Search results for query: *

five bucks said:

The real problem here is that cavalry forget to couch their lances most of the time (they need to be travelling downhill to do it), and if they don't couch their lance and try and stab instead, they will miss the stab 70% of the time, especially if their target is even slightly moving in any direction.

Follow a pack of Banner Knights sometime and watch as they hardly ever couch and half their stab attacks are released way too early/late, making them swing wildly at the air three meters away from where their target actually was.

If TW fixed this inaccuracy, melee cavalry would be worth a damn.

Click to expand...

Yeah, after playing today I had the chance after getting knocked out early to watch cavalry try to do their thing, emphasis on "try."

It was like they had crippling choice anxiety; if there was more than one on foot target within range, they'd start jittering between targets and either stab at some empty space near them at the last moment or fail to try and stab altogether.

Wheem said:

When it comes to on-the-battlefield performance, Vlandia needs buffs, not nerfs. Melee cavalry is still extremely bad overall, and in basically every 1.8 game I've started, Sturgia has 100% wrecked Vlandia in the initial war. They haven't taken any territory beyond Caleus Castle, but my god do they *destroy* Vlandia's armies. I'm not sure if the Sturgians are starting with more T5 units than the Vlandians do or what, but the open field battles aren't even remotely a challenge for them.

I've tried joining Vlandia to turn the tide, but it feels pretty hopeless in the early game. The Vlandian cavalry can't really do anything worthwhile, and once the infantry lines clash it's just an endless sea of red and absolutely horrendous kill:death ratio for our side. Sturgia still has issues defending 2-3 fronts when fighting multiple different wars, but that's true for most factions (though perhaps a bit worse for them). But at least Sturgia is strong when actually fighting the battles - Vlandia is actually quite bad.

Click to expand...

I feel like it's partly thanks to the AI actually being too good at defending against cavalry. As soon as they so much as see a horse they'll pack in tight with a Shieldwall or Circle formation that protects the archers and entraps anyone foolish enough to think they can charge through without getting stuck by the mass of bodies or a spear causing their horse to rear up. It's usually a different story if the enemy is engaged in combat, but like you and LDominating said, Vlandian infantry will start loosing badly if the matchup is poor, taking massive casualties long before the lancers can make a meaningful dent in the enemy numbers.

AFAIK the "One Step Ahead" perk in Tactics lets you make pre-battle decisions on placement and formation prior to battle. That's probably where the bulk of any strategic decisions would have to go as a well. Trying to pull off complex troop movements real time w/o a bird's eye view is not really that fun for most people, even if TW was able to replace the current F keys menus with something less cumbersome.

dannazgu said:

Not really strange.. Ok, I agree a bit in feudal societies like the one we have in game, Vlandia ( the only one I beieve).

• Empire is common, it's said many Emperors were elected, even if it was passed down father to son, still the senate and the people of calradia ratified the choice: Arenicos, Neretzes, etc....
• Sturgia seens to be tenancy (Viking Style), the most powerful lord rules
• Vlandia - feudal
• Battania - tribal
• Khergit - Horse tribal, the times of Khans I don't know the name of government they had
• Aserai - feudal mixed with tenancy/tribal

As I see it of course, so elections excepting in Vlandia is the norm

P.s: I guess I'm what people called casual player, since only fridays and weekends I play, rarely after work, specially during this COVID time. I'm on the main branch and waiting for the new one

Click to expand...

IIRC Monarchy elections for a feudal society isn't strange, particularly during the sort of Early Middle Ages/Fall of Rome time period the game is inspired by, though it might have been a formality unless the family line had died out or the heir was someone everyone hated.

Actually it would make more sense for Battanians to have a Welsh accent, being the closest modern descendants of the Britons from Roman/Pre Anglo-Saxon times that the Battanians are obviously inspired by. If you think "Scottish" looking at them I recommend watching Outlaw King to purge everything wrong with Braveheart from your mind.

But yeah, +1 on more accents.

Considering that there is suppose to (eventually) be a generational aspect to the game, I can see some of the WB factions show up dynamically.

For example, Sturgia's Prince, who is the son of a Nord and the reason they're part of the faction, dies. His successor, be it some snot-nosed brat of his or a nee clan, don't give the Nords the respect they deserve, so some of them stop working for Sturgia and start some raiding. Then M&B's analog to Ragnar Lothbrok is executed by the player or an NPC after capture in one of these raids, and the Nords show up Great Heathen Army style to conquer NW Caladria and form the Nord major faction, with at least part of Sturgia eventually becoming the Vaegirs.

adrakken said:

There is a reason for coding songs like this

99 little bugs in the code
99 little bugs
Fixed one now, patch it around
112 little bugs in the code

or the really geeky one

100 buckets of bits on the bus
100 buckets of bits
Take one down, sort it to ground
FF buckets of bits on the bus

A thing only a coder will understand...almost impossible to explain to someone also since there really isnt anything else like it.

Click to expand...

IKEA furniture.

You start with a mess of parts that go together with seemingly no rhyme or reason, have to occasionally dissemble whole sections of it because of something you missed, have bits left over which you have no idea what they are for, and secretly want to murder pretty much anyone who "helped" you with it by the end.

Honved said:

Don't mention them. Alexander usually granted authority over a conquered territory to a former administrator or ruler of that territory, as long as they acknowledged his own authority above theirs. When he was gone, the areas pretty much went on as before, with only a change of who they paid taxes to. Those conquests did not significantly change the cultures of the conquered, and when the conquerors were succeeded by the next set of rulers, the ties often had to be re-forged with another campaign through the area. Only a few major cities were left with a proper garrison to insure longer-term control, and several of those later rebelled or changed allegiance. They weren't "annexed", they were merely beaten into submission and forced to pay tribute.

Click to expand...

Similar with the Mongols, who were perfectly fine with letting those who surrendered willing go on as before or even help them administrate their neighbors who tried to fight (for example, Muscovy) and it still took two generations for the Mongol Empire to reach its largest size. IIRC Temujin (i.e. Genghis Khan) was dead for almost two decades before the Mongols first showed up in Eastern Europe.

I say you only go to the extent Crusader Kings II does, which had:

-No rape (other than the implied kind from taking captured women as concubines)
-Three types of captivity/general care for prisoners, ranging from "Honored Guest till ransom is paid" to "Thrown into the hole noone is expected to come back alive"
-Various forms of Torture/Humiliation, but in most cases you never actually picked the exact method yourself.
-Same with Executions; many possible "ways", but only a few specific bloodlines or circumstances that would allow you to choose one of them (with some of the more horrific ones having the potential to send you (the executioner) into depression or even insanity over what you just did.)
-You never see any of the above actually occur, only some of the outcomes (such as someone loses an eye to torture, their portrait will show them with a patch/only one good eye.)

Considering all the ways you can be a horrible person in CKII, I feel confident in saying that going beyond the above would be a terrible idea best left out of the game.

One interesting idea I've seen is that, just like you have to buy horses for your cavalry, maybe you should be required to buy some of the equipment for other upgrades as well.

Like, to upgrade your Imperial recruit to a soldier, you need to give them a (not bent/rusted/etc) shield and/or weapon, and for the archer you need a bow. Next ranks might not need more, but once you get to Legionnaire, you're going to have to pony up at least some portion of the thousands of dinars that their equipment is actually worth.

Well, the family rescue questline still needs to be finished, so maybe we get something out of that. Maybe we rescue the family member of another clan, or find out the slave operation they were sold to is backed by another clan.

Ikea Knight said:

Hmmm. I wouldn't like to have bad clans that are evil for all eternity.
My suggestion is that the clan leader dictates the actions the clans follow, rather than dictating a personality.

So if the clans leader is a brute, he makes his members their prisoners even if they don't want to.
Clan members, that are not happy with that could follow orders more reluctanly or try to leave / marry into an other clan.

Another example:
If the player is in bad terms with a clan ruled by an "evil" leader and he faces a clan member with a friendly attitude. The conversation could be something simple like " I don't want to fight you [player] but my leader [clan leader] makes me."

Click to expand...

Personally, I think of it more like a skills-based reputation, rather than a moral one. Is the clan known for strength in battle? The wealth its members have accumulated through buisness and trade? Their ability to lead? And so on.

It would make sense to me that someone who grew up in a clan famous for archery would have at least some familiarity with bows and how to use them, even if they ultimately became a famous merchant or engineer.

I think some of the weirdness of your clan mainly being you and your companions should be fixed when they finish the family questline and you get to rescue your younger brother and sister (who I assume would become members of your clan)

Hopefully, once they start working more on the generational aspect of the game they can flesh out the clan to be more than just an extension of the player.

With Assassins and Vendettas, I would think players of low renown/Clan Rank/hypothetical RtR should see a much harsher and deadlier response to executions, including potentially from members of major factions that don't even have a direct grievance against you for the act, as they aren't simply a murderer, but a "commoner" whose defiance of the natural order could upset the norms the established clans rely on for power. Those who come after you don't need to bring you alive... they just need to bring your head.

On top of new clans being generated to fill in some of the holes left by your murder spree, they could also be used as a means to force even someone whose goal is to burn the world to have at least some token concern to politics within their kingdom. After taking direct control of a certain number of fiefs, there could be a chance that an influential member of the populace ends up becoming the de-facto holder of the fief in question as your vassal since you aren't able to pay enough attention to the people's greviences with all that new land you're getting from executing everyone. It should be something that can happen even if the town in question is well-off and genuinely likes you (as it isn't so much a "they hate you for your negligence" thing as a "so-and-so has been dealing with matters that normally the feudal lord dealt with so things keep working smoothly, and it has gotten to the point people just go straight to them instead of trying to reach you" thing) so that beyond a certain size, you are pretty much guaranteed to have vassals who can get disgusted enough with your actions to rebel.

Finally, a particularly infamous player (or anyone fighting a particularly desparate faction) hoping to conquer or raid fiefs for recruits and food might find that the village is abandoned, everything of value missing, the livestock slaughtered, the crops burned and the land salted. Always harder to murder your way to success if you starve before you can finish the murdering.

First thought:

AHHHH! There is no automated blocking direction option for SP anymore! I'm going to actually have to learn how to block!

Second thought:


AHHHH! I have to worry about blocking direction for shields now too! I can't simply hide behind them instead either!

Third thought:
... Challenge accepted.

I'm in the same position myself, and right now wondering if I have any friends (who don't care one wit about Steam achivements) that would gift me a Steam Version of Warband for the non-Steam one...