Recent content by Bratok

New Vlandian shoulder armors look like **** (2:46)
Apart from the scale gorget, which is a lazy copypasted recolor from already existing Aserai/Strugia armors, others look like cheap WoW fantasy bull****.
Funny thing is that other armor additions for other factions look good. Who still thinks that TW doesn't hate Vlandians??

Maximum997 said:

If i remember it makes infantry even more crap becouse shields are weaker and cavalry is far stronger.

Click to expand...

Nothing can make vanilla troops more crap. In RBM armor and shields work 10000 times better and actually protect their owners.
Also, you can tweak all damage, armor and unit skills/loadout yourself.

froggyluv said:

Thats a pretty big assumption. How could you possibly know what they did with those profits -thats a hefty amount and money managers are not just gonna let that evaporate. Those intern Devs aint making that big a salary and they just built a building for themselves -i get the feeling they doing allright but do agree they want the next big payday too -which is consoles. Am I cheering for them..... .... ... .. ... ...

Click to expand...

Ehmm, because of the state the game is currently in? Because they desperately grasp every other income opportunity (consoles)? Because they can't allow simultaneous "development" on all platforms? Because they can't get their **** together for 12+ years already? Dunno...

Goyyyio said:

They def didn't make 100 million.

Click to expand...

Why not?
As was stated in the latest interview - 3 millions copies sold multiplied by average price of +-50$ = ~ $150 million.
Minus Steam/GOG standard margin of 30% and we'll get approximately $100 million. Plus, don't forget about governmental funding.

The problem is (judging by the overall development condition) that TW is not very good at managing anything (employees, time, development cycles etc.) So, my guess is that those profits are mostly gone (embezzled, spent, or otherwise wasted with zero return etc.) . That is why TW decided to move BL to consoles while abandoning the PC version.

But considering TW's development practices this is a very stupid decision.
Consoles don't have early access, have very strict quality control, all post release patches and DLCs must pass the quality check - that is why console updates take longer to implement than on PC.
For example, CD Project RED really dropped the ball with CP2077. The game was released in such a terrible state on past-gen consoles that it was temporary removed from sale, and AFAIK it still plays like **** even today.
And that was CDPR - a much bigger developer with much more experience (including console development). TW has ZERO chances making it to the consoles without turning the game into another buggy festival of ****.

Maximum997 said:

So before start again i want to ask some tips or mods to overcome this issues?

Click to expand...

Then you need to edit Sturgia troops yourself IF you want to change their stats or weapons.

Aapknecht said:

Not sure if troll?

Click to expand...

Maybe not. I was also very surprised with performance increase when I returned to the game at 1.7.0. after abandoning it at v. 1.5...

Performance really got better in the latest versions. BUT mostly due to horrible LOD distance decrease (in both battles and campaign map), also animations start skipping frames (and animated armor/clothes freezes) at a much smaller distance than before. E.g. animated capes turn into static models when PC is at 5+ meter distance from the wearer.
Looks like ****.

Spinozart1 said:

Which apparently is one of the reasons we still don't have our banners in game.

Click to expand...

This one works with the latest version. With both visuals and TROOP MORALE EFFECTS. Made by just one guy. Wasn't so hard it seems.

Spinozart1 said:

But they are coming, no stress... just a question of time...

Click to expand...

Sure thing, champ. We've been waiting for 12 years already. Another 3-5 years of "active development" is nothing really. I am sure we'll get our banners by 2025.

Bjorn The Upset said:

"The fact that nothing is added to the game is because the game entered the period called feature freeze months ago and the resources were transferred to other projects. One hundred percent of the Taleworlds team are not dealing with Bannerlord, and the number of people working on Bannerlord is seriously low. It would be naive to expect a big feature in future updates. Of course, what I mean by big feature are things like deep diplomacy and intrigues that aren't cheesy like a barber."

Click to expand...

Well, it was pretty much obvious. Show's over, boys. Steam sales matter not. Consoles are where all the money is!

Wow, I have never seen so many modders, developers and community managers in these threads all at once. All hands are on the deck for so much needed damage control, it seems.

Because, you know, even the most devoted fans are getting very angry with the current state of the game.
And I can't blame them. Especially when the lead developer openly states that PC IS NOT A PRIORITY.

Seriously, how are you even going to accomplish that? The PC version is a barely playable fish skeleton after 12+ years of "development". Do you guys know that there is NO EARLY ACCESS ON CONSOLES? I know it is hard to comprehend, but YOU WILL ACTUALLY HAVE TO MAKE A COMPLETE GAME! You won't even be able to turn those console players into free beta-testers, who pay you money (like us).

Norseman13 said:

Example I lost a Fian Champion to auto resolve of 170 troops to 1 looter

Click to expand...

These looter guys have ROCKS. your Fian Champion never stood a chance, mate...

Philozoraptor said:

Then there is problem of spam, player can mass 250 maybe even 500 cavalry and he will face army of similiar size on the field no matter how big the actual army is due to limitations of game so player can abuse critical mass. But this is more about self control, if someone wants to exploit single player game he will (cough blacksmithing cough), there is nothing keeping players from taking all recruits (which results in more organic armies) and participating in huge 2K vs 2K battles which will whittle down even elite cavalry in his army very fast.

Click to expand...

Agreed. Never understood those strange people. If you think that playing with heavy cav is too easy, then DON'T PLAY that way.
If you like playing full heavy cav or full Fian - be my guest! It is a single player sandbox game FFS.

Philozoraptor said:

I am almost certain that generally two light infantrymen were not equal 1 light cav in the past, otherwise noone would bother with cav (one horse alone eats like 10 times as much calories as human, and war horses ate grain not grass, not to mention that knights / horse archers often had multiple horses, there were 3 supporting personnel per knight etc).

Click to expand...

Warband had a 1.66 wage multiplier for mounted units. What governs recruit and upgrade costs in BL?

I wish we could make an increased consumption of grain and flax for horse troops and free horses in the inventory. Common horses only consume grain and flax, when travelling on snowy/desert terrain. Warhorses consume only grain and flax all the time. Steppe horses have decreased food consumptions etc. Malnourished horses should have decreased stats and can even die of starvation.
But I guess theses things are too complicated even for TaleWorlds. LOL

Terco_Viejo said:

This tool will be great for you; take a look at it. It has saved me a lot of time in the past. Working fine in 1.7.1.

Click to expand...

WOW. That is nice. A thousand thanks to you, sir!

Philozoraptor said:

Cav is actually underpowered in comparison to history, no need to nerf them further. One good charge to flank or rear should win most of the battles, instead it just does some damage and causes chaos.

Click to expand...

Underpowered??? In RBM heavy cavalry usually just charges head-on with zero ****s given and WINS.

Real cavalry charges looked different than popular culture and videogames depict. Apart from occasional rear and flank charges, no sane person would actually charge a fully prepared and aware infantry formation. Warhorses were EXPENSIVE, it took years to breed and train them and they were priced like modern luxury boats and supercars. Only the wealthiest knights could afford an immediate replacement for a wounded/slain warhorse.

Something tells me that a charging warhorse (with a rider) is a frightening sight, so cavalry success mostly relied on psychological attrition:
1. Cavalry is charging (flank or rear charges were not always available, medieval commanders were much smarter than Total War AI)
2. Infantry starting to waiver, soldiers fail to keep formation, intervals increase, some people may even flee, leaving gaps in the formation.
3. Charging cavalry tries to break INTO GAPS, plowing the way for other knights, mostly by just pushing infantry aside. Lances were useful, of course, - to kill the first footman in line, the others in the back won't have time or free space to react.
4. Infantry is scattered and running for their lives. Cavalry starts pursuing the fleeing footmen. This is the stage when most casualties happened.

If cavalry failed to frighten footmen before the impact, they just slowed down, turned away and tried again (maybe in other place).

BL has too many horse armors, RBM makes them excessively protective. 250-350HP high tier horses are almost invincible. In reality, even late medieval full plate barding always leaved horse's belly and legs unprotected. Most iconic "anti-knight" weapons (bill, halberd, glaive etc.) were primarily an anti-horse weapons, because dismounted knights were pretty much always ****ed and posed a relatively low threat.
In BL dismounted knights continue to wreck havoc amid enemy infantry like nothing happened.

I understand that BL engine has lots of limitations and I don't want to NERF heavy cav, I want in to be realistic and reasonably fair.

Dargorius said:

I made an account just to reply.
Ever got hit by a horse? Because I have, multiple times even. And they weren't galloping, they were just prancing, or walking their normal speed.
If cav would be realistic in this game, the charge damage should have like 50% change to insta K.O., since Vlandians charge with full horse armor, weighing something like 45 kg, on top of the horse weighting 500-800 kg and don't forget a beast of a man riding the damn thing.
So a full charge of heavy cav is something you win a battle with.
Cav should be much more expensive, not nerfed, but without changing what's already in the mod I do believe cav to be in a good spot balance wise.

Click to expand...

Okay. And how exactly is it related to my original post?

With clumsy economy and half-baked Crusader Kings wannabe elements, the only thing that is still viable in BL is combat (with mods) and butter (with rye bread and some red caviar).

That is what I fight for.
I don't need fancy endgames and ****ty plot.
Hell, I've been playing since maybe v1.5.0 and haven't finished a single playthrough.
Only blood, sweat, and butter!

The RBM cavalry being OP issue has been discussed in several threads lately.

So, I've been thinking. Apart from the strong armor and high skills, it's a mount that makes cavalry so OP in Bannerlord.

In reality, I guess, falling from a horse in the middle of a melee was an almost 100% death sentence to even the most heavily armored cavalrymen.

I know that a lying plate armored knight unable to stand up (like a turtle) is a popular misconception, but there could be a plethora of other deadly factors - e.g. your own horse (~600 kg) falling upon you, enemy infantry stomping you or poking their rondel daggers into your eyeslits, deep mud/water, which doesn't help to breath naturally (especially if you are crumpled under a horse or other dead/wounded people) etc.
At Agincourt many French knights (who were probably still combat capable) fell in thick mud and suffocated, when English longbowen shot their horses, and French allies kept advancing, stepping on their own fallen.

Also, in reality concussion and shock is a thing. Even without brain damage, falling prone from a saddle height will get you incapacitated at least for several seconds (which is still enough to kill you in a thousands of ways). If there is a hard ground underneath (with rocks and bumps), you may also get a broken neck, bone fracture, dislocated joint or some other heavy blunt trauma (even in full plate). Falling down at a gallop speed? Multiply all trauma factors at least 10 times.

But even in non-combat situations falling from a horse was often lethal. Drunk nobles cosplaying a Wild Hunt on their way to rape some peasant wenches? Bam!!! Count Geoffrey falls down from his horse at a 45 km/h! Bam!!! Broken neck, broken spine, broken ****ing everything! Look at that list for example:


What do we have in BL? Imperial Cataphract/Vlandian Banner Knight lost his horse/fell of a saddle at a full gallop? Nah, he'll be fine. Probably will even **** some infantry up right after he gets up almost unscathed.

So, my opinion is that instead of nerfing body armor and weapon damage/penetration values, we should make all dismounted (either by melee hits or by killing the mount) NPCs dead/knocked out, regardless of how many HP are left or what armor is currently equipped. Is that even technically possible, I wonder?

CrazyElf said:

Alternatively, you could mod manually with XML

Click to expand...

Trying this right now and this is so ****ing annoying, like a chore. I greatly miss Warband troop editor.
Bannerlord requires manual xml tweaking and a full item ID list at hand (and there is only one in the net, which seems to be from old BL versions with some items missing). Also, every single change must be tested in custom battle. It took me 3 days of work and testing to change Imperials only. I've been stuck on Vlandia for a week now.