A bunch of petty complaints. I get mad every single game. I hate this stuff so much. I get so mad.

Users who are viewing this thread

Madijeis

Sergeant
WBNW
Sumpter horses? I'm a full imperial changer player, I don't **** around with casual horses, but do you need the image I posted of the many bandits in a cluster ****? That's just dum to have so many at the start of the game. I can get around them or kill them all, but I think they need to be redesigned in how they spawn.
I do deliver the hard and either sell or turn in the horses and just buy chargers.
It's not that hard to ride around them and waste their rocks.
They have so many rocks that If I fight say 30 looters, they're still showing rocks at with last one, meaning I've kitted and killed them all, alone and they been chucking rocks the whole battle, that's too many rocks, they should have 1/2 that many. It's like an un designed unit they just made superficially and didn't bother with adjusting it.
I mean bro that's on you. If you don't want to use sumpter horses to balance out in the early game, I don't know what to tell you. You sound like that guy who complained about crossbows being OP because he couldn't singlehandedly kill every Rhodok army. Also, the AI now picks up their projectiles if they can (which is something I really like), so they might very well have a reasonable amount of stones but they keep on picking them back up. And anyway, I repeat that looters being that good is a teaching experience for newbies. I am pretty much in the Dwarf Fortress school of doing things.
Blunt damage does too much damage
Hard disagree. If you face a legionaire with your starting armour don't expect him to be kind.
*average bottom rant*
Are you like saying that winning a tournament is too easy or too hard? You're literally not making sense. Games shouldn't be balanced around the 1% of people who can exploit, break them or otherwise are very proficient at them, they should be balanced around the average casual. If you can win a tournament with 0 athletics and 0 one handed, good. If you don't, also good.

Also, Battania's perk ain't that great. Not everywhere is a forest, there are large patches of territory where you're basically at the mercy of your opponent. Based on playstyle and builds, other perks are arguably stronger. Especially because there's only so much you can do as a wandering hunter-seeker, you're gonna have to group up in armies and that's where all the influence and army perks from other factions shine. You might shine in skirmishes but you can't skirmish 900 men away from your fiefs.
 

Ananda_The_Destroyer

Master Knight
If you don't want to use sumpter horses to balance out in the early game
A sumpter horse doesn't even give you mounted footmen speed bonus.
Also, the AI now picks up their projectiles if they can
They can't pick up rocks. Have you ever even looked at a looter in battle? I have. Have you tried to pick up a rock? I have.
Hard disagree. If you face a legionaire with your starting armour don't expect him to be kind.
They go down in 3 hits like everyone else and they fight just like everything else. When was the last time you did a tournament in this game? I feel like you maybe just don't know how easy it is to 1 on 1 the AI or how much damage the blunt weapons do. Also if you have max armor, they will still down you in 3 hit in the tourney with blunt damage, probably with live weapons too, not that that would ever happen since they a harmless infantry unit, at the complete mercy of the player in live battle.
If you can win a tournament with 0 athletics and 0 one handed,
Why is there athletics skill if the character can move fast enough without it? Why is there 1 handed skill if the character can swing weapons perfectly without it? In warband it was really hard fight if you started character with low weapons skills because they were slow and awkward, in bannerlord you start perfect and even against a lord with highs skills you can still get in a hit just fine because the effect of the skill it too small! It's not far to these poor NPCs, they trained the sword while I was..... they should be able to win tournament too!
Based on playstyle and builds, other perks are arguably stronger.
Yes, if your playstyle is slow and bad then useless perks will fit right in. I can roast them into oblivion, go ahead and make case for them if you want. You will most likely learn new and interesting things.
you're gonna have to group up in armies
I don't have to and it's an inferior play from a martial POV, my 1 party with precision composition can defeat any size of enemy force with me controlling it. Meanwhile any AI allies perform much higher in auto calc battles then in live combat, so it's much stronger to let vassals make the armies and do their stuff while you control 1 powerful fast party. If I make armies, it's only to raise leadership and it's always wasteful and a chore.
You might shine in skirmishes but you can't skirmish 900 men away from your fiefs.
Yes I can and do defeat 1k+ armies with my 1 party. Also, they rarely can make such a large force because I can run them all down as they assemble.
 

Madijeis

Sergeant
WBNW
Bro I don't get it, you're a minmaxer, are you complaining about too much min maxing or too little? Also, it's not like there's no difference between 0 and 100 skill, if you face a noble in a tournament in the early game it can be rough (unless they're on horseback, dear god their timing is horrible).
 

Ananda_The_Destroyer

Master Knight
t's not like there's no difference between 0 and 100 skill, if you face a noble in a tournament in the early game it can be rough
I dare you, start a new game with no 1 handed and go to imperial tournament where you get at lot of sword and board 1 v1, tell me you really think the lords are challenge in 1 v 1 with sword and shield? There may be a difference on paper but if it's still the same amount of hits to kill something, it's not a functional difference.

you're a minmaxer, are you complaining about too much min maxing or too little?
Bannerlord manages to do both! There's too little because many skills have no pay off or punishment for increasing or ignoring. Meanwhile it's also too stingy on attributes (attribute system is bad and not needed too) and the staggering/spacing of perks to make min max very UN-satisfying!
Being able to 1 shot a fully armored unit or lord should be a pay off to investing and raising a skill, but nope here I come with my capped 18 polearm skill and my long glaive swinging right to left 1hko everyone. Here I come with my zero athletics and 1 handed winning the tournaments.
 

Madijeis

Sergeant
WBNW
I dare you, start a new game with no 1 handed and go to imperial tournament where you get at lot of sword and board 1 v1, tell me you really think the lords are challenge in 1 v 1 with sword and shield? There may be a difference on paper but if it's still the same amount of hits to kill something, it's not a functional difference.


Bannerlord manages to do both! There's too little because many skills have no pay off or punishment for increasing or ignoring. Meanwhile it's also too stingy on attributes (attribute system is bad and not needed too) and the staggering/spacing of perks to make min max very UN-satisfying!
Being able to 1 shot a fully armored unit or lord should be a pay off to investing and raising a skill, but nope here I come with my capped 18 polearm skill and my long glaive swinging right to left 1hko everyone. Here I come with my zero athletics and 1 handed winning the tournaments.
Well, by "challenge" I mean that, since the gulf in skills is that large, they're able to block your attacks more often, sometimes not even bashing with the perk guarantees a hit. I haven't re-tried the old trick where you block for a split second to make them lower their guard, I enjoy having directional blocking with the shield too much, I guess that still works wonders as it always has. Personally, my favorite tournaments are the ones where there's the possibility to die in one hit: bills, lances, 2handers... Caladog whooped my ass with a 2 hander in the early stages of a tournament, and it took a long fight to take him down in the final round. If anything, 3 hits is too much for me.

In general, I partly agree that your investment or lack there of should be appropriately punished or rewarded, so far it seems that martial progression comes down more to money than actual training/experience. How I would go about it is a matter for the suggestions subforum. I however don't like the idea to make it impossible for a player to perform well at low levels, if you put enough hours into the game that you can blast any snot nosed snob 2 seconds into your campaign, that's great, like how Dark Souls puts mini bosses in starting areas that seem impossible when starting out the game but then are just lootboxes for rare items early in the game on your 10th playthrough.

EDIT TO AVOID DOUBLE POST: I do really like the perks which knock down people if you hit them hard enough, cracks me up everytime it happens. I hope they never fix the javelin ragdoll
 
Last edited:

Bluko88

Regular
I hate medicine
Yeah it sucks to level up Medicine, though it's not impossible. But getting it going is quite slow I'll admit. Also don't think I've ever gone much beyond 100.

Easiest/cheesiest way is to starve your men for experience. I can't see TW adding Hospitals, but maybe they could add some kind of "plague" quest in Villages to get lots of Medicine XP. Like the amount of XP for a jailbreak w/ Roguery. So wait for a few days in village to help the poor and sick, boom your residency is done.

Also this is really why there needs to be trainers. If something is hard to level up, pay somebody so you can get it leveled up. Really wouldn't hurt to have more money sinks in-game, especially for late game.

Too many bandits in sandbox starting area!
Never had this happen at start, but agree Bandits are a bit too prolific.

Blunt damage can gtfo

Do you realize sea raiders are easier then looters
Uh no? Not sure why everyone hates Looter rocks so much. Range is really limited, and they usually kill horse before me.

Only way you should die to Looters is if you're heavily outnumbered. And if that's your problem, well as Frankie said "That's life!"

Blunt damage gets a second round of hate, now I understand getting hit with a blunt sword would hurt someone, but it's not going to make them ****ing explode in a wave of blood and gore, as seen in tournaments! People get ran over by trucks and have less damage then a Cataphract getting BONKED in a tournament!
Bladed two-handed weapons are a little extreme, but then you also can't block those pesky arrows/bolts. So I say it's fair.

But tournament get more hate because having a 2 on 2 teams ruins it because there's no commands to make them hold (in WARBAND you could do it!).....wtf? "oh hold on guy I have like 2 athletics!" "oh don't worry I don't want to win I just wanna get bonked and explode and make you lose! You're never getting that new poney chump!"
I guess I've just learned to live with stupid A.I. Though by the same token I've had tournament mates clutch a win when outnumbered, so it can work both ways.

The culture perks are bad, except battania. It really bothers me so much when the perk and malice are the same category of thing, like Aserai get more money (via trade penalty reduction) but have to pay more for wages...
I think the change is good overall, old perks were really broken. *cough* Khuzait *cough*

Roguery, like above it really annoys me that it's only purpose is basically +money but it costs a bunch of money and campaign time to raise it up...
Well TW could make it possible to level up Roguery beyond jailbreaks, but they don't, so that's the real problem. Admittedly the perk "more loot" is a bit odd - though not inappropriate.

Ranged troops suck at shooting horse archers. Being still is supposed to have more accuracy then moving, but in bannerlord it much easier for horse archers to land stray hit all over a formation then for 10X as many ranged units to shoot the horse archers.
Not really, problem is horses are basically the armored vehicles of their day. Horse Archers beat regular Archers, if for no other reason then they are more expensive. Remember it's just a game.

The real problem is what beats Infantry blobs? Archers kind of, but a big enough/well coordinated Infantry blob is basically unstoppable.

All these jokers who up with khan's guards! It doesn't matter if it's only like 5, it completely distorts the battle! It's like he's making fun of me! "Oh yeah I can get them too what now?"
I'd like to Khuzait Darkhans to have more unique gear of their own. Though I think people complained when they changed them before, personally I preferred their old look. Also the Battanian gloves look purty stoopid on them.

Sad thing is I know there was way more but now I'm all tried from hating all this stuff so much!
Contrary to what every streamer says "Ooo new patch! Make a new character that you'll put a few hours into, only to get bored with soon after!"

Treat these like your local weed dealer, and realize it's not always in your best interest to try the new stuff. Sometimes you gotta just step away.
giphy.gif
 

Userre

Recruit
I hate medicine
Medicine is hard to increase, I agree completely. There need to be more opportunities to increase it, and it should increase faster through normal means (wounded units). But I think in some sense you're way overprioritizing medicine in the early game. The personal effects are nice but certainly not necessary to make a solid character. Maybe you'd be better off putting it off until you have a larger party and can starve them or just naturally gain medicine through regular gameplay. Focusing on it is bound to make you hate it considering how slowly it increases.
Too many bandits in sandbox starting area!
Sometimes it seems like bandits are everywhere, sometimes it feels like they're nowhere to be seen. In the early game when I have rather low scouting, I tend to have a harder time finding bandits rather than seeing far too many of them.
no recruits anywhere
? I guess I'm just confused because it doesn't line up with reality. I don't know the average bandit party size precisely, and it likely fluctuates throughout the game, but I'd have to imagine it's around 20 or lower. Despite the fact that some villagers will have a negative predisposition towards you, you'll get at least one or two recruits per village. Make a dozen village trips and you'll have around 20-30 units. So long as you replace them as they die, slowly you'll develop a more experienced, small party.

My personal strategy is to usually recruit some vlandians because they can become horsemen. I prefer trading as early game income because it's satisfying and gives good EXP early on, so a fast party means I can hunt down bandit parties more easily and can get around faster for trading purposes.

I'll admit, there aren't a whole lot of ways to play out the early game. Trade is, as far as my experience goes, the only super viable way of getting through the early game somewhat rapidly. Just hunting bandits to progress takes a lot of time, and you could build up your party to a reasonable size and hunt down neutral minor factions but the money is hit-or-miss and party costs are quite high. There definitely need to be more methods to earning money in the early game and advancing through that stage in general.
Blunt damage can gtfo
The rocks are a little silly for sure, especially in contrast to your usual starting equipment. The starting bow is so slow and so bad that the rocks are really quite scary. Your best bet though is to use your troops. The first thing I learned switching from Warband to Bannerlord is that you really need to use your troops in the early game as your meatshield to earn EXP in your combat skills. If you're taking on looters by yourself in your slow, rinky-dinky horse and your **** bow, expect to get pummeled by rocks. It seems like you're almost shocked that looters might be actually difficult when you're playing with a very linear, solo-oriented, troops-never-die mindset. Let your troops do the work for you, and supplement them. Don't try it the other way around bcs rocks'll **** u up.
The culture perks are bad, except battania.
I guess I just have to disagree. The Battania perk is quite useful given the number of forests that exist, and some culture perks are bad, but some of them definitely have their draws.

Vlandia's 15% increased income as a mercenary is great for a player like me who usually avoids joining a kingdom as a vassal. I like to ensure that I have loads of money before I start my own kingdom, that I have the most cracked party that I can want, and that I have the maximum number of parties on the map. That costs a lot of money, and 15% more money for my influence gain is a meaningful difference. And because I quest a lot in the early game and get my learning rate for Charm as high as I can in character select as well as early game, it means that I get access to some incredible perks as a mercenary that significantly improve my influence gain.

The Sturgian perks are pretty weak honestly. 20% more relationship penalty for kingdom decisions isn't all that bad, but 25% less recruitment and upgrade costs don't add up to much. For example, a Vlandian recruit upgrading to a Vlandian Pikeman (tier 5) costs 114 denars. If you're cycling out let's say 400 units per year (not unreasonable at all for infantry units if you fight frequently in wars vs other lords), the maximum costs are around 45,600 denars just to upgrade these troops from tier 1 to tier 5. Obviously not every troop will make it to tier 5, but for more experienced players, most non-noble units will hover near tier 4 or 5 because of high level recruitment and frequent replacement for lost troops. So the costs might more reasonably be 30,000 denars per year. Factoring in the Sturgian bonus, we get a cost of 22,500 denars. That's 7500 denars per year which isn't great. I believe a Bannerlord year consists of 120 days (30 days per season), so 7500 denars over the course of 120 days isn't particularly great. It does add up over the course of a playthrough, potentially to hundreds of thousands of denars, but over that same period of time, such an amount of money might be trivial.

The Aserai perks, for all the hate you have for them, honestly are viable for specific portions of the game. If you're hard focusing on getting Everything Has a Price in Trade, 10% less trade penalty is a big difference-maker. 30% cheaper caravans also menas a more reliable return on investment. If you're going to play in the Aserai area, no speed penalty significantly improves speed which, again, speeds up your trading. Battanian forest speeds won't make much of a difference here. And yeah, daily wages are up 5%, but that's quite the tiny amount of gold to pay for pretty sizeable advantages in trade. I'd probably take 5% more troop wages if it meant that my caravans were far cheaper to get up and running, and I have a sizeable headstart towards getting the most powerful perk in the entire game as well as loads of others.

Here's a good example of how a trade-focused style synergizes with the Aserai perks. With Aserai bonuses, a caravan only costs 10000 denars. This means that if you want to get three caravans up, it'll cost 30000 gold instead of 450000. Big enough that I could get 4 caravans running for less money than it would take to run 3 normally.

Furthermore, because of my improved trade penalty reduction, I'll level trade faster.

I'll get quicker access to perks like Insurance Plans which return 5000 gold per caravan destroyed.

I'll get improved renown from Artisan Community or Great Investor which leads to faster clan tier promotions.

I'll get Spring of Gold which more than makes up for the 5% increase in troop wages if I maximize the profits. In the VERY late game, I have a 400 man party of exclusively noble units, most of whom are tier 5 or 6. I have Talent Magnet so I have 5 parties on the map if you include my own. Including all those parties, my wages are 9409 denars per day. 5% of that is 470 denars. Even in the ultra late game with five parties, one of which is comprised of around 400 high tier noble units, Spring of Gold will pay out that percentage by more than double.

And of course Everything Has a Price.

And sure, you don't need the Aserai perks to get max trade or Spring of Gold, but it makes a big difference to add 10% to your trade penalty reduction (I don't believe it's added but rather multiplicatively factored in, but the difference is still noticeable in my personal experience).

The Empire cultural perks seem like they'd need a pretty complex analysis that I'm not currently up to the task of doing, but suffice to say that 20% less garrison costs can be meaningful, and 20% hearth growth costs aren't very meaningful. Examining my decent city of Galend, it has a prosperity of 6814. Not the highest of my cities, but not bad. Galend gives me 2778 in taxes. Its villages give me 1574 denars, and that's with three villages. It seems pretty evident that cities make more money so long as they're relatively prosperous (oh, and the hearths of these villages are no joke either, as they're all above 1000). The current wage for Galend's garrison is 3154. If we gave the Empire perk bonus of 20% less costs, it would go down to 2523 denars. That's 600 denars difference in the garrison of Galend alone, probably quite a bit more than enough to pay for the 20% lower growth rate of villages. At the very least, it's not definitely awful, but perhaps you have a more sufficient analysis.

The Khuzait perks are just kinda bad, but that's the numbers talking mostly. Their bonuses could be more reasonable with numbers tuning (perhaps 5 or 10% less town income for a 25% bonus in cavalry recruitment and upgrade costs).

So no, I don't think every single cultural perk set is bad except for Battania.
Roguery, like above it really annoys me that it's only purpose is basically +money but it costs a bunch of money and campaign time to raise it up
Agreed. I don't think Roguery is fully implemented into the game in any meaningful way yet, hopefully that changes.
Steppe bandits are too fast.
I've never done a Roguery playthrough bcs of how slow and tedious it can be, so who knows. Perhaps a perk should be added that causes bandit parties to not run away from your party. Would be cool perhaps.
Ranged troops suck at shooting horse archers.
I don't personally have the same experience. With a strong archer line and proper direction-facing management, Vlandian crossbowmen and battanian fians can seriously devastate horse archers. Even vs the Khuzait, the numbers killed vs lost aren't particularly close. I'll have battles where around 200 or my archers have to deal with around 200 mostly tier 3-6 horse archers and I might lose a dozen archers before half of their horse archers have died. I am minmaxing and usually have close to max or max tier archers, but with my experiences, it just seems unlikely that archers really do have such a hard time even at tier 3 or 4.
It's too hard to kill you husband now!
Um, never considered that, but respect to you and your playstyle lol. Perhaps they should introduce a poisoning method or something.
 
Last edited:

black_bulldog

Knight at Arms
WBWF&SVC
I hate medicine,
Yes it needs a better leveling exp, along with Trader and Engineer. But it's EA so they have plenty of time for balance. :iamamoron:

Too many bandits in sandbox starting area!
It sometimes happens, but not enough to be a huge issue. But when it screws you over it definitely screws you. I can remember a run where I went to the first village to recruit, and got 2 as soon as I took 3 steps I had bandits come from 4 sides. :cry:

Blunt damage gets a second round of hate,
This is one of my biggest complaints about weapons in this game, because blunt damage trivializes all other weapon types except 2 handed polearms. I remember in Warband it was important to have 2 melee weapons a sword or axe for lower level to mid level troops and a blunt weapon for higher level troops.

Ranged troops suck at shooting horse archers.
Except looters who actually use guided missiles. :iamamoron:

It's too hard to kill you husband now! Remember killing your spouses? I do. Miss it? I do.
I'm sorry man but this is not a real complaint. You've come to lean on this cheesy mechanic, and now that it's been nerfed your mad. Sending a spouse to get killed should be possible but it should impose some harsh short term penalties to your character, and possibly children too.
 

Ananda_The_Destroyer

Master Knight
But I think in some sense you're way overprioritizing medicine in the early game.
Oh no-no I want the 25 skill perks asap, every game, it must be done early or it becomes a problem, once I have good troops I will not be getting KO units very often (and will use highest surgeon in game) so it must be done while getting to rank 1. You can actually just ignore medicine if you want, like all skills it's weak and petty compared to it's warband counterpart, but getting the preventative medicine lets me always fight and picking up a 120 skill medic will eventually save some high tier units.
The Aserai perks, for all the hate you have for them, honestly are viable for specific portions of the game.
Yeah this is true, if you're going to absolutely (legitly) trade to 300 and make caravans asap, then it's okay, but that's like a role play choice and not actually playing the game to succeed, you're deliberately choosing to play a very slow way for personal pleasure. But then if you use certain methods to max trade fast it's all useless again because you never needed the culture perk.
But it's EA so they have plenty of time for balance.
@SadShogun said they were working on something for medicine, but that ways a long time ago now and no news :dead:
I'm sorry man but this is not a real complaint. You've come to lean on this cheesy mechanic
What would I lean on, thier gear that's worth then mine? I just want my family page full of dead husbands again! Dead husbands and a baby of every color🌈..... hey remember THAT? You used to get kids of different culture, for a long time now they're all mothers culture, that's not a petty complaint though, that's a serious business complaint! Give me back my baby diversity TW!
 

SirLosealot

Recruit
Ranged troops suck at shooting horse archers. Being still is supposed to have more accuracy then moving, but in bannerlord it much easier for horse archers to land stray hit all over a formation then for 10X as many ranged units to shoot the horse archers. I makes every fight against khuzait like 2 fights that takes the time of 10 fights. I get so bored and tired of it, have to move every one to the back left, every one face direction, oh here they come please shoot at them, okay not other group get behind them, okay now other groups move on top of them.... it's like a puzzle game every battle to just make you troops kill the ****ing horse archers.
I second that. The archer's AI is having trouble with hitting horse archers even with fians and sharpshooters.

There are ways to make foot archers hit horse archers such as using cavalry to slow horse archers down or using corner of the map or using hills. It boils down to slowing horses down. So I think foot archers have a big problem shooting fast moving objects. But wait, shouldn't moving object hard to hit? Yes, but this is a very big blob of moving objects moving in a circle at the same speed. I have no problem hitting a big blob of horse archers moving in circle around me. The AI, however, will waste ammo shooting at nothing unless there are some interferences. I tested this in custom battles.

So the most reliable ways to help foot archers is to use cavalry to interfere with the orbit of horse archers. Just hope that there are not too many Khan guards in the enemy's formation. Because they will eat cavalry or any other unit for breakfast.
 

AngryPanCake

Veteran
I second that. The archer's AI is having trouble with hitting horse archers even with fians and sharpshooters.
I thought HA were terrible at landing hits.
I usually pursue touted enemies with horse archers (I make them "Follow me") and I slowly move behind fleeing enemies so they can finish them up. My HA loose volley after volley at fleeing looters in order to kill 3-4 of them!
 

SirLosealot

Recruit
I thought HA were terrible at landing hits.
I usually pursue touted enemies with horse archers (I make them "Follow me") and I slowly move behind fleeing enemies so they can finish them up. My HA loose volley after volley at fleeing looters in order to kill 3-4 of them!
HA are terrible at landing hit at one man. But when they surrounded a formation, they just need to aim at the general direction of that big blob of infantry to have a chance to hit someone. That seems logical, no complaints here.

However, the HA formation is also a big blob running around in circle. I can also do the same trick with a bow. If I want to hit someone in that formation. I just need to aim a bit ahead of the formation to compensate for the speed of the HA formation. I can reliably hit HA formation that way. Sounds logical too, right?

But the AI foot archers just couldn't seem to reliably land a hit at that big blob of formation. My doubt is that they do not compensate for the speed of the horses when aiming. So I made a custom battle between HA and fians. I tried to pause many times to take a look at the shot from the fians. This is what I found:
xvlPk.jpg

Can you see the arrow that was shot out by one fian in the middle? Imagine its trajectory. I am 99.999999% sure that it would hit the ground. Instead of aiming at the "head" of the formation, this guy aimed at the "tail". Why?
 

mortache

Recruit
Medicine and scouting are two skills that need some skill in it in order to get more skills. The more skills you have, the faster you grow. That's why it's so bad trying to raise it from 0 to 330. Better off using other surgeons and/or starting the game with those skills.

Btw the perk that makes your surgeon skill apply on the enemy too, does it help increase medicine faster?
 
If we're talking about petty things...well. As a vladian lord, I really resent having to live in battanian hovels. Why can't we rebuild their run down towns into beautiful vladian castles?
 

Ananda_The_Destroyer

Master Knight
Btw the perk that makes your surgeon skill apply on the enemy too, does it help increase medicine faster?
No.
Medicine and scouting are two skills that need some skill in it in order to get more skills. The more skills you have, the faster you grow.
With scouting, once you get a little bit, say 25+ it will just passively level during normal game play, though I suspect having an enemy faction either makes you spot track easier or you get more exp form enemy tracks, or only from enemy tracks, I don't know, but I feel if I'm not in wars I don't get the big gains from tailing an army and seeing their tracks. With medicine, the problem is you just have to play completely butt backwards to keep raising it. You don't want to lose troops in battle, so if you play well, you barely get any medicine. The best thing to do is actually just take a group of units to some forest bandits and have them hold positions and let them kill/ko them all, then leave. But even this, starts to get really slow after say 150 medicine, it's just too much for too little. The same can be said for other skills, such as for roguery you must do prison breaks and you may only be able to do so many in normal gameplay (meaning not going around JUST looking for prison breaks) but you can still do them and eventually reach high roguery. Leadership requires an army for significant growth, but once you've started conquest in one way or another it can be left to just passively level up as you do whatever, but with a party or 10 attached to you. Don't get me wrong, I would love to not need an army to raise leadership, I would never do it for any other reason.
 

Madijeis

Sergeant
WBNW
No.

With scouting, once you get a little bit, say 25+ it will just passively level during normal game play, though I suspect having an enemy faction either makes you spot track easier or you get more exp form enemy tracks, or only from enemy tracks, I don't know, but I feel if I'm not in wars I don't get the big gains from tailing an army and seeing their tracks. With medicine, the problem is you just have to play completely butt backwards to keep raising it. You don't want to lose troops in battle, so if you play well, you barely get any medicine. The best thing to do is actually just take a group of units to some forest bandits and have them hold positions and let them kill/ko them all, then leave. But even this, starts to get really slow after say 150 medicine, it's just too much for too little. The same can be said for other skills, such as for roguery you must do prison breaks and you may only be able to do so many in normal gameplay (meaning not going around JUST looking for prison breaks) but you can still do them and eventually reach high roguery. Leadership requires an army for significant growth, but once you've started conquest in one way or another it can be left to just passively level up as you do whatever, but with a party or 10 attached to you. Don't get me wrong, I would love to not need an army to raise leadership, I would never do it for any other reason.
Don't allied troops count for the surgeon skills? I noticed a suspicious amount of level ups after participating in army battles. Or did the ai just slaughter my poor soldiers
Can you see the arrow that was shot out by one fian in the middle? Imagine its trajectory. I am 99.999999% sure that it would hit the ground. Instead of aiming at the "head" of the formation, this guy aimed at the "tail". Why?
@SirLosealot I really don't think that's what's going on. The AI seems to understand the concept of a "lead" while aiming, but changing your direction constantly seems to frustrate their attempts. The HAs are moving in a circle the whole time, that slight change in trajectory seems to be enough to miss them. For what is worth, the Fian is aiming at some horseboy in the back of the formation, probably a correct shot, but the guy is going to change his direction or impact with a fellow cavalryman and slow down. You can dupe human players with that. For what is worth, the circle formation seems to work wonders against them.
 
Last edited:

Ananda_The_Destroyer

Master Knight
Don't allied troops count for the surgeon skills?
No. They count for their party leader's surgeons skills. One good trick is before a siege or big battle, talk to clan parties in your army and slide all thier troops in yours so they're under your surgeon both for protection and you surgeon can gain skill from them, then after the battle, put them back in the clan parties before you take a over capacity penalty when time passes. This can also be used to stop clan parties from donating to fiefs at the end of a siege.
 
Top Bottom