Adding in Khuzait racial trait just makes their campaign OPness even more obvious

[TheChewieShow]

Also has anyone noticed that executing the leader of the faction doesn't really do anything? Just another guy or girl comes in their place and its business as usual, they just dislike you a bit... I would think that killing a faction leader would cause chaos inside that faction and maybe an internal struggle for power between the lords

 

[Osium]

Horses and pack animals need to consume food at least to put them on a somewhat even ground in terms of the campaign mechanics. Currently, on a per-distance basis they consume fewer resources (gold, food, influence) per distance traveled since they travel faster. Add in food consumption for animals and cavalry will still be strong and having hundreds of horses will probably still be mandatory (I despise this) but at least we'll make it not relatively punitive to have troops on foot. Then change the Khuzait trait so that their horses consume 20% less food or something more or less equivalent power-wise to the other nearly useless racial traits. (Racial traits are dumb and shouldn't exist anyway but whatever.)

Incidentally, it's ahistorical for cavalry to be faster than infantry strategically, outside of say, steppe, or grassland plains. It might even be related to the horses that steppe peoples used. They didn't use big hot blooded, or even big cold blooded horses. They used very small, incredibly tough and hardy ponies.

You take your typical European mount from the medieval period, and try to have that poor horse keep up with infantry for a week and a half, and the horse is going to die, and or break down.

 

[Punished Mert]

Anyone who says that cav only armies dominate on the field of battle needs to sit down and study some history. Mongol armies were strategically, logistically and tactically well ahead of their time. But when it came down to the actual battle, mongols could not break western european heavy infantry/cavalry formations unless they had days worth of outflanking/harassing etc.

The khuzait racial trait and their cav only armies emulate the advantage of having 5-6 ponies per soldier. The autoresolve giving a flat 30% advantage to all cavalry does not do it justice and basically lets all tiers of khuzait have the advantage AI vs AI. The fact that armor is useless and range is incredibly strong in BL their horse archers just become murder machines. So yes, the khuzaits need to be toned done, the autoresolve system revamped, and armor made useful.

 

[Nokturnel]

Also has anyone noticed that executing the leader of the faction doesn't really do anything? Just another guy or girl comes in their place and its business as usual, they just dislike you a bit... I would think that killing a faction leader would cause chaos inside that faction and maybe an internal struggle for power between the lords

Yea a lot of Diplomacy features are MIA, think they were planning on rebellions to occur in Cities with low Loyalty and other features that aren't implemented yet.

A fun mod you could try out is "Shattered Kingdoms" removes Kingdoms from the game in favor of having all the different Clans all vying for control instead.

 

[kweassa]

Anyone who says that cav only armies dominate on the field of battle needs to sit down and study some history. Mongol armies were strategically, logistically and tactically well ahead of their time. But when it came down to the actual battle, mongols could not break western european heavy infantry/cavalry formations unless they had days worth of outflanking/harassing etc.

The khuzait racial trait and their cav only armies emulate the advantage of having 5-6 ponies per soldier. The autoresolve giving a flat 30% advantage to all cavalry does not do it justice and basically lets all tiers of khuzait have the advantage AI vs AI. The fact that armor is useless and range is incredibly strong in BL their horse archers just become murder machines. So yes, the khuzaits need to be toned done, the autoresolve system revamped, and armor made useful.

Actually, a long standing idea of mine, was to implement some "cons" to the factions as well -- as in, for example the Khuzaits currently in discussion, add "unskilled engineers" punitive trait to Khuzait culture leaders of parties/armies and remove them from being able to use onagers, trebuchets, ballistas, siege towers.. and simply limit them to battering rams and ladders. Also, this penalty will generally lower the building speed of anything related to engineering -- siege camps, battering rams, building in castles and towns.. etc etc..

History-wise, the bane of steppe-armies were siege battles, and their inability to take over well-defended positions.

Even the Mongols took 44 years to defeat the Southern Song dynasty in China, spent something like 6~7 years in the siege of Xiangyang, and only after getting their hands on trebuchet technology from engineers from the Middle East, they were able to push on. From this experience, the Mongols began including a considerable number of infantry and engineer corps in their armies, and they became the masters of siege battles as well, but before that point, even the invincible Mongols were extremely poor in siege battles and their basic strategy was to "just wait it out."

In the case of Manchurian Jurchens -- the founders of the mighty Qing Dynasty -- they weren't able to make it past the Shanhai Pass fortress, and the founding leader Nurhachi died after having been injured by the defensive artillery from the fortress. The Jurchens entered mainland China only when the garrison of Shanhai Pass basically gave up and surrendered due to certain political reasons.

...

So, if we translate this into the game, it would mean that the Khuzaits would be faster than most, extremely capable in field battles, but their sieges will always take much longer than other factions. Their sieges will always be exposed to enemy defensive artillery, without proper means to retaliate, and all they can do is simply break down the gates and storm the walls on ladders.

I think a range of similar "cons" can be added to a lot of other factions as well, to both increase the 'flavor' of each faction, as well as implement necessary balance. In that sense, the Khuzait can be a dominating force on open field battles, but always having trouble in actually expanding territories through siege conquest.

 

[durbal]

I don't like the idea of racial buffs, let alone debuffs. It's weird MMORPG-style gameplay and even in those game it's never balanced right. And balance is just one tiny part of why it's bad design in a game like Bannerlord.

 

[kweassa]

Why?

Conceptually, as well as fundamentally, such "buffs" or 'debuffs" are simply no different a character/clan/factions given a set of numbered parameters to portray their relative differences. Have a swordsman with 100 1h skill, and then have someone with 120 1h skill. That 20 difference is no more or less natural/unnatural than having someone with 100 1h skill given a +20 buff through a trait/buff. Same applies to all perks in the game as well.

There's nothing inherently "bad" about such in Bannerlord. Such methods are already in use in the game, in almost every aspect.

All that matters is whether it can do the job or not in terms of the given purpose. You can have a town with NPCs that are superbly sophisticated in it's AI to live out the day washing, ****ting, eating, working, sleeping to simulate a real person (think SIMS), or simply, you can write a scheduled script for the AI that just routinely follows a given schedule. Is any other better than the other? The only thing matters is which one does the job better. Unless someone is going to follow around an AI 24/7 in-game time to nit-pick every aspect of their life which is unrealistic or artificial, in most cases, scripted behavior is just simply incomparably more efficient.

Same with any portrayal in this game -- if it works, it works. Be it through artificial buffs or traits, or be it through some kind of superbly complex military/social/political AI that makes a faction behave in their strengths and weaknesses as one would expect. The difference is, which is more efficient.

Do you expect the devs to come up with a socio-political/economic/diplomatic simulation on the level of Paradox's CK2 to simulate the inherent strengths and weaknesses of steppe factions and have them behave dynamically? I don't see this happening any time soon. More likely, never.

 

[durbal]

Why?

Because they're never balanced well and the balance gets in the way of other factors like preference for certain gameplay styles with units, different starts, roleplay aspects, etc. which are made at the same time (i.e. when picking a faction at game start). And they're just fantasy-land gamey stuff. Creating buffs and debuffs almost works when you're talking about racial abilities of gnomes and orcs in an MMORPG, but it's especially silly in a game like Bannerlord which purports to have some semblance of basis in reality. They're just super weird abstractions that don't make sense, and having these high-level, top-down abstractions like 'horse man make horse go faster!' when there are already different horse speeds, a horseriding skill, and weight system, etc. etc. it becomes really goofy. They're unnecessary, and I'd say they improverish gameplay more than they add to it.

 

[kweassa]

You keep saying "it's silly" or "doesn't make sense" -- but just exactly what?

You're absolutely right that buffs, traits and etc.. are abstractions -- and like I said, every aspect of the game we have, is already a set of abstractions to portray some semblance of historic realism in the way best it can. The skill in stuff like 1h, 2h, polearms, riding, athletics etc..? That's an abstracted form of reality to represent the relative differences of troops and characters. The game did not simulate their upbringing and training as a warrior to give tierX troops Y amount of skill.

It is absolutely an illusion if you think the very core of this game, is not a set of such abstract traits. The thing you say will make the game goofy, is already what the game is from the bottom up.

IMO you're acting upon some sort of a purist ideal here. If anything, my suggestion for example, would certainly better portray the Khuzaits than the current status of things, would it not?

Without the necessary social/political/economic depth to this game, how would it ever portray any difference between the different factions and cultures without such elements?

Answer: It can't.

 

[durbal]

You keep saying "it's silly" or "doesn't make sense" -- but just exactly what?

The very fact that a race or ethnicity of humans has a special ability or disability is silly and doesn't make sense. Didn't think I needed to be that explicit but dancing around that fact apparently wasn't communicating it well enough.

Without the necessary social/political/economic depth to this game, how would it ever portray any difference between the different factions and cultures without such elements?

Exactly what is social/political/economic about moving faster in snow? There are already per-unit stats that can affect this type of thing, so we don't need the high-level, goofy abstraction of 'man from snow land move faster in snow'. The top third of Khuzait territory is covered in snow too. Most of the northern Empire is forests. The Aserai have a core of light cavalry and even have the fastest breed in the game. So exactly where do the 'racial' traits fit in? They're just extra unnecessary filler. The idea of adding a debuff of all things and saying that a Khuzait character is inherently worse than everyone else with siege technology just impoverishes the character creation process even more than the buffs already do.

 

[TheChewieShow]

I don't like the idea of racial buffs, let alone debuffs. It's weird MMORPG-style gameplay and even in those game it's never balanced right. And balance is just one tiny part of why it's bad design in a game like Bannerlord.

I don't think there should be any racial buffs or debuffs that can't be learned through gameplay, aka a 20% increase in movement speed through the snow.

In my opinion, your culture should decide your starting point/city on the map and contribute to the weapon specializations you choose in later character creation. Maybe something like Vladia gets an additional skill point in polearm and riding, while Kazuits get additional skill point in riding and Archery.

 

[Apocal]

I will admit I never have a campaign where the Khuzait are a major loser...

I have.

Notice that I'm a vassal of the Khuzait Khanate and then notice the date. Varnovapol was my town, my only fief.

 

[SmattlePattle]

All that matters is whether it can do the job or not in terms of the given purpose. You can have a town with NPCs that are superbly sophisticated in it's AI to live out the day washing, ****ting, eating, working, sleeping to simulate a real person (think SIMS), or simply, you can write a scheduled script for the AI that just routinely follows a given schedule. Is any other better than the other? The only thing matters is which one does the job better. Unless someone is going to follow around an AI 24/7 in-game time to nit-pick every aspect of their life which is unrealistic or artificial, in most cases, scripted behavior is just simply incomparably more efficient.

I am about to go down a complete rabbit hole because your point is on a topic I find interesting to discuss. I'm prefacing this by acknowledging this is well beyond the scope of the initial thread, or even your reply to it.

So, when it comes to efficiency/resource usage/dev time, there is zero argument against you. Absolutely 100%, you gotta make decisions about where your efforts do the most.

However, if we bracket resources, more complexity is almost always better imho. Why? Because it creates more points of interaction and allows more emergent situations. What am I yammering about?

Lets go with your example, with the town. If the town remains essentially window-dressing, the two are virtually identical. However if your a modder, or a licensed DLC team, if you have a fully simulated town you suddenly have potential to incorporate gameplay elements that weren't there previously. Say your doing a DLC that focuses on notable characters in a city, the gang factions, and crime and you want to flesh this area of the game out more. If the underlying town has actually these sophisticated simulations where the AI has highly variable behavior, you could do some really interesting stuff with that - like dynamic spy/intimidation or assassination quests that'd require you to observe the individual habits of that NPC, rather then memorizing a few predetermined quest template/scripts and being bored once you've seen them all.

So, from the perspective of seeing the game as a platform for future additions - be they mods, DLC, whatever - I would argue complex simulations are better. I think this is especially true in games where a huge appeal is the unique generated "story" of every playthrough, which is where you see the big crossover between CKII and M&B, for example.

Not really disagreeing with you in any way, everything you've said is true, I suppose I'm just trying to add some food for though as to why sometimes taking the long-route with simulation versus script can be worth it.

 

[Midnitewolf]

I'd say I agree with that, especially once the economy gets ironed out a bit more. It should definitely be more expensive/logistically challenging to have tons of cavalry.

(Not that I think infantry are pointless really, since in very very large battles it's a huge advantage to have a bigger/better blob. Non-archer horsemen don't really perform that well against The Infantry Blob. But that's beside the point, I guess.)

I think I will second this as well. Right now there is way too much advantage to having cavalry, spare mounts and pack animals with almost no disadvantage. I mean the speed bonus alone from having cavalry and spare mounts is huge. The disadvantage should be that you have to carry a massive amount of grain to keep those horse fed, maybe 3-4 times the amount (of grain) that you would normally have for an infantry army to keep it fed for 30 days.

 

[R4MPZY]

In my campaign khuzait got wiped out first by the northern empire, they didnt even last a couple of years.