Search results for query: *

I think people get frustrated as the game seems to get worse rather than better

The improvements made to the game are adding things that don't work on top of lots of other things that dont work rather than fixing the things that dont work.

What do I mean by that

Some long standing issues that have not been properly addressed

Siege engine ladders ( c'mon fix them )
Garrisons starving ( c'mon fix them )
Looters with bionic arms thet throw rocks that hit harder than arrows or axes ( c'mon fix it )
Armies that put mounted companions in charge of infantry who then charge solo at the enemy and die ( c'mon fix it )

I'll not bore you with the rest theres loads more stuff I could add

Most games have something like

Horse beats archer and non spear infantry (4/1 ) at least
ie 10 heavy armoured horsemen will easily beat 20 - 30 and will only struggle to beat them when the numbers rise to 40 - 50 infantry /archers

Non spear infantry beats spear infantry (2/1)
Spear infantry beats horse (2/1)

Foot archer beats horse archer but moves slower
( they have bigger stronger bows and can fire further more acurately due to not being on a moving horse )

Arrows beat un armoured (6/1)
Arrows beat lightly armoured (3/1)
Arrows next to useless on heavy armoured (1/10)

Heavy armour offers a large degree of protection to infantry and cavalry especially from arrows
( is usually very expensive and limited to a percentage of your army
It dramatically slows down the wearers and isn't used at all by bowmen )

Crossbows are more accurate three times as accurate ( possibly better armour piercing ) than bowmen but the rate of fire is very very slow in comparison ( 1/5 - 1/10 th of the fire rate ) but crossbowmen can wear heavy armour so in a stand off crossbowmen tend to beat archers but are less effective against unarmed or lightly armoured due to a slower rate of fire

It means every unit has a hard counter and a reason to exist

The main problem I think is that TW are trying to make everything equal because of multi player
They dont want cavalry trampling infantry or any hard counters they want any unit to be able to beat any other unit
or the multi players will only play the best unit the solution is of course to code multiplayer and single player seperate
for some reason I don't think they want to do this

( Idiot proofing games is pointless the world just produces more creative idiots )

Julio-Claudian said:

Yeah it's been this way for ages. They said months ago that they were going to reduce the death rate and enable deaths in non-player battles. It's something that would be so easy for them to put right but presumably it's not a priority for them to change a couple of lines of code, despite the fact that it is causing campaigns to become so unbalanced.

Click to expand...

They've said they would fix siege engine ladders for many more months but their still a problem so I wouldn't hold my breath

I've always found putting the archers on the left side of my formation worked better I always assumed it had something to do with shields being more open on that side ie firing at the enemies weapon side rather than shield side

On the other hand horse archers seemed to perform better on the right side of my formation I assume something to do with the side they fire their bow from assuming their right handed

My ideal defensive position is high ground to the left where I put my archers slightly to the side and slightly in front of my infantry wall so enemy attacking the wall are more exposed to arrows I often mix in some two handed spearmen as some cavlry always gets through

My horse archers I keep back from the main formation and to the right and only tell them to attack when I am engaged

My cavalry behind the infantry a bit to the left and often send them at any cavalry who attack my archers


Attacking can be more difficult unless you can entice the other side to attack you
If I'm attacking I send a shield wall to the front in the middle soak up some arrows archers back a bit to the left supported by cavalry horse archers back to to the right

If working with allies wait till they attack then support them don't lead the attack unless it's a fient with cavalry and you are ready to retreat as they often will hang back and leave you to fight the entire enemy on your own

Then again I nearly always use the realistic battle mod which gives a better armour might make a difference to tactics

I've laways though that spawning in was silly they should increase the maximum total number 1200 seems reasonable then just adjust the ratios to suit if I outnumber the enemy by 2-1 I can have 800 and they can have 400 even if the actual numbers were I had 2000 and they had 1000 no need for a respawn just let the ratio be similar.if I take 30% casualties then 30% of the 2000 will die not the 800.


Companions and nobles should have an option of a bodyguard or two who have a 90% chance to jump in and either save them or die in their stead

The odering of the army needs improving

I should be able to set up my army before the battle arrange formations and assign units and commanders instead I have to try and do it after the battle starts

Then 4 horse archers from the enemy run in and attack at the side I send 40 cavalry after them
I order my infantry to charge and instead of attacking the hundreds of infantry in front of them they all run to the side and chase the 4 horse archers
of course they will never catch them because their on foot and infantry cant catch up with cavalry.
While the companion in charge of the infantry who happens to be on a horse runs solo at the hundreds of enemy infantry and promptly dies

Yes it still needs some work

AndrewArt said:

Hmm, the only way I see better armor becoming good for gameplay is if they reduce the amount of armor high level troops have (like the legionnaires) so that lords can stand out more in battle and be more resilient in general. Like someone mentioned, only the wealthy/nobles/knights wore plate armor etc. So the noble line could have better armor, and common troops should have less armor, and lords have the best armor. Then you can increase armor effectiveness and I'd say the gameplay becomes really awesome

Click to expand...

yes true although realistic battle mod makes a good attempt at balancing armour the amount of unarmoured / lightly armoured troops needs to be increased and the lighter troops need a mobility advantage of some sort.

I think the core game is basically finished the polishing may take quite a while, a year or two I'd think. I like mods and tend to stick with a version for a while with mods that suit that verison. When I upgrade by several versions of course most of the mods wont work and the ones that do need updating but then again some of the mods are no longer needed as the game has improved so I usually play without mods for a while then start adding some again.

Some mods that I have used and no longer work but I think were great are
Generals bodyguard ( gives you a bodyguard of a few soldiers)
Peasant Banners ( Bannerlord needs banners among your armies )
Slow down ( allows you to actually catch things like caravans and stops you having to run all over the map I've never quite undestood how a larger army can't just send its cavalry to pin a smaller host in place to force it to battle chasing things all over the map is no fun)
More troops in hideouts ( tried different mods that did this all were great )

Some mods that seem to keep well up to date and I think are great are
Improved garrrisons ( keeps up to date and keeps adding features like patrols )
Realistic battle ( Improves armour and weapon damages to be more realistic )


The things i'd like to see added to the vanilla game apart from some version of the mods I've mentioned are

Allowing all sources of income to be viable, most people wont use all sources of possible income so dont balance it like everyone has 4 workshops 4 caravans, does some trading and loots all the time.

eg: make caravans, workshops, trading, castles and loot all provide more money, make money sinks like upgrading castles towns more expensive give me additions to throne rooms like gold statues expensive decor, tributes to gods for short lived bonuses, to let me spend that money, have really expensive upgrades for troops like really expensive armoured war horses, or faster horses, a special guard troop with minor advantages in stats but dont make me struggle financially to field a basic army of infantry archers and cavalry or garrison my fiefs.

A large defender bonus for castles ( castles should be a lot harder to take, even vastly outnumbered garrisons should be inflicting lots of casualties and taking longer to overcome, also give castles enough income to allow for a decent garrison)

Hideouts give more renown for less troops but let me have the option of taking lots more troops for less renown

Better controls in battle, let me set my troops up initially in groups 1- 10 then allow me to send each group or target each enemy group seperatley

Spawning in reinforcements is poor a better system is needed ( Possibly moveable spawn point )

Better battlefields for larger armies, Its no fun to try and fight 500 v 500 in a forest once a battle is larger than 100 v 100 more spacious battlefields should be used it might also omprove lag as the battlfield would be picked with larger armies in mind.

Theres various arguments most have some truth in them

My thoughts on the subject are armour is too weak as are archers but the elephant in the room is spears which definitely need some imrovement.

Good armour is too readily availiable ( good armour ie the heaviest should be limited to around 20% of an army either through expense or just hard caps on types of troops but should slow troops down substantially to give a mobility advantage to lighter armed troops) Yes I've seen youtuibe vidoes of armoured men turning cartwheels but try running a mile carrying 30KG or more. Possibly give them a 30m metre faster move to allow a charge of sorts then slow down by more than half as fatigue sets in.
Good armour is too weak especially to arrows good armour should stop most arrows with little damage but archers should not be allowed the heaviest armour as it would interfere with firing a bow.

Arrows are actually too weak against non armoured troops an arrow or two to the body should take non armoured or lightly armoured men out of a fight and archers have too few arrows there should be a resupply mechanism during a battle or just give them more arrows if that's too difficult to do.

Light crossbows and light bows should do minimal damage to good armour but should decimate un armoured / un shielded soldiers.

Crossbows especially heavy ones are too fast loading but should get an aim bonus over bows at all distances over 30m to partially make up for a much slower rate of fire.
Crossbows should get slightly greater armour penetration at a short distance ( under 30m ) bows slightly better penetration at longer distance ( over 80m ) compared to each other.

The Heaviest crossbows and bows should be roughly similar in damage and should penetrate all but the toughest armours fairly well at optimal ranges but they should be rare and probably limited to certain factions eg: empire has heavy bow at highest tier as do battania Valandia gets heavy crossbow at highest tier the rest of the factions dont get heavy bows or crossbows but obviously do get lighter or medium versions.

Looters should get slings which would account for their good damage and superb throwing skills

Ye rock throwing looters are super soldiers, they should at least give them a sling then it wouldn't look so bad, a guy with a sling is supposed to hurt you bad even with armour

yes at least an option to disable autosave would be nice, why would I need hundreds of saves anyway if I want a save I'll quicksave

I just had a quick look at the newest patch, the issue of poor siege engine performance isnt addressed and as far as I could see wasnt in the known issues section either so I assume it wont be addressed any time soon.

Yep its been there the whole time I've been playing sometimes you get lucky and they'll use one of the three ladders on the seige tower occasionally I've seen them even use two but not often. Other times they mill around or go up then back down again.
I think people just got fed up reporting it and knock down the walls instead

The refusal to climb seige tower ladders has been around for as long as I've played sometimes its a little better ie they actually use one ladder but not the other two, sometimes worse, they wont use any ladder or they stop near the top then start coming back down
I think it no longer gets reported much because most people gave up trying to use them and just knock down the walls ( I know thats what I do). The lvl 1 ramps are fine why not just put in bigger ramps if you cant fix the ladders ( assuming you've tried to fix the ladders a few times).

Happens here too 1.52

I did find archers a bit overpowered but only against armour when I first started the game
( I thought archery was slightly underpowered on unarmoured troops )
I haven't played without realistic battle mod for some time which seems to balance it just fine so I cant say if its changed

the other issue was not enough fall off over distance as far as I was aware most projectiles lose power over distance
(after their initial accelaration)
eg 50% less power after a hundred yards which might make little difference on an unarmoured target as it would still
pierce the body but could make the difference of piercing armour or not
arrows appeared to still pierce armour regardless of distance

The number of soldiers you take should be by choice and reflected with greater renown if you take fewer soldiers

EG: take 10 soldiers and gain 20 renown as you deliberately took only a few soldiers taking a personal risk
take 25 soldiers gain 10 renown as you took a reasonable number to deal with the number of bandits
take 60 soldiers gain 5 renown as you overwhelmed them with numbers and took little risk

I use the 'realistic battle mod' which appears to sort most of the issues
though those looters still have the throwing arms of professional baseball players

Heavy armour is better it's especially noticable against arrows
battles seem to take a little longer as it takes a bit longer to kill off troops with heavy armour
Cavalry seem to perform a bit better
Archers are still good but you wouldn't want only archers in your army as they would struggle with the heaviest armour
troops seem to use their shields better
Spears dont seem as useless as they were

As an archer you tend to prioritise the lighter armoured targets as you do more damage, your bow seems to be slightly better at short distance and slightly worse at long range than the vanilla.
If your are wearing heavy armour you shrug off a couple of random arrows but you wouldn't ride solo at a line of archers it doesn't end well I've tried it.

You can still die pretty quick if you were to say run into the middle of a bunch of troops even with heavy armour I still die just not as quickly or as often.
On a horse you tend to avoid thise two arm spear guys as they can take you down pretty quickly solo


Its all a bit subjective but the mod appears to have improved battles overall I'm not sure exactly what they changed but it seems to work

I like the basic idea each faction could have the specific roles and it could be shown in the ui the same way companions are assigned as
scouts / healers / engineers

There could also be a research part to each role costing lots of coin to research improvements in the specific field the same way that town improvements are done but costing lots more perhaps paid for from a flat faction tax so you have to decide on what to prioritise for research
do i research for example better siege engines or go for better catapults.

I think archers are a bit overpowered but only to heavy armour they seem a bit underpowered against unarmoured /lightly armoured
I'd expect volleys of arrows to mow down unarmoured/ unshielded opponents like a machine gun they dont

Then again heavy arnour is everywhere and if you buff amrour too much you'd need to limit its avaliabilty somehow and probably need to buff archers effect on unarmoured / lightly armoured targets

Some archers seem to do rather well in melee I'd expect trained and equipped melee soldiers to beat archers easily they dont
Cavalry even when they reach archers dont seem to beat them easily

So to my mind theres two issues archers apparently high level of melee proficiency which need reducing
Archers apparently high damage against heavily armoured targets.

the sort of principle I'd impliment if I was making a system for damage would be

(NA) No armour takes full damage from cut pierce and blunt
(LA) Light armour takes 50% cut damage full damage from pierce and blunt
(MA) Medium Armour immune to cut damage takes 50% pierce damge full damage from blunt
(HA) Heavy Armour Immune to cut + Pierce takes 50% blunt damage


---------------------------------------------------------------- NA-- LA -- MA -- HA--
Sword Swing 100 cut 20 blunt -------------------------110 -- 60-- 20--- 20
Sword thrust 100 pierce 10 blunt ----------------------110 - 110-- 60-- 10

Axe 30 cut 80 blunt----------------------------------------110 -- 95-- 80--- 40
Mace 10 Pierce 90 blunt---------------------------------100-- 100-- 95--- 45
Spear 90 pierce 20 blunt---------------------------------110-- 110 -- 65-- 10
2 handed long spears 90 pierce 40 blunt -----------130-- 130-- 85-- 20 + velocity damge, charging horse eg: +30 pierce+30 blunt
Arrows 30 cut 30 pierce 10 blunt------------------------70--- 55--- 25--- 10 + speed damage for better bows eg: long bow + 20 pierce damage

This would make everything pretty effective against unarmoured but give each weapon its own niche
Sword would be most versatile because you can thrust and swing but wouldnt be great against heaviest armour

Maces and axes would out damage swords considerably on heavy armour but sword would be slightly better on unarmoured and light armoured

2 handed spears would outdamage on most things except the heavy armour unless hitting a charging horse
Arrows would progressively weaken with heavier armour

Light amrour would reduce sword axe and arrow damage by a bit but still take full damage for thrusts
Medium armour would reduce sword axe mace spear and arrow damage but with axe,spear and mace still doing quite high damage
Heavy armour would reduce all damge considerably with axe and mace doing the most damage unless your a 2 handed spear hitting a horseman whos running at you at speeed in which case you'll outdamage every other weapon

I'd reduce most tier 6 troops to medium armour most archers would be light or no armour
Heavy armour would very expensive to buy and would be for noble elite troops only