More slots for weapons

[il Condottieri]

I´ve said this many times, and it seems now that it wont be implemented, but...

PROPOSAL:

You should be able to have at least one extra slot for weapons, maybe unlocked after you get certain perk, certain encumbrance level or maybe (if you are in a horse) after you are able to buy horse armor.

It is ridicoulus not being able to fullfill certain weapons combinations because four-slots limitation.

Imagine you are a horse archer. You are on a horse and you either have small range melee weapon or long range, but you cant have both because you have already spent two slots on bow and arrows. The solution is going out there without a shield, which is even more ridiculous.

Imagine you are a footarcher in a big army. Your main objetive is to keep yourself alive and shooting, most probably behind your infantry. It will be more likely that you should have not one but two slots dedicated to ammunition (bolts or arrows). Well, that leaves you without protection (maybe no shield) or without any melee weapon, not even a dagger or knife.

It is clear that usually you dont need a dagger or knife in M&B because game mechanics dont reproduce well close fighting, which is for me the greatest weakness of this game. But after all, to give a closer feel to real battle gear, you should be able to carry a small backup close range weapon. Even the lower soldier of an army will have a knife in his belt. Well, if you are a fighting peasant in M&B you cant... one slot for sickle or chopping axe, one slot for a bag of throwing stones, one for a makeshift shield of some sort and one for a crude staff. That leaves you with no place for your eating-close range combat knife.
Imagine you make a roman era mode. You are a classical legionary, one slot for the scutum, one for the gladius, one for the light pilum and other for heavy one. Well, you don´t have more room for the pugio.

And I could keep going...

Hope they are still in time to add it, or maybe it will be very easymodable. Maybe changing a line like: "numb_slot: 4" to numb_slot: 5"

What do you think about?

Regards!

 

[John the Roleplayer]

Regarding footmen I think four slots is enough. Archers shouldn't really carry shields. They'd stay out of range of enemy missiles, or shoot back (requiring both hands).

An extra equipment slot for horsemen was discussed in another thread once before, and I believe that might work. Maybe it would need an additional weight restriction or penalty for the total gear carried though, to prevent heavy cavalry from carrying lance, shield, sword, and then also crossbow and bolts, just because they can. For light horse it might be more appropriate.

 

[Duh]

Crossposting (posting the same thing in several places) is considered spam and thus against the rules. Please avoid it in the future.

 

[vota dc]

A single slot is 40 arrows, I doubt a foot archer would carry more. If he is defending will have access to supply wagon.
For throwing endless projectiles against enemies they used slingers.

 

[il Condottieri]

Regarding footmen I think four slots is enough. Archers shouldn't really carry shields. They'd stay out of range of enemy missiles, or shoot back (requiring both hands).

An extra equipment slot for horsemen was discussed in another thread once before, and I believe that might work. Maybe it would need an additional weight restriction or penalty for the total gear carried though, to prevent heavy cavalry from carrying lance, shield, sword, and then also crossbow and bolts, just because they can. For light horse it might be more appropriate.

I agree with you about not making a modification that allows any kind of troop being fully equiped with all kind of weapons, because that will kill troop specilization and it would be a disaster in many ways.

But, even if you are an archer you cant go to battle without protection, and a shield is cheaper than an armour. There are plenty of examples through all history of ranged troops carrying shields.
It might be a possible solution that the fifth slot I´m claiming might be a restricted one, with a size restriction. That way you may only be able to put there a dagger, a knife or a buckler or small shield. That would do if you are on foot.
If you are on a horse, you might have two more extra slots (depending on your kind of saddle/horse armour) but again with size or type restriction. That way, as you pointed, you wont be able to carry also a crosbow because you have the slot.

I hope Bannerlord implement this, on sort of way. It will make all of us very happy.

 

[il Condottieri]

Crossposting (posting the same thing in several places) is considered spam and thus against the rules. Please avoid it in the future.

Sorry, to tell you the truth, never realised there were more bannerlord threads besides the DevBlog ones until today. I usually access through Taleworlds main webpage and arrive here.
Today I´ve started checking the forum for warband mod updates (I cant stand the waiting) and realised there is a whole bannerlord subforum. Sorry again, please erase my message on devblog and keep this topic.

Regards 

 

[Footbeard]

How about having the horse carry a spare weapon? Buy a saddlebag from horse vendors, equip that on the horse, exchange weapons midfight by holding interact with your horse. I think the saddlebag would only be able to hold 1 weapon or a certain type of weapon

 

[TehRalph]

I think 4 is the perfect amount. It makes you choose your weapons carefully before entering battle based on the situation. You can't always be carrying every weapon you could possibly need.

 

[il Condottieri]

I think 4 is the perfect amount. It makes you choose your weapons carefully before entering battle based on the situation. You can't always be carrying every weapon you could possibly need.

I´m not saying carrying every weapon you could possibly need in every possible battle everytime

I´m saying to add a fifth slot (restricted as said above) that symbolize carrying a knife on your belt, which is a situation I can imagine every soldier in every battle fought had done. Even if it was only your dinning knife.

On a horse, I believe almost everyone agrees that it should be a feature implemented in some way. Even more now, that a slot for saddle or horse armour has been agregated.

 

[TehRalph]

I think 4 is the perfect amount. It makes you choose your weapons carefully before entering battle based on the situation. You can't always be carrying every weapon you could possibly need.

I´m not saying carrying every weapon you could possibly need in every possible battle everytime

I´m saying to add a fifth slot (restricted as said above) that symbolize carrying a knife on your belt, which is a situation I can imagine every soldier in every battle fought had done. Even if it was only your dinning knife.

On a horse, I believe almost everyone agrees that it should be a feature implemented in some way. Even more now, that a slot for saddle or horse armour has been agregated.

I would be okay for a slot just for a knife. Or a one-handed weapon slot for your horse, which would stay attached to the horse if it fell and you didn't have your one handed weapon selected. You could then retrieve your sword or whatever from your fallen horse instead of being stuck with a lance and shield on foot, but having to sacrifice your vulnerability by retrieving said weapon.

Also, there are perks that add more ammunition while on horseback, so the idea of horses holding battle equipment isn't out of the question for TW, I just think it's being implemented wrong. I think horses should have an equipable ammunition slot and a 1 handed slot with certain higher tier armors/saddles.

For a foot archer problem, perhaps a little bit of pre-battle deployment while defending that could include things like barrels of arrows for your archers to replenish their stocks from.

 

[ArnulfFloyd]

I thinks as 4 slots is enough

 

[HUMMAN]

As far as i know archers use knife to carve wood and kill escaping enemy, i dont think an archer use knife against an infantry. I know basque archers carry small axes but it's like  archers carry sword in 4 slot.  And 4 slot is more than enough you mostly use 3 slot in battle anyway. What i would like to see different slots for different faction soldiers, like one skirmiser in empire carrying 3 throwable 1 sword, in sturgia for example carrying 2 throwable 1 shield 1 axe etc.

 

[Honved]

As far as i know archers use knife to carve wood and kill escaping enemy, i dont think an archer use knife against an infantry.

More accurately, archers won't VOLUNTARILY use a knife against infantry, but may have no other choice but to do so, if attacked.

I think 4 "free" slots is plenty, although the game could add one dedicated "restricted" slot for special circumstances.  That slot could be limited to a knife or small hand-axe for most troops, an extra ammo slot for mounted archers/skirmishers (which would be lost as soon as they dismounted), or other dedicated function items for specialized troop types (perhaps a "gunner" could "equip" a cannon in a Napoleonic timeframe).  It might pay to make allowances to add the slot now, and not use it, so it can be activated in future expansions or mods.

 

[Revverie]

I think Calvary is OP enough to add another slot for them, this system works fine and I think it's enough weaponry for one person to carry, I doubt that soldiers carried that amount of stuff to a war, if you're going to the realistic route, and being 4 slots already works fine for me and for balancing. Imagine a soldier carrying: armor, a sword, a two handed sword, a shield and javelins. That already happens in Warband and it's quite a lot already in my opinion. Drink your daily juice fellows

 

[FBohler]

Having a slot dedicated to knives would be cool..... especially if knives worked well enough.

 

[Sarin]

IMO the system should be different. Two large slots (back) for any kind of weapon/shield, two medium (belt/thigh) slots for one-handed melee, short throwing (daggers or axes), shortbows, cavalry crossbows, bolts or arrows and one small for backup weapon (dagger/knife).

 

[Lord Engineer (Castor)]

If an additional lot were to be added, I reckon it should have restrictions on it.

Maybe if you are skilled in archery you have an extra slot for arrows, same for throwing weapons and the throwing skill, and crossbow skill with bolts. It could be a perk or something. This would also mean that a less skilled character would have the default amount.
This is pushing it for me, but if there was another item slot that's how I reckon it should function.

Having an extra slot for another shield or polearm is a bit silly in my opinion.

Also about knives, whilst they were used on battlefields pretty often, with the way they currently work in Mount and Blade they're kind of not very useful.
Whilst in real life they can be concealed weapons,
in Mount and Blade everyone psychically knows everything,
in real life they could be used to stab through gaps in a heavily armoured opponent once grappled,
in Mount and Blade you can cut through plate with a sword.

The point I'm getting at is knives and daggers are very useful in real life, especially in close quarters combat and the current design of Mount and Blade does not support this (especially with hitpoints. In real life getting stabbed in the back and in the foot are not equally as serious), though to be fair Mount and Blade is a game and realism does not always equate to fun.

(Look up Warthunder and realism, they tried to make a very realistic game but didn't go all the way so the game could actually be fun)

 

[xdj1nn]

I'd be totally in for holstered weapons adding carry-weight within the scenes, making you more encumbered the more weapons you were carrying into battle. And for that effect all weapons should show (which seems happening) on your character as you walk around.

Thing is, it'd be cool to have the PC drop weapons during battle on quick-switch between them, making it slightly more realistic, adding possibility for wooden hafts to break too, like for axes (lower chance) and spears (higher chance), still, none of those things seem plausible to be added, and carrying an whole arsenal of weapons would be silly. I already find carrying 2 shields in WB to be seriously silly tbh

 

[ArnulfFloyd]

I must says but M&B not was about realistic combat as KCD

 

[Honved]

Realistically, the ability to carry 4 or more weapon-related items without problems depends entirely on WHAT 4 or more items you're attempting to carry.  A dagger, sling, bag of small stones, and small shield shouldn't even slow you down.  A halberd, a 2-handed sword, a large shield, and a crossbow should leave you practically dragging the items due to the inability to hold or conveniently strap all of them in place without drastically interfering with movement.  There were a few actual military units which exceeded the 4 slot limit, such as Persian Immortals carrying a spear, shield, bow, quiver, and backup/eating knife or other one-handed weapon.  Some Byzantine cavalry mixed bow and arrows, lance, sword, and shield, but some of that may have been attached to the horse when not in use, and/or dropped after use (lance).

Obviously, tracking the placement and interference of all of the possible combinations would be overwhelming, so it's heavily abstracted into any 4 items.  The one Chinese saying is that it's a sin to carry a weapon into battle and not use it.  The cultural assumption was that weapons were rare and expensive, so carrying a second weapon instead of arming another person was sub-optimal.  In Europe, the inability to project power at a distance and supply an army in the field after the decline of Rome meant that you sent only a small army of highly trained and well-equipped personnel, not a large and poorly equipped peasant mob.