Search results for query: *

kweassa said:

You've spent 2,600 hours in the game, and still haven't thought of obvious solutions like:

(1) Sabotaging those countries from the within
(2) Act as mercs frequently switching kingdoms to help with suppressing a kingdom that becomes too strong
(3) Act as mercs to help out kingdoms dying out, and help them rebuild lost ground
(4) Starting out with eliminating those factions before anyone else

... etc etc?


Frankly speaking, what you're saying here sounds like someone who played the game for less than 260 hours, much less 2,600.

Click to expand...

Zorion_no said:

Yes lets not provide them files, so they can find it faster.. or in some cases they dont have it on their end and thus cant replicate it..

I also can witness that this behaviour happends always, not alot, but always.
The only time they will defend is if the defenders have overwhelming numbers, like 2-3x the amount of attackers.

From my speculation it seems that the attackers have a huge advantage in auto-calc that the AI is aware of?

Read take this example of attacker bonus - a fief is under siege, the attackers is 1k army, defenders inside castle is 100 troops + 250 milita.
I arrive with my troops 150 units.
Now when I charge to the aid of the besieged - the attackers win overwhelming.
However when I breach through the attackers and loose 10-30% of my troops, and now defend from the inside, I win an overwhelming victory against the attackers.

I feel there is "something" to this that is the cause of the issue.
That attackers just have too good a bonus, so the defenders need to have either overwhelming numbers to defend.

I've seen them instead of defending besiege the fief next to another.

I dont have a file atm that I can upload, but I'll keep it in mind if you dont see this behaviour ingame.

This also applies to armies of other kingdomes that the player is not part of.

Click to expand...

MArdA TaleWorlds said:

Could you send us a save file where that issue is occuring so that we can debug it on point?

Click to expand...

kweassa said:

The "difference" you think is completely arbitrary without reason. Heavy horse archers and heavy lancers are the equivalent to the elite of the Mongol forces which would constitute around 20~30% of an expeditionary army at any given time, and there's nothing saying that they were poorly armored.

If you're thinking vaguely "oh horse archers were generally poorly armored" -- try compare it with the T2-T3 horse archers, instead of comparing with a T5-T6.




According to whom?

The East ALWAYS used way more heavy cavalry in ANY given moment of history. From the first moment large-scale clashes would happen between the Roman Republic with the Parthians and their cataphracts, to the bit*ch-slapping the Imperial Romans received from Sassanid cataphracts, all the way to Medieval armies of the Arabian Caliphates and Seljuk Turks, and latter-day Ottomans.

What, you think only the West were relying on elite cavalry forces?




Demonstrably false.




You mean like at Horns of Hattin?
How about the Fall of Acre?
The disasters of 5th and 7th Crusades?
How about Ager Sanguinis?
Forbie?

What? The Crusaders didn't have any knights in the above instances?

Or how about we extend the period to the latter times, instead of just remaining at the earlier exploits of heroic Crusaders, and say, to a time when the times of Mamluk Sultans and Ottoman Sultans would start to appear? They don't count?

See, you think it was a "one-sided massacre" because this narrative you're familiar with is one of a giant confirmation bias which simply leaves out major humiliating defeats of Crusaders, and remembers only the handful few humiliating situations for the regional Muslim factions. So you remember just Dorylaeum and Jaffa, or the heroic exploits of just a few hundred capable knights routing thousands of soldiers of the armies of the amirs, and yet, just simply leave out all the MAJORITY of instances where similarly-sized armies of similar composition of HEAVY cavalry fought, with some victories going to the Crusaders, others going to the Muslim factions.




If this isn't about comparative historical accuracy, your entire argument has no basis at all, and falls apart.

Who says a totally fictional army of horse archers or lancers, have to be necessarily less-armored (which, they ALREADY ARE. Have you seen the leg armor on the Khan's Guard?) than knights?

Click to expand...

TheGreatAIA said:

Sure thing, just let me know and I can get those to y’all. Also correction the version is 1.2.9

Click to expand...

kweassa said:

El. Catph: Body 64
Druz.Chmp: Body 57
Bann.Kni: Body 54
Van.Far: Body 67
H.Lanc.: Body 51
Kh.Gua: Body 52
H.HA: Body 48

The Khuzait cavalry in-game are universally lesser armored than Vlandian, Sturgian and Imperial cavalry.

And I dunno why you're assuming Faris should be lighter armored than other cavalry, because historically the ancient Middle Eastern factions were using heavily armored cavalry long before the Romans adopted the practice for themselves, as well as Medieval Middle Eastern cavalry were every-bit as well armored as Western cavalry. As a matter of fact, both the pre-Turk Caliphate cavalry, AND the later Seljuk Turk cavalry were formidably armored.

The complete overtaking of Western armor quality over Middle Eastern, happens when the transitional period ends and full-body plate protection begin to arrive -- and that's after the Medieval era has ended, in the 15th~16th centuries.

Click to expand...

veronicaaltoids said:

wait, what do you mean?
so you are the defender in a Seige, shotting ballista to attacker ?

I guess my war strategy is too aggressive and always attack, never defense a town/castle.
my engineer leveling up is sooooo slow

Click to expand...

Totalgarbage said:

Yeah, they can make it simple and give non-hero units +1 HP per 10 athletics or something to make them better. Khan's guard problem is that cutting polearms in general are super OP, we've asked for a damage reduction for years now.

Click to expand...

Totalgarbage said:

Yeah, Sturgian Heavy Axeman is somehow worse against shield infantry than his spear counterpart. TW should really give them back their shoulder armor and increase the axeman's 1H & athletics skills by 10 or 20. I have no idea how the legionary dominated them so hard though.

Oathsworn are also crap and needs to be buffed to at least be somewhat competitive at tier 5 (I'm not counting the wildlings since Strat held fire with them deliberately for the purposes of the test).

Imperial Sergeant Crossbowmen are somehow so overtuned that they're one of the best infantry units. Take the mace off their loadout maybe?

Click to expand...

BlueRiddle said:

I've looked throgh the code to fix them before, and afaik it's to do with the code dictating the specific armour pieces these weapons are made out of. This tricks the troops holding them into thinking that the weapon isn't throwable, even though it is. This is the relevant piece of code for the Pilum:

Code:

<CraftedItem
        id="imperial_throwing_spear_1_t4"
        name="{=rkqaCud5}Pilum"
        crafting_template="TwoHandedPolearm"
        culture="Culture.empire"
        modifier_group="polearm">
        <Pieces>
            <Piece
                id="spear_blade_38"
                Type="Blade"
                scale_factor="90" />
            <Piece
                id="default_polearm_guard"
                Type="Guard"
                scale_factor="100" />
            <Piece
                id="spear_handle_14"
                Type="Handle"
                scale_factor="90" />
            <Piece
                id="default_polearm_pommel"
                Type="Pommel"
                scale_factor="100" />
        </Pieces>
    </CraftedItem>

Afaik, ALL melee weapons in Bannerlord are created out of individual parts, using the smithing system. Specifically, I believe the problem is in the weapon part spear_blade_38. Relevant code:

Code:

<CraftingPiece
        id="spear_blade_38"
        name="{=nr3K4od2}Pilum Head"
        tier="4"
        piece_type="Blade"
        mesh="spear_blade_38"
        length="23.7"
        weight="0.0744"
        excluded_item_usage_features="swing">
        <BladeData
            stack_amount="2"
            physics_material="wood_weapon"
            body_name="bo_spear_b"
            holster_mesh="throwing_spear_quiver_3_2"
            holster_body_name="bo_throwing_spear_quiver_3_2"
            holster_mesh_length="96.8">
            <Thrust
                damage_type="Pierce"
                damage_factor="2.5" />
        </BladeData>
        <Flags>
            <Flag
                name="BonusAgainstShield" />
            <Flag
                name="NotStackable"
                type="ItemFlags" />
        </Flags>
        <Materials>
            <Material
                id="Iron3"
                count="1" />
        </Materials>
    </CraftingPiece>

And here's the code for spear_blade_35, which is used for the Jagged Throwing Spear:

Code:

<CraftingPiece
        id="spear_blade_35"
        name="{=ZUp9mm79}Jagged Spear Head"
        tier="3"
        piece_type="Blade"
        mesh="spear_blade_35"
        length="41"
        weight="0.3056"
        excluded_item_usage_features="swing">
        <BladeData
            stack_amount="4"
            physics_material="wood_weapon"
            body_name="bo_spear_b"
            holster_mesh="throwing_spear_quiver_5_1"
            holster_body_name="bo_throwing_spear_quiver_5_1"
            holster_mesh_length="96.7">
            <Thrust
                damage_type="Pierce"
                damage_factor="2.0" />
        </BladeData>
        <Materials>
            <Material
                id="Iron3"
                count="3" />
        </Materials>

I believe the problem lies in the Flag <name="NotStackable">. The Pilum has this flag and does not work, the JTS doesn't have it and works properly. Removing this flag from the Pilum Head and the Triangular Throwing Spear head seems to fix the bug. You can do that yourself, by going into crafting_piexes.xml.

Click to expand...

Zorion_no said:

I dont think you understand that we who wanted the endless raids by the landless to stop - didnt want this implemenation that they gave us.
We wanted them to be vassals of other kingdomes when it broke up, like some of the mods do instead.

And no its not a fact thats your opinion, your subjective experience.


I think part of the problem with the recruitment you talk about is that some of the factions is "just too poor" (Sturgia and Battania, less so with Khuzait and or their t2 is mounted anyways more or less).

So the AI emphasis on volume of troops of they have less than 40% of ther max allowed troops(below 40% they cant be called into armies).
Thus they recruit 100 t1 troops instead of 35 t4 troops..

The end/late game of this is really not that great unless you use mods, that let you tweak all kinds of things.
The setting you talk about "kingdome destruction" can be flipped in the mod diplomacy, so it wont be destroyed when their last fief is done, but instead when the final war is over - meaning if they declare war on others or are declared war upon, they will keep on raiding until the dawn of a new era..

Given that most of the things you want more or less is done by modders already I would say its not "hard" but it may not be how TW wants the game to be.

Click to expand...

Ananda_The_Destroyer said:

Give Khuzait back their + mounted map speed!

Click to expand...