搜索结果: *

Thank you for the analysis, it is clear a LOT of work went into it!

My question is, what is the goal? What would be considered the optimal kingdom mechanics? I am genuinely interested, since I have not yet played a Bannerlord campaign past about 120 days, so I do have no idea what late-game feels like or what it should feel like.

I understand that one kingdom dominating most of the map after a few years is bad. On the other hand, if the map looks the same after 40 years as it did in the beginning, except for maybe 2-3 cities, is that the ideal outcome? Do players want the NPC kingdoms to be of equal strength, locked in a stalemate? Perhaps so that the consequences of player actions are the most visible (i.e. if the world changes significantly, the player knows it had to be his doing)?

Lets assume that is the case (i.e. the goal is for NPC kingdoms to remain roughly equal throughout time without player intervention). If that is achieved by kingdoms mostly trading one town and a few fortresses back and forth, so that the map looks roughly the same no matter at what time during the 40 year playthrough you look at it (this is a simplification of course, but I hope it illustrates the point), doesnt that make the world kind of boring? Again, maybe that is the desired goal, the world should be kind of "boring", or rather stable, without player interaction. But in my eyes, a more violent, changing world sounds more interesting. And I think it could be achieved even while keeping the primary goal of "factions are not eliminated and no faction ends up dominating the whole map forever". Meaning that wild swings happen, lots of territories change hands, but some kind of equilibrium is always restored to prevent a total collapse.

One way to achieve this could be some kind of kingdom management mechanic, where the larger a kingdom is, the more difficult it is to manage, the less stable it is and the more likely it is to break up, be ganged up on, etc. I believe Total War: Rome II had such a mechanic, where larger empires suffered greater and greater penalties (more internal political strife, more expensive upkeep of armies, more likely to be viewed negatively by others in diplomacy), so that they were attacked more, had more rebellions, and it was overall more difficult to keep the empire together.

Not only would this prevent snowballing of NPC kingdoms (violent swings could still happen, where a kingdom radically expands, but it would be unsustainable and it would break up, or be pushed back again), but it would also make late-game for players more interesting. As I said, I never got to late-game myself, but I read from others that once the player-owned kingdom reaches a certain point, the game turns into a boring, one-dimensional sequence of taking one fief after another. Making a larger kingdom more difficult to manage, defend and keep together would make the late-game more interesting (perhaps even shifting focus from constantly mopping up armies on the battlefield to proper kingdom management).

This mechanic could possibly (though questionable and perhaps not necessary) be paired with an opposite mechanic for very small kingdoms, making them even easier to manage and defend. Again, this would help NPC kingdoms bounce back, it would make it more difficult to completely finish off a kingdom (again making late-game more challenging). Also, it would make the start of a player-owned kingdom less challenging - of course if starting the one's own kingdom is already too easy, it would be counter-productive.

If I completely misunderstood the state of the game because I'm a noob, feel free to rip into me, I'm interested in all opinions and feedback.

This can be really annoying, especially when helping out an ally army in battle. I am in command of all my troops, but the allied AI just charges the enemy, I try to help by attacking a flank, the allies get killed, allied reinforcements spawn far away and I get slaughtered by the enemy reinforcements (it can be avoided if you have mobile troops, but with Sturgian tropps against Vladian enemies, no chance). I just resorted to letting the allies die without my help, then hope I have enough to handle whatever the enemies have left.

Just to be clear, your relations with the lords in your army or with everyone in the city (recruiters etc) increase? If the latter, does this apply only to an army or to a regular party as well?

Possibly, but it might throw off the balance. It could be difficult to keep the game balanced on both aging and no-aging playthorughs. Given that they plan on aging playing a big role, much of the game will be balanced around it - how many members do clans have, for how long are lord imprisoned and how likely are they to be executed, how often do lord jump ship, how likely are lords to die in battle etc.

Right now aging is a shallow system with little impact on the game, almost useless. But if they dont screw it up and implement it properly, it could make the game much deeper and more awesome. Just one example - marriages could actually mean something now. Marry well enough, and (if they make children grow up fast enough to be useful) you might be able to die a vassal but continue playing as your child, who became king by birth-right. That is of course far in the future of development and a lot of things would have to go right for something like this to be added and work well, so I dont have my hopes high.

Puerkl8r 说:

I liked Ymira the best because you could make her into whatever you wanted.

点击展开...

You creep!

I like the idea, no matter how realistic or not it is. There is a problem though - it would make raiding manyvillages impossible without capturing the surrounding fiefs.

I think an idea of a supply line works better - you must maitain a supply line for your army, if you besiege a city in the center of enemy territory, the supply line will get broken.

xdj1nn 说:

• Spears need to be fixed, either through proper AI use, or by tweaking their stats (that's a fact).
• Mounted units need both a automatic skirmish tactic command (instead of manually charging and retreating, which is annoying) and better hitbox placements for their attacks (currently they miss 90% of the attacks)
• Infantry units need to raise their shields, currently they only do it under specific formations, and even then their ranks are disorganized, putting troops who have no shield in the #1 rank even in a shield wall (broken).
• AI lords cheese their way by zerg rushing, it's doable (beating them) but quite annoying and unimmersive. Makes no sense.
• AI lords can't lead armies properly, needs fixing.
• Early Game is too steep, needs rebalancing.
• Late game is too easy, needs rebalancing.
• Offensive Sieges are too easy for both players and AI, needs rebalancing.
• Persuasion is locked once you've failed, and doesn't seem to have a cooldown, needs fixing.
• Siege scenes where the placement of siege engines (catapults mostly) make it impossible to hit anything.
• Siege scenes where allied troops operating catapults Team Kill 30 soldiers by stupidly attacking their own siege tower.
• Slight buff to mounted charges so enemies get knocked down or stunned longer.
• Effectiveness of armor should be improved and more related to dmg type
• Faster XP gains so to make it viable to use at least 2 ultimate perks, also to be able to shape followers into decently skilled and useful.
• Rebalancing of food shortages + prosperity.

And this is a "short list", there are many other things that are encompassed within "balancing issues", so you're wrong, you may be right about some very specific claims or requests, but for the most part, the game is quite broken balance wise.

点击展开...

That's a pretty good list. I would also like to see:

• AI lords being locked out of the top 2-3 tiers of recruits in villages and towns (I assume currently all AI lords have access to all recruits regardless of relations with recruiters), giving the player an advantage if they take the time to grind the relations.
• Make kings behave more strategically, when they declare war it is a reasonable decision, ideally (this might be too optimistic) with a plan in mind (to capture a specific settlement on the border, retake a settlement etc) - this could be enhanced by the ruler publishing war quests that his vassals could undertake (while the ruler leads the main army, publish a few smaller side goals that individuals or smaller armier could take on).
• Fix smithing - remove stamina and have every smithing action take in-game time, you can refine 500 charcoal in one go, but when you emerge back from the smithy one week has passed by. Also rebalance prices of smithed items so you cannot be making 500k denars per day.
• Make aging more meaningful - when the campaign starts, have NPCs of all different ages. 10 years into the campaign, some lords should retire and be replaced by their heirs. 5 years into the campaign, some new lord parties should emerge, lead by nobles who have grown up etc etc

rocco baroco 说:

Man, I am afraid you didn't understood the single point, and you are talking about completely different thing. I will try to explain in numbers (in my bad english) :
You have a battle 200vs200 against AI. You completely destroy them. You will left with 150 (irrelevant) they are left with nothing. AI lord will respawn somewhere with 25% of his max troops that is 50. Then let just say, average amount of available troops per village is 4 for recruitment. In order for AI to refill his army to max capacity, he will need to revisit 37 villages. Another thing is all other lords recruiting from same villages , and on top of that villages don't respawn high tier troops that much.
conclusion: it's absolutely impossible for AI armies to recruit additional soldiers at speed rate that they are doing right now, including your own vassals when you establish your own empire. If someone have other theory on this topic, please educate me, Thx

点击展开...

First of all, doesnt the average village have like 10 recruits if you have access to all the recurit tiers, which I assume AI lords do (maybe that should be changed, I am not sure). Second, the main reason why a lord shows up with a big army soon after being completely wiped out is because he went to his castle and took troops from there. So it is not a cheat about recruiting from villages, if anything it is a cheat where their garrisons increase number of troops and level of troops automatically without explicit AI lord actions, thus providing a passively growing reserve of troops that the lord can access whenever necessary.

cachx 说:

Similar to my experience as well. In the course of a few in-game weeks, factions have shot up in power and gone extremely war happy with me.
Honestly, without a robust working diplomacy system, all this "balancing" feels like a bunch of shots in the dark.

点击展开...

I dont understand these types of arguments. The goal of the current development process is not to make the game maximally enjoyable right now, it is to work towards the ultimately desired state of features and ship the changes as they get done. So they have an idea for where they want the army compositions and sizes to be ultimately and they are working to that end, implementing it as it gets finished. When the kingdom management system is finished, it will be implemented too. Why would they implement armies in a way that they dont ultimately want just to make it go well with a kingdom management system they dont ultimately want.

TheChewieShow 说:

So with version 1.3.0, my campaign is officially screwed. The kingdoms around me grow at a much faster rate, the lords recruit so many troops that there is nothing left for me to recruit, the bug that makes my kingdom declare war on other nations, randomly, without reason is still there... And also captured lords still escape instantly, literally not a day passed and captured Lucon slipped away... and came back with an army of 112, 2 days later.... Where did he get the troops from? I don't know.
Also before I installed Beta, I was running the game at solid 80 fps now I'm struggling to keep 20fps on the same settings lol

I don't understand how after 10 years of development this game is still nowhere near finished

点击展开...

That is right, they started developing the game one day after Warband was officially released Performance has been getting much better for many people including me, the game runs better than ever, not sure what the issue is on your side. The patch did say that lords now recruit aggresively to fill their army to its maximum size and have on average higher tier troops - what exactly are you surprised about? Also you say that all the villages have no recruits because the lords recruit them all, but at the same time they cheat by not actually recruiting? Makes sense. And dont forget that there is no shame in lowering the difficulty, thats what the options are for.

Well the patch notes mention that lords now fill their armies to their full size by recruiting aggresively and have on average more quality troops, both of which influence the strength calculation, it should not be surprising.

light6486 说:

There is a mod what makes stamina regenerate while traveling on the map.

隐藏

Smith Stamina Regen Fix

Removes the necessity of being in a settlement to regenerate crafting stamina. Ability to change crafting stamina cap and regen also provided.

www.nexusmods.com

I'm using it and it's so much better than vanilla, I always hated wasting huge amount of time waiting for stamina to regenerate. Now it's so nice to play the game normally and smith something from time to time. Makes the whole gameplay better because you know you can do something else like fighting the bandits or lords and by then your stamina will be full again, no need to waste time sitting in town doing literally nothing. Balanced or not, I literally don't care because I can't stand afk waiting for every 100 stamina anymore.

点击展开...

I have tried this mod and a few other smithing mods, that is how I found out about how bugged the prices are, I got lucky with unlocking a blade and in 10 in-game days I was making 20 000 per day. Now I just use a mod which unlocks all smithing recipes, use a companion to craft whatever cool weapon I want in the beginning of the game and then release him and dont touch crafting for the rest of the game, the easy money is too tempting

I do agree stamina should regen while traveling, or the above suggested idea that time progresses while smithing - they achieve the same goal, the second solution being less painful.

On foot no crosshair is fine. Mounted it is less than ideal. I will never get used to first person on a horse and in third person horse archery with no crosshair is doable, but you are guessing even more than normal (had 150 riding, 150 bow, all horse archer perks, the accuracy still sucks) and playing bow lottery becomes boring after a while. It it in no way comparable to the satisfaction of regularly headshotting moving targets while on foot.

ironiccookies 说:

I'd like to see Vlandia tournaments with a medieval style tournament; 24 knights melee and jousting, imperial gladiator games (with animals and ships if they add those in patches) and chariot racing (again if they add chariot units), swimming, horse fights, and wrestling for the Sturgians, and horse archery for the Khuzaits. I'm not sure about Celts or Aserai. I'm basing these off of real historical games played by each represented culture except for the Khuzaits (Mongols) but that's all I could think of.

点击展开...

Even the planned features will take at least a year to flesh out, so lets have the devs spend 3 months on wrestling AI, controls and animations. I'm all in.

ste636 说:

Considering I am a gamer and a citizen, yes, I am concerned about how people's mentality works nowadays, the football team they are fan of? I could not care less, they have debts because they live above their paycheck? I could not care less.
But Society and Gaming are activities that involve also me, so yeah, I care

点击展开...

When historians hundreds of years from now are studying the collapse of society in the 21st century, I am sure they will pay special attention to the people who did not lose their **** because a game released in EA with many features unfinished.

Aruda 说:

There's much more than that.I'm sure you haven't played Warband so you really dont know the issue here. Making marriage simply "harder" doesnt solve anything, it needs depth. We could learn poems, dedicate tourney victories, challenge other suitors etc and family affiliations meant something. The families with strong lords were important. There are many many features in Warband that we currently dont have in Bannerlord, every relation point meant something in Warband. So calling them 2 very minor balance changes is not true. These are huge features that creates depth and effects the overall gameplay in the long run. I hope devs implement those features to the game and just dont leave them simplified as they currently are.

点击展开...

First of all, I have hundreds of hours in Warband. 95% of that in mods of course, becasue the native Warband kinda sucked, it could barely sustain the first playthough before it got boring (if you also played the original M&B as I did, I dont really know how Warband felt for a new player). It seems to me that people forget how underwhelming native Warband was.

Bannerlord already feels like a bigger improvement over Warband than Warband was over the original (talking pure native here). Maybe that is just because I am not a child and actually understand how game development works, meaning I am able to judge the product based on which features are finished, which are not fully fleshed out and which are purely placeholders.

Also, if you think the shallow gimmick of poems in Warband was depth, I have a bridge to sell you.

Which chapter of Art of War is that?

For example lord personalities had a bigger part in the game then now, for recruiting them, getting them to follow you etc.
Or the whole courting experience, in Warband you needed to pick the right lord with the right daughter for the kind of game you are playing, then start oiling the wheels with the Lord in question, court the lady, maybe elope if you wanted, etc...
Now I just spawned as a scrub and bought my wife FROM A RULER and it was only RNG I got her (plus the money).

It seems to me that many mechanics have been "simplified", in Warband I was having my own kingdom at around day 1000 just for comparison

Some may say it is EA, I say that main features had to be in already and in EA we only had to find missing line of text or little mistakes, subtle stuff.

点击展开...

You complain the game lacks depth, yet you mentioned 2 very minor balance changes (giving lords more diverse traits and giving traits more pronounced effects, and making getting marriage approval harder). Are you serious?

mexxico 说:

For 3-4 days I worked on lords to have better tier troops. It will be at beta branch 2-3 days later with other developments :

Here is latest situation after developments, as you see tier1 / tier2 troops are generally 25%+20% = 45% of all troops. It was 45%+25% = 70% before. Also now NPC lords will be visiting settlements & recruting more to fill their party size (more compared current version). Previously they were going enemy lands more frequently with less men (currently using 60% of their party size in average with additions this ratio will rise 80%). Also if they have lots of wounded troops they now go settlement and rest more. Armies will care their food more (they were dying because of starving much and their food management is a bit developed). Sally out exploit (if you lay siege with neutral army thing) will be gone. You will not be able to change troops of villagers / caravans / militias with donate troops option. NPC lords will make better economical management, if they are rich they will recruit more and increase party / garrison sizes (this was already at game but developed). All these improvements will be at beta branch soon (2-3 days).

Also decreased lords escaping probability by 25% / 50% (from mobile party / from settlement). This will be later decreased more when replacement heroes are added to game. Currently it is risky to reduce very much because replacements are not added and some clans only have 1-2 lords. This addition (slightly decreased escaping probability) will be at beta too 2-3 days later.

Also you will be able to hire a caravan including better troops with 50% expensive initial cost and daily wage. However party size will stay at 30. Later new perks will be added giving +5 size to player caravans. I tested latest situation in lots of different save games and still caravans are very good value and travel with very low risk in most cases. I think we lost lots of time discussing this 30 thing. It was something needed and minor compared to other issues. People overreacted it before testing / playing enough.

点击展开...

Seems like many things that we complain about are bring worked on. This is not guarantee that things will not suck, but it does give credence to the opinion that just looking at which features are patched every 2 days and judging the game, the developers and the predicted state of the game 1 year down the line based on that is not really fair. It's certainly not the full picture.

My advice is just chill out. If you get angry every time a patch comes out and it doesnt address issues you feel are important, when those very issues might be addressed a few days or hell even weeks down the line, it might feel cathartic in the moment, but doing that every 5 days for a year of EA is not healthy. Gotta keep that blood pressure down folks.