-
If you are reporting a bug, please head over to our Technical Support section for Bannerlord.
***Community Feedback ROADMAP - What Taleworlds still needs to fix!***
- Thread starter five bucks
- Start date
Users who are viewing this thread
Knight at Arms
RozBritanicus
Sergeant
I don't think so . Your friend is wrong
Forest-Bandit
Recruit
Well said
Zoogielord
Recruit
* AI Kingdoms with no fiefs left raid the player forever. They need to be removed from the game after 30 days of holding no territory.
I came back to this game from early access and came here to post about this issue, only to find it in here in my current playthrough.
How has this not been addressed, did they abandon this game? 30 days may be too early, but i just executed their fiefless leader and it made some other noble in the faction(unrelated by blood) their new leader. It makes me want to quit knowing the only way to deal with them is to execute literally every single one of them.
I came back to this game from early access and came here to post about this issue, only to find it in here in my current playthrough.
How has this not been addressed, did they abandon this game? 30 days may be too early, but i just executed their fiefless leader and it made some other noble in the faction(unrelated by blood) their new leader. It makes me want to quit knowing the only way to deal with them is to execute literally every single one of them.
It hasn't been fixed because it is intended. TW wanted fiefless factions to have a chance to come back from the dead.
Yet, forget (or don't have the capability) to give them the systems to actually come back from the dead.
Zoogielord
Recruit
That's fine, they can have time to do so. Maybe 30 days is too short. Factions shouldn't evaporate instantly because they have no fiefs. But pretending these people can keep running around fielding armies of 100+ people with good troop quality without any land(And still claim to be a lord, who does not have a dayjob) forever is ludicrous in terms of realism and in terms of gameplay. In some ways, they went way too hard on trying to emulate supposed realism in this game, only to end up with gameplay that isn't realistic at all as a consequence. These people launching a forever guerrilla war while landless is just one such thing.In my current playthrough, the southern empire has had no fiefs for FOUR years before i launched my own kingdom and hasn't owned a fief since then either. My only solution would to be execute them all, something they've apparently put in active measures against me being able to do so with lords spawning out of thin air. At some point, these people become little more than bandits. Since they have had zero fiefs, they have not launched a single siege on a castle or town.
Another good example of this(trying to make things realistic but failing) is pretending that the only way to have someone join your faction IRL would have been to the leader of a clan to get them to join you, and that you need to talk to him personally and find him across the huge map they made. The requirement of talking to the clan leader makes sense, but not that you personally have to trek across this gigantic map to find them and convince them personally. Writing is a thing. People used writing well ahead of the advent of feudalism that this game is grounded in. People with fiefs and huge amounts of dinars surely can pay a messenger to arrange a meeting at an agreed upon place at the very least. If this was an actual, intended, decision its just a very bad one both from a gameplay and a realism perpsective. This decision they apparently made and others made me realize how tedious the actual kingdom gameplay was and it just wasn't worth the time to continue playing this. Its another decision that gets in the way of what this game at its core is(and what it does best)- a medieval combat simulator with paint the map aspect to it. I want to like this game(I played unmodded warband), but there are too many things that get in the way of a huge chunk of it to actually play it beyond the early part of the game(which in my case is all set up for becoming my own kingdom). I'm at the part where i put in all the work just so i could get to the whole "fight battles and seiges all the time" stage but there's all this stuff in the way of that. Some of the decisions makes me wonder if they actually had someone inhouse playtest their game in full at all.
I know this may sound odd, but vanilla warband was far less tedious and frustrating than this game because of the decisions they've made with this title. The things i've identified don't require a huge patch to change presumably. Some of the requests people are making(Major features) would be better off done as DLC if talewords has issues with making money from their efforts.
Last edited:
It isn't fine to me. When a faction starts circling the drain and losing back-to-back field armies, it shouldn't keep fighting, it should start asking for peace. Once it is down to a city or two castles or whatever arbitrary number feels good, they should be begging and pleading for peace, with tears in their eyes and large sums of money in their hands.
The only thing fiefless factions should be doing is crying and ****ting themselves about their lost lands in someone else's throne room.
The problem is that this **** stops being fun when you do twenty times and becomes tedious instead. But even without cheats, you wind up having to slog your way through effectively the entire continent's manpower pool to actually gain anything substantial against a faction. Once I've done that chore, I expect it to stick, not for the AI to continuously pester me with wardecs and raids.
five bucks
Knight at Arms
Anyway it seems like we're all in agreement that zombie kingdoms suck and make the game more unfun.
RozBritanicus
Sergeant
I would like rebel kingdoms to become a regular kingdom and have a chance to take the map. It would add that randomness everything single playthrough where you don't what will happen. As for dead kingdoms the clans should become neutral to everyone and other kingdoms could higher them as merc's or get them to join your clan or kingdom.
five bucks
Knight at Arms
I would like that too but there need to be mechanisms for that to happen, eg rebel clans banding together, otherwise they will never be strong enough to create a faction on their own.
In fact, moreso than rebel clans, I would like to see noble clans breaking away to create their own kingdoms and taking other noble clans with them.
That seems like a good way of doing it.
Zoogielord
Recruit
When they should or should not be making peace is a different issue from whether and when the faction should dissolve. I don't think they should poof instantly because they have no fiefs. But don't disagree about them not dissolving at somepoint and the make peace formula being busted, the formula for when they should make peace is absolutely broken and makes no sense.
also, in my playthrough with the southern empire that hasn't had fiefs for four years, the way they lost their last fief was they idiotically declared on the northern empire who wasn't at war with anyone else and was much much larger(southern had a single town) and lost it, because whatever the calculus for declaring war is just as stupid as the calculus for making peace.
But yes, it stops being fun and tedious very quickly. I didn't want to play hide and seek and wack-a-mole when i bought this, but that's what this game devolves into pretty fast. The decisions they made make the experience of making your own kingdom/vassal play way worse than warband because of these issues. That's why i've quit, and occasionally look at this(but probably going to not soon since if they don't make any changes related to this there is no point, i'm done)
Two things I note on this list:
Engineering being slow to level? It takes only one siege to max it out if you use siege equipment and levels quickly throwing rocks off walls. And levels fairly quickly just laying siege.
Tribute - the system could be better, but most players seem to want factions to roll over when they are losing which is unrealistic and just makes the game easier. On top of that, you faction might roll over too easily - I am now in a faction paying 4k in tribute when we had finally captured all their nobles so we were ready to take some fiefs and they offer a 4k tribute and we took it because it was the oldest of our two wars.
I'll also add the AI should prioritize proximity more and garrison size less. They shouldn't know all the garrison sizes, really, and it's less a border gore thing and more a, hard to defend and you open yourself up to more enemies if you're willing to cross a fourth of the map outside your own territory. With minimal expansion from both I've seen Sturgia and Aserai go to war.
Just my three cents.
Engineering being slow to level? It takes only one siege to max it out if you use siege equipment and levels quickly throwing rocks off walls. And levels fairly quickly just laying siege.
Tribute - the system could be better, but most players seem to want factions to roll over when they are losing which is unrealistic and just makes the game easier. On top of that, you faction might roll over too easily - I am now in a faction paying 4k in tribute when we had finally captured all their nobles so we were ready to take some fiefs and they offer a 4k tribute and we took it because it was the oldest of our two wars.
I'll also add the AI should prioritize proximity more and garrison size less. They shouldn't know all the garrison sizes, really, and it's less a border gore thing and more a, hard to defend and you open yourself up to more enemies if you're willing to cross a fourth of the map outside your own territory. With minimal expansion from both I've seen Sturgia and Aserai go to war.
Just my three cents.
five bucks
Knight at Arms
I could have worded it better (trying to reduce post length), but what I'm trying to say is: you can't partake in sieges at all in the early game (or even some of the midgame), and there is pretty much no other source of Engineering XP, making it impossible for an Engineering oriented player to do anything with that stat for the entire first 25% of the game. The post used to say "there needs to be more ways of gaining Engineering XP" until I cut it short for brevity.
I think what most players want is for their kingdom not to propose paying tribute to a kingdom they are inflicting insane casualties, imprisonments, and fief losses on.
Seems sensible to me. I don't think factions that don't share borders should never go to war, but it should be a bit less common than now.
I am curious - what would you like to see gain engineering xp outside of sieges?
Tribute isn't about winning but willingness - willingness to wage war. I am on board with the winning kingdom not agreeing to pay extortionate tribute which I do see and agree with. A lot of posts I see. however, complain about the loser not wanting peace without the player paying which is usually justifiable.
To expand on this, I've been on the losing side, fought tooth and nail to finally get the upper hand only to have my fellow nobles sue for peace because we were getting a little bit of tribute after a long war.
Right on - and it's impossible to be perfect, as borders can change dramatically but watching vlandia march on Jalmarys from their starting borders I am just like "why?" - oh it has the smallest garrison of any town.
RozBritanicus
Sergeant
Be good if you could build your siege equipment with out having to siege so you could carry some ready to a siege and have a sorter set up time. you could say for every 60 men carry one or have the weight really high on equipment. The heavy crossbows could be deployed on the battlefield too. This would let you increase Engineering. Also your could help in your cities building projects for a build time speed buff that could aslo give you engineering.
What i would like to see is a chat between faction leaders king to king. The one that offer peace and the other then can except a meeting and meet face to face on a battlefield or city what ever and use speech checks to get the be deal you can. Could use some of that influence to make it more useful. The more intelligent and social kings would be best at this naturally but a threat of brutality could also sway a diplomacy meeting.
I think entering a region with a army without permission could raise tensions . So maybe a tribute of money to the kingdoms you pass through or if i can pass through your domain you can pass through mine. So more meetings. Thats have i would like to see it go. Plus when the player gets his own kingdom there would more to do and it would feel like you got real power as king or queen and everyone else doesn't. Obviously caravans would travel freely to keep the economy ticking.
Ah. So, historically you would never deploy siege equipment in a pitched battle and it was always constructed at the siege, not beforehand. This was for a multitude of reasons. So in this case history makes things simple for TW. (A note on ballista - while deploying them in pitched battles was foolish in the early medieval period, the Romans who developed it did deploy it effectively in pitched battles - but their engineers were better and their ballista were a bit different.)
It's funny - this is technically possible, but you have to be faction leader talking to a faction leader and suggest peace which I have never seen in all my hours playing and testing.
They have code in the game for something similar to this that is unused so I am guessing there were some problems they didn't have time for at some point. I forget what and where I saw that in the source - but next time I see it I'll try and remember to bring the details to our little thread here.
five bucks
Knight at Arms
Multiple potential ways it could be done - any one of these or something different could do the trick:
* setting up camp (like in Warband) and fortifying it with stakes (like Viking Conquest) could give early xp
* the option to help rebuild raided villages: could give XP as well as positive reputation and Mercy trait gain
* Skill books you can buy and read as you travel (like in Warband, which had an Engineering skill book)
* Similar to the above idea, Skill Trainers in different cities, who you can visit for a day to gain XP in specific skills, for example the "Engineering Master" lives in Danustica and will train you up to a certain level for a fee
The other thing is there should be more peaces concluded with neither side paying tribute.
Yeah, that's silly.
Rebuilding villages is a great idea - it makes sense in vanilla without any additional mechanics and beyond just providing xp. I am all for it.
That I can get down with - I also wish you could trade fiefs for peace. Like when my nobles take a town a million miles away, I can give it back for an earlier peace arrangement at no tribute.
Side note - paying a little bit of tribute can be an advantage as it buys you longer peace time. Kingdoms are less willing to fight you if you are paying them money and it's something I've only taken advantage of when I start my own kingdom. It'd be helpful if it was less tedious to track tribute amounts because they are also highly volatile - I've seen multi thousand denar swings in a day.
Yeah it drives me nuts.
