搜索结果: *

Before TW do something to the scouting skill, don't use the realistic option when starting the game. In warband, there is a skill path-finding that give you speed bonus so you can catch up with any party. In bannerlord, the skill is gone, and realistic moving speed will make you have the same speed as other parties, so you cannot catch them anymore. The perks in scout give a 1% bonus each, which can hardly see any difference. I suggest the perks to be boosted, 5% each perk would be more reasonable. And the scouting skill of the scout in your clan should give speed bonus like path-finding in warband.

The moving speed setting is only changeable when creating the game, so for existing games, you need to use the mod, or the cheat if you don't care.

I am so sick to see this topic again. They won't take "No" as an answer. Every time someone reject their idea, they just start a new thread to do it again. So I have two suggestion to it.

1. Let's make the game more realistic than ever. Not only horse should eat food, they should need water as well. Add water to the game and make men and horses need it alike. And you know what, horses need salt as well. They will sweat if you put them on load and their food cannot provide so much mineral. If you don't give them salt, they will not drink and dehydrate themselves.So run out of food, water or salt, boom, all your horses die and all cavalry degrade to foot soldier. And we should not only look at the horses. You men need food as well. And cooked food I mean. So every party should stop from time to time to cook. And we should introduce nutrition system into the game too. Having limited variation of food not only lower the morale, and will be lethal if you are in war. Just because it is medieval doesn't mean you can torture your men, they have human rights! And after all the diet issue, let's go to consumable. All parties should consume oil and linen, may be iron as well, similar to food. It is not stainless steel or titanium swords you are using, they will rust and your clothes/armor will wear out. So all the material is needed to keep your weapon in shape. If you run out of those, all your units degrade to peasants and looters. There are still so much to add for the game to be more realistic, but I think these will give us a good starting point.

2. Add a mod or option to remove all mountable item and cavalry from the game. This should satisfy the horse-haters to not bring the issue again.

Negative 说:

Well i'm just saying 'realism' isn't really an argument in a game with so many specifically designed shortcomings to it's realism.
I mean we've got mixed period weapons and armor, with mixed period armies and such. And a lot of that to seemingly make cavallery less powerful.
But i'm in favour of rebalancing on map party speeds. Because let's face it on-foot peasants in Khuzait territory just getting eaten up by unchaseable Steppe Bandits is just bad...

点击展开...

I think before TW do something about it, we should use easy setting for party speed. With the path-finding skill gone, it is impossible to catch-up with any riding party, and the perks from scouting and background feats is almost useless at the moment.

metafa 说:

If you don't like realism (weird as this game if you haven't noticed is trying to depict reality) then consider that it's just a square unfair advantage to have xx amount of horses in your party without there being *any* downsides to it. So it's from a realism and from a gameplay perspective problematic imo. On the other hand I love that I have the option of customizing the size of my inventory and gamespeed with this mechanic. I am not asking for a huge punishment though. Don't get me wrong.

点击展开...

I remember when I have over a thousand horse (from using cheat and defeat tons of cavalry) I have a big speed penalty from have herd. So unless I am mistaken, having too many horse do have downside. And your suggestion to make horses eat food is not effective to counter the having too many horse compare to your party size. It just encourage people to keep even more horses because the capacity of each horse is reduced, due to the food have to carry. And depends on the penalty of not having food for the horse, it can total destroy AI cavalry. By the time you have too many horses to be reasonable for your party, I can hardly imagine needing a little more food will have any impact. The feature will only bring more hardship for early game, where you have little money. So as a whole, I don't see any reason for the horse food feature.

High chief Kieran 说:

are you sure ai dont keep horses? i have looted them from battanian armies that were not using cav and considering their map speed i would say they do have it.

点击展开...

Well, they usually don't have any, I think. The reason the battanian army have it as war trophy? I don't recall seeing battanian party travelling at speed of 6. I am not sure but I don't see they keep unnecessary stuff.

The upkeep method is possible, but I doubt in mid-late game a few hundred more upkeep can do any difference. I still think it is the price of the horses too low and you get way too many horses for defeating cavalry.

metafa 说:

I am sorry. This can't stand. Imagine I have a party with 50 men. Chasing another party with 40 men. Only I have 200 horses in my party and they don't. We will consume roughly the same amount of food. But I will be able to easily outrun him and carry a sh*tload of loot. It just can't stand this way. This needs to be balanced. I love the sense of realism and not to forget possibilities at customization that more horses equals more speed and more room for loot, but it needs to have a downside.

点击展开...

It do have downside already. If the 40 men chased has 40 horses, and your 50 men has 200 horses, you will never catch up with them due to the herd speed penalty. If they have none, well they have no horse, how can they outrun a ground with horse? Since AI don't keep horses, it is an issue you can control by restricting yourself for role-play reason. If you really insist something should be done, may be a hard cap for the total number of herd linked to your party size like the prisoner system.

I dreamed to play merchant in the game. The dream died in warband due to the inventory mechanism. I spend the first 4 days in bannerlord to play as caravan. Maybe not a very good choice since it breaks away from the main idea of the game and quite boring. So here is so experience I learn from my caravan days, before I say goodbye to it.

Some hint on the trade skill. It gains exp only if you sell trading goods at good prices (red price only I guess). Even if you are making profit, if the selling price is green, you gain no exp. The game remember the buy backs so buying and selling in the same town gives nothing.

I think the game auto collect all the rumors for you when you enter the town, including the staying caravans. So sometimes you will get some rumors real far from you. Ignore those rumors. Keep record of buying and selling price is not bad, just sometimes the price is affected by some odd reason and cannot be relied on. Keep record of good produced by the towns is better. Sometimes you may find rumor of very low price of goods in a town, travel there just to find the town has no stock of that goods.

If you are not war-orientated, keeping more packing animals to increase your capacity can yield good money. Do the overbuying, as long as the price is good. Just don't over sell, cause the price go down real fast. Stock pile low price goods, as long as you can afford the denars, and travel to different towns, selling them in smaller sections.

The large range of low (green) price probably is caused by broken economic. The goods is not consumed and piling up in the town, make the price go so low. But there will be towns that pay high (red) price for that goods. So if you can afford carrying goods in your party for long time, saving the goods for those town can really bring good profit. Maybe not for hides, that the highest price I ever see is 95. The need for hides is just too low everywhere.

Grains should be buy at 7 or lower, but I will accept 9 to 10 if my stock go really low. I usually keep 300 stock when it is cheap, after I have 20k+ weight capacity. It can be sold for 18 or even 20 when the price is high. Usually 15 is a good selling price.

Silver ore has price around 120, so price lower than 100, usually at producing town/villages, is good buying price. The selling price can go to higher than 180, through you can sell 1-2 only before the price drops to 150.

Jewelry is a tricky one, the price can change so much and the stock is so low. It is like gambling. Usually buying price around 200 is good, and selling price around 250. But I see price of 300 in some rare case.

Fish should be buying below 10, and can be sell at around 20, Oliver can be buy below 20, and sells at 35, sometime 40. Food stuff is quite stable, just the profit per weight is not really good.

Flex buy at 8 or below and sell at 13, clay buy below 10 and sell at around 20, hardwood buy at around 15 and sell at around 23-25. I usually don't do these raw materials unless I have nothing else to buy.

Iron ore is a weird one. At some producing town you can buy at below 30, at other producing town, 50. So the price is odd. The consuming towns can sell for as high as 80, well, for the first few ore. Overbuying the iron ore, they may stay in your inventory for real long time.

Pottery is my favor. At the producing towns you can usually buy below 50, and at general town you can sell for 80 (white price). I find it quite stable but more test may need to be done to find out.

High chief Kieran 说:

if they make it so that my horses die than they should make it so that if a horse dies it provides meat for my soldiers. in history it did happen quite a lot that people killed the horses when they were starving, they only did this as a last resort though since they were both a status symbol and of strategical importance.

点击展开...

You can kill herd for meat. I do not notice if you can do it with horses, probably not. You can ask for the feature as it can be real simply. If horses starve to death I doubt that they can provide much meat. It just make the mechanism too complicate for too little effect. Well, I personally think there should not be the horse food feature. The grass, if really needed, may be sold by camp followers who do business with the army. But it is not a life simulation game and I don't think every detail in the Medieval age should be added.

And what if you don't feed the horses? They die? And what about other cavalry? They die too? I think this feature likely to cause all cavalry disappear from Calradia, or just cause the player trouble if the AIs do not have to feed their horses.

The problem of too many horses in your army is that the price of the horses is just ridiculously low. For the price of 1-2 low rank sword you can buy a average horse, and a decent horse is cheaper than mid rank armor.

I think the real annoying part of the mission is that you have to escort them to 2 towns. They can lead you go across the entire Calradia. It just make the money not worth the time. And the follow party command is gone, so I have to manually move my band in circles around the caravan. To top the pain, sometimes if they are attacked, they may change destination after the fight. There is once they are going to Revyl, which is the second town. I got distracted a bit to the village, and they got ambush by sea raiders just at the door gate of Revyl. After I rush to and save the caravan with their last one standing, they suddenly decide they should go to Argoron (or may be it is Amprela, I don't remember). Oh come on, it is one-third across the world! And I am stuck to the party for another week, moving at 1.0 due to lots of wounded people.

For a early access of game, I must say the game is much more complete than I expected. Yes, there are still tons of feature not implemented, lots of mechanism overhaul and balancing to be done, and even more stuff to be added. But the game is playable! It just give me much hope how the game will become. I just want TW to give a schedule on what they are working on, some short-term issue and long-term target, so we can know what to expect and give our opinion. Don't want to see that they spend long time develop a feature that not many of us really fond of.

And below is my real FIRST REACTION:

Oh my god where is the auto-block? I don't care how good other people play, I need the auto-block! How can you guys do that? (After 3 hours+ in the training ground trying to do the 2H)

Fahn 说:

Yeah, in 1.0.6 you can easily take on 10 looters early game with a bow and 1 hander (no shield) if you want. Only a couple will throw stones that miss fairly often, and the rest just charge at you. You don't have the 40m looter stone archers now lol

点击展开...

The problem is not if the player can do it alone or not. It is if you have 10 new recruits vs 10 looters, you can lost 2-3 men on the charge before the melee. If you kill all the looters with your main character, your recruits will gain no exp and no upgrade. With the trainer skill gone, you must send them to fight to get them better.

I really don't understand how far this "Reality situation" discussion should go but I will entertain you a little bit.

Michael Bolton 说:

1. That's not my point. My point is that it's possible for an underdeveloped body to throw a considerably heavier projectile at 50 MPH. Take it a step further: The average 14 year-old girl, with practice, can throw an even heavier softball upwards of 50 MPH as well. Therefore, it should be reasonable for a lighter rock thrown by a grown man to reach speeds sufficient to sting if it hits you. Also, why can't they practice? What do they do in their downtime? There are historical cases of poor troops in the east training to throw rocks, why can't looters?

2. Obviously. Rocks are denser, so they're more dangerous if they hit you. People get hit by baseballs all the time and don't die, but rocks were used as projectiles in war.

3. I'll present this question: Would you stand still while some kid threw a small, jagged rock at you? Would you stand there unflinching? Don't say "Yeah, if I was wearing armor", either, because armor protects you against more than half the impact of the rock ingame. As someone who had rocks thrown at me when I was a kid, I can attest that a single rock can cause large welts and even break skin. Just a regular old rock picked up off the ground, thrown by a 14 year-old runt. They can break glass, for heaven's sake.

4. Behold.

点击展开...

1. I think looters should be cast out from villages, which they cannot feed anymore and leave to die out there. So an underdeveloped well-fed, well-trained body definitely throw better than looters. And it takes a full body motion to make such a throw, on a baseball field, with a baseball. Stones are not well-shape and size like baseball, it has rough surface that will cut your hand if you try to throw it hard. Find a brick and try throwing it and you will see what I mean. Also, I think starving people don't practice sport in their downtime. Actually, I think they have no downtime. There are still much more reasons to it but it is clear that the throw you mean for the looters is not very practical.

2. Denser = more dangerous only applies if there is punctuation or the rock directly hit you, and cause more serious trauma. But you are limiting the situation to a rock denser, but lighter than a baseball. It would make the rock quite small, even more difficult to throw as you cannot hold it tight, and the air drag will be significant.

3. If I have a more dangerous weapon, I may choose to retaliate. Let's be fair. If you charge to someone who throws a rock and hits you, you will get serious injury. I grant you that.

Michael Bolton 说:

Extrapolation:

• A sling can throw its ammunition at nearly 100 meters per second.
• A sling doubles the projectile's speed as opposed to the average throwing speed.
• This means the throw would be around 50 mps, which is just shy of a longbow arrow's speed.
• But this is based on very hard throws, so let's chop it to 30 mps.
  • Assuming it hits the armor and sinks in about a quarter inch (0.006 meters) before bouncing off, we'll take (0.5 x 0.00005 kg x 25 mps ^ 2) / 0.006 meters for an impact force of 4.5 Newtons or 8.25 pounds force.

With all that in mind, is it really so unfair to say that a rock coming in at 8 pounds of force and dinking off your helmet could stun you for a half-second and take 1/15th of your health bar?

点击展开...

You are making it very vague so let me make it more clear how the number comes from.

A sling as long as the thrower's arm, theoretically, can double the projectile's speed, if you can swing your arm as fast as without the sling. Professional cricket bowlers or baseball pitchers can throw at about 50 MPS. So with direct calculation, a sling that long can make the projectile to reach 100 MPS.

Do you have any idea a sling as long as your arm looks like? It is definitely impossible to use. At least not without extensive training. And with that long long heavy sling, I am sure the thrower cannot swing his arm that fast. And the motion for pitching is totally different from using a sling, so you will need some professional sling user, aka looters, to do the throw.

You said the rock will bounce off, but your calculation show a prefect elastic collision. So the rock will embed into your armor/body, and make no sound in the process at all. It must be made from cyber material comes directly from some secret military lab. It is impact you are looking at, so it should be the momentum to be considered. Mass x Velocity, which means at the same speed, or same kinetic energy if you prefer, lighter the rock, smaller the impact. I have left college far too long and cannot dig up so much memory. If you are interested, please look it up yourself.

I really hope the "I see it in some Guinness Record so the looters can do it" discussion ends here because it is the game I want to discuss, not physic.

Herbiie 说:

If they are using slings then that would explain a lot, but there really needs to be an animation. It'd also be a bit short range for a sling, then again looters being armed with slings would be quite harsh, if not overly unrealistic.

Bolton, I am not missing the "point" of your comparison, your comparison is utterly ridiculous. Here is why, although I'm sure you'll ignore it:
1. Looters are not even junior high baseball pitchers who practise throwing to get the fastest they can. They are desperate men throwing rocks.
2. Rocks and baseballs have more differences than simply weight. I feel that I shouldn't have to point out that throwing a rock and throwing a baseball, even if they are the same size, will be different.
3. Baseball pitchers throw their baseballs in a specific way in order to achieve that speed. Cricket bowlers have a run up. Looters have neither. Rocks are not aerodynamic meaning that they will not have the speed and accuracy of a ball. You can see the rocks that are being thrown. They are not smooth balls. They are larger than a fist. and ragged.
4. The rocks being thrown are not the perfectly smooth rocks that are used for slings. The reason being that you can't throw a pebble as fast as a sling can propell them. If you could, then why would slings exist? You say "RANGE!" but the reason that slings go further than a thrown rock is because they are thrown with more force and therefore go quicker. It's basic physics.

If you argue against the above Bolton then you're kind of showing that you can't be taken seriously at all. Baseball pitchers and slings? Seriously.

点击展开...

Wow, I wanted to point those out but you beat me when I am finding those stupid data. But I think the main point is: Hey man, it is a game! All those "It is possible in real life" argument is just nonsense.

Let's get back to the game, I find that unlike warband, which the accuracy greatly depends on the weapon proficiency, bannerlord has the accuracy depend on the weapon mainly. Weapon skill has very limited effect, so a peasant using a bow can shoot almost as good as some elite troops. I think TW should really lower the base accuracy of the weapons and make the skills count more, so troops with different skill level and our characters do make a difference. Right now the skill level is just something that limit the usage of high rank weapons and for leveling the character only.

And the stone with 14 ammo doesn't make sense at all. I think you can carry 1-2 pieces of stone. For the gameplay reason, I can accept a number of 4 ammo. And if the looters can have stone, why not the new recruits and peasants use stone too? This will make them more useful in the field and make the early game easier.

pygc1 说:

the old days in warband when i could solo sea raiders with a new character are gone

点击展开...

You can still do that. You just need to do some ultra long range shot and kill them one by one. The retreat mechanism in bannerlord is even easier and forgiving than warband, given that you can outrun your enemy.

I think the problem is likely all the troops has overpowered weapon skills. Even looters has 40 in one-hand and 40 in throwing. Forest bandit even has 150 in bow. The high skill level give a boost to their accuracy.

You can hardcore yourself by not saving and use the auto save only.

Well if you are playing from stream there may be two reasons I can think of. The first one is stream sometimes does not handle large download well, and some file may be corrupted. Right-click on the game on stream library and select properties, at the local files tab, select verify integrity of game files. It will check out if the files are fine.

The second reason I cannot be sure, but you should select the latest version at the BETA tab. It may or may not relate to the issue your game won't start. The game is just unbearable without the patches so just do it.