Recent content by Eneas21

Bloc said:

Precisely like this

Spoiler

C#:

      if (clan.IsEliminated)
        return;
      if (clan.Kingdom?.RulingClan == clan)
        this.AddRulingClanIncome(clan, ref goldChange, applyWithdrawals);
      if (clan != Clan.PlayerClan && (!clan.MapFaction.IsKingdomFaction || clan.IsUnderMercenaryService) && clan.Fiefs.Count<Town>() == 0)
      {
        int num = clan.Tier * (80 + (clan.IsUnderMercenaryService ? 40 : 0));
        goldChange.Add((float) num, (TextObject) null, (TextObject) null);
      }
      this.AddMercenaryIncome(clan, ref goldChange, applyWithdrawals);
      this.AddVillagesIncome(clan, ref goldChange, applyWithdrawals);
      this.AddTownTaxes(clan, ref goldChange, applyWithdrawals);
      this.CalculateHeroIncomeFromWorkshops(clan.Leader, ref goldChange, applyWithdrawals);
      this.AddIncomeFromParties(clan, ref goldChange, applyWithdrawals);
      this.AddIncomeFromTownProjects(clan, ref goldChange, applyWithdrawals);
      if (!clan.IsUnderMercenaryService)
        this.AddIncomeFromTribute(clan, ref goldChange, applyWithdrawals);
      if (clan.Gold < 30000 && clan.Kingdom != null && (clan.Leader != Hero.MainHero && !clan.IsUnderMercenaryService))
        this.AddIncomeFromKingdomBudget(clan, ref goldChange, applyWithdrawals);
      Hero leader = clan.Leader;
      if ((leader != null ? (leader.GetPerkValue(DefaultPerks.Trade.SpringOfGold) ? 1 : 0) : 0) == 0)
        return;
      int num1 = Math.Min(1000, MathF.Round((float) clan.Leader.Gold * DefaultPerks.Trade.SpringOfGold.PrimaryBonus));
      goldChange.Add((float) num1, DefaultPerks.Trade.SpringOfGold.Name, (TextObject) null);

I don't have the exact code change but I believe the issue started to happen after they introduced the budget limit for player parties which probably started to affect indirectly their other clans. They most likely don't have a limit by default hence they continue recruiting more people even though they don't have gold to pay their wages.
Because you see that they are recruiting more people but then they are leaving the army and yet, AI continues to do the same and creates an endless poor-finance management cycle.
Pumping money out of thin air won't solve this problem either since spending logic is flawed. They have to check this carefully and trace back to main reason.

Click to expand...

what a chad, they should fire the guy doing the sheep textures and hire you instead

The main issue is the lack of population and how underrated actual feudal economy is, which is based on ownership of property, lands and taxes. The problem is that you as a freelancer can go with 100 troops, defeat an actual Lord, and you complain that they dont recruit like you do, bruh, he is a lord and has several thousands of peasants under his protection at his fiefs, working for him, he should totally spawn with a bunch of troops raised to replenish his fallen army, tho they should be mostly T1-T3 troops, plus, his main income should come from taxes, war can be an enterprise so costly that it can make you lose money even when you win it, food and all takes a lot of money, and you make your best effort since losing the war can be the end of your rule, so you do everything at your hand to expand the possibilities, forcing peasants to join the army, confiscating food or raising taxes, maybe even starving your own population, all to win the war, which can totally be an economic loss on the short term. Most wars between feudal nobles are disputes on land ownership, which would give actual profit a few years after taking them.

And all of these features should apply to the player too once he becomes a lord. Which shouldnt be as fast as just leveling up your clan, you should come from lower nobility, do more relationship grinding. Right now we have this wacky economic system where being a lord and having fiefs gives really low income, not even enough to cover a reasonable defense of said fief, and with you, the chad player, making ends meet with trade/smithing/selling war loot. You main source of income should be fiefdom taxation as a lord. This is not a capitalist economy where you can just create goddamn Microsoft and become a billionaire to fund your kingdom. If at the XXI century not even Bezos or Bill Gates can earn more money that States, how the **** are we making more money than lords in a feudal economy.

War loot is overpriced and i understand that they did it this way so that there is a feeling of progression as you can afford high end stuff only when you are rich, but i think they could give the same progression if they link being able to wear certain armor or using top weapons, with your character skills. This allows even rpg gameplay for people who want to play as a lord would, commanding troops, not being good at fighting since he doesnt want to risk death (permadeath?) so he cant really use complicated weapons and armor effectively or should train a lot for it if not learned at battle.

We need population system to make sense of the world and link it to the economy, and there should be even types of population, having a 7% of population educated should make a huge economic difference agaisnt a kingdom with only 1%.

So yeah, Population and Feudal Economy, i know they wont do it, but talented modders should try to give a shot at this, could end up being a mod that would become a must have for other mods that change the setting of the game to Westeros or Feudal Japan.

SerLunchALot said:

When I try to offer my relatives for marriage, they would only accept my brother, but not my sons.
They are lvl 20+ and have decent stats, so should be fit for marriage.
What stat is it that determines whether one is accepted for marriage or not?
So far noone could tell.

Click to expand...

Sir forcing your sons into marriage is a criminal offence, I'll have to ask you to come with me to the Police Station ?‍

Terco_Viejo said:

Of course, in SP and MP.


And it is here that we again see a degree of negligence on Taleworlds part where they did not consider suitable within Banerlord's own design line as fundamental, mods that were extraordinarily and indisputably indispensable and essential to the Community. Because... honestly, I refuse to believe that it was a question of ignorance of what their own Community generated at the time for their previous titles


Here, another missed opportunity to add to the unfortunately long list, imho.


Any M&B veteran who has played with mods already knows (directly or indirectly) about Caba`drin's Pre-Battle Orders & Deployment (not forgetting the illustrious add-ons by motomataru, Papa Lazarou, The Mercenary...etc).


In my opinion, PBOD should be (should have been) the foundation from which to build tactical options and implement them through a 2.0 adaptation for Bannerlord (+ what we already have). Whoever joins the franchise with Bannerlord should read the feature list of that particular mod and ask themselves if they wouldn't want that already implemented in Bannerlord.


And as I've said many times, focus fire should be a feature available for Bannerlord... mostly as a matter of sum of inheritance from mods and as a natural evolution of the franchise in this regard.

Click to expand...

Too complex my dude. Here, have some new 4K cow textures.

LevonVeldspar said:

It would make sense for personally defeating a rival lord to give a renown bonus and maybe some sort of positive or negative relation depending on their personality and whether or not they're killed.

Click to expand...

Let me get this straight, If I kill another lord then that lord will be very mad at me right?

Idk something's fishy there....

Everyone knows that the best bannerlord modder is TheLegend27

stevepine said:

Hey, I answered your questions in a polite and calm way.

You reply with nothing but aggression and personal insults.

I think the forum would be a better place for everyone without you. You have been reported to a moderator.

Click to expand...

Dont feed the troll, just report and move on. There is an incredible ammount of idiots on this world, and I know this for a fact as I am an idiot myself and because of that I know you shouldn't argue with me or him

Clsy said:

how about we can have their heads as a trophy you can equip to the saddle that give you like 5% more experience

Click to expand...

Witcher 3 player detected

Bjorn The Hound said:

I don't think we could get having to store your money feature somewhere(actually you can store your money in the game on your fiefs but the game does not make you to have to store) or maintaining your army gear feature(I don't know how I feel about this actually, it might be too much of micromanagement and there is too much war going on right now, that this too can be boring repetitive stuff you have to do) since I think TW's vision right now does not align with these features. However, having a price debuff on gear equipment, which you get from loot, is something we could ask from TW. Nonetheless, these two feature you are talking about making the game difficult and that is something this game so much lacking right now.

Click to expand...

I agree about TW situation and yeah the goal is to make it harder and more realistic. Also when i said about maintaining the army gear i didnt mean to actually go piece by piece, just by troop types, like "these x30 vlandian vanguard gets everything fixed for 600 denars and a 8h wait in settlement" I wouldnt consider that too much micromanaging, but by TW standards it is obviously. Anyway its best to forget because the AI would have to do it too and thats just adding more stuff to their calculations and opening to new bugs, at best it should be simulated, like if this AI lord has over X amount of denars, he is rich, therefore all this troops always have gear in good condition, if its lower than X then they dont have enough, only top 70% of troops have good condition gear, etc. Thats would be the safest way

But I really think they should balance the selling loot money vs fiefs/bussiness because it is ridiculous

Terco_Viejo said:

8 pages, 141 comments, 14k views... if this isn't dogged dedication, what is?
Taleworlds, make it happen! @Dejan why isn't this a priority?

Click to expand...

Vlandia ens roba

@Bjorn The Hound
I think thats a problem, too much money on late game, there should a higher risk to getting poor again or just having to rely on your fiefs for a time to recover. We have an economy that makes possible being a millionaire with almost no fiefs like you were Jeff Bezos or Elon Musk in a capitalistic society like its XXI century. Economy in medieval ages cant have such reliance on coin and market. Fiefs, trading caravans and local bussiness you own should be the main source of income, loot after battle gives too much in this game, and sacking villages or towns should give more.

Gear is overpriced to make it hard for the player to get well equipped, giving a sense of progression, but at the same time winning battles, taking loot and selling all that overpriced gear makes it too easy for the player to get rich. There should be less loot after battle, you cant bash their helmets with a poleaxe and then sell it like its new and ready to use, its too damaged. So instead there should be a durability feature that affects price, and perks and stuff so that your gear and your party gear is repaired constantly over time or by going to a town and asking the blacksmith to fix your troops armor by paying a lot and staying in the city for a few days, but improving their performance on battle.

Another alternative, though they can both be used, is that after a battle you get X amount of loot, part of it is okay to use, same as now, and the other majority of gear involved in battle is not in a good condition and you get scrap metal as a material, which you can melt to get proper iron, steel, etc.

I think the second option is the best since its easier, it makes the smithing mechanic better, rebalances economy to make it more property and trading based like it should in a feudal society, though there should be a boost to fief income, a massive one.

Another way to make sacking more profitable could be to make money material in the game world, those 2M denars you carry in late game have to be SOMEWHERE, currently is like they are bitcoin, unrealistic. They have to be stored somewhere, most of it should be in your castle, city, bussiness treasury, caravan treasury, some of it with your party, and banks too with a cost for saving your money. And the profit of sacking should be linked to how much money you can yoink from these places, while giving a lot to your men too. And you can get fcked too if the city where you stored most of it is lost too.

Ananda_The_Destroyer said:

Well there'll be plenty for you to shoot since nobody's going up the ladder ?

I'm not seriously trying to excuse the siege situation, but I do find it hilarious that you can actually push them into the ladder and it makes them go!?

Click to expand...

they are a little shy, they just need a little bit more confidence to throw themselves in those walls full of enemy soldiers that will rip his guts out

I agree with OP, there should be some kind of investment mechanic to help villages or towns, and that could also add to the kingdom's policies and roleplaying aspect of it. Being a king or a lord that actually cares for his citizens and tries to help the lower classes by investing into policies, like creating non profit organizations that give food and shelter and make that have an effect on prosperity and security, etc. Also there could be policies about how to distribute the weight of war. You described it, you got rich from all that loot, you and your men, and your people got poor because of the war and because you didnt do enough to protect them as their lord (roleplay point of view of peasants). Makes sense to bring up how this unfair situation should be settled, this could be some kind of political dilemma to face as a ruler or a kingdom policy forcing lords to invest a % of their profits on raided villages. Etc.

On the other hand you can also roleplay a lord that is a **** and doesnt give a ****, maybe bringing revolts or other negative events later on by denying help

This is actually an idea that could bring a few cool mechanics and events if a modder gets interested in this.

Moton said:

Console ports are useless. Why not refine your product to this wide userbase you have/had? Instead of thin it out and ultimately make it worse for everyone just so you can reach a small audince? I might be wrong but my understanding is that Warband never was big on console.

And lets not even start on no mod support.

Click to expand...

Armagan big brain time.

Seriously now, in terms of profit/effort it is easier to take whats already been done, pack it up nicely and sell it to those console peasants, a little cash grab with some investment on public relations with youtubers and stuff, than it is to actually finish the game to the "RPG you can play the next 8 years standard". So thats what they went for, a short-term cash grab.

Because we are 15 months away from EA release and we got a lot of bug fixing and tweaking mostly, and very few added features. So it would take them forever to achieve said standard, modders are actually faster and they can make mods from other settings. Two notes on why they are slow:

1. They spread out every single little crash fix and bug fix on the patch notes so it looks like they are working a lot. Most patch notes from other games just say hey, we fixed several crashes, and if one or two issues are occuring to a lot of players then they say they fix that one so they know the game now works for them.

2. Adding features on EA seems painful for them, and the problem seems to be two things, lack of manpower and poor management, they need more developers, they have the money but it seems its hard to hire developers in Turkey since most of them prefer to go abroad and avoid the political situation and get better economic oportunities, And the poor management seems to be coming from micromanaging every little decision, which makes even slower the process.

I believe the game will eventually get to the golden standard it was always meant to be, but modders will have to finish it, the only thing we need is TW to attend modders demands. So releasing early with less features is probably a good thing, since modders can take the wheel sooner with a more stable version.