Search results

  1. Chonokhan

    Community Feedback-based EARLY ACCESS ROADMAP - ready for you, Taleworlds!

    This was an excellent post and very well made. I do hope Taleworlds take note.
  2. Chonokhan

    Settling our Horde

    Greetings I would propose that a mechanic be made officially, that we can make the experience of our ancestors and establish camps for our tribes, similar to how the steppe peoples have done so many times throughout history. We Mongols settled in Nei Mongol (Inner Mongolia) to trade with the...
  3. Chonokhan

    Giving Fiefdoms to Family/Companions

    Is it possible to grant fiefdoms to your dynasty members or companions yet? That was a great way to distribute land to loyal warriors who fought alongside you... and you got to kit them out too.
  4. Chonokhan

    Place order at a workshop

    I'm always annoyed that need to travel for hours to find a specific item that I like.

    It would be nice to have a feature where you can order stuff from a workshop.
    How should this work?

    IF a settlement has a smithy you should be able to ask for the catalog what they are making.
    What is in the catalog should depend on culture.
    Next part is easy, you should be able to place an order, pay upfront and receive you pick up your package some days later (depending on the tier of the item).
    When receiving you also need to pay some extra cost, overall cost should be more then buying the item directly from the market place.

    If they ever implement workshop leveling, then the lvl should have impact on the tier armor/weapon your can order and the creation time.

    Let me know what you think (or if I missed a similar thread)
    This is an excellent Idea +1 for Implementation.
  5. Chonokhan

    Conquest by Marriage and cultural change

    new conquered cityes should slowly change culture to the conquerors faction , so if kuzaits are dominating the map , we indeed see more and more kuzaits armies and no big empire or sturgians armies figthing for the kuzaits , or at least not so many

    Yeah, I like this idea... it's annoying conquering new territory than having to go alllllllllll the way back home to pick up some new guys. We should at least be able to have a Recruiter in every city, regardless of region, that recruits troops and turns them into Khuzait style troops.
  6. Chonokhan

    Conquest by Marriage and cultural change

    Uhmmm, can you please elaborate more about this? You mean that if I marry with someone from ruler clan, then I could get elected as King even if I am not vassal of that kingdom.

    Oh... my bad, I thought that was a thing... I thought I saw it on a video or read it in the forums, but I guess not.
  7. Chonokhan

    Conquest by Marriage and cultural change

    What if you were already the monarch of a nation... and your wife mysteriously "died" in a battle... Theoretically could you marry into a noble family of another faction and usurp their throne too? Also when will it be possible to slowly integrate a new city into your own culture?
  8. Chonokhan

    M&B2 Napoleonic Wars (for the future)

    Even though Bannerlord has a long way to go yet... It would be awesome if we had a Napoleonic Wars game/dlc in the future... not just for Multiplayer, but for Single Player too. The multiplayer version was fun for it's time, but most of the time the battles were very unorganised (unless you...
  9. Chonokhan

    I want to do more...

    M&B has always been about it's battles and roaming the map to raid and do quests with your companions true... but I believe that bringing more in-depth things into a game, creates a greater fondness for a game, that makes it far more memorable in the years to come... and with every other "new"...
  10. Chonokhan

    Khuzait invincible? Council of the commons

    So your argument is that something can be wrong because there were other wrong things in prior games or versions? I don't think so.

    All factions can use horses but there are some dedicated infantry factions (Sturgia, Battania) which should not be disadvantaged. Battania meanwhile is changed by the devs seemingly, I see them with a lot or cavalry and they became almost as annoying as the Khuzaits, not only because of their ugly beards. Making lore infantry factions cavalry heavy is not a good solution for the problems of the cavalry autocalc bonus.

    I could accept the cavalry bonus (from which the Khuzaits profit the most) if there were situational disadvantages, for example a 20% autocalc malus for cavalry in wood and hill battles. Or if lord parties could ambush chasing parties under certain conditions. They cannot.

    Then there is the Khuzait faction cavalry movement bonus which is nonsense in the game environment, with the very artificial movement-party engagement mechanic. Khuzait parties can catch smaller lord parties and can evade similarly composed lord parties with ease. I'm against such boni/mali which affect game core features. No movement bonus (also not for Battanians), no autocalc cavalry bonus, neither in sieges nor on the field, no autocalc cavalry malus for sieges (as proposed by some).


    No, my argument is that crying about movement speed is irrelevant, because all armies have access to horses. There is a tiny speed bonus for Khuzait armies but that doesn't contribute to it snow balling... whoever says that, either doesn't actually play the game, or doesn't know what they are talking about. The Khuzaits are not the only faction that "snow ball". Vlandia, Azerai and the Khuzaits are the 3 strongest factions in game atm... and all 3 snow ball. Why do they snowball? Because the AI declares too many wars, spreads out it's forces too much and loses.

    But should they nerf Vlandia, Azerai and Khuzait? No... they just need to improve the AI to act more strategic and not moronic as previously discussed.
  11. Chonokhan

    Khuzait invincible? Council of the commons

    Yes okay sure, 100 000 vs 30 000 and still Hungary had minimal losses while the Mongols got their **** handed to them. The point is that the Mongols was a formidable force but they had some clear weaknesses and it isn't historicaly correct that they dominate everything. In the game they dont seem to have a clear weakness since they win mostly every fight they go into and take castle after castle with ease.



    Everyone hated the fact that Knights was OP in M&B 1, people even hate the Swadian nights in Warband. One single unit shouldn't be totally OP, the game should encourage you to have a mixed army.


    Really? I was around during that time on the old forums. I don't ever remember seeing a thread about it... yet every week or so, there is a thread "I got ass kicked by Khuzaits, NERF THEM" type comments.
  12. Chonokhan

    Khuzait invincible? Council of the commons

    Although I enjoy a historical discussion about areas and eras I'm not very familiar with (or usually interested in), I find the direction not very helpful. Wether the Khuzaits are based on the Mongols or not or partly based on them is not of the utmost importance.

    They are a faction in a video game based on factions conquering settlements from other factions mostly. All main factions are not nomadic but are settled, also the Khuzaits (unlike the early high medieval Mongols ...). All parties move on the map in a defined speed. There is usually no possibility to depart faster army parts to trap other parties (for the AI). It is not possible to use ambushes generally. Horse exhaustion is not simulated. Horses are important for the speed of parties. The game has to deal with it. Using Mongol historical achievements does not help in the faction design, even if we do ignore some modern bias which is obviously involved in the discussion.

    There should be no faction in the first place which has game mechanic advantages or disadvantages that cannot be balanced by other game mechanics. The Khuzaits for me fall into this category however.


    There is nothing stopping other factions from using horses... ANY party that has horses in it's inventory will move faster mechanically. It even says it in the game.. Every town (even the Battanian cities) have access to horses. People like to complain about the Khuzait... but when Swadia was the power house with it's super OP knights in M&B 1... no one cared... I wonder why?
  13. Chonokhan

    Khuzait invincible? Council of the commons

    You guys should read this https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_Mongol_invasion_of_Hungary

    The second invasion of Hungary Mongolia had an army of 200 000 and Hungary 30 000. Almost everyone of the Golden horde died or got captured while Hungary sustained light casualties. The first invasion was very successful but it went downhill after that.

    Those figures are disputed, but yeah... Hungary proved it's metal and won a great victory against the Golden Horde.

    Stefan Kraowski indirectly places the Mongol invasion force a fair bit above 30,000 men by estimating the smaller Mongol invasion of Poland two years later as having about that many soldiers, stating that Nogai and Talabuga personally leading an invasion suggests it is a massive force by definition.[27] Peter Jackson, using contemporary Hungarian charters, concludes that the Mongol army was very large, but is unsure if it was larger, smaller, or comparable in size to the 1241–42 invasion force.[28] A contemporary letter from Benedict, the provost of Esztergom, estimates the size of the Mongol army at 200,000. This is almost certainly an enormous exaggeration, as the Mongols almost never fielded armies larger than 100,000 men.[29] The Austrian chronicler of Salzburg recorded that the Mongol military camp covered an area of 16 km (10 mi) in width and 10 km (6 mi) in depth (whether this was Nogai's or Talabuga's army, or how this chronicler got his information, is unknown).[30] The Galician-Volhynian Chronicle puts the size of the Mongol army in the hundreds of thousands, saying that Talabuga's column alone lost 100,000 men during the march through the Carpathians.[31]
  14. Chonokhan

    Khuzait invincible? Council of the commons

    I don't think many people want any faction snowballing consistently.

    Then they should fix the AI. It's not difficult to counter mounted archers, I do it in Total War games all the time (when im not playing a steppe faction). The Empire armies are more than capable of doing it, the AI is just moronic and incapable. AI diplomacy and strategy is incredibly dumb too... they declare war on too many factions, then their forces get spread out and they get wiped.

    I've seen it happen to the Khuzaits as well.. They usually get snowballed at the start by a united Southern Empire attack... the lose a few cities... then the Southern Empire will declare war against the Aserai, send all their forces deep into the desert... and get divided and conquered.

    When I've helped the Khuzaits conquer half of the Southern Empire and a few parts of the Aserai and Sturgia... they do the EXACT same thing... the empire is too large and their forces are too spread out, they declare war on multiple factions and get rekt (without my involvement).
  15. Chonokhan

    Khuzait invincible? Council of the commons

    Only a tiny part of Bannerlord's world map comes close to resembling Central Asia, which is why I said "Near East" instead.

    That's a myth.
    Rashid Al-Din, a high minister and historian of the Mongol Ilkhanate, specifically states that Batu did not know about Ogedei's death when he decided to withdraw. He states that they withdrew from Hungary to put down a Cuman rebellion, and then left Europe later in 1242 because they felt they had completed their mission, not because of the influence of any outside force.[21] Rashid had access to the official Mongol history when writing the Ilkhanate's history; additionally as historian John Andrew Boyle points out, the section where Rashid addresses the Mongol withdrawal from central Europe contains orthography that indicates he took this version of the events directly from earlier Mongol records.[22] By Carpini's account, a messenger would have to be able to make the journey from Mongolia to Central Europe in a little over 3 months in the middle of winter. Carpini himself accompanied a Mongol party in a much shorter journey (from Kiev to Mongolia) during the summer and fall of 1246, where the party "made great speed" in order to reach the election ceremony in time, and made use of several horses per person while riding nearly all day and night. It took five months.[23] The History of Yuan does not mention any particular reason for the withdrawal, but does note that Batu did not seek to attend a kurultai at all, and was only convinced to attend by Subutai in the year 1244, long after he had left Hungary.
    What spared Europe from devastation was the Mongols incurring heavy enough casualties trying to besiege stone castles that they gave up and left.

    Follow the ****ing link, man. The bright orange writing. That's the source.

    Pretty much none of what you said actually contradicts my point. Be proud of the steppe peoples all you want, but Khuzaits snowballing to take a third of the map (less so in newer patches thankfully) are not an accurate representation of what their source material ever accomplished in actual Europe.

    "That's a myth."

    No.

    "What spared Europe from devastation was the Mongols incurring heavy enough casualties trying to besiege stone castles that they gave up and left."

    Now this is a myth.

    Your quotation from Rashid al-Din doesn't give ANY reasoning to as why the Mongol armies stopped invading Europe. It merely points out why Batu Haan did not attend the Kurultai. So, your response is without substance and does not justify what you said earlier.


    "Follow the ****ing link, man. The bright orange writing. That's the source."

    I did... and it said

    The Khuzait Khanate draws its inspiration from the steppe peoples of central Asia. Genghis Khan's alliance is probably the best known example, thanks largely to the remarkable document, the Secret History of the Mongols, which chronicled the Khan's rise from lone fugitive to the ruler of one of the greatest empires the world has seen. The Khuzaits are based partially on the Mongols but also on their more modest cousins, the Avars, Göktürks, Kipchaks, and Khazars, who were more regional powers than global ones.

    " The horse lords now ruled over towns and farmers and counted tariffs and cropland. Urkhun imposed discipline on the unruly clans, forcing them to ride to war on his command instead of simply when they wished. But with the coming of statehood and its burdens, the spirit of unity was lost. Urkhun died, and though his descendants still rule the Khuzait Khanate, the other clans feel that they should be the ones to raise the nine-horsetail banner that symbolizes the supreme authority. "

    And your telling me this is not similar to how Chinghis Haan Temujin united the various tribes and peoples of Mongolia and Tuva to conquer the settled peoples? 😂

    " The nomads-turned-kings swiftly took on many of the cultural aspects of the peoples they conquered, so that the various Mongol or Turkic dynasties dressed, feasted, worshipped and administered their lands like the Chinese or Persian rulers who came before them. But it's clear that they still fondly remembered their heritage out on great grasslands. Travellers to the Uyghur capital of Ordu-Baliq wrote that the khan built a great yurt on top of his palace, apparently feeling most at ease in the felt tents of his ancestors even as he also enjoyed the protection of walls. We try to make the Khuzaits' settlements reflect this cultural mixing. And for those holdouts who would never submit to a khagan no matter what security or riches he offers, we have a minor faction, the Karakhergits, who keep the old ways. "


    Like how Mongol Haans adopted Persianised culture in the Ilkhanate, the Chagatai Khanate adopted Persian culture, the Mughal (persian for Mongol) adopted Persianised culture, conquered India and then adopted a Persianised Indian culture?

    Chingis Haan Temujin also refused to live in a palace and preferred to live as a humble nomad, in his Ger rather than a palace.

    And your telling me that the Khuzaits aren't representing the Mongol Empire? lmao This game is the creation of Turkish people, who while they love our people's achievements and claim part of it as their own, also pridefully try to side line it with their own Turkish heiritage.

    " The Khuzaits are based partially on the Mongols but also on their more modest cousins, the Avars, Göktürks, Kipchaks, and Khazars, who were more regional powers than global ones. "

    No, I think the majority of the Khuzait similarities are based on the achievements of the Mongol Empire.

    "Pretty much none of what you said actually contradicts my point. Be proud of the steppe peoples all you want, but Khuzaits snowballing to take a third of the map (less so in newer patches thankfully) are not an accurate representation of what their source material ever accomplished in actual Europe."

    So, what... you want the Empire to snow ball across the map instead? The Empire is supposedly based on the Roman Empire during it's Split (Eastern Empire vs Western Empire). During that time, the various barbarian peoples from Europe and Asia invaded Europe by migration or by war... and the empire collapsed. So I think it's about right.
  16. Chonokhan

    Khuzait invincible? Council of the commons

    In 1000, 1001, and 1003 the Khitan repeatedly attacked Song fortifications, and each time retreated without actually capturing them or making permanent territorial gains. Now to me, that sounds like a prime example of the "absolutely nomadic cavalry" being poor at besieging fortifications. The tribute was just a tired empire seeking peace, a goal which it succeeded at, and was not made because the Song were facing destruction otherwise: the Song actually won the defense of Chanyuan and this is why the Khitan were willing to stop raiding and sign a treaty.

    That quote isn't implying that horse archers can't be effective (I've already said I agree they could be an effective strategy, so I don't know why you're trying to make it look like I'm arguing with you). Instead, I'm using horse archers failing in battle against horse archers to make an obvious point: even the most effective tactics can still fail due to other factors.

    And yet, there are scores of tribes of horse archer tribes who never survived the Mongols. Because horse archery, like any other tactic, can be defeated even if it is effective. If you do consider a state's survival an example of efficacy of a tactic, then again just look at Hungary and Poland.

    The (admittedly unsourced) number I saw was 600,000 for the Mongols. I can't find your source anywhere to see the context you've left out, as all copies of that Cambridge text are paywalled. At any rate even your source sounds quite numerically close, and it's not as simple as raw numbers when defection was so extremely common among the disaffected Song nobility, who in many cases surrendered entire armies/cities/fortresses and joined the Mongols without a fight due to dislike of the Song emperor. Quickly 100,000 Song men could become 100,000 Mongol men, which meant the Mongols could overcome their inability to besiege by using the traitor locals' siege expertise.

    What about the First invasion then? During the Siege of Esztergom they had 30 siege engines. These reduced the wooden fortifications but failed against the stone castle. The Mongols then suffered heavy casualties from crossbowmen while trying to assault the castle. Because they suck at sieges. Also, why are we counting non-Mongols from areas nowhere near Mongolia as "Mongols" in the first place? If for large periods of time the Mongols were bad at sieges when they didn't have other groups available to help them, it's a very safe statement to say that Mongols were bad at siegeing stone fortifications.

    This argument has only lasted this long because you refuse to address my two key points.

    1: The invasions of Poland and Hungary were a prime before-and-after example of how effective crossbow/stone castle/heavy cavalry tactics could be against the Mongols.

    2: Using the Song as an example of crossbowmen/fortifications not being effective at stopping Mongols is like using a DIY carpenter hitting their thumb as an example of a hammer not being effective at driving nails. The Song were an incredibly incompetent, inefficient bureaucracy which made multiple crucial mistakes, had no experienced generals, had an army mainly consisting of barely-trained peasant militia, and often had its forces defect without a fight, and their collapse was inevitable. They couldn't use the tools they had available to their proper effectiveness. Despite this, their fortifications kept them alive for much longer than they would have lasted otherwise. The Mongols would have wiped them out in 5 years instead of 45. But instead the bungling Song were one of the most difficult cultures for the Mongols to conquer. Once you acknowledge that, the Song become a positive example and the argument is over. Which is why you keep skirting around it and pushing the argument towards tangential matters.


    Bannerlord isn't meant to be all of Eurasia though. It represents only part of the Near East, Europe, and North Africa; a total area the Mongols only ever conquered about a sixth of. More importantly, Khuzaits aren't really Mongols! They only have partial Mongol inspiration, as Bannerlord's setting takes cues from 600-1000, well before the Mongols ever reached Europe. Khuzaits are mainly based on Gokturks, Avars, Kipchaks, and Khazars. These groups never conquered anywhere near as much as they do ingame. They were actually wiped out, for the most part.
    The Roman empire utilized cavalry but the bulk of its army's strength was in its footsoldiers, and this applies for plenty of other large empires throughout history.


    Bannerlord's map represents a fantasy version of Europe, Middle East and Central Asia. Mongols conquered from China, Persia all the way to Hungary, Anatolia, Ukraine and raided as far as Austria and Poland with plans to raid as far as France. The only thing that spared Europe from such devastation was the death of the Khagan, in which the greatest Bataar (hero) and other important members of the empire, were recalled to the capital to elect a new Khagan.



    "They only have partial Mongol inspiration, as Bannerlord's setting takes cues from 600-1000, well before the Mongols ever reached Europe. Khuzaits are mainly based on Gokturks, Avars, Kipchaks, and Khazars. "

    Source? because no one even cared about these other Altaic races, before our Mongol Empire brought our entire peoples into glory. Bannerlord isn't on real history and so time period is irrelevant. The Gokturks are the ancestors of the Khazars and Oghuz Turks and the Gokturks were a Confederation of many nations and peoples.

    "These groups never conquered anywhere near as much as they do ingame. They were actually wiped out, for the most part.
    The Roman empire utilized cavalry but the bulk of its army's strength was in its footsoldiers, and this applies for plenty of other large empires throughout history."

    The Khazar Khaganate was the most powerful empire in the Crimea and promoted great trade and development throughout it's realm. Every neighbour nation looked to them for military assistance and economic aid.

    The Avars were part of the Hunnic confederation, which raided all of Europe and conquered from Kiev to Germania, subjugating entire nations of people.

    Kipchaks were also part of these confederations, as well as part of the Mongol Invasions.

    The Khuzaits represent the entire Altaic family tree (though not unified by language, but unified by race). Primarily this consists of Turkic and Mongolic peoples.

    The Oghuz Turks eventually formed the Ottoman Empire after years of selling themselves as mercenaries and building relations in their new adopted homeland.

    So yes... the Khuzaits are a representative of Mongols and other Altaic peoples, before they became Islamified by the Arabs and fellow slave Turks (mamlukes).
  17. Chonokhan

    Khuzait invincible? Council of the commons

    I have had campaigns where the Khuzaits were rubbed out by the Blue Queen of the empire. But I mean... look at human history... The Xiongnu/Huns that invaded Europe, all the way to Germania and Italia. The Khazar Turks and the Oghuz Turks took over Crimea, Tartaria, Central Asia and Persia. Mongols conquered most of the known world, from China to Persia up to Hungary and half of the Middle East. Mughals (Persianized Mongols) conquered all of India.

    The greatest empires were built on the back of the horse... except the British Empire, which was built on the back of the Opium trade and corporations.
  18. Chonokhan

    Playerbase shrinking rapidly -10% in the last month

    It kinda gets a little boring after 200 hours. Waiting for formerly spoken of content and then new content/mechanics to enjoy the game again. I hate relying on mods and so I don't... even though they are totally recommended for the M&B games... I just want the family/dynasty, criminal underworld... and kingdom management (with lots of stuff to spend gold on, like hiring patrols, military trainers, caravans, workshops, villages.. perhaps even investing in nomadic tribes that wander around raiding and selling loot, giving us a cut as their Haan).
Top Bottom