NoRegretz00
Recruit
Duh deserves more praise cus I'm convinced he's the only dev actually working on the game
-
If you are reporting a bug, please head over to our Technical Support section for Bannerlord.
Beta Patch Notes v1.2.0-v1.2.6
- Thread starter Dejan
- Start date
Users who are viewing this thread
Recruit
I would have assumed since scale is smaller it would be easier to make it more in depth and fleshed out when it comes to certain elements. CK3 has its own faults as a game and there are certain aspects I would want in Bannerlord while others I would prefer to keep in CK3. Getting wounded with the possibility to remain so for years in game or just straight up lose a limb would suck severely. Is it realistic, yes very much so and would probably be apart of the allure but once it happens to me it becomes a different issue.
I think traits should be passed down in a sense. I don't think they come up until the child is about 4 or 8 but I agree that it should be based on their upbringing as well. If the father has valor and the mother is calculating the child should have one, both and a third or 4th trait based on their upbringing or a life events. I like the idea of being able to create a new clan based on a family clan member and their spouse or being able to marry your women and not lose them, but there are aspects of the game people already don't want to deal with that are implemented within the game. One for me is the culture, like I get why folks wanted the children to take the main characters culture but it should have been an option that we get to choose between ours and the spouses, based on how we want to expand the kingdom.They could either spend time with my siblings for my culture or their grandparents and uncles for their mothers and this could also affect trait variation as your wife's household has more negative than positive so the child may have a disposition towards negative traits. While stash is handy for storing goods for the workshops I feel like storage is a bit more intentional and I am on console so I am unsure if that update made it to the systems as of yet so I cant say how effective it is or isn't but at this point in my game play I might not use it as though I never needed it originally. I did find it tedious to continuously re-do caravans after they would be captured mainly from war, or bounce around the map buying up goods and moving them to my workshops early on. My point is we all have to deal with parts of the game we don't want to deal with. I get your point with the smithing, the killer for me is when I update their perks and skill and have to undo everyones that I did first just to fix the one I messed up because I meant for him to have 6 social and 5 intel not 7 social and 4 intel or early game buying goods to sell back to the town constantly to make product early on and my personal favorite....marrying the oldest woman in the clan off. Im not saying change that entirely but it should be an option for me to "suggest" to the clan head or father that our "children" spend time together to see if they are actually compatible and if they are you can choose to put forth a marriage offer.
Draupne
Recruit
By the way, regarding dynasty and clan members.
If making children not appear as clones is very difficult, at least make it so they spawn with different hairstyles, or that players may visit the barber and change the hairstyle of family members. The fact that the two brothers you spawn with in Campaign mode are exact copies is very frustrating. So is the fact that my two sons are. Its impossible to tell them apart. Changing hair and facial hair at the barber rectify this at least somewhat. Shouldn't be too difficult to implement.
If making children not appear as clones is very difficult, at least make it so they spawn with different hairstyles, or that players may visit the barber and change the hairstyle of family members. The fact that the two brothers you spawn with in Campaign mode are exact copies is very frustrating. So is the fact that my two sons are. Its impossible to tell them apart. Changing hair and facial hair at the barber rectify this at least somewhat. Shouldn't be too difficult to implement.
there the different colour in hair and eyes too, they should work on that, clone are the major problem... they already removed the dead lords counting on the clan limit, so that's a progress
Dead lords counted!?
selected_character
Recruit
I would love to have my characters, family members and companions wounded, even infirm, ill, mad, with smallpox/leper (or something with another name that fits with the lore) and so on.
I'd also like to see more interaction between family members and characters in general, with love, treason, plots, murders, instead of NPC that just follows everything I say like robots.
Let say my character has been wounded in a battle and is now infirm. His brother and his allies just murdered him to take the thrown. Now that I have selected my eldes child as heir, I have to gather an army to confront him. A simple medieval tale that I'd love to see in Bannerlord, rather than tastless snowballing conquests.
We take CK3 as the main example, because it provides such great mechanics like this. But I don't think we should copy/past stuff from a game to another. Bannerlord can beneficiate a lot with similar features, but these additions should also fit with the game scale. I'm not a game dev, but I'm pretty sure is something to do with these ideas.
Last edited:
Gadheras
Squire
I don't think every player would share that want in regard of have their player character become infirm etc -) I had enough games of CK3 where I ended up almost yell at the screen. But unlike CK3, you can't just get hold of a good commander to leader your army in Bannerlord. See your high skill character get suddenly replaced by a low skill one, when consider what it take to level up in Bannerlord. I don't see people to happy about such -)
NoRegretz00
Recruit
Update this Friday?
selected_character
Recruit
Looks like something players could decide to activate or not, like the actual birth and death.
Some mods also give the choice to check/uncheck options in-game.
If some players prefer to play easy mode with a immortal god as a main character, I really don't mind.
I guess I've seen enough games like that to be fair.
But I don't think this is a reason to get rid of cool ideas and never polish a game. And Bannerlord does need polishing. Like...a lot.
Allowing players to enable (or not) some features is an opportunity for everyone to enjoy the game as we want, whatever if we are chill players or more demanding ones (probably like me).
Let's call this the power of flexibility.
Last edited:
See when you first proposed the idea instinctively, yes I would like the more realistic aspect but on the other hand I am used to the realism that bannerlord already provides (which is quite inaccurate) thus I would piggy back off @Gadheras earlier statements when referring to the aspects of play that would be annoying to deal with especially since they are saying traits will be randomized. However if you make such elements optional as you stated above this allows players to adjust to the new settings and choose whether or not they wish to be bothered with them or not. I wouldn't mind if I could auto select certain perks or skill trees I would want clan members who descend from my brothers to focus on consistently so I wouldn't have to deal with the younger members milestone notifications mounting up on themselves and also set it to where I manually select the skills for my main characters direct descendants. Also I understand my nephews not calling me "uncle" but my grandkids could at least acknowledge our relationship
All this talk about traits. In the end, they end up mattering so little that it makes almost no difference what traits a character has. Perhaps if they expanded the usefulness of traits and/or gave them a bigger effect, then arguing about traits would make more sense.
For me personally, I wish that traits affected the AI of the NPC. They don't even need to be deterministic. Instead they could just alter probabilities and weights. Cruel lords should be more likely to do X, Y and Z and less likely to do A, B, C. Merciful lords just the opposite etc.
For me personally, I wish that traits affected the AI of the NPC. They don't even need to be deterministic. Instead they could just alter probabilities and weights. Cruel lords should be more likely to do X, Y and Z and less likely to do A, B, C. Merciful lords just the opposite etc.
@Dejan
I have a suggestion about units after battles in Mount & Blade II: Bannerlord. For Example, after defeating an enemy army that had captured multiple allied armies or lords of my kingdom, it turns out that I have around 800 units available to add to my army. These are the troops that were captured by the enemy ready to join my army, apart from the prisoners.
However, if I choose not to recruit any of these troops, they are automatically discarded, which represents a significant waste of units. This situation is repeated when capturing a castle or city, where I have more than 800 troops left ready to join my army, but I am forced to discard them because my army is already full.
My usual approach in these cases is to recruit all the troops and then distribute them among the lords who are part of my army or leave them in the nearest city or castle, if possible. Otherwise these troops are discarded entirely, but it can be a bit annoying because of the time you waste doing this. But this can be automated or improved so that it automatically happens after each battle.
My proposal is this: when I lead an army with multiple lords and discard these troops after the battle, the AI should focus on completing the armies of the other lords whenever possible. They may not be able to do so due to lack of resources such as money or food, but if I discard troops, the rest of the lords should try to recruit them in order to make the most of these valuable units, especially those of higher rank.
In the case of capturing a castle or city, after discarding troops from both myself and the lords of my army, the remaining units could remain as a garrison in these buildings. In this way, all the troops would be fully used, avoiding waste at the end of the game.
Also correct me if they are already in the patch notes or have already been mentioned before, I appreciate you reading this
I have a suggestion about units after battles in Mount & Blade II: Bannerlord. For Example, after defeating an enemy army that had captured multiple allied armies or lords of my kingdom, it turns out that I have around 800 units available to add to my army. These are the troops that were captured by the enemy ready to join my army, apart from the prisoners.
However, if I choose not to recruit any of these troops, they are automatically discarded, which represents a significant waste of units. This situation is repeated when capturing a castle or city, where I have more than 800 troops left ready to join my army, but I am forced to discard them because my army is already full.
My usual approach in these cases is to recruit all the troops and then distribute them among the lords who are part of my army or leave them in the nearest city or castle, if possible. Otherwise these troops are discarded entirely, but it can be a bit annoying because of the time you waste doing this. But this can be automated or improved so that it automatically happens after each battle.
My proposal is this: when I lead an army with multiple lords and discard these troops after the battle, the AI should focus on completing the armies of the other lords whenever possible. They may not be able to do so due to lack of resources such as money or food, but if I discard troops, the rest of the lords should try to recruit them in order to make the most of these valuable units, especially those of higher rank.
In the case of capturing a castle or city, after discarding troops from both myself and the lords of my army, the remaining units could remain as a garrison in these buildings. In this way, all the troops would be fully used, avoiding waste at the end of the game.
Also correct me if they are already in the patch notes or have already been mentioned before, I appreciate you reading this
Gadheras
Squire
@Dejan
I have a suggestion about units after battles in Mount & Blade II: Bannerlord. For Example, after defeating an enemy army that had captured multiple allied armies or lords of my kingdom, it turns out that I have around 800 units available to add to my army. These are the troops that were captured by the enemy ready to join my army, apart from the prisoners.
However, if I choose not to recruit any of these troops, they are automatically discarded, which represents a significant waste of units. This situation is repeated when capturing a castle or city, where I have more than 800 troops left ready to join my army, but I am forced to discard them because my army is already full.
My usual approach in these cases is to recruit all the troops and then distribute them among the lords who are part of my army or leave them in the nearest city or castle, if possible. Otherwise these troops are discarded entirely, but it can be a bit annoying because of the time you waste doing this. But this can be automated or improved so that it automatically happens after each battle.
My proposal is this: when I lead an army with multiple lords and discard these troops after the battle, the AI should focus on completing the armies of the other lords whenever possible. They may not be able to do so due to lack of resources such as money or food, but if I discard troops, the rest of the lords should try to recruit them in order to make the most of these valuable units, especially those of higher rank.
In the case of capturing a castle or city, after discarding troops from both myself and the lords of my army, the remaining units could remain as a garrison in these buildings. In this way, all the troops would be fully used, avoiding waste at the end of the game.
Also correct me if they are already in the patch notes or have already been mentioned before, I appreciate you reading this
Afaik, if you lead an army with other clans. The number of loot, prisoners and possible recruits after a battle come down to your share of participation in the battle. If you do the majority of the killing, you get the most. The AI parties already make use of their share. It's a bit annoying to see so many "free" troops let go, but I end up just cherry pick the "good" troops and dish out between parties in the army that need replenishment.
megafun89
Recruit
When you hear "I want deeper management", it's hard to say no, and yet... In my opinion there are two obstacles to this
- Firstly the hardest part is not to add, but to balance and stabilize. Even an ultra-popular mod like “Fourberie” brings a lot of unbalancing to other mechanics. Another proof is this patch. Stabilizing the additions takes longer than having created them. And it's wrong to accuse Taleworlds. For example NHL (EA Sports), a team bigger than Taleworlds, add nothings and still hasn't fix a simple but serious bug of uniforms since 2 months ! There is a lot of invisible work when you code for a company
- And secondly we have to be careful with what we want. For me Bannerlord should not become a management game. Like Total War, for me 'diplomacy' is just a pretext for war. And childrens just an excuse to continue. Too much management can disrupt the rhythm of the game. The additions that I read seem too off-topic or too difficult to be implement. Betrayal ok but when and how? Where will the fun be if groups of 80 soldiers suddenly abandon you in the middle of a siege, leading to an undeserved loss of your entire army and your city? In a "Game of Thrones" mod ok, losing is part of the lore, but not in a base game. A cool addition won't necessarily be cool to play. In my opinion the game can still improve but only marginally, like clones or children's skills.
- Firstly the hardest part is not to add, but to balance and stabilize. Even an ultra-popular mod like “Fourberie” brings a lot of unbalancing to other mechanics. Another proof is this patch. Stabilizing the additions takes longer than having created them. And it's wrong to accuse Taleworlds. For example NHL (EA Sports), a team bigger than Taleworlds, add nothings and still hasn't fix a simple but serious bug of uniforms since 2 months ! There is a lot of invisible work when you code for a company
- And secondly we have to be careful with what we want. For me Bannerlord should not become a management game. Like Total War, for me 'diplomacy' is just a pretext for war. And childrens just an excuse to continue. Too much management can disrupt the rhythm of the game. The additions that I read seem too off-topic or too difficult to be implement. Betrayal ok but when and how? Where will the fun be if groups of 80 soldiers suddenly abandon you in the middle of a siege, leading to an undeserved loss of your entire army and your city? In a "Game of Thrones" mod ok, losing is part of the lore, but not in a base game. A cool addition won't necessarily be cool to play. In my opinion the game can still improve but only marginally, like clones or children's skills.
used too, but according to Piconi, the last beta patch (the one you're playing now) removed that.
I haven't payed for awhile.. I went back to Dnd on a discord server so that's the only game i been playing lately.
Maybe next patch I'll play again, there's lot of thing that turn me off on the game right now, and Mount and Blade was the type of game I always wanted, even if my big love was on the Rome Total War and CK
SadMoney
Regular
What's hilarious is that Total War games have 100 times more in-depth and interesting diplomacy than Bannerlord.
If you constantly wage war, like you said above, there will be nothing to continue after ~20 years
selected_character
Recruit
When you see the current state of Bannerlord, which is mostly battles and grind, that we endlessly repeat, I guess a deeper management system in general can't hurt.
Not to mention how fast players usually outmatch factions in a way or another, until they reach the so called "late game" in no time, where there isn't not much to do (and they can already think about starting a new campaign at this point).
It's not like there is an overwhelming choice of complexes features to deal with.
These are the main reasons why many of us artificially add more challenge, thanks to some mods for better immersion and deeper management.
This is also why mods are actually successful, especially for Bannerlord, because there are many blanks and unfinished features that need to be filled (and fixed ?).
So yeah, more management please, but nicely implemented, with the right balance so it fits with the game pace, that is the minimum we can expect from a company such TaleWorlds.
Also a better menu navigation for a smoother experience, this also can't hurt.
Last edited:
Gadheras
Squire
You can lump in really any total war game, and other similar game in here. Because with all of these kind of games it come a time when you are so powerfull, there is hardly any obstacle left, and all left is to moop up rest of the map (whatever). End of the day, it all come down to how long you want to keep play your campaign. If you play the sandbox, the end goal is yours to set. WIth the actual campaigjn, you have something to achieve...(Sort of).
I don't think stretch game time by introduce more management is the way to go in a game that is focused on battles/fights.
selected_character
Recruit
I don't think there is any point to stretch time with more management if we don't plan to add birth/death for example.
But once these features are activated (for those who want to play like that) it's like another kind of game, where time becomes a feature by itself. Since we can die, in battle or old, having heirs is a good idea to secure a dynasty.
Mariages are cool, having children is cool, dying is, in a way, also cool. Probably not for everyone, maybe there are more players playing with birth/death than others not enable it, or maybe not, I have no idea.
But these features are here and already add depth to this "battle/fights" game. I don't remember a full crowd asking this to be permanently removed. And those enabling it generaly expect more polishing and improvements.
Once again, people aren't releasing management mods or are excited for more official features for nothing.
I remember a time where we couldn't assign anybody correctly at the start of the battle. Infantry heroes where randomly added to a cavalry formation or mounted ones in the front line with the infantry. I lost family members because of this nonsense. Good thing we can manage this now. This is a good example of improved feature that fits with the game (and no one is asking Bannerlord to turn into a CK3/Total War/Football Manager, please no).
Warehouses, Weather, Targeting systems that came with 1.2.0 also are good examples of new management features (now you will have to make sure bad weather won't mess with your siege or anything else). Not saying they are perfects, also need polishing, but at least it's here.
I'm repeating myself by now, but Bannerlord is an unique game that needs to have unique ways to implement deeper/clever management systems, as long as it's well balanced.
And I'm sure we can make everyone happy by giving the opportunity to enable/disable some impactful options.
Last edited:
