Which leveling system do you prefer Warband or Bannerlord?

[Watercrown123]

I think they listen too much to those who cry how it is too easy. Ofc it is not al all. Fix the thing, it doesnt give exp like at all ... goodness.

It's funny because I personally use a x5 XP multiplier mod to actually make the system semi-bearable, and even with 5 times the progression certain things still feel like a bit of a chore to level up. It could just be blamed on the fact that I absolutely despise grinding in games beyond every single other negative feature, but still... 5 times.

 

[stevehoos]

It's funny because I personally use a x5 XP multiplier mod to actually make the system semi-bearable, and even with 5 times the progression certain things still feel like a bit of a chore to level up. It could just be blamed on the fact that I absolutely despise grinding in games beyond every single other negative feature, but still... 5 times.

Me too, you are not alone here.

 

[Squibbles]

I also feel like the actual impacts of extra levels are either almost OP in some cases and completely worthless in others. I can easily get to +50 on my party due to steward, which is also one of the easiest skills to level up, whereas having 120 skill in one-handed gives me... about +14% damage and +7% speed, I believe? That effectively means that I can easily get a massive party... yet in the course of the game's combat progression I have gone from being able to kill looters in 3 hits... to killing looters in an average of like 2.5. Seriously underwhelming.

I completely agree with this. A lot of the perks seem pretty, out of place.

Trainer was the nuts.

You know what's up

 

[Marcery]

I think they listen too much to those who cry how it is too easy.

this is so damn true, there’s so many conflicting threads on the forums. Some people say spears are trash others say they need a buff, some people say Calvary needs a nerf others want a buff, for every thread that says one thing I seem to find another that says the opposite

 

[Squibbles]

It's funny because I personally use a x5 XP multiplier mod to actually make the system semi-bearable, and even with 5 times the progression certain things still feel like a bit of a chore to level up. It could just be blamed on the fact that I absolutely despise grinding in games beyond every single other negative feature, but still... 5 times.

See, I like grinding in games, but I find this to be something WAYYY different. Like with how slow progression is, how can you actually get anything done?

this is so damn true, there’s so many conflicting threads on the forums. Some people say spears are trash others say they need a buff, some people say Calvary needs a nerf others want a buff, for every thread that says one thing I seem to find another that says the opposite

I guess that's a negative aspect of listening to the community so much, not a point I have actually though about up until now.

 

[F0_]

The grinding is 100% not rewarding enough and anyone who believes grinding =difficulty is a potato

 

[Watercrown123]

this is so damn true, there’s so many conflicting threads on the forums. Some people say spears are trash others say they need a buff, some people say Calvary needs a nerf others want a buff, for every thread that says one thing I seem to find another that says the opposite

I think more threads need polls attached to get a bit of a better feel for the actual public opinion, and not only that but better polls, a lot of them are just straight up yes/no, like/dislike, and even then they tend to be customized to try to sway things towards the creator's opinion. For example, a while ago some threads had polls asking people if they preferred Warband's leveling system or Bannerlord's leveling system. Personally, I want to keep the basic idea of Bannerlord's system, but that poll gave me no room to express my dislike of the grind.

 

[Pancakelord333]

Attribute points should give +5 to their 3 bound skills (e.g. +1 vigor would add 5 to 1h, 2h and polearm) right now assigning attributes feels so pointless, it lacks feedback, when you look at the XP growth multiplier they add a small amount vs what focus points add. So instead they should add flat 5 extra levels to skills IMO, that way starting a character with 5 vigor (for example) will start you at 25 points + whatever points you got from your origins, so its less of an absolute slog.

They should also start using round numbers, and stick to displaying either percentages, decimals or multiples in the UI - it looks messy right now as it's not standardised. (mouse over your XP gain multiplier and its components are not in the same format, makes it a pain to try and work out where that "4.11x engineering xp gain" is coming from.

e.g. how does 1.33 + 32.13 + 94 = 7.47x

 

[GrasSclammPferd]

I don't like it. The current system only gives the player the agency to raise caps rather than actually level skill. This ends up making the levelling far slower than Warband's. I'm running a level 12,13 character and his stats are far lower than what it would be if he was in Warband. For some reason, the BL system doesn't compensate for the lost of Warband's instant points in skills, attributes and weapon prof. Not to mention, we have more skills to invest points in BL but less points gained for each level.

 

[Squibbles]

The grinding is 100% not rewarding enough and anyone who believes grinding =difficulty is a potato

Maybe this is realistic: Hey look at all the practice I put in and I'm unstoppable!! *proceeds to take a rouge arrow to the face, ending your command in 34 seconds

lol

The current system only gives the player the agency to raise caps rather than actually level skill

That's the best way to put it. I agree with your full point, maybe they just need to find the sweet spot. I don't think levelling should be TO easy in this, but this is just kind of ridiculous in my opinon

 

[Watercrown123]

It's also worth keeping in mind that the intention on the part of the devs seems to be to make you play a multi-generational game, so it could very well be that while we're planning out 50-100 hour games, they might be planning for us to be playing for literally hundreds of hours in a single save file. I kind of hope that's not the case and that if they are going to stick to the multi-generational idea that they seriously speed up time and progression to be a little bit more CK2 style, I don't want to spend 50 hours grinding and slowly leveling up my character only to have to completely restart keeping nothing but my money and fiefs.

 

[Squibbles]

It's also worth keeping in mind that the intention on the part of the devs seems to be to make you play a multi-generational game, so it could very well be that while we're planning out 50-100 hour games, they might be planning for us to be playing for literally hundreds of hours in a single save file. I kind of hope that's not the case and that if they are going to stick to the multi-generational idea that they seriously speed up time and progression to be a little bit more CK2 style, I don't want to spend 50 hours grinding and slowly leveling up my character only to have to completely restart keeping nothing but my money and fiefs.

That's fair. At the same time though, I feel like this kind of game is kind of never ending anyway, so I think you just go until you drop, take a break, and start a new character or continue through your offspring lol I can't see everything being taken away, but there probably needs to be some trade off when moving to the next generation. Like if you don't take any impact, and your just on a steady rise in XP and character growth, I feel like it would become to easy late game.

 

[Pancakelord333]

It's also worth keeping in mind that the intention on the part of the devs seems to be to make you play a multi-generational game, so it could very well be that while we're planning out 50-100 hour games, they might be planning for us to be playing for literally hundreds of hours in a single save file. I kind of hope that's not the case and that if they are going to stick to the multi-generational idea that they seriously speed up time and progression to be a little bit more CK2 style, I don't want to spend 50 hours grinding and slowly leveling up my character only to have to completely restart keeping nothing but my money and fiefs.

One would think that your heir(s) would also be levelling up whilst you are still alive.

You start the game aged 30, lets say you die at 60 (a hard life, arthritis and lots of micro-fractures on your skeleton from constant combat, lung problems from breathing crappy medieval smoke-filled air, stress from governing a fiefdom, gout from drinking too much as a fat old lord etc) and had your first heir at 35. that's still 15-20 years (depending on how heir management gets implemented) for you to train them, coach them, take them with you into wars across the continent and level them up to be something half decent, so that when you do finally kick the bucket you don't start off playing as a total spoilt pillock lol.

 

[Watercrown123]

That's fair. At the same time though, I feel like this kind of game is kind of never ending anyway, so I think you just go until you drop, take a break, and start a new character or continue through your offspring lol I can't see everything being taken away, but there probably needs to be some trade off when moving to the next generation. Like if you don't take any impact, and your just on a steady rise in XP and character growth, I feel like it would become to easy late game.

I mean yes, but good progression also tends to entail an easy late game. Normally if a game is well balanced the majority of the play-through is challenging but not boring or impossible feeling, however the further you get in the game the more powerful you feel until in the late game, you have a feeling of a "power fantasy" where you can just annihilate everyone that used to cause you so many issues earlier in the game. The problem for this game is that you don't really feel that. You can assemble a massive army that actually can annihilate everyone, but you yourself still feel incredibly weak. A fully leveled up late game character with the best armor and weaponry that you can physically get in the game can and will still get absolutely wrecked by a few looters throwing rocks.

 

[Watercrown123]

One would think that your heir(s) would also be levelling up whilst you are still alive.

You start the game aged 30, lets say you die at 60 (a hard life, arthritis and lots of micro-fractures on your skeleton from constant combat, lung problems from breathing crappy medieval smoke-filled air, stress from governing a fiefdom, gout from drinking too much as a fat old lord etc) and had your first heir at 35. that's still 25 years for you to train them, coach them, take them with you into wars across the continent and level them up to be something half decent, so that when you do finally kick the bucket you don't start off playing as a total pillock lol.

Oh yes I'd definitely hope so. At the moment I'm not overly confident in that being possible considering how impossibly slow it is to level up my companions, but in theory that mechanic should be far better balanced by the time that multi-generational play-throughs even become possible.

 

[GrasSclammPferd]

That's the best way to put it. I agree with your full point, maybe they just need to find the sweet spot. I don't think levelling should be TO easy in this, but this is just kind of ridiculous in my opinon

They need to make the skill points gained within the cap a lot faster. The good thing with the cap system is that you can't over level per se since your cap(by extension, your level) is limiting your growth. It's bad right now because they made the skill growth within the cap really slow for very little reason.

 

[Ananda_The_Destroyer]

I don't like it because it seems that by the time you get any real payoff for the perks the game will be over, as opposed to in warband where if you wanted to be the medic, you could get 14 surgery by a low level early in the game, or be a master archer, or huge party leader. You coudln't be everything right away but you would excel in one way if you wanted at the expense of something else, or be average all around.

Plus many perks don't work/aren't coded so it makes it makes me do weird things like taking all the HP perks just because I know they work.
Also, the way some skills increase is very inappropriate, you have to do poorly and have troops defeated to gain skill in battle and in healing them...... this of course leads to degenerate behavior involving tournament arrows for constantly supply of knocked out recruits....

I would have 2 types of skills, 1 with FP for skills you can actively level, but remove the hard limits, just let them be very slow without more FP.
Then a second point for skills that you can't actively level, like medicine.
Like you get a 'special point' and put that SP in medicine to immediately have +surgery% or into leadership to immediately get +party size, or what have you.
These support skills could still improve by use/time but you could choose to have a useful bonus in one early on, then get another at some point.

 

[Squibbles]

I mean yes, but good progression also tends to entail an easy late game. Normally if a game is well balanced the majority of the play-through is challenging but not boring or impossible feeling, however the further you get in the game the more powerful you feel until in the late game, you have a feeling of a "power fantasy" where you can just annihilate everyone that used to cause you so many issues earlier in the game. The problem for this game is that you don't really feel that. You can assemble a massive army that actually can annihilate everyone, but you yourself still feel incredibly weak. A fully leveled up late game character with the best armor and weaponry that you can physically get in the game can and will still get absolutely wrecked by a few looters throwing rocks.

I get that, and it makes sense what you're saying. There is a part of me that wonders how overpowered they could make you, without it feeling too unrealistic I suppose?

 

[Watercrown123]

I get that, and it makes sense what you're saying. There is a part of me that wonders how overpowered they could make you, without it feeling too unrealistic I suppose?

I feel like Warband did it well in terms of late game power level, I think if they just achieved the same thing here it'd be perfect. That specifically is probably one of the few things that I feel they couldn't have possibly improved on.

 

[kXlIdRoberta // Seb Merc]

i like it