Companions dying..

正在查看此主题的用户

Heroes, as in the people who are supposed to be exceptional, should not need to be put into a hidey hole so that they never actually fight. That is absurd. They shouldn't need to be babied so that they don't die in every battle.

Leaders and Captains of armies very rarely got killed, they were far too valuable as captives. If I lose the battle then ransom them back to me or something, I am fine with that. If I win the battle then any captives would ... y'know ... not be captives anymore. The vast majority of battlefield wounds would not cause death either, especially on units wearing lamellar or mail armour with quality helmets. A companion dying should be a rare event and not something that happens every other battle unless they are sent to hide in the corner of the map. An arrow to the eye, an axe halfway through their head, a spear hitting a major artery .. those are the types of things that should happen once in a blue moon and cause a companion death. There are very very few thing's that kill a man outright. At the very least it should be an event chain system where they are in a critical condition and being tended to and death being one of a number of possible outcomes alongside full recovery, partial recovery (permanent wounds).

To address an earlier point. we aren't talking about a companion in a "tough or impossible" situation where they are fighting off 10 people simultaneously and get beaten to death. We are talking about people in armour worth a small kingdom's fortune in the middle of a melee that die the second they get hit by a sword slash that would barely bruise them in reality. If they are in a hopeless situation then it is fine if they die. If I have 100 men fighting 50 peasants and I only lose 5 men and 2 of them are companions then that is grade-A bull****.

As it stands companions have zero in-battle use and are only useful as governors or as scared little children hiding at the back of the map. To make matters worse Taleworld's have absurdly chosen to tie the birth and death features together so that you either get all or nothing. It was perfect how it was before - death from old age and birth by default with the option to toggle battlefield deaths. Now if I want to play that way I need to revert to an old version of the game without the revolution and anti-snowball features which is unacceptable.

Leave the option in for all of the masochists who want it. Just let the rest of us turn the damn thing off.
 
Heroes, as in the people who are supposed to be exceptional, should not need to be put into a hidey hole so that they never actually fight. That is absurd. They shouldn't need to be babied so that they don't die in every battle.

Leaders and Captains of armies very rarely got killed, they were far too valuable as captives. If I lose the battle then ransom them back to me or something, I am fine with that. If I win the battle then any captives would ... y'know ... not be captives anymore. The vast majority of battlefield wounds would not cause death either, especially on units wearing lamellar or mail armour with quality helmets. A companion dying should be a rare event and not something that happens every other battle unless they are sent to hide in the corner of the map. An arrow to the eye, an axe halfway through their head, a spear hitting a major artery .. those are the types of things that should happen once in a blue moon and cause a companion death. There are very very few thing's that kill a man outright. At the very least it should be an event chain system where they are in a critical condition and being tended to and death being one of a number of possible outcomes alongside full recovery, partial recovery (permanent wounds).

To address an earlier point. we aren't talking about a companion in a "tough or impossible" situation where they are fighting off 10 people simultaneously and get beaten to death. We are talking about people in armour worth a small kingdom's fortune in the middle of a melee that die the second they get hit by a sword slash that would barely bruise them in reality. If they are in a hopeless situation then it is fine if they die. If I have 100 men fighting 50 peasants and I only lose 5 men and 2 of them are companions then that is grade-A bull****.

As it stands companions have zero in-battle use and are only useful as governors or as scared little children hiding at the back of the map. To make matters worse Taleworld's have absurdly chosen to tie the birth and death features together so that you either get all or nothing. It was perfect how it was before - death from old age and birth by default with the option to toggle battlefield deaths. Now if I want to play that way I need to revert to an old version of the game without the revolution and anti-snowball features which is unacceptable.

Leave the option in for all of the masochists who want it. Just let the rest of us turn the damn thing off.
(y)
 
Are they exceptional heroes, or some random you picked up for less than the price of a lame horse in a local tavern?

Think of your companions as your most trusted advisors and specialists. They fill a specialised role. Do you send your best scout into the front line in a battle? Or your best doctor? or best engineer? No. you send your grunts.

Realistically, an historic medieval era army had many non-combat roles, or specialised combat roles. Armies had payroll officers, accountants, architects and engineers, surveyors, cooks, all manner of logistics officers, plus a million different camp followers and clingers. Armies are about more than just grunts.

My companions get into the fight when needed. That doesn't mean treating them with kid-gloves, it means respecting them. I treat them like I treat my character. I don't charge the front line solo at the opening of a battle. I attack when an opportunity arises to maximise my impact, my character is better alive to command. I group my companions together and use them as a mobile reserve. I can place them where I see weakness in my line. They are all mounted, and missile armed - which makes them great to sit in behind the front line, killing any cavalry who break through.

It's a respect thing.
 
I am totally fine with companions being able to die, be it a small % chance. The first time either of mine got wounded, they died. Both times they were the only casualty of the entire damn battle. Enemy lords that I damn near cut in half for 300+ damage (glaives are so damn op) are ALWAYS wounded. Yet my companion trips over a rock, and is dead.

I get this is EA and things need balancing, but even save scumming them back to life, they die the very next time they are wounded again while the same lord takes another 300+ damage hit to the face and is only wounded. Thats just silly.
 
Are they exceptional heroes, or some random you picked up for less than the price of a lame horse in a local tavern?

The game literally defines them as Heroes. This isn't something I will argue based on their price or skills, the game objectively labels them as "Heroes".

Think of your companions as your most trusted advisors and specialists. They fill a specialised role. Do you send your best scout into the front line in a battle? Or your best doctor? or best engineer? No. you send your grunts.

Realistically, an historic medieval era army had many non-combat roles, or specialised combat roles. Armies had payroll officers, accountants, architects and engineers, surveyors, cooks, all manner of logistics officers, plus a million different camp followers and clingers. Armies are about more than just grunts.
This would be fine - if there was the ability to leave those specific companions out of the battle entirely. The fact that feature doesn't exist makes it a moot point. If they are sent into battle by the game itself then they should be able to perform that role without dying every single time.

My companions get into the fight when needed. That doesn't mean treating them with kid-gloves, it means respecting them. I treat them like I treat my character. I don't charge the front line solo at the opening of a battle. I attack when an opportunity arises to maximise my impact, my character is better alive to command. I group my companions together and use them as a mobile reserve. I can place them where I see weakness in my line. They are all mounted, and missile armed - which makes them great to sit in behind the front line, killing any cavalry who break through.

It's a respect thing.


Having those characters in a specific unit for their safety and only putting them into battle when it is deemed safe to do so is treating them with kid-gloves. You cannot trust them not to die if you don't go out of your way to stop it happening. Do you think medieval army leaders had all of their captains following them around doing nothing? No, they actively took part in battles. I respect my companions by giving them the best armour that many can buy that would stop all but the most unfortunate of blows from killing them. I respect my companions by accepting that I would willingly pay thousands of Denar's in ransom if they were captured in battle. I respect my companions by realising that Aeric the Red who has lore retelling him being a great warrior should be able to hold his own in a battle.

I am not even against death being a possibility. However, it should be a rare possibility that only occurs once in a blue moon and not an everyday occurrence unless you take extensive precautions. If it is not a rare possibility then it should be toggleable in a way that doesn't lock away an entire separate aspect of the game.
 
You're split quoting, so it's clear you feel strongly about this. We can agree to disagree.


I agree with op that companions could have more impact in combat.. it is a common complaint they are little better then the average t3 or t4 troop. Their defining use, captain skills, is not well represented to the player so its hard to know if they actually have any impact on the battle or not. Companions should die in combat and be part of the permanent death system but a cut and dry 10 percent is lame.

I wish companions had more of a durability system where they had a 10 percent chance on knockout to recieve a wound and debuff to stats to represent being scarred or losing a limb ect. Eventually after enough wounds were collected they would be too hobbled to be useful or would die in combat at a certain threshold. Much better then the current dice roll system we have now.
 
The worst is when you are part of another character's army and you have 0% control over your companions. I had a battle where I was leading the archers. My companions, including my wife, were all part of the cavalry. The other lord says we'll fight defensively, before their infantry were even close to our infantry the AI sends all of the cavalry on a frontal charge against their infantry. Most of their infantry were using spears so yeah...lost my wife (who is pretty decked out and highly skilled) and my engineer in that battle. Ended up save scumming from that bs. I've basically relegated my wife to governess duties since there is no way to predictably keep her alive. I've skewered people for 300+ hp damage and only injured them, so I assume its just a random roll.

I also hate how they have the lord/companion always lead a formation from horseback in the front of the formation. I can see them leading a charge, but in a shieldwall that is just asking for death.
 
I can certainly understand frustration at the AI killing your companions. I decided I'd had enough of that carry on. I avoid finding myself or my parties under an AI lord's command.
 
Maybe you should swap your companions to the Archers. There they survive longer as cav or infantry{they should have a range weapon} . Regarding other formations, like 5-8. Take care if you fight in villages since, in these scenes, those formations will spawn 50 meters away from the enemy
 
Do you send your best scout into the front line in a battle? Or your best doctor? or best engineer? No. you send your grunts.
Actually, I'd like an option to set a companion as a non-combat one so they would simply not participate in battles.
 
Yeah, I'd prefer to have a reserves/baggage train option to allow for companions or even troops to stay out of a battle. I think it could speed up training low level troops if say your T4+ troops and companions could stay out of the battle allowing your low level troops the chance to really cut their teeth on an enemy (looters/bandits).

Don't get me wrong I'm actually okay with companions/family/personally dying, I just think it needs a more worked out algorithm for determining if a hero/player character dies. Like armor values, personal skills, winning vs losing (since doctors might tend to you faster if your side wins), where the damage occurred, etc. (hopefully they at least have it in an easily modifiable format for modders, since I doubt they will revisit it with all of the other stuff that needs worked on.)
 
Are they exceptional heroes, or some random you picked up for less than the price of a lame horse in a local tavern?

Think of your companions as your most trusted advisors and specialists. They fill a specialised role. Do you send your best scout into the front line in a battle? Or your best doctor? or best engineer? No. you send your grunts.

Realistically, an historic medieval era army had many non-combat roles, or specialised combat roles. Armies had payroll officers, accountants, architects and engineers, surveyors, cooks, all manner of logistics officers, plus a million different camp followers and clingers. Armies are about more than just grunts.

My companions get into the fight when needed. That doesn't mean treating them with kid-gloves, it means respecting them. I treat them like I treat my character. I don't charge the front line solo at the opening of a battle. I attack when an opportunity arises to maximise my impact, my character is better alive to command. I group my companions together and use them as a mobile reserve. I can place them where I see weakness in my line. They are all mounted, and missile armed - which makes them great to sit in behind the front line, killing any cavalry who break through.

It's a respect thing.
Oh boi.

What is it good for, when characters best suited for role of a captain, are left behind, with few others , just to idly guard your back lines and throw spears when enemy gets close enough? You talk about respect and yet they cower behind your troops, which is exactly oppossite of what would a feudal want by the way.
I value my companions, yet most of them were trained to be captains. I can understand your approach with archer captain. Sure, he has nothing to fear if you can manage your army well and control the battlefield. But my infantry captain, whole different story. She is there to give my ranks advantege in man to man combat, and if the enemy charges your lines, who do you wait for to stop it. Well I guess you try to put archers behind your infantry, right ? And it's the infantry captain that is suddenly in grave danger. It's either to risk her, or to risk everyone else.

Had this glorious battle, which allowed me to besiege a castle or a town undisturbed and unopposed, I don't really remember what it was anymore, but among casulties there was my infantry leader. After few attempts I quit playing tbh. Even tho I could propably take the settlement and have better immediate reward. But I don't want to trade a town/castle, that there's a possibility I won't even get from that poor bloke Alary, for life of one of my experienced, equiped, skilled, valued and "trusted" followers I had since almost the start of this run more than half a year ago, and as you said, are exceptional. It would be certainly a loss in a long run.

But tell me, why is there the option then, obviously intended one, to put them in charge of a fighting unit?
 
Don't send them into battle. Put the companions you don't want to fight in a group on their own and then keep that group safe in reserve
To play devils advocate you can't control your companions during sieges and it doesn't matter what group you put them in they'll die. I think being given the option to label a companion as a non-combatant would probably be the best option.
 
I just reload the battle when my companion / wife dies. TW will also reduce the death chance "soon".
Yes, exactly. This will solve the problem.

They have said publicly that they plan on bringing companion death chance down. And by quite a lot I think. So just wait and hang tight for now.

Until then, keeping them in reserve seems a sensible choice.
 
I just reload the battle when my companion / wife dies. TW will also reduce the death chance "soon".
Exactly, my wife/companions never dies, between a great victory and my party lifes I chose my party. Useless feature.
 
后退
顶部 底部