Castles value

Users who are viewing this thread

Are there any plans to add any meaning to castles? Right now they are just useless markers for bound villages owning. They have no strategic or wealth meaning. You cannot sustain a basic low/mid tier garrison with profits from them not even talking about main party costs. I know there is a lot ways to make profit but none of them is something you can focus on except of fighting. Also being a lord and castle owner is less 0rofitable than being a mercenary.
 
You cannot sustain a basic low/mid tier garrison with profits from them not even talking about main party costs.

With the -50% garrison wage for castles perk + the others (-20% for ranged, -5% overall garrison cost, etc.) I think they are a lot more viable as main party stash houses now.
 
With the -50% garrison wage for castles perk + the others (-20% for ranged, -5% overall garrison cost, etc.) I think they are a lot more viable as main party stash houses now.

I agree but before getting to this point you must become merchant/ warlord landowner to get enough money and experience which at least for me breaks possibility for landowner focused playthrough. It's also not enough to maintain other clan members parties.
 
With the -50% garrison wage for castles perk + the others (-20% for ranged, -5% overall garrison cost, etc.) I think they are a lot more viable as main party stash houses now.
Are these governor perks? (sorry can't check right now)

I agree but before getting to this point you must become merchant/ warlord landowner to get enough money and experience which at least for me breaks possibility for landowner focused playthrough. It's also not enough to maintain other clan members parties.
Yeah definitely still need caravans/workshops if you only have a castle. I agree there seems to be no real benefits from them, as they arent used what they were used for in history, hiding and defending in them, the AI just wont go in them to defend because they can be exploited (reason given by devs).
 
why not remove the perk for half wages adn reduce the cost based on teir e.g.g teir 1s are free or 90% cheaper adn so on till like teir 6 troops are only like 20% off there upkeep meaning a castle cant just be filled with elite troops for 50% reduction in pay
 
In general buildings need more value, not just on an economic way.

I think is normal not be able to keep a big garrison on a castle, since the fount of wealth is a little town next to it, so I think it does make sense to keep wealth throught battles, trading, workshops, caravans...

But yes, castles must have meaning. I would focus cities on a more economic way, improving a lot management on it giving the player a lot of upgrades and ways to increase income, and on the other way, castles focused on war power.

War power like training soldiers, change defenses system so you can improve it multiple times adding stuff paying upgrades such as burning oil, better siege weapons, better walls, reloadable arrows, traps outside, dunno, a lot of stuff.

Thoose are stupid ideas maybe, but the point is that castles should have meaning.
 
Castles should do at least some of the following:
Reduce the wages of the garrisons in them by default.
Train the troops inside them much faster.
Allow you to recruit noble troops from them.
Automatically recruit troops to fill the garrison from the surrounding villages.
Automatically send out troops to defend nearby villages from raids or aid nearby armies in battle.
Send out small patrols to wipe out any bandits.
Serve as a hideout for smaller armies and parties fleeing from bigger ones.

As they are right now they don't have any value at all, as most of their value comes from villages that the AI can easily raid no matter how amazingly upgraded and staffed your castle is.
 
Castles should do at least some of the following:
Reduce the wages of the garrisons in them by default.
Train the troops inside them much faster.
Allow you to recruit noble troops from them.
Automatically recruit troops to fill the garrison from the surrounding villages.
Automatically send out troops to defend nearby villages from raids or aid nearby armies in battle.
Send out small patrols to wipe out any bandits.
Serve as a hideout for smaller armies and parties fleeing from bigger ones.

As they are right now they don't have any value at all, as most of their value comes from villages that the AI can easily raid no matter how amazingly upgraded and staffed your castle is.
this is almost everything on my wishlist for castles.
I would like to add the following.
- NPC's you could talk to for the above mentioned functionality
- Fight as you governor in a defensive siege if your MC is far away
- zone of control around the castle. Small enemy parties would not dare to come close to a castle garrison that can easily defeat hem.
 
Castles should do at least some of the following:
Reduce the wages of the garrisons in them by default.
Train the troops inside them much faster.
Allow you to recruit noble troops from them.
Automatically recruit troops to fill the garrison from the surrounding villages.
Automatically send out troops to defend nearby villages from raids or aid nearby armies in battle.
Send out small patrols to wipe out any bandits.
Serve as a hideout for smaller armies and parties fleeing from bigger ones.

As they are right now they don't have any value at all, as most of their value comes from villages that the AI can easily raid no matter how amazingly upgraded and staffed your castle is.
those are good suggestions. please post them in the suggestions section. it seems devs do go through them.
 
Castles should do at least some of the following:
Reduce the wages of the garrisons in them by default.
Train the troops inside them much faster.
Allow you to recruit noble troops from them.
Automatically recruit troops to fill the garrison from the surrounding villages.
Automatically send out troops to defend nearby villages from raids or aid nearby armies in battle.
Send out small patrols to wipe out any bandits.
Serve as a hideout for smaller armies and parties fleeing from bigger ones.

As they are right now they don't have any value at all, as most of their value comes from villages that the AI can easily raid no matter how amazingly upgraded and staffed your castle is.
+1

To all this I would add what this mod with evident warband modding heritage proposes.

It's funny how hot topics are repeated over and over again, which can give a clue to Taleworlds where the fans' interest is heading. The last one Iirc was this one, quite complete and with a lot of feedback by the way.
 
+1

To all this I would add what this mod with evident warband modding heritage proposes.

It's funny how hot topics are repeated over and over again, which can give a clue to Taleworlds where the fans' interest is heading. The last one Iirc was this one, quite complete and with a lot of feedback by the way.
what is your experience with the unfriendly territory mod? I would like to add it to a new play through, but am a bit hesitant about the statement that bandit parties can disrupt the working of the mod.
 
what is your experience with the unfriendly territory mod? I would like to add it to a new play through, but am a bit hesitant about the statement that bandit parties can disrupt the working of the mod.

The idea is interesting for strategic points like castles, I would personally apply it in Bannerlord only for them. However, as for the mod, I don't think it's a good solution to reduce the speed within the territory of a hideout.
 
Castels should have a "radius" area that prevents armies from passing, like some armies in Total War games, so the enemy have to conquer it before advance further, at least it gives a meaning for it existence.
 
Castles would be great if they significantly offered better protection against sieges than other settlements, where you could win even in great odds disadvantage; They shouldn't be a money sink, garrisons should be cheap to maintain, troops could be trained there... And, if supply lines had a greater effect on the time you can sustain a siege being the attacker (sieging should be more expensive in resources).
 
Last edited:
How about instead of your troops becoming seasoned and powerful units after a week of riding around killing people, that instead tier five and/or tier four troops have to be trained at a castle for some time when you want to upgrade them? Really, troops like Imperial trained infantry (T3) make little sense. I mean, who's training them in the tactics and doctrine of the old empire? Me? The dude that just started out? There's very few threats to you before you join a kingdom if you have high tier troops in your army, and is one factor that makes battles a pushover.

Not to mention the noble troops that you can recruit from villages and towns.... I mean, surely castles would be the better place for this recruitment?
 
Last edited:
How about an actual npc castellan that offers more services based on the upgrades?
 
And yes, they should remove noble troops from villages and bandit lines and make it so that it's only available from castles. As it stands now, it's way easier and cheaper to get khan's guards by converting raiders than the traditional method of hiring them as recruits from villages.
 
With the -50% garrison wage for castles perk + the others (-20% for ranged, -5% overall garrison cost, etc.) I think they are a lot more viable as main party stash houses now.

Can you please tell me which is this perk? I just can find one perk in steward which gives -20%, not -50%. Thanks.
 
Back
Top Bottom