Search results for query: *

Gandamula said:

Imagine that my brother Nogland leading his own party of 115 men decided to attack a ten looters one a hits him with a stone and kill him... Anyway, I take my wife with me until I have children and a surgeon to recover troops, the others I use in trade, or perhaps at a party leader, as I cannot leave them in the camp, which does not exist, I place them among the archers, because usually the surgeon doesn’t even have no combat expertise, so their death is something against nature, it breaks the essence of the game, mainly because 90% of the possible companions are useless, they made what a ordinary soldier do,they only have combat skills.

Click to expand...

Right. Even ancient and medieval armies included significant numbers of non-combatants. Maybe specialist companions should be at some risk under special circumstances--like losing a battle perhaps, but they should not be at the same risk, every battle, as if they were a frontline grunt. They would be back in camp, or with the baggage train, or the equivalent.

The old way the game handled this was by making them un-killable, just like the main character. Maybe assigning them to a "baggage" unit type, the same way they can be assigned to infantry, or cavalry or whatever, would work? If you win, they stay out of the way. If you lose, they get captured, maybe with a risk of being killed? But they won't be at risk of fatally stopping an arrow every time you roll up on some bandits, just because the game sticks everyone in the front lines by default.

GrandiousBrain said:

Oh you mean that time consuming field battle that barely lasts 4-6 minutes or that time consuming siege that takes 10-15 minutes.Bannerlord now with your so called consuming time litteraly plays like mobile game.The only time it took field battle more than 10 minutes is when AI stood back and didnt aproach or if i PERSONALY stalled the battle by doing manuvers/tactics.If field battle of 5-10 minutes and siege battle that barely lasts 10-15 minutes is time consuming to you then SORRY but you realy need to find some other type of game like for example mobile games or some fast paced FPS games.

Click to expand...

You have misconstrued what I meant by "time consuming." I do not mean, in any way, that the battles take too long. I mean that managing my companion idiot/brain trust so that they don't get themselves pointlessly killed takes time away from the fun part of the sometimes extremely quick battles, which is fighting and managing the troops that are supposed to fight.

I don't know where you get off telling me what to play, seems like you maybe have some personal issues there, but I won't judge. I am kinda new to to Bannerlord, but played a ton of M&B Warband- vanilla, mods expansions, etc. This is probably my all-time-favorite PC game series. I don't see where having some better options to keep certain characters off the frontlines invalidates my enjoyment of the game.

To make some matters worse i even played some mobile games that took way more time,more planning,more coordination than what Bannerlord gives and you are saying that its time consuming.Game like MB Bannerlord should MINIMUM have field battles last about 20-30minues while Sieges should last minimum 30-50 minutes and not like it is now where you get castle in like 10-15 minutes and it only takes that much bcs of siege engines/ram to be pulled otherwise it wouldve lasted even shorter.Then when the siege is over you are IMMIDIETLY greeted with MAGICAL TELEPORT out of nowhere message where you alredy chose/vote who gets the castle bcs all of that instant teleport magic stuff is ONE of the reasons why they/we have this HUGE snowbaling issues its bcs everything is instantanious,everything is given on silver plate,everything is done as quickly as possible like you are playing some medieval FPS or mobile game.

Click to expand...

I don't really know what this has to do with anything I wrote. Long battles can be fun, short battles can be fun. Managing characters that really should be non-combatants, instead of participating in the interesting part of the battle, not so much fun.

I agree that having an ever-growing pool of immortal aristocrats would be non-fun. On the other hand, having my newly recruited siege experts, surgeons, and other totally inexperienced newbie companions repeatedly getting killed on their first battle is also non-fun (and pretty unrealistic--people like that would have been kept away from the the front lines in any historical situation). It was especially annoying since it was impossible, in game terms until yesterday. I started my campaign with "hero death" checked off, and lost three companions (with all their gear) before figuring out what was up.

There are solutions to this, I can assign companions to an unused troop slot, along with some tough troops to keep them out of trouble and send them to the back. This will probably work, and might even be arguably more "realistic" in some way (although I am not sure how they will make much progress that way). It will also be time-consuming and not at all fun. Dysentery and extreme body odor might seem more "realistic" for the period too, but I am not looking forward to the day they can be included in a game, either.

In the long term, having some way of culling an infinitely growing pool of nobles might be needed. In the short-term, having no better and less distracting way of keeping vital support NPCs alive than fiddling around with micro-managing their non-participation in a battle seems less than optimal.