the Sim Settlements forums!

Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Notes about Vassal Control Effectiveness from Patrols

bullyrook

Well-Known Member
Community Rockstar
Messages
783
I just saw that the Conqueror wiki https://simsettlements.com/web/wiki/index.php?title=Conqueror has been updated to include this wonderful graphic:

800px-Conqueror_NPCRoles (1).png

--https://simsettlements.com/web/wiki/index.php?title=File:Conqueror_NPCRoles.png

Mad props to Donald Strong ! and to @WetRats or whoever made this!
for keeping up the wiki.

If I understand things and please don't assume I do,
the effectiveness on Control provided by Patrols depends on the number of Warriors at the source Outpost.

Patrols give 10 Control for every Warrior. This means that the effectiveness of patrols varies first by Warrior Count. More warriors make each Patrol more effective.

Edit: Each patrol also provides a base amount of control. Each Patrol "recruit" provides 25 base control.

A patrol supported by 15 Warriors provides 150 Control. A patrol supported by just 1 Warrior provides only 10 Control.

So a patrol "recruit" supported by 15 Warriors provides (150 + 25) Control. A patrol "recruit" supported by just 1 Warrior provides (10 + 25) Control.

Until you are able to start recruiting, every time you assign a recruit to a Patrol, you decrease the total count of Warriors in that Outpost. And, thus, the more patrols you have coming out of any one Outpost the less effective each Patrol is.

So, for example, 1 Patrol backed by 15 Warriors = 15 Patrols backed by only 1 Warrior. (You can end up right where you began.)

The warrior bonus is the same between 1 Patrol backed by 15 Warriors and 15 Patrols backed by only 1 Warrior, but the base control given by 15 Patrols is obviously much higher than just 1 Patrol.

This new chart shows everything (base control score + warrior bonus control) for patrol "recruits':

Patrol_Control2.png

The math here is (Patrols X 25) + [(Warriors X 10) x Patrols]

Total Control provided by multiple patrols from any one Outpost has diminishing returns, but not as bad as I first reported. Here is an updated graph:

Patrol_Control Graph2.png


You'd get the most Control when Patrols=Warriors, but this has negative consequences for role-ratio and Outpost morale.

Note also that the possibility of even starting with 15 or more Warriors assumes a Raider start with Jammer.

If you are using a faction pack and only start your first Outpost with 5 recruits, the max control you can get with any one patrol and 4 warriors is 40 65 (25+40). So until you are able to start recruiting more Warriors, Patrols will never be as effective as just sending a Guard (+50 Control/guard) to a Vassal. Actually, in this situation, it turns out in regards to vassal control, 1 patrol is always more effective than a guard. But patrols don't help with vassal defense like guards do and actual defense at a vassal is probably more important than (total) control.


The other interesting thing to note about the graphic on the wiki page is how it stacks control next to W/R/E needs: a guard needs 10W/10R/10/E and provides/covers 50 Control. A captive needs 0W/5R/0E and adds 20 to Control needs

Can I assume that to map out control needs in an Outpost or Vassal it is as simple as adding up all the W/R/E production?

If a vassal produces 100W/100R/100E, does that mean I need to cover 300 Control? So I need some configuration of warriors and patrols and/or guards that equals at least 300?
 

Attachments

  • Patrol_Control Graph.png
    Patrol_Control Graph.png
    20.4 KB · Views: 177
  • Patrol_Control.png
    Patrol_Control.png
    167.5 KB · Views: 184
Last edited:
Dang. Them's some well-crunched numbers!
 
If a vassal produces 100W/100R/100E, does that mean I need to cover 300 Control? So I need some configuration of warriors and patrols and/or guards that equals at least 300?

Yep - right now, it's a straight match! We will introduce some variables into the system in the future when we get to the Outpost/Vassal leader traits patch - but for the most part that's going to remain the formula.

Thank Donald Strong for the infographics!
 
May have to redo the above chart. It looks to me in game that Patrols actually provide a base Control score + 10x each Warrior). The above shows just 10x each warrior without the base Control score.

Should mean that patrols are even more effective than noted above. But will still suffer as warrior count decreases.
 
Updated the original post with charts that show Patrols base control Score plus the Warrior Control Bonus. The original post left out the base control score completely.
 
How do we summon patrols so we can get them back/redo them? Summon Provisioner isn't doing it.
 
How do we summon patrols so we can get them back/redo them? Summon Provisioner isn't doing it.

Do you have IDEk's? If so you it allows you to craft a summon unemployed tool.(You can craft it at the station or at a CP desk so actually using a station isn't required.)

When you use this tool, it will also summon your patrols to you. They aren't unemployed but it still does the trick for some reason. Note: don't use the gavel's back to work feature immediately afterwards. Let the them go back to doing their thing on their own.

@MisterKen At least in my game, the reports (at first) are a little quirky in regards to patrols. When I send a patrol from an Outpost to a Vassal, if I then immediately check the settlement report it will only show the patrol's base control (25 for a recruit). I then have to go to the vassal. Arriving at the Vassal seems to force the bonus control from # of warriors at outpost to calculate correctly. Waiting may work, too, but I've never tried that.

Depending on your situation, the report can show a much lower Control percentage than you actually should/will have. I think this is just a reporting problem/delay. I mention it because it can be a little off putting to say the least to redo your Control regime only to have the report not immediately show you the fruits of your effort. Trust but verify, right?
 
The town meeting gavel will summon your provisioners, I'm not sure if it gets patrols or not, but it would be worth trying.
 
I really am fond of the Gavel.

It usually gets one of my precious hotkey slots.
 
Yep - right now, it's a straight match! We will introduce some variables into the system in the future when we get to the Outpost/Vassal leader traits patch - but for the most part that's going to remain the formula.

Thank Donald Strong for the infographics!
My main base produces an excess of water (40 water pump + vault water plot + ag plot w 10 water bonus). Water can obviously be used as an exploit. Don’t want that but would like to repurpose (sell) to some excess to offset shortfalls in wages/rations/equipment (purchase). Any thoughts on this?

The armory (martial) plot upgrades weaponry to troop level. Does this feed into any of the equations? Presumably, a patrol of pipe pistols would be less effective (less control?) than one with miniguns.
 
Last edited:
My main base produces an excess of water (40 water pump + vault water plot + ag plot w 10 water bonus). Water can obviously be used as an exploit. Don’t want that but would like to repurpose (sell) to some excess to offset shortfalls in wages/rations/equipment (purchase). Any thoughts on this?

The armory (martial) plot upgrades weaponry to troop level. Does this feed into any of the equations? Presumably, a patrol of pipe pistols would be less effective (less control?) than one with miniguns.
With the new Conqueror mechanics, I tried to ensure basically everything exists "outside of your inventory", so that it's not even in the same economy to break things balance-wise. Sim Settlements can very easily break your game balance from the single-player, exploration RPG side of things, by providing too many resources. In the same way, allowing those player items to impact the SS systems too much can lead to simple exploits that make the SS systems trivial.

We're still looking into ways to offer alternative means of generating WRE resources, especially temporarily for the sake of getting out of bad ruts.

Per equipment on Patrols- no effect. Their rank does have an effect though. We will be introducing more ways to rank up in the future, to make it more likely for you to gain that benefit.

One change I am considering making, in regards to Control, is to make the Patrol boost from Outposts based on the number of guards, rather than the number of Warriors. Right now, if you're running assaults, you risk breaking your control scores all over the map if they were dependent on the number of warriors linked via patrols - which feels like you are being punished for attempting to make progress.

If we made that change, then losing a bunch of Guards after a rough defensive raid, could break your control score in linked settlements, which feels more natural to me, and makes the raids more impactful. In that scenario, having one key outpost attacked could destabilize a lot of your empire, so you have more incentive to rank up your guards, which I like.

Would basically stabilize your control scores, give you an incentive to rank up more of your troops, and make it less punishing to keep taking your warriors out on assaults to take over the Vassals needed to maintain your WRE needs.
 
With the new Conqueror mechanics, I tried to ensure basically everything exists "outside of your inventory", so that it's not even in the same economy to break things balance-wise... We're still looking into ways to offer alternative means of generating WRE resources, especially temporarily for the sake of getting out of bad ruts.
makes sense. given that, wish the plots themselves (as opposed to inventory items they produce ... re: too much micromanaging, susceptible to exploits, etc as you mentioned) conferred more obvious WRE benefits. plot choice would be more interesting and impactful if plot specializations altered offensive, defensive and WRE factors. plot A boosts warriors/offense, plot B guards/defense, plot C rank levels (all NPCs), plot D WRE (infrastructure), etc. extending this further, competing factions could have a disposition (offensive, defensive, balanced). that disposition could influence the plot specializations, etc.

speaking of ruts, i'm in one and i don't want to disable the WRE link to recruitment. i have enough resources to build anything but the path forward isn't clear.

to be honest, right now, i'm fishing in the dark. something like a tech tree/map or a brief snippet in the plot descriptions relative to WRE (or has no WRE benefit) would make the fishing more purposeful
 
Last edited:
If we made that change, then losing a bunch of Guards after a rough defensive raid, could break your control score in linked settlements, which feels more natural to me, and makes the raids more impactful. In that scenario, having one key outpost attacked could destabilize a lot of your empire, so you have more incentive to rank up your guards, which I like.
gotta say i like it too. get too aggro and suddenly the other factions detect the weakness in your guards and (counter) attack
 
With the new Conqueror mechanics, I tried to ensure basically everything exists "outside of your inventory", so that it's not even in the same economy to break things balance-wise. Sim Settlements can very easily break your game balance from the single-player, exploration RPG side of things, by providing too many resources. In the same way, allowing those player items to impact the SS systems too much can lead to simple exploits that make the SS systems trivial.

This seems to me to be the hurdle a number of us players have. We've jumped from straight arithmetic to algebra without a year of pre-algebra in between. Grasping that W/R/E isn't caps/food/junk is difficult for many of us trained in the old ways.

W/R/E aren't actually anything tangible. They are just a number or a measure that goes up and down depending on how many plots (commercial, ag, and industrial), what level they are at, morale, location (outpost or vassal) and number of troops/civilians.

The very fact that I could produce 100 food (vanilla crops) and still 0 rations seems strange to many. This very fact points to the radical change introduced by Phase 2 mechanics. And radical change is hard.

One change I am considering making, in regards to Control, is to make the Patrol boost from Outposts based on the number of guards, rather than the number of Warriors. Right now, if you're running assaults, you risk breaking your control scores all over the map if they were dependent on the number of warriors linked via patrols - which feels like you are being punished for attempting to make progress.

I always sort of thought this was deliberate and by design. Encouraging players to play a taller game as opposed to a wider game at first.

At the beginning, most of your patrols will go between HQ and your first or second vassal. If you conqueror too many settlements too fast your control capacity will become strained and you will put yourself at risk of losing control over vassals.

But, as your empire grows the best path forward is to diversify your patrols, sending patrols from multiple outposts to each vassal. Instead of 4 patrols to Abernathy all from RR, 4 patrols each from 4 different Outposts. This requires more management at some point but if all the warriors at one outpost are slaughtered or if you somehow lost control over an outpost, the hit to Abernathy's Control wouldn't be as great as if you had all your eggs in one basket.

The power comes from the aggregate and not any individual Outpost. It's like a combat box.
 
We've jumped from straight arithmetic to algebra without a year of pre-algebra in between. Grasping that W/R/E isn't caps/food/junk is difficult for many of us trained in the old ways.
It’s more like using integral calculus to get the area of a sphere from the circumference of a circle without having had geometry or algebra

The very fact that I could produce 100 food (vanilla crops) and still 0 rations seems strange to many. This very fact points to the radical change introduced by Phase 2 mechanics. And radical change is hard.
The rules changed but haven’t been (well) described. Can’t read the SS-C wiki and get a sense of which plots and actions impact W vs R vs E vs none vs combination of them

The power comes from the aggregate and not any individual Outpost
To me, vulnerability in defense of a specific settlement should largely be a function of its defenses, not the empire’s (Fort Knox is Fort Knox no matter who owns it). Ability and willingness of enemies to spy upon and initiate an attack against that specific settlement should largely be an inverse function of the target empire’s patrols (Eternal vigilance is the price of liberty). Hard to launch an attack if all your men get killed en route.
 
Last edited:
Top