Community Feedback-based EARLY ACCESS ROADMAP - ready for you, Taleworlds!

Does this roadmap represent your basic wants for Bannerlord?

  • Yes

    Votes: 260 87.0%
  • No

    Votes: 39 13.0%

  • Total voters

Currently viewing this thread:

five bucks

Sergeant at Arms
When Taleworlds started Early Access, they said they'd use community feedback to bring the game to the level that the community expects, and wanted to release in a year. But a year has passed and the game is far from finished. Major problems which players have complained about since launch still aren't fixed, but instead, things get added which nobody asked for.

It seems like TW's devs each follow their own path, instead of working together on a plan based on community expectations. I hope I'm wrong, but that's the impression we get. Community managers can rarely confirm any long-term information, indicating TW has no plan. We have this statement, which is good but only seems to list short-term goals - not long-term ones. If there is no long-term plan, that explains the 8 years of development, and delayed release: If 90 people all work without a clear goal, you get confusion and wasted effort.

So: Taleworlds needs a long-term roadmap that states how Bannerlord should look when it's finished. And yet, despite - many - requests, there still isn't one.

That's why this thread is here. I sorted community feedback from all over these forums, and elsewhere, to make an Early Access Roadmap for Taleworlds, so if they do want to "bring the game to the level the community expects", here they can easily see what the community expects.

But keep in mind we're just customers, and Taleworlds is just a company (one that, to be fair, made millions of dollars by hyping up this Early Access). They don't have unlimited resources. They are obligated to provide what they led customers to believe the game would be like, but they can't make everyone's dream game. So I limited community suggestions in this post to only things within the established scope of Mount & Blade. Even then it's a very long list!

With that out of the way, here it is. Completed issues and added content/features are marked in green. Issues/features/content which Taleworlds said they are working on are marked yellow. Features which are "probably not" happening are in grey. If I made any errors, please let me know. This post was made in patch 1.5.8, and I'll try to keep it updated.


CATEGORY 1: Features missing that were previously in M&B, or were mentioned in dev blogs. (High Priority)
Taleworlds used the Mount & Blade name to sell Bannerlord; to be true to that, it must be as good as their previous Mount & Blade product, Warband. TW hyped up buyers by talking about new features in the developer blogs, so they should deliver on those expectations.

Civil Wars: A noble can claim they should own an existing kingdom, and recruit you and other nobles to their cause in a war against the current ruler. This feature was in Warband, and also mentioned in dev blogs.
* Kingdom Court: In Warband, you could choose a fief to hold your Court in. Nobles who were interested in joining your faction would arrive at your Court so you didn't have to chase them down yourself, and a Minister in the Court would tell you about quests that needed completing in your kingdom.
* Suggesting to allied nobles to attack/defend a specific location without you, or bring reinforcements. A similar feature, setting defensive or offensive behaviour for allied parties, was added in 1.5.10.
* Ability to promote companions to nobles as a faction ruler.
* Deserters: Former troops who were a stronger neutral enemy than normal bandits, and spawn when low-morale troops abandon their party.
* Manhunters: Neutral bounty hunters who spawned to fight bandits in areas of high bandit activity, and had unique recruitable troops.
* Choosing whether you accept the offer to ransom a captive enemy noble, or keep them prisoner (Added in 1.5.10).
* Reasons for support for war or peace (Added in 1.6.1)
* Minor Faction bases as seen in the 2016 demo video, as minor factions need somewhere to recruit their troops and for the player to hire them.

Feasts: The ability for nobles or the player to hold feasts during peacetime, to increase Influence and relations, and create an opportunity for the player to conveniently talk to lots of nobles in one location, along with a benefit to immersion.
* Reactive Companions: In Warband, companions sometimes told the player stories about themselves or the world, and presented the player with choices to make, such as disputes between companions. Unique companions with persistent personalities, appearances and stats.
* Political quests: Plots to betray a faction ruler. (A "Noble Revolt" political quest added in 1.6). Resolving disputes between nobles.
* Noble Duels: Insulting a noble so they challenge you to a one-on-one Duel. If you win, you reduce that noble's Influence and gain relation with their enemies, but you lose relation with them and their friends.
* Sandbox Mode: Option to skip the main quest and choose your own starting situation (Added in 1.5.9).
* Ironman Mode: Option to play a save where you cannot quit without saving (Added in 1.6).
* Courtship: Coming back more times to visit, to improve your chances of success in courtship. Rival suitors who compete with you for a love interest, and must be persuaded to quit, or dueled.
* Skill Books: Items which you can buy from a bookseller to increase a certain skill over time.
* Sword Sisters: Hiring peasant women you free from enemies, and upgrading them into camp followers who become combat troops.
* Organized Crime system: Taking over an alleyway from a gang to create your own highly profitable criminal operation there, which is described on the Steam Store page as "building a secret criminal empire".

* Nobles who hate you hiring Assassins to attack you when you enter town. Belligerent Drunks attacking in taverns.
* Visible spawn point marker for reinforcements.
* Fighting your way out in civilian gear after failing to sneak into a town.
* Prison Break quest and battling your way out of the dungeons/town. (Added in 1.5.9)
* Fighting in the keep after winning the wall fight of a castle siege. (Added in 1.6.1)
* Defenders making a stand inside the streets when they have lost the walls during a town siege.
* Tax Collection quest where you must enter a village to forcibly collect taxes (Added in 1.6.1)
* Nobles with the Daring trait being more likely to use aggressive battle tactics, and Cautious nobles being more likely to use defensive tactics.
* Pre-battle army placement in field battles.
* Siege commander AI which splits its forces on multiple fronts.
* Banners borne by troops as shown in the 2017 video.


CATEGORY 2: Completing and balancing existing features, or adjusting them to create more satisfying gameplay. (High Priority)
Although I know TW is aware of some of these issues, they are listed for the sake of completeness.

Strategic AI: Parties don't go into friendly towns/castles when fleeing (improved in 1.5.9), will raid a village just before capturing its town, bounce back and forth between targets without committing to an action (improved in 1.5.10), do not enter to assist allied castles under siege, etc.
* Finances: Prices of weapons/armor are way too high. Average tax income from fiefs/caravans are too low. High tier troop wages should be slightly lower, but with a higher upgrade cost to compensate, for a better progression curve.
* War/Peace: Peace between wars should last longer (with a minimum duration, to prevent many short wars) so the player can regroup their forces. Kingdoms should be less likely to accept peace when they have lost territory in the war and their enemy is currently much weaker than them. AI kingdoms should offer peace to the player (Added 1.6.1).
* Castles: Not useful enough to be worth the cost of their garrison. Possible solutions: Increase their tax income a bit, increase their defensive value in non-simulated sieges, allow them to be used as a source of noble troop recruitment (In 1.5.10, villages bound to castles give noble troops).
* Autoresolve/Simulated Battle: Players don't want to use it for its purpose (skipping easy, boring battles), because they run an unacceptably high risk of valuable troops dying who would never die in a real battle; it needs to better represent the outcome an actual battle would have. AI nobles die too rarely in simulated battles.
* Governing: Player needs more ways to get towns out of starvation, and the ability to assist village recovery.
* Kingdoms with no fiefs should be removed from the game after 30 days, so their raiding parties stop being a nuisance.
* Bandit hideouts spawn too often.
* Siege Artillery: Trebuchets are too good at killing siege engines, but Fire siege engines aren't good enough at it to be worth using them. Siege machines built by AI defenders on the world map are different to the ones within the battle scene (eg: they have ballistas on the world map, but mangonels in the battle).
* The player should recieve mercenary job offers from factions. Mercenary relations should reset when a war ends, so that mercenaries don't wind up bound to a single faction.
* Voting/Influence: Having more Influence or being the ruler should have more effect on the outcome of votes. Vassals should vote based on their personality traits and relations with candidates (added in 1.6). Player should be able to remove themselves as a candidate from votes. There should be a longer delay between votes on the same topic. The leader of the army who captured a fief should be a candidate when the kingdom votes for who receives it. Clans have thousands of influence and nothing to spend it on, making large armies too easy to maintain for a long time.
* Culture Bonuses: Battanian culture speed bonus is too strong and should be halved. Khuzait troop cost bonus should be doubled.
* Imprisoning nobles is unviable as they escape very easily (fixed in 1.5.9).
* Player has almost no control over their clan/companion parties (Fixed in 1.5.10 with stance and wage options for kingdom/clan parties).
* Raiding: Small, hard-to-catch parties can easily cripple the player's economy through raiding villages, but for the player it has little use past early-game, as the reward is too small for the time it takes. Raiding should take longer for small parties, and give more reward for big parties.
* Armies: Player needs more incentive to join armies an AI is leading, as currently it has too many downsides to be worth doing.
* Minor factions: Lore-gameplay mismatch. Criminal factions (eg: Hidden Hand) don't seem to do much crime. Elite warriors in-lore (eg: Skolderbrovta) have weaker troops than normal factions' T5 units. Eleftheroi lore indicates they should be neutral with the Empire, not at war. The Beni Zilal lack dialogue or an encyclopedia description.

Skill Levelling: Takes too long overall (Fixed 1.5.10). Engineering and Charm need more ways to level them. Trade, Roguery, Leadership and Medicine need to be easier to level. Steward is too easy to level. Trade should level when owned workshops return a profit.
* Skill Effects: You should be able to sell (but not buy) fiefs without needing the level 300 Trade perk, as it makes no sense you cannot sell something you own. Athletics, Charm and Engineering skills are underpowered for the player. Riding perks should be nerfed slightly as they are almost mandatory. Leadership perk "Loyalty and Honor" is bugged to apply to T2+ troops and makes morale unimportant by making it easy to get fearless troops; its effect should be changed to only make T4+ troops fearless.
* Tactics skill is too focused on simulated battles, giving little benefit in real ones. This is bad, as it discourages players who level Tactics from actually fighting their battles and getting to use tactics. Tactics should instead allow you to alter ratio of enemy and ally troops on the battlefield in your favour, as it did in Warband.
* Smithing: If you are lucky and get good parts early you can easily make game-breakingly valuable weapons (improved in 1.6). Some weapon types lack parts, e.g. two-handed maces. Smelting cheap weapons gives too many good materials. Unlocking recipes by grindy click-spamming is not fun (Orders system added in 1.6 made smithing more fun).
* Companions: Some cultures only have 1 companion available at game start. Companions/clan members take too long to level up skills. Attributes and focus points given to companions are too random and can leave the companion with inadequate stats for their role. Some personality traits seem to have little/no effect.
* Personality Traits: Honor and Mercy traits are too difficult to increase; Valor, Calculating and Generosity are almost impossible to increase. Various quests do not provide the trait gain they should. Executing people increases Deceitfulness, which makes no sense; it should increase Cruelty.
* Persuasion: It is highly reliant on luck, which is unfair to the player and encourages save-scumming. Potential solution: Make the system more deterministic. If player has enough skills/traits/relations for a dialogue option, they always succeed. If the player doesn't meet the threshold, there is a very small chance of success, which makes it worth trying the option but doesn't make it worth save-scumming to force it.
* Allow camels to be bought in markets.
* Upgrading a unit should use the cheapest horse the player has, not the most expensive.
* NPC Relations: Gaining good relations with nobles by repeatedly attacking and releasing them makes no sense; it should instead be a minor gain or loss, based on the noble's personality traits. Relation with your spouse should be higher. Relation should have more influence on the likelihood of persuading NPCs, or of enemy nobles allowing you to leave without a fight. You should be able to secretly convince nobles to join your faction before openly declaring independence.
* Quests: Some quests do not trigger often enough (Fixed? in 1.6.1). There is a lack of interesting quests worth doing in the mid/late game. (Improved in 1.6 and 1.6.1 with "Conquest of City", "Noble Revolt" and "Revenue Farming").
* Tournaments: Become pointless by mid-game. To make them useful, there needs to be higher levels of tournaments which have tougher enemies, but reward the winner with more money, renown, and relations with the town.
* Dialogue: Many lines of dialogue are not implemented, don't trigger, or have grammar/spelling issues (improved in 1.5.10, 1.6 and 1.6.1). Traits, relations, and the player's actions should alter dialogue recieved more, e.g. if the player kills the ruler of a faction, other NPCs should acknowledge it in dialogue.

* Singleplayer Armor/Damage model: Armor gives much less protection than it should, especially against arrows. This makes expensive armor not worth its cost, is unrealistic, makes companions/nobles/high tier units too easy to kill, and causes archers/horse archers to be vastly overpowered, which leads to shallow tactics and battles ending too quickly.
* Combat AI has multiple problems. Major issues include: Cavalry are very bad at hitting infantry with lances. Troops don't block or parry enough (if the AI gets hit, it will attack instead of blocking), and high skill AIs are easily stunlocked to death by two low skill AIs. Ranged unit AI stops targeting cavalry outside of medium range (Fixed 1.5.9). Infantry AI is too accurate at hitting fast moving targets, and is too quick when turning to face an enemy behind them. Cavalry will charge to the other side of the map to gain charging distance on an enemy who is behind them moving at the same speed (Fixed 1.5.10). Ranged units sometimes ignore close threats to focus on enemies who are too far away (Fixed 1.5.10). Some polearm troops don't use their primary weapon by default. Spearmen allow enemies to get in very close range before attacking.
* Due to collision zones, crowds of units jitter rapidly, and can stand inside each other and attack through each other.
* Singleplayer Weapon Balance: Throwing weapons don't do enough shield damage (Fixed 1.5.9). Player and the AI cannot brace pikes in singleplayer. Crossbows should have indefinite aiming time. Spears and pikes are too slow and weak, slashing polearms are too strong.
* Horses: Attacking from horseback with swords and spears feels very inconsistent; the animations poorly match the hitboxes and attacks do not have enough reach. Horses charging into infantry don't cause enough knockback and thus get easily caught in even thin infantry formations.
* Multiple shields and armor pieces have protection values which do not match their appearance, or their level of quality relative to other pieces of equipment. (For example, Reinforced Round Shield looks stronger than the standard Round Shield, but provides worse protection).
* AI captains charge into the thick of battle and die. They should be staying behind their formation and only fighting when the fight comes to them. (Improved in 1.5.10, captains spawn in the middle of their formation).
* The chance of AI nobles/companions dying in real (non-simulated) battles is too high.
* Reinforcements spawning right in the middle of a fight can cause the player to lose in situations they otherwise would have won.
* Retreating from a battle is highly exploitable due to having little penalty associated with it.
* Morale: Triggers too easily against low tier troops, but has almost no effect against mid/high tier troops - needs to be a more gradual curve. Perfect morale is easily obtained for low tier troops (fixed in 1.5.9). Morale should have a global effect that allows the player to cause chain-routs when an army loses its commander or becomes heavily outnumbered, as the devblogs said, with tier having medium effect on likelihood of rout.
* Sieges: Troops use siege ladders and siege towers very inefficiently on some maps (improved in 1.6.1), and attack the inner castle gates one at a time (Fixed in 1.6.1). Siege towers shouldn't drop their bridge until a group of attackers are ready at the top. Battering rams get in the way of troop pathing (Fixed 1.5.9). Defenders don't stand close enough to cover the gap of a breached wall or gate, allowing attackers to flank them. Defenders shouldn't climb onto siege ladders or siege towers to pursue the enemy. The player should be able to order troops to stop setting up ladders. Attacking artillery often hits allied siege towers or troops while trying to hit enemies (Fixed in 1.5.10 and 1.6.1). When they aren't bugged, sieges are too easy for attackers; the ratio of spawned attackers to defenders should be more even. Defenders should be able to open the main gate from the outside so they can retreat after a sally-out.
* SP Faction Variety: Half of the faction troop trees are very similar and lack distinct strengths and weaknesses, making the game more repetitive and less varied. Each faction should be more unique in what their armies can and can't do, so the player has a reason to use different tactics.
* Prison Breaks: Need the ability to tell the prisoner to wait where they are (Added 1.6.1). A successful breakout should provide more reward.
* Tactics are very frustrating to execute when your units chase after the wrong enemies when you want them to attack a specific enemy formation. Possible solution: Allow the player to order a formation to attack a specific enemy formation (many players have requested this).

Many town, castle, village, tavern, and field battle scenes are unimplemented. (Many added in 1.5.9, 1.5.10, and 1.6.1)
* Rulers of a faction lack clothing which makes them look like what they're meant to be, such as crowns for battle and civilian outfits (great models were added in 1.5.10, 1.6 and 1.6.1)
* Female NPCs look very strange when smiling (facial animations improved in 1.5.10 but smiles still look weird).
* NPCs in conversation do not blink, which makes them look creepy.
* Male NPCs often look very similar. Deeply set eyes, Egg shaped head, bulbous long nose, and highly pronounced jowls/cheekbones are a very common combination.
* Emblems are applied to shields off-centre.
* Upgrading large quantities of troops in the UI is irritating. (Fixed 1.6)
* Displays of money should have commas to help read large amounts. Eg: 8,743,830 instead of 8743830
* Troops have open hands when holding their weapons in photo mode.
* Frequent sound for relation gain is annoying.
* Music: Some situations lack music variety. Music can loop very noticeably.
* Balding haircuts.
* Unimplemented voiceovers.

Mod tools and their documentation need to be completed (improved in 1.6.1), and the modding community have requested the code to be more easily accessible, with less use of internal keywords (done in 1.6 and 1.6.1).
* Choosing which troops are used in Custom Battle (Added in 1.6).
* Custom servers for Multiplayer.
* Various mechanics in the game are poorly explained, and could receive more information in the Encyclopedia.
* Performance improvements, e.g. memory leaks in sieges. (Ongoing - Major improvements in 1.6 and 1.6.1)
* General bug/crash fixing. (Ongoing every patch - TW tracks bugs in this thread)

Please note I do not understate how difficult some of these things are just because I only give them a single point. Also, while there is a lot of complaining here, there is a lot the community likes and appreciates about the game as well.


CATEGORY 3: New features needed to make existing features useful. (Mid priority)
There are multiple features in Bannerlord which don't have much reason for the player to use them. It's fair to assume that if you buy a game because of an advertised feature, in the game it should be something you want to do. Once Taleworlds has completed and polished the features which are supposed to be in the game, this should be the next priority- add mechanics which are needed to make existing features more useful.

* The beautifully detailed town scenes of Bannerlord lack gameplay reasons to explore them; about 1% of gameplay takes place there. Possible solution: Add gameplay activities which tie into the main gameplay loop and can only be done inside those scenes.
* Minor factions were said in devblogs to "have their own agendas that aren't part of the struggle for power" and do unique things. But in gameplay terms, they only work as roaming mercenaries. Minor faction troops are also under-used, even by their own factions. Possible solution: Create a unique quest for each minor faction which involves them acting as they were described to, and allows you to recruit minor faction troops as a reward.
* The heirs system is of little use to the player; if you have played long enough for your heir to take control, you've probably conquered most of Calradia anyway, and have no challenging enemies left to fight. Possible solution: Allow the AI to start civil wars in kingdoms which grow too large. This will give the player a source of enemies in the end-game, making the heirs system more useful.

These three categories make up the roadmap. The next two categories aren't part of the roadmap, and are just guidelines.


CATEGORY 4: "Pet projects." (Low priority)
Features which Taleworlds employees would personally like to see added but which are not expected or asked for by the community. As Taleworlds is being paid by the people who bought Bannerlord, and told those people they aim to make the game to the buyers' expectations, it should be higher priority to fulfill promises made to the buyers first.


CATEGORY 5: "Bonus features." (Low priority)
Any features which are popular requests among the community, but were not promised or implied by Taleworlds, and aren't needed to make the game's other features have a purpose. If Taleworlds feels like working on such things, or making them into a DLC, they can, but the customer has no right to demand these things.


@armagan @Dejan @MArdA TaleWorlds @elysebluemoon @Singil @uçanbiblo @SadShogun @Duh_TaleWorlds @lottendill @Callum
If I haven't caused offense, please feel free to use this roadmap as you wish. It would give the community great confidence to see that Taleworlds has a unified plan for the long term. If 90% of this list can get completed, Bannerlord will be a truly good sequel to Warband, and though you can never please everyone, you'll please the vast majority of your buyers.
Last edited:
After reading this book...I mean post I agree with most points.

Sadly TW will continue to ignore post like this. I hope you haven´t wasted that much time by writing this essay.


"I don't feel like you're listening to me so I'm going to throw a wall of words at you"

It's like raaaaiiaiaaan on your wedding day...

....It's a free ride when you've already paid....


can't wait to see absolutely none of this list make it into the game
I'm as pessimistic as you are at this point given the lack of communication, but if we don't try, why are we even here.
For the lols and the memes, and to see TW fail over and over again?

It´s like a seeing a car crash, I can´t just look away.

And there is some minimal hope left that things maybe will change...


Really well put together!

Unfortunately I have absolutely no faith in TW. You've put more effort into coming up with an organized strategy then they have


Spanish Gifquisition
Grandmaster Knight
I broadly agree. However, after a long time battling those windmills... I have to say that:

Oh my god, the memes. :smile: That's the real legacy of Bannerlord.
I sincerely hope the OP will get some kind of meaningful response ("tldr" "lol effortpost" are funny, but unbecoming), because he did the necessary work on behalf of the community.

This is another opportunity for Taleworlds to offer constructive engagement and say something like "thanks, we will look over the list, consult our secret roadmap, have an internal discussion over the list and we will let you know which suggestions are in our plans and which are not so you can color code them accordingly".
That won't happen. At best, Dejan will curate the list on his own and try to get them to discuss a limited number of features. The Committee for Rejecting Suggestions will tear his sub-list to shreds in a 15-minute session.
Last edited:
This is another opportunity for Taleworlds to offer constructive engagement and say something like "thanks, we will look over the list, consult our secret roadmap, have an internal discussion over the list and we will let you know which suggestions are in our plans and which are not so you can color code them accordingly".
While I applaud the OP and all the work that went into this tread I hate to say it but I think this is just wasted effort. People on these forums need to realize TW either doesn't really care or doesn't want to communicate with forum users. We've been begging for more info for a long time and they won't change now why should they, they have our money there's no need to change the status quo, and 1 or 100 posts isn't going to change how they operate.
Top Bottom