Am I the only one who doesn't like the huge battles?

Users who are viewing this thread

I don't mind the army battles occasionally but I wish they would bring back having a marshal and having them being the only ones who could organize a big army, while other lords could skirmirsh/raid/etc in smaller battles
 
I love the chaos of big fights!
If you have your own army, you can command everyone.
You can split groups
Flank
Or join in on foot!
In my playthroughs, it is usually the case where i kill less in big fights than in smaller fights because i am busy positioning troops.
so if you use normal battle tactic, your first group of archers will use all the arrows sooner or later,
if they don't die, then no new reinforcement will respwan,

then what would you do? would you retreat , then re-enter the battle?
if so, then you will lose lot's of battle loots, but you will have less causality
 
so if you use normal battle tactic, your first group of archers will use all the arrows sooner or later,
if they don't die, then no new reinforcement will respwan,

then what would you do? would you retreat , then re-enter the battle?
if so, then you will lose lot's of battle loots, but you will have less causality
If you are using your archers to force the enemy to charge then let loose
If the enemy is cautious and won't budge then you need to be more conservative with your arrows, Select group (2) +F4 to tell them to hold fire, F4 again when you want them to fire.
Lure them with you infantry to force them to face a certain way and place your archers in a favorable position so that in the middle of the fight they won't be wasting shots on shields. You can of course cheese this but i don't. It is not fun and i am trying to enjoy the game with the tools that we have :smile:
Depending on what archers you have, a flanking unite of emptied quiver/bolts is still devastating. If your infantry is in square formation and you are doing this because you tried to lure them with arrow shots and it didn't work, let the enemy envelop them and then charge with your archers and infantry at the same time, tell your infantry to change formation to the line formation and enjoy the slaughter :smile:
It is gonna be like you created 2 flanks and if you have cav, they will add to the chaos!
 
I don't much like Bannerlord's giant battles either, but it's entirely about the incompetent AI and the total lack of real control over them. It makes battles a gigantic chore.
You can add the forests / tight maps, for huge battles. Unmanageable. Huge battles need PLAINS / LOWLAND; not mountains nor forests.
 
If you are using your archers to force the enemy to charge then let loose
If the enemy is cautious and won't budge then you need to be more conservative with your arrows, Select group (2) +F4 to tell them to hold fire, F4 again when you want them to fire.
Lure them with you infantry to force them to face a certain way and place your archers in a favorable position so that in the middle of the fight they won't be wasting shots on shields. You can of course cheese this but i don't. It is not fun and i am trying to enjoy the game with the tools that we have :smile:
Depending on what archers you have, a flanking unite of emptied quiver/bolts is still devastating. If your infantry is in square formation and you are doing this because you tried to lure them with arrow shots and it didn't work, let the enemy envelop them and then charge with your archers and infantry at the same time, tell your infantry to change formation to the line formation and enjoy the slaughter :smile:
It is gonna be like you created 2 flanks and if you have cav, they will add to the chaos!
The problem I have, is when enemy doesn't attack, then I have to move close to them, I can deal with first enemy "wave", but then eventually after 2-3 enemy reinforcement wave, my archers will run out of arrows

I still have very minimum loss, and I have kill at least 200-400 enemy, but if I don't cheese it, I have no choice but to let every one charge, let me archers die, so my reinforcement archers with fresh arrows can come

I still win the battle with very few loss, I just don't like how the game design, the respwan system
 
Actually I think big battles(+1000 units) need to be rarer, and have more impact on the development of wars / diplomacy, now just look like an infinite grind, even when some factions have a couple of castles and cities left they still has several large armies every few minutes, the whole campaign is build in how ONE battle changed the history of the continent, but so far battles seems to have 0 real impact.
 
The problem I have, is when enemy doesn't attack, then I have to move close to them, I can deal with first enemy "wave", but then eventually after 2-3 enemy reinforcement wave, my archers will run out of arrows

I still have very minimum loss, and I have kill at least 200-400 enemy, but if I don't cheese it, I have no choice but to let every one charge, let me archers die, so my reinforcement archers with fresh arrows can come

I still win the battle with very few loss, I just don't like how the game design, the respwan system
You can retreat your archers when they run out of ammo :smile:
 
that bothering to do any strategies is almost always pretty insignificant
I've actually turned around some major battles as a captain. Stopping infantry from over-extending is really important if you get that group. Archers is a lot about positioning based on height/line of sight and distance with regard to the enemy forces. Also need to know when to regroup when the AI infantry DOES overextend. I'm less sure about how to properly manage cavalry, though i'd imagine it has to do with target selection and timing for greatest disruption.
 
Actually I think big battles(+1000 units) need to be rarer, and have more impact on the development of wars / diplomacy, now just look like an infinite grind, even when some factions have a couple of castles and cities left they still has several large armies every few minutes, the whole campaign is build in how ONE battle changed the history of the continent, but so far battles seems to have 0 real impact.
This is so true!
However, this is their answer to a snowballing problem they had before. I hope it is a placeholder till they find another solution. I want these battles to be meaningful and more impactful. Like after a battle like that both sides will be less willing to fight for a while or something of the sort, so your armies will have to be capped at a certain limit (Winners get a slightly larger cap)
 
If you think that the generals of late antiquity and the Middle Ages had the same overview and management tools as in the Total War series of games, it is not surprising that you will suffer chagrin and difficulties.
They were usually able to arrange their lines before battle though (with some exceptions, naturally), and one of them was able to choose where the battle would take place.
 
The problem I have, is when enemy doesn't attack, then I have to move close to them, I can deal with first enemy "wave", but then eventually after 2-3 enemy reinforcement wave, my archers will run out of arrows

I still have very minimum loss, and I have kill at least 200-400 enemy, but if I don't cheese it, I have no choice but to let every one charge, let me archers die, so my reinforcement archers with fresh arrows can come

I still win the battle with very few loss, I just don't like how the game design, the respwan system
Nonne likes this stunborn un-intelligent way. I think a game designer should ask questions about himself…. Or a game director, whatever his/her rank, result is disapointing
 
Not disagreeing with you but where in any 1st person style game have you seen this done better outside of this series?

I think BL could make more realistic large battles by how they do spawning troops. Instead of a stream of of individual soldiers, they should spawn as units / formations that organise into a mass, with other new units, before advancing towards the enemy.

But we all know TW doesn't want long battles so .. Quick game play over realism.

.
 
I don't like them at all, I think 200 VRS 200 (or 400 total on map) is about the biggest where gameplay doesn't suffer too much.
All of the flaws of the AI units, non-balancing, sloppy formations controls, clunky placement, slowness of troop placement, SMALLNESS of map, lack of meaningful effects from terrain....all of it just gets cranked up to 11 once there's more units on the map at once.
Everything feels like it was designed with warband sized battles and parties.

And why is it so hard for LINE formation to to be a line and not a square or blob?

I hope order of battle update cleans up some of the formation issue.

Anyway, I think armies are a bad mechanic and make the game worse, they should be rare event with a singular committed purpose.
 
I'm less sure about how to properly manage cavalry, though i'd imagine it has to do with target selection and timing for greatest disruption.
Distracting the enemy archers and pulling big chunks of their infantry along for the ride, so that your infantry are given really favorable many-on-few matchups. If you're fighting Aserai or Khuzaits, scattering their horse archers with a countercharge.
 
Not disagreeing with you but where in any 1st person style game have you seen this done better outside of this series?
(Not meant as an attack, just tired)
That's not an argument. Just because no one else had done it, doesn't mean TW didn't do a terrible job.
 
And why is it so hard for LINE formation to to be a line and not a square or blob?
Yep, noticed that too, my number VI formation appears in a sort of square, have to manipulate formations a lot to sometimes manage to get a shield wall, also archers sometimes are sorted as a pack and it's hard to have them in line...
 
The best solution I've on the forums is to make them spawn outside the map
Yes this is a good idea, at the moment I anticipate by not launching forces till all reinforcements have come, but it can be compliacted when the ennemy retreats far back from his initial position.
 
I hate big battles because the reinforcement mechanics makes all kinds of tactics pointless, just send your troops to a meatgrinder as the enemy pours in a continuous stream.

But I love it when the enemy retreats in an orderly fashion instead of fighting to the last man and running straight back with no regards for self preservation. In the orderly retreat they will fight back and suicidally charging into their shock infantry can be fatal lol.
 
Last edited:
You can add the forests / tight maps, for huge battles. Unmanageable. Huge battles need PLAINS / LOWLAND; not mountains nor forests.
Some forests are actually great for big battles, even better than other "open terrain" maps which are basically just football fields with invisible borders.
 
Back
Top Bottom