SP - General Better Diplomacy and Civil War

Users who are viewing this thread


I noticed a pattern while playing Bannerlord: Battanians get beaten to a pulp pretty often. In my current Sturgian campaign, I went so far as to reload a save from 24 gameplay hours earlier to try and revert their complete destruction. Now almost 24 hours later, they're in the brink of destruction again, with their power severely diminished and holding only Dunglanys. Meanwhile the Vlandians, who control 3 of their cities (Sturgia controlling the rest), keeps getting stronger. Declaring war on Vlandia is nearly impossible, since I need support to do so (it also seems to fluctuate a lot. I checked yesterday and the support for it was at 37%. 2 minutes later, it was back to 0%.)
That made the shallow diplomacy in Bannerlord painfully apparent to me. I really wish I could try and actually convince my kingdom to go to war, rather than just have a "yes or no" vote, where it's extremely unlikely you'll ever get anything done other than pass or repeal some policies. Something else that I would have appreciatedmaybe as a quest, was to be sent as an envoy to Caladog to offer a joint war against Vlandia (who are currently stronger than both Battanians and Sturgians, and took 2 of my castles), since they're common enemies, where we (Sturgians) would commit some forces to the fight (not fully, for balancing reasons) in exchange for some rewards, as well as additional terms (such as giving back some of the castles and towns we captured while previously at war with them). Pacts of non-aggression, to prevent wars being declared on each other, at least temporarily, would also be nice.

Secondly; I watched Raganvad give himself 4 settlements in a row, as well as 2 castles, where his "council" voted against it (2 of the settlements were supposed to be granted to me, based on votes, and by a large margin at that). I would have appreciated the option to have my grievances heard, and, failing that, to declare an outright Civil War to depose Raganvad (not just leaving the kingdom while keeping your own lands), since I was far from the only clan he shafted along the way. Let someone else be the ruling clan for once.

Something else that bothers me about Bannerlord is how you can only get a fief by taking it from somebody else. I'd have appreciated the option to build up my own at a suitable location, rather than hope to be given one of a different culture as spoils of war. Being able to trade fiefs would also be nice. I watched Marunath, which we had captured, get taken by rebels 4 times in a row, then be given back to the clan that had previously captured it each time. It was only after it was given to me that the rebellions stopped. I would have gladly paid gold to take it from its ruling clan's hands to save us all the trouble of putting down rebels (where villages always end up getting raided anyhow, leaving the settlement weaker than before).
I dont know what platform you are on, but if you are on pc there is solutions for this with mods.

I do totally agree that this kind of features should have been built into vanilla Bannerlord, so that Consoles arent getting shafted.

Diplomacy mod for instance lets them form non-agression pacts alliances etc, you can set the tendencies in a MCM(Mod configuration Menu)
You can set alot of things.

There is other mods that deal with the "better distribution" of fiefs.

Generally speaking from my observation, again my observation so it may be flawed - but it seems like that they try to get 7-8 fiefs pr clan before new ones are tossed into the mix.

There is more to it - proximity, clans relations with others, wealth, rank - its a formula.
But sometimes it do get abit annoying when a clan gets 50% of the new conquered fiefs.

As for your claim on "Tradeing fiefs" - this is already in the game, but its waay badly gamedesign imo.
Check the end perk in Trade - 300 skill required.
With it you can trade fiefs.
Just horrible gamedesign decision to put it there.
I'd be up for them haveing some "barriers" like you need to be clan rank 3 to buy a castle, and rank 4 for a city.
Leveling up trade is just dreadfully slow if you dont "focus on it hard" or use some of the tactics to lvl it fast - read look it up on Youtube there is tons of guides.

The whole system they made for war/peace is really poor imo, first of you get as you mention Battania that will be ganked hard early on so within 5 years they are gone from the map or in a state of no recovery.(I personally think its something wrong with the policy they have that gives more militat but they recive 5% less taxes, I've never looked at the code but something seems off)
I've joined Battania as a lord, and removed the policy and boom they are much more able to even recover from the state of despair.

While I get from lore perspective that Battania is "doomed" it dont make for great gameplay in Sandbox specially if you are going for a "long generational game" (generally speaking it never is a good game in this regard as you can conquer the whole map on your first character anyways if you push for it).

You can provoke wars though, but its not very popular - read you will take a hit to relations.

You are Sturgia you say, and want to wage war on Vlandia.. go raid a village of theirs or take out a caravan..
I havent tried it in some time, but it used to work atleast before on unmodded play.

This will typically impose severe relations among the lords of your faction + the Vlandians.
Top Bottom