RozBritanicus
Sergeant
Yes i get what you mean. The main reason i was think something like this is that once i go down my army just charges and gets wiped out. But it get you and your right.
-
If you are reporting a bug, please head over to our Technical Support section for Bannerlord.
As of 1.8.0, What Do You Think is Needed to Fix Bannerlord's End-Game?
- 主题发起人 stevepine
- 开始时间
正在查看此主题的用户
Sergeant
five bucks
Knight at Arms
Yes. We need feasts for peacetime, so that we can increase our influence, renown, and relations with people more during peace.
I would also say that clan rank 4 should be achieved sooner. Grinding to 900 renown is very slow and boring, especially when you are at peace. It should come at 700, so the player can move on to making their kingdom.
SomeWeirdSins
Veteran
I think the focus now needs to be on polishing, balance, and AI behavior.
It's very hard to guess what systems might be needed to make the late game more engaging. Right now, the game lacks depth because the AI doesn't have the ability to challenge a player that is trying to play effectively (and without exploits). It's not because of any inherent system, it's just that the AI isn't very good at playing fights or at playing the strategic layer.
It's very hard to guess what systems might be needed to make the late game more engaging. Right now, the game lacks depth because the AI doesn't have the ability to challenge a player that is trying to play effectively (and without exploits). It's not because of any inherent system, it's just that the AI isn't very good at playing fights or at playing the strategic layer.
five bucks
Knight at Arms
If we are talking making it more challenging (as opposed to less frustrating, which there are many obvious areas for improvement) then one way of making battles more challenging is to balance troop types more and fix bugs.
It is very easy to cheese the AI with horse archers and archers, and they waste their money on cavalry and fodder infantry who are not very effective. But what if cavalry charges were actually scary? What if archers could lead their targets and shoot moving horse archers? What if spearmen could use spears properly? What if glaives and by extension Khan's Guards weren't murder machines? What if armour actually allowed you to survive more than 5 hits from arrows, say 8? What if mercenary units the AI sometimes picks up didn't ****ing suck? What if Sturgian infantry weren't a pile of shisenhausen?
Suddenly it would be much harder to cheese the AI, because the troops that they recruit without any thought into their effectiveness would all be roughly equally useful, as opposed to the current situation where the player's army is made up of 100% good troops and the AI's army is made up of 50% troops that suck for one reason or another.
Fixing armour against arrows would also mean that the dumb circle defensive formation the AI does in the face of arrow rain would be less of a suicide tactic.
As for the overworld/strategic layer, one small but easy way the AI could be made more effective there is by being made to keep catapults, ballistae and trebuchets in reserve until they have at least a few built up, then unleash them all at once, rather than what they currently do (build one, watch it get destroyed by 4 catapults, build another).
最后编辑:
Earth Dragon
Sergeant
Propelling you to a lackluster end game faster doesn’t actually solve anything.
I think the pacing is fine in that front. Name recognition and accomplishments are the only things that are giving you a “right to rule” here, and of course the player can choose some perks to best compliment their play style.
Some quick tips:
If you have some strong warrior companions, you can often just watch and auto-resolve the tournaments. Then winning gives your clan the renown.
Pay attention to bandit bases around you territory. If you see one, see if a nearby village wants someone to clear it. This gives you renown for both clearing the mission and clearing the hideout.
Send companions out of missions. You can get quite a bit done this way, again getting renown everytime one is cleared.
I agree there needs to be a few more activities in game, as well as doing more with what is there. Make playing board games with nobles do something, for example.
True, end game is just poorly developed in BL as is so I'd rather stay in the small/early/mid-game.
I just think the renown curve should be tweaked still as clan T1-3 feels too quick (and partially T4) relative to how your 'character' in the world.
The only issue is limiting how many workshops and companions you can have based on Clan tier, which is stupid. I get maybe limiting how many parties you can have out based on that but why companions/workshops? Given I still have to buy the workshops (now more expensive) and pay companion wages (which is high relative to early starts) still.
Who could have thought, right? Wait, TW could not.
Earth Dragon
Sergeant
Mainly because there isn’t a sufficient system for you to loose those shops or have competition spring up to reduce your profits. The system is simple, therefore the restrictions are simple to keep it in check. But you’re talking about huge levels of complexity to keep it in check if you took the cap off. Sandboxes need risk versus reward mechanics to actually play well.
You can view it as a simple show of span of control. You only have so many contacts and capability to manage so much, and when your clan increases a level, that span of control and contact network is expanded
TBF, workshops, fine, can understand reasoning for some measure of cap but this is different from Warband where you can't really lose one. In BL, even without a cap, the 'smart' thing would be to only buy from your kingdom or ones opposite end of the map given how 'unpredictable' wars can break out.
Why not have workshop cap tied to trade perk/skills (or even leader/governor ones)? That seems like a perfectly reasonable place to put it.
Have clan tier only cap # of roaming parties or number of castles/towns (within some measure of reason) you can control? Or clan tier allows easier recruitment of noble troops, town patrol/manhunters. As it is now, I can technically have 40 towns+castles as clan tier 4, but 5 workshops only?
SomeWeirdSins
Veteran
Agree in principle with most of the things you're saying.
The 1.8 armor system seems to have been a pretty big nerf to archers, and the sturgian infantry line is now among the best.
Unfortunately, don't think the leading target issue will/can ever be implemented when this involves up to 500v500 agents computationally.
Likewise with spear ranges, it's as if they only give them the ability to gauge one single melee range distance across all the varying melee weapon types. Given the range of maces, they probably used that base range (say ~70) and which is why they facehug you all the time.
Now, understand they may not be able to TBD on the specific ranges within each weapon type, but why not have spear-users have a 'keep @ range' starting at ~150 or even further, to counterbalance the opponent who may have a 'keep @ range' of 70.
SomeWeirdSins
Veteran
I haven't noticed HA being particularly hard to beat, or particular useful on my team for a handful of patches now. (with the exception of Khans, which are still cartoonishly overtuned)
five bucks
Knight at Arms
They got nerfed but not by much at all. I did tests in 1.8 where I stood at a 30 metre distance wearing different tiers of armour and let archers of various tiers shoot at my chest, and compared to previous tests I've done with the same method in 1.7, the result was that arrows still do almost the same damage to armour as before at lower tiers; at most above tier 4-equivalent armour it has increased by one hit to kill and at tier 6-equivalent by a couple of hits to kill. It's still way too much damage, a same-tier archer can usually kill you in 4-5 hits.
100 T5 Palatine Guards or T5 Sharpshooters or T5 Master Archers can still outright slaughter 100 T5 Pikemen or T5 Voulgiers or T5 Heroic Linebreakers killing most of them before they reach their line, and T6 Fians can kill them before they're even in spitting distance. Arrows do their damage as piece damage primarily, with a small chunk (like 10%) of blunt, and blunt damage was nerfed in this update but pierce wasn't, so arrow damage is largely the same.
Comparatively, infantry has had its damage reduced by significantly more, being halved in many cases. So since infantry got its damage reduced a lot and archers barely at all, this update was arguably a comparative buff to archers, other than that cavalry can knock them down more now.
I was exaggerating, but Sturgian infantry are weak overall. Because spears are broken in Bannerlord - they are slow, do mediocre damage, can only stab, the AI doesn't understand how to space properly against enemies which makes them do the worst possible damage at point blank range, and they also have a tendency to have their spear stab wind-ups interrupted by allies behind them - and on top of all of this, infantry don't even use spears if they are fighting infantry, they will use their sidearm instead -this makes spearmen the worst mainline units in the game, and Sturgian Spearman uses a weaker sidearm than other spearmen too, which contributes to them being bad. Sturgian Heavy Spearman was one of the worst units in the game until 1.7.2 where it got its body armour buffed (though its head armour nerfed), but it's still not a great unit because of all the problems mentioned above.
Sturgian Heavy Axeman used to be the second best infantry unit behind Imperial Legionary, but then they took away its Lamellar Pauldrons in 1.7.2. Shoulder armour is very important in infantry vs infantry combat because most attacks are downwards slashes to the body.
I do like what Taleworlds is going for here, they're making Heavy Axeman a less armoured more offensive unit and Heavy Spearman a more armoured defensive unit to differentiate them more which is good, but Sturgian units need to be stronger.
Sturgian Heroic Linebreakers are pretty mediocre as shock infantry go, they get outperformed by Battanian Veteran Falxmen and Imperial Elite Menavliaton(s).
So now all of Sturgia's melee infantry are third-tier, for a faction which is supposed to be focused on their infantry. I would like to see Legionaries become weaker somehow, perhaps by having a weaker shield (but also get their throwable pilum back!) so that Sturgia can be the shield infantry kings of Bannerlord.
最后编辑:
Earth Dragon
Sergeant
They don’t tie the workshop cap to trade for the Same reason your parties raise in size every time your clan levels: you aren’t pidgeonholed into having to take the same skills on every character you build. There needs to be a workable baseline in order for characters to dabble in everything and then just specialize.
Trade increasing inventory and Workshop effectiveness is the better route the dictating overall management capacity. It’s fair enough you could argue that +1 Workshops could be apart of skill tree, but even then, I feel more of those things should be “clan” perks versus character perks. Something I’ll probably do mods for when this game is actually released
I'm pretty ok with the damage of archers as is now, it just feels like a lot/quick 4-5 hits to kill mainly because of how accurate some T5s can be at long distances. I would assume, realistically, if someone is shooting an arrow at me from ~150m, I have some ability to react/try to dodge it if I'm a veteran infantry.
I'm in favor of nerfing the accuracy of bows, particularly at distances ~50m beyond; what about modifying the drop rate/velocity (if possible in this engine) of projectiles at longer distances? A Fian within 30m should be able to hit accurately and kill even armored infantry within 4-5 hits as it's a roundabout way to mimic 3-4 of those hits 'deflecting/ineffective' against the armor and only that 1-2 that technically pierced through vitals (assuming it hits the body area).
A baseline yes, considering the generational characters, or to be less 'pidgeonholed' putting under skills/perks, maybe not cap workshops at all. Apply just diminishing returns for the higher# of workshops you have or some multiplying factor for buying +15 workshops. That way, it still falls under skills/perks, and a trade focused character can pull more profits/advantages; whereas a warmongering character earns much less due to lack of trade skills and may even consider selling off some workshops.
Ie. Your first character could be trade focused, buy 50 workshops, etc...have 50mil denars and just hoard T6 armors; and still doesn't have clan T3 as you decide to RP him more as a pacifist (which you can't be as workshops tied to renown/clan tier). They die of old age, and their kid (no trade skills) inherits it all but now some workshops pull no profits due to inefficiency; sells all the workshops/hoarded armor and focuses on getting the clan to T5 or whatever through combat/joining a kingdom. Or they can become a trader and, maybe buy their way to a kingdom.
five bucks
Knight at Arms
If we want to be realistic, then a bow of the sort used in Bannerlord, penetrating high-quality armor (lamellar, double mail over padding, or especially coat-of-plates) in 4 hits, is far from it. We have multiple historical accounts, backed up by modern tests, of 10+ arrows being fired into padded mail with little effect. The Byzantines in 1108 wrote how they could not make an impression with their arrows on the mail of the Franks; the Arabs in the 3rd Crusade wrote of how they would shoot tens of arrows into Crusader infantry, with the arrows actually sticking in the mail and getting caught in the padding beneath, and they would keep advancing at normal pace without breaking ranks. In some cases, armies survived multiple days of constant arrow bombardment thanks to their armor. Armor was expensive, it was annoying to wear, but people wore it despite that because it gave good protection!
So the most realistic course of action is to increase the protection that armour provides. Even if it's just to, say, 7-8 hits to kill rather than 4-5.
From a gameplay perspective, nerfing the accuracy of bows at long distance is not going to fully solve the problem of 100% horse archers/90% archers, 10% infantry being the strongest and best way to play, because:
A - When you have a block of 100 inaccurate ranged units shooting at a formation of 100 advancing infantry, shots that miss to the left or right of the intended target can still hit a guy on the left or right side of him. If there's a height difference involved, even shots that go too high or too low for their intended target can still hit the guys in front or behind! So accuracy nerfs have to be pretty harsh to make a difference.
B - 100% horse archer strategy is still OP. You just tell them to hold fire until they are at close range, then circle the enemy while shooting - you're uncatchable, and you're shooting at close range so long distance inaccuracy changes nothing.
C - 90% archers and 10% infantry strategy is still OP. You put archers close behind infantry in loose formation, hold fire until the enemy infantry is attacking your infantry. Now the enemy infantry is clustered around with their shields down and backs to your archers, at close range, so long range accuracy doesn't matter.
Both infantry and archers will kill in 4-5 hits, but infantry get in each other's way, and can be blocked by melee swings. So while multiple infantry are attacking 1 infantry, all your troops are attacking all enemy infantry without interruption.
Even if your infantry die, your archers in the center of the line become the next melee distraction, while your archers on the left and right wings keep shooting the enemy infantry.
If we nerf accuracy and the AI's archers are staying at a distance as usual, they will be missing more shots - so the accuracy nerf may actually make this tactic even stronger against balanced armies!
Here's an illustration:
(1 - Enemy has 5 melee troops fighting at reduced efficiency due to melee block, and 5 ranged troops fighting at reduced efficiency due to distance inaccuracy. Player has 1 melee troop fighting at reduced efficiency due to melee block, and 9 ranged troops fighting at full efficiency.)
________A A A A A
.
.
.
________IN_IN_IN
________IN_IN_IN
.
A__A__A__A__A__A__A__A__A
(2 - Enemy has 2 melee troops fighting at reduced efficiency due to melee block, and 5 ranged troops fighting at reduced efficiency due to distance inaccuracy. Player has 2 ranged troops fighting at reduced efficiency due to melee block, and 7 fighting at full efficiency).
________A A A A A
.
.
.
__________IN_IN
___________A A
A__A__A________A__A__A__A
To change this scenario, you would have to make T5 archers unable to consistently hit a guy a few meters away, to a frankly unrealistic degree. And why do that when you could instead buff armor, and make it act more realistically?
Making arrows do less damage against armor is the solution.
最后编辑:
But do the historical accounts detail the strength/poundage of the specific bows and type of arrowheads/velocity used in those examples? I'm not a historian, but are these 10+arrowed 'hedgehog' knights embedded with arrows due to long range barrage of arrows from 150m+, what range, etc...? Using Fians, assuming they are using 'longbow' equivalent and ignoring RL stamina/drawspeed aspects, should be able to pierce plate/mail within 30m?
And HA should be nerfed, for sure, as I would assume their bows in RL are usually a much weaker poundage and require quite close ranges to be effective as you lose the leverage for stronger draws being on horseback and all that. They were used to skirmish and try to incite infantry/cavalry to break formations afaik to chase them
There's still some work to be done with the balancing in game but have to be careful we don't swing the other way and make infantry too OP (or make T5/6s less frequent), as they also aren't significantly impacted from the weight or stamina needed as they would be in RL which is the general trade off for the added protection?
Yes, but there's no game simulation for deflected shows/splintered arrows/etc...that were still feared even among a stack of armored infantry as those can find the gaps in armor (non existent in game) where it can injure/harry advancing troops just from sheer number/rain of volley arrows.
Yes, HA are still OP, more so with the armor changes to the top tier ones as they are significantly tankier + the speed tank element. But making other units a lot tankier shouldn't be the fix. Nerf HA, be it their armor or strength of the bow or for counter range to actually lead their shots. As there's no such thing as horse stamina or even horse slow down mechanic from injuries; or if not, make them more costly in relation to how OP they are.
Yes, but again, there's also the missing negative of friendly fire which is why we can abuse this mechanic and make archers OP in those situations. Realistically, I would assume once infantry engage, archers either close in and join in the melee or get close enough to not miss and hit their allies or choose another target.
Shields in the game have a stupid amount of coverage as well.
No, I'm saying their accuracy beyond +50m should be toned down, or damage modifier reduced the longer the projectile is in the air. I mean, in the Olympics, using modern compound bows (these should be technically more accurate than medieval) @ 70m or something don't always hit bullseye. Even if they do, these are the supposed 'best' in the world and it takes them a long time per shot for focus/concentration/etc...they aren't shooting an arrow every 5 seconds.
Now imagine that, but with medieval bows, and whatever expertise training was at that time in comparison.
Earth Dragon
Sergeant
Something that could help at all stages of the game is generic tasks you can accomplish at villages, castles and towns.
Just like a game master will only let you bet on a game and win once a day, these would be things you, your companions and/or your troops could do to improve an aspect that you could accomplish there. This would depend on a few things:
Culture
Prosperity level
Resource Generated
If apart of your faction
If you are the owner
The general aim of these tasks would be to:
Increase their Militia count
Increase Veteran Militia
Improve recruitable volunteer tier
Improve prosperity
Improve production yield
Improve relations with Notables and Owner
These tasks would assist you and your party’s skill development as well. A sample list of task could be for an Aserai Horse Ranch:
Owner/Product - Breed Rare Horses - Requirements 2 Aserai Horses - Stay at village for 6 hours. 50% chance for an extra Aserai Horse to be produced each day for the next 5 days
Faction - Train Militia - Arena style mock fight in a field with you and 9 others selected like you are raising a bandit camp. Experience as normal for your troops. If you win, 2 additional melee militia are generated. If you lose, 1 is generated with a 10% chance to generate a Veteran.
Faction - Equip Locals. Expend 2 tier 0-1 head, shoulder, body, foot, bow, arrow, knife, sword (culture dependent) spear and shields. Village generates 0.25 extra militia per day for the next 10 days. Villagers are accompanied by 2 militia when making town runs during this time.
Culture/Product - Horse races. Run a course through town. You and your companions gain 10 riding XP each. Depending on how well you do, each volunteer has a percent chance to advance to the next closest cavalry choice in town. (Recruit-Mamluke, Mamluke-Regular, etc. If not on that path, no chance to advance)
Low Prosperity/Product - Build Stable. Expend 4 Wood, 4 Grain, 1 Linen, 1 Leather, 2 Desert Horses and 1 Pack Animal. Wait for 4 hours. Gain 10 Eng XP per character. Give Village a +.5 Prosperity modifier for one month. Increase relationship with Land Owners.
High Prosperity - Assist with backlog work. Wait for 6 hours. 1% chance per troop to get wounded. Gain 10 Stewardship XP per character. Increase Village yield by 20% for 7 days. Increase Relationship with Headman.
These would be a little different then missions, as they would be things you could do as long as the buffs wasn’t already being received and the town could still grow from it (if all the hirable troops in this situation were Tier 4, they aren’t interested in horse racing anymore, they want action). Because it would stimulate the economy, bolster defenses, and train your and local troops, they would be great peace time activities to do. And of course most, if not all, would increase your relation with the village/castle/town owner, which everyone has hounded needs to mean a little more then it does.
There should also be repeatables like this you could do to start revolts in cities and cause infighting in other factions (if they don’t find out it was you)
Just like a game master will only let you bet on a game and win once a day, these would be things you, your companions and/or your troops could do to improve an aspect that you could accomplish there. This would depend on a few things:
Culture
Prosperity level
Resource Generated
If apart of your faction
If you are the owner
The general aim of these tasks would be to:
Increase their Militia count
Increase Veteran Militia
Improve recruitable volunteer tier
Improve prosperity
Improve production yield
Improve relations with Notables and Owner
These tasks would assist you and your party’s skill development as well. A sample list of task could be for an Aserai Horse Ranch:
Owner/Product - Breed Rare Horses - Requirements 2 Aserai Horses - Stay at village for 6 hours. 50% chance for an extra Aserai Horse to be produced each day for the next 5 days
Faction - Train Militia - Arena style mock fight in a field with you and 9 others selected like you are raising a bandit camp. Experience as normal for your troops. If you win, 2 additional melee militia are generated. If you lose, 1 is generated with a 10% chance to generate a Veteran.
Faction - Equip Locals. Expend 2 tier 0-1 head, shoulder, body, foot, bow, arrow, knife, sword (culture dependent) spear and shields. Village generates 0.25 extra militia per day for the next 10 days. Villagers are accompanied by 2 militia when making town runs during this time.
Culture/Product - Horse races. Run a course through town. You and your companions gain 10 riding XP each. Depending on how well you do, each volunteer has a percent chance to advance to the next closest cavalry choice in town. (Recruit-Mamluke, Mamluke-Regular, etc. If not on that path, no chance to advance)
Low Prosperity/Product - Build Stable. Expend 4 Wood, 4 Grain, 1 Linen, 1 Leather, 2 Desert Horses and 1 Pack Animal. Wait for 4 hours. Gain 10 Eng XP per character. Give Village a +.5 Prosperity modifier for one month. Increase relationship with Land Owners.
High Prosperity - Assist with backlog work. Wait for 6 hours. 1% chance per troop to get wounded. Gain 10 Stewardship XP per character. Increase Village yield by 20% for 7 days. Increase Relationship with Headman.
These would be a little different then missions, as they would be things you could do as long as the buffs wasn’t already being received and the town could still grow from it (if all the hirable troops in this situation were Tier 4, they aren’t interested in horse racing anymore, they want action). Because it would stimulate the economy, bolster defenses, and train your and local troops, they would be great peace time activities to do. And of course most, if not all, would increase your relation with the village/castle/town owner, which everyone has hounded needs to mean a little more then it does.
There should also be repeatables like this you could do to start revolts in cities and cause infighting in other factions (if they don’t find out it was you)
最后编辑:
SomeWeirdSins
Veteran
I'm very hesitant to get into detailed discussions about gameplay and balance for the 1.8 patch. Right now it's profoundly broken/buggy, and the AI is very poor at playing fights. Until these things are fixed, we're really just guessing at what the current units/armor could look like with functional AI.
five bucks
Knight at Arms
I recommend the article, it is very informative and answers both these points:
"An experiment conducted by the Royal Armouries concluded that a padded jack worn over a mail haubergeon (a common combination during the 15th century) was proof against Mary Rose longbows."
Mary Rose longbows (1545) are more powerful than any bow that would have existed in Bannerlord's setting (~1000).
For arrowhead type:
"Russ Mitchell believes that felt is especially effective against bodkins because it has no woven structure for the point to open up and slide through. The felt deforms around the bodkin and pushes it back out of the target.74 Broadhead typologies, on the other hand, have cutting edges that can allow them to slice through felt. So felt would be less protective against these arrowheads. However, mail is extremely effective against cutting edges. The combination of mail and felt provide good protection against both bodkins and broadheads."
In another example from the article, Walter of Chatillon was fighting archers in an urban street.
"...and whilst the Turks were fleeing before him, they (who shoot as well backwards as forwards) would cover him with darts. When he had driven them out of the village, he would pick out the darts that were sticking all over him; and put on his coat-of-arms again... Then, seeing that the Turks had come in at the other end of the street, he would charge them again, sword in hand, and drive them out. And this he did about three times."
If he was charging to the end of a street, they were probably not at football field range.
Fair points, yes, we don't want to make infantry OP.
Here's T5 archers slaughtering T5 infantry.
It seems they mostly start getting hit within the 50m mark. Most of them are dead or at very low health by the time they reach melee range. So decreasing accuracy past 50m wouldn't change much.
But increasing armour protection from 4-5 hits to kill, to 7-8 hits to kill, would mean those Voulgiers reach melee range at 30-50% health instead of 0-20% health! Rather than losing 20-80, they might win or lose 50-50. Balanced.
With this, plus fixing archer accuracy against horse archers, and cavalry accuracy in melee, and every troop type will be useful:
* Ranged Cavalry are strong against Pike Infantry and Shock Infantry (balanced by cavalry's higher cost and uncommonness).
* Pike Infantry are strong against Melee Cavalry.
* Melee Cavalry are strong against Shock Infantry and Ranged Infantry (balanced by cavalry's higher cost and uncommonness).
* Shock Infantry are strong against Shield Infantry.
* Shield Infantry are strong against Ranged Infantry.
* Ranged Infantry are strong against Ranged Cavalry due to better accuracy, range and damage shooting on foot. They are also useful in sieges, where they get much more time to shoot the enemy before they reach melee range. And in group battles where they have allies protecting them, they can constantly shoot without getting attacked in melee.
Well if we have historical examples of armoured men getting hit by 10 arrows and those arrows not finding gaps, then I think taking 7 hits and the 8th one "hitting the gap" is quite reasonable. I'm actually asking for less survivability than real life.
As for realistic balance factors that are missing: Yes, infantry don't get tired by heavy armour, but neither do archers get tired from drawing bows at super high speed, or (as you said) have to worry about friendly fire, or horses getting tired. The lack of stamina for all parties balances that out.
Why not though? Making armour more effective against arrows would solve the problem and be more realistic.
最后编辑:
