What is the next major content after Rebellions?

[Ananda_The_Destroyer]

I got in a defensive siege battle once, but I couldn't put my troops where I wanted or make them behave to **** the AI over the way I want to, so I re-set the game and sallied out. It's a big ****ing problem for me if being in your fief is HARDER and jankier then being in an open field battle. My archers should have a ranged advantage but it won't let me line them all up on the walls! It would be a blow out to then pull back to the yard and a fire squad them as they trickle over the ladders, putting small SW at the bottom of stairs and behind gate in case any get through... BUT NO... the archers either do their AI scripted bull or stand somewhere butt out like a zombie not doing their job!
TW just let me be the boss! The games not fun if I'm not in control! I get no joy out of watching units zombie march into each other.

 

[Julio-Claudian]

I got in a defensive siege battle once, but I couldn't put my troops where I wanted or make them behave to **** the AI over the way I want to, so I re-set the game and sallied out. It's a big ****ing problem for me if being in your fief is HARDER and jankier then being in an open field battle. My archers should have a ranged advantage but it won't let me line them all up on the walls! It would be a blow out to then pull back to the yard and a fire squad them as they trickle over the ladders, putting small SW at the bottom of stairs and behind gate in case any get through... BUT NO... the archers either do their AI scripted bull or stand somewhere butt out like a zombie not doing their job!
TW just let me be the boss! The games not fun if I'm not in control! I get no joy out of watching units zombie march into each other.

This is identical to my one defensive siege battle experience lol. It felt like I was at a disadvantage despite being in a castle and not that heavily outnumbered.

 

[SGT_Night]

I bought this game 10AM EST on release day... I've played it as recently as yesterday, and I have yet to experience a defensive siege battle.

The AI is just a pain, dont be this sad about not doing a defensive siege, a fought in one and was pretty horrible, siege AI is dumb as ****

 

[Apocal]

The AI uses the same power calcs for autoresolve and manual battles, with an adjustment for player parties being more powerful, so if you play a defensive battle that the AI takes, it usually rapes you.

 

[Earth Dragon]

I bought this game 10AM EST on release day... I've played it as recently as yesterday, and I have yet to experience a defensive siege battle.

This is somewhat your responsibility though. What 90% of people complaint on this front keep asking for is dumb AI that throw themselves at a lost cause.

There is a better happy-medium, but how many times did you break the siege to run to the keep? How many times did you wait in a settlement as you saw the army approaching? How many times did you do anything to initiate the situation period?

Those questions are for anyone complaining about the lack of siege defense participation period. If you aren’t exploring what systems the game already puts into place for things to occur, it weakens your ability to reasonably criticize. This is why those 90% of suggestions to “fix” the problem are unreasonable or made by people who would just avoid defending often anyway

 

[crowoverhoe]

This is somewhat your responsibility though. What 90% of people complaint on this front keep asking for is dumb AI that throw themselves at a lost cause.

There is a better happy-medium, but how many times did you break the siege to run to the keep? How many times did you wait in a settlement as you saw the army approaching? How many times did you do anything to initiate the situation period?

Those questions are for anyone complaining about the lack of siege defense participation period. If you aren’t exploring what systems the game already puts into place for things to occur, it weakens your ability to reasonably criticize. This is why those 90% of suggestions to “fix” the problem are unreasonable or made by people who would just avoid defending often anyway

So you're saying I should create the opportunity for the AI to siege and battle me near my castle? I don't share that opinion. In my opinion the natural flow of the game should lead to defensive sieges sometimes. I haven't played Warband for awhile but I agree with other posters that one reason I got hooked on Warband was the epic defensive sieges which I didn't need to create myself they just happened naturally because I overextended and captured a castle with my army which was a risky move on my part. But having to create these scenarios myself massively takes away from my immersion.

 

[Savagecanadian43]

Is it just me or does this game feel way to fast paced its always about offensive constant offensive wars no Depth to Diplomacy Marriage Kingdom or Fief Ownership not even defense I feel like im playing a More COD Version of Warband sometimes..

 

[Benjamin Bones]

How many times did you wait in a settlement as you saw the army approaching?

Many, many times. I was once in Seonon with only 200 men and a Derthert army of over 1000 passed us by for a castle that had 300+ (garrison and militia but no army) ...

Is that really my fault?

it seems the only way to take part in a siege defense is if you're guaranteed to lose idk.

Those questions are for anyone complaining about the lack of siege defense participation period. If you aren’t exploring what systems the game already puts into place for things to occur, it weakens your ability to reasonably criticize. This is why those 90% of suggestions to “fix” the problem are unreasonable or made by people who would just avoid defending often anyway

You've completely missed the point friend.

The issue here is the fact that taking part in defensive sieges as a player is far, far too rare as evidenced by the numerous people who have expressed that problem.

It's not us... It's how the game AI works.

Though nice to see someone on these forums defend the AI in this game. You, sir, are a rare breed indeed.

 

[Earth Dragon]

Many, many times. I was once in Seonon with only 200 men and a Derthert army of over 1000 passed us by for a castle that had 300+ (garrison and militia but no army) ...

Is that really my fault?

it seems the only way to take part in a siege defense is if you're guaranteed to lose idk.



You've completely missed the point friend.

The issue here is the fact that taking part in defensive sieges as a player is far, far too rare as evidenced by the numerous people who have expressed that problem.

It's not us... It's how the game AI works.

Though nice to see someone on these forums defend the AI in this game. You, sir, are a rare breed indeed.

Drop the smugness, you cherry pick cut out the part that noted there needed to be a re-balancing of the AI formula

 

[Magello]

Why would anyone defend an AI which clearly isn't working as intended. Why not during EA when so many have said it will be fixed Soon. Point it out and speak on it now so it can be updated. I don't want an AI which only picks the lowest hanging fruit only. But makes decisions also based on other factors such as distance so we just don't trade fiefs. Or like I do and almost empty a castle deep in our territory and then just pick off long march armies on their way to take it. Good way to lock up on those nobles.

 

[Julio-Claudian]

Yeah it bothers me when I see armies marching directly past fully garrisoned castles on the border of their kingdom to besiege a settlement deep in enemy territory and that being totally fine. There should be consequences, such as the guerrilla attack feature added by this mod (great mod):

Supply Lines

Allows the player and AI to send food supply caravans between fiefs the clan owns and siege armies. Select troops from your garrison to escort your supply caravan to it's destination or let the AI han

www.nexusmods.com

 

[vonbalt]

Yeah it bothers me when I see armies marching directly past fully garrisoned castles on the border of their kingdom to besiege a settlement deep in enemy territory and that being totally fine. There should be consequences, such as the guerrilla attack feature added by this mod (great mod):

Supply Lines

Allows the player and AI to send food supply caravans between fiefs the clan owns and siege armies. Select troops from your garrison to escort your supply caravan to it's destination or let the AI han

www.nexusmods.com

Supply lines + Party AI overhaul and commands + Unfriendly territory is my dream combo in bannerlord for now, it is improving the strategical gameplay soo much instead of the mindless armies attacking deep into enemy territory without consequences that is vanilla.

 

[Julio-Claudian]

Supply lines + Party AI overhaul and commands + Unfriendly territory is my dream combo in bannerlord for now, it is improving the strategical gameplay soo much instead of the mindless armies attacking deep into enemy territory without consequences that is vanilla.

Yep I always use those three as well. Shame Supply Lines doesn't work with 1.5.6

 

[Earth Dragon]

Supply lines + Party AI overhaul and commands + Unfriendly territory is my dream combo in bannerlord for now, it is improving the strategical gameplay soo much instead of the mindless armies attacking deep into enemy territory without consequences that is vanilla.

There are consequences, they are just soft. How often does an army roll up on you when you’re sieging?

Probably not as often as it should happen. Armies shouldn’t be allowed to siege for a month, but they can as the opposing army is on these absurd long campaigns themselves.

There would definitely need to be an overhaul to how food works, and I’m not sure that’s necessary. There are things like Cohesion that could get taxed more the further you were away from your lands.

But at the end of the day, I think faction “priority targets” should get added and worked on. This would determine what they want their empire to look like, which would then direct the AI as to who it would declare war on and which lands it would try to conquer. The further a castle is from these territories, the lower the weight would be for them attacking it

 

[stevehoos]

Many, many times. I was once in Seonon with only 200 men and a Derthert army of over 1000 passed us by for a castle that had 300+ (garrison and militia but no army) ...

Is that really my fault?

it seems the only way to take part in a siege defense is if you're guaranteed to lose idk.



You've completely missed the point friend.

The issue here is the fact that taking part in defensive sieges as a player is far, far too rare as evidenced by the numerous people who have expressed that problem.

It's not us... It's how the game AI works.

Though nice to see someone on these forums defend the AI in this game. You, sir, are a rare breed indeed.

Oh my, yep.

 

[Terco_Viejo]

Supply lines + Party AI overhaul and commands + Unfriendly territory is my dream combo in bannerlord [...]

+1
IMO, a combo that should be part of the playable experience offered by the Native in an integral way.

 

[ElCrisp]

Yeah - seems like they're trying to add a very light sprinkle of a strategy game building it now after the fact rather than at the base of development. That generally doesnt bode well from own experience but i hope im dead wrong

You have made many good criticisms in this thread froggyluv but this one is what I believe best outlines the truth.

Bannerlord and all games in the Mount and Blade series are the fusion of two seperate games:

• The battle simmulations in which we hack and slash our enemies.
• The campaign map on which we strategise
  

The character development system touches both halves of the game as you try to make a character more affective in both aspects.

Its clear that the battle simulations are a difficult technical feat of AI calculations and units rendered.
Even the continuous non turn based nature of the campaign map makes it a greater technical challenge than other games.
However with these consideration for the economy of developers time.

The campaign side of the game it seems has never had a singular vision of design, it is several good ideas roughly welded together with no vision for the overall whole. Which can work its just harder. (Even games with overal visions make changes and adjust for new ideas, but they know where they intend to finish)

My example for this is the dynasty system, this is the most ambitious departure from the previous Mount and Blade titles in terms of the campaign. expanding your character story to be intergenerational, lengthening your Journey!

But what has been added to make your story more interesting so that you would want to enjoy it longer? A snowballing solution beyond the numbers tweaking would surely be an essential feature, infact maybe multiple. How else would players interest be maintained through multiple generations if the gameplay loop shows no variety or change in diffuclty over time.

The last thing is while I know many features have a decent amount of depth to them with many ways a player can affect an outcome, all of that depth is hidden from the player. Never properly explained in a tooltip at the place of relevance.

If for example an AI makes a binary choice with 8 or so variables effecting the final descision but the player has no idea that it is within their agency to affect those 8 or so variables and hence the end choice. Then that end choice appears irrational random or somewhat outside player control.

Setting aside the technical difficulties of a new engine as a player after 10 years in development I simply expect a better game, even if thats irrational given realties its how I feel.

If im honest and I compare Bannerlord to Warband, this patch 1.5.6 which added rebellions and clan marriages, is the day one patch of early access the first content of the sequel game.

This post may seem very negative and I suppose its the result of pent up frustration as I have watched the development of the game but I actually have a lot of patience for the game and think it can be saved. If they better work as a team on the campaign side of the game. I think mexxico's effort to involve the community in development has also been hugely admirable and important. The campaign side of the game needs the resources given to it in development to consolidate and flesh out its features.

 

[Benjamin Bones]

Drop the smugness, you cherry pick cut out the part that noted there needed to be a re-balancing of the AI formula

I didn't cherry pick - I was directly responding to your assertion that it is somehow the players' fault (i.e mine) that siege defense battles are so rare in this game...

And I wasn't being smug... It IS nice to see someone with a different point of view, even if I don't agree.

 

[vonbalt]

In warband i used to be part of siege defenses all the time and it was rewarding to break the enemy armies in our walls, in bannerlord i have fought in them maybe.. two times since EA release? the pacing of the game is favoring endless offensives and relief forces don't join the siege defense, at max they wait until the enemy assaulting the walls have less troops than their army due to the assault then attack them but the battle is fought in a common battle field with no castles/towns in sight.

maybe what's is really missing is a mix of siege defense/relief forces attacking the besieger's camp from the rear in those situations, kinda like the battle of Helm's Deep in LoTR, this or it being like like in warband where the relief force just join the side of the siege defenders as if they had bypassed the encirclement.

 

[Savagecanadian43]

Does TW Have any Plans to address this Siege Defense Problem?