commanding rank system

[gencov0]

First, apologize in advance if this discussion has already been mentioned.

As mentioned earlier in the Dev blog, the leader of a battle is determined by its ranking in the clan or realms.
https://steamcommunity.com/games/261550/announcements/detail/2430169961236176684
One problem here is that most of the medieval army's command system was not directed to unit ranks, but rather to direct the forces used.

If one Duke, one Count and one Baron participated in a battle, if the Baron brought more troops than Count, he don't lend the troops to the Count. The Baron directs his troops separately, and the Count, who has few troops, takes care of his troops only.
This is the actual Medieval command ranking system in the game background.

The assignment of commanders by role for each unit is long after,
In real history, it appears to be before or after the battle of Pavia, and it is not fully established after that, but it is settled after the 30-years war.

Of course, the background of the game is not completely based on real history, but merely borrows the characteristics of the times.
However, the focus of the "influence" and "diplomacy" systems saying on the DevBlog is typical of the early Middle Ages, where the kingship was not concentrated and distributed among clans and nobles.

after all, what I want to say is that the command system in the Dev blog may can not be immersed in playing "Medieval-Feudal".

I would love to hear from the Devs and the community about this.

 

[AleksanderTheGreat]

The game is not based on realism. Its genre is under fantasy/medieval FPS/TPS. The more realistic you make a game, the more unpopular it will become. Thereby you need to balance these things in order to have an enjoyable game.

 

[Frostic]

The game is not based on realism. Its genre is under fantasy/medieval FPS/TPS. The more realistic you make a game, the more unpopular it will become. Thereby you need to balance these things in order to have an enjoyable game.

Agreed, imagine bleeding to death in your first battle because an arrow hit an artery in your leg. 

 

[gencov0]

Agreed, imagine bleeding to death in your first battle because an arrow hit an artery in your leg. 

well that's tempting
that happens everytime when i play ArmA mutiplayer instead of Arrow is Bullets
and i enjoyed it

 

[hruza]

One problem here is that most of the medieval army's command system was not directed to unit ranks, but rather to direct the forces used.

If one Duke, one Count and one Baron participated in a battle, if the Baron brought more troops than Count, he don't lend the troops to the Count. The Baron directs his troops separately, and the Count, who has few troops, takes care of his troops only.
This is the actual Medieval command ranking system in the game background.

True, and given new system doesn't add anything to the playability either -unless you bring no own forces to the battle, I don't really know why it was introduced over classic MB system which was much more enjoyable and more historically accurate. It just needed interface for player receiving commands from AI commanders in case he is subordinate to them.

 

[gencov0]

The game is not based on realism. Its genre is under fantasy/medieval FPS/TPS. The more realistic you make a game, the more unpopular it will become. Thereby you need to balance these things in order to have an enjoyable game.

well yes, it's for realism.
but what makes that would be un-enjoyable?

 

[John the Roleplayer]

Keep in mind that this system applies only when several parties are formally organised into an army via the influence system. Warband style battles can likely still occur when nearby allied parties reinforce one another due to proximity (unless they changed something about that, which hasn't been mentioned).

 

[FBohler]

In Calradia it works this way.

Calradia and real world are different places.

One belong inside your computer while another belongs outside.

 

[DoDoCat]

King Harlaus: That's nice

 

[killer-blead]

Agreed, imagine bleeding to death in your first battle because an arrow hit an artery in your leg. 

well that's tempting
that happens everytime when i play ArmA mutiplayer instead of Arrow is Bullets
and i enjoyed it

This would also mean it happens in SP, you won't get a lot of time to do anything in a game you could pump thousands of hours in if your first battle is pretty much always your last.

 

[AleksanderTheGreat]

The game is not based on realism. Its genre is under fantasy/medieval FPS/TPS. The more realistic you make a game, the more unpopular it will become. Thereby you need to balance these things in order to have an enjoyable game.

well yes, it's for realism.
but what makes that would be un-enjoyable?

You can never make a game to realistic, because if you did, it would be a bit boring to almost die every time you get sliced or if you get cut, and get infected and die by the infection. Maybe it's a wrong word to use, certainly some people would find that enjoyable, so lets call it a little boring.

 

[gencov0]

The game is not based on realism. Its genre is under fantasy/medieval FPS/TPS. The more realistic you make a game, the more unpopular it will become. Thereby you need to balance these things in order to have an enjoyable game.

well yes, it's for realism.
but what makes that would be un-enjoyable?

You can never make a game to realistic, because if you did, it would be a bit boring to almost die every time you get sliced or if you get cut, and get infected and die by the infection. Maybe it's a wrong word to use, certainly some people would find that enjoyable, so lets call it a little boring.

oh yes, let get it to the first.
first of all, i didn't mentioned about "Full varieties of Realism" (who brought this, anyway?)
I said the Commanding rank systems only, and you just reply 'bout "realism will make game un-popular, and make you boring". of what? exactly?

As everyone here knows, M & B is not a perfect realism game, but a genre game that focuses on realism as much as possible.
For example, the "influence" or "clan" mentioned above, or the family and death system. Looking at these things, Devs' focus is to get as close as possible to medieval feudal realism, which seems to be within the "realism limit" of the game I understand.
(I also played this game for over 10 years. )
So let's stop the reaction of "You don't know this game."

Once again, I'm talking about what a commanding rank system might be like a more medieval feudal-ish.
I never mentioned making every part of the game to realistic. (Ignore the arrows in the legs thing.    It's just about personal taste.)

 

[MountAndMemeButterlord]

I find this system confusing and think a second devblog explaining it in detail would be great.

"For determining who will lead what, the game first assigns a seniority rank to each lord present, including the player. Calculation of the rank takes into account clan renown and power, and of course, faction rulers are given a huge boost to reflect their position within the realm. The system also takes into account the leader of the army itself, as well as, the number of troops that each lord has brought to the field of battle.

The lord with the highest rank is selected as the commander for the battle. Following this, captains are allowed to choose the formation they will lead in order of their rank. For NPC lords, an AI routine selects the most appropriate formation (usually the largest and most prestigious one remaining).

When it’s the player’s turn to choose, the game displays the menu above. Formations led by higher ranking lords are shown as locked and may not be selected. Players may select any of the remaining ones, or choose not to lead any formation at all (entering the battle as just a warrior with no special responsibilities). Once the player makes a choice, any remaining AI lords are also assigned to their choices in the order of their rank. Players may then review this order of battle and then click done if satisfied with how things look.

Conversely, if the player has the highest rank and is assigned as the commander, then they will be given total control over the entire army during the battle. In this case, the player is still shown the menu but can’t change anything and just has to proceed after reviewing the information".

https://www.taleworlds.com/en/Games/Bannerlord/Blog/114

I have a few questions, most of them should be simple to answer. Does this only apply when a lord/sergeant/mercenary captain/etc doesn't have their own army to command? Will personal stats be taken into account when they choose what formation to command (so high renown horse archer lords choosing to lead the ranged cavalry even if the infantry formation is larger and more elite)? As commander can you really not assign formations to lead, do the lords always figure it out among themselves by rank and renown? What will it look like when another lord nearby brings his army to the battlefield?

 

[AleksanderTheGreat]

The game is not based on realism. Its genre is under fantasy/medieval FPS/TPS. The more realistic you make a game, the more unpopular it will become. Thereby you need to balance these things in order to have an enjoyable game.

well yes, it's for realism.
but what makes that would be un-enjoyable?

You can never make a game to realistic, because if you did, it would be a bit boring to almost die every time you get sliced or if you get cut, and get infected and die by the infection. Maybe it's a wrong word to use, certainly some people would find that enjoyable, so lets call it a little boring.

oh yes, let get it to the first.
first of all, i didn't mentioned about "Full varieties of Realism" (who brought this, anyway?)
I said the Commanding rank systems only, and you just reply 'bout "realism will make game un-popular, and make you boring". of what? exactly?

As everyone here knows, M & B is not a perfect realism game, but a genre game that focuses on realism as much as possible.
For example, the "influence" or "clan" mentioned above, or the family and death system. Looking at these things, Devs' focus is to get as close as possible to medieval feudal realism, which seems to be within the "realism limit" of the game I understand.
(I also played this game for over 10 years. )
So let's stop the reaction of "You don't know this game."

Once again, I'm talking about what a commanding rank system might be like a more medieval feudal-ish.
I never mentioned making every part of the game to realistic. (Ignore the arrows in the legs thing.    It's just about personal taste.)

If you stick to the topic, of what he asked, then maybe you can find out why I replied as I did also maybe I misunderstood what you actually asked, my apologize.

For example, the "influence" or "clan" mentioned above, or the family and death system. Looking at these things, Devs' focus is to get as close as possible to medieval feudal realism, which seems to be within the "realism limit" of the game I understand.

I agree on this.

So let's stop the reaction of "You don't know this game."

Sorry, I don't know what you are referring to.