Notes about Vassal Control Effectiveness from Patrols

[fessmods]

I started here:
https://simsettlements.com/web/wiki/index.php?title=SSConqPatch#Version_4.1.0

Thanks! Patch notes? Was looking in the general description

• Wages are generated by Commercial plots, Equipment by Industrial plots, and Rations by Agricultural plots. The amount provided is determined by whether they are in an Outpost or Vassal (Vassals gain a natural bonus to production) and the Morale level of that particular settlement.

Taking the above at face value, all plots within a type are treated the same. So, East Wasteland Tea Co produces as much in wages as any other interior commercial plot (eg Roadhouse Bar.) For the sake of simplicity, it makes sense. But, beyond design simplicity, it doesn’t make as much sense. In a military base, there should be a premium on plots selling armor and weapons. After that, plots that function like a PX or a bar. And, then the rest ... essentially 3 wage tiers.

The logistics mod has a lot of functionality. It’s not yet clear to me if it helps shift some WRE ‘excess’ from a plot-rich settlement to a connected outpost/main base.

 

[bullyrook]

But, beyond that, it doesn’t hold together as well (the PX & bars should do better)

At one extreme, a level 4 3x3 Industrial Farm plot can produce 32 food. At the other, a Wasteland Ventures level 4 happy farm only produces 10 food. Both however produce exactly the same amount of rations.

This is what I mean when I say wages/rations/equipment isn't stuff at all. They are abstract measures of a settlement's development and capacity to support an empire. Wages aren't really paid. Rations aren't really eaten. Equipment isn't really used.

These plot still produce whatever they have always produced, but W/R/E is just a value tacked on to keep every thing determined by SS plots (this why I call it an algebra: It's not so much about the actual numbers as it is about the abstraction and the rules,) to keep the system from being gamed via external exploits: Most notably an IDEKS station in a non Conqueror settlement linked to one in an outpost/vassal. You can still do this to provide your troops food, but you can't ration your troops via this method. Rations, like wages and equipment, are only generated by SS plots in an outpost or vassal.

Here's a fun fact that will drive you crazy: A typical level three Ag plot produces more than 6 times the food (usually) as a level one, but it always only produces twice as much rations as a level one.

It's easy however to imagine other things generating W/R/E. Currently, your HQ produces 50W/50R/50E by itself without having any plots at all.

In a similar way, I'd love to see a certain amount of W/R/E generated by some City Plans and each of their levels. This would encourage CP usage and make these city plans more valued as targets of conquest. You could have a level 3 CP that produced a shit ton of one of the three resources: simulating that it was commercial hub (banking center), or a farming hub (granary), or an industrial hub.

This bonus W/R/E would, however, come at a price. Control needs always equal total W/R/E production. So controlling one of these CP's with bonus production would require you to provide even more Control than usual. This would play into the notion that these centers are highly sought after by competing factions. Taking it should be difficult but keeping it even harder. To do so would be a sign of great progress and power.

But I imagine a game where you maybe can take it but can't ultimately control it and keep it for any extended period. Another faction wrests control and you have to fight for it again. But while you do control it, it provides substantial benefits and means to grow and supply your empire elsewhere.

 

[bullyrook]

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.

There's a slick subtlety here. When I first read it I assumed the negative case. Losing warriors/dead warriors would break control scores, that's why I suggested diversifying patrols from multiple Outposts to a Vassal.

But I conveniently didn't see that everyone will experience this problem even if you never lose a warrior.

When you establish your second outpost, however many troops that survive the assault then leave HQ and move into that new settlement. Whether they all survive or all get killed or some where in between, until they are replaced at HQ with new recruits, the control provide by HQ Patrols will be diminished by exactly how troops you sent on the mission. Depending on your W/R/E production, this might be a longer or shorter period of time.

Every time you take a new outpost this re-deploying of troops to the new outpost will have some negative effect on the control effectiveness of the old outpost(s)'s patrols until those re-deployed troops can be replaced. The larger the assault force was the greater the hit to patrol control effectiveness until new recruits move in. If, however, the assault force is made up of troops from multiple outposts, all this is greatly minimized. It should be less and less of a problem as your empire grows. But it does seem "punishing" at the beginning.

This happened to me after taking my second outpost. Establishing this second outpost blew up the control over my main vassal by quite a bit. 15 Warriors moved out of HQ. Each of my 4 patrols lost 150 Control until these warriors were replaced.

I made it a point to only take my third outpost after I had banked enough W/R/E surplus to be able to almost immediately replace any warriors that were lost or moved. I also went with a smaller assault force.

 

[fessmods]

This is what I mean when I say wages/rations/equipment isn't stuff at all. They are abstract measures of a settlement's development and capacity to support an empire. Wages aren't really paid. Rations aren't really eaten. Equipment isn't really used.

I understand the WRE aren't tangible goods (in-game inventory items). In the abstract, ceteris paribus seldom applies the same across entities within a class as there's differentiation/specialization. One can imagine synergy in the abstract for a settlement specialized in a particular way (resource:company dependent upon resource - crop:making food, wood:making furniture, weapons:making war... it's the basic design mechanic behind numerous games ... most recently Anno 1800). In RL, this is the theory behind industrial-military complex (and why toy and tea mongering aren't considered a part of that). The value of specialization is already acknowledged in game by virtue of the new SS-C martial plots. The same level of abstraction could be applied to Ind-Comm-Ag plots with basic, tiered impact upon WRE.

 

[bullyrook]

The same level of abstraction could be applied to Ind-Comm-Ag plots with basic, tiered impact upon WRE.

I agree. But if some plots gave more W/R/E than others, I'd only ever use those plots.

 

[fessmods]

This bonus W/R/E would, however, come at a price. Control needs always equal total W/R/E production.

This is where i don't understand how traditional settlements come into play.

Is it possible to have a high level of control with a main base and a small number (1-2) vassals? Now add some traditional settlements. What happens to 'control'? Having 8 traditional settlements in addition to that (versus none) should impact the abstract notion of control, or else control is somewhat of a misnomer.

 

[fessmods]

But if some plots gave more W/R/E than others, I'd only ever use those plots.

If it were straight up, I'd probably agree. Though I'm not sure that's a problem. Is any Raider party using the tea plot (no offense to the mod... it's great just not exactly the Raider vibe... ah, yes, the best selling beverage at the Combat Zone is herbal tea)?

A way to balance it is to add a (relative) cost. Not unlike the old FO start up and the FO4 Start me up mod. The decision would then be do I pick balance or an extreme (or how extreme)

 

[bullyrook]

This is where i don't understand how traditional settlements come into play.

They don't until you make them an Outpost or a Vassal.

Is it possible to have a high level of control with a main base and a small number (1-2) vassals?

Sure it is.The fun and frustration is figuring out how.

Having 8 traditional settlements in addition to that (versus none) should impact the abstract notion of control

Why? Traditional settlements, built or unbuilt, owned or unowned, are just targets. They don't produce W/R/E until you conqueror them. How would they have any impact on Conqueror Control until you conqueror controlled them?

You could make a vassal that only farmed vanilla food, just like in the good old nukaworld days. This vassal would produce as much food as you wanted or needed. It could feed many warriors. They'd never I love you about being hungry. But this vassal would produce no rations, so it wouldn't help you grow your empire. In fact every settler who lived there would cost you 10 rations. It also would require absolutely no control.

Or put another way, it would always be at 100%Control without any effort. No W/R/E=no control needs

An outpost with only rec plots and martial plots, likewise needs no control.

You don't need to control settlements themselves. You only have to control their W/R/E production.

Is any Raider party using the tea plot (no offense to the mod... it's great just not exactly the Raider vibe... ah, yes, the best selling beverage at the Combat Zone is herbal tea)?

My raiders are quite sophisticated. They are lunatics, but sophisticated lunatics. If yours don't like tea build them a drug dealer. It's all the same as far as W/R/E goes, so spice the soup to your taste.

One thing to keep in mind is that vassals produce more W/R/E than the same plots in an outpost. This is to encourage the effort to conqueror them.

My vassals love tea. It helps calms their nerves after my raider horde visits to steal a cut of the fruit of their labor. My raiders don't care if their share comes from a tea room or an outhouse as long as they can stay high on psycho and keep killing.

 

[fessmods]

Or put another way, it would always be at 100%Control without any effort. No W/R/E=no control needs

It makes sense from the perspective of taking over locations within Nuka World. It makes less sense from the perspective of empire management. Hostile factions should want to target ALL of your holdings... doesn’t matter main base, outpost, vassal or traditional settlement. Ideally, control therefore should function relative to all.

Now, all games have limitations. Maybe adding traditional settlements is a structural impossibility or it would stress the mechanic (and have unintended/untoward consequences). If that’s the case, fine. But, from the perspective of my faction vs an angry, blood thirsty world, ALL my holdings should be threatened as we are all in the same boat

A collection of weak traditional settlements (part of one’s holdings/empire that also includes an outpost or two and vassals) that get wrecked every time NPCs attack and yet having 100% control might make sense from a current mechanic perspective, but from a strategic gameplay perspective it doesn’t make sense

 

[bullyrook]

Maybe adding traditional settlements is a structural impossibility or it would stress the mechanic

But you can add traditional settlements to the Conqueror system by making them an Outpost or a Vassal. Being a vassal or an outpost is the price of admission for Phase 2 mechanics.

It seems to me that you want a bunch of settlements that you own via the old way, i.e. running a fetch quest for some dirt farmer, to some how confer some benefit for your outpost/vassal system.

Conqueror those settlements! and then reap the rewards and frustrations of controlling them.

If you are wanting to mix regular settlements in with your vassals/outposts, you are crossing the streams!

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

 

[fessmods]

My raiders are quite sophisticated. They are lunatics, but sophisticated lunatics. If yours don't like tea build them a drug dealer.

Not playing raiders. Playing liberator.

So for warmongers tea should have the same return rate as weapons. Sarcasm noted

 

[fessmods]

If you are wanting to mix regular settlements in with your vassals/outposts, you are crossing the streams!

Unlike Nuka DLC, SS-C enables both so yeah.

I look at settlement types as follows:

• Outpost - very high resource consumer (high consuming plots limited to outpost), very high resource importer, low-moderate resource production, high def, high atk potential (high range of atk & def result from outpost specific plots)
• Vassal - low resource consumer, very high exporter (high producing plots limited to vassal), low (intrinsic) atk and def
• Traditional - Moderate resource consumer, moderate producer, moderate-low exporter, moderate atk and def

 

[bullyrook]

Not playing raiders. Playing liberator.

This is probably why we don't understand each other.

 

[fessmods]

This is probably why we don't understand each other.

If SS-C prevented you from building traditional settlements, there’s be some internal consistency. It doesn’t

And beyond that, have yet to hear a rational explanation (beyond mechanic related) for why a traditional settlement that can’t defend itself should be considered to have 100% control

If possible, I see traditional settlements as a balanced settlement. As a Raider or Liberator, one might want to augment one’s holdings of vassals with a traditional settlement or two

 

[bullyrook]

f SS-C prevented you from building traditional settlements, they’d be some internal consistency. It doesn’t

And beyond that, have yet to hear no rational explanation (beyond mechanic not possible) for why a traditional settlement that can’t defend itself should be considered to have 100% control

Conqueror doesn't prevent you from building traditional settlements. I build traditional settlements. I then either maintain them as such or I make them vassals/outposts.

All I was pointing out is that traditional settlements are not part of the vassal/outpost (Conqueror)system until they are made vassals or outposts. At most, they are targets to be conquered or liberated depending on what you are up to.

Only SS plots in outposts or vassals produce w/r/e. All plots still produce whatever it is that they always produced. All settlements still need to be defended according to vanilla rules. But w/r/e is only produced in vassals or outposts. Traditional settlements will have potential, but not actual, w/r/e production.

Control needs are determined in CONQUEROR solely based on w/r/e production. Because a traditional settlement has no w/r/e production, this kind of Control does not apply. Call it zero, call it 100%. The point is it doesn't apply. Just like the food HUD bar in an unpopulated settlement is full regardless of whether any food is being produced. If none is needed, zero fills the bar.

I don't know if this explanation is rational or not, but it is the way things are.

I look at settlement types as follows:

• Outpost - very high resource consumer (high consuming plots limited to outpost), very high resource importer, low-moderate resource production, high def, high atk potential (high range of atk & def result from outpost specific plots)
• Vassal - low resource consumer, very high exporter (high producing plots limited to vassal), low (intrinsic) atk and def
• Traditional - Moderate resource consumer, moderate producer, moderate-low exporter, moderate atk and def

This is an interesting point of view. But read the patch notes again.

How does morale work in a traditional settlement? What's the right ratio of settlers to civilians? It doesn't and there isn't because Morale, like Control, is a mechanic that only applies to Vassals and Outposts.

Traditional settlements exist within and according to the old, pre Phase 2 mechanics. You do have to keep them happy and defended, but Morale and Control doesn't apply.

Conqueror or liberate them and all the sudden everything changes. Now you have to both keep them happy and defended and also you have to keep Morale and Control up.

Just because we aren't understanding each other doesn't make either of us "not rational," but I'm beginning to have my doubts about you. It's not that I think you aren't rational, it's that I think your assumptions are getting in the way of what's in front of you.

If I'm wrong, forgive me. We are both fellow travelers.

If all I'm saying is this is how it actually works and you respond by but it shouldn't work that way! I think it should work this way! We are talking past each other and are having two different conversations.

I'll admit I'm a convert and a true believer in the Phase 2 mechanics. But I read the patch notes before yesterday. I'm only trying to spell out how the system currently works in the game. I'm not making assumptions about how I think it should work.

I've embraced the system and am having a blast. I see all sorts of new and different settlement builds and solutions to the problems each presents within the system as it stands.

I'll admit that much of this is opaque. But I think before anyone suggests changes to the system or questions the assumptions that the entire mechanic makes, they should spend some time trying to figure out how it actually does work. And see if they like or not.

But maybe I am irrational that way.

 

[fessmods]

I don't know if this explanation is rational or not, but it is the way things are.

you're reiterating the mechanic.

Just because we aren't understanding each other doesn't make either of us "not rational," but I'm beginning to have my doubts about you..
I've embraced the system and am having a blast... they should spend some time trying to figure out how it actually does work. And see if they like or not.

i understand what you're saying.

previously, you mentioned WRE as an abstraction. take control as an abstraction. at a high level, control as a concept should apply globally. it doesn't. not because traditional settlements are immune to existential threats but because the mechanic doesn't incorporate/recognize them. that's my hangup. it's not an issue that prevents me from liking SS-C.

like or not? you're making some assumptions. i'm enjoying SS-C immensely and am learning more with every passing day. that said, i see room for improvement. it's not going to make or break my assessment of SS-C but imo it could add another interesting layer of strategy.

In regulated software development (as a reference point), one doesn't need to complete all functional testing (or all IQ OQ PQ) before identifying potential areas of improvement. You appear to be holding me to a standard higher than that which is used to develop regulated software (eg medical device software)

 

[kinggath]

Wow lot to catch up on here.

RE: Traditional Settlements - the idea is to give players flexibility and freedom to RP, so traditional settlements are considered outside of the Conqueror system. They do not belong to any particular faction's control and so provide nothing into the system via WRE. If they show the Conqueror HUD or a control score or anything like that via the HUD or other reports, that is a bug (one that I keep running into and don't yet understand...)

RE: Building Types Providing Different Benefits - In general, we're trying to move to a system where addon pack authors are free to experiment and create different styles of buildings that have different impacts on the settlement mechanics without having them destroy the balance of the Conqueror system which is much tighter by design.

So to facilitate that, all plots of a certain type are treated equally, with the plot level, assigned NPC role, and morale scores affecting the benefits as opposed to the design itself.

The vanilla settlement system is subject to all sorts of balance issues, as tons of mods take different approaches to the amount of Food/Water/Power/Defense they provide, since we can't really deal with that effectively, I've taken the stance of just letting addon authors go nuts with providing whatever benefits they want in their plot designs. With Conqueror - we had an opportunity for a fresh slate to build a "walled garden" of sorts, at least mechanically, where we could have challenging gameplay within the settlement system.

The benefit to this method is that we can provide the functionality and strong code backing, and allow addon pack authors to focus on artistic design rather than balance or gameplay mechanics. This is one of the reasons the Martial/Recreational plot sub-types were introduced and will continue to be expanded on. In the future, it is very likely we'll get into sub-types that directly influence WRE, Control, and Morale.

RE: Additional Means of Gaining WRE - This is on the horizon, possibly as soon as the next patch. We have a number of new gameplay systems in the works for this. This is one of the reasons I've opted not to loosen up the numbers any, even though they are pretty frustrating for some folks. Once we introduce all of these new elements, the challenge will be diminished, and I think some of you who enjoy it will request I tighten up the numbers a bit after those features are in the wild. (Conqueror Classic incoming?)

RE: Documentation - The plan originally with the launch of Phase 2 was to have lots of documentation and infographics, but due to the constantly changing nature of the mod and the fact that we had never designed anything this strict before, I knew we were going to go through a lot of iterations and features before we got to a good balance - so we only created a few graphics to date.

I think this was a mistake and we should come up with not only a good text/graphic manual for the mechanics as they stand now, but I should do a video tutorial series for them as well to chunk them out into simple 5 to 10 minute lessons.

I'm currently in an excessively busy work period that should be wrapping up in a few weeks, and I can add the videos to my task list.

In the interim, if any of you wants to suggest some summary documentation to explain the mechanics as you see them, @WetRats would be more than happy to facilitate getting them onto the Wiki so we can provide a quick spot to point beginners.

RE: Everything Else - Apologies if I missed some important points, I'll definitely reach out for more feedback to future direction, and feel free to continue the discussion and I'll try to keep up.

Phase 2 still has a long way to go. Much like Phase 1, it will last many months of updates. Unlike previous expansions, Conqueror has a multi-year development cycle planned - so we won't be stopping anytime soon!

 

[fessmods]

All sensible explanations Kinggath. Thank you taking time to go through the dif pts.

This is one of the reasons the Martial/Recreational plot sub-types were introduced and will continue to be expanded on. In the future, it is very likely we'll get into sub-types that directly influence WRE, Control, and Morale.

Beyond the scope of SS-C, a central appeal of it is atk-def. It’s far better that Creation Club settlement ambush thingy. If there were one thing possible, I wish SS-C could enable some kind of battle to defend traditional settlement (loosely in proportion/strength to the main base control). Maybe enabling such would require too much tinkering

 

[bullyrook]

f there were one thing possible, I wish SS-C could enable some kind of battle to defend traditional settlement (loosely in proportion/strength to the main base control).

Have you tried SKK's Settlement Attack System: https://www.nexusmods.com/fallout4/mods/37393
It basically makes defending traditional settlements a helluva lot more fun and gruelling. Seems to scale the attacks based on how much defense the settlement has.

These attacks more often than not look an awful lot like Conqueror Defend Missions. I've had twenty or so Super Mutants or Raiders with multiple missile launchers attack my IR Quest town settlement multiple times. Super fun.

 

[fessmods]

Have you tried SKK's Settlement Attack System: https://www.nexusmods.com/fallout4/mods/37393
It basically makes defending traditional settlements a helluva lot more fun and gruelling. Seems to scale the attacks based on how much defense the settlement has.

These attacks more often than not look an awful lot like Conqueror Defend Missions. I've had twenty or so Super Mutants or Raiders with multiple missile launchers attack my IR Quest town settlement multiple times. Super fun.

No, don’t have it. Read the description. Sounds interesting but not exactly what I’m looking for (eg some of its remedies cure what I like). Might try it if my current conflict mods underwhelm

Right now, have More Attackers - Get Off My Buildzone. It’s ok so far at least when combined with Pack Attack NPC Edition - Gangs With Group Combat Tactics, Deadly Gunners of the Commonwealth, Deadly Raiders of the Commonwealth, Ad Victoriam Apocalypse Edition, Exotic Enemies v20, and Buffed Minutemen Militia... all enemies of mine. Had Synth Overhaul - 4K (really like) but replaced it with Synth faction pack and Super Mutant Redux (love it) but disabled it due to too many CTDs (guaranteed every time I approach the toy factory)

Was playing survival and it was a blast with SS-C. Had to start over because switching to workshop mode started zeroing my HP (fixed with last SS-C patch)

The rabbit trail aside ... not really looking for yet another conflict mod but a more integrated conflict framework. Think SS-C is a cut above the rest. As Kinggath explained it does so by starting anew. That’s great but the old is left standing in the cold rain looking in through the display window with longing eyes