[parsehtml]<p><img class="frame" src="https://www.taleworlds.com/Images/News/blog_post_39_taleworldswebsite.jpg" alt="" width="575" height="290" /></p>
<p>The ultimate goal for most players of Bannerlord will be to carve out their own piece of Calradia through bloody conquest, however, Mount & Blade games are about more than just raising an army and leading it into battle. A big part of the game revolves around plotting your rise to power and building up a war chest that is capable of making your ambitions a reality. In this week’s blog, we will take a look at one of the ways that Bannerlord’s deep economic system enables players to raise the funds needed to equip themselves, gather an army and set forth on a military campaign: productive enterprises.</p></br> [/parsehtml]Read more at: http://www.taleworlds.com/en/Games/Bannerlord/Blog/59
Dev Blog 10/05/18
- Thread starter Callum
- Start date
Users who are viewing this thread
KhergitLancer80 said:
I was referring to the heir system for player. It was demanded by some players to continue as the son of the first character.
It only takes a small thought to realise this is a bad idea because M&B is an rpg game after all and all those leveling ups and skill points going to waste was indeed not a good idea. Plus, even though it is confirmed that years will pass faster in BL compared to WB, still the time scale for a standard game does not really fit for such a feature.
Other than that I support other lords to have families and I want royal families to exist within factions.
Note: Attila was victorious in Catalonaum
2 things about players having heirs: I feel that it could absolutely fit into BL. Imagine your character, working his way up from a poacher to a minor lord in, say the Vlandian kingdom, fights in a large battle and is killed. Your son inherits his fief, any businesses you've set up, and any companions/soldiers that survived the battle or were stationed elsewhere (you can garrison forces in any friendly city in BL, i believe). Plus, your new character gets a stat bonus for being the son of a lord, like starting as a lord in VC rather than as a peasant. I think this gives plenty of reason to continue playing, avenging your "father's" (your) death, as well as not making it too much work to start back up, as you've already got a lot of the things you'll need. As far as your worry about children maturing fast enough, I think it's pretty obvious that people grow up much faster in Calradia than they do in our world, judging by the fact that you can recruit soldiers from the same village only a few days after your previous recruitment. Perhaps a teenager in our world would be considered an adult in Calradia, so a 7 year old would be like a 15 year old, plenty old enough to fight in wars and hold and lead fiefs.
I would say, as I know you've said before on these forums, the battle of Catalonaum was more of a draw than a victory for either side. The Roman coalition achieved the short term goal of halting the Hunnic advance, and were left in control of the field, widely regarded as a victory in most estimations. However, the "victory" was Pyhrric in that the Huns managed to kill one of the barbarian kings present (as well as his son iirc), caused enough damage and casualties that no army really stood against them again, and ultimately lead to the execution of Flavius Aetius, probably the only person who could possibly have stopped Atilla. For the Huns this was a case of "losing" the battle, but winning the war, like the Romans in the Pyrrhic wars, Americans during the American Revolution, and just about any modern insurgency (Vietnam, USSR vs. Mujahideen, current American wars in the M.E.).
Referans
Release the damn blog before i piss myself 
Madijeis said:
I would say it's come down as a "last victory" more because western society is based (largely) on Roman laws and culture rather than Hunnic, so it makes more sense for a positive story to be passed down than the story of a defeat. Any victory the Romans could claim was largely helped by the fact that night fell, causing mass confusion on both sides, and I believe the presence of disease in the Hunnnic camp, forcing them to quit the field before another day or two of battle, which most likely would have seen a Hunnic victory. Any Roman claim to victory is purely Pyhrric in that they remained in command of the field, but left themselves unable to continue the war. I agree that Flavius Aetius was the last hope of the Empire, and had he been commended for his "victory" rather than executed, we may have seen an entirely different end to the invasions of Atilla.
Don't let Catalonaum being the famed last victory of Rome and Flavius Etius the equally famed last Roman distract you from the fact that ITS ALMOST 2000 GMT AND NO BLOG IS OUT YET!!!1!!11!1!1!11!!!!!!!11!
Anyway, wasn't the Ostrogoth king killed during the clash with the Visigoths (or the other way around, I'm not good at distinguishing the Goths)?Roccoflipside said:
But yes the battle was too bloody to be defined a victory.
I'M TRYING NOT TO THINK ABOUT IT YOU DIMWIT T_TCrowcorrector said:
Crowcorrector said:
I'm hoping it's taking extra time to upload the huge video and extra epic screenshots we're going to get
.
Callum hinted at something special on Discord.Roccoflipside said:I'm hoping it's taking extra time to upload the huge video and extra epic screenshots we're going to get
(not release date or anything like that)
The Meddling Monk said:Callum hinting at something special on Discord.Roccoflipside said:I'm hoping it's taking extra time to upload the huge video and extra epic screenshots we're going to get
Can you give any more specifics? What was it he actually said?Edit: we all know the pain of being promised "something special" based on quotes from the forums and what not only to have it be just a misinterpreted regular post
Okay folks, Friday is officially blog day.
Now I'm actually kind of excited for it and I don't want to beThe Meddling Monk said:Callum hinted at something special on Discord.Roccoflipside said:I'm hoping it's taking extra time to upload the huge video and extra epic screenshots we're going to get
(not release date or anything like that)
Roccoflipside said:
Edit: we all know the pain of being promised "something special" based on quotes from the forums and what not only to have it be just a misinterpreted regular post
Oh boy this better be goodThe Meddling Monk said:Roccoflipside said:
Edit: we all know the pain of being promised "something special" based on quotes from the forums and what not only to have it be just a misinterpreted regular post
The Meddling Monk said:Roccoflipside said:
Edit: we all know the pain of being promised "something special" based on quotes from the forums and what not only to have it be just a misinterpreted regular post
Cool! Any in-game screenshots, videos, etc. are acceptable to me! Thanks for letting us know
EZI0SREVALATION
Recruit
Note: Attila was victorious in Catalonaum
Huns Withdraw from Gaul
KhergitLancer80
Banned
Madijeis said:
I had been researching Attila's life and this particular battle for a very long time.
Huns destroyed the last army stock of the Empire, Gauls and made the empire vulnerable to any further attacks.
Ofc, before invading Italy he had to rest his troops since they had been through a very bloody war.
Unfortunately for Huns, Romans were the only ones who kept record of history and they had a people to maintain public order on
and Romans using propaganda is not a very odd thing to say.
I know what are said for this battle in western scholars. The thing is European countries see Roman Empire as the father of European civilization(which is true btw). Flavius Aetius the last true roman and this battle is the last roman victory so long story short they are romantizing this battle which clouds their reasoning.
Except one thing, one year later Attila the Hun marches to Italy and the only thing that makes him turn back is the disease in Roman cities, Romans accept to pay tribute and Attila leaves to plan his attack on Sassanids(but he dies in 453 in his wedding night).
I assure you wikipedia used to say it was a decisive Roman victory but now it says tactical outcome disputed, strategic importance disputed.
+Roccoflipside
I know where you are coming around you are saying they lost the battle but win the war.
The thing is, such things like these are defined by humans.
Victory. What is victory ? According to Eastern Roman Empire's military philosophy war meant diplomatical failure but for more warlike societies it was an opportunity to expand and a reality of life.
You can say that Attila's real aim was to invade Italy and he failed so it was a defeat for him and I can say Attila's real aim was to have a bloody war with Romans therefore running them out of manpower so that he can invade them one year later.
I think wikipedia gave the right call to call it tactically disputed but I think it should have been strategic Hunnic victory.
Anyway, that example of Taleworlds was bad not because Huns won the war or sth but because Hunnic army was more Germanic than Hunnic, there were a lot of Germanic tribes and Taleworlds was giving examples for defeats of Horse archer armies.
EDIT:
+FlaviusAetius
After inflicting enough damage to Romans so that they cant raise an army in his future invasions.
cough Attila's invasion of 452 cough ! Where was Roman Army cough !
KhergitLancer80 said:
Fair, if Atilla's only goal was to smash the army of Rome and her Germanic allies it was a victory. However, if that was his goal, I would say his was the Pyrrhic victory then, as he couldn't take immediate advantage of the victory. No argument from me that Atilla won strategically, left the Romans with no army reserves and it's leadership in shambles, but I maintain that leaving the Romans in charge of the field is (barely) enough reason to declare the Romans victors of that specific battle.
Also in agreement that both armies were mainly composed of Germanic troops, as well as leaders, and could almost be considered a Germanic war lead by outside forces lol.
Where can i find a link to the discord?The Meddling Monk said:Roccoflipside said:
Edit: we all know the pain of being promised "something special" based on quotes from the forums and what not only to have it be just a misinterpreted regular post
AmateurHetman said:
Is this an actual thing, or are you just guessing/joking? Just wondering, because if so I'll stop manically refreshing the dev-blog page
