Search results for query: *

On top of that it'd been nice if vassals were hierarchical... for one being able to order around your clan regardless of what the kingdom says and also that you would could have indirect vassals and lieges. You're under a liege and the liege is under the king, for instance.

ThirdHorseman said:

it’s true. I mean my wife and I weren’t together for months and she got pregnant. Sometimes women can get pregnant even months after intercourse.

Click to expand...

Eh I don't know about months... maybe up to a week or so

mexxico said:

I wonder what you think about one issue related to caravan's current situation.

Currently caravans are nearly 100% safe money source. You build your caravan and it buy some cheap stuff then sell them in next destinations. It buys cheap and try to sell expensive again and again. After some time (like 10-15 days) their capital passes initial limit (10K) and you start to get profit from them. Caravans are currently so cautious and fast they are nearly always ignored by enemies. Also bandits are generally weaker compared to them. This results in player gaining 0.8K daily from one caravan as average until party is disbanded by player. Caravan's party wage is about 0.2K. This means one caravan make 0.6K profit daily in average.

As summary to create a caravan you pay 15K and in one year you get 50K, in two years 100K and this goes on... If there is no extraordinary situation.

I think this situation is not a good design because caravans are currently obviously OP and player has no fear of losing them. This results in caravans to be a stable game element. There are nearly none caravan involved battle in map and this create lack of variety. I want to make caravans more desired targets so that bandits and minor mercenary faction lords (which player is in war with) will attack caravans even they are a bit weaker compared to it or even they are a bit far. So this will result in losing your caravan time to time (more than current situation). Of course this should not be very common. In average once in a year player can lose his/her caravan.

What do you think about this development idea? I know caravan owners will be a bit disturbed however we are trying to make game more exciting.

Click to expand...

You can make 50k a day at some point by beating enemy lords, ransoming them and selling their loot. Caravan makes peanuts compared to that (though it's nice to have a positive daily turnover).

What I would like to see instead of having caravans more lucrative targets for bandits is AI caravans competing with your own so that yours will not be able to turn a profit so easily. You would have to be protectionist to make your caravans work for you in the long run - either by actually raiding other caravans or if you're a ruler/town owner then by applying tariffs and trade embargoes - which should also be reciprocated by other lords and rulers.

For that however, the economic aspect of the game has to be fleshed out.

There is a concept of strength in the game that's more than merely army count and when lords choose to engage or run away from you they do it based on strength assessment. Notice by the way that when you besiege a town or a castle, enemies will park outside as long as they're weaker than you, then once they're roughly the same strength they'll engage you.

I hope that other factors like moral difference, renown, etc, army composition and risk/reward (e.g. I might lose this battle but it'll be a Pyrrhic victory for my opponent who's in a weaker kingdom) can also come into play, though I'm not sure to what extent that is the case at the moment.

I had like 3 fresh starts in the game so far and the main quest hasn't been much of a hassle since at the start I was wandering around the map anyway and before you know it you've already met 10 nobles and got enough renown to do whatever you want.

Having said that, the whole thing can probably be stripped out with a little bit of modding. It would be nice to start the game with a couple of siblings (that work the same way as spouses do, except they can have their own spouses and their own kids).

Perhaps the way to go about it is to be able to choose your starting point. Younger but with less XP, with or without siblings (which means its own trade-off), even with or without parents, a spouse etc. All of these things seem moddable (that is, there can probably be a mod that allows you to set up a start).

Dude, get the memo. She ran off with the kids and doesn't want you chasing her.

On a more serious note... you were just unlucky, your wife is part of your clan and when you leave a kingdom all members of your clan also leave that kingdom. For companions who can't stay at a particular place they'll wander around the map - afaik that applies to spouses as well.

GCEGalotta said:

But I can ask for a little effort, can´t I? Repeating the same handfull of generic quests over and over again is no fun. On top of that the writing is simply terrible and there is a bunch of stuff happening (the doubled familiy feud quest i.e.) that doesn`t make any sense. If they want to implement RPG-elements, then they should improve on that. Otherwise what`s the point? Leave it out completely and focus on strategy and micromanagement.

Click to expand...

I don't see how adding more quests or writing them a bit better can immerse anyone, although it's one of those things they're working on. It's a sandbox game... the quests are just there to give you resources (money, relationship, skills). The main thing you do in the game is not quests but the constant grind for power - recruitment, training, warmongering, occupation, trading, etc.

This isn't an adventure game or even your run of the mill open world RPG like Elder Scrolls. The effort should go far away from scripted content to core game features that make the game what it is.

SirStart said:

not exactly sure wha a zoomer is, but i think i get the hang o wha ye mean by tha XD
Aye most new players think they can waltz into this game series thinking its some kind o jedi/shaolin knight hollywood simulator when the actually system is extremely simple which is more in line with medieval combat. its more realistic tha ye cant take on 10 guys by jumping around flailing with a 2 hander. if they want tha they can go somewhere else is my opinion or mod it in the game if need be

Click to expand...

A "zoomer" is someone from generation Z... i.e. born after 2000s. In this context it refers to people who haven't experienced the original M&B games.

TL;DR: "Hurr durr it's a computer game and things that happen there aren't immersive enough for me".

This is how computer games are. Humanity hasn't yet created a master AI that can generate story lines and have everything make sense and feel real. If you want immersion then don't play a sandbox game because you're not going to get auto generated stories that are also immersive.

As for the rest of your complaints... the combat system takes after the previous M&B titles with very little adjustments. It works well for the large scale battles that happen. The game has to trade-off scale and strategy with first person action and looking back at my hours both in Bannerlord and previous M&Bs it does it very well. If you want a more detailed medieval combat experience then play something like Mordhau.

Finally, the game is also in an immature stage of development and features are going to be added and refined. The game is simple enough to not require a tutorial. Bannerlord is also a massive improvement as far as AI tactical movement on the field goes and it's probably going to get better.

Ogagon said:

Abagai.
Or Yana, she's an all-rounder.

But I haven't married in my 50 hours of playtime thus far, since I failed every attempt.

Click to expand...

Tbh that's one of those places where save scumming is called for

It could also be part of the conspiracy phase of the main quest, but I'm not entirely certain about that. Basically the conspiracy is to cause you to declare war on other kingdoms.

Your "GPU" doesn't have 8 gigs of VRAM... it shares memory with the rest of the computer (that is, main RAM).

Your rig is nowhere near capable of running this game properly... get a proper rig.

I think the characters are beautiful.

#BodyAcceptance #StopCyberBullying

Aerouant said:

How do you know they are using semantic versioning ?

Click to expand...

It would be pretty odd to use a three numbers versioning system where there's no difference between the numbers. Even if it's not 100% up to the spec (nothing really is), you'd still expect a middle number increment to mean more than merely "we fixed bugs".

Sweet Lemon God said:

Maybe they're disregarding that 1.1.0 is a big patch and it's just a regular patch like we've been seeing the past week

Click to expand...

That's not really how versioning works... it's not merely adding up numbers. If that were the case why not simply use a single number system?

So I was like surely they must release 1.1.0 now because they ran out of numbers but then I figured... 1.0.10 :S

I do wonder if the commodity prices in the markets are reported to be cheaper or costlier than average means some hard coded average or takes into account the fluctuating (and indeed inflating) market prices.

I noticed that at the beginning of the game you can find stuff to buy and sell between towns that are somewhat far away from each other, but as the game progresses most items become marked as above the average price - which doesn't mean that you can't make profit, but you'd have to work harder.

Another more concerning issue for you as a player is that you're competing with caravans, including your own. The more traversal of goods there is, the faster prices of goods become universally fixed and there's less money to be had by buying and selling. In a real world market that would be good news for manufacturing (workshops) since there's always access to buyers and sellers (consumers and raw materials) and so the market would respond with more and more production (hence economic growth) which would require more and more traders to be moving around.

Alas, the game cannot simulate a real world economy that way since there are too many complex variables to consider and to simulate. One issue in particular is that it's unclear whether or not the world Denars has a fixed source or is it generated dynamically with no "sinks" - that also results in inflation (hence the problem with fiat currency). It would have been nice for instance to tie Denars to silver ore - basically towns take silver ore from the market and dump Denars back into it and thus the production of currency does not arbitrarily grow. Still... other aspects of the game's currency remain fixed like wages, cost of setting up things, item prices which again causes issues for the player (money becomes either too available or too inaccessible).

To make a real trading sim would probably require far more than what's reasonable in a sandbox medieval war game.

Van-d-all said:

I'm pretty sure it doesn't work as intended. The description clearly says it allows characters to die IN BATTLE, and I've been fighting various lords for over 50h now, and not a single one of them died, even though I defeated a few of them several times. While of course, I could just execute them, this option would actually make up for a lot more dynamic world if lords could die in battles between AIs.

Click to expand...

Fair point

makbeth said:

Probably answered here

Click to expand...

Yeah, I left cheat mode on to be able to counter the influence problems due to lack of war declaration. Had no idea it does that, but I turned it off.

✪Chewy said:

The option is "Heroes can die in battle"
I still don't think you can die of old age. There is a character in my game almost 90 years old. He's still fit and not dead

Edit: Don't quote me on this. Maybe he dies at a 100 years old idk.

Edit 2: Here is the man nearing 90

Click to expand...

Oh I didn't claim that death from old age was implemented. What I meant is that the intention was that your character could not die in battle but through other means (perhaps, when/if it gets implemented).