Recent content by roadworker

Spectacular Knight said:

The player characters's children will always inherit the player's culture, all other children will randomly inherit culture from either their father or their mother.

Names are set separately, girls will get a name from their mother's culture, and boys from their father's.

I don't think there are any bugs here. Are you certain your daughters ever had imperial culture?

Click to expand...

i am a 100% sure. it was the whole reason i made that playthrough, to check if they fixed the inheritance. daughter is supposed to inherit mothers culture, and sons their fathers. i clapped my hands when it finally looked right because i put off playing the game until it was fixed, because of the consequences it creates down the line

it is not just their names but also how they dress and what skills they can develop, just like when you start a new character the choices you get depend on the culture you picked. the names, outfits and skills are right, but the wrong culture ruins their ancestry generation after generation

when it was the other way around, people would instead argue that its because mothers spend most time with children so she influences both. even if you are playing as the woman and dont hang around, or if you make your wife a party leader, or have her travel with you at all times. no sense. people can keep making up arguments for why these bugs make sense, but they are still bugs

as long as this bug gets fixed. i dont feel the game is so playable when it comes to future generations with it going on. i also prefer thats its mother - daughter, father - son inheritance. that just seems to make more sense than making it random or father only. i mean it looks like what you intended in the first place? the sons dress up and fight like their father, while daughters dress up and fight like their mother, only right now both cultures come from mothers side

i wonder if this is an idea worth noting, but to me it is a bit off putting that ai always knows the garrison and state of towns and castles, while player has to do manual scouting. maybe both the player and ai has the ability to send out scouts who are vulnerable to attack but are fast moving, their sole purpose to scout places you/ai ask them to and make them return with the info as soon as they can, kind of like when the player is asked by a vassal to do scouting

the player could ask a vassal in their army to go do the scouting, and the ai can do the same, or ask you through a quest. you and the ai could send out several scouts at once if many fiefs have to be checked

this way both the ai and player only have information on fiefs as fresh as whats procured from the scouts, if they make it back at all. if they dont, then the ai has to make a half-informed guess at best, and stick with it, even if its a bad one. or they will have to go check around fiefs themselves before making a final decision


plus all of that, i think the ai should make much more smarter decisions on what they are capable of. if they have an army with over 1000 units, they should not go dig around for low garrison, poorly maintained fiefs, they should utilize their strength to capture a bigger prize. if they have over 2000 units, they should look for the juiciest and most difficult targets to capture. right now it looks like ai just picks the weakest target, regardless of army size. some clan leader can make a small army that does not take too many volunteers to go pick the weak ones, leaving more volunteers available for bigger conquests. overall, ai should just be smarter with how they make and distribute army forces. i have also noticed that clans who own no fiefs will never create armies. i think it should only be based on the influence they have to spare, otherwise kingdoms with many lost fiefs are in too much trouble

agreed. maybe something like "+1 troop slot unlocked when recruiting from same culture", or available instead of unlocked

i thought about it too that it would be nice to pass on leadership before death, something that cannot be undone, making your main character a clan member instead

froggyluv said:

Find this irksome. Too hard? Theyre Lords and not supposed to be easily dispatched Day 1 of the game by a green player. i just dont get these types of gamers -dont you want to develop a skillset even over years to best the best? I wish the enemy AI did more, Duck, Evade, Push, Bash, Charge, Warcry and generally the highest level of aggression or cold duelist mentality possible. What makes fighting fun.

Click to expand...

yeah what the hell? i was also wondering if i was just really rusty when i played the game when it came out, i remember it being somewhat difficult, and tourneys posing a real challenge (also remember khuzait darkhan was ridiculously well armored but i assumed it was intentional, that got nerfed) and now my lvl 1 characters beat every tourney available and is always on the top of the leaderboard in their 30s, no matter how many points i invested in fighting, if none at all

they added a difficulty option... the highest difficulty should always pose a challenge to those well into the game, that should be the whole point of having the options. but thats just not how it works. i bought the game to one of my friends and watched his stream, and i frankly just told him to put the difficulty to highest because it would not matter. after getting used to the combat he did well and won tournaments and beat a fair amount of looters without any troops, he probably forgot it was on highest difficulty at that point

Kentucky 『 ＨＥＩＧＵＩ 』 James said:

The point of kicks is to punish excessive blocking, I haven't tested it in bannerlord but in warband landing a kick on a block gave you like half a second of stagger over the blocker. If the AI did this properly the kicks wouldn't be an opportunity for the player because they would be staggered by the kick for longer than the kick animation.

Click to expand...

i like the idea of kicks punishing blocks. i just wish ai also knew how to punish hit and runs on foot (itching to do it as a two-handed athletic battanian vs many footmen), or use the same filthy tactic against the player and while they are at it they can make cavalry more consistent with hitting, calculating their own speed, so footmen dont suddenly have an obvious advantage in combat. as it is now, fast cavalry is only good against chasing down other cavalry, nothing else. they are too stupid for everything else

also dont understand why foot archers and foot skirmishers do just fine calculating where the enemy will be at when the shot reaches them, but horse archers and horse skirmishers dont. cant really be faulted on not calculating their own movement, or can it? otherwise they just completely ignore the movement of their opponent. im thinking in terms of khuzait tourneys - ive had khuzait tourney matches (single rounds) take up to 5 mins to complete, where on average other matches take 30-60 sec. there are so many problems with the ai combat that keeps me awake at night

Yoshioki Ouchi said:

I like to play it safe by making as many kids as possible as soon as possible lol. Or, at least, an heir per bloodline down the line. At least until "retirement" is implemented, it's actually a bit of a risk to live too long relative to your designated heir because, well, if you die at 70 and you had your picked child at 25, then they'll be 45 and nearing death when you enter them.




I'm not sure where (officially) you read of the political system being a placeholder--I've seen disgruntled players say this but nothing official. Unfortunately, since the game's still in development despite being "officially done," it's impossible to be sure of anything since we could be 6 months away from a major overhaul of this or that or it could be "properly done" with only bug fixes and minor additions before possible DLCs.

Relations DO NOT factor into fief voting unlike Warband, I can confirm that much since the developers actually spelled out how fief voting is determined, but I cannot say what relations does and does not impact otherwise.

I'm not sure what determines bride/groom costs; I know when I, as my daughter, became sultan and went husband hunting, I eventually have up on the third or fourth rejection and just "bought" a husband and found I could be paid ~20,000 denars if I wanted to be lol. She had high Medicine but low other skills and was of Clan Tier 6 negotiating with a Tier 4 or 5, so I'm not sure what determines pricing here. I did not convince my husband-to-be to marry me (I know succeeding this minigame greatly adjusts pricing to be more favorable to the player) so maybe I could have charged far more if I had (not that it would matter--I was a multi-millionaire lol).





Both; youth speeds up growth and old age retards it AND successive generations are blessed with more initial Attribute and Focus points. If you have, I dunno, 3 kids, spaced out in such a way that you had your first when you and your spouse were in their early 20's and the last in your mid 30's, you'll likely find your youngest child the most blessed with Attributes and Focus points (at least in my anecdotal experience that I only noticed a possible discrepency in after the fact...).

Therefore, when a character approaches 50 years of age, their growth rates diminish considerably and while they're teenagers they're super-charged. PLUS inherited bonuses (that I suspect are based on the stats of the parents, but I'm not sure).

Click to expand...

idk how to do parted up replies so i will try like this (lol nvm i literally just found out how to by *trying to do it like this* - copy pasting the part)

well, if you die at 70 and you had your picked child at 25, then they'll be 45 and nearing death when you enter them.

Click to expand...

yes haha, and i think thats intentional too. its to make it very risky to do a matriarchy, but no problem to do a patriarchy. after all, sons and nephews always stay in your clan except for matriarchy marriage, so you can have them married whenever you like, make an heir whenever you like. daughters, not so much, **especially** when going for the first born first right rule. i assume the point is that no one in this game willfully accepts to marry away their sons, its seen as a disgrace, and only accepted if the woman is of importance (clan leader). so in case of a patriarchy, i dont think how old your current character becomes is that big of a deal, you can always secure the heir for each generation as long as its run by men

Relations DO NOT factor into fief voting unlike Warband, I can confirm that much since the developers actually spelled out how fief voting is determined, but I cannot say what relations does and does not impact otherwise.

Click to expand...

so with the whole placeholder thing + this. i dont know if its a placeholder, i went around saying that with an "i think", before i saw others say it and so i just assumed it was fact and spilled it out as such. so to put it more correctly, it *feels* like a placeholder compared to how warband worked. warband feels like the real sequel in comparison, that is why i assume it must be a placeholder and needs to be remade

the political system overall does not feel very complex. a lot of the generic non-fief related votes just seem to be ruler vs the rest, even if the ruler is a sacred majesty or known for bad temper. or not just prioritizing, but only making choices between who is closest to the new fief, prioritizing those with no fiefs first. meaning those with rich safe towns that dont need high garrison + also have a good income, never get to use this income to protect new fiefs. but those protecting fiefs on the frontline, stretched thin with poor income and lack of budget for garrison, are expected to protect even more vulnerable fiefs, over and over again

i also dont like how votes are predetermined and that the player is always last. again, in warband there was an actual moment of voting, where the player could tell other vassals who they voted for and try to use relations split between the player and the voted on, to ask for support, needing high pathfinding and good scouting to get around to as many as possible, or taking advantage of feasts. i would like for the votes to be more dynamic before the actual vote happens, also among the ai, countering in their traits and relations (though i do agree negative relations should not be the most prioritized, it ruined warbands voting system - ai should be willing to use votes to fix poor relations)

but just think about clan leaders generally telling you they support your vote, and thats true, but then you hear the same from a deceiving personality, and they end up voting something else than they promised and then the game forces your relations down to simulate the distrust

I'm not sure what determines bride/groom costs; I know when I, as my daughter, became sultan and went husband hunting, I eventually have up on the third or fourth rejection and just "bought" a husband and found I could be paid ~20,000 denars if I wanted to be lol. She had high Medicine but low other skills and was of Clan Tier 6 negotiating with a Tier 4 or 5, so I'm not sure what determines pricing here. I did not convince my husband-to-be to marry me (I know succeeding this minigame greatly adjusts pricing to be more favorable to the player) so maybe I could have charged far more if I had (not that it would matter--I was a multi-millionaire lol).

Click to expand...

(cant evn remember with sons and nephews, if you also get to bargain for a price for yourself and not the other way around - kind of weird if yes) yes i am not sure about this because obviously in the beginning of the game when you are bargaining for yourself, the chances of succeeding the courting minigame greatly increases the more skills you have developed, plus the traits you gather, but skills seems to impact the most. when you are some 50-60 year old and you have to remarry, all the minigame choices are almost always 100% chance to succeed. but you obviously dont do a minigame on behalf of your daughters and nieces but it would seem logical that their skills do play a role, when it does for the player during the minigame

Both; youth speeds up growth and old age retards it AND successive generations are blessed with more initial Attribute and Focus points.

Click to expand...

okay that is good to know, and interesting feature. i usually play up to three generations with not much having happened on the world map since then, because i try to blend in with the ai and not be some superhero. so the grannies too are blessed with more attributes and focus points so it really is good to know it plays a role when you start developing their skills

JunKeteer said:

The only way to fix the combat further in this game is adding other options that both the player and AI can utilize; whether in 1v1 or against 3v1. Upping the stat numbers here or there doesn't change the fundamental issues with this type of combat in games.
Shield bashes/kicks sort of work in that element, but the AI need to have that tool too. Crouching...still really don't know what this does except that 'rare' dodge you can chance; among all the other player-only 'dodges' we use against thrust/downstroke attacks - or sometimes cheese along the walls. There's no stamina factor (akin to RBM posture) - though this one, can understand why it might not be well liked by a majority.

afaik, there is one already 'duelist' or something? and I think another that boosts the swing speed that multiplies that too.

Click to expand...

i dont really think the ai needs more combat options although it would of course be welcome. first of all combat needs to have a real progressive line where no points in it actually makes you terrible. the player can beat a tournament with zero skills in combat, that already puts ai in a clear disadvantage. secondly, ai reactions are extremely poor even on highest difficulty, in some cases its entirely bugged how its delayed. if you have seen fast cavalry trying to take down a fleeing enemy on foot you know what i mean. or watching khuzait tournaments... the worst tournaments in the game when trying to level clan skills

it also used to be that in warband, if you tried to do hit and run on foot, at least in third person, the game would punish you for doing that and you most likely got hit. your character did not wheel according to how you turned your view, it took a while for them to make a turn and would continue to run the opposite direction you were looking for a second, so you could not slash an enemy, and dodge their attack right after. if it cant work the same in bannerlord, with too fast and far turning being slow both on first and third person, then the ai should also be able to run out of reach from your attacks or run in circles around you, so you have to be flexible with catching up to them or suffer if your athletics is too low. and if the ai prepares an attack before they turn around again, you have to do mirrored blocking which could be an interesting challenge, like seeing their weapon in one direction but having to block the opposite direction, at least without shield

its kind of similar to elder scrolls oblivion even though that games combat was pretty dumb overall. but the ai with high athletics could circle around you so fast it was impossible to keep up, which was pretty challenging and encouraged you to move away instead of trying to spam attacks

yeah.. i kept in mind that duelist was actually a perk, but somehow forgot about it answering that post... i think in my mind i didnt even want it to be a perk, but a natural bonus regardless of skill. but i think it still works as it is. i dont think the game will ever encourage me to use daggers in the first place though, i keep that as a novelty for roguish companions using throwing knives too. smithing daggers gotta have some use

Lesbosisles said:

For my character it was like this:
20-25: pregnant, pregnant, pregnant
26-35: pregnant....
36-43 (for now): totally sterile.

I guess, if you have 3 or 4 children in your early twenties (meaning if your PC is a female), then chances of conceiving another one decrease dramatically and it gets even lower as your PC gets older.

Click to expand...

yes haha like i said, pregnancy reduces fertility significantly faster than age does. you can have a 20 year old woman who has pumped out kids since she was 18 and already have three kids, who will first be able to have another child in her 30s, or you can maybe have a 40 year old woman who can also produce at least three children before going sterile. so starting out at an early age is only if you dont want to take any risks, in case you or your partner might simply have a low reproduction chance from the get-go. then you want all the time in the world possible. but for anyone who is not supposed to be your heir, you can be more relaxed about who they marry and focus more on how it benefits your clan, ie what skills do they bring in / what money you can get out of it / relationship building with certain clans. finding the right partners, or holding on to daughters and nieces, is especially useful if you are trying to do a no companion playthrough - simulating to be like other clans

like yoshioki mentioned, the way you bargain for money is either a choice between the cash or relation gains, so its up to you what you are going for. if bannerlord works like warband, then making sure you are friend with anyone, including enemies, will make sure fewer raid your villages out of spite and that allies vote for you (the political system is a wobbly placeholder currently though). and if they ever should want to defect from their liege, having good relations with them improves the chance of them joining your side. but i mostly just go for the cash, and instead release prisoners for the relation gain if the war allows it. if i remember correctly, then good relations in warband also allowed you to use these relations to weasel your way out of a fight, costing 10 relation points. but thats yet something implemented in bannerlord. as for the cash, i think the more developed your child is, the more money you can take for their marriage, so marrying off 18 yo should be less valuable than marrying off a 35 yo well developed person. at least, if it doesnt work like that, i think it should. you are saving other clans time from having to develop their skills, and their fertility change should not be noticeable

yoshioki: oh i thought you meant like they actually speed up learning at a young age. like if you have this poor 40 yo woman who has been rotting as a governor forever and then finally get to go fighting, her focus points in fighting are going to be as impactful as someone at age 18 with equal focus and lack of learning, or will it be different?

Yoshioki Ouchi said:

I an attest to this; therefore, I don't recommend stressing about fertility because you're pretty much guaranteed AT LEAST one child, quite likely 2-3 without even really trying.

However, to answer the original question (that I'm late for); I'd answer ASAP since more family members equals more stuff you can do and also people to play on as should you die either naturally or violently. I prefer close age ranges (for obvious reasons) so I'd recommend getting your sons shipped ASAP as well but not marry any daughters out unless you're playing as them (because otherwise you'll lose them).

As for skills... I prefer spouses with combat-oriented skills because I'm never going to have my own spouse outside my unit since I want to maximize fertility (and I like to have them around lol) so anything for party leaders or governors is kinda useless on them. I'd even do this for wives of sons (other male relatives) because I at least want them paired together until they have 2 kids (including at least one son) so I can "secure their bloodlines" since they don't make babies unless they spend time together (and there's no way they're spending time together if leading separate battle parties lol and the governor trick is both horribly slow/unreliable and outright buggy as of the latest patch). But I mainly just marry whoever's willing and not fugly while still being in an acceptable age range lol. I don't prioritize their skills since they can grow into what they need over time anyway.

EDIT: Note that youth (for both players and NPCs) amplifies the rate at which their skills develop while old age retards it, so keep that in mind... overall.

Click to expand...

i also want to add to this that you should reject marriage proposals if you have no good reason to accept them. theyre practically tryin to scam you just for goodwill. if you make your own proposals, you get to bargain for money, squeeze the suitors dry, let them know your daughters may not be invaluable, but they are worth something

i didnt know about the learning by age, explains why my two young daughters are quickly becoming rampant fighters when i let them lead their own parties (while i do my best to reject every marriage proposal ) only send them off to marry first when they can fend for themselves, and for good luck

also, i think if you take your time to win the romance miniquizz, you get to marry them for free. asking for a suitor through clan leader adds in the bargaining price. so yes i think its more valuable long term to drag through dating, rather than arranging marriage, since marrying early isnt always a guarantee for many children, as the fertility threatens to dive for each birth more than age does

i have checked the age of every woman giving birth in my last playthrough, so if your question is about heir chances here is what i have gathered

teenage women: high fertility, but they have an unusually high death rate from birth, especially from first born child, though it could just be a coincidence (and is not exclusive to young age, i have seen 40 year old women perish for same reason)
20-25: high fertility, (probably) more safe births
26-35: decent fertility, can have quite a lot of kids in this timespan alone
36-45: if they are virgins, a pregnancy is almost always guaranteed, otherwise by this age their fertility is (getting) low
46-55 low fertility, or lost fertility

for each child birth, pregnancy becomes rarer. something out of control, random chances, also affect fertility. you could marry a young woman who has not married before and still struggle to have children for many years, no matter how much you spend time on it (been there, only had two kids overall, and if i remember right she died on the second birth )

on my current playthrough i played as a woman and got late into marrying, around mid 30s, but i still managed to have 5 children

for male fertility, it looks like their fertility is strong all the way up to age 50 (not counting in random gene factors), then it declines. i have seen 60 yo's still impregnate women of all ages, so i assume their fertility disappears completely between the age of 65-70

Yoshioki Ouchi said:

I didn't know I could do that! I'll load up my save and check it out (and edit this post later)...

Yeah, I really enjoy seeing the timeline of people aging as well, I had a great 48-year first playthrough so many people lived, were born, and died in that time frame and my oldest grandkids were almost 18 by the time I unified Calradia as my eldest child/daughter (who was 43 where I left off in 1132).

It was a surprise, a sad one at that, but not too unexpected because I figured I'd probably die in my 50's and made sure my new kingdom could handle not being led by me while I spent a season "in the hospital" and hurrying up my daughter (who was leading a clan party) back to my own unit so I could smoothly transition authority (and player-control) to her. Unfortunately, I overestimated how many troops she could lead by a factor of 100 or so but it wasn't a big loss since I could dump out low tier units in Senala to make room for them, but it was a big shift from ~500 to ~350 or so (including the kingdom policies that boosted how many troops I could lead by 80 cumulatively). I even had some nice RTK6 and 7 music to add more ambiance to my own funeral and subsequent election... It did interrupt my campaigning around Ortyisa, but, thankfully, the Vlandians didn't take the opportunity to attack me during this moment of weakness and their King Erdurand (son of Derthert, he took over during the very first year of my playthrough) actually died of natural causes just 2 seasons after I died. Epic coincidence.

I thought the medical perk to avert serious illness would apply if granted by a medic (my doctor ended up living into her 80's!) but it didn't, so I got the notification that I was slipping in and out of consciousness shortly after I turned 49.


EDIT: According to the Encyclopedia, the oldest person ever at the time of their death was a woman named Zerosica "of Phadon's Clan" at the age of 92, dying of natural causes in 1124. The oldest person alive is a man named Joron Leonipardes at the age of 87. Then it's living lady Agnala of the Qarais' Clan at 86, dead lord Arcor of the Osticos at age 85 in 1118, living mercenary captain Valaos of the Embers of the Flame at 84, and so on. Emperor Lucon's the oldest living monarch who died at the age of 81 n 1103; Yarli Bloodaxe is my oldest living companion, 81 as of now (and ironically spent most of his life as a governor lol); the oldest CURRENT monarch is Urik Kuloving, aged 72, King of Sturgia while the youngest (not counting independent clans or mecenaries) is Queen Loen dey Meroc of Vlandia, aged 38.

Click to expand...

omg the young queen haha xD reminds me in my current playthrough, lucon the king of northern empire passed early (52 something) and who was he replaced by? some 20 year old nobody boy. im not lying when i say their kingdom quickly crumbled after that. they have had only one fief for many, many years now that they are diehard guarding, i like to think its all the young kings fault. why the heck did they elect a kiddo, who wasnt even the son or part of lucons clan? i think he is in his mid thirties now, soon 40, he hasnt been married once. hands down the most unattractive, most unsuccesful, and most failing king in bannerlord history

i think they should first fix the combat. i agree that blocking without shield against fast weapons are very difficult, but on the other hand its insanely easy against slower weapons even on highest difficulty. there are a lot tournaments that feature very slow weapons (aserai long sables for instance) so you could go about blocking as much as you want in one match and gain skill or exp with zero consequences

at least for fixing the combat when it comes to this, ai should be less easy to manipulate. how you can block and hit with no obstacles, and with the ai eventually lowering their block for no reason and take the predictable incoming hit... they should be more mobile, dodging your attacks and retaliating with an already prepped attack, then i think blocking should grant exp, because then you dont just need to block predictable attacks, you also need to make a turn (ai is also insanely stupid when you do this against them)

reiksmarshal: "How about a perk the gives you + 20% damage for not having a shield? I usually run with a crossbow, voulge, and a mace so I don't have space for a shield in my load out."

i absolutely agree with this idea though, if its a perk added to one handed weapons only. i wish it was a common addition for every fighting game, perk or not. why am i expected to use a dagger and a shield, makes no sense. let me just wield the dagger and get a damage bonus for allegedly using it in a wieldy sneaky way, the way it was intended. you would also have more power in your swings when you get to use the force of both hands to hammer down a one handed mace into someones face

there is a game i know that makes use of it, and thats battle brothers. it makes very good sense in that game since shields are otherwise a nobrainer. having a dagger guy who can dig through armor and hurt them directly, makes sense to boost his damage as much as possible so he makes swift work of heavy armored opponents, sacrificing defenses

but i think first the devs of m&b really need to do something about the damage scale? like why am i able to damage so much at zero skill levels with a crappy weapon in the first place. if i tried to do the same in warband, unless i had a good speed bonus from riding against an opponent, i would always deliver 0 damage, with insane speed bonus i might be lucky to damage somewhere above 10. or you can at the very least put a hurt on some unarmored or civilian dressed troop. bannerlord is too cautious with making combat easy to learn and easy to master. it feels pointless to put full focus points into fighting skills unless you are eyeing for the perks alone for better leading. the damage boosts and attack speed/ranged accuracy quickly become an overkill. like my current playthrough i have just 3 focus points into polearm and i still slaughter enemies with up to 600 damage and can down any heavily armored troop in one hit. i also didnt spend that much points into riding. i dont recall having thrown that insane an amount of cash on a deadly weapon, just 2000-4000 ish. seems strange to me when there are weapons costing up to 60.000. now why would you buy them when a cheap weapon in comparison with only half maxed skill is enough

the way i understand it, putting all focus points into a skill should be because you dont want any situation where your damage is diminished, or you want to be lethal with the crappiest weapons possible, which would make more sense if they implement enemy looting your equipment. putting zero focus points into a skill is because you dont expect fighting with that weapon, ever, as it should do jack. i am winning tournaments using fighting skills i neglected, and i frankly hate it. then theres the middle road, get one or two points into a fighting skill, and let an expensive weapon take care of the rest