Building a dynasty with children: what for?

Users who are viewing this thread

This game is full of RP possibilities that could make us forget the bad mechanics. But i'm not manager at TW.
Hopefully the next few TW's updates will be more bent towards improving role play and adding depth to the experience or more economy tweaks. Best way to fix economy would be to bring the prices way down of armour and weapons and have to repair them and also have the enemy take yours and your companions equipment after a defeat. Then blacksmith wouldn't be over powered because the prices would be stupid .
 
Last edited:

Brano

Veteran
Yep, role-play reasons, why not. No issue with me to have kind of side quest with interesting and funny mechanics to get the wife of your dreams. To get one-time boost like +1 charm after marriage? Maybe some interesting trait? And that's it. Silly 80 or even less days a year and no day and night routines just to artificialy speed up time for your jids to grow up? No, thanks.
 

Nawari

Regular
Hopefully the next few TW's updates will be more bent towards improving role play and adding depth to the experience or more economy tweaks. Best way to fix economy would be to bring the prices way down of armour and weapons and have to repair them and also have the enemy take yours and your companions equipment after a defeat. Then blacksmith wouldn't be over powered because the prices would be stupid .
Above all, I would like the game to offer us other things than chaining battles after battles for no reason... RP, RP, RP... Role Play... Role Play is not only management, but story... I don't think sandboxing will ever be fun simply because it will always be repetitive. You need quests, stories, lore, real RPG! You have to give this game a soul!

But you do what you want except that by going in this direction, I will play "Civilization", it will always be better. Good god, Bannerlord is made for the RPG, it's obvious!

Today, there is nothing in this game that allows you to imagine a story. No lore, no books, no stories of heroes or peoples, nothing, nothing, nothing. What's the point of having a bunch of kids since you'll only be doing the same things with them over and over again. No mystery to find, no points of interest, RPG is not Kingdom management, RPG means having a backstory, it gives meaning to the game. For that, it requires a great effort of writing. And that's what this game is sorely lacking. And you'll never change my mind. To forget the bad mechanics of the sandbox, the game would have to have a very rich backstory.
I sincerely think that TW was totally overwhelmed by their success when they released Early Access. They just thought they would bring back the faithful plus a few more, and they got pressure from a lot of new players with new expectations. I put it to their credit: they weren't ready.
So, without putting any pressure, developing the backstory of this game, the "lore", the RP, seems to me to be just essential if they don't want the players to even disappear.
 
Last edited:

Nawari

Regular
Working on the backstory, the lore, the RPG dimension, would be a way to make people forget the weaknesses of the "sandbox" mechanics. On the contrary, these weaknesses would become a quality in the service of a very written RPG dimension because we would be entertained by the richness of the backstory, the descriptions of the world. And the advantage is that the background story, the lore, the special quests, the lore, can be permanently fed without touching the mechanics of the game if you do it right.
But of course, you can't pretend. You really have to work on the background of the history of the world of Calradia to make people want to know more and more. Today, there is nothing to discover, it is totally meaningless.
 

xdj1nn

Knight
WBWF&S
On a simpler scope, if the feature was working properly, I'd say to push the challenge of forming a kingdom behind being a vassal walls by requiring that your clan becomes fully established BEFORE you can even have a chance at forming a kingdom. To that end they'd have to add layers of politics with what I'd call a Überdiplomacy Mod on Steroids (Warband's good old mod, Diplomacy, for the kids), where it's required to do lengthy steps to forge alliances and clan cooperation among you and others and only than be able to even cogitate forming a kingdom. Doing so properly would basically delegate the mission onto the heirs of the Clan rather than the old fart starter character.

On paper it sounds amazingly cool, but in practice the game has too little to offer for us to spend literally a in-game character's life-time to accomplish over-arching goals. To mitigate the isse they have only 2 options:

1- make time move faster on a steep multiplayer

2- create enough features to keep us busy and entertained for hundreds of hours in mid-late game (first toon is pretty much done, but you can't yet achieve massive scale goals)

First sounds like a bad idea, and the second's exceptionally unlikely. As is, this feature's nothing but a gimmicky second chance on a "hardcore" playthrough (and even than your kid isn't grown enough to take over for ages)
 

Dabos37

Sergeant Knight at Arms
On a simpler scope, if the feature was working properly, I'd say to push the challenge of forming a kingdom behind being a vassal walls by requiring that your clan becomes fully established BEFORE you can even have a chance at forming a kingdom. To that end they'd have to add layers of politics with what I'd call a Überdiplomacy Mod on Steroids (Warband's good old mod, Diplomacy, for the kids), where it's required to do lengthy steps to forge alliances and clan cooperation among you and others and only than be able to even cogitate forming a kingdom. Doing so properly would basically delegate the mission onto the heirs of the Clan rather than the old fart starter character.

On paper it sounds amazingly cool, but in practice the game has too little to offer for us to spend literally a in-game character's life-time to accomplish over-arching goals. To mitigate the isse they have only 2 options:

1- make time move faster on a steep multiplayer

2- create enough features to keep us busy and entertained for hundreds of hours in mid-late game (first toon is pretty much done, but you can't yet achieve massive scale goals)

First sounds like a bad idea, and the second's exceptionally unlikely. As is, this feature's nothing but a gimmicky second chance on a "hardcore" playthrough (and even than your kid isn't grown enough to take over for ages)
Why do you think that moving the time faster would be a bad idea. I actually think that it is the only viable option.
 

xdj1nn

Knight
WBWF&S
Why do you think that moving the time faster would be a bad idea. I actually think that it is the only viable option.
the grind, to (without cheating) go from peasant aspiring nobody to something viable (again, no cheating nor exploiting) in BL it takes much longer in gameplay time than WB to reach a "toon's useful" state, to reach a "toon's great" it takes around 3 to 5 years in-game time. If time moved faster (as fast as it needs to be) you'd only really reach such a state when your toon's old or dying already. It's a really bad idea, because the only way out of this loop would be to diminish the grind, but that would remove the challenge from the game, you'd play a few hours, become godlike and quit.

The timescale's already too fast for many things. It's even easy to lose the campaign quest due to it (or was, idk if they've changed that).

As I've said, they must give a more cohersive progression curve (cohersive, I'd say neither too steep nor too flat) with as much immersive feats as possible to actually distract us from the grind, the more bland the game, the more you feel it, the more repetitive too. As is there's just too much repetition in-game atm to make the dynastic feature viable, the ideal for the current state of the game would be to slap in depth to characters and make more unique and memorable side-quests, but if they've been cutting features left and right since 2016 I wouldn't get hopes up (read signature).
There's a world where TW managed to merge Crusader Kings with Warband and that game's named Bannerlord, this isn't that world
 
Last edited:

Apocal

Grandmaster Knight
the grind, to (without cheating) go from peasant aspiring nobody to something viable (again, no cheating nor exploiting) in BL it takes much longer in gameplay time than WB to reach a "toon's useful" state, to reach a "toon's great" it takes around 3 to 5 years in-game time. If time moved faster (as fast as it needs to be) you'd only really reach such a state when your toon's old or dying already.
Even if you sped up the passage of years by cutting the years down to a third of what they are now, that would still mean 300 days to get everything together and be set. That's a little fast but not too much.

Then you get an heir who has super-stats.
 

Dabos37

Sergeant Knight at Arms
the grind, to (without cheating) go from peasant aspiring nobody to something viable (again, no cheating nor exploiting) in BL it takes much longer in gameplay time than WB to reach a "toon's useful" state, to reach a "toon's great" it takes around 3 to 5 years in-game time. If time moved faster (as fast as it needs to be) you'd only really reach such a state when your toon's old or dying already. It's a really bad idea, because the only way out of this loop would be to diminish the grind, but that would remove the challenge from the game, you'd play a few hours, become godlike and quit.

The timescale's already too fast for many things. It's even easy to lose the campaign quest due to it (or was, idk if they've changed that).

As I've said, they must give a more cohersive progression curve (cohersive, I'd say neither too steep nor too flat) with as much immersive feats as possible to actually distract us from the grind, the more bland the game, the more you feel it, the more repetitive too. As is there's just too much repetition in-game atm to make the dynastic feature viable, the ideal for the current state of the game would be to slap in depth to characters and make more unique and memorable side-quests, but if they've been cutting features left and right since 2016 I wouldn't get hopes up (read signature).
There's a world where TW managed to merge Crusader Kings with Warband and that game's named Bannerlord, this isn't that world
Yeah, I know that only reducing the days per year by its own would not be a great idea, and this is why I usually say that this change should come with some other tweaks. Look, I am at day +800 in my current campaign which means 10 years in game, and my main character has better skills than almost any other lord in the current campaign (and he is just 32 years old). Even when I am trying to roleplaying and not trying to grind as much as possible. I got my first son pretty early, and he is just 9 years old now…

Lets asume that devs cut days per year in half, that’s would mean that my main character would be 42 years old (still pretty much young), and my son would be 18 years old and ready to work now.

While cuting days per year in half won’t make everything perfect, this would be a step in the right direction IMO. What we currently have now (84 days per year) is simple an insanely high number of days per year, and not even mods would be able to add content for making campaings appealing during +3000 days or so. Especially not with the current pace of battle.
 

Nawari

Regular
I just "finished" a new campaign (to test 1.8.0).
We must admit that it is much more stable than two years ago, fortunately.
It must also be admitted that this campaign is still as absurd as ever. The Empire destroyed, we say to ourselves as always: "Was the game worth the candle?"

I played quite "commonly" Khuzaits. I made this choice because I knew in advance that I would win more easily with them.

Note another improvement: at this point in the game (elimination of the Empire),
- there are Azeraïs still powerful enough to maintain their "borders",
- there are still Vlanders still powerful enough to worry us even if we have weakened them a lot and I know that in the long term, we could eliminate them (but to do what?

The surprises :

- the battanians, very powerful before, disappear very quickly from the map.

Classic stitches:

As before, the Sturgians all but disappear from the map.

What I do not understand :

The campaign is based on the idea of destroying the Empire but not of waging a perpetual war. It is originally, according to the speeches of the "quest giver" to revive cultural diversity against the homogenization imposed by the Empire.

So, if the economy, politics, alliance system, and especially the "war and peace" system, were better developed, when the Empire is destroyed we should enter this new phase:

- there should be a big council to re-establish the "old cultures" and thus agree on the borders (difficult to do, I admit, but it would be coherent),
- favor trade, diplomatic and political exchanges to find a "peaceful" balance (this would mean having a statistical witness that gives us an indication of the risks of war with this or that faction rather than a looped war system).

For that it would be necessary that the system of war in loop stops and that a newn loop function more diplomatic, political and commercial starts as soon as the Empire is destroyed.

The war in a loop could resume only if the statistical indicator "risk of war" turns red in all areas.
The war could happen because our Kingdom would be too hegemonic at the commercial level, because we would have made bad diplomatic choices, because a neighboring faction "would feel" militarily able to "break our hegemony", for example by founding a alliance against us.
A hegemonic position of our Kingdom could cause alliances in the opposing factions and a war.

For the moment none of this is possible.

And since I think that will never be possible, or that it will always be of questionable quality, I believe more in developing the game towards the RPG.

Finally, as before, when we arrive at the end of the campaign, we say to ourselves: “All that for that, it sucks”.



There is another possibility:

When the Empire disappears, we enter a period of peace automatically. We can then develop our business, policies, and other functions to invent and implement.
But above all, we are opening up the map to new RPGs, new points of interest, new stories.
The end of the war would open up possibilities to discover with our main character (or one of her children) little-known facets of Calradia and therefore real RPG quests allowing us to discover the Background of this world in depth.
The end of the war would open the doors to exciting new adventures that would allow us to discover the cultures of Calradia and its mysteries.
As I said before, rather than making a "bad Civilization game", make a good "episode" RPG game.

Thus finishing this painful main quest would open the doors to new adventures implemented on the map gradually. But for that, you have to do a lot of work to document this universe, write it, describe it, give "life" to characters, imagine the history of Calradia, mysteries, intrigues, etc. In short...

In short, the end of the war would bring us back to a period of peace where the management of the Kingdom or our clan would be in the background and the discovery of Calradia in an RPG style in the foreground.

Anyway, this "RPG" dimension would only be for the "Campaign" mode. Of course, I understand, you may not be able to do everything. But in the long run, it would make a "beautiful game".

I know that many players are asking for the "management" dimension to be more developed. I wonder if it's possible and if it will ever be just a very frustrating part of the game.

On the other hand, adding a "spiritual" dimension to it with religions, with witchcraft (metaphorically, no real witches), inquisition, murders, mythical stories stemming from the beliefs that could be found in the High Middle Ages, such as Celtic, Norse, Latin, Eastern mythology, etc. could make a great game. Working with students who are passionate about this period...

By having fun with the way people represented the world in the High Middle Ages, with old beliefs, you can make a beautiful game.

But, if you prefer to continue on the path of a bad "Civilization game", it's your choice...
Good luck...
 
Last edited:

xdj1nn

Knight
WBWF&S

Sturgia's cancer, they are an attempt to blend Nords and Vaegir from Warband, but they lack any functional army formation through having been given t6 cav with short range lances and one of the worse armors in the game, along with focusing their troop tree around infantry but also giving them mediocre gear along with above average stats. Add to that the rivalries with Vlandia and Khuzaits and we're in for hell on the battle auto-calculation which basically grants automatic victory to whoemver fields more cavalry followed by whomever fields more high tier troops.

Since release, if we don't step in to rescue Sturgia, they get wiped. To make them properly on par with their rivals (so they survive) there needs to be a few buffs to them without changing the others by inserting at least one extra t6 infatry specifically built to counter-cavalry, or by re-introducing vaegir secondary cavalry (they used to have weaker horse archers). Basically turning them into a "rhodok" anti-cav faction, that way they'll likely hold. If done through infantry buff, they'll need a rework for the auto-calc either by giving them a strong buff effect, like sturgian inf having massive bonuses against cav units compared to others, or a full rework of the auto-calc in general.

The interesting thing is that the Sturgians are a split where half of them fled to colder zones becoming Vaegir (simulating kievan rus) and the others merged with the Norse who invaded en mass (forming the Nords). I still have a feeling that there must be a plan to add the Nord invasions, but I can't be sure. I also hate the fact that they've miss-positioned Sargot.
 

Nawari

Regular
Sturgia's cancer, they are an attempt to blend Nords and Vaegir from Warband, but they lack any functional army formation through having been given t6 cav with short range lances and one of the worse armors in the game, along with focusing their troop tree around infantry but also giving them mediocre gear along with above average stats. Add to that the rivalries with Vlandia and Khuzaits and we're in for hell on the battle auto-calculation which basically grants automatic victory to whoemver fields more cavalry followed by whomever fields more high tier troops.

Since release, if we don't step in to rescue Sturgia, they get wiped. To make them properly on par with their rivals (so they survive) there needs to be a few buffs to them without changing the others by inserting at least one extra t6 infatry specifically built to counter-cavalry, or by re-introducing vaegir secondary cavalry (they used to have weaker horse archers). Basically turning them into a "rhodok" anti-cav faction, that way they'll likely hold. If done through infantry buff, they'll need a rework for the auto-calc either by giving them a strong buff effect, like sturgian inf having massive bonuses against cav units compared to others, or a full rework of the auto-calc in general.

The interesting thing is that the Sturgians are a split where half of them fled to colder zones becoming Vaegir (simulating kievan rus) and the others merged with the Norse who invaded en mass (forming the Nords). I still have a feeling that there must be a plan to add the Nord invasions, but I can't be sure. I also hate the fact that they've miss-positioned Sargot.
Anyway, at this stage of the campaign, nothing motivates to play. Already that...
So whether the Sturgians are "dead" or not, doesn't matter...
 

Apocal

Grandmaster Knight
Sturgia's cancer, they are an attempt to blend Nords and Vaegir from Warband, but they lack any functional army formation through having been given t6 cav with short range lances and one of the worse armors in the game, along with focusing their troop tree around infantry but also giving them mediocre gear along with above average stats. Add to that the rivalries with Vlandia and Khuzaits and we're in for hell on the battle auto-calculation which basically grants automatic victory to whoemver fields more cavalry followed by whomever fields more high tier troops.
The only part autocalc cares about is tier and if they are mounted or not.
 

Nawari

Regular
The speed of a group is sometimes painful. When you have a troop of 20 men at the start and you run after bandits that you can't catch up with, it's a shame. When coding you always have to ask yourself if it's fun or not. Bandits, it's just to loot when you start. We shouldn't need horses for that.
 

svelok

Sergeant
A lot of people seem to see the dynasty systems and immediately think the game can/should become Crusader Kings, despite by necessity being on a several order of magnitudes slower timescale?

This might not be what TW intended, but from the beginning I've seen the dynasty stuff as existing 95% for the sake of the sandbox/AI.
 
Trade or battle and few quest (blacksmith is terrible and game breaking) and no intrigues . Gets boring fast in peace time as nothing really happens just waiting for war. Long unending wars get boring and sends you back to peace time and its trade and same few quests and no intrigue. A boring loop. I really hope next update or updates make peace time interesting and fun.
 

xdj1nn

Knight
WBWF&S
A lot of people seem to see the dynasty systems and immediately think the game can/should become Crusader Kings, despite by necessity being on a several order of magnitudes slower timescale?

This might not be what TW intended, but from the beginning I've seen the dynasty stuff as existing 95% for the sake of the sandbox/AI.
Trade or battle and few quest (blacksmith is terrible and game breaking) and no intrigues . Gets boring fast in peace time as nothing really happens just waiting for war. Long unending wars get boring and sends you back to peace time and its trade and same few quests and no intrigue. A boring loop. I really hope next update or updates make peace time interesting and fun.
svelok presented the criticism, rozbritanicus simply answered without answering
 

xdj1nn

Knight
WBWF&S
Anyway, at this stage of the campaign, nothing motivates to play. Already that...
So whether the Sturgians are "dead" or not, doesn't matter...
without a massive package of mods, yes, Bannerlord's playable once, after you reach very-late game it's just boring and you feel better by quitting than any other options.

My tip is to find as many mods that flush out missing features and start a new campaign with ALL of them turned on (also slap in a few rebalance mods for armor and leveling so you have a better time, specially leveling due to the game having one of the worse progression/reward curves I've ever seen, I know what causes it but I won't turn this into yet another giga-wot). Also, if you don't have mods that fully overhaul owning a kingdom, simply don't own one. Play as a vassal or by doing other secondary roles. RP something else entirely, once you create your own kingdom the game tends to become crap.
 
I'd really love for technology to advance throughout the game years and have better equipment and better horses, etc become available by the time your kids take over.

The slow process of building a kingdom seems artificial but I'm hoping for good mods to create something out of the game that realizes all the potential for the current framework.
 
Top Bottom