Should the clans be more, distinguishable

[professorchaos]

The kingdoms in the game are at least distinguishable, but the clans are not so much. The clans should have a deeper background that affects how they perform in campaign, thus make them more distinguishable. Right now given a clan that defected several times in the late game, I just can't tell where it's from and what's its original fief. A valandian clan just shouldn't be accepted immediately by khuzait and given a fief in the steppe, and just make it their home. Their cultural background and leader traits should make a larger difference.

To add more flavor to this, clans with different cultural background should not defect so easily. They should also have a stronger tie to their original fiefs, nobles are not nowadays governors that you could easily reassign across the country.

suggestions:
1. Harsh conditions for clans to defect, stronger trust issue between king and different culture nobles.
This could help with some kingdom get snowballed because of massive defection waves.
2. Settlement loyalty to clans, positive would make it prosper and negative cause issues.
This could be changed by the behavior of the owner clan, like plus when protecting settlements from invader and bandits, and reduce when villages get raided and such. Not the same as the current relationship with notables, as this would emphasize how stable/rebellion a settlement is under the clan's ruling.
3. Heavier relationship penalty when taking the "HeadQuarter" of a clan.

In this way, the clans would at least be distinguishable. We could have something like, "Ingalther of Charas", etc.

 

[TheCalradian]

I think that the there is a lot of potential in clans. But I don't think the current view of merely listing enemies and friends is a good user interface for it. I would much rather have a map where the various clans and portraits had color coded relationship connection lines.

So that I could peruse both my kingdom and enemy kingdom to identify potential splits and weak points in others and groom cohesion in my own kingdom.
I think the utility of clans would be much more useful if this avenue was expanded upon. Right now, they exist, but they don't really have a function except that you consult the wiki for every army you encounter in case it is a clan head that may be willing to negotiate terms of entering your service.

I would very much like a dev blog post to clarify what the vision is for the game of houses. This part seems very placeholder'ish to me.

 

[Rabies]

The longer I play Bannerlord and read these forums, the more convinced I become that defections need to be abolished.
Just get rid of the idea.
In Warband, the best you can say about defections is that they made the game a bit messy; in Bannerlord, it just ballses up the whole game.
Now, I'm aware that players need a way of recruiting clans into their own faction after they start one. I think it'd be better all round if clans that leave or are expelled from their starting faction should become independents, and a functioning role in the Gameworld found for them while they are independent.
It's just weird that at the start of the game's scenario, each faction's clans are neatly organised according to their culture, and then within a few years they're all mixed up. In terms of lore, continuity and immersion it just doesn't make any sense, and in terms of gameplay it creates a whole raft of balancing problems.

 

[Solomani]

I'd like to see some cultural differences. It should be somewhat more difficult to recruit a Khuzait as a Valandian, etc...
I think culture could become a good part of the game. The AI would need to know how to handle it though.
Also would be cool if say you have a good reputation with a certain mercenary faction, they may refuse to fight.

 

[monkeynomics]

I'd like to see some cultural differences. It should be somewhat more difficult to recruit a Khuzait as a Valandian, etc...
I think culture could become a good part of the game. The AI would need to know how to handle it though.
Also would be cool if say you have a good reputation with a certain mercenary faction, they may refuse to fight.

kingdoms and clans interactions could use a lot more detailing and behaviours tied to culture etc. that would definitely give the game A LOT more character. demands an equally great amount of work to be done, though.

 

[wookdaddy]

The longer I play Bannerlord and read these forums, the more convinced I become that defections need to be abolished.
Just get rid of the idea.
In Warband, the best you can say about defections is that they made the game a bit messy; in Bannerlord, it just ballses up the whole game.
Now, I'm aware that players need a way of recruiting clans into their own faction after they start one. I think it'd be better all round if clans that leave or are expelled from their starting faction should become independents, and a functioning role in the Gameworld found for them while they are independent.
It's just weird that at the start of the game's scenario, each faction's clans are neatly organised according to their culture, and then within a few years they're all mixed up. In terms of lore, continuity and immersion it just doesn't make any sense, and in terms of gameplay it creates a whole raft of balancing problems.

I agree. The idea that an entire, huge family would abandon their homeland to go somewhere (without receiving a castle there first) is pretty ludicrous. It's more fun playing a pure faction vs. faction rather than two hodgepodge factions with no cultural identity left.

 

[Apocal]

Right now given a clan that defected several times in the late game, I just can't tell where it's from and what's its original fief.

You can tell where they are from at a glance by looking at their clan name:
Aserai: Banu Something
Battanian: fen Something
Imperial: Somethingos
Khuzait: Somethingit
Sturgian: Somethingoving
Vlandian: dey Something

 

[vota dc]

The cultural difference for recruiting is a good idea, also a political one is good and seems partly implemented already with the fact main clan never defect.
They should also fix the relation drop when a city gets conquered:
Lucon: Amprela has fallen to Khuzait invaders,we must fight together to give it to Impestores clan!
Encurion leader of Impestores: look at me, I'm a vlandian now!

They should also implement civil wars (there are some placeholders) and make some gameplay effect about grudge. For example if there is a grudge between two clan one will never join in the army of the other or will ignore enemies that are raiding the fief (that is the default AI that ignore ALL raid on fiefs).

Right now we have 3 placeholder factions for culture (except the empire that has 3 factions) but the effect is just a different report about the battle of Pendraic. Also some clan not involved in battle have some description (for example clan Varros) and Neretzes has an NPC that is killed at the start of the game.
A funny thing is the Vlandia clan which the leader is the baroness but unlike Mesui she doesn't have any martial skill and the husband lead her army.

 

[AverageSturgian]

It's just weird that at the start of the game's scenario, each faction's clans are neatly organised according to their culture, and then within a few years they're all mixed up. In terms of lore, continuity and immersion it just doesn't make any sense, and in terms of gameplay it creates a whole raft of balancing problems.

Agreed. Clans should be solid and only the player via persuasion or quests should be able to recruit some lords.

They should also implement civil wars (there are some placeholders) and make some gameplay effect about grudge

Also agreed.Clans should be able to from their own kingdoms and also allow ther player to create alliances and even allow some common actions like attacking specific settlements or making trade deals. This will add to the longevity of the game.

I would very much like a dev blog post to clarify what the vision is for the game of houses. This part seems very placeholder'ish to me.

Yes this is indeed important and we should ask the devs what are their plans about this aspect.

 

[countzero]

it would be cool if clans that leave or get kicked out could start their own kingdoms like the player can, maybe just doing a rebellion thing against the clan they just left rather than trying to take on all the others. It would add a lot more interest to diplomacy and war.

 

[professorchaos]

I'm not sure about the idea enabling each clan to form their kingdom that so many people mention. Would it add complexity? Sure. But is it meaningful and add flavor to the game? Not necessarily. The current number of kingdoms is already enough. They are distinct, and kingdom sized warfare is possible. If you further divide it into pieces, then it would be total chaos without some proper complex diplomacy system. If you don't divide all of them, then the independent clans would make no difference and get wiped out easily. Thus, have independent clans forming more kingdoms sounds more like a mod or DLC idea to me, mainly because it contradicts the general vibe of the current game.

Sure, many strategy games have many factions fighting each other, like shogun based or totalwar etc etc. But they all have dedicated diplomacy system, which is not the case here.

Plus, legitimacy is required to establish a kingdom historically. That's why the player need a Dragon Banner from the main quest to establish a new one.