Recent content by inox_ionizer

BIGGER Kentucky James XXL said:

Everything I've read so far points to the bannerlord system being pretty unsophisticated and boring because there are no roads, no indication of variations in fertility and grain availability, and no zones of control. So unless armies start starving after a few days in the field, there isn't going to be any difference to the capacity of an army to supply itself other than the amount of villages nearby (which themselves seem uniformly spaced out).

Click to expand...

If each village has a stockpile of supplies which slowly regenerates*, a large army will be forced to send foraging parties far out or move the entire army frequently. That requires map awareness, just in the opposite direction: Instead of being concerned with what is behind you (supply lines), you would have to think about what is ahead of you (hopefully fresh stockpiles). In his analysis of some campaigns, Van Creveld found that their paths were largely decided by the need to move to unravaged areas, rather than some grand strategic maneuver.

I definitely agree villages should not be spaced evenly! But compared to implementing a new system of supply lines, that is quite easy to fix, right? Let's hope the developers at least experiment a bit with clustering villages in fertile areas. With that strategic element added to the map, they would hopefully also not feel the need to have mountains everywhere.

*This is how it worked in Warband, right? I hope they keep/improve this. Maybe have villages only generate supplies in summer, to get an annual cycle as monoolho mentioned.

The system described in the devblog sounds about as realistic as we can expect. Pre-modern logistics relied little on supply lines. There was less reason for them to have them, and it was less feasible.

In modern warfare, supply is mostly huge amounts of ammunition and fuel, which have to be transported from factories/depots (unless captured), thus supply lines. In pre-modern warfare, most of the supplies were water, food and firewood, which are better to forage/plunder nearby. This will hopefully be well represented by the system described in the devblog. The defending army could reduce the efficiency of the attacker by attacking his foraging/plundering parties, or at least have forces nearby to threaten them, thus forcing them to stay closer together and cover less ground. This will hopefully be a feasible defense strategy in Bannerlord. When an area was exhausted or too well defended, the attacking army would typically move to another area (for example home, ending the campaign).

If well prepared, having carts and travelling along roads, the army could bring supplies for a while, maybe even a month or two. The Roman army arguably was capable of organizing supply lines as an addition to foraging/plundering. However, the main part of these would be by ships, which are unfortunately not planned to be in the game. Long-distance transport over land was not very efficient before railroads and motor vehicles.

There is not so much written about pre-modern logistics, but Supplying War by Martin van Creveld is a good place to start. Two other interesting works are Logistics of the Roman army at war by Jonathan Roth and Warfare in Medieval Europe (chapter on logistics) by Bernard & David Bachrach.

BayBear said:

The fence is only passable by cavalry for game balancing purposes.

Click to expand...

I understood the purpose of those fences, what I am objecting to is that it looks silly for soldiers capable of hacking down doors and gates to be blocked by a stick at hip height (as it is in Warband). An iron fence or a solid stone wall would make a more believable obstacle.


Or as a different type of obstacle, how about water? There could be a weight threshold (which could be influenced by strength and a swimming skill) that lets the lightly armed swim while the heavily armed drown. For balancing purposes, I think it can be just as good, and unlike an unbreakable stick, it does not break immersion.

small fences that only cavalry can jump over

Click to expand...

In Warband it feels quite silly to be blocked by a puny fence made of sticks. I suggest to make all fences destructible, low enough to jump for both men and horses, or replace them by some more believable barrier, like stone walls.

Rabies said:

How do castles dominate the landscape in the campaign map?

Click to expand...

It is a very good question! As I understand it, pre-modern armies were at a disadvantage near enemy fortifications because it forced them to stay concentrated or be vulnerable to sudden attacks from the castle's garrison. And being concentrated meant they were less efficient at looting and foraging the nearby countryside. If unable to forage, they would quickly starve, as they were not able to carry supplies for long periods. Some civilizations might have been able to establish supply lines, but securing those into enemy territory was probably not feasible.

Unfortunately, these mechanisms are hardly present in Warband. The player's army can carry enough food to live on for a long time, and I am not sure AI armies even need food. The cattle raid quests fit well with the above model for supplies, except they do not seem to have any effect on the campaign besides keeping the player busy and frustrated. And with the lootable wealth concentrated in very few points (1-2 villages per castle/town), attackers do not need to split up to be effective. Thus they are never vulnerable to garrisons and can ignore the castles.

To make castles more useful, I think it will help a lot to simply make AI armies dependent on food and adjusting numbers so armies cannot carry supplies for more than a short period. Cattle raids, looting granaries and even harvesting enemy crops should be an important part of campaigns.

Not so unlike contemporary Roman armies, according to this: https://www.scribd.com/document/252072756/PETERSEN-siege-warfare-and-Military-organization-in-the-successor-states-400800-a-D. See page 149 and onward for Goths.

Looks nice. I especially like the one on the lower right - he looks very happy!

The Finnic tribes meanwhile are represented by the Sons of the Forest, a semi- nomadic clan that practices swidden slash-and-burn agriculture in the depths of the woods.

Click to expand...

Interesting. Will this be represented in the game mechanics? Something like villages/camps that move once in a while? And maybe fully nomadic groups that have no settlements?

AmateurHetman said:

I don’t prefer any of the theories over the other. I know it is true that Vikings were invited to rule in Rus, and I also know Slavic cultures went to Scandinavia and so on.

Click to expand...

That is essentially what the Norman theory is. But it is not generally agreed upon. For an introduction to other theories, you can see page 24 in this dissertation about the historiography of Normanist/Anti-Normanist theories: https://www.duo.uio.no/bitstream/handle/10852/26680/7245.pdf?sequence=2 I guess this discussion fits better in the thread about Sturgians, or the section for actual historical discussion.

lolbash said:

No

Click to expand...

If you disagree, try explaining why. Dickhead.

AmateurHetman said:

Bullet crossbow? those were used more for hunting than military purposes and didn't see use in Europe until the 16th century.

Click to expand...

The least serious of my suggestions. A bit wacky, but at least something new.

kalarhan said:

they mentioned in the blog that this weapon is a rare thingy (hero weapon), you won't see a army of them (something from the 14-15th century).

that means you may get some expensive units (elites) with them, plus if you want your companions.

Click to expand...

Yes, I guess in singleplayer I can mostly opt out of this. But I fear that the two-handed swords will still be ubiquitous in multiplayer.

I hoped that the Vlandians, set in a earlier time than the Swadians, would play and look a little differently. From the screenshots and the fact that couched lances, crossbows and two-handed swords (as a historical justification, I think the single textual reference from the battle by Civitate is not very convincing) are included, they look and sound like an exact copy of the Swadians - a generic, stereotypical representation of Medieval Europe mixing early and late equipment.

Taleworlds, I beg you, at least remove the two-handed swords! Or add some other weapons so the Sw... Vlandians have some variation. Maces, axes, slings, bullet crossbows (a bit wacky, but at least something new). Or make some cosmetic changes that go well with their Norman inspiration, like giving them facemask helmets, coloured helmets, or the distinctive Norman haircut on the Bayeux tapestry. Anything that makes the Vlandians less bland and bleh.

Some photos to illustrate:

And even the best heavy cavalry should think twice about crashing into a wall of spears - even the Normans could not break the shield wall at Hastings, instead wearing it down with combined arms and feints.

Click to expand...

I think Hastings is not a good example for this. I have not studied it in detail, but was not Harold's force on top of a hill, and are not the vast majority of Norman riders depicted using their spear overhanded? Though I do agree that even heavy cavalry should have to be careful against organized infantry. More than in Warband, I hope!

ModusTollens said:

Nearly 2 years after his impeccable captaincy resulting in winning the first Scramble League, Tura "Old but still angry" Turambar decided to rally familiar Reveranites and associated Revenants. After secretly training for a couple of months he now deems the team ready to be personally led by him into the battles of an upcoming tournament.

Click to expand...

Is this for the purpose of recruiting soldiers to his team? Or to find challengers to fight him? In both cases, I say 'Yes, this is my great dream. Take me to your leader.' But I can contact him directly, I guess.

Yes, OK, October is nice too!

OK, thanks. No whirlpools in my home.