Recent content by VincentNZ

I do think the analysis looks sound, I do have other things to add that though. The Battanians are in a similar state where they can be attacked by many factions and are likely to be at war with more than one. Additionally, when fighting on two fronts losing two successive battles (and with that castles and/or towns) has a far larger effect, so these factions are indeed more easily steamrolled, simply via position.
As for the Khuzait is also very worth noting that here Geography plays a good role in defending, as the Makeb Chokepoint can easily be held against the Northern Empire, to the south Aserai would have to cross a day's worth of no man's land to get to the nearest town, while Danustica is indeed just around the corner.
Additionally Khuzait are cavalry centric and therefore faster on the map, meaning they can reach further, can retreat, chase and converge more effectively, especially since their home turf is also pretty dense, as all towns are within a day's or less reach. The Sturgians have more mountains and forests that will slow down the enemy, but more importantly themselves in a country that is basically one long stretch.
Also the Sturgians have the problem that their chokepoint against Battania and Vlandia is not secured by a town and that their town south of the mainland, which serves as a foothold, is hard to defend and therefore simply invites invasions.
I am also unsure, if the AI is always using geography to its advantage and if complicated geography actually hinders their movement more than the player. Generally AI scripts sometimes seem to complicated to be used correctly. For example Tyal was under Siege by the Khuzait and the main Sturgian force was too weak to defend or relief the town, so they decided to attack an underdefended castle in Khuzait mainland. Generally not a totally bad idea. However it took the Sturgians two days to reach it and another day to siege it. In that time Tyal siege was almost over (generally sieges seem way too fast) and while they managed to take the castle, they then spread out and got mopped up one by one by a way faster Khuzait army, leaving the Sturgians in a state worse than they were before or if they just tried to relief Tyal.
.
Something that should be considered is a 10% speed boost for Sturgians in the forests and mountains so they can coverge and retreat quicker as well as a general speed boost to all factions on their original home turf. Also the option for AI parties to make a makeshift defensive fort when being chases to level the odds a little. Like the wagon fort of F&S.

Yeah there is a huge issue with notifications and general awareness of the current political situation. I only ever really notice when cities or castles switch possession, when I see a faction taking multiple prisoners at once. And even that only tells me that something switched sides.
At no stage I ever know who is still at war with whom, when peace or war starts or what the current strength of certain factions is.
Also the general UI is not very well thought out, as you will often miss notifications, because they disappear after a couple of seconds and are then gone. They also disappear whenever you load a new screen, which happens a lot in this game and the fade-out timer does not stop either when your game stops or lags for whatever reason.
There needs to be multiple changes:
- A political tab where you have direct access to the current political situation, with stats, bars, graphs recent news and notifications
- Where the notifications arise a way to keep them permanent, like a small chat window that is open and shows the latest notifications,
- Options to increase the fade-out timer and the amount of messages you will receive there as well as different colour coding so you know who/what/when as well as many more notifications. Throw in some rumours as well.

Dabos37 said:

In my current games in beta 1.2, peace time exists for some few days and for some factions like Vlandia.

On the other hand, there are not much to do when factions are at peace and I doubt that feasts would change much.

Click to expand...

It is important for the persistent game world they created, as right now the longer the wars last, the bigger the bandit issues get, the more likely is a snowball etc..
Peacetime is needed for the AI to get economy back in line, let Lords recruit armies and level them so you do not encounter dozens of recruits.

I really do not see the issue with the Khuzaits on the battlefield, especially when the argument stems from the T2 horse archers. They are, as horse archers always are, a compromise.
The later versions are way better, especially when their horses are barded and their general armour increased. They can then also double als a lighter shock cavalry giving them more utility once their arrows are depleted. However these are T4-6 units, so nothing that you will regularly see (especially not Khan's Guard). Plus they have an extra cost via horses.
The biggest issue indeed stems from their additional movement speed on the campaign map, as this makes it easier for the AI to coordinate attacks, get away from stronger enemies and so forth.
However I mostly view this as a problem of the AI itself and the general campaign movement speed to low, especially for infantry heavy factions. It seems that all factions follow the same AI scripts and that might favour the Khuzait more. I have not seen a playthrough in any case where the Khuzait did not take Amprela 40 days into the campaign. I do not know if that validates any nerf to the Khuzait though.

I liked lances until I found a glaive. Highest hit so far was 290. It is also quite a funny animation, when you sweep a looter from his feet.

Yeah this is a classic case where game mechanics have to trump authenticity. Armour already does give quite the protection especially at further ranges. There is always room for tweaking, but in the grand scheme of things they did well.

LordKay said:

What the actual ****.

Out of all the civilizations in the world, I really doubt any had a warrior armored like this. This is more a storyteller/shaman costume than actual combat gear...

Click to expand...

They are based off the berserkers, light infantry troops the germanic tribes had. The etymology of their name is supposed to either come from "bear", although this is disputed, as fur is heavy.
More likely it was formed out of the word "bar" today in German a prefix meaning no clothes. Very comparable to the English "bare", as in "bare-naked".
.
They appear in nordic folkore as well around the 9th century, where they are often described as wearing wolf-fur and fighting without consideration of their personal well-being. They are also said to fight without body armour. However outside of folklore there are little sources on their actual use and/or equipment. So there is your reference.
.
Just like with many things in Bannerlord it is a not a mirror of our medieval times, but with added flavour drawn from sagas, their own lore and pop-culture.

Family Feud only broke once for me, the train troops quest is indeed borked, yet the rest are absolutely working, especially the "X wants his daughter found" quest, as you can solve it in three different ways:
Either you let them go, convince them to go back themselves, or kill the dude and bring her back yourself. The extortion of deserters I is tricky since you need an army for the 28 enemies, but you will know how to deal with after the first failure. These are all issues I had so far.

Cèsar de Quart said:

Come on, it's my first playthrough, I win my first horse trophy, and then it magically vanishes because some cataphract needed it more than me? Don't you think this is a bad engagement loop?

It's not annoying, it feels like a broken thing within the game. Things I win in tournaments shoult not be used up by unit upgrades, especially when nowhere does it say that I can lock it so that it doesn't happen.

You can shrug it off as "whoff, learn the game!", but this is already a game which doesn't tell you jackpot about how anything works. Adding another thing to the pile, when it's as avoidable as "lock any items the player wins in tournaments", doesn't seem like good game design, does it?

Click to expand...

Sorry if I came off too harsh there. I agree that this is, like many things, not very intuitive. In EA, besides content and mechanics the game is missing polish. I fear stuff like this is to be expected for some more weeks. I do not consider it broken, the game is missing help, hints and convenience tools at the moment.
However, now you know the workarounds to these issues until they are getting fixed.
I would agree that T4 horses should not be eligible for unit upgrading, as they seem to be rather rare, however I do think that elite units needing a standard horse and then a warhorse is good design, it limits cavalry, which are the most elite troops and adds an economic factor.

Cèsar de Quart said:

It still makes little sense that a random highwayman takes my prized tournament horse which I can't still ride because I'm not at 90 riding yet.

When this happened to me the first time, I though "hum. This is absurd". All of your "named" or "won" equipment should be locked by default.

Click to expand...

As said you can lock them and they should not be used for upgrades. Also in the end, unless it is your first playthrough, you know that upgrading uses horses and that you need to be careful about it. As another workaround you can hire a companion whose riding skill often will be sufficient and lock the horse this way. I get that it is annoying, but it is avoidable.
A steppe warhorse is purchaseable for 500+ and the units using them are T4 and upwards, hence I think the cost is justified.

The helmets are based on real examples and, as with all gear, pop-cultural influences to reflect a period we call the medieval times. It also portrays a wide variety of cultures and land area, ranging from today's western europe to the steppes of central asia and from the scandinavian north to the north african arid deserts.
Yes, they are taking some liberties, however in the grand scheme of things they are doing well visually.

Yeah the issue gets more pronounced in rather confined areas and/or areas that have a lot of difficult terrain to traverse. It does have dire consequences, as certain villages basically are cut-off from everything. So lords can not replenish, they can not sell their goods etc.. And of course nobody can go after them, but the player. The fact that hideouts right now are a big challenge to anyone makes them prone to just left alone, too.
So the things needed are:
- Peacetime
- Adjusted spawnrates and/or less hideouts
- A manhunter faction dedicated to wiping them out. They do not have to be very good, but at least to get rid of some parties or killing a few bandits in the bigger ones.

Kniggit said:

What do the letters mean? I see some icons have "S", "I", "O" on them.

Click to expand...

Salt and Iron . As these have no clear icons, just goods in a baskets. Edit: And Olives to differentiate it from Beer.

Brave_Lung said:

Yes and kings will have always armies with peasants armed with forks right? In which world?
It depends how the armies were formed! In 14th century's europe they payed for well armed armies in order to push back the ottoman invasion!
They didn't always just fought with peasants untrained and unarmed. They would never win.
In fact in the majority of cases they won in inferiority using good tactics and well armed calvary. The knights etc.

What about making the game less boring? Do you want to charge your calvary on peasants forever?
Do you think the game is ok like this?
It doesn't make sense at all. It's all idiotic repetition of senseless battles against peasants and these Lords come again and again and again. At a certain point you wander yourself, what the hell am I doing here?

Like I said, Warband had almost the same problem, they didn't learn at all.

Click to expand...

I just wanted to iterate on the issue of authenticity of armies full of plates. And yes, Kings often had their personal houseguard, however they called their lords into war, which recruited their soldiers from their fiefs i.e, peasants. There are many examples of professional armies, that are well equipped I agree, however those were mercenaries AND expensive. I agree their is an issue that money handling of lords is pretty crap and game mechanics really enforce that with constant war, no training mechanics and recruitment resources being the same for everyone and limited. This is an issue and a big one at that.

You might want to include what the workshops of the cities make at the start, too. Great map!
Edit: And one question: The villages bound to castles, where do they bring their goods?