SP - General Armors and weapons prices should be reworked

[crimsonsogood]

I like to mention about how good quality armors or weapons prices is absurdly high and other normal or low quality ones is very low..

we understand that in calradia earning money is a hard, some folks just do farming, crafting and some of us fighting for our fortune. But if we ever tried to calculate the logic of having good quality armor, that would be very interesting.

Lets see, a vlandian banner knight, a level 31 top tier cavalry, best unit of the entire kingdom. only has 17 daily wage(it can be more I couldn't find the base value)
if he would worked us for a 360 day which is quite time for not to be killed, he would have total of 6120 denars. without spending any of it. which is impossible of course. even the army leader would have cover the most expenses.

So based on this fact, he couldn't get more quality armor more than the common infantry soldier. and we are talking about paying a solid 100.000 denars to a very good quality armor set.. This isn't logical of course, the best unit of the entire kingdom would have more access to better armor and weapons.

All aside from this little story, Prices should be reworked. many of us, who enjoy the bannerlord are abusing the smithing skill and get the easy money for to acquring more good quality armors. without abusing smithing, it is very hard to acquire them anyway.. (based)

Summary: for the love of god, please lower the high tier armors and weapons price.

 

[Tryvenyal]

Economy rework is ontop of my "Wishlist" too. But just picking out gear and soldiers would make the world very poor and 10 times harder to earn money.

Here is my suggestion:

Fiefs
+++ Earn more money from fiefs. Just increase the base tax values abit. Easy
Workshops
--- Cost less, allow more of them.
* Give AI access
Caravans
--- Cost Less to start
* Move starting templates.
* Increaese survivability
* See Tradeskill & Experience gain
Equipment
--- Lower Base-price on a plain Item 30-50%
--- Increase price-penalty for broken items
+++Increase price for boosted gear.
* Slightly increase drop-rate for undamaged gear, to make up abit for lootvalue

• The lower is the tier, the higher chanse to get a plain version instead

* This includes Smithing - Cheaper weapons gives less XP and less gold
* Improve armourvalues with a flat X %(Make Armour matter more!)
Soldiers
+++ Cost much more to upgrade the higher tiers.
+++ Small increase to salary on higher tiers.

 

[crimsonsogood]

Economy rework is ontop of my "Wishlist" too. But just picking out gear and soldiers would make the world very poor and 10 times harder to earn money.

Here is my suggestion:

Fiefs
+++ Earn more money from fiefs. Just increase the base tax values abit. Easy
Workshops
--- Cost less, allow more of them.
* Give AI access
Caravans
--- Cost Less to start
* Move starting templates.
* Increaese survivability
* See Tradeskill & Experience gain
Equipment
--- Lower Base-price on a plain Item 30-50%
--- Increase price-penalty for broken items
+++Increase price for boosted gear.
* Slightly increase drop-rate for undamaged gear, to make up abit for lootvalue

• The lower is the tier, the higher chanse to get a plain version instead

* This includes Smithing - Cheaper weapons gives less XP and less gold
* Improve armourvalues with a flat X %(Make Armour matter more!)
Soldiers
+++ Cost much more to upgrade the higher tiers.
+++ Small increase to salary on higher tiers.

Seems good ideas, I can agree with them. it is indeed very hard to become rich without smithing.. even if you try only merchant like kind of role playing, its very hard to get enough for soldiers and equipments. But whenever you start smithing its like abusing the game..
aside from fiefs and workshops ideas which is great ideas to fix the economy, drop rate for undamaged high tier equipments would be a so much better.
I am writing so much this sentence these days but, like in warband we was had more chance of getting high tier equipments from big battles. though economy was indeed more balanced in warband.

 

[Kentucky 『 ＨＥＩＧＵＩ 』 James]

I think that player money and "state" money like what you use for hiring troops and building stuff should be completely separate. Having a glaive that is more expensive than an army of 100 men with the same glaive is obviously ridiculous, but it also prevents you from wanting to try anything new out, because the pool of money you splash out with is the same pool of money you need to be able to win wars. It creates a zero sum game between things that really shouldn't hold each other back.

I think troop recruitment should be based on manpower and land. That's it. A village you own is obliged to give you a certain amount of recruits. The higher the prosperity the more quality troops you get. No recruitment cost, no wages, nothing. Then if you're not a lord, you have to pay for mercs with your own money. But mercenaries would be the only time you would have to pay for troops.

 

[Tryvenyal]

I think troop recruitment should be based on manpower and land. That's it. A village you own is obliged to give you a certain amount of recruits. The higher the prosperity the more quality troops you get. No recruitment cost, no wages, nothing. Then if you're not a lord, you have to pay for mercs with your own money. But mercenaries would be the only time you would have to pay for troops.

Sounds like making a Europa Universalis of Bannerlord. Very far from what it is and what it comes from(Warband).

 

[Kentucky 『 ＨＥＩＧＵＩ 』 James]

So? The recruitment system in warband was awful, probably the single worst mechanic in the game. You spend ages running from town to town grabbing useless recruits which you then have to grind up to something useful. In bannerlord it's even worse.

Warband was not a perfect game by any means. Contrary to what most people think, I actually believe Bannerlord's main problem is that it doubles down on the warband formula and amplifies all it's issues.

 

[Jur]

I think that player money and "state" money like what you use for hiring troops and building stuff should be completely separate. Having a glaive that is more expensive than an army of 100 men with the same glaive is obviously ridiculous, but it also prevents you from wanting to try anything new out, because the pool of money you splash out with is the same pool of money you need to be able to win wars. It creates a zero sum game between things that really shouldn't hold each other back.

I think troop recruitment should be based on manpower and land. That's it. A village you own is obliged to give you a certain amount of recruits. The higher the prosperity the more quality troops you get. No recruitment cost, no wages, nothing. Then if you're not a lord, you have to pay for mercs with your own money. But mercenaries would be the only time you would have to pay for troops.

How would you recruit troops at start when you don't have money and you can only fight looters?

 

[Kentucky 『 ＨＥＩＧＵＩ 』 James]

You wouldn't. The early game would be rebalanced so that you mostly use companions, then hire mercenaries if you want to take on bigger armies. Currently, recruiting grunts the early game is just to compensate for how bad your character is. You ride and run at a ridiculously low speed and do virtually zero damage. The fact that they make looters a grindy fodder enemy and they're still really tedious to fight should be a sign that the first few hours of gameplay need to be drastically changed.

Obviously Taleworlds is probably not going to make any of these changes, because for some reason they think it's fine that people's first impression of the game is a 2-5 hour mind-numbing grind against boring enemies, but explaining what's wrong with the game is infinitely more interesting and entertaining than actually playing it, so here we are.