For those saying 'just retreat', it doesn't work.
I believe I understand your reasoning but it doesn't work with how battles are fought in Bannerlord. For one, Bannerlord is incredibly limited in strategic maneuverability and tactical flexibility and feedback. Let me compare it with Total War for a minute as it is the closest we'll get to an authentic medieval battlefield. Right, in Total War (used semi-synonymously with 'in real life') all your infantry units, say, are not a big fat line like in Bannerlord, they come in their own organized blocks of 50-150, this means you have considerably more options in forming your army's starting formation than you ever will in Bannerlord, and by the way you can't even organize your troop's starting positions either. Now onto my main point: When you make an attack in Total War, you don't go all in, never, that's a good way to risk your entire army, instead you send your infantry to test the enemy, distract them or break their lines, push them back, what have you, while the rest of the forces remain behind covering their flanks, waiting for an opportunity to flank the enemy lines etc. which again means if the odds are turning against you and you have no reason to risk your men's lives further, you call back your attacking infantry, and retreat in an organized manner. You can probably see why you can't do that in Bannerlord. There is only one formation for infantry, missile and melee cavalry each, meaning if you wanna make an attack, you send all your infantry troops, and as the combat currently stands in Bannerlord, they get melted ridicilously fast, and your men cannot even recover / retreat from that. No relief forces, no anything, the slightest mistake? They're all gone. As OP has said this is frustrating, inauthentic, illogical and need I go on?
There are more issues that make Bannerlord, or M&B battles in general so less challening, rewarding and exciting than say a Total War, which I understand might be an unfair comparison but the idea is there. Let me try and add a few to OP's suggestions if that's okay.
- Larger army / battle sizes. Being one of my highly anticipated features for Bannerlord, I am gravely disappointed to see a setback from Warband in that lords now either carry 50 troops, or 150 recruits. I would guess that this limitation is there so the player can catch up with the militaries of other lords (even as some unknown vagabond), but I believe it would make much more sense to make recruitment and training easier (more passive training activities, still time consuming), increasing army sizes.
- I thought of some others as well but ultimately where the point they all lead to is this: Take inspiration from games that were successful in implementing what M&B is lacking. I hope we can all agree this game has to be more than 'Warband graphics and animation overhaul'.
Edit: just realised OP's already mentioned the topic on my first paragraphs, eh.
I believe I understand your reasoning but it doesn't work with how battles are fought in Bannerlord. For one, Bannerlord is incredibly limited in strategic maneuverability and tactical flexibility and feedback. Let me compare it with Total War for a minute as it is the closest we'll get to an authentic medieval battlefield. Right, in Total War (used semi-synonymously with 'in real life') all your infantry units, say, are not a big fat line like in Bannerlord, they come in their own organized blocks of 50-150, this means you have considerably more options in forming your army's starting formation than you ever will in Bannerlord, and by the way you can't even organize your troop's starting positions either. Now onto my main point: When you make an attack in Total War, you don't go all in, never, that's a good way to risk your entire army, instead you send your infantry to test the enemy, distract them or break their lines, push them back, what have you, while the rest of the forces remain behind covering their flanks, waiting for an opportunity to flank the enemy lines etc. which again means if the odds are turning against you and you have no reason to risk your men's lives further, you call back your attacking infantry, and retreat in an organized manner. You can probably see why you can't do that in Bannerlord. There is only one formation for infantry, missile and melee cavalry each, meaning if you wanna make an attack, you send all your infantry troops, and as the combat currently stands in Bannerlord, they get melted ridicilously fast, and your men cannot even recover / retreat from that. No relief forces, no anything, the slightest mistake? They're all gone. As OP has said this is frustrating, inauthentic, illogical and need I go on?
There are more issues that make Bannerlord, or M&B battles in general so less challening, rewarding and exciting than say a Total War, which I understand might be an unfair comparison but the idea is there. Let me try and add a few to OP's suggestions if that's okay.
- Larger army / battle sizes. Being one of my highly anticipated features for Bannerlord, I am gravely disappointed to see a setback from Warband in that lords now either carry 50 troops, or 150 recruits. I would guess that this limitation is there so the player can catch up with the militaries of other lords (even as some unknown vagabond), but I believe it would make much more sense to make recruitment and training easier (more passive training activities, still time consuming), increasing army sizes.
- I thought of some others as well but ultimately where the point they all lead to is this: Take inspiration from games that were successful in implementing what M&B is lacking. I hope we can all agree this game has to be more than 'Warband graphics and animation overhaul'.
Edit: just realised OP's already mentioned the topic on my first paragraphs, eh.
