Beta Patch Notes v1.2.0-v1.2.6

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 2 (members: 0, guests: 2)
CundoCam said:
@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 :grin:
Click to expand...

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.
 
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.
 
Lokey7800 said:
Dead lords counted!?
Click to expand...
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
 
megafun89 said:
- 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.
Click to expand...
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:
Blacke said:
When you see the current state of Bannerlord, which is mostly grind and battles, 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.

These are the main reasons for many of us to add challenge by spicing up our campaigns, thanks to some mods that allow us better immersion and deeper management. This is why mods are actually successful, especially for Bannerlord, because there are many blanks and unfinished features to fill so far.

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.
Click to expand...

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.
 
Gadheras said:
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.
Click to expand...
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:
Gadheras said:
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.
Click to expand...
That's right, the mechanics are currently that, but I consider that if you discard recruits, prisoners or loot, all these "leftovers" can be distributed among the AI, so that they can be better used after a battle.
 
SadMoney said:
What's hilarious is that Total War games have 100 times more in-depth and interesting diplomacy than Bannerlord.
Click to expand...

As someone who's played total war games for almost 20 years the diplomacy in that is also pretty bad- with the possible exception of three kingdoms- I will admit there are at least a few more features to it (trade agreements, non aggression pacts, alliances), but I wouldn't exactly call it in depth.

Still, it's a direction I'd like to see explored more, especially if they give minor factions more to do.
 
Sg15fan said:
Gonna be real interesting on here on December 1st when we still dont have a live 1.2 update.
Click to expand...
And then it's surprising that the developers don't want to give an estimate...

Waiting for your package with a gun is not the best way to motivate the postman to deliver it to you :roll:
 
megafun89 said:
And then it's surprising that the developers don't want to give an estimate...

Waiting for your package with a gun is not the best way to motivate the postman to deliver it to you :roll:
Click to expand...
This is sort of irrelevant. I feel I am justified in my annoyance. I only bought this game cause it had cheats for console. As per the video update in June.

You may say there is no onus on TW to make it abundantly clear to non nerd pc players that the youtube update video in June did not mean that those features were part of the game. However, when I saw that video, as a reasonable, not completely dumb human being who is not a gaming nerd, I bought the game thinking and because it had cheats (for console). When this was not the case, every day feels like a day too long.

Earlier in this thread, a TW employee even admitted that there could have been more obvious signposting that the features in the 1.2 update vid in June were not live and would not be for some time.
 
megafun89 said:
And then it's surprising that the developers don't want to give an estimate...

Waiting for your package with a gun is not the best way to motivate the postman to deliver it to you :roll:
Click to expand...
Fair, but in this example, the package was delayed for a good couple of months and the tracking link has the same "at facilities" update from a couple months ago.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Piconi
  • Sticky
Patch Notes v1.2.9
18 19 20
Replies
393
Views
37K
Duhk_Tails
Duhk_Tails
Dejan
  • Sticky
Patch Notes v1.2.8
6 7 8
Replies
152
Views
18K
pekka05
Dejan
  • Sticky
Patch Notes v1.2.7
6 7 8
Replies
149
Views
29K
Gianna99
Back
Top Bottom