Search results for query: *

  • Users: Pejot
  • Order by date
  1. Pejot

    Why isn't the AI kicking and using the shield bash in combat?

    Also flinching because being hit by another arrow, so that my perfect wannabe-headshot misses. :lol:

    In the arena (mostly, because in battle one on ones are seldom for me) I sometimes have the feeling that my shield is pushed away despite holding it up, and I get hit by the AI. Do others have similar experience?
    Some weapons (two handed axes for example) can hit above the shield in some situations. So it's totaly possible. also the side from which You're blocking is important cause attacks from side can pass through if You block up or front.

    Going back to the original question of "why the AI doesn't use those moves?" I believe the answer is very simple. It would probably be a huge pain for TW to code it. I hope I don't sound too salty when I say this, but the AI in Bannerlord is extremely bare bones(or, to be more honest, just brain dead) as it is. Adding kicking and shield-bashing, with the prerequisite conditions for use would be a pretty major endeavor for TW, I believe.

    Or to put it another way, if they can't be bothered to make an AI that utilizes the most basic of functions of attacking, defending and moving proficiently, I don't think they would be willing/able/both to make it use kicking and shield bashing effectively either.

    I cannot agree with it. AI is totaly capable of using shield bash and kicks and it was using them at release. They nerfed the AI to make skill more important cause we had looters using same moves as legionaries. They just did not balanced it good cause from all troops using all moves they changed it to only some lords using all moves and others not using them at all. This is basically connected to skill lvl of weapon they use and more complex moves start around 230-250 skill.
  2. Pejot

    [1.7.0] Battlesize & reinforcement issue

    I think they should remove the reinforcments system completely cause i don't see any possibility to make it usefull in game. First not all players can just extend battle size with mods cause their rigs won't handle it. With reinforcment system advantage is on the side of army that is closer to spawn point which makes using topography useless in most situations.

    They should just split the battle into multiple stages that will happen until one side runs out of units fit to fight. Maybe even with some time passing on the map between this stages. Something like battles taking a couple of days to resolve.
  3. Pejot

    This is the big river you cannot cross

    Epicrotea got a map with a river you cannot cross, except through the bridge.

    They might use the same for Amitatys, eventually. If there's one thing we know for sure is how TW is slow

    I don't think there's any river You cannot cross. You can basically go full underwater and still cross without problems. Maybe if the banks of the river are completely vertical.

    Rivers don't play any important role in battles and that's a big problem.
  4. Pejot

    Beta Patch Notes e1.6.2

    I've got a strange bug (or it was intentional).

    When I put one companion in cavalry group and second companion in another cavalry group (light cavalry for example) together with cavalry units the unit is split even between 2 groups at the start of battle. For example I have 20 stadion knights in light cav group together with one companion and a single other companion in group 3. At the start of battle the knights are split between both groups 10 in cav and 10 in light cav.
  5. Pejot

    Fiefs income nerfed in 1.6.1 - Why???

    Mid-tier I would say. What usually happens is that clans start going to bankrupt, and lords start disbanding units but at the same time they continue upgrading them. The money invested on these upgraded units is a waste, because they disband these upgraded units after some days too.

    Mexxico added an AI behavior to stop recruiting when lords' parties reach the wages limit, and maybe they should also stop upgrading units. I know that this could be a double-edge sword because people could complain about lords having too many low-tier units, but it is also a bad thing to having to face really small lord parties. Plus, most part of these upgraded units are going to get disbanded after some days, so the AI is spending money unnecessarily. The new system for limiting AI parties' wages is great but it needs some polishing. If I remember correctly, before this we had a system where the AI did not pay wages if clans were pretty low of money, and I have the feeling that devs have replaced this system with the new AI limiting party system, but now the AI needs more money. Maybe it is just about increasing taxes a bit, while increasing prosperity and adding some buildings for some kingdoms fiefs.
    If they have mostly mid tier units than battle loot is also smaller for them. So they have double nerf by lower taxes and lower battle loot getting them in a loop of being poor. On top of it we have loop of upgradong units that are disbanded what makes the costs higher for them. So in the end those changes broke the lords economy system.
  6. Pejot

    Fiefs income nerfed in 1.6.1 - Why???

    To be honest, it was just an idea. Actually a lot of things would need a change before making workshops and caravans tied to trade skill.

    Anyway, I am currently playing a campaign as mercenary without any workshop or caravan, and it is still pretty much doable. I can pay my expenses and still increase my treasure progressively.

    I'm not saying it's not doable right now. It's just that whatever Youwant to roleplay You're always forced to fight to maintain a decent army. Playing as merc is ok but if You want it to be profitable You need to sell tons of loot cause contract alone is not enough to be able to participate in harder fights.

    In my opinion merc contract would work better if You have guaranted income based on your paty quality and quantity and number of wars at the same time + bonus for each battle instead of basing it purely on influence. Basically it is possible to restrict it with current mechanics by changing drop rate of inluence after certain point so if You won't participate in fights for longer time You'll still lose base income. On the other hand with this mechanic You won't have to fight tens of battles everyday just to cover the wages and food.

    It's not that it is hard to earn money right now but for me it's to grindy. And at certain point You're always forced to relay on all available income sources without the chance to focus.


    Also no focus option for player is making it harder for AI since they have single income sources and they are nerfed just so the player won't have advantage. But instead of nerfing everything and allowing player to use all options at the same time it would be better to make each option profitable but force the player to focus on one or two instead.
  7. Pejot

    Fiefs income nerfed in 1.6.1 - Why???

    I quite like this idea but IMO Trade already has one of the best Perk trees. Adding your suggestion would make it pretty much essential for every playthrough. Bear in mind that Trade has the Renown for workshop perk as well as 'Spring of gold' and 'Everything has a price'.

    Loot is pretty lucrative income at the moment. I guess nerfing that would have more effect on the player than the AI? If so then surely a better option than nerfing fiefs.

    Perhaps reducing item value in general is the answer. This would also help nerf selling crafted items. It doesn't really matter if the player can buy good items (because they are cheaper) early on when they can just marry and steal 200K armour pieces anyway.

    It won't make it mandatory if other income sources become profitable. If fief and merc contract income starts being profitable You'll have a choice to rush the trade skill for profit and focus on being merchant or focus on fighting/becoming vassal/king.
  8. Pejot

    SP - Economy Make income source a choice instead of mandatory.

    I think that the big problem with income is that You don't have to choose one but rather You are forced to use all of them. AI has only one source of income while player has multiple sources so we can either allow AI to have multiple sources or raise income but lock it behind certain...
  9. Pejot

    Fiefs income nerfed in 1.6.1 - Why???

    The problem in Bannerlord is that You don't have to choose between different sources of income You just get all of them while AI has only one. Instead of nerfing fief income that was already low and unworthy they should change how You get access to different income sources. For example workshops should be locked by skill not renown. Same for caravans. And they should add a way to use rogue companions for loot so it will be low if rogue skill is low.

    By nerfing one of the sources they are forcing the player to use all of them so no option to play as lord maintaining his land for profit. I really hate that I cannot have stable income without caravans and workshops.
  10. Pejot

    Beta Patch Notes e1.6.1

    Shots from my first 1.6.1 siege:




    And no, it did not eventually resolve. Come on. I mean, come on
    I was talking about ledders not siege towers. These will never be fixed xD
  11. Pejot

    Beta Patch Notes e1.6.1

    I... don't have a good enough imagination to imagine this being fixed. This can't be real, right? I'm downloading it now. If these are really - I mean REALLY - fixed, it will buy Taleworlds my goodwill for like 8 months. I'll start acting like I only paid $47.99 for early access.

    But it can't really be fixed though, right?

    10 sieges. They use the ladders. All of them. They have some minor issues from time but they do use them. And I noticed better behaviour from defender's near the gate. They don't let enemy in but circle entering enemies right at the gate.

    It is something that I couldn't believe that's why I've run from siege to siege as merc.
  12. Pejot

    Any weapons companions can use half way decently on horseback?

    Depending on their weapon and riding skill. I saw my companions getting a lot more kills when they are 150 in both riding and given weapon skill.
    So for example a camopanion with 150+ riding, 150+ one handed and 100 polearm was better with long one handed sword than with lance or spear.

    Still they are best as infantry or ranged on foot. I keep only one of them on horse to use his perks as captain of cavalry. and others are either infantry or ranged on foot and i also use thei captain perks.
  13. Pejot

    Modyfying food consumption for village owners

    Alright, turns out that you do not need to use Harmony to patch both of those methods. You can just create a new model and inherit from the existing one.

    This is some very rough code that I came up with. Take note that it doesn't display an extra line in the tooltip at the bottom right corner explaining the food provided by a clan's village hearths. But other than that this code works:

        public class HearthsProvideFoodModel : DefaultMobilePartyFoodConsumptionModel
            public override ExplainedNumber CalculateDailyFoodConsumptionf(MobileParty party, bool includeDescription = false)
                float num = base.CalculateDailyFoodConsumptionf(party).ResultNumber;
                float num2 = 0;
                if (party.LeaderHero != null)
                    foreach (Village village in party.LeaderHero.Clan.Villages)
                        num2 += village.Hearth;
                num += (float)Math.Floor(num2 / 10) * 0.05f;
                num = Math.Min(num, 0);
                return new ExplainedNumber(num, includeDescription);

    Also take note that I didn't implement this part.

    For some reason I cannot mak it run. It crashes the game on start. I tried to create a mod based on that.

    using System;
    using System.Collections.Generic;
    using System.Linq;
    using System.Text;
    using System.Threading.Tasks;
    using TaleWorlds.CampaignSystem;
    using TaleWorlds.CampaignSystem.SandBox.GameComponents.Map;
    namespace VillagesProvideFood
        public class Main : DefaultMobilePartyFoodConsumptionModel
            public override ExplainedNumber CalculateDailyFoodConsumptionf(MobileParty party, bool includeDescription = false)
                float num = base.CalculateDailyFoodConsumptionf(party).ResultNumber;
                float num2 = 0;
                if (party.LeaderHero != null)
                    foreach (Village village in party.LeaderHero.Clan.Villages)
                        num2 += village.Hearth;
                num += (float)Math.Floor(num2 / 10) * 0.05f;
                num = Math.Min(num, 0);
                return new ExplainedNumber(num, includeDescription);
  14. Pejot

    Army AI is utterly broken, unplayably broken.

    Then I don't understand how a city can starve, you would think if the granaries are been used then the city would have first dibs on any food coming into the city to fill the granaries back up.

    Granaries are filled by food surpluss not directly by items that are on the market (they don't take for example grain straight to the granary but if there is a lot of grain the granary is gradually filled up). So if there's no surpluss granaries are used even if You have food items on the market and AI can still buy those items.

    The problem is economy itself. If city is low on food nothing should show up on the market for people outside of the city.
  15. Pejot

    SP - General Suggestion - make villages provide food for the army

    In the link I wrote there is a thread related to logistics and supply lines that suggests a way to introduce them using assets already in the game.
    In summary, it recalls what you have proposed but solves some problems that could arise by simply associating the villages to a supply parameter over time.
    This is because questions such as:
    Should the parameter be associated with the owner lords?
    If so then a player would hit that lord's territories and not the others.
    But usually it is the border territories that provide support lines for a possible invasion, as supplies must necessarily pass through those places.

    another doubt: If it is not possible to attack the border villages (because they are not sensitive objectives), one must necessarily enter enemy territory.
    But this leads to a "waste of time" for those who want to defend themselves from an invasion, since only to remove the supplies from the invading army must enter an enemy territory, while the invader is already in allied territory and can act in the same territory. manner and therefore remove the defender's supplies to prevent him from acting against him.

    The supply line must have as its main purpose that of making invasions more difficult and the defense of the territory easier, not the other way around.
    Since in the first case it can be used as a lever for any problems related to the snowball effect.
    It is enough to adjust the quantities of food transportable by the wagons, their speed and frequency, their visibility, route, etc. to determine the survivability over time of an army according to the quality of the supply lines.
    It also forces armies to split up to defend the lines.
    But if they were just numerical parameters associated with some village, all this gameplay depth would be lost.

    In general, I am in favor of the proposal, but I would prefer it to be more substantial and "visible".
    The wagons are assets, the villages are there, the caravans can be made ...
    In the link I inserted you will find the thread related to this issue (in addition to others if you are interested).

    I like the idea from your threads but I think it's too complex and hard to balance. My idea is simplier. I don't need any additional visual reflection of supply line based on a lot of additional parties (that are hard to balance) all over the map.

    I was thinking on simply summing up hearths splitting by 10 (each 10 can feed one soldier) and giving 60% of it to clan leader and splitting the rest equally between other parties of that clan. If there is.only one party from that clan it gets 100%. If their food needs are higher, villages are raided or they don't own any they need to buy on the market.

    AI is already targeting villages by it's own so no additional need to code new behaviour (attacking additional parties on the map). Maybe just adjusting frequency of decision to raid village and decision to leave a party to defend fiefs if they have more than one.

    Food on the market is still need and used but owning prosperous village is more beneficial and some more reason to own a castle that are currently useless.
  16. Pejot

    Mercenaries in armies need to gain influence to cover the cost

    I find it fairly easy to get profit out of mercenaries job. First You get paid for influence. Second You have battle loot.
    And there's an "exploit" of taking escort merchant Caravan while being contracted as merc. From this quest fights You can easily get up to 30 influence and there's battle loot plus quest payment.
    Also You get influence from.most quests done when being contracted as merc as long as they involve fighting somone.
    Droping prisoners Also gives influence and for some.lords You can get up to 15 influence per lord.
  17. Pejot

    Army AI is utterly broken, unplayably broken.

    Yes this can increase army's life as you said but this will have negatives also. As you know when an army enters a town each party try to buy food and even with current 10 days rule they nearly buy most of town's food and some players complain about their town left with none or less food after one army enters it. Actually current design gives nearly nothing to town if an army buys food from there. Only 5% of paid money is added to tariff tax which is nearly nothing for owner.

    Maybe before heading to objective, armies should enter nearby town one more time to buy food with current 10 days rule. This will need extra layer in army AI, short Term Behaviour should be set to visit settlement with a nearby target settlement before heading objective. Only for offensive ones, defender ones should be quick and no big food need for them.

    By the way @Bannerman Man I suggested you to team several times previously. I do not know if you consider or not but if you consider probably you can take a freed seat in campaign team with your knowledge and control over code in future.

    What if we reduce the food need based on hearths in owned villages. Something like 10 hearths can feed 1 unit. This will affect only lords owning villages (that are not raided) and will force everyone else to buy food normally.
    And this will also simulate supply lines in a simple way that can be affected (raiding villages).
  18. Pejot

    Army AI is utterly broken, unplayably broken.

    Last time this subject came up I meant to mention something related to armies' food management, but never got around to it, so I'll post that comment here.

    As far as starving armies goes, one thing I'd like to point out that I've noticed, is that after an army has gathered, they often don't enter a settlement before heading off toward their objective. This ends up being fairly important to the success of a siege because there is a difference in the amount of food supply a lord will try to maintain when they are in an army vs. not in an army.

    If a lord is not in an army, then any time they enter a settlement that sells food, they will try to buy enough to maintain a 10 day supply. So this means most solo lord parties will be running around the map with roughly 9-10 days worth of food at any particular point in time. However, if a lord is part of an army, then any time they enter a settlement that sells food, they will instead try to buy enough to maintain a 15 day supply.

    When an army is formed, it usually takes roughly 1-2 days for all of the lords to reach the rally point, and all of the lords will continue to consume food each day while waiting/travelling to the army, meaning by the time the army is ready to head off it might only have anywhere from 7-9 days worth of food left, since the lords only try to keep 10 days worth as individual parties.

    An army that stops in a settlement before heading off to their objective will stock up on 15 days worth of food, giving them roughly an extra 6-8 days of food vs. an army that does not visit a settlement before moving to their objective. This also makes an army more resistant to the food draining effects of the multiple objective switches that will send them walking back and forth across the map that people have pointed out already.

    So, all that said, it might be a good idea to introduce a one time only factor after an army forms that boosts the utility of stopping in the next town an army passes by for food, so that armies will more often start with about 15 days worth on an offensive campaign rather than 7-9. Since it's more important for defending armies to be quick rather than to be fully stocked on food, maybe that factor is only applied for offensive armies.


    I can see one problem with that approach. Sometimes closest city doesn't have enough to supply the army for 15 days.
  19. Pejot

    Spears feel weak and unsatisfying.

    What I would change in case of spear. I would make it the only weapon that can launch attack without lowering block.

    It should have the option of overhead attack while blocking.
  20. Pejot

    Modyfying food consumption for village owners

    Hi, I'm totaly new into moding Bannerlord and i wanted to ask if anyone can help me to achieve the below: I wanted to reduce food consumption of parties that are leaded by owners of Villages. I'm interested in doing that for both player and AI. How exactly should it work: Each 10 Hearths in...
Top Bottom