It is not inconsistent at all. The Gauls were Celts, and they were known for having great cavalry for the time and place. They often served under Rome and Carthage as mounted mercenary troops. Yes, Bannerlord is supposedly more or less based in 800-1100 AD, so long after the Gauls were subjugated, but you also have a minor faction with Hastati-Princeps-Triari troop tree so...
-
If you are reporting a bug, please head over to our Technical Support section for Bannerlord.
Beta e1.7.2 Troop & Equipment Changes
- Thread starter Dejan
- Start date
Users who are viewing this thread
After much debate @five bucks and I came to the conclusion that Battania needs a pure line of skirmishers divided between javeliners and slingers.
From this point on, personal opinions come into play when it comes to structuring the trees. In my opinion, the native Fiann concept (ranged+2h sword+super armor) is an abomination, as I've said several times before. In my eyes, it works much better a unit (keep calling it fiann I don't care) that works as a tier5 which is the result of a line of pure skirmishers where you find javeliners and slingers in the process of moving up in tier.
This new fiann I'm talking about, I imagine it keeping its longbow + ammo but of course taking away the lordy armour factor and that two-handed sword to switch to intermediate armour and a combination of small buckler (Pictish aesthetic, square or H-shaped) + Pictish axe or small 1h sword.
Celtic two-handed swords are much less plausible than the use of the bow, combining them with a longbow + excellent armour creates in me that rejection by the native fiann unit. Therefore I would place the 2h weapons in the falxman shock units where in my eyes this role/function is best represented.
It would be acceptable in my eyes that in exchange for a pure skirmishers line (slingers, javeliners, hunter archers and maybe crossbowmen too) with those fianns rebuilt to t5 not noble as top level, move the regular cavalry line to a noble line where the role function would be mounted javeliners+melee. I have said this several times, in my eyes it makes more sense the noble line in combination with the horse as a symbol of power in a bid to recreate the Celtic Gallic/Celtiberian cavalry of antiquity.
In general all troop trees need an overhaul, but a comprehensive overhaul where a battle structure with strengths and weaknesses, where these are the determining factor in intra-faction balance, is faithfully manifested in the gameplay.
Of course, an indispensable requirement is the long-awaited redesign of the damage/protection formula.
From this point on, personal opinions come into play when it comes to structuring the trees. In my opinion, the native Fiann concept (ranged+2h sword+super armor) is an abomination, as I've said several times before. In my eyes, it works much better a unit (keep calling it fiann I don't care) that works as a tier5 which is the result of a line of pure skirmishers where you find javeliners and slingers in the process of moving up in tier.
This new fiann I'm talking about, I imagine it keeping its longbow + ammo but of course taking away the lordy armour factor and that two-handed sword to switch to intermediate armour and a combination of small buckler (Pictish aesthetic, square or H-shaped) + Pictish axe or small 1h sword.
Celtic two-handed swords are much less plausible than the use of the bow, combining them with a longbow + excellent armour creates in me that rejection by the native fiann unit. Therefore I would place the 2h weapons in the falxman shock units where in my eyes this role/function is best represented.
It would be acceptable in my eyes that in exchange for a pure skirmishers line (slingers, javeliners, hunter archers and maybe crossbowmen too) with those fianns rebuilt to t5 not noble as top level, move the regular cavalry line to a noble line where the role function would be mounted javeliners+melee. I have said this several times, in my eyes it makes more sense the noble line in combination with the horse as a symbol of power in a bid to recreate the Celtic Gallic/Celtiberian cavalry of antiquity.
In general all troop trees need an overhaul, but a comprehensive overhaul where a battle structure with strengths and weaknesses, where these are the determining factor in intra-faction balance, is faithfully manifested in the gameplay.
Of course, an indispensable requirement is the long-awaited redesign of the damage/protection formula.
five bucks
Knight at Arms
As skirmishers. They would throw javelins from the back of chariots/horses, or even dismount to fight. So their javelin cavalry is thematic but their lance cavalry isn't.
"Their mode of fighting with their chariots is this: firstly, they drive about in all directions and throw their weapons and generally break the ranks of the enemy with the very dread of their horses and the noise of their wheels; and when they have worked themselves in between the troops of horse, leap from their chariots and engage on foot." - Caesar's account of the Gallic Wars.
Probably dreaming to think they'd add slings at this point. Maybe in an expansion.
I think for Battania, they could just have one of their cavalry troops become an archer - probably the skirmisher and then the other cav could get a stack of javelins. They could split the skirmisher line at T3 or T4 to give earlier access to the archer too.
The problem with noble units currently is they became too easily amassed, so that getting a pure Fian or Khan's Guard army isn't that hard.
The other problem is kind of convergence of issues in the Fian and Khan's Guard.
- Archers(/crossbowmen) are too strong/important in general for some factions to have dramatically superior or inferior ones(poor Sturgia).
- Horse archer mechanics are broken since they don't block eachother's LoS like normal archers, and also cause foot archer AI to do stupid things automatically. So of course, an elite horse archer amplifies the imbalance between horse archers and foot archers.
- Lastly you have the 2h sword / Glaive issue where the Fian and Khan's Guard are doubling as shock troops - with the Khan's Guard being considerably more absurd as the best melee cavalry which makes all the Noble Cav units seem relatively less noble.
The third is more complicated. Fians might be fine keeping their sword and armor if archers are toned down generally and noble units were more rare. However, T5 infantry should be able to handle fians in melee even if just barely - as should T5 cav. I think they used to bee too rare, now they are too common and feel less noble and more "stack these to win". The Glaive, however, just needs to be nerfed I think. Khan's Guards do ridiculous damage with it, and it is way too good up close for being a swinging polearm. Regular and especially noble cavalry should counter Khan's Guards if they end up in massed close combat where its length should be an issue but isn't, rather than Khan's Guards completely wrecking them which is currently the case.
@anoddhermit Obviously there is no official statement regarding implementing animations/weapons/units that revolve around the slingshot. But imagine for a moment such a unit or similar for Battania (Obviously with appropriate animations):
Having to relegate something like it to an expansion/dlc seems like a joke to me, but hey.... that's my personal opinion. Despite this, I remain unwilling to buy the fian as a noble+shock+ranged... it's a real nonsense imho.
Here you're really bringing in three foundation problems that collaterally affect each and every troop tree:
1. Protection/damage formula that is a disaster.
2. High ease of getting noble troops
3. Combat Ai
If these three points are not corrected everything will fail. Example: why have pike units if they are only contemplated as an anti-cavalry weapon and still work badly...?
These three points have been discussed in several threads ad nauseam, giving feedback and so on... Taleworlds still does not apply drastic changes.
On the other hand I have truly always defended the Khan Guard and their glaive (2h polearm) + bows from the burning, not because I use them or like to cheese with them but because they form a steppic-asian warrior archetype that in my eyes fits very well at the top of the Khuzait strengths and by role/function stands out unique.
My only gripe is the length of the glaive native and swing arcs for this kind of weapon on horseback. I commented about it here in the MP section but it's easily applicable for the SP.
So in my eyes strength factor Khuzait would be that mobile force of the branches with melee cavalry (personally I would deprive them of any barding/armour for the horse) mounted archers and foot archers but with clear disadvantages in the shock (non-existent) and infantry branches. Noble cav>ranged cav>melee cav>infantry>ranged.
In short, the only plausible shock+ranged unit in my eyes is the khan guard and its minor tier versions.
And I insist, If these three points from above are not corrected everything fails.
Having to relegate something like it to an expansion/dlc seems like a joke to me, but hey.... that's my personal opinion. Despite this, I remain unwilling to buy the fian as a noble+shock+ranged... it's a real nonsense imho.
Here you're really bringing in three foundation problems that collaterally affect each and every troop tree:
1. Protection/damage formula that is a disaster.
2. High ease of getting noble troops
3. Combat Ai
If these three points are not corrected everything will fail. Example: why have pike units if they are only contemplated as an anti-cavalry weapon and still work badly...?
These three points have been discussed in several threads ad nauseam, giving feedback and so on... Taleworlds still does not apply drastic changes.
On the other hand I have truly always defended the Khan Guard and their glaive (2h polearm) + bows from the burning, not because I use them or like to cheese with them but because they form a steppic-asian warrior archetype that in my eyes fits very well at the top of the Khuzait strengths and by role/function stands out unique.
My only gripe is the length of the glaive native and swing arcs for this kind of weapon on horseback. I commented about it here in the MP section but it's easily applicable for the SP.
So in my eyes strength factor Khuzait would be that mobile force of the branches with melee cavalry (personally I would deprive them of any barding/armour for the horse) mounted archers and foot archers but with clear disadvantages in the shock (non-existent) and infantry branches. Noble cav>ranged cav>melee cav>infantry>ranged.
In short, the only plausible shock+ranged unit in my eyes is the khan guard and its minor tier versions.
And I insist, If these three points from above are not corrected everything fails.
Last edited:
HalfMetalJacket
Knight
Better yet, go out and make your own mods to get what you want. What people want in this thread are some very different things that I don't think fit TW's vision for their troop trees... and that's fine. Again, mods exist for it.
I mean, I myself want commoner longbows in Battania... but I also love Fian Champions as a super soldier concept. I like historically inspired, but I don't give a damn about doing straight up copycats either. And seeing as I don't care to see much cavalry in Battania, I found it quite easy to just flip some slots around.
A real celtic faction would just get slapped around silly by everyone else. No seriously, try imagine an Irish Fianna doing anything to a Turkic force. I don't mind heavy longbow nobles with honking huge swords to even things up.
And at any rate, doing any drastic changes to the troop trees at this point though will be too tricky, unless you don't mind breaking saves.
five bucks
Knight at Arms
Here's how I would change Battania:
Right now they are way too similar to Sturgia in playstyle (tons of shield infantry, javelins, jav cav and one handed axes). They lack a clearly defined strength or weakness, basically doing everything at a mediocre level (it would be fine for them to be a "generalist" faction except that Vlandia, Aserai, and 3 different Empire factions are already generalists!) Their army composition could do a better job of matching their culture description and their Celtic inspiration. So changes are needed.
* Turn the Clan Warrior into a shock infantry troop from T2, this will make Battania have more shock infantry than any other faction, being accurate to their culture description. They have a small targe as backup, to help protect against arrows.
* Remove the Battanian Horseman for the previously mentioned reasons.
* Add a new shock infantry troop, the T5 Gallowglass, branching from the shield infantry line. To differentiate itself from the Veteran Falxman, it uses a two-handed axe, wears heavier armour, uses throwing axes, and has no targe. This will make Battania's culture description accurate and further increase their unique niche as a shock infantry faction.
* Change some of Battania's troops with large shields into troops with long pikes. This will make them more unique from Sturgia.
This would make them more unique in gameplay, and more representative of their Celtic inspiration. Leaving aside Braveheart's historical inaccuracy, this video clip sums up 1000 years of Celtic armies' general approach to battle:
* Turn the Clan Warrior into a shock infantry troop from T2, this will make Battania have more shock infantry than any other faction, being accurate to their culture description. They have a small targe as backup, to help protect against arrows.
* Remove the Battanian Horseman for the previously mentioned reasons.
* Add a new shock infantry troop, the T5 Gallowglass, branching from the shield infantry line. To differentiate itself from the Veteran Falxman, it uses a two-handed axe, wears heavier armour, uses throwing axes, and has no targe. This will make Battania's culture description accurate and further increase their unique niche as a shock infantry faction.
* Change some of Battania's troops with large shields into troops with long pikes. This will make them more unique from Sturgia.
This would make them more unique in gameplay, and more representative of their Celtic inspiration. Leaving aside Braveheart's historical inaccuracy, this video clip sums up 1000 years of Celtic armies' general approach to battle:
Strong +1.
The fundamental way of countering horse archers should mirror real life, either you throw/shoot back with any projectiles you may have, or hunker down behind a large shield and wait for them to miss enough shots/hit your shield so many times that they run out of ammo.
Again +1. Seems like common sense. If a unit is the best horse archer it shouldn't also be the best melee combatant.
Khan's Guard either need to have their melee capabilities significantly nerfed, or as @Terco_Viejo suggested as an alternate nerf, they can decrease their melee capabilities to a reasonable level and also lose their horse armour.
Last edited:
@HalfMetalJacket Definitely the freedom that mods offer is infinite, even more so if you design it for yourself first hand. Imagine the possibilities when OSA is complete 
.
Back to the subject of Battania. I've commented on it a few times and many of you will agree that mercenary troops are of little use and need a revamp too. I keep believing that the native fiann unit (shock+ranged) would fit better as a mercenary troop, which I would replace them without hesitation in place of the wolfskins, which are redundant. Then we could adapt that Irish lore to these kind of troops, imho.
.Back to the subject of Battania. I've commented on it a few times and many of you will agree that mercenary troops are of little use and need a revamp too. I keep believing that the native fiann unit (shock+ranged) would fit better as a mercenary troop, which I would replace them without hesitation in place of the wolfskins, which are redundant. Then we could adapt that Irish lore to these kind of troops, imho.
After some further tests, we decided to add a second stack of quivers to Palatine Guards (should be in the next Beta).
I can confirm that their ability to throw the pilas was removed intentionally. It's still being discussed internally though. If you have any specific feedback related to that, I can forward it.
Sooooo what I am starting to gather is that you no longer read patch notes?
MP is still being developed as you can see with the 172 patch. If you have any real questions, I can look into them though.
HalfMetalJacket
Knight
What is the logic behind this? It was quite the blast to have them chuck their pilas around and gives them a little more identity besides just being a spear and shield sort of troop.
Pilas are also a type of throwing spear, so that's doubly odd.
Great to hear that
Sorry, but this decision was rather short sighted. Either give the legionaries a normal spear instead of the pila or make them throw it again. Currently the pila is not really used as a pole arm. At the moment the pila is simply dead weight and the legionaries only offer the high armor amount, which with the current armor and damage values is also debatable.
So please think about changing things to either
- make the pila throwable again
- exchange the pila into another, more viable, pole arm
- exchange the pila into some javelins
The concept of specialized infantry troops requires the shield wall to consist of heavy armored troops with shields in the front and lesser armored troops without shields in the second row. Sadly the AI still mixes troops without shield in the front rank during an advance (charge is another matter and completely fine to let the agents act on their different athletic levels). This requires an unnecessary micro management between the shield wall and an extra shock infantry group.
AFAIK the idea behind planted pikes was to create a wall of pikes against a cavalry charge. Which is fine. But currently you have to set the shield wall in front of the pike group and position both groups individually.
Another premeditated decision that you will allow me to include in the list of the Bannerlord experience™. I know it's not your decision, but Dejan ffs...
The legionary should have that type of weapon available in both spear and throwable functionality. Furthermore, let me be bold, but your "pilum" as a weapon itself is far from what it really should be.
First, what you call a pilum is not a pilum; what you have is supposed to be a spiculum/angon but extremely short and lame. Here's a suggestion for a size change to make this weapon the multi-purpose weapon it should be:
I have no objection to continuing to call it a "pilum" but in my eyes (and in the eyes of many) it is a mistake to have deliberately taken away the ability to be thrown by the AI.
Like others have said, might as well remove the pilum from the unit if they cannot throw it
But in TW´s theory world they benefit from it even if they never use it. Maybe a secret modifier like "have pilum be better soldier, for gondor!" or something like that.
Of course players, so the guys really playing the game made by TW, know that it doesn´t make any sense.
That's a very good choice, otherwise there's no reason to make them over Xbowmen. I would say ad second stacks to the lower tier imperials archers as well, there's no reason for them to have 1/2 the ammunition of other archers either.
LuciusDomitiusAurelianus
Sergeant
That is great to hear! Thanks for getting everyone's collective feedback back to the appropriate dev team. I echo @Ananda_The_Destroyer 's sentiment of also adding other quivers to the lesser units, at least the Veteran archer, as they have the same issues regarding ammo-to-power/skill curve as other similar tiered ranged units/bandits.
That is disappointing. Right now the Empire does not have too much counter-cavalry / counter-heavy infantry usage with that gone. The "pila" is more akin to different weaponry. Semantics, yes, but in its non-throwable form it is not very useful. Maybe giving them Jarids or Harpoons (3 or 4 stack) would be fine. As Byzantine heavy infantry did retain their spear-chucking capabilities well into the 1200s. That way they can retain their identity and be great units to counter other shock troops or slower cavalry advances.
Specific feedback wise, if the Legionary gets their spear throwing/pila throwing back, it would be great if their profile would prefer targeting skirmishers/infantry/melee cav versus trying to run out and throw it at horse archers.
LuciusDomitiusAurelianus
Sergeant
Missed this at first pass. Didn't seem to quote-post me correctly.
I'd be okay with that honestly. It would add more flavor to using Vlandia as I guess they're supposed to be some sort of expeditionary proto-Normans and add more flavor/realism to empire if they got some light melee cav options.
Even the Celtic/Celtiberian/Welsh-inspired Battanians have light cav and mounted skirmishers - which make sense - their progeny (Gauls, mostly) were excellent skirmishers and horsemen in their own right.
