搜索结果: *

Same as https://forums.taleworlds.com/index.php?threads/chanopsis-village-blue-textures.457840/#post-9863771 correction in progress

Done.
In less that 24 hours in the save, a kid will come of age.

Yes, still having same issue on v1.1.1

True but why does Sturgia need to be the underdog or Vladia the superpower in each campaign? It just hurts replay value. And balancing the factions more would hardly create a static situation. I mean the three empires factions are equal in unit composition and between them you can get different outcomes in each campaign.

True, Battania and Sturgia have the short stick in the factions overview. I do put Sturgia at bottom though.

Battania has the best archer in the game but everyone else sucks. Their T5 infantry can't even hold their shields straight for shieldwall but they have good economy and their towns are all close to each other, they are easier to defend. Their problem is Vladia just being too good.

Sturgia is just a mess, their roster besides T6 Cav and maybe T5 Spearman is just bad, their economy is bad and their position is bad. Their towns have very little prosperity to generate money early own and half the towns in Sturgia are terribly positioned. Tyal is too far away from the rest, Varcheg and Omor are too open, very easy for Vladia, Battania and NE to take them. Without these three towns, Sturgia is reduced to only half their original towns and it usually happens very early in each campaign.

Also the AI doesn't know how to handle two wars in both sides at the same time for Sturgia. How many times they create an army near Varcheg only to send them to attack the Tyal area while a Vladian or Battanian army is going around in the area. And yeah, it's a shame diplomacy isn't in the base game (without mods).

Vladia is quite strong yeah, it becomes a regular occurence in each campaign where Vladia just takes the world. Strong overall roster, good geographic spot and good economy.
The Khuzait though have seen better days, haven't seen a campaign where they dominate in quite a few campaigns.

I think this only happens if the siege has already started though and the garrison is involved

MArdA TaleWorlds 说:

Do you have a save file of the session that you experienced this issue? With your save file, we can reproduce the issue much easier and faster. You can find your save file here: "C:\Users\username\Documents\Mount and Blade II Bannerlord\Game Saves"
To send us a ticket, please visit the www.taleworlds.com site and login to your forum account from the top right. Click on "My Account" and then click on "My Open Tickets". You can create a ticket there and include the save file as well as the forum link of this thread. You can find more info about how to upload files to us with the new ticketing system here. Thanks for reporting and sorry for any inconvenience!

点击展开...

Done. Thank you

Xyronos 说:

Was this issue fixed in v1.1.0?
Couldn't find information in patch notes.

点击展开...

No, it is still happening.

I agree with you in one point but it would be cool if the encyclopedia at least kept the data from the dead companions that were part of your clan as a historical data of your clan. That said, from my 40 year playthrough, the dead companions tend to disappear from the encyclopedia after a while.

So I wrote in the update that I wasn't seeing cav being distributed to other formations, well I do now. I think simply put, the AI counts how many formations you have and then look at your companions and distributed them based on a specific order (I think recruitment?). So formation 1 stays with the player character, formation 2 has the first companion recruited, formation 3 has the second companion recruited etc etc. So if you have 4 formations, the AI does this to your character and 3 others.
In the picture shared, my character had infantry formation, infantry captain (was first recruited) had archer formation and infantry second companion (second recruited) had cavalry formation (at the time I only had these 3 formations). The 4 companion was correctly with Cav formation has a second companion.

Jarl Baller 说:

My bad, what I meant was that if the situation is that bad that they had to retreat while attacking the walls then they should be wise enough to just abandon the siege altogether. Not try again for the millionth time without success.

And yes, in that save file there isn't any other fief in my kingdom with a garrison smaller than 400 units so that explains why they're so insistent on taking Amprela.

点击展开...

Yeah I get what you mean, it seems that the minute an army is created, the AI needs to do something and since it prefers to attack than defend in the latest patch, it goes straight to the "weakest" link. Given that it doesn't have an alternative, it gets stuck there. Don't know if that's what's happening but it sure does feel like it

Jarl Baller 说:

That's why my suggestion is that the attacking army should have the option to abandon the siege altogether if they lost too many troops.

点击展开...

Don't they do that though? I do notice the AI tends to abandon sieges if their numbers start getting near the number of defenders in 1.1.0 but it might just be that there is some other settlement more appropriate to their new number of soldiers to siege and they just move from it. In your case maybe that other settlement didn't exist?

Heya, thank you for the response.
Yeah, I don't use cheat codes or even the console at all.

You can disable player death in battle and from old age in settings, when you start a campaign