Search results for query: *

  1. Best companion combination?

    I find that having many companions to be inconvenient and expensive to arm, and since I usually have some sort of competent heavy cavalry, I don't really need mounted warriors. So I've mainly used Marnid (path-finding, tactics, engineer) and Ymira (doctor skills) and no one else. This also has the advantage of not spreading out quest experience too much, which can happen if you have a lot of companions.
  2. I have finaly massed my army!

    It doesn't really matter, since stats can be altered with CharExport, making pics unreliable too. And more importantly, that stat is impossible to get without cheating because the max level is 62 and the max stat is 60.

    Source:
    http://forums.taleworlds.com/index.php/topic,128730.msg3102791.html#msg3102791
  3. What is tax inefficiency?

    Use the search function, you're not a recruit anymore.

    http://forums.taleworlds.com/index.php/topic,113493.msg2844161.html#msg2844161
  4. Has anyone had any success with the Swadians?

    I've had good success with them. As mentioned many times, the biggest challenge to the Swadians is that they have a wide expanse of land surrounded on all sides by potential enemies, and it's difficult to protect every side if multiple factions declare war on them, which happens rather frequently. If that happens, you should try to negotiate peace between the nations you don't want to fight through a quest given by the guildmasters of your faction, which really should be an option that is always available to you.
  5. Pros and Cons of all factions

    Rookfrjosa said:
    I don't know...It seems to me that Swadia surviving long enough to see who 'punched their tickets,' is generally an anecdotal event.

    You apparently misunderstood the purpose of my post. I was pointing out that anecdotes aren't valuable, not trying to say that the Swadians are good. If I was trying to make that point, I would cite objective facts like their stats and equipment rather than statements like "I used Swadians to good use, therefore they are good" or the inverse.

    Also, livingdeath, Rookfrjosa was the one who said the quote in your sig, not me. I don't really care if you keep me as the source, but he might.
  6. any plans to ever make infantry not completely useless?

    Bracing would be a decent solution, though it would require that cavalry AI be changed so that they don't charge straight into the spears. Another thing is that bracing is not merely the holding of a spear, and requires far more commitment than couching - with couching, you just lower your lance, tuck it in your armpit, and charge. With bracing, you must bury the end of your spear in the ground, similar to the large wooden spikes typically surrounding castles. Obviously, this requires time to do, and makes the fighter less mobile.

    Another idea would be to let spear men stab unobstructed past their allies if in good formation. This would allow spears and especially pikes to be used as they were intended, creating walls of points several points deep.

    Also, an interesting thing to note: apparently contemporary medieval theory held that one knight was strategically worth 10 infantry. Which gives credence to the idea of making knights count more in the party population, alongside the fact that knights were never unaccompanied, having squires and  servants to take care of their horses and equipment.
  7. Pros and Cons of all factions

    Rookfrjosa said:
    Bulzeeb said:
    livingdeath62 said:
    Yeah, I took someone's advice and told my FOOTMEN to stand closer about 4 times, and we won against a group of 50 swadian men at arms, with 5 casualties.

    And I've crushed Rhodok armies when outnumbered 10 to 1 with a handful of Swadian Knights, near mountainous Yalen, taking minimal to no casualties. What's your point, and why are you so against anyone liking swadia  :???:?

    Were the Rhodoks standing in close formation/on a hill?

    They were in formation, but I chose the map to use flat terrain. I would have been stomped on a hill, sure, but I have no reason to fight on a hill then. The point was that anecdotes involving the player's help aren't that useful in gauging a faction's effectiveness.
  8. Khergit Strategy

    Oh, I knew that. I guess I didn't adequately explain the strategy:

    1. Order horse archers to retreat, and they should be able to do so with their fast horses
    2. If you have reserve troops, they will come now, and you can keep fighting if you wish.
    3. Otherwise, once all your troops are far from the enemy, retreat yourself by pressing tab so that you can start a new battle with fresh ammo supplies.

    You could also just use the last step, but I think you'll take casualties if your troops are near enemies.

    And once again, you don't need to retreat mamlukes and huscarls because they don't rely on finite ammo supplies. I mean, if you REALLY want your expensive VHA's to slaughter themselves pointlessly in melee, go right ahead. But I thought the whole point of the thread was to figure out ways we can avoid that?
  9. -- Official Unofficial 'Ask Questions About Warband Singleplayer Here' Thread --

    Prisoners only serve three functions as far as I know:

    1. Sell (obviously)
    2. Prisoner Exchange, which is a lord quest where they request that you capture a certain number of a particular type of troop so that an exchange can be made
    3. Recruiting from the prisoners

    Recruiting from your prisoners can be a quick way of bolstering your party with high tier troops, but at the same time you'll run into severe morale problems, both from your own party and from the prisoners, who are likely to run away, and even if they don't they'll still have low morale due to the fact that you will almost certainly have a negative morale bonus with the faction they belong to, seeing as how you had to fight that faction in order to capture them.

    Prisoner exchange is kind of too rare to really justify holding onto prisoners for, and you're not even guaranteed to have the right type and number of prisoners, but I guess in the off-chance it does match it's pretty convenient.
  10. Khergit Strategy

    Withdrawn soldiers are available to use again, as far as I know, so long as you don't lose the battle. I've had allied farmers retreat before and then retreat again when battle began afresh, so I'm pretty sure they don't act like regular casualties. I'll try it out to confirm later.
  11. Pros and Cons of all factions

    livingdeath62 said:
    Yeah, I took someone's advice and told my FOOTMEN to stand closer about 4 times, and we won against a group of 50 swadian men at arms, with 5 casualties.

    And I've crushed Rhodok armies when outnumbered 10 to 1 with a handful of Swadian Knights, near mountainous Yalen, taking minimal to no casualties. What's your point, and why are you so against anyone liking swadia  :???:?
  12. "Militarily, you're in no position to come to my help"

    It's possible that the lord you're trying to recruit is just in a terrible position if he joins you. Maybe he's surrounded on all sides by potentially hostile opponents, so even with your mega army, he won't feel safe at all.
  13. Pros and Cons of all factions

    Blaze said:
    Bulzeeb said:
    No, they do not have the same stats! As I said, the stats of a troop depends on their level. The difference is not huge in the case of Mamlukes vs Knights, yes, but it's present.

    Well they certainly don't in this newest update, but you're right.
    Turns out that Mamlukes got a 2 point boost in riding now.

    taph0z.jpg
    2h5rvx1.jpg

    Turns out I was off on the Swadian Knight skills. They only have 5 and 5 in Ironflesh and Powerstrike, just like Mamlukes. So skill-wises Mamlukes on average should do better with their higher riding skill, and stat-wise Swadian Knights should be slightly better.
  14. Khergit Strategy

    You don't have to retreat melee units because they don't rely on ammo to do their fighting. And I don't see the harm in retreating - you basically reduce casualties for no cost. It's not like it's that hard to press F1, then F5.
  15. a question about couched lance

    I find that couching is easier when done in first person because your character and horse don't get in the way of seeing where the point is going.
  16. Khergit Strategy

    If your archers run out of ammo, couldn't you just have them retreat? Since they're fast and mounted, most of them should be able to do so easily, and your reserves could come in without you killing off your archers. Alternatively, you could retreat yourself after your troops did so that you could start a new battle, with fresh supplies of arrows.

    Also, I had an idea about helping them skirmish. Currently there is no system to have your horse archers shoot and avoid melee. This could be changed if you edited their equipment to use only sharp melee weapons and only blunt arrows, I think by changing either the bows or the arrows, or both. Then order them to use blunt weapons only so that they can't use melee, and they might skirmish then. Haven't tried it myself, but it seems like a good idea.
  17. Pros and Cons of all factions

    No, they do not have the same stats! As I said, the stats of a troop depends on their level. The difference is not huge in the case of Mamlukes vs Knights, yes, but it's present.

    And their skills have a base level that can be exceeded but not lowered. For Mamlukes it's 5 and 5 for Iron Flesh and Power Strike, and for the Swadian Knights its 6 and 6. That doesn't mean that Swadian Knights will necessarily end up with more because a few extra skills are added on in random areas.

    Try looking at your unit's stats, and see. You can access them by talking to the unit in the Party menu.
  18. Pros and Cons of all factions

    livingdeath62 said:
    Mamlukes have like 8 ironflesh, swads have like 7
    This is misleading. Units start out with a base level in their stats, and gain a set number of additional stats, but the placement of these stats is random. Swadian Knights have a base stat of 6 in both Iron Flesh and Power Strike, whereas Mamlukes only have a 5 in both. It's just that in your particular game, Mamlukes were randomly given more points in Iron Flesh than the Knights.

    Azrooh said:
    MGStewart said:
    mamlukes ant better than swadian knights u an get an average by looking at wage cost - i saw in my game

    mamuluke 48 D
    Swadian Knight 50 D

    Wage cost has nothing to do with how good they are - higher leveled units cost more. An NPC's level doesn't affect its stats at all.

    Yes it does actually. A troop's total stats are equal to their level + 20. So Swadian knights have 48 stat points, whereas  Mamlukes have 47. It's one reason for the poor performance of Nord Veteran Archers - they have 5 fewer stat points than Marksmen and Sharpsshooters.
  19. Help leveling troops

    A pretty good way to level companions is to complete quests. You'll get some amount of experience, and that same amount will be spread out to all your troops equally.

    So take the "Destroy the Bandit lair" quests. I think they give you 3000 experience, but I can't remember for sure. Anyway, if you had three companions, each would get 1000 experience for being in your party while your complete a quest. This is mainly good for your non-combatants like Jeremus who aren't going to see much battle and can't get experience as well, so keep in mind that if you have too many companions the experience gets spread out a little to thinly, so if you want to train up your surgeon, you might want to let go of everyone else for the time being.

    Another good quest off the top of my head is the "Rescue the Lord quest" (have the villagers of the castle/town's associated village start a fire for an easy time). Both of these quests can be tracked by asking guild masters for work.
  20. This is how it was meant to be? Really?

    ppg said:
    I dont really agree with that. There is no logic in constantly repeating one thing expecting different outcome. If the lords were real people, dont you think it would tire them after, lets say fifth taking/retaking of that city? I am sure they would manage to think of some different solution then "take it and let it be". I am sure that if you want to actually KEEP some conquered city and you know that enemy WILL be trying to take it back sooner or later (which AI probably isnt capable of knowing in this case), the most reasonable thing to do is stay alerted nearby with as much army you can have and be ready for counter attack or attack yourself to prevent such a thing.

    Because, like I mentioned, if factions were actually aggressive and capable of consolidating their holdings, then one faction would quickly destroy the other. It doesn't matter if it's unrealistic - I don't want to play in a game where by the time I can actually grow strong enough to make a difference, the faction I want is already defeated, or even worse, one faction has beaten all the others. After all, realistically speaking, if a faction takes a fief from another faction, they should be "better" off than that faction, and if they were aggressive they would end up taking another fief, and another, and another.
Back
Top Bottom