When playing as Skaven, Vampire Coast, or Daemons I would like a new feature where if you sell a city to a faction, you leave behind an undercity/pirate cove/ cult! There are many times I want to travel around, building my secret cities and I meet a factions I want to be friends with. I do the natural thing and sell them cities on my warpath, but I also want to create some secret cities in this friendly territory I don't intend to attack anytime soon. My only option is to perform hero actions on my new friend, tanking my reliability! For such nasty and duplicitous individuals, I don't think it would be at all strange that land these unscrupulous mercenaries sell off would have some nasty surprises hidden beneath the surface!

Yeah, because an overpowered mechanic needs to favor the player even more. This game isn't piss-easy enough yet!

​

Sticksnstones#4136 wrote:

When playing as Skaven, Vampire Coast, or Daemons I would like a new feature where if you sell a city to a faction, you leave behind an undercity/pirate cove/ cult! There are many times I want to travel around, building my secret cities and I meet a factions I want to be friends with. I do the natural thing and sell them cities on my warpath, but I also want to create some secret cities in this friendly territory I don't intend to attack anytime soon. My only option is to perform hero actions on my new friend, tanking my reliability! For such nasty and duplicitous individuals, I don't think it would be at all strange that land these unscrupulous mercenaries sell off would have some nasty surprises hidden beneath the surface!

No for Daemons, as I don't think they should have that mechanic to trade a settlement at all.

But yes for Skaven, vampire coast and added to vampire counts.

This mechanic needs to be nerfed though, it offers way too much in the way it is deployed, I mean I use it to make a campaign fun as I don't like having too many settlements to manage, so give it to a military ally to utilise and also move them forward (this mechanic makes having military allies worth while).

So less money, or maybe a less money option to have an additional feature for certain factions I think would improve it.

So the empire for example should get a significant boost to the empire mechanics if trading back a region to one of the other empire factions on the board, that makes sense for them.

Undercities, pirate coves etc. take less money, have that instead. Makes sense.

​

TainBoCuailinge#8335 wrote:

Yeah, because an overpowered mechanic needs to favor the player even more. This game isn't piss-easy enough yet!

Well ideally I'd love a whole overhaul to how diplomacy works; that bug where the "break x deal" request has all it's chances inverted (so you can never get that deal to work with a faction that likes you vs asking an enemy to ruin their diplomacy is perfectly good) is still in the game. Since fixing all those bugs and making systems like settlement trading actually function between AI factions, making more than like... six diplomatic traits actually do something, would all be pretty hard to implement... Yeah, I'd love a low-effort bonus mechanic added to encourage more quirky playstyles.

​

Sticksnstones#4136 wrote:

When playing as Skaven, Vampire Coast, or Daemons I would like a new feature where if you sell a city to a faction, you leave behind an undercity/pirate cove/ cult! There are many times I want to travel around, building my secret cities and I meet a factions I want to be friends with. I do the natural thing and sell them cities on my warpath, but I also want to create some secret cities in this friendly territory I don't intend to attack anytime soon. My only option is to perform hero actions on my new friend, tanking my reliability! For such nasty and duplicitous individuals, I don't think it would be at all strange that land these unscrupulous mercenaries sell off would have some nasty surprises hidden beneath the surface!

​Or maybe an even better idea, that when you start a campaign, all cities on the map also have an undercity by default, and each of the undercities has a special slot where when you build a building, the city becomes yours or you build other building that take 90% of the city income into your treasury every turn, so my 9 year old nephew can also play on legendary mode.

I like this idea, and if not officially adopted, hope it shows up in a mod someday. As someone who plays on Normal/Normal and enjoys painting maps more than fighting every single battle, I think this adds some interesting options.

And as ever, if you don't like it, don't use it. Simple.

​

Renairen#7153 wrote:

And as ever, if you don't like it, don't use it. Simple.

Yeah, if you want a game that isn't braindead, play a lesser version of it with missing features. It's always such a good idea.

Are you for giving the player infinite money too? You could just pretend that you don't have infininte resources. Hey, why not make your troops invincible? You could just dismiss random troops after the battle to simulate losses!

This argument has never been anything but terrible.

​

Sticksnstones#4136 wrote:

​

Ehnaton91#4152 wrote:

​​Or maybe an even better idea, that when you start a campaign, all cities on the map also have an undercity by default, and each of the undercities has a special slot where when you build a building, the city becomes yours or you build other building that take 90% of the city income into your treasury every turn, so my 9 year old nephew can also play on legendary mode.

Firstly, congrats on getting the next generation of Total War players started early! Secondly, I'm not sure if you know this - but Skaven already have a "take the city" building in their undercities. Now, I'm certainly not the most avid of Skaven players, but assuming that being able to create undercities in a new way is on par with auto-winning the campaign when you've forgotten what one of the buildings is supposed to do, or you've never used the mechanic in the first place really speaks volumes about how powerful the mechanic actually is.

I'm genuinely stunned how many people think this would somehow tear apart the integrity of the game when it SHOULD be obvious how terrible of a playstyle this is in the first place if it's your primary goal. Seriously think on this: you capture a city that MUST be next to a neutral/friendly faction. You sell it to them for maybe one good paycheck, then every other city will net you at best 2k gold because the faction is now bankrupt. Next you must spend at minimum 5k gold to make a profit of about 200 a turn, so it takes 15 turns to start turning a profit, longer if you're Skaven and paying a maintenance cost to steal "food" from the city too. VS... you know, just keeping the city, making about 400 a turn and making food from the T4 building + rebellion + commandment?

So YES, I do think it would be ok if my pirate cosplayers had an option to make their little hidden cities in a debatably less horrible way, thank you very much!

As a Skaven, you only have an undercity (visually), and if you're selling a settlement, what are you actually selling? You want to sell the settlement that is beneath the city, but to keep undercity. Really? isn't the game too easy already?

Regarding the economy, I believe you don't understand how it works, that is, you don't understand the exploit in the game. You can get 100k+ gold for selling one city, and taking the profit from the buildings has nothing to do with their total income but the city revenue (you make a building that steals a percentage from the city, so it's not only 200 gold). Besides, why would you sell to just one faction and not 5-6 different ones? You could sell after 20 turns again to everyone, when they fill the treasure.

Despite all this influx of money that you can get from selling the settlement, which can currently be taken in the game, you are asking that you should have an undercity left. Insane.

​

​

Ehnaton91#4152 wrote:

​

Sticksnstones#4136 wrote:

​

Ehnaton91#4152 wrote:

​​Or maybe an even better idea, that when you start a campaign, all cities on the map also have an undercity by default, and each of the undercities has a special slot where when you build a building, the city becomes yours or you build other building that take 90% of the city income into your treasury every turn, so my 9 year old nephew can also play on legendary mode.

Firstly, congrats on getting the next generation of Total War players started early! Secondly, I'm not sure if you know this - but Skaven already have a "take the city" building in their undercities. Now, I'm certainly not the most avid of Skaven players, but assuming that being able to create undercities in a new way is on par with auto-winning the campaign when you've forgotten what one of the buildings is supposed to do, or you've never used the mechanic in the first place really speaks volumes about how powerful the mechanic actually is.

I'm genuinely stunned how many people think this would somehow tear apart the integrity of the game when it SHOULD be obvious how terrible of a playstyle this is in the first place if it's your primary goal. Seriously think on this: you capture a city that MUST be next to a neutral/friendly faction. You sell it to them for maybe one good paycheck, then every other city will net you at best 2k gold because the faction is now bankrupt. Next you must spend at minimum 5k gold to make a profit of about 200 a turn, so it takes 15 turns to start turning a profit, longer if you're Skaven and paying a maintenance cost to steal "food" from the city too. VS... you know, just keeping the city, making about 400 a turn and making food from the T4 building + rebellion + commandment?

So YES, I do think it would be ok if my pirate cosplayers had an option to make their little hidden cities in a debatably less horrible way, thank you very much!

As a Skaven, you only have an undercity (visually), and if you're selling a settlement, what are you actually selling? You want to sell the settlement that is beneath the city, but to keep undercity. Really? isn't the game too easy already?

Regarding the economy, I believe you don't understand how it works, that is, you don't understand the exploit in the game. You can get 100k+ gold for selling one city, and taking the profit from the buildings has nothing to do with their total income but the city revenue (you make a building that steals a percentage from the city, so it's not only 200 gold). Besides, why would you sell to just one faction and not 5-6 different ones? You could sell after 20 turns again to everyone, when they fill the treasure.

Despite all this influx of money that you can get from selling the settlement, which can currently be taken in the game, you are asking that you should have an undercity left. Insane.

​

​That’s an easy fix—just lower the value of cities sold by those factions.

​

​That’s an easy fix—just lower the value of cities sold by those factions.

​Easy fix? Tell that to CA.

Read the forums, we've been asking for this for years.

​

Ehnaton91#4152 wrote:

​

​That’s an easy fix—just lower the value of cities sold by those factions.

​Easy fix? Tell that to CA.

Read the forums, we've been asking for this for years.

Suggestions made solely to increase the challenge are no different from those aimed at lowering difficulty—they aren't the developers' top priority. Especially as the game's ratings decline, they will be more cautious in considering such changes.

​

Neversetcrazysun1#7505 wrote:
Suggestions made solely to increase the challenge are no different from those aimed at lowering difficulty—they aren't the developers' top priority. Especially as the game's ratings decline, they will be more cautious in considering such changes.

They decline because the game has become so boring, there's a lot of people complaining about the lack of difficulty now. Have you not been paying attention?

Besides, those who just want easy curbstomps can, *drumroll*, just play on easy.

I think a building that can create an underground city in nearby settlements would be a great design choice.

​The discussion on difficulty has drifted off-topic, so I won’t continue with that part.

​

Neversetcrazysun1#7505 wrote:

I think a building that can create an underground city in nearby settlements would be a great design choice.

​The discussion on difficulty has drifted off-topic, so I won’t continue with that part.

It's part of the debate because settlement trading right now renders the entire game utterly trivial because you can so easily turn other factions into staunch allies. It's impossible to use the feature without abusing it because even if you demand nothing, you get a ton of positive diplomatic attitude from it.

So no, asking for the feature to become even more powerful is out of the question until the mechanic has been balanced properly.

​

Neversetcrazysun1#7505 wrote:

I think a building that can create an underground city in nearby settlements would be a great design choice.

​The discussion on difficulty has drifted off-topic, so I won’t continue with that part.

That building already exists, the chance of expanding the undercity to the neighboring city is about 5% and can be increased. We are talking about something else here.​

​

Ehnaton91#4152 wrote:

​

Neversetcrazysun1#7505 wrote:

I think a building that can create an underground city in nearby settlements would be a great design choice.

​The discussion on difficulty has drifted off-topic, so I won’t continue with that part.

That building already exists, the chance of expanding the undercity to the neighboring city is about 5% and can be increased. We are talking about something else here.​

​What I want is to build in my own city, not in someone else's.

​

TainBoCuailinge#8335 wrote:

​

Neversetcrazysun1#7505 wrote:
What I want is to build in my own city, not in someone else's.

I would be OK with that.

But then you should remove the ability to spread undercities via engineers and spreading undercities shold cost growth points.

Yeah, I agree with that.

​

Sticksnstones#4136 wrote:

When playing as Skaven, Vampire Coast, or Daemons I would like a new feature where if you sell a city to a faction, you leave behind an undercity/pirate cove/ cult! There are many times I want to travel around, building my secret cities and I meet a factions I want to be friends with. I do the natural thing and sell them cities on my warpath, but I also want to create some secret cities in this friendly territory I don't intend to attack anytime soon. My only option is to perform hero actions on my new friend, tanking my reliability! For such nasty and duplicitous individuals, I don't think it would be at all strange that land these unscrupulous mercenaries sell off would have some nasty surprises hidden beneath the surface!

...makes a lot sense. +1