• If you are reporting a bug, please head over to our Technical Support section for Bannerlord.
  • Please note that we've updated the Mount & Blade II: Bannerlord save file system which requires you to take certain steps in order for your save files to be compatible with e1.7.1 and any later updates. You can find the instructions here.

Beta Patch Notes e1.5.6

Users who are viewing this thread

beybi123

Developer
Hey guys, did your character get fatter and fatter? No matter what my char eat, he turn into a balloon in no time.

Is it just me or some kind of new bug? I install no mod. And i roll back to 1.5.5, the body weight thing work smoothly, you only gain weight while you idle in town, and you can keep the weight under control if you watch your diet, like only eat grain.

Now? No matter what food my character eat, the body weight raise like 0.1 everyday, it's quite annoying. I know this is not important, but any information is apperciated.

You gain weight while you are in a settlement and not starving. To lose weight, you have to avoid staying in settlements for a long time or starve yourself :smile:
 

RavenDier

Recruit
You gain weight while you are in a settlement and not starving. To lose weight, you have to avoid staying in settlements for a long time or starve yourself :smile:
I travel on foot and try to avoid staying in settlements all the time, and i gain build as much as weight, like 0.1 per day. Starve myself works but meanless, i cant keep starve all the time.And once my character consume food he "stores" it in his stomach, i cant get it out. After 10 days he turn back, like in the real world. Thx for the quick reply :grin:
 

kreamy

Sergeant
Yes with new security / loyality additions average tax from castles and towns are both reduced (because if loyality < 50 or security < 25 tax reduces) and yes if we can get rid of security and loyality at castles (which are nearly useless currently because there is no rebellion in castles) castles will be more profitable at least and we can make overall design more fluid (with less variables). Of course this will not be enough because castles should be good for military not economy actually but it is better than nothing. But for a short time I do not think it will be accepted. It was just an idea.
I think definitely having high tier (3+) and nobles only spawning in castle (which also requires upgrade maybe..?, like the barracks) and regulars in castle fief will make castles a primary target for warfare. And only militias available in the cities & city fiefs. (or even, at least the option to choose this from the beginning in character setup.. i.e 'realistic' recruitment)

No castle, no high tier troops. And catch 22, because if you want to take castles, you need troops, and if you want to field the army, you need towns. I think it will spread it more evenly.

Also, making some major reduction in wages (I think its 50% currently? - if its not, that would be welcome... But an upgrade that makes it 50-75% could really make it OP...) & adding a notification system from castles (castles should have increased view range, and when they see large army (like 500men+) the player gets a generic 'tracking' report (like Army of 500-1000 seen around X heading toward Y) this could also make them more useful. (there are never THAT many armies to report)

I do not understand your point. What is relationship with that feature and castles? Castles already do not have notables before that feature and it has no connection with this feature. I accept castles are a bit useless currently except their villages but this has no connection with this new addition.

Should castles have notables??? I understand the intent is probably so you cant recruit from castles, since they are not meant to be a population center (i assume that may have been one of the reasons.....?)
I can see how its good for castles to have notables, and make only high tier troops / nobles available thru the castle notable (not the village).

Can you explain a bit / rationale for why theres no notables for castles and the intended design?
 
Last edited:

optye

Recruit
Usability> Art Design

I would rather see things rather then have to burn my eyes to do it

Just look at the KCD inventory design it has a cool medieval theme yes it does is it stupidly hard to use because of that design also yes

Lets not even talk about CK2 medieval UI design
That's an interesting thought, I wonder if there is a way to do both :smile:
 

D0c1

Knight at Arms
When I can find the time, I try to give an answer to every post I see in the UI feedback subforum and I would love to hear your honest feedback in there too.
that's really good of you!
i just thought that devs don't respond because it doesn't work that way and there is a huge amount of suggestions.
i thought the guys responsible for collecting bugs collect suggestions from the forums and show it to the devs on a regular basis.

idk if it's your code but the color scheme is too modern. not the actual buttons placements. warband had parchment colors and it was nice imo.
 

Cregan

Recruit
I didn`t play 1.5.4 and 1.5.5, I played 1.5.6 and I can tell it`s much much better. Behaviour of soldiers in formations is great, but when you lead army and you give advance order to infantry and archers, if hero assigned to lead them is on horse, he charge enemy alone. So every time I lead army I lose one or two hero. Progress of EA is great and to have longer playthrough I only need child education and hero deaths in simulation.
 
So with March gettig closer and closer, I assume (and hope) that the initial stated of goal of being in beta for about a year will not be met?
I would rather them push EAfor additional 1-2 years and by doing that we get more stable and functioning features alongside if possible more mechanics/features that are maybe worked on at some point then shelved or were in plan BUIT due to time they chose not to include in the game and scraped the idea.I wouldnt mind at all and would gladly accept them to push EA to be for another 1-2 years if that additional 1-2 year will give us some more abandoned/planned but scraped features,mechanics to be included into a game rather than being forced to release it in March as it is now and then needing to wait for like 1-4 years of the mods to be made and 100+ mods to install just so we could have features that we wanted from the beggining.

I realy dont mind them postponing EA for another 1-2 years if that means we will get more features and its layground be in vanila game bcs we as players will EIGHETR WAY need to wait for 1-2 years maybe even more for mods that implement features so its much better to just devs prolong EA for another 1-2 year and have some of the additional features immplemented so that modders dont need to waste so much years of tyring to via mod add some of the features and that modders can mroe focus on other parts of the mods or do as minimum work needed due to featurs alerdy being in vanila game and just needs to small things here and there.Also thatw ay we wont need to instal 10 different mods tat have high posibility of breaking the game due to clashing with one another rather than just having as much features,mechanics in vanila game as possible taht will be balanced and wont clash with one another cbs its in vanila game.
 

KucukEniste

Master Knight
WBWF&SNWVC
Hey @mexxico about castles being useless. Can we have a recruiting and training system in castles. In the late game travelling the map to get some soldiers is something that pull player from late game to early game grind. To prevent this, there should be a way to gather army in castles from nearby villages and passively upgrade them to a limit (like maximum tier 3 from castle training for an example ). This would not only help player but npc lords (who has lots of recruits in their army) as well.

With system like this we could solve armies with lots of peasents, castles can become somewhere to visit and interact with.
 

SGT_Night

Knight
WBNW
I didn`t play 1.5.4 and 1.5.5, I played 1.5.6 and I can tell it`s much much better. Behaviour of soldiers in formations is great, but when you lead army and you give advance order to infantry and archers, if hero assigned to lead them is on horse, he charge enemy alone. So every time I lead army I lose one or two hero. Progress of EA is great and to have longer playthrough I only need child education and hero deaths in simulation.
Tell the inf and archers formations to dismount
 

Gortar

Sergeant
As someone mentioned before, would be great, if you could repair broken equipment. Its so frustrating when you finally get good loot but then its cracked, worn etc. and stats are ****, especially on armor. Of course with the appropriate price so repairing before selling wouldn't be profitable.
 

stevehoos

Banned
As someone mentioned before, would be great, if you could repair broken equipment. Its so frustrating when you finally get good loot but then its cracked, worn etc. and stats are ****, especially on armor. Of course with the appropriate price so repairing before selling wouldn't be profitable.

All looted equipment is worn or cracked I think? It would be nice if only some of it was.
 

Pejot

Sergeant Knight
WBVC
Hey @mexxico about castles being useless. Can we have a recruiting and training system in castles. In the late game travelling the map to get some soldiers is something that pull player from late game to early game grind. To prevent this, there should be a way to gather army in castles from nearby villages and passively upgrade them to a limit (like maximum tier 3 from castle training for an example ). This would not only help player but npc lords (who has lots of recruits in their army) as well.

With system like this we could solve armies with lots of peasents, castles can become somewhere to visit and interact with.

There is already upgrade that gives xp to garrison and they are automatically upgraded. The only problem is You cannot control how they are upgraded and You need to provide recruits. Still i don't see a problem with restocking Your army mid/late game cause generally there are already fiefs at the time that provide better recruits and You should have higher relations with them. The problem with castles is that they have no purpose economically/military. They are worse than villages cause they provide nothing except garrison costs.


Making Castles able to send garrison to help besieged towns would be great, but I think that not possible. How the AI would handle this? I mean, AI takes into account garrison before targeting a fief to attack, so these castles would look much more appealing to besiege if garrison goes out.

I was reffering to garrison troops and You also have militia. This mechanic could be trigerred only after there is certain amount of militia to defend. Most of castles defenders that prevent AI to target it are militias.
 
Last edited:

Gortar

Sergeant
All looted equipment is worn or cracked I think? It would be nice if only some of it was.
Only low tier equipment can be of normal quallity or even improved, like starched or hardened. I didnt get single equipement tier4 and higher that wouldn't be broken. Its probably like this beacause the best equipment in the game is so expensive that it would sell by a lot even if cracked. For example I got cracked broad blade javellins from mountain bandits camp and its value 36k.
 
I would rather them push EAfor additional 1-2 years and by doing that we get more stable and functioning features alongside if possible more mechanics/features that are maybe worked on at some point then shelved or were in plan BUIT due to time they chose not to include in the game and scraped the idea.I wouldnt mind at all and would gladly accept them to push EA to be for another 1-2 years if that additional 1-2 year will give us some more abandoned/planned but scraped features,mechanics to be included into a game rather than being forced to release it in March as it is now and then needing to wait for like 1-4 years of the mods to be made and 100+ mods to install just so we could have features that we wanted from the beggining.

I realy dont mind them postponing EA for another 1-2 years if that means we will get more features and its layground be in vanila game bcs we as players will EIGHETR WAY need to wait for 1-2 years maybe even more for mods that implement features so its much better to just devs prolong EA for another 1-2 year and have some of the additional features immplemented so that modders dont need to waste so much years of tyring to via mod add some of the features and that modders can mroe focus on other parts of the mods or do as minimum work needed due to featurs alerdy being in vanila game and just needs to small things here and there.Also thatw ay we wont need to instal 10 different mods tat have high posibility of breaking the game due to clashing with one another rather than just having as much features,mechanics in vanila game as possible taht will be balanced and wont clash with one another cbs its in vanila game.

+1
 
I've seen this being suggested in other places, and I really like the idea of castles projecting military control over the map.

This would be done with patrols around the castle that hunted down bandits and smaller parties and an area around the castle in which the garrison would join battles so going deeper into enemy territory would require armies to be more careful not to get caught near castles. Capturing castles would help disrupt local movement around it and it could be used to isolate towns.
 

Shun

Squire
WB
I would rather them push EAfor additional 1-2 years and by doing that we get more stable and functioning features alongside if possible more mechanics/features that are maybe worked on at some point then shelved or were in plan BUIT due to time they chose not to include in the game and scraped the idea.I wouldnt mind at all and would gladly accept them to push EA to be for another 1-2 years if that additional 1-2 year will give us some more abandoned/planned but scraped features,mechanics to be included into a game rather than being forced to release it in March as it is now and then needing to wait for like 1-4 years of the mods to be made and 100+ mods to install just so we could have features that we wanted from the beggining.

I realy dont mind them postponing EA for another 1-2 years if that means we will get more features and its layground be in vanila game bcs we as players will EIGHETR WAY need to wait for 1-2 years maybe even more for mods that implement features so its much better to just devs prolong EA for another 1-2 year and have some of the additional features immplemented so that modders dont need to waste so much years of tyring to via mod add some of the features and that modders can mroe focus on other parts of the mods or do as minimum work needed due to featurs alerdy being in vanila game and just needs to small things here and there.Also thatw ay we wont need to instal 10 different mods tat have high posibility of breaking the game due to clashing with one another rather than just having as much features,mechanics in vanila game as possible taht will be balanced and wont clash with one another cbs its in vanila game.

+1

Since the game is out in EA there is no need to rush to release IMO. Anyone interested can buy in at any time, like with the first M&B. Take your time and make the game great TW!

I've seen this being suggested in other places, and I really like the idea of castles projecting military control over the map.

This would be done with patrols around the castle that hunted down bandits and smaller parties and an area around the castle in which the garrison would join battles so going deeper into enemy territory would require armies to be more careful not to get caught near castles. Capturing castles would help disrupt local movement around it and it could be used to isolate towns.

That would be a great feature if the AI can handle it. Else it would be lost work IMO.
 
Top Bottom