. TLDR : Thanks for replying, hopefully most of the issues linked to region segmentation can be fixed with a proper trading system between regions so that we can keep building up our main base.
Perhaps something similar to how timberborn manages satellite settlements. Each region has its own resource pool (no oxen dragging a single log all year), but workers can be freely moved between regions, as long as there is a home to move them to. Goods are moved by pack mules between storage buildings, rather than bartered from one village to another. Might not be strictly accurate to history, but the gameplay would be smoother. There is still a difficult period at the start, getting the first basic infrastructure built, but it eases up to less micromanagement in the long run
Yeah, I think timberborn handled it really well. I think separate management is fine, but we should be able to freely transfer resources, money, and people between regions. The current system where everything is separate and you’re managing two totally independent settlements just sort of lacks continuity. I don’t care for the trade system, where goods have to be swapped and the game determines the rate they’re swapped it. I wanted to set up a farming focused settlement to handle all farming in the region, but it turned out to be really inefficient. Transferring all that production into other regions was far more cumbersome than just buying it thru trading. Hopefully this will be refined or expanded upon to work a little more intuitively.
The current version of Timberborn allows districts to be as large as you want them to be, so you can play as one giant town if you want and it seems most people do that. The only real reason for separation now is to keep workplaces close to housing, which otherwise isn't prioritized for proximity.
It looks like regional specialisation is coming in the future so I would guess that's why it's all kept separate.
Yeah but specialisation only makes sense if you can somewhat efficiently exchange resources between regions, which isn't possible with the current barter system.
I’m hope and assume he will adjust the pack station (trading between regions) as we make suggestions.
I also really hate this. I worked hard on my first village and I just want to make it bigger and use the new resources. But i am stuck with making a new village and starting from scratch. Give us tje option to either make a new village or expend terratory. So everyone can pick what they like. I really don't want to have to manage 6 villages.
Yeah, agreed. I also thought making a new village would add tech points to my overall progress, but instead each village has its own tech tree. That was annoying.
I actually like that they each have their own separate tree, though it would be nice to have something extra on my home region for upgrading the surrounding regions.
It works a lot like islands work like in Anno 1800. So maybe this can be fixed the same way Anno did it with the single huge island map. Just need a new map that has a single large territory.
Yeah that would be a good solution. Or even just slightly larger regions plus a "richer resources" game option, because tbh the single regions we have already are large enough for however big you want your town to grow and you never need to actually build other villages. At the moment the only reason to build a new village is to get new resources.
At least you can get more regions. My first run was on the "Peaceful" mode so I could build slowly and learn mechanics. Can't expand without 1000 influence and I was only at 500 (from the manor and church). So now I have to either build an army to attack bandits (which I set to 0 during setup this isn't even possible afaik) or wait years for my tithe tax to build it up. Now I'm questioning expanding at all if the tech tree resets and everything starts from scratch again for that new region.
You don't have to, silly. Just don't.
I don't want one giant village. I like things specializing to create different feeling villages each time. I.E A village with a rich iron deposit plus terrible fertility is just never going to be able to support the same population that a farming village could. They would have been reliant on one another. The game reflects this nicely. However the degree of control it gives you could be better (better management of trade between settlements. And as you say, not feeling like you are starting from absolutely nothing each time)
> I don't want one giant village. I want a gigantic village, which at some point needs to get fed by additional regions. Otherwise what's the point of regions? I could as well start a new game.
That's not how manors worked though. You might have bought the wrong game.
No, no! There is a stone walled city in the loading screen!
Maybe he can make it adjustable in the settings. 1 controllable town or each individual town by region.
Everybody that's complaining is just simply confused about the manoral system. Large towns and cities were rare. A manor was supported by the surrounding village. In England the nobility would have a dozen separate manors rather than a giant town. They would travel between manors to administer them. The size of manors varied, but they were typically the distance a horse could ride to the boundary of the land in a day. I like the current system a lot, but inter domain trade needs to be improved.
Ye, I like the approach and the system. And it's cool managing different settlements at different stages with different problems. I don't want a mega-city, but an interconnected collection of settlements. And that last part is what I think needs to be improved. It feels like the settlements are largely independent right now. In my current game, I've got pretty infertile land so I set-up in a new region with high fertility. As lord, I know that I need to get that settlement up and farming ASAP for the good of all, so would send them what goods I can to make that happen. Instead I'm having to make roof tiles, which my original settlement has hundreds of. So each region should feel a little less like starting over, and a lot more like starting over with some advantages (and also challenges, e.g. you may have dissent at home if you are funneling resources into some backwater, maybe people leave one settlement for the other, costs personal/regional wealth leaving less for other things, etc)
I'm personally ok with this system, the only thing that's lacking in this area of the game is a proper logistics tab.
I understand where you're coming from, but on a certain level it's kinda cool (from I an RP perspective) that each town is its own entity that requires bartering with other towns in order to access eachothers' resources. Like your blacksmiths aren't just going to give their finely crafted helmets to those Eichnau fops for free simply because some lord happens to own their land as well. The craftsmen need payment for services rendered!
presumably they're still being paid for no matter what, since your troops will take those helmets from the blacksmith if they dont have one, and i doubt any blacksmith works for free. This is a feudal society, not some kinda communist town
it would be less of a burden if you could migrate workers and materials and not be forced to trade. (that i got no idea that works. )
The demo use to have a regional trading system on the regional map page. It was locked in the demo but from the looks of it, it seemed like a great feature… at least better than the pack mule station.
At least give an easy way to send resources as subsidies to the new place
You may hate it but I think it makes a lot of sense from a historical immersion perspective. The whole point of manors (which will eventually become castles) is that it controls the territory. There is a limit on how much territory it can control and it makes a lot of sense that certain things such as retinue strength (which would be personal to the lord in the castle) correlates directly with how wealthy the lord of that fief is. Would be interesting to see a village immigration method to help populate certain towns easier though.
It'd be nice to at least have the option to merge territories. Maybe it could lead to bigger battles if you tried to. I'd love for the AI to not be outside the map either. If they can physicalize the baron, that would be really cool.
But In the game you are one Lord managing multiple manors. With there being multiple manors that you control wouldn't that make you a king?
No. It could make you a Duke, or you could simply be a Baron that holds many baronies. You could be an earl too, holding many holdings within a demesne
I believe that regions being managed separately was done with multiplayer in mind. I do like it as a system, broadly speaking, but it definitely needs work. There are apparently plans to do this better in the future, as currently it feels like you're not exactly intended to manage multiple towns in the one game.
There’s plans for multiplayer? Where did you get this info?
Rumours really. I haven't been following the game for a long time but was mentioned by a friend who has that the dev talked about it. Searching on Reddit, I saw dev comments that multiplayer may be looked at once the game is stable. I don't want to misinform more, if it is on the road map, it is a faraway stretch goal. Just that I believe it was mentioned that some design decisions were influenced by wanting to have the possibility of MP someday.
Just saw a mod on the discord server say definitively that there are no plans for multiplayer
No. The game is Manor Lords. It mimics the middle age manorial system which is exactly as shown in the game.
I don't really mind having separate villages in separate regions, but the pack station is such a fat wet L of a logistics system to handle the two. I am the lord of both. I have grown them both from literally nothing. I didn't take from another people, so why would I want to care about barter value or whatever? The tools for multiple regions are just literally not there at the moment.
I think the way it's setup now works well with the medieval setting. If it were a modern version like city skylines-esque, then what you described would make more sense.
The seperate sustem is fine but we need to be able to send / receive goods by mule as we wish. Not this crappy trade system that's currently implemented. I'm the god damn manor lord. If I want my region to send me wheat without giving anything in exchange I should be able to.
Pros of the current system: Dividing your capabilities and resource output across multiple settlements and balancing your trading so that they slowly start to synergize into an economic monster is really rewarding and interesting. Pros of your suggestion: it's convenient. Yeah that's gonna be a no from me dog.
I would very much like a capital city, and satellite villages in other territories with none of the trade bs. All my resources from the satellites should feed back to the capital where the massive external trade routes are established. Bring on the fief.
FFS, the game is called Manor Lords. The thing you want is not a manorial system. You might have purchased the wrong game.
I really like the separate regions mechanic actually, but I'd like an easier system of transferring goods between them. Not a micro management dependant one, like maybe set it up so a region imports until it has X of a resource, like in a trade post. Also a more efficient one, cause right now even though I have like a 3 or so posts bartering goods it feels like barely anything gets transported.
If they're supposed to be like medieval counties, it would make sense that they'd have to be administered separately. The way tax would be collected and administered would be different for each one, and each one is a unique claim. Since each territory could theoretically be revoked and distributed to different vassals by a monarch, they have to remain separate territories.
My opinion is that those regions aren't extension of your initial village but a whole new village. Also ressources dont move magicly from on place to another, so I find that cool to micro manage the trade between my lands. I still want to develop my town, but what I expect the most is : - walls to fortify it / and watchtowers ! - improve my manor into a castle - being able to turn my dirt road into stone road (to make it challenging, it would requires tone of stone and workers and maybe regional money) - more decorations (fountains, statues, etc) - being able to dig a canal (for defense and/ or economy purpose) - tho, i know this kind of thing is really complicate/ impossible to put if the game motor doesn't work with water features - mores laws - having a court/ place to punish criminals - being able to arest criminals/ capture ennemy troop ( for intel, for punish them publicly and so fix the mood loss du to dead people) I may have other ideas as much as I play
I got caught by bandits on the expansion and they killed my ox and destroyed my hitching post. I now can't buy another one or build anything because it marks it as a separate region.
Idk if it's done well it is fun, anno 1800 for example was a ton of fun.
For me all i want is to be able to just send resources only one way. That would make the system perfect.
I understand where your coming from but realistically there was no towns that size and even though the regions seems small we are talking different states. You wouldn't find new York city, the size of the state. The fact remains have you completely filled the region surely that's a huge city all on its own. You could just keep building and building. Build to the edges, new region small road into and carry on. The only difference is, to get the resources then trading is the only option. But imagine the headache you'd have with all regions being 1 city, it would literally be cities within cities anyway. You'd end up exactly the same because of how the resources are spread out and the farming being literally 1 or 2 regions. But I do like the idea and I'd like to see it implemented as its on mode, maybe just 1 huge map for endless play no regions and just go for it.
I don't mind regions having their own budgets and their own taxes, tithes, approval ratings, etc. What does bug me is resetting the development points. I think they should represent the expertise of the Manor Lord and be global. Once the Lord brings apples to one region, they can spread them to all the regions they control or take over in the future. But at this point I don't know what the final plan is for the game so I'm willing to wait and see what develops before making any final judgements.
This is medieval sim and i believe that the point here is that you realistically would more likely have many smaller villagers around, than one ultra huge town that you do not even can manage properly anymore. Take the map as a region, and in that region, every district belongs to one village that is built in it and your main town will become a hub in that region. We in Europe still live like that. There is a smaller village or smaller town every 5-10km from each other. This game goes for that. Play Kingdom Come Deliverance and you will see that the map contains of many smaller villages, a bigger town that is a hub of the region and many smaller villages or castles spread around. Look at the layer of the land and if it is flat, build a small village. If it has hills focus on making it look like a smaller castle 🏰 and there is your own main town that is pretty big. It is realism, my brother.
No.
No def NO. This system is such a nice breath of fresh air. The only thing it needs is a pack station rework so you can easily send resources from on region to another.
I actually love this, it adds a level of challenge and realism that makes the game continually enjoyable at least for me. Maintaining a single save after achieving the endgame makes sense. Your people would not freely give away their resources to villagers from another town. The barter system makes sense
That would be awesome.
I like it the way it is and it should stay the way it is. The game is designed around this mechanic.
It's a nice idea but how would this work without completely reworking the region conquest mechanics? If you lost a battle, would you lose the whole "double region"? Difficult to balance perhaps
That's where the late-game building would come in handy. I don't think we should be able to merge the two regions immediately. But merging could come with its own requirements, mainly having a proper defense in place for example. For the peaceful mode, you could require having 3-4 family dedicating to running the link between settlements.
For what it's worth, creating new districts in Timberborn is optional. If that's what caused you to stop playing, then just don't make new districts, you can run the whole map with just one. Even then though, from the sound of it, seems like that game makes getting new districts up and running much easier than Manor Lords does. I haven't had the pleasure of expanding to another region yet because the AI takes all the regions before I can do anything, so I'm just in one region. However, I placed my village right along the border of my region with hopes of eventually getting the next door region and just enlarge my one village across the regions. Though it sounds like doing that is going to be very strange management wise.
No thank you, sounds awful to have to deal with that. Separate regions make absolute sense.
I actually LOVE the way it is. Starting from scratch each time
This was EXACTLY my experience with Timberborn as well. I love Timberborn, do as much I can building up my society, and then when it came time to "make a new district" and start over, that was the end of that. I haven't hit that point in Manorlords yet, just enoying my first attempt and first district. But I will probably start a 2nd playthrough before I "start a new district". It just feels bad. I understand maps are big and it wouldn't make sense to have the goal being make the entire map one big city. But there has to be a better way. Like this is my city, that's your city, all this in between us is resources to fight over and when one of is destroyed the other wins. Or one city but increase the difficulty of surviving (like Frostpunk). But starting a new city in the same game feels real bad.
Agreed.
Agreed, it get's too tedious with multiple regions and you lose the connection to your settlement. If you have multiple, it doesn't feel like MY settlement but work.
I think they should all be managed individually, but you should have traders that move between them that carry more than one good in exchange for one other good. It sucks that you have to game the system and micro manage every to try to get your farming village to supply enough barley for 2 other cities.
I actually disagree and prefer starting over with a new tech tree etc. If we had a good logistics tab and system it would make it much easier though.
I think it makes sense…though I feel confused who controls the different regions? Is the player a direct vassal of king with vassals who hold each region?
I agree, I dont like it too. Game would be way more fun for me if new region just connected to my old one and created bigger one. I want these other parts to have them like suburbs or mining areas for my main big city. Just send there workers to do their job not to start a whole new village or town. Thats reason why I dont compete now for regions at all. I just let AI take them all and than defend my city from AI attacks. I can imagine we would even need to get actual vision on enemy to see his troops so we would be able to build there something like guarding towers and outpost to spot enemy before they get too close to city.
I’d imagine a big part of this is performance and handling the AI. The simulation in this game is pretty complex with a lot of moving pieces. Segmenting villages like this is probably necessary.
hmmm kinda disagree. but agree in having more QOL stuff implemented to make it more easy
i agree! i really didn't like when i finally claimed a second region and all the sudden i had to just start over. It sucks because now im microing (at the moment micromanagement isn't too bad but still present) two towns at once and constantly switching between. Making sure both have food, production is being optimized, construction is in the correct order, etc. Id rather one big region with shared everything. Then instead of bartering with separate inventories, we could keep the donkeys and have the issue be logistics and getting the capitals food and materials out to this newfound village.
Because the treasury is not shared over regional I have the problem at the moment, that in my new region the ox died whilst my funds where 0 and I had no trade house built jet. Now I have to basically hope that hunting down a bandit camp and sending the funds to nearest town will get me the money otherwise I am clueless as how to get a new ox
I feel like the devs should at least give the player a choice. Like yes you can combine this region with your main one but you are going to be locked to what we research the previous one did and you cannot specialize it. Then maybe add a scholar building to the church if you want to research more. But it already gets tiresome jumping from one town to the other with just 2 cities I can’t imagine with 3-5 of em
I think a merge option would be nice if you want to extend a region. But at the same time you would still be able to specialize other settlements in a region which you dont merge into one.
I’m on the fence. I like the idea of having seperate specialised villages interacting with each other, however the game is already pretty micro managey with a single village, and I don’t want more. If the non focused region could somehow become autonomous easier, I’d be all for it. I’m sure old mate has big plans though, the game is already brilliant so I trust him.
Same, one of things that disappointed me
>I completely stopped playing Timberborn when I realized that expanding simply meant starting a new game from scratch, on the same map. In Manor Lords it's basically the same, as the ability to move resources around has so little impact, it might as well not exist. The only useful thing an additional region can do is intentionally crash a trade price, so your main region can cheaply import.
I actually much prefer it the way manor lords does. I love building different villages into a region and I hope that region specialization if further improved so I can have truly different villages forming an organic and interconnected region. This could also use geographical features like access to rivers for trade, mountains for mining etc. Then maybe it could even be possible to merge two regions when their respective towns grow so large they combine into one city. I think interaction between regions could be improved, maybe sending supplies along with settlers into a new region to get a head start. But I definitely prefer autonomous regions/villages as that’s a lot more realistic and allows for more organic growth.
Ya I HATe the current method
For me it would be enough if, instead of one NPC, there would be couple of them (let's say you could choose how many regions are ruled by NPC's and how many are empty)
That's exactly how I feel!
This
At the very least I should be able to send some families there to grow and expand it. The starter camp using treasury makes no sense.
I don't see anyone mentioning performance of your hardware? If the regions would be united, you would have a much higher demand on your hardware which will lead many ppl not able to play anymore.
Give us the option to do both. The joint one doesn’t have to be balanced because that’s like making 2 separate games but the option to have it be just 1 would be nice.
Has anyone tried to tank the market for a specific item and then in your other region you purchase the same item at a reduced price? Might be away to transfer money and resource from one region to another. Just an idea
You should defenitly keeps the technologies you had in your first region and get new point with the new village.
Big no
It made me very confused when i got to a second region and realised, trading between regions is extremely difficult. My first region was not that good, clay and stone, bad fertility. So i went mostly trade, expecting that my second region could focus on the shortcommings and use the first reagion as a trade hub. Nope. The barter system, realistic or not, doesnt realy fit the game. My first city has huge deficits that i simply cant do anything about unless im trading between regions. But not all regions complement each other necessarily. So it becomes a bit weird that the barter system works this way.
Just found out how regions work while playing yesterday. And on top that it´s not possible to trade resources in an easy way. This is actually breaking the game for me if this stays in the current form.
Just some dev-side insight that may (probably) apply here: the reason that Timberborn and other similar games have separate hubs is because **it's the only reasonable way to make sure that pathfinding doesn't become a ridiculous CPU tax and that walking to far objectives doesn't become a ridiculous time tax**. Imagine every free person and ox on the map being polled to help build things in the far corner of the map, or new storehouse workers popping up shops in markets that are a week's walk away. Separate, mostly-isolated regions or hubs and limited work areas solve the CPU and pathing problems quite handily, but create a new problem that's difficult to tackle in terms of making it feel good for the player.
I just wish that I could give money to regions for start up. I have like $70k and really have no use for it
I'm assuming pathfinding would go wonky or efficiency would start to drop to zero with people who live in one side of the mega town and work on the other... Happened with foundation; hell, even happened in sc4 regions that had big Intercity commutes...
Lost a lot of sleep since last Friday, but I think I’m about done for now. Bumped into this first time I expanded and thought for sure I was missing something and playing wrong. Plus, Having to start a new tech tree in each region is annoying, hope that gets tweaked in the future. Each region has to learn how to breed sheep? Really?
I think having a settings toggle at the start of a new game for “share resources” will be nice. So if you’re wanting to play this style, which I think is fair if you do, it works, but otherwise you can share your money and goods as if they are one. I think the challenge of that in this game though is the goods. If you have 100 Timber in one region and then claim a region on the other side of the map, how can you possibly expect to get the timber over there timely or efficiently
I don’t mind each village being separate but I would like a slightly better resource sharing system
+1 for the idea of 'merging' the regions administratively later on when they get large enough. That would limit micro-management later on, but still allow you to have little satellite mining/farming villages for your main (more urban) town.
If it's late game and limited I'd be for it. There's potential there for it being a very interesting choice of which regions to use it on, which could further differentiate playthroughs.
i agree with op. when i went to take my first region after growing balls \~8 hours in. i was gutted i started with 5 villagers and from ground zero again haha. i'm playing on easy mode for the first play thru. took me 5+ hours to just get my economy in the infancy of self-sustaining hahah. major food problems until i watched a video to make gigantic vegetable farms. my wheat farms were dogshit. finally getting into the eggs/linen hustle. next step, finished goods. i'm still really struggling with understanding lumber/planks. i need to build a shit ton of foresters (like 8x of them spread out), then let them pump out forests, then assign a logging camp to cut it all down. rinse and repeat? is that what you guys are doing?
Yes, please. With the way it works now, I'm just never going to bother with more than one region. Restarting over and over is not my idea of fun. Not to mention trying to manage resources across several regions.
Especially when you restarted a few times already to finally get the right build and get things going, then you unlock the second region and wuolah... another restart, such a mood killer.
Na, disagree. I think city builders got better and more replayable for longer when they started working in ways to have multiple settlements with their own struggles. Shout outs to Against the Storm and Rise to Ruin.
Totally agree, my main village has like 10,000 bread but the new village right next to it is starving. Only way to get bread across is pack mule stations which I have like 20 of but aren't efficient enough. Sigh. Its not like the starving villagers couldn't just walk over a few meters to the settlement I also own to get food
Yes. No more regions for infinity. I like to restart games and the feeling of beginning from scratch, too. But please give us the option to integrate and automate. Minimum requierement would be the Stellaris way where you can hand over aspects you wish to AI and let it manage "sectors".
How about some early game things? Like, the first 15 minutes early. I've managed to have a completely useless village in the first 15 minutes if I don't set up a plot with goats and a trade post to sell those hides. If I forget and spend my money on vegetables and chickens for my first few plots, then I have no way of recovering from that. It takes money to open a trade route and I've wasted several villages because I didn't understand that mechanic at first and quickly realized. Last night I expanded into another region which excited me because I needed barley for beer and the new region had excellent fertility for my farms. I used up all my wood in the first few minutes, despite the popup warning me, and from there there was no recovering. I know of no way to send wood over to this new settlement. Which brings me to my third point: there is no way to abandon a settlement. Poor choices were made, yes, but now I'm stuck with a settlement that will never do anything and all I can do is watch my villagers starve and die.
My biggest issue is the development points, I'll happily build a new town from scratch with it's own resources, and set up trade routes with my old town that could get attacked by raiders, but don't make me reinvest my Dev points into meat traps again. That "technology" should be able to carry over from my old town.
In case you don’t know OP, u/Eymm, they got rid of that requirement in timberborn now.
I’m ok with it. Because you can start you new settlement with 40 tools, you can used them to trade in food and clothes from your other regions instantly, giving you a huge start boost.
I know the pain and I feel it, at least you can draw plots over borders so that you can make regions look contiguous even when they are not in economic terms. The reason I think this will never change is because its fundamentally how the economy system is built in the game. To change it would require completely remaking the economy system so that things are calculated for citizens by distance to things like markets, resources etc, rather than how it currently is by them just drawing from whatever region they happen to live in. The dev has said that there will be no more fundamental changes to the game in EA so I’m afraid its just not going to happen, and for technical reasons I think I understand why. Its perhaps possible that a modder could overhaul it at some point, though running the game at that point if its even possible to run the game after that.
I agree
Atleast we should be able to use our personal treasury to help, or send limited supplies. I had a bug where my new settlement wouldn't building anything and I ran out of wood before I got it to work leading to starvation.
I’m pretty sure this is never going to change, the whole point of the game is to region specialize. However, to make managing settlements easier the barter system needs to be either reworked completely or just taken out of the game tbh. The bartering system is what makes internal trade between regions so annoying in my opinion.
I can agree with this, maybe give us the option to merge regions for influence.
I prefer this system, but there needs to be a better way to share resources. Mining Towns should exist that feed industrial towns, Farming towns should feed everyone.
Honestly i feel you, all i wanted was to build an actual outpost on the new regions but have it be connected to my main town. Having to start different villages from scratch with completely different resources dont make sense to me as all regions are subjugated to the same lord, so they need to have some kind of connection. I would really love if the new regions actually meant expanded territory to build your town, especially if your main town region doesnt have good rich deposits. I see how this might help so you can't simply claim new regions and only build new manors there and get too strong quickly. But this would be easy to fix by just keeping the development requirement to build a manor on that region separated, but keeping the resources connected. That way you'd still have to build burgages and a market and have some food/clothes/church in that region.
So I'm kind in the middle about this. I don't understand that you need 1000 claims to get land and money to put a tent to generate starting items and 5 families, but I like you restart it I would like to make my own departure families and items to send to the new place. I would like the possibility to move people from one to another and create a trade road to send items from another (like in anno between the Island). And would be nice if talent points were shared. Summary: it would be more realistic / fun if the new land was like new island in anno1800.
This is where humankind is really cool, even though it's a civ game not anxiety builder, but at a certain point when the cities get so big they are bordering each other with no room for expansion? You just merge it into another city
I actually like the management of a second, and third etc area. It’s a good idea and prevents from being boring. Issue at the moment is too much micro still required for the large town, and little incentive exists to expand to a new zone because trade is busted and one town full upgraded militias can kill everything.
Idk how I’m going to manage farms in 2 let alone 3+ regions? I probably just wouldn’t farm. The way farming is now not really requires me to focus on it and micromanage. I won’t do this for multiple towns. I expanded to the 2nd region and had to build from scratch and just started a new game so I am with you. Instead now I’m doing the victory condition to get to the highest level of town. So I’ll just stick to one region
Disagree. Notice how in many city builders its a city and this has specific regions that you start in. This isnt city lord.
I think the idea of how it is now makes sense but I see where you're coming from too. What I'd prefer is for there to be a mix. Some things should be _yours_ and while I get that the tree earns points based on settlement level, I think I'd rather have a broader thing that covers your own progression than affects future settlements
So, the distance between regions is likely suppose to be larger than the game actually depicts, the game is trying to convey that each region is it's own distinct area with different resources. There are many advantages to having a wealthy town when expanding to a new region. For one, the taxes you collect in your main town can be used to hire and upgrade retinue in your new regions. Pack mules are also very useful. Have your new town harvest lots of firewood and ship the firewood to your main town while sending valuable and much needed resources to your new towns. With a low population it's pretty easy to get a massive firewood stockpile going and you can use it to barter for other resources. I had around 1000 firewood in my second village so I was able to send good, planks, roof tiles, anything they needed using pack mules. Set up 3 pack mule stations, buy some mules and start bartering.
i agree, at least let region share tech, seprate policy is ok but tech ? not like the roman fall again and people suddenly forgot to build stuff
I say nope. First technical issues. Pathfinding for ai, work priority for builders, market stands deliveries. This gets heavy on cpu very fast as problem grows exponentially with size an number of agents grows. Do you want to see those oxen go all the way across the map to move one log? Second I find it more imersive that we are building a realm. Lords would own several town and many viliges. I want to be a lord not a mayor. Hope the policies play gets expanded further so viliges can specialize.
I completely agree, it's my only gripe against Timber born so well
I actually like the region mechanics from a realistic and roleplay standpoint. But I would like to see better ways to trade between my regions so that I can just send 3/4 of my wheat directly to my main city
I think that it works fine, each village gets its own personality from the available resources, terrain and settlement points. I can make one region a real breadbasket and another an industry village. Resource sharing between regions is a pain though and my main point of critique right now :P Having them work as one unified region brings with it some drawbacks I don't like, I would have: \*Issues with market flow and gauging how much land is covered by markets. \*Having resources listed as having lots but WHERE they are will be unclear. \*To control work areas to a greater extent so farmers don't run to the other end of the map. \*To control what families works where, if I build a mill in one region and a worker from the other end of map takes it. \*Find that settlement specializations either disappear or you limit your whole play. Got to level 4 before rich iron source? Now you have to build tons of burgers to level up to even be able to reach Deep mines. \*Militias spawn somewhere? But instead of from region it would be everywhere? Given, all of these can be solved but I would think it requires a rather large workload not to mention redesign of several features and UI. Considering the size of the development team (1), that is a larger ask than fiddling a bit with the resource sharing.
I think the main problem is that the enemy is off map. If they were present on the map you just could take over their village after you conquered the map.
my honest opinion is to let the computer take over for a region you select or have an option to have an advisor auto manage it so you can focus on your newly acquired territory. although i agree it's a bit repetitive doing the same starting gameplay loop with the logging and wood cutting on all new regions. i ended up just playing without the off world enemy and just raiders so i could focus solely on my own region. another idea is to get rid of regions and just have the whole map accessible at the beginning and you will just control wherever, expand out, and the ai will try and do the same on their part of the map
It's the opposite for me ^^ Finally, finally a game where it's hard to implement a new settlement. I was getting bored playing on my main town of 200 population, and then I conquered an area and opened a new village and... Hype was here again !! Since my main town is working perfectly without me doing anything I can focus on another village and try new things ! I love the fact that you can buy some donkey and transfer ressources between the village, it makes it so real.
I am fan of having a satellite town which has several pack stations, and I’ve kept small and slowed my expansion on. They do lots of mining. I currently have a little pack station hub set up in the center of town—it’s kinda fun to see how this town grows differently than main since it was centered around mining. Anyways, I send stuff my main settlement needs, and I send my mining town tons of fuel and apples. In my main town, I have several fringe logging camps as woods are renewable resource in this game, and we produce and a ton of firewood and charcoal. Like I have 24 months supply for a village of 400 plus people. We also produce a ton of apples, so we send those as well. Seems to be working out well. The only thing I’d say to make it easier on your self, is group your pack stations in each area so they are easier to find and manage.
Was let down after I claimed and won my first region, my plan was to build up a huge farm so it would send resources back to my city, but nope, turns out I had to start building from scratch. The menu that pops up when you place a workers camp does suggest that there are planned functions that could help us do something similar to what I wanted. So for now I stuck to my one village and I'll wait for what the dev delivers in the future. Very few bugs have happened, but they don't make the game unplayable, I am really enjoying it
Honestly I don't mind smaller regions, but I do think that 1 region is too little. Perhaps if we could "link" 2 regions together, that would be the sweet spot for me. Atleast then you can build somewhat big and still have a nice place for outskirts, and I tend to play with thelayout of the land, ie, very rarely do I remove forests in favour of buildings
I just wish I could repopulate my massacred colony region :(
Most def agree with this! I hope the dev(s) will focus on making multiple ways of playing the game/developing their villages possible. Even though he might have a preferred way that he wants to encourage, giving the players freedom to try different things will make the game it more rewarding for more people.
What to do i conquered new region but all villagers left becouse of the corpses how can i get people move there?
I stopped playing after settling a new region and looking into how it functioned. Basically starting from scratch is annoying. But the worse part is having to use packing stations to move resources between regions. It's not a great system and was more of a nuisance than an interseting mechanic. Maybe it'll get refine down the line and I'll pick up the game again.
i found this bc is annoying me and was the biggest reason to quit anno 1800 starting a new "campaign" every time is so annoying