搜索结果: *

TengriBless 说:

Fine if you're talking about the modern age but frequent popular revolts in medieval Ottoman Empire? Gonna need sources on that.

点击展开...

I wrote a few articles about the early Ottoman some years ago, so at the moment I'm hazy about the details and don't have all the books I had back then, but I'll tell you some examples.

The interregnum period 1402–1413 certainly created instability, which in addition to the on going struggle of succession caused several more or less popular revolts ro raise. History focuses on the main characters, who often channeled the dissatisfaction of people against their enemies to gain popular support (much like Skanderbeg did a few decades later). Sheikh Bedreddin led I guess the most popular one 1416 against the most powerful claimant, Mehmed I. He started in Wallachia, but were joined by other revolts in the area ruled by Mehmed. Interregnum is a fascinating topic, if you read about it (and also the sidenotes) you will notice how pretty much all of these rebellios princes met also smaller local revolts in their areas. Some of the revolts were raised to support another claimant than the one governing them, and some of them were born from general restlessness and insecurity of the interregnum era. Because of it, there were many occasions the future of the empire was very unsure.

As you know the Janissaries revolted quite often. The late medieval Janissaries are often romantically described as a super loyal and professional army of the sultan, but in reality the first Janissary revolt took place already 1449, when they successfully demanded better wages.

In the Ottoman heartland, Anatolia, there were revolts, because the local rulers had long roots in the Turkic nobility, and they wished recognization and sometimes even independence, also because differences in ethnicity and religion. A rebellion led by Şahkulu in 1511 was one example where the Turkmen and the Shia muslims revolted against the Ottomans.

The Ottomans faced revolts in recently conquered parts of Europe too. Albanian revolt 1432-1436 was led by Gjergj Arianiti, a friend of Skanderbeg's, also led several other revolts against the Ottomans. Of course a while later, Skanderbeg, a former Ottoman governor, led an over 20 year long revolt against the empire. Sometimes the revolts would give a somewhat founded claim to the Ottomans. They helped to put down the revolt in Morea, asked by the ruling Palaiologos family despotates, and later, as they did have to do the same too often, finally the Ottomans took over completely in 1460. Generally, in the area we know as Greece it was quite restless for the Ottomans all the time, from the very beginning.

Depends of exactly when we see the medieval period ending namely in the Ottoman empire. For example the Ottoman empire and their rival Hungary are both described as medieval during the time of the battle of Mohacs (1526). The Ottomans conquered Damascus in 1516 and there already were a several revolts in few years time, like al-Gahazi's, who named himself as sultan and revolted to form another Mamluk empire.

This topic fascinates me to no end, but as I currently have to work on another area so I have to be cautious to not get myself too deep in this lol.

Life_Erikson 说:

I too see that as a problem. But I think the idea of a "peasant revolt" in general is a bit strange. Unlike today the ruling class of the day consisted of professional warriors who trained all their life for war. Revolting against such a class as a commoner who has neither the experience nor the equipment to fight on the same level would be suicide. Also culturally commoners generally knew their place. The church cemented the idea of the classes being gods will. Thus peasant revolts were quite rare during the middle ages. Also why should the town revolt against their lord? What benefit would they have for doing so? The villages won't resurrect themselves when the lord is gone.

I'd rather have a different solution: The ability for the player to select the option of rationing food in cities. This would have the same effect as the game behaves now: prosperity would sink slower but loyality would sink significantly, whereas not doing so would see the prosperity plummet instantly but the loyality untouched. When the player is indeed the one who causes people in the city to have less food available this would give them a real reason to start a revolt.

For the player this would be a choice between playing it safe with the city and risking loosing money to sustain his army or risking loosing the city whilst keeping his income high.

点击展开...

Usually in Europe there was always a revolt happening in some place. In some other parts, like in the late medieval Ottoman Empire revolts were pretty much a norm. Most of them were small, sidenotes in history pages, they weren't seriously threatening and you really have to dig to find information about them, they were small expressions of anger when the burgers or the farmers were unhappy about something - typically hunger or too heavy taxes. If life becomes too hard too unjustly, and people don't have any opportunities to continue life, they might as well rebel. Sometimes these rebellions were crushed so quickly that they didn't have time to grow, sometimes settlements were reached by negotiation, sometimes the crowd would just get tired and dissolve by itself. Most of the revolts are not listed in Wikipedia list of peasant revolts or anything like that because they didn't have any greater historical significance, but they did happen all the time.

Adrivan 说:

T6 archer takes 10 shots to down a T6 infantry? I think it's a bit much, I would spam full infantry armies and rush enemy archers if that was the case. Remember, a good amount of infantry also has shields, so its really tough to actually land 10 shots on a guy...

点击展开...

There are accounts of people having 20-30 arrows in their body before falling, one of the famous ones was Benkei, an adjutant of Yo****sune, who died looking like porcupine because of all the arrows

Maybs it could depend heavier on the distance between the archer and the target. The shorter the distance the higher propability to cause damage & pierce armor. An arrow shot from 10 meter distance against an unarmored torso would be a killshot, from 120 meters a mere "dang, ouch!" -5 health.

Edit: also, perhaps somewhat slower rate of fire could help.

Also seems like you can't give custom names to crafted weapons, you can type them in the box but in the inventory they show as "crafted javelin" or whatever.

Why don't you put a trade screen there, which would allow the player to decide which axes to give?

MArdA TaleWorlds 说:

Are you still experiencing this issue?

点击展开...

No, seems like inventory works fine, like it used to. I'm also playing 1.5.8 beta.

froggyluv 说:

Thats weird because any alcoholic drink equals a negative glass of water meaning you would dehydrate quickly and badly if you used it as a replacement for water. You'd get sick and die especially if you are being active

点击展开...

I wrote "weak beer and wine", meaning the percentage of alcohol they had in their drink was less than in beer that you or I enjoy in a pub. That's because the hydrating benefit of the drink would be lost to increased need to urinate caused by alcohol in the drink. And even with the stronger beer we have, you should be able to manage at least couple of days with zero problems, I am a living proof of that. I went to long hikes with two buddies, and we pack a lot of beer, start drinking immediately when we leave, to get rid of the weight. Normally it's all consumed in first two days, and it's at that point when we start drinking water. I live in Finland, I don't think this is special behaviour here, more like what we men sometimes do.

Askorti 说:

That is not entirely accurate.

点击展开...

Well obviously I made a generalisation, and generalisations concerning lengthy periods & multiple regions and cultures are never entirely accurate, but nevertheless the lack of clean drinking water has been a major health issue in developing countries & crisis zones in modern times, and it certainly was so in the middle ages. I get a feeling the guy is "busting myths" so eagerly, that he chooses to ignore the parts which are accurate. While in the era people had some knowledge of purifying water and protecting water sources, weak beer & wine was especially popular as a replacement among the moving armies because soldiers had less chances or time to ensure the purity of water while they were on the move. Typhoid continued to be a major problem for military to the end of 19th century.

Dreed89 说:

• Units consuming wine in player's inventory

点击展开...

I'm not the greatest historical accuracy freak, but, in the middle ages troops would prefer wine & beer over water, because these drinks were just so much safer than water. This is also (part of) the reason wine & beer were popular in monasteries. I would like it better if there was a mechanic that your troops will get typhoid if you don't have alcoholic drinks in the inventory.

Aren't you supposed to assemble the pieces of The Dragon Banner in the main quest because the owner of the banner will be the one to unite Calradia?

Screminmemes 说:

But there is no other way to play the game. If an NPC has great combat skills, why wouldn't you put them on the front line? Why should we have to plop them in a castle and never use them for fear of them dying? Putting them in their own party is ridiculously expensive (why a party of 1 person costs $2k+ per day when my party of 100 costs 700 is beyond me) and they always decide to go fight on the front lines first instead of doing missions and stuff so they are getting captured despite having 150+ tactics.

If we had something else worthwhile to do with the combat-centered NPCs to keep them out of harm's way, then I would say that makes sense. Or they can just be the gods that they should be. If I can kill 20 enemies in a battle with half the stats, there is no reason they should die on the first volley of arrows of their first battle.

点击展开...

You're very right. Basically I don't mean anything I said in that post any longer. I was playing my first game death enabled and taken back when I suddenly lost so many companions. After playing Warband for so long, and now Bannerlord, guess I just wasn't used to the idea that companions could die in this game. But with time I put some thought into it & started to see things differently. Also had a battle, where five Khuzait nobles died, setting their kingdom back, which ment a turning point in the war. What a great day that was! So I thought, if I experience as a positive, then basically that is what also can happen to me also negatively - due to the cosmic laws of balance. Without this balance, there of course can't be much joy in Bannerlord. There's no other way to play it really, that is true.

Maybe in time, or maybe there will be a mod or something which makes Bannerlord in a sense close to the Crusader Kings, where death of the player character is not so much of a as the power always transferes to a heir. That way, maybe the player character also could have a rare chance to die in the battle?

More like popular opinions lol.

It's good you pointed these out.Got me thinking about how many ways I just restrain myself in the game to not abuse it, like I let the wife keep her equipment, and also don't look for the fastest way to get to tier 3, so I get to have a longer early game.

Bloc 说:

And they think the game is almost ready. What you and me envisioning about the game isn't shared with TW management and employees.

点击展开...

Well said. Like how it was declared in the 1.5.5 hotfix notes that crafted weapons won't show up as tournament prizes anymore, the same repeated in 1.5.6 patch notes. I start a new game with 1.5.7, and as soon as I craft a two hand sword, it shows up as a tournament prize.

orgat 说:

I think you are really stupid, or can't read.
I explained at least 3 or 4 times that it's actually very easy to beat the game by relying on bandits and getting a huge army of Khan's guards or Sea raiders or Fians.
F**k off

点击展开...

And you are a little kid whining when he doesn't know how to play the game.

If it's that easy for you why don't you then complain about that. What you are doing you're complaining about not having a system like the AI has which would give you ready made heroes to replenish the ones you lost in actually somewhat difficult battles. The AI is dumb and it needs to have benefits so it can offer a challenge against an average human player - which, it looks like, is a category you fall under.

I'm tired of kids like you crying "Baahaa mommy the game is not fair make the game easier!!!" You f**k off.

orgat 说:

I will never play ANY game on a difficulty that is not hardest. NEVER.

点击展开...

Think maybe you should. I don't see much point of anyone playing the hardest difficulty if they can't cope with it or handle it, and feel a need to complain that this or that feature makes it too demanding.

orgat 说:

My issue is that I feel like the game doesn't give you a solid way of replenishing your forces other than mostly tier 1 units, even in late game.

点击展开...

Well that's probably because the game doesn't want to give you everything ready on a silver platter. Why don't you just train troops yourself, keep them in a castle as reserves, and take them to your party when you need them? And avoid battles which could cause heavy casualties?

You should. It's perfectly normal to get tired of playing an early access game and that is exactly the moment when it's a good idea to take a break.

Years ago I played Dayz Standalone a lot, I had some fun but felt like was always waiting for it to get better & less buggier, and with every patch I lost all the gear I had gathered. While starting afresh can be fun, it also can become deadly frustrating if you have to do it after every few months just because the game is unfinished. Tbh I haven't even seen 1.0 of Dayz, I just can't play another minute in that world. After that experience I was very suspicious to play another EA game, then had a great experience with Rimworld.

Why don't you play on the easiest setting then?

For me the game is overtly easy as it is with the most difficults settings on. And no, I haven't found it almost impossible to recover from casualties. Taking a lot of casualties means a week long recruiting & training pause in the current war, if that much. Then even with your mostly rookie party you can take out a single enemy party with prisoners, get some of your troops trained, and new replacements from the released prisoners.

Zorion_no 说:

Seen it with several Sturgian aswell(Valla, Drakha or what her name is(70yrs or that old at start, she dont even have armor..)
Noticed it on a few Battanians + Aserai, havent seen it on Khuzait so far(but I've not interacted with them besides on the battlefield).

点击展开...

Haha yeah she was my favorite in an earlier game, often in my army because cheap influence, and in battles she just rode straight towards the enemy often being the first casualty.