Civil Wars in Bannerlord

Users who are viewing this thread

lolbash

Master Knight
Does anyone else find the amount of "brewing internal dissent" in all of the major factions annoying?

If you have not read the Faction Blogs and videos m I will sum this all up for you.

Empire: They have already split up and fighting each other.

Aserai: They are united, but only temporary so they can fight the Empire. Once the Empire is completely gone the clans will kill each other again.

Vlandians: They have lots of internal dissent and will regularly fight each other.

Sturgia: Same as Aserai. They are split in clans and hate the idea of a king so if the threat of the Empire is completely destroyed, they will revolt and kill each other.

Battania: They have a High King, but he has never made an attempt to rule over the other Cheiftains and as such the Cheiftains do not see him as a true king and are all independent.

Khuziats: Their king died, so now the other clans are planning to become king and this will naturally have them twangle and fight each other.
 
Well, look, they will destroy the empire. Ok, the empire is gone. But one of the rulers can find a new enemy for their faction. And he can send to war his vassals against a new enemy, remaining the supreme ruler.
 
I believe as feudalism in Bannerlord will be better than in Warband(I not see feudalism in game at all than abstract concept of own settlements with no feudal system)
 
To answer the OP: No.

No faction should ever have completely stable internal politics, and furthermore no ruler's position should be a hundred percent stable.
I like the idea of there being internal dissent in a faction, especially the now with the clans.
The descriptions for each faction all having some element of internal dissent set the field for a politically volatile environment, which most of us sort of expected anyway.

I hope this is a sign that internal factions can overthrow the ruler and place either one of their own, or a friendly faction on the throne.

Also I just wanted to point out something from Gamescom:
OgPgG.jpg
Look at the clans, specifically the second one.

As shown in the above spoiler the Khergits are one of the Clans of the Khuzait Khanate, they even use the same banner as they did in Warband albeit with different coloring. This strongly hints that the Khergits will eventually take power and or prominence one day.

So "brewing internal dissent" may play a bigger role than you realise.
 
I believe as not will be civil wars in BL how OP states because situation in middle ages was different than in ancient times as not exist a centralised government
 
I hope they add some kind of feature to make it harder to conquer the entire world, such as when your empire gets really big that you have to be really careful or lords/peasants could rebel and create their own faction or revive a faction you already destroyed.
 
With the confirmation of (hopefully) pc permadeath, and playing as character's relatives, I think having internal dissent/civil wars is a cool way to possibly extend gameplay. Just when you've got almost all of Calradia conquered, that guy who's father you killed and you threatened into vassalage now controls a good portion of your empire and revolts against you, all the sudden you've got to conquer half of Calradia again.
 
Bannerlord become strategy game because we can playing with our relatives, also I want to experience a full-scale civil war as a Northern Imperial lord which want overthrow all Empire rulers including Empress herself, afterwards declare total war in whole Calradia :iamamoron: :iamamoron: :iamamoron:
 
I think all of the internal strife is a way for Taleworlds to allow the player to join a faction as their own clan, battle within that faction against the other clans, and become the ruler of a kingdom without the tedious "capture 50+ fiefs". Hell, you might even be able to just build up your relation and influence with other clan leaders to become the ruler peacefully. I'm not gonna rag on it until I see how it plays out in game.
 
I feel I did not expand further on the issue and people did not see it, so I will say it.

I think that Taleworlds have placed too much power into Clans. If we take these blogs to heart then I imagine Clans will join forces with other clans, and then we start seeing heterogeneous mixtures of factions eating each other out.

So if Vlandia were to declare war on Sturgia, then in Bannerlord's system we will be seeing Aserai and Battanian lords serving for Vlandia killing each other over Suno while an army of Khuziats run over carrying Sturgian banners kill them both before being backstabbed by a greedy Empire clan who also defected to Sturgia.

So where are the Sturgians and Vlandians? Half the Vlandian lords are busy killing each other and the other half defected to the Empire. The Sturgians are feasting while one clan is busy fighting Battanian Aserai horsemen and anoter one is mucking around in Khuziat lands hunting bandits as a vassal of Monchug.

It stops being a war about Sturgia and Vlandia. Its a war brtween Clan Brugyudol and Clan Barthhearts being defeated by Clan Ulfru, they just happen to carry their faction banners.

This reduces faction identity too much as kings don't have much power and can't keep factions together especially if Clans are as greedy and backstabby as the blogs imply.

Of course I could be too pessimistic, and Clans are perfectly fine, but based on this blog, I only feel pessimistic.
 
I like civil wars in WB.
Makes the game more fun and rather hardcore, though being a deliberate option that you are to initiate or not.

Besides this 'dissent' does make it more realistic as it was in the Middle Ages, no?
 
Civil wars in WB were not so on a scale how will be in Bannerlord, but I suggest as lords and peasents begin civil wars and revolts against player when public order is low(in a image in BL is showed a fork icon suggest this thing) for make game more interesting and more challenging
 
Rainbow Dash said:
I feel I did not expand further on the issue and people did not see it, so I will say it.

I think that Taleworlds have placed too much power into Clans. If we take these blogs to heart then I imagine Clans will join forces with other clans, and then we start seeing heterogeneous mixtures of factions eating each other out.

So if Vlandia were to declare war on Sturgia, then in Bannerlord's system we will be seeing Aserai and Battanian lords serving for Vlandia killing each other over Suno while an army of Khuziats run over carrying Sturgian banners kill them both before being backstabbed by a greedy Empire clan who also defected to Sturgia.

It stops being a war about Sturgia and Vlandia. Its a war brtween Clan Brugyudol and Clan Barthhearts being defeated by Clan Ulfru, they just happen to carry their faction banners.

This reduces faction identity too much as kings don't have much power and can't keep factions together especially if Clans are as greedy and backstabby as the blogs imply.

Of course I could be too pessimistic, and Clans are perfectly fine, but based on this blog, I only feel pessimistic.
I think you're being a bit over the top.

I don't think clans will so freely change their allegiance as you suppose, we might see minor factions acting as mercenaries changing sides but that is to be expected.
Highest bidder and all that.
However clans are different and actually belong to a faction, and unless they are treated very poorly or the another faction offers very favourable terms I don't see them changing that often.

Where did you get the idea that clans will just completely ignore factions when forming alliances?

I personally relish the idea of clan on clan warfare, ever heard of the War of the Roses? that's what I imagine when I think internal conflict.
An important part of the War of the Roses was that is was started by a dispute between two Houses over the succession of the throne.
Houses which are analogous to clans. So I welcome the idea of conflicts between clans such as House of Tihr and the House of Valant.

I also think that the idea of clans bearing grudges against clans from other factions is a good idea, though I don't there should be a war between them. These clans might push for war harder than other clans but I don't think they should be able to start wars on their own, or if they do they would be punished for it.

Prominent families, like the clans which are presumably nobles, have a lot of influence and make up the power of the faction.
What makes a ruler truly powerful is that they can command these families, his vassals. That is one of the basic ideas behind feudalism.
A ruler has much less power if the nobles disobey them.

So I don't know truly how much power Taleworlds has given clans, but I don't think the situation is as dire as you seem to think it is.
 
on the screen with the gamescom was an army of 900 people. I think this is enough for the fact that the war would not be called simply a fight of individual clans


and if the lords who do not love the king after his death would have waged wars for power or separated themselves into their kingdoms it would be great
 
Rainbow Dash said:
I feel I did not expand further on the issue and people did not see it, so I will say it.

I think that Taleworlds have placed too much power into Clans. If we take these blogs to heart then I imagine Clans will join forces with other clans, and then we start seeing heterogeneous mixtures of factions eating each other out.

So if Vlandia were to declare war on Sturgia, then in Bannerlord's system we will be seeing Aserai and Battanian lords serving for Vlandia killing each other over Suno while an army of Khuziats run over carrying Sturgian banners kill them both before being backstabbed by a greedy Empire clan who also defected to Sturgia.

So where are the Sturgians and Vlandians? Half the Vlandian lords are busy killing each other and the other half defected to the Empire. The Sturgians are feasting while one clan is busy fighting Battanian Aserai horsemen and anoter one is mucking around in Khuziat lands hunting bandits as a vassal of Monchug.

It stops being a war about Sturgia and Vlandia. Its a war brtween Clan Brugyudol and Clan Barthhearts being defeated by Clan Ulfru, they just happen to carry their faction banners.

This reduces faction identity too much as kings don't have much power and can't keep factions together especially if Clans are as greedy and backstabby as the blogs imply.

Of course I could be too pessimistic, and Clans are perfectly fine, but based on this blog, I only feel pessimistic.

No way, but I suspect you know that & are just stirring discussion.  :grin:

Clans will retain feudal faction obligations - remember the armies & influence blog:

This new system allows for all lords to call on other allied lords and build their own army. Because of the large influence costs, it is of course easier for a king to do this, however there will certainly be times when some powerful lords will have more influence and money than their liege and will be able to amass their own powerful armies to take on a campaign. It also makes it possible for players to try their hand at army management relatively early in the game, before they have had a chance to climb to the top of a kingdom.

We feel that the new influence and army gathering systems better simulate the historical feudal system. When the player becomes part of a kingdom, they have obligations to their liege. This system allows players to pay for the benefits of being a lord by supporting their liege and fellow lords in military campaigns while building up influence within the realm to serve their own purposes.

https://steamcommunity.com/games/261550/announcements/detail/1457336536714336332

The only clans I expect to fight their own wars are minor factions in their own right:
NPC99 said:
The Bannerlord Encyclopeadia in the Gamescom demo listed 89 clans:

8 Aserai clans
7 Battania clans
8 Kuzait clans
8 Sturgia clans
10 Vlandia clans
7 Northern Empire clans
8 Southern Empire clans
10 Western Empire clans
6 Bandit types (same as Warband)
1 Playerland - the player starts with his own clan
1 Neutral - unaffiliated NPCs/civilians?
1 Test clan
14 Minor Factions

The minor factions were:

Beni Zilal - back-alley thieves & enemies of the Aserai
Brotherhood of the Woods - enemies of Vlandia
Company of the Golden Boar - a mercenary company associated with Vlandia
Eleftheroi - cossack enemies of the Empire
Embers of the Flame - enemies of the Empire
Forrest People (Sons of the Forest in Dev blogs) - Finnic tribes & enenies of Sturgia
Ghilman - a brotherhood of slave soldiers or Mamluks associated with the Aserai
Hidden Hand - a rural mafia & enemies of the Empire
Jawwal - Bedouin enemies of the Aserai
Karakhuzaits - traditional steppe tribe & enemies of Khuzait
Lake Rats - enemies of Sturgia
Legion of the Betrayed - a mercenary company formed from a disbanded Empire Legion
Skolderbrotva - Nord/Jomsviking mercenary brotherhood associated with Sturgia
Wolfskins - Fianna enemies of Battania

One of the minor factions mentioned in the Dev blogs, which wasn't listed was the Nord Varangian guard of the dead Emperor, which turned into a mercenary company. Unless this is also the Skolderbrotva which the Dev blogs associated with Sturgia.
The other was the Watchers or Akritai from the Empire's borders. Were they renamed Embers of the Flame?
 
Honestly we don`t know enough about how tight the factions are. From what I`ve read it seems the Clans are mostly supposed to make inner politics more interesting rather than more violent. I don`t expect civil wars to be common, I find it more likely that clans will lean in to marshal elections, army gatherings and successions. Civil wars are difficult to balance and I find it highly unlikely that clans will have enough autonomy to spontaneously switch sides. Probably both clans and individual lords will embrace the chance for some profitable looting

That being said, faction management might benefit from a "Realm peace" -function, where the ruler could use influence to enforce a period of internal co-operation in the face of a major external threat.

Another thing that I`m actually worried about is that instability implied in the flavor text is just that - flavor text and will have no impact whatsoever in the gameplay.
 
Rainbow Dash said:
I feel I did not expand further on the issue and people did not see it, so I will say it.

I think that Taleworlds have placed too much power into Clans. If we take these blogs to heart then I imagine Clans will join forces with other clans, and then we start seeing heterogeneous mixtures of factions eating each other out.
I think you've made an unstated assumption that lord defection will be handled just like it was in Warband, where a lord from faction A will leave his faction and must necessarily join another faction, taking his troops with him. You may have also taken it a step further and assumed that new troops this lord recruits will match his original faction rather than his new one (which is not how it worked in Warband, new units matched the lord's current faction). Unfortunately, Warband's factions are bland, homogeneous entities with no internal differentiation, so if a lord wished to defect he could only defect from the entire faction rather than a subset of it, and the only place he could go was to another faction.

In Bannerlord, we know that factions do have internal differentiation (clans and minor factions) and so there are new possibilities for defectors. They may defect from their clan rather than from the faction, and this may even happen amicably through marriage. They may leave the faction mainstream and affiliate themselves with a minor faction, which for all intents & purposes are still part of the overall faction. If they do become full-on expats, then it's likely to be handled like Warband where they integrate themselves into their new faction and begin recruiting their new faction's troops. What we may see then is expat lords with out-of-place names and appearances (a Khuzait man doesn't look like a Sturgian man, etc.) fighting with a mix of their old units that they haven't lost yet and new units from their current faction. Seeing as this actually happened in reality--even without defection or treason--it's not something I would worry about.

What's more interesting to me is what you describe as a problem, but which is actually a more accurate representation of feudal society and a dramatic shift from Warband.
It stops being a war about Sturgia and Vlandia. Its a war brtween Clan Brugyudol and Clan Barthhearts being defeated by Clan Ulfru, they just happen to carry their faction banners.

This reduces faction identity too much as kings don't have much power and can't keep factions together especially if Clans are as greedy and backstabby as the blogs imply.
This is precisely what happened throughout history. Kings and emperors had to compel their vassals to cooperate with the crown, either subtly or overtly. Several kingdoms fell apart because of in-fighting of vassals which were selfishly trying to increase their own wealth, power, and influence. It is the king or emperor's responsibility to police their vassals, and the amount of authority each faction sovereign has in Bannerlord has been described. The Battanians, for instance, have a king with very little authority over the clans. The Imperials, on the other hand, fractured when there was no clear successor to their very powerful figurehead. The Battanian culture places very little importance on centralized power, while the Empire successor states consider it paramount.

Hopefully we will see these cultural differences at play in Bannerlord, where Battanians are effectively dependent on the whims of the most powerful clans (which are allowed to grow practically unchecked because the crown can't or won't stop them), while the Empire will have weaker individual clans but much greater cooperation in times of need.
 
Some mods in Warband already work with the concept of civil war, when some lords get together and stablish a new faction (vide Medieval Conquests), so vassals of the  Kingdom Of England can form the Kingdom of Britannia, for example, and start a "civil war".

I think that's possible to achieve a scenary of civil war without total caos or complex consequences using this concept, since a clan that got strong enough can form another faction or sub-faction, having it own system of clans and maitaining the dynamic of diplomatic relations in the game, without making it super complex. This could match up with the new dynamic NPC's system, so if a clan form a faction, another clan can rise up to fill the gap.

I believe that internal grudges will exist to make gameplay more interesting, for example: if the Kingdom's Marshall is from Pazuzu clan, and the Balrog clan does not like the Pazuzu clan and wants another marshall, they could intentionally neglect the call-to-arms and boycott the military campaign of the marshall from the Pazuzu clan, and then increasing his "controversy".
 
Back
Top Bottom