搜索结果: *

Annoying indeed, not only for hideouts but in general. I used this mod https://www.nexusmods.com/mountandblade2bannerlord/mods/2909?tab=posts for it's option to define the time of battles, so i always fight at daytime. Sadly it does not seem to be updated to the latest version of BL, I'm still on 1.0.3 or so.

I'd really like it. Another bonus could be the ability to decrease range and increase pivoting angles of artillery, to make the defenses a bit less stupidly designed. Or add kind of barriers/traps in front of the walls (just slowing down siege towers and rams, currently I use a mod for that).

I bought Starsector some time ago, sounds promising, but I did not play yet (the combat seems to be a bit tedious?). Maybe I should, after I ended my endless trials to decide what class I'll play in Baldurs Gate 3 release version.

There should be either a black African or a kind of South East Asian style kingdom in the south east of the map. With a lot different clothing and armor style compared to what we have now.

All Aserai in the south is as boring as would be more clone factions similar to existing faction as are sadly proposed in several posts.

Does not make sense for me as random event. Who pays the big amount of money to hire them, for what? If it had political reasons, then it should be late in the campaign and the player had a certain high position, otherwise, why? Such a high ranked person should have bodyguards and wear some form of armor perhaps when going through some shabby streets.

If it were a certain event/quest with a story and an assasination could be expected, the player should be able to prepare for a situation, like wearing some armor in towns.

On the other hand, there could be kind of robbery attempts in towns in certain areas. But not that often, please.

Blocking without a shield for me is the most difficult and annoying task in M+B/BL. I can defeat a top tier soldier in the best armor (with RBM mod without tournament module) in the arena unarmored relatively soon if I have a shield, but without it I'm in dire straits. So blocking with weapons surely should generate lots of xp. If one wouldn't want to benefit automatic blocking, it could be exempted from the xp. Blocking with a shield should only give xp if it was a perfect directional block.

Totalgarbage 说:

One thing I'm more curious about, how many people have had their main character die? Only one of my characters died and it was due to old age in a playthrough I actually attempted world conquest. Even my companions died only a handful of times after the death rate was changed to 2ish% chance. I wish they would modify the death chance in battle (not auto-resolve) to 5%. I found 5% as the sweet spot between making death likely to occur a couple of times over a playthrough while not too often as it was with 10%.

点击展开...

I died three times as player in battles till now, in different campaigns. However I really don't like the "generation dynasty" aspects of BL, I don't marry and don't have children most of the times. I like the pressure that your companions (from whom some for me are kind of "friends/lovers") can die, so I always play with deaths enabled, which sadly starts the "getting older and get a family" mechanic. Detailed Character Creation saves me from the nonsense partly.

Before the modder sadly disappeared, I used "AI Values Life" and "Heroes Must Die" mods with higher death chances, so the AI (lords, companions) had a more dangerous life but lords also often avoided combat when having no chances. I did not start a new campaign after the death of my player character but reloaded, for me Ironman is not a challenge, but stupidity.


To OP: I don't think that the game is that easy. It is sometimes too easy and sometimes too harsh. It's surely boring and grindy after some point, and having big difficulty could make that even worse. To make games of a difficulty that very good experienced players see a big challenge is very difficult in itself. I'm not such a player and not a Warband vet (ok, I played it a bit, mostly 1257 AD) and I'm not very good in combat, especially without a shield, because I cannot parry well.

There is not much one can do to make the game more difficult (or interesting). Using Diplomacy and Separatism mods is self-explanatory, isn't it?

What else?:
1. I play on Bannerlord difficulty.
2. I use full RBM mod but without tournament module (so fully armored high tier enemies in tournaments from start, these bastards).
3. I upped T1 to T3 troop's skills and gave recruits shields, because AI often uses them.
4. T5 from normal and most T6 from noble troops are gone, to even the field and make the typical op player army more rare. Sometimes I read about problems with Filans or Crab Guards or so, don't know what that is.
5. I made me a custom faction (using Tetsojin mod, sorry) with a kind of Maya/Aztec/Toltec vibe, and I only use faction troops (10 foreign troops per party are allowed). My "Toltecs" have no to very few armor and no cavalry (with the exception of the top tier noble unit, medium armor and sitting on a giant armored war camel; party limit for this unit is 10).
It's (a bit) more difficult to win with such troops.

I don't think that "interesting new units" would change the field considerably. Only the addition of extremely op units (PoP style) or of fantasy elements, like magic, could have such impacts.
And even then it has to be a massive change. For example I gave soldiers with firepots (from OSA mod) to the Empire and the Aserai who can easily kill 10 to 20 troops with one throw. It's "funny" to suddenly see a big area of red fonts appearing, and it's just one enemy soldier. Sometimes they kill their own troops too, the morons, hehehe. There is no big impact to gameplay however (except the player gets a firepot and can use it in siege defenses ...).

What would change the game, as said by others before, were deeper tactical possibilities in battles. It needed a good AI first.

On what version are you playing? You know, it's 2023 and not 2020. In my game Mr. Husnphree is named "mount" as far as I remember. A dromedary camel can be a mount, even if not a horse.

Depends on your preferences. Do you play modded or vanilla? Do you like tournaments or battles? Do you use a shield or twohanded or do you like ranged?

I'm only playing on "Bannerlord", with otherwise full RBM mod without the tournament module (so you have fully armored high tier enemies in tournaments from start), without reticle. It is a bit more difficult than vanilla because the AI is better in blocking, but it is more satisfying when you defeat people in tournaments. Generally, for me a slash or thrust with full force has to kill unarmored opponents in one or two hits, otherwise it's not "immersive".

In battles the difficulty does not matter that much in my experience, it's chaos and situational all over. As ranged is very strong in vanilla and armor rather weak, a decrease of the damage to the player might be advisable, to avoid some stray arrows kill you quickly and make you are mere bystander of the ongoing fight.

I would not change the party speed to the easier settings, the map already feels a bit small.

If you have the ingame and life time to stand around during the fights till the end, doing nothing, you really deserve the incredible amount of 250 denars, as compensation for utter boredom.

For those who don't like slow grinding I would propose to install a mod (like RBM or Arena Overhaul, or both) and make tournaments and practice fights really useful and profitable.

The AI probably often does not see the enemy army early enough to escape, so it does not try. It has the disorganised status after lifting the siege and is very slow. It would be great if there were a messenger system in the game to warn and manipulate lords from your own faction, also there should be a skillbased ability of lords to reconnoiter far away (and the ability to utilize small hunting parties to catch spy parties). Presumably too complicated for the BL AI ...

I cannot support the notion that there are no battles other than sieges. And sieges and battles developing from sieges were the norm in the high medieval period, pure field battles were very rare. Quite a lot in BL is random, sometimes (or, often ...) it seems the AI is totally braindead, but sometimes it also is ok and achieves goals I had not counted on. In my recent campaigns the AI parties helped each other quite often, more often than the player party did, hmm.

Take also into account that humans during many/all military conflicts during history quite often acted quite stupidly, on par with the worst deeds of the BL AI. I don't have the feeling that the AI was once great or better and has become worse. The AI is stupid on the same level about since Warband, in my opinion.

Some remarks in no order:

1. Are you on consoles? Your fault.
2. What are Khan Guards? Never noticed them.
3. Decide, don't complain (because it's complaint No. 1,027 of the same, you said it yourself): remove/change the unique op unit and suffer that there is no longer an unique (op) unit, or keep them and suffer while dealing with them (see it as proof of your competence in gaming). Anyway, you cannot get a mouse-sized big elephant.

So the info system about mistakes made in the xml is made by TW themselves? It saved me countless of hours of my life for lots of times (I quite often change xml files), and I did not know wether it's vanilla or from a mod.

To the bows, have to be changed. I did not notice till now, maybe because I play without reticle and have to aim in first person?

You could watch the videos on Youtube about Land of Sika (LandofSika on Nexus), for example from ReformistTM. Land of Sika is indeed a bit like PoP, of course still not nearly as elaborated but with good ideas. I tried the mod but found that story based RPG is not my biggest desire in the M+B system. Land of Sika has an interesting world but the mod My Little Warband kind of incorporated, in other words you can make your own op troops quite soon which I really don't like. LoS is also for 1.8.x or so and maybe buggy.

"The Old Realms" is in very good state, definitely worth a try. It offers a lot in addition to BL. Maybe a bit too much. I would prefer a lite fantasy system with some magic, but more restricted, and without firearms, but I'm not a real Warhammer fan. TOR will really shine when they introduce bigger monsters and of course more cultures. Currently you have several Empire factions and the Vampire Counts. All very well made. I will only play if/when the Woodelves become playable, I like some skin exposed on my troops. I cannot imagine how fantastic the mod would be if they could make big creatures and steam tanks work, or even flying stuff (don't know wether the system allows the latter, possibly not).

JunKeteer 说:

The issue is putting every form of progression and jamming it into the current skill/attributes/perks system.
They should've just separated combat progressions from your administrative or other personal skills; I don't even know why clan leader perk is there (we already have clan tiers? or the fact there's barely any perks applicable anyways). Governor perks could've acted more like a simple A/B perk path (maybe 5 levels or something) that you pick and develop the longer someone is a governor at X fief.

Or they should've treated the AI/companion skill path completely separate from the player as it still makes no sense why some skills only affect the clan leader, only the party leader, only the governor. Some perks will just never be of use even after managing to get a companion to get to that skill level.

点击展开...

I think it's obvious that you get a better governor for example with good bow skill (like 150 in BL), isn't it? Once I knew the reason for such clever skill/perk design, but I forgot it.

If your companion wins the tournament, the party he/she belongs to (that's in effect you) gets the item won. That's a reason why I like my companions taking part in tournaments. The ridiculous amount of gold for selling that piece of metal is a fault of the vanilla item price building mechanic, not the tournament system. If you would use for example RBM mod, the helmet would have given you about 3,500 gold when selling.

If you are using the mod Improved Garrisons, it's a pleasure to find huge amounts of prisoners after getting a fief, for recruiting them automatically over time. If you need the money and want to sell the poor prisoners, you have to make the journey to a town several time. Boring, but there are worse tasks to make money in the game. If you don't need the money, usually at about the time you get lots of prisoners in fiefs, and they annoy you, just release them. It does not cost you real money.

I would find total zones of control in BL not very immersive. Such zones were nothing medieval. A fort of the Maginot line in France in the 1930s could hard control an area of 30 km, a medieval castle perhaps a zone of 400 m, hardly any obstacle for a bigger group of enemies. A soft control zone with reduced movement speed of the enemy army and perhaps random reductions of foot could make some sense as simulation of parties from the castle attacking logistics. Constant supply lines and overawing importance of supply is also a rather modern thing, not one of the ancient . medieval and early modern world. Except food and water old day armies needed actually very little constant supply.

Totalgarbage 说:

I've never seen something like this happen in several campaigns with or without mods, this is really weird. I've noticed maybe 40-50% of a single troop type in an AI party (excluding parties filled with only recruits and whatnot) a few times here and there, but never saw literally 80% of a party be composed of a single unit type ever.

点击展开...

Same here. Archers in my campaigns never formed the majority of an army (except Khuzaits maybe). That was in older campaigns with vanilla, Improved Combat AI mod or RBM mod AI module. It's the same in my current campaign with full RBM. Which is great because I'm playing a custom faction with almost no armor and cavalry which would get destroyed (even more than now in manual battles ...) with the RBM archery and the smaller shield area.

There is a lot of magic in the perks. Why do people get more hp with good medicine? It is ok that they don't die that often but the existence of doctors in the camp don't make people more resistant to sword cuts.

You can imagine that a party leader/captain with good combat skills sees their importance and puts big efforts into training to make the soldiers better. So it trickles down the rangs. There is a mod, Tutelage, which has companions profit from high skills of other companions, that's the same idea.

The idea that in reality towns were easier to conquer than castles is not realistic. Fortified towns were frequently much tougher nuts to crack than castles, because of the higher number of defenders alone. BL should not make towns soft targets. Castles one the other hand frequently were not pure defense structures but centres of administration and bases for patrols to contol the surroundings, and also places to live.

I agree with the OP that it should be almost impossible to get a town as player right on. You should start with a small fief and develop. I would make towns much more prosperous than castles btw and much more money hubs than currently in the the game. Getting a town should be a big deal.

I would like castles to be like this:
1. There are some vendors with a restricted offering to buy and sell, as castles usually had some production facilities.
2. Castles allow patrols (like in Improved Garrison mod, which surely everybody uses, or not?)
3. Castles spawn Veteran Militia, but few.
4. Castles have 50% garrison costs by default.
5. Noble units can only be recruited in castles, if you are a vassal, not in villages for any faction. Nobles should be recruitable in towns if you are a mercenary for the faction. (that is probably not for anybody's taste ...).
6. Artillery is permanent, the owner can decide what to build where.
7. Castle walls III are very resistant and cannot be attacked with ladders. Castle gates are much stronger than town gates.
8. There is almost a guarantee that you get a castle again if it was conquered and reconquered.
9. Castles allow to convince the smaller population to cultural changes over time.