DerKommerSpyd
Recruit
Dear TaleWorlds,
I have now spent close to 100 hours with Bannerlord, trying to push the game, test etc. to give some honest feedback, as the game is in Early Access.
I don't know whether or not this is the right section to post in, if you guys will actually listen or whatever. Keep in mind that this is just an honest opinion.
First off: I've done this in two ways:
Combat
Firstly, I know there are very different opinions on this topic. From what I've been able to read here and on the Steam forums, people seem to disagree a great deal on whether it's balanced or not. In my opinion it is.
While many people I've seen post, predominantly seem to think some units are over-powered, I'd say they're fine - all of them.
If you ask me, sure, Imperial Legionaries seem to very strong against cavalry compared to other units of the same type, but one has to keep in mind, that these guys are equiped with a spear as well. While this is a very short spear, it does give them a great deal of advantage against cavalry - as should be the case, as it's the most effective weapon against said type, if you follow the standard doctrines of "the time", which I take is medieval.
While these guys have an advantage against cavalry, which many people say is "unrealistic" or "over-powered", I say leave it as it is. Every faction has its own strengths and weaknesses. Sturgians for example, in return have some incredible advantages against other infantry, with their axes. The same can be said for the Khuzait, which in turn have a lot of spears, making them weak against infantry, strong against cavalry and also, very strong against everything, with their mounted archers just circling around the enemy like and insane Mongol hord - or the likes.
In summary, I'd say: Leave the untis as they are. Sure, a few tweaks can be done to the A.I. here and there, but generally speaking, the game is well-balanced as it is, combat-wise, with the various strengths and weaknesses of each faction. In my opinion; don't listen to the complaints. People need to adjust to these things and learn to play their cards right. This should not be another one of those games, where every unit is essentially the same, but with different looks depending on culture and faction.
Yes, this part was very short and perhaps vague, but it should be left as it is in general.
Though, maybe with one small tweak:
I saw some guy make an excellent point about cavalry charges. Now, if you get rammed by a Cataphract, which is basically the Medieval equivalent of tank in some aspects, there should be a higher amount of damage done. Cataphracts where to know to be v-e-r-y heavy cavalry, breaking the enemies' lines, not only because of their weapons, but also because of the sheer force of impact done, when an armored beast like that charges into your shield wall. It will leave more than a bruise on most people.
A.I.
Now, here's a part that needs a few tweaks. Not because anything is "over-powered" or "buhu it's kicking my ass, I want it easier." Simply, because in some areas it's very faulty, to a degree where it seems like it's retarded.
During sieges, there's in my experience a huge tendency for the A.I. to simply not be able to just put their hands around the latters or the siege towers and start climbing. They're basically, just screwing around at the buttom like brain-dead lemmings. I don't know if it's a path-finding thing or whatever, but it happens 9/10 times. Also, while it can be a help, they tend to prefer one side of the castle walls over the other. I tend to build both siege towers and the battering ram, but they generally end up only storming one side of the wall. Sure, if there's a weak point in the enemy's defense, use it. But running the length of the castle or city walls, to get slaugthered by archers, crossbows or ballistas, simply because they don't like the colour of their given wall section, is plain annoying and idiotic. I'm sure this is not how it was inteded to be, but it happens - a lot!
Another thing: Map A.I. for enemy armies is to me a joke. Once you reach a certain strength, they will no longer dare any attacks on castles, cities or your armies. They will only raid the smaller bound settlements.
The perfect way to stay "unconquerable" is to simply leave 200 of your high-tier units in each settlement. Ballance them as 150 infantry and 50 archers, and you're safe. I've done this with the Empire, Sturgia and Vlandia, and it works every single time. Even an 800-strong enemy army, won't dare. Further, if you get to around 300-500 men of high or top-tier units, beat an enemy army of equal size o-n-c-e, they will always run from you. Unless they're at least 3-400 men stronger. However, when they finally do get the courage to attack you, 9/10 times, they've got an army comprised of +50% recruits, making it an absolute blood-bath of a slaughter. At this point, the game is no longer able to have wars. It's simply you running around like a god, committing the occassional genocide - because why not?
In my opinion: Make the A.I. a bit more aggressiv or daring in that aspect.
I can't decide if you should change the way their armies are comprised or not, becuase at the same time, the player also needs to be able to replenish losses and get them leveled before they attack again.
Now for companions and armies. P-L-E-A-S-E FOR THE SAKE OF THE LORD, make companion parties in your armies STOP recruiting troops, when they're at their party limit! I cannot begin to describe the frustration of constantly having to micro-manage my companion parties in my army, because they hire some annoying peasant farmer, looter or whatever, when I've given them all but top-tier units! To see world-class armies desert, becuase they are over their limit and suddenly end up with 500 looters, instead of Legionaries, Shock Troopers or whatever, is such a pain that it's almost made me throw my keyboard at one point. If you at one point get stuck on an issue, have too much spare time or ain't hungry so you're going to skip the lunch-break, then FIX this! PLEASE! It happens so often after battles of any kind.
Now for A.I. relations. Generally, I think it's working fine. It's sometimes difficult to get good relations and sometimes not. It's a mixed thing. However, I think there's some small tweaks to be made.
For instance: Sturgia is at war with Vlandia. I join in on Sturgia's side as the Empire. I kill their army and capture one of their nobles. I then excecute said noble. Now, everyone in the whole world hates me - including the Sturgians whom I'm allied with. What's up with that? Surely, if the player captures and kills a mutual enemy, they shouldn't be mad? Also, why would the Khuzait on the other side of Calradia be mad at this, when they've got no ties with them whatsoever, if they've even heard of them? Doesn't seem right. They're also completely opposite of each other culturally, so one would think that they'd be happy about it, considering classical xenophobia and annimosity during wars. Other than that, probably fine system.
Economy
Now.... I'm gonna get grumpy here. It's broken. It doesn't work. Simple.
Workshops: Not worth it. (I know you've said they aren't balanced yet)
Caravans: Not woth it.
Land titles: Not worth it.
The only things that will properly get you going early on are Tournaments and winning battles and selling the loot. Nothing else is worth it.
The ammount of money and time it takes to get a Workshop vs. what you earn from it, is just not worth it - at all. Same goes for caravans, but almost even more so, as they have a significantly higher maintainence cost. It doesn't matter if it's early game, where you're running around with idiotic peasants who die like there's no tomorrow or late game, with nothing but top-tier units all around. Netiher workshops, caravans or landed titles are worth it from an economical piont of view. At all.
The "only" way to truly get going is:
Abuse the tournaments and get a bit of cash, hire a few troops, kill looters, upgrade troops, move on to larger prey and become a vassal. Not even King or Emperor is worth it. The latter two for different reasons though.
When you're a King/Emperor and start a war, the economy of your Kingdom/Empire will crash immediately, regardless of whether or not you empty out a settlements market by buying it out completely. I've done this over and over, to see if I did something wrong or it was a simple one-off. But sadly, no.
It goes as follows: I'm an Imperial Faction (after the banner is assembled). All of my 12 settlements are fine, including their bound villages. Prosperity, food, everything is fine and growing. Garrisons are comprised of 200 troops each as mentioned earlier, with the unbeatable settlements. Now, I declare war on a random faction. 1-2 days later, troops are deserting their garrisons, because of lack of food. That means the prosperity goes down as well, and boom, everything is dead and right there for the taking. It takes anything from 1-2 days to a week for your empire to collaps this way. Deserting takes a little longer, but the economy crashes that fast. As I said, broken.
I'm pretty sure this is not how it's intended, but that's what happens. As I said, I've done this with and with progression and console commands. It always happens. Having this happen is why, it's only worth it to be a vassal, if you want your economy to survive. Because being a vasssal, you don't have to necessarily have a settlement, meaning you don't have to deal with this. Instead, you just murder whatever army you come across, making money of the loot.
Please, make this a top priority, because as I said, the rest is fine. But the economy, is not working - at all. (Remember this is opinion, as it says in the topic line)
Siege and Bombardment phase
This gets a small topic line for itself.
Simply put, because it's utterly pointless in some ways. Don't get me wrong, though. I love the idea of it. I really do. However, I'll break it down nice and simple, why it's pointless.
You cannot, and I mean CAN NOT, get anything from acutally trying to build Onagers, Ballistas or Trebuchets. It's pointless. No matter how you put it.
The defenders will ALWAYS, out-build and out-shoot you. Yes, A-L-W-A-Y-S. I tried with the console commands and cheated my Engineering skill to +300, and still I couldn't maintain a single Onager for long enough to even be close to finishing the second one. I've tried so many times, with so many different levels of engineering for me, companions, other lords in the army etc., that I probably know more about this mechanic than you by now. (Exageration of course)
There's only one TRUE viable option for this phase, if you want to actually bombard the enemy:
Build your siege towers and battering ram first. Then build a single Onager, Trebuchet or Ballista and as soon as it finishes hit the "Lead Assaulst" button. Then, after deployment, go to it, take over and aim better than your troops. Not kidding, but this is the O-N-L-Y way it will be worth it. Even with extremely high engineering skill.
I simply found out by saving before I started the siege, then simply with the console increasing my engineering skill by 10 and reloading to see if it would get better. Conlusion is: It won't. At all. The only thing it seems to have a decent impact on, is the time it takes to set up the siege camp itself. However, even here, it's such a small difference, it's hardly noticeable from the lower 30-ish range to the extreme +150-is range of Engineering skill.
This could have probably been noted under Combat, but since it's a phase by itself, I thought I'd leave it seperately, as it doesn't really affect combat itself.
A side note on the siege equipment: Now, you might want to consider adding an easier way to aim with the seige engines on the battlefield for newcomers, who might not want to learn the almost "blind aiming" with these things. Of course, it should be toggleable as per difficulty setting, so you can't just "cheat" and add it from one shot to the next. While it's fun to figure it out, not everyone will be as patient with this and potentially miss out on the great deal of fun it is to 'accidently' hit Carl in the face with a catapult rock, simply because he bent over to pick up another Ballista arrow at the wrong time
All in all
Please, leave combat as it is, except for the few mentioned issues with ladders. There's no need for this game to be another one of those Total War games, where every unit is the same, but with different faction colours and uniforms. It's perfectly fine that there are different strengths and weaknesses to each faction, and also, that some factions might 'appear' stronger than others. It should be up to the player him-/herself to figure out how to win the battles. Otherwise, there's no challange and we might as well just cheat ourselves to victory or simply just not play. The Roman Army was superior to the Gauls and the Germanic tribes. However, they still found a way to beat them. Just saying.
For economy, I've already said it. It needs a loving hand and fast!
For the Siege and Bombardment phase: I don't know if you intended it that way, but it seems to a little off, when the skill is supposed to better this, but in reality it doesn't.
Overall a lovely game. Some of it seems to be just Warband with new paint though (sorry, but I have to be honest), but I love it.
Keep it up, and hope it was useful.
I know it was vague at points, but feel free to ask. I've broken this game in so many way already, I don't know where to begin.
Sincerely,
Me
(Early Acess Bannerlord: 4,5 of 5 stars)
I have now spent close to 100 hours with Bannerlord, trying to push the game, test etc. to give some honest feedback, as the game is in Early Access.
I don't know whether or not this is the right section to post in, if you guys will actually listen or whatever. Keep in mind that this is just an honest opinion.
First off: I've done this in two ways:
- Played the game as is it's meant to be played; progressing from nothing to ruler of Calradia (with multiple factions).
- Played the game with a developer console enabled, just to push the game a bit. Yes, call it cheating, but I had to see how it handles the player being a demi-god.
- All playthrough were done on realistic settings.
Combat
Firstly, I know there are very different opinions on this topic. From what I've been able to read here and on the Steam forums, people seem to disagree a great deal on whether it's balanced or not. In my opinion it is.
While many people I've seen post, predominantly seem to think some units are over-powered, I'd say they're fine - all of them.
If you ask me, sure, Imperial Legionaries seem to very strong against cavalry compared to other units of the same type, but one has to keep in mind, that these guys are equiped with a spear as well. While this is a very short spear, it does give them a great deal of advantage against cavalry - as should be the case, as it's the most effective weapon against said type, if you follow the standard doctrines of "the time", which I take is medieval.
While these guys have an advantage against cavalry, which many people say is "unrealistic" or "over-powered", I say leave it as it is. Every faction has its own strengths and weaknesses. Sturgians for example, in return have some incredible advantages against other infantry, with their axes. The same can be said for the Khuzait, which in turn have a lot of spears, making them weak against infantry, strong against cavalry and also, very strong against everything, with their mounted archers just circling around the enemy like and insane Mongol hord - or the likes.
In summary, I'd say: Leave the untis as they are. Sure, a few tweaks can be done to the A.I. here and there, but generally speaking, the game is well-balanced as it is, combat-wise, with the various strengths and weaknesses of each faction. In my opinion; don't listen to the complaints. People need to adjust to these things and learn to play their cards right. This should not be another one of those games, where every unit is essentially the same, but with different looks depending on culture and faction.
Yes, this part was very short and perhaps vague, but it should be left as it is in general.
Though, maybe with one small tweak:
I saw some guy make an excellent point about cavalry charges. Now, if you get rammed by a Cataphract, which is basically the Medieval equivalent of tank in some aspects, there should be a higher amount of damage done. Cataphracts where to know to be v-e-r-y heavy cavalry, breaking the enemies' lines, not only because of their weapons, but also because of the sheer force of impact done, when an armored beast like that charges into your shield wall. It will leave more than a bruise on most people.
A.I.
Now, here's a part that needs a few tweaks. Not because anything is "over-powered" or "buhu it's kicking my ass, I want it easier." Simply, because in some areas it's very faulty, to a degree where it seems like it's retarded.
During sieges, there's in my experience a huge tendency for the A.I. to simply not be able to just put their hands around the latters or the siege towers and start climbing. They're basically, just screwing around at the buttom like brain-dead lemmings. I don't know if it's a path-finding thing or whatever, but it happens 9/10 times. Also, while it can be a help, they tend to prefer one side of the castle walls over the other. I tend to build both siege towers and the battering ram, but they generally end up only storming one side of the wall. Sure, if there's a weak point in the enemy's defense, use it. But running the length of the castle or city walls, to get slaugthered by archers, crossbows or ballistas, simply because they don't like the colour of their given wall section, is plain annoying and idiotic. I'm sure this is not how it was inteded to be, but it happens - a lot!
Another thing: Map A.I. for enemy armies is to me a joke. Once you reach a certain strength, they will no longer dare any attacks on castles, cities or your armies. They will only raid the smaller bound settlements.
The perfect way to stay "unconquerable" is to simply leave 200 of your high-tier units in each settlement. Ballance them as 150 infantry and 50 archers, and you're safe. I've done this with the Empire, Sturgia and Vlandia, and it works every single time. Even an 800-strong enemy army, won't dare. Further, if you get to around 300-500 men of high or top-tier units, beat an enemy army of equal size o-n-c-e, they will always run from you. Unless they're at least 3-400 men stronger. However, when they finally do get the courage to attack you, 9/10 times, they've got an army comprised of +50% recruits, making it an absolute blood-bath of a slaughter. At this point, the game is no longer able to have wars. It's simply you running around like a god, committing the occassional genocide - because why not?
In my opinion: Make the A.I. a bit more aggressiv or daring in that aspect.
I can't decide if you should change the way their armies are comprised or not, becuase at the same time, the player also needs to be able to replenish losses and get them leveled before they attack again.
Now for companions and armies. P-L-E-A-S-E FOR THE SAKE OF THE LORD, make companion parties in your armies STOP recruiting troops, when they're at their party limit! I cannot begin to describe the frustration of constantly having to micro-manage my companion parties in my army, because they hire some annoying peasant farmer, looter or whatever, when I've given them all but top-tier units! To see world-class armies desert, becuase they are over their limit and suddenly end up with 500 looters, instead of Legionaries, Shock Troopers or whatever, is such a pain that it's almost made me throw my keyboard at one point. If you at one point get stuck on an issue, have too much spare time or ain't hungry so you're going to skip the lunch-break, then FIX this! PLEASE! It happens so often after battles of any kind.
Now for A.I. relations. Generally, I think it's working fine. It's sometimes difficult to get good relations and sometimes not. It's a mixed thing. However, I think there's some small tweaks to be made.
For instance: Sturgia is at war with Vlandia. I join in on Sturgia's side as the Empire. I kill their army and capture one of their nobles. I then excecute said noble. Now, everyone in the whole world hates me - including the Sturgians whom I'm allied with. What's up with that? Surely, if the player captures and kills a mutual enemy, they shouldn't be mad? Also, why would the Khuzait on the other side of Calradia be mad at this, when they've got no ties with them whatsoever, if they've even heard of them? Doesn't seem right. They're also completely opposite of each other culturally, so one would think that they'd be happy about it, considering classical xenophobia and annimosity during wars. Other than that, probably fine system.
Economy
Now.... I'm gonna get grumpy here. It's broken. It doesn't work. Simple.
Workshops: Not worth it. (I know you've said they aren't balanced yet)
Caravans: Not woth it.
Land titles: Not worth it.
The only things that will properly get you going early on are Tournaments and winning battles and selling the loot. Nothing else is worth it.
The ammount of money and time it takes to get a Workshop vs. what you earn from it, is just not worth it - at all. Same goes for caravans, but almost even more so, as they have a significantly higher maintainence cost. It doesn't matter if it's early game, where you're running around with idiotic peasants who die like there's no tomorrow or late game, with nothing but top-tier units all around. Netiher workshops, caravans or landed titles are worth it from an economical piont of view. At all.
The "only" way to truly get going is:
Abuse the tournaments and get a bit of cash, hire a few troops, kill looters, upgrade troops, move on to larger prey and become a vassal. Not even King or Emperor is worth it. The latter two for different reasons though.
When you're a King/Emperor and start a war, the economy of your Kingdom/Empire will crash immediately, regardless of whether or not you empty out a settlements market by buying it out completely. I've done this over and over, to see if I did something wrong or it was a simple one-off. But sadly, no.
It goes as follows: I'm an Imperial Faction (after the banner is assembled). All of my 12 settlements are fine, including their bound villages. Prosperity, food, everything is fine and growing. Garrisons are comprised of 200 troops each as mentioned earlier, with the unbeatable settlements. Now, I declare war on a random faction. 1-2 days later, troops are deserting their garrisons, because of lack of food. That means the prosperity goes down as well, and boom, everything is dead and right there for the taking. It takes anything from 1-2 days to a week for your empire to collaps this way. Deserting takes a little longer, but the economy crashes that fast. As I said, broken.
I'm pretty sure this is not how it's intended, but that's what happens. As I said, I've done this with and with progression and console commands. It always happens. Having this happen is why, it's only worth it to be a vassal, if you want your economy to survive. Because being a vasssal, you don't have to necessarily have a settlement, meaning you don't have to deal with this. Instead, you just murder whatever army you come across, making money of the loot.
Please, make this a top priority, because as I said, the rest is fine. But the economy, is not working - at all. (Remember this is opinion, as it says in the topic line)
Siege and Bombardment phase
This gets a small topic line for itself.
Simply put, because it's utterly pointless in some ways. Don't get me wrong, though. I love the idea of it. I really do. However, I'll break it down nice and simple, why it's pointless.
You cannot, and I mean CAN NOT, get anything from acutally trying to build Onagers, Ballistas or Trebuchets. It's pointless. No matter how you put it.
The defenders will ALWAYS, out-build and out-shoot you. Yes, A-L-W-A-Y-S. I tried with the console commands and cheated my Engineering skill to +300, and still I couldn't maintain a single Onager for long enough to even be close to finishing the second one. I've tried so many times, with so many different levels of engineering for me, companions, other lords in the army etc., that I probably know more about this mechanic than you by now. (Exageration of course)
There's only one TRUE viable option for this phase, if you want to actually bombard the enemy:
Build your siege towers and battering ram first. Then build a single Onager, Trebuchet or Ballista and as soon as it finishes hit the "Lead Assaulst" button. Then, after deployment, go to it, take over and aim better than your troops. Not kidding, but this is the O-N-L-Y way it will be worth it. Even with extremely high engineering skill.
I simply found out by saving before I started the siege, then simply with the console increasing my engineering skill by 10 and reloading to see if it would get better. Conlusion is: It won't. At all. The only thing it seems to have a decent impact on, is the time it takes to set up the siege camp itself. However, even here, it's such a small difference, it's hardly noticeable from the lower 30-ish range to the extreme +150-is range of Engineering skill.
This could have probably been noted under Combat, but since it's a phase by itself, I thought I'd leave it seperately, as it doesn't really affect combat itself.
A side note on the siege equipment: Now, you might want to consider adding an easier way to aim with the seige engines on the battlefield for newcomers, who might not want to learn the almost "blind aiming" with these things. Of course, it should be toggleable as per difficulty setting, so you can't just "cheat" and add it from one shot to the next. While it's fun to figure it out, not everyone will be as patient with this and potentially miss out on the great deal of fun it is to 'accidently' hit Carl in the face with a catapult rock, simply because he bent over to pick up another Ballista arrow at the wrong time
All in all
Please, leave combat as it is, except for the few mentioned issues with ladders. There's no need for this game to be another one of those Total War games, where every unit is the same, but with different faction colours and uniforms. It's perfectly fine that there are different strengths and weaknesses to each faction, and also, that some factions might 'appear' stronger than others. It should be up to the player him-/herself to figure out how to win the battles. Otherwise, there's no challange and we might as well just cheat ourselves to victory or simply just not play. The Roman Army was superior to the Gauls and the Germanic tribes. However, they still found a way to beat them. Just saying.
For economy, I've already said it. It needs a loving hand and fast!
For the Siege and Bombardment phase: I don't know if you intended it that way, but it seems to a little off, when the skill is supposed to better this, but in reality it doesn't.
Overall a lovely game. Some of it seems to be just Warband with new paint though (sorry, but I have to be honest), but I love it.
Keep it up, and hope it was useful.
I know it was vague at points, but feel free to ask. I've broken this game in so many way already, I don't know where to begin.
Sincerely,
Me
(Early Acess Bannerlord: 4,5 of 5 stars)
