Bannerlord SP First Reactions: Megathread

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 2 (members: 0, guests: 2)
My reaction in a nutshell:

This game has potential. But the lack of balance at release, the number of missing or completely broken features is astonishing.

Back when it was a two person team... that was one thing. Now that it's a studio of many many people, I would have expected a more polished, professional product -- and more community engagement. What I've seen is quite the opposite.

Sieges are broken (and unbalanced), marriage is broken, most of the quests are broken. Crossbows not fully implemented? Really?

The only thing I can say plays reasonably well are army encounters on an open field.

The snowballing issue for instance; multiple patches later it's still a problem. Meanwhile some dude on the nexus fixed that **** in an hour. I'm not impressed. Maybe it will end up as a decent mod framework.
 
So far, it's about what I expected. That is, it's early access, so many things aren't implemented or working as intended, and there are loads of balance issues, but overall it's clear that Bannerlord has the potential to be a fantastic game.

I bought the original Mount and Blade in early access as well, and Bannerlord is streets ahead of where MB1 was at this point. So, I'm confident (backed up by 5 patches in one week fixing many of the major issues) that in a few months Bannerlord will be awesome and will eat as much of my life as MB, Warband and Viking Conquest did (That is to say, too much!).

(Edited for punctuation)
 
My initial reaction is that this is a solid place to start from to make a really fun game, but that it requires another 1-2 years of work to make it as enjoyable as Warband let alone awesome mods like PoP or Perisno. The aesthetic and feel of the different factions is great except for the different Empire factions (maybe have each Empire faction favour a different style of warfare: phalanx, bows, heavy horse or crossbows?). Combat feels sufficiently weighty and utterly lethal on realistic setting although trying mounted melee combat against foot troops is suicide at the start of the game unless you get a really long or a ranged weapon. Archery and throwing javelins feels good to use as a player but when going against them it's suicide to use anything but a shield.

I really like the new tournament system but more balancing needs to be done as you can get in completely unwinnable situations when it gives you a team of recruits against cataphracts/legionaries. The tournament rewards need some work as I feel the value of the reward varies too much. Quests are a very weak point and there's very few you can do as a low-level character due to groups of low level ranged guys decimating your small army in the poacher/pasture missions or completely RNG-based persuade checks. Their rewards are just not worth it except for the "find the daughter" quest.

There is very little to do at the start other than tournaments, trading or grinding endless amounts of looters (which generates very little income due to how deadly they are against your troops). Loot drops need looking at to avoid the warband problem of never getting any decent loot when your party size is more than 20ish. The current implementation of the levelling system does not work for companions - they will never level up and will remain forever as they were when you recruited them due to them only using combat skills (which are pre-capped for the majority of companions I came across). The levelling system perks are terrible and you feel no increase in power. The levelling system itself encourages you to take non-combat skills only as your specialisations at the start due to how difficult they are to increase when compared to combat skills. It reminds me of Oblivion where you had to specialise in skills you had no intention of using to maximise your level ups and is very counter-intuitive.

A lot of the NPCs in the game look really silly - a lot more work needs to be done with the faces to avoid having that inbred nobility look. One or two derplords in the game would be fine but not 50%+. There really needs to be body customisation sliders in a 2020 game - it's a glaring omission. Troop stats need looking at as there's quite a few with ridiculous stats such as mercenary crossbowmen with 40? skill in crossbows and the previous tier in that troop branch which comes equipped with a crossbow and pavise-like shield but has only 20 kill in crossbows. Most top tier troops from the standard troop tree across all factions have the same stats capping at 130, some variation to distinguish factions other than in their noble troop trees would be great.

More interactions with lords would be great as they currently have even less to say to you than the warband ones. There's no recognition of who the player is or what they have done, no feedback of progressing your relationship with the lords/factions. I was hoping that they would actively seek you out if you've helped them a lot in the past. There's huge scope for expanding the player relationship system. The ability to smith armour & shields would also be really nice, maybe lords can commission special items from you if you become a really high tier blacksmith. Things that make the world seem alive are very much needed.

It's a good starting point and I'm happy I've supported you by buying the game in EA given that i've had 1000s of hours of enjoyment from Warband. I would however be disappointed if this is near feature-complete.
 
I adore the M&B series all the way through, I love the game loop/design and the dynamics of the game. However because of how dynamic the game is, it's going to produce a lot of bugs that are very tough to catch. I'm going in as a former veteran M&B Original & Warband player, so the fact the game is built in essence of the original was a great design choice considering how well Warband did.

What I have experienced in the 50+ hours of play since early access release I have to say I am shocked by how un finished this game is. I feel like the game definitely had some development set backs or a hiatus. All that aside I really like what I'm experiencing aside the fact scenes aren't done and some things are not even plugged in yet. I like how caravans operate now and how the new mechanics and systems work plus the re worked existing mechanics for a lot of quality of life improvements.

The game feels faster in terms of how fast things change and evolve with kingdoms taking over centers, before the first year factions were already steam rolling most other factions and at this time I was only clan rank 2. I feel like the game world evolves much faster than player progression and this creates issues, by the time you are ready to take a center yourself two or sometimes three factions are already destroyed. That was discouraging as I wanted to relate and interact with all of the factions and npcs.

I really like how Bannerlord has so many better options for making money, companion trade caravans especially, or being a merchant king yourself. The grind isn't as bad as Warband was with making money, I feel like this game is just going to play out faster where more people will be doing more playthroughs than before with previous titles. What really annoys me about the game now is not having relation hits where they need to be, rescuing a fellow lord from being destroyed in battle and captured is a great example of the player getting a positive relation hit with that lord when that lord thanks him for saving him and I don't see this happening. Possibly not plugged in all of the way yet.

Overall I am really liking the game, just can't wait for everything to be plugged in and working like intended. For some reason I am really excited for troops carrying banners into battle.
 
My first impression:

The game engine is amazing. Combat feels incredible. This game is going to be just absolutely crazy when it is ready.

It's not quite ready. There are some major things that still need a lot of attention. I believe the character and leveling system is the biggest one. I think it needs to be revised heavily or even overhauled. But I haven't played very far into the game yet. I don't know how the whole dynasty aspect plays out. Can you grow to more easily have high levels of all the "party skills" across different members of your clan?
 
I wouldn't call it a first reaction , but this was an epic experience for me, so what happened is , i was at war with south empire (i am owning 1 castle only, managed to siege it and take it from them, because it was to far from their main kingdom (it was in Aserai , and south empire is at war with aserai also, long story short, i was about to siege a second castle from South empire, but then an army of 1500 units was aggressively aproaching me, i had no choise but to run with my party of 233 men, but what i knew is that this army of 1500 was about to start moving to my only castle , so what i did, i retreated to my castle, and i also knew there is no way for me to win in a siege fight with my 233+175 castle def units, and i got this wild idea, what if the ai need food aswell?."what i did is i bought every possible food in cities and farms thst were in path to my castle (costed me about 30k, at the end i had over 2k food) , and i went to my castle preparing the units, recruiting units from nearby villages, in few hours the enemy arrived and the siege started, they with over 1900 men Vs Me with 350 men, they had the numbers on their side, but i had the food and best castle upgrades i could get, and guess what happened, the siege didnt last more then 2 days, as they started to starve and lose men, in desperation the enemy tried to raid one of my villages, for food supplies i belive, but it was to late, in matter of hours their army lost over 500+ men to starvation , when their army tried to retread i went forward so i could buy all the food in their retread path (because there was no way for me to fight them, they still outnumbered us 3 to 1 in open battlefield) in matter of days they lost over 1000+ men, and me and boys crushed what were left. (It was an amazing experience) thank you taleworlds!
 
I played 50 hours, and I’ll play another 1000.
This is a brilliant game. thanks to the taleworlds.
I especially liked the internal politics for influence, the behavior of Lords on the global map, the combat system, the sandbox.
 
For a early access of game, I must say the game is much more complete than I expected. Yes, there are still tons of feature not implemented, lots of mechanism overhaul and balancing to be done, and even more stuff to be added. But the game is playable! It just give me much hope how the game will become. I just want TW to give a schedule on what they are working on, some short-term issue and long-term target, so we can know what to expect and give our opinion. Don't want to see that they spend long time develop a feature that not many of us really fond of.

And below is my real FIRST REACTION:

Oh my god where is the auto-block? I don't care how good other people play, I need the auto-block! How can you guys do that? (After 3 hours+ in the training ground trying to do the 2H)
 
The game feels like a more polished Warband in terms of the core gameplay which is a good thing.

Needs improvement: the balancing which I know you are aware. It's a blessing and a curse. The more I play, the more I realize the balancing problems have a lot to do with the awesome "living world" simulation that's occurring in the background. The actors in the world are making interesting decisions. The problem is that from a player's perspective, it just results in massive world changes with no context. It feels like the world is evolving on its own without input from the player which renders our actions somewhat moot. Especially since things unfold way faster than the character progression does. Makes me appreciate the complexity and tweaking that went into M&B and Warband.

I started playing with a mod to reduce the size of enemy armies and at level 15 ish, I am now a major player in the world. My economy progression is maxed but other skills are still in their infancy like "riding" despite undergoing constant usage (balancing). The world has winnowed down to 3 major empires and the balance of power is such that the conquest aspect of the game feels like Warband. the other empires all fell within the first day of this campaign run (I started this save this weekend on version 1.04 and am up to 1.06).

I appreciate the EA as with thousands of players running through the campaign and pointing out balancing issues, this provides mountains of data for you guys to figure out where the broken parts are and can more quickly sort things out so I am happy just starting new games over and over and seeing where they take me.

Bearing in mind that I understand that the order of operations is Game killing bugs -> Balancing of core gameplay -> fixing existing features -> new features, my main observations are:

- There's a lack of community within the Kingdoms. Warband had some Roleplay aspects like feasts and major tournaments that made the Kingdoms feel like a family. This is sorely lacking and the relationship between lords feels more like a stats game with no real human consequences other than votes and menu politcking. I was hoping this aspect of the game would have evolved a bit. Right now it feels like it's been axed. Looking forward to seeing what's to come. It's not that I want feasts or menus telling me my faction is having a tournament, it's that I want a sense that the factions interact with each other beyond just war parties. It would be nice if some dialogue interactions occured through messengers and runners. A fellow vassal could send marriage proposals, hatch plots, air grievances, or just say what's up! Since I am the most hated man in Caladria, I'm guessing some of the lords would be sending me baskets of horse dung periodically :grin:

- Was hoping the other NPCs and factions behavior would have evolved now (maybe it has but I just can't see it) but the behavior seems to be more or less like Warband. Lords defect, or join your faction, they target settlements, there's a back and forth and then peace is declared until the next war. I don't see a lot of curveballs in their behavior that feel more interesting which I would have thought would a next step in M&B's evolution.

- Warband introduced some unique and innovative gameplay features. I was hoping to see some of that innovation in Bannerlord but right now it feels more like an update to Warband rather than a next step in the M&B series.

- The progression of the world, factions, and the player feel all out of sync. This is the balancing issue but I thought it important to frame it as what the balancing issue means for the game. Warband felt like there was a requisite amount of time required of the player to get strong enough to become influential in the world. And when you did,the world had progressed and was ready for you to take part in it. There had been changes and Empires had shifted but you were joining a war that has been raging, not joining a war as it was winding down or had spiraled out of control long before you came into the picture.

- Large scale combat feels great and is a huge improvement. One on one combat is not as tight as Warband in some respects. I'm not sure if it's my character progression or the new engine, but it feels there's only a few moves that are effective at taking out NPCs where as Warband felt like combat was much more dynamic. Right now block and left swing seems to be the only thing that connects so I pretty much just stick to that.

- Item progression has some pretty big gaps in it. Big example being horses. You unlock most horses at riding 10 and then all of a sudden, you can't ride anything until you reach riding level 60. I'm guessing adjusting these level requirements are just on the to-do pile with other more pressing features requiring attention. But a lack of natural progression with items and armor is apparent. I have been trying to stick to my Battanian roots and fight with axes but that has been problematic as they seem to cap out at Tier 3.

- New quests were a welcome addition but there's just as few in Bannerlord as there were in Warband. Would like to see a lot more variety and a return of some of the classics so that the life of an adventurer is a viable and interesting pathway in the game.

Keep up the good work and look forward to seeing where Bannerlord goes.
 
Last edited:
Bannerlord improvements from my experience so far:

Forest Bandits; map need to be more linear, calling in 40+ archer buddies to shoot at your men ain't fun or balanced, perhaps more cliffs need to be added like the desert/ mountain bandit camps.


Bandit lairs in general; army should scale to the force faced, having 9 men for a lair filled with 100 bandits is beyond challenging, for every ~10 bandits above 30, 1 man should be added to your party.


Smithing; I don't mind the grind, honestly it's a big money maker, but please give me quests related to smithing that give me a chance to get some of the schematics at random (free a master blacksmith/ help him get materials), or move the perk to unlock more away from the iron/steel/ refining path, perhaps adding books to splurge some money on and unlock weapon parts to smith. (I could go up the dual skill tree with a companion I suppose.. but leveling smithing with one just to unlock schematics and splitting smithing xp between the refiner and the weapon smith would be awful)


Generally;
A pop up tooltip for party size giving you the requirements for increasing it.


More map varieties, mainly bandit lairs and some more open world I feel it could add a significant challenge/ enjoyment factor by mixing it up.
 
Hmm , my Bannerlord experience was quite mixed so far.

I have about 100 hours by now.

The core gameplay, especially the combat is very enjoyable. I love how finding the correct army placements on different battle maps can give you a huge advantage to possibly even take on armies 2-3x your size.
It also seems like the high tier units are not as powerful as they were in warband. If you have 200 tier 2-3 units against , say an elite troop of 60-80 tier 5's they will probably lose (unless they clearly counter the majority of the big army) in warband that was different.

The ability to create and lead armies is great. It is a huge improvement from the previous game. The influence system is decent(though it really need some balancing, especially the Council of Commons Law)

There are also some big issues with the game currently. (I might still be a little bit salty about losing a save with 80+hours in it due to a bug that would endlessly loop me in a conversation with an attacking lord.)
The game however is so fun that I gladly just made a new save and tried out a different faction and different perks.

The skill system is another issue. Some skills seem vastly underpowered.(I.E. the 'Trainer' perks in Leadership)
I was especially disappointed with Roguery. When I first read the description I thought that skill would allow me to create my own bandit army. Well, I guess it sort of does... After you grinded thousands of ingame days to get it to 275 :razz: Recruiting from prisoners doesn't really allow for the same magnitude. I would love the option to properly become a criminal I.E. If the character does a lot for the gang leaders and does not attack bandit groups(maybe excluding Looters) they will eventually be able to 'recruit' bandits straight from hideouts.

Some perks like the Man-At-Arms perk in Steward just straight up don't work(which is part of EA I suppose). The Charm perk is also more grinding lord fights than anything else, or have enough money to barter with every lord you see. Since there aren't that many interactions with nobles yet , you are sort of forced into that path if you want to lvl the skill.

The different personality traits also seem very unobtainable. You get some from your backstory , but especially the honor one you lose pretty much immediately if you do anything that the game considers dishonorable. There also does not seem to be a way to really achieve the positive perks. (I managed to get to Honor -2 by executing a whole faction , but that's about it)

There also seems to be barely any change in the chances while persuading. Neither based on Charm nor , especially , based on character traits.

I.E. the option with Mercy(green) has 39% success while the one with Honor/Valor which the character both does not have, allows for a 89% chance.


All that in mind , I still enjoy the game quite a bit and I have not yet been able to properly establish my own faction or take over the entire continent within a faction, so there is still room. I also haven't experienced death yet. I am very curious how that mechanic plays out(if it already is implemented that is) I have had 2 children so far. Though that save is now lost for eternity :'(

Keep up the good work , I am sure that together as a community we can get this game to a state where it truly feels like the amazing game it should be by full release!

Much love
 
In this game have some mistakes. This mistakes ruining my contact with calradia and my story. I think we all loving game because of the feeling that we can be whatever we want in calradia! And i want to feel like that again!

1)Hp bars of siege instruments and castle gates. (don't knowing when will broken is more exciting) -remove permanantly-

2)The bar above the screen that showing who will win, who has how much power. -remove permanantly-

3)Alt key that showing us magically where the enemy forces and how many of them. -remove from battlefields permanantly-

4)We can do everything before enter the city and again alt key showing us evrything. -Not remove this things permanantly but alt key can show us that where the places once we went and people once we meet. I mean alt key can show us people already we met and places we already went. -

5) Encyclopedia has to remove immediately! If we can learn anything from encyclopedia what is the point of playing this game! It's killing the game. Even at warband if we want to find a lord we was had to ask someonelse. We should ask to townmans for locations that we need and they should request bribe and if we threaten them, they should attack us or afraid from us based on our skills and our reputation. I mean instead of encyclopedia use villagers, townmans, merchants, lords, ladys, mysterious npcs and even bandits! If you do that game can be more fun than just clickings.

6)Small parties has to surrender without fighting.

7)After the sucsesful siege why we are continue from outside castle?

:cool:Let us attack to enemy from further ditance. I mean currently in the battlefield there is distance betwen us with the enemy like we just didn't talk face to face 2 minute ago. At some distance game should ask us 'do u want attack from this distance?' and if we need interact the enemy, there should be 'keep following' option. If we choose attacking from futher distance without interact, the game should keep distance of between two armies same with now. But if we choose 'keep following', when we catch the enemy, battle phase should be start and armies should be closer, than we should interact with enemy forces captain at the middle. And if we decide war without loading screens we should fight just there! etc.

Sory for my bad english. :grin:


https://forums.taleworlds.com/index.php?threads/suggestions-for-making-game-İmmersive.409216/
 
Last edited:
I am generally happy with the basic mechanic. It is staying true to the formula.
I like the expansion into kingdom dynamics. Especially the legislative dynamic of a Kingdom has potential.

I must say that I haven't spent to much time on the politics, but if there are natural opposing concerns that would result in different positions on the legislation that would naturally pit the owner of city A against the owner of city B because they have different economies, then I would say that this has a lot of potential. Right now, I only see the voting as a way of gaining favor with a particular lord.

I also had some big hopes, which haven't panned out (yet).

The game of lord is too grindy. In order to greate replay value, it would be good to have freak occurrences play a bigger part so that the narrative of your game will be affected. Right now, you can completely save a king from certain defeat in a battle and you get a measly +2 relationship score. This should be impactful.

The subjects and vassals of a kingdom is just a big list of names. It's not easy to assess clan strengths, identify groupings or subdivisions of these lords unless you are willing to do an excessive amount of clicking and taking bunches of notes. I would like to have an overview that just were portraits and names with lines going between them that visually represented how they regarded eachother. Using such an overview, I could start looking for estate owners that were either friendless or possible to plot against to get at their estates.
And then you could go into that particular wiki entry and then start scheming.
Also, you should be able to CONSULT such a view when faced with a vote, dialog decision or something. Such a view would be the battlefield of the game of houses within a kingdom. Todays list of friends/enemies just doesn't give you the overview needed to make strategic decision.... like which relationships are critical for the kingdom cohesion.

I don't understand why they have dispensed with the tournaments as a way of distinguishing yourself among lords. Beating champions and lords in tournaments should not just be names. It should also tie into relationships. Wether it be praise or subsequent visit from assassins.

Especially field matchups should matter. If you beat someone that has the larger army, then that person should be wary of doing the same again. At least until someone from the same clan/house has broken curse by defeating or besting you.
 
Version 1.0.8 as of today.

I played about 20 hours so far (since 1.0). SP only.

Performance improved a lot this 10 days. The patches for that are working great. I do have the "reviewed" recommended setup (16GB and SSD to fight the leaks) tho. Doing campaign battles/sieges with 1000 troops on high is damn cool.

Game needs a lot of balacing tho. Much more than I expected for EA. Well lets just ignore the first month and call it alpha-EA. Let's do that.

Game is fun. Lots of potential. Mods are coming (even without proper tools and documentation). Looks great. Combat is fantastic.

Looking forward to how the game will look in a year and all the TC Mods (overhauls like LOTR, medieval Europe, Vikings!,) after that.
 
First time M&B player. Game is keeping me up till late.

Like the start how you can give your character a rich history which ties into your skills. The learning curve can be steep if you didn't watch a number of YouTube guide videos or read articles. Hope this gets addressed were each feature gets touched on during a quest to explain it.

Try to meet the 10 lords was tiresome after a while. Almost wanted to give up. But realised it is the point not to make it easy. And do this while you level up and forge relationships.
Made a smart move by marrying the daughter of one of the faction heads. The mechanic felt slight odd but I like how you have to come back and ask for approval from the parents. Would have liked to have seen a cut scene like with the execution.
Like how you built up your reputation and kingdom. Also enjoy the dynamics of how factions expand. Though there were 1-2 moments where I felt a faction would be wipe the map clean.
Not sure if it is a feature but I wasn't aware my faction made peace with a foe until I went into the Kingdom menu.

Noticed a bug with my party/group where the group assignment would reset every time. For missions where you have to train new troops or want to level up your tier 1 troops I leave them in 1. Push them forward while the archers soften up the targets.
Participated in 2 short sieges. The mechanic felt slightly odd.
Combat myself I enjoy and curse myself when I miss hitting a foe as I pass him on a horse. Personally don't understand the strong call for auto block. I like that you have to be on your toes.
As for tactics, if it were not for the Screamerlord mod I would fail with this feature a lot. The system feels unnatural to me. And a lot can go wrong in the heat of the battle. It is the same with using the default buttons on the keyboard. You can easily press 'R' instead of 'E' when things get tight.

Perk/skill level up is not really clear. Could use some more explanation.

Items use is clear at some points (food, clothing) but odd with other like horses and weapons. There need to be more incremental jumps for some items.

What I'd like to see is weapons wearing out and having to use the smid to repair them.
The ability to pick who I bring along when clearing hideouts.

My biggest gripe are the double loading screens. I find it odd that there is a loading screen when you approach/attack another unit, then a loading screen to join the battle. Interaction likes these make more sens as a pop-up box. No need for the 3D model.
 
I've played 49 hours worth of bannerlord over the last few days.

So much potential, and very close to being a fantastic game. Its not quite there yet, and there were a few things about the combat that was really bugging me. Initially, I was one of those people who was surprised about the removal of autoblock. I have thousands of hours sunk into warband, mostly playing PoP and I had always used autoblock. So it took quite a few hours to learn how to manual block to any level of effectiveness. Now im not too bad with it so, while I think for a single player game it makes sense to have the option. If the option came in now, I probably wouldnt use it.

However there is something else "off" about the combat. Combat is way WAY too fast. (Also some of the enemy lords for example in the arena move at insane speeds but thats not what im talking about here). In warband, shield wall combat lasted a long time, hell with armies a fraction of the size of what we have in bannerlord and fights would last far longer. I think the recent post about collision mechanics is probably spot on, or is at least part of the reason. There are lots of examples of fights with 200 man armies where the entire fight is over in less than a minute. The 1 v 1 combat is almost spot on (although I feel that the shield bash or kick mechanic needs to have a little more to it), however something is wrong about the large formation combat.

Sieges look amazing, and the castles look great. Im aware of AI issues in sieges which im sure will be fixed. However the main issue with sieges is the same as the above issue with the shield wall. If you have a fortified castle, a small force should be able to hold off a large force for a considerable length of time. Sieges are over far too quickly. I also think that because we now have siege engines, battering rams and towers that ladders should not be a primary method for assaulting a castle. In many cases its the troops on the ladder that make it up onto the ramparts first and that shouldnt really happen. I think that the speed at which troops climb the ladders probably needs a bit of a nerf as it should be a distraction and not a realistic way to actually assault a full castle. Obviously in warband it was a work around, and the ladder effectively took the place of battering down the gates and fighting through a narrow passage into the courtyard, but now with battering rams and everything else at our disposal the ladders should really take a back seat (imo). Speed of the siege also affects the ability to actually use the siege weapons, the longer the assault goes on for, the more the siege engines can be used and will be a factor, at the moment with the battles over so quickly, I barely get to fire more than 5 bolts from a ballista before I need to defend the walls against the army trying to climb up the ladders.

So in conclusion, M&B has always been about the combat and its so close, but this factor is causing some major issues in the big fights. I really hope its just a collision box thing and that it can be fixed easily. With this one fix bannerlord combat becomes better than warband combat. With the AI improvements for siege attack and defense we will finally have an M&B game with excellent combat in both open fields and in sieges, and with huge armies!

Outside of combat of course also requires some improvements, but im guessing that this is the part of the game that is probably the least fleshed out going into EA so Im not as fussed about this as im sure it will be fixed. The big issues being the snowball effect which I have no doubt will be patched. Im also really not a fan of the levelling system. XP grind is far too slow and personally I think the system just needs to be reworked.

All in all there are more bugs than most games that come out for EA these days, but then most EA games are just games which have been released a month early, whereas this seems like far more of a single player beta (im ok with that). Im not fussed about the bugs as you guys have been fixing them, and the pace at which the patches are coming out is impressive and really builds confidence in you guys.

However, I think that im going to be going back to warband PoP for a while. I'll probably keep checking bannerlord daily because as soon as the combat issue and snowballing is fixed ill be back to do a full on mercenary campaign (the mercenary changes you guys implemented look good). Its close, very close to having me switch, but not quite there yet.
 
First reactions: there is very little content and it perhaps it takes too long for player to gain experience. Things mostly seem good so far. Elite units without shields maybe too woulnerable to arrows (i would not remove shields from my elites if improved armor can't compensate for it).
I like how long it takes for units to gain experience.
In large battles infantry should be split at least into 2 units, reserve and front line. Player should at least be able to command small portion of the infantry most of the time, either to flank the enemy, protect your own flanks or archers etc etc. Or just act as reserve.

I love balance in battles (at least so far). No unit seems to be overpowered or useless. Rock paper scissor is not too extreme, swordsmen who maintain formation won't die when they see first horse. Missile units are not machine guns and armor is relevant. Infantry is useful and forms core of the armies, as it should.

But those are just my first impressions. I love that game does not feel like extreme rock-paper-scissor arcade action micromanagement hell like modern Total War titles.
 
Sieges seem broken. 1000 man army hits a castle, i tag along, they "build" siege equipment, only to assault with only ladders? barely take the castle and lose 800 men due to ladder jamming. wheres the catapults? the rams? ai makes wonky decisions.

most of my other gripes are mentioned already by others, however one thing that's really driving me crazy is the horrifying troop/party/army user interface. no way to see how many cav/inf/archers are in your party (totals listed) in the party screen, and it retains warbands godaweful list everything in 1 massively long list so right now with a variety of troops its an endless scroll and drag and drop to try and organize your party for battles.

no way to auto upgrade troops enmasse.

baffled that this was not improved on from warband, it's a major constant thing you interact with.

i'd like to see 3 columns for 3 core troop types, or some type of windows tree, some way to not have upgrades bounce the end of the list, some way to group troop types together, etc etc.

also would like to see options to have default starting setups like infantry in shield wall right away. ordering crossbow elites to shieldwall and they leave their shields on thier backs...hmpf.

Too many small parties of raiders/looters/etc, which become a pain to chase down as your party grows.

armies do wierd things, no food, or take a castle, then leave right away only to have the enemy hit that same castle right away again. patrols of 2000 man armies doing nothing but running in circles for hours, disbanding, reforming, starving.

also want to be able to set my players starting age. seems to be 30? sure is unskilled for a 30 year old.. seems more like a 16-25 year old from the startup sequence.

PC level and skills and growth do not seem to jive with NPC skills & growth, ie npc's of the same level have ridiculously high skills vs the pc.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

kweassa
It's 2024. Spears still suck
2
Replies
33
Views
2K
Bombcat1
The main questline might as well end about 2-3 quests in (lots of spoilers)
Replies
0
Views
778
Generaljoebear
Load Order & Load Times (Modded)
Replies
0
Views
93
Annysimmers
Back
Top Bottom