• If you are reporting a bug, please head over to our Technical Support section for Bannerlord.
  • Please note that we've updated the Mount & Blade II: Bannerlord save file system which requires you to take certain steps in order for your save files to be compatible with e1.7.1 and any later updates. You can find the instructions here.

Election system still ruins the game. Please delete, let player run own faction, please make strategy game!

Users who are viewing this thread

Ananda_The_Destroyer

Master Knight
I don't want to see peace votes when I'm in the middle of a siege. I don't want to be forced to vote before I can send troops to finish a siege or to sell my ENTIRE FACTION OF PRISONERS. I don't want to waste influence to block peace. I JUST WANT TO PROGRESS THE GAME MY WAY, with my plan, MY WAY! ME, THE PLAYER! THE CUSTOMER! I don't want to use the stupid, nonsense logic you programed the AI to use for voting!

It doesn't matter what the power/fief ratio is if I have the entire enemy faction poisoner, the vassals can do whatever they need to to build up with no threat, but they want to vote for peace because they don't know that. You should just delete this system, they don't need to vote for peace!

You made them stupid on purpose to prevent them from snowballing, but you need to make the PLAYER's system 100% separate because we DO NO WANT to use the same stupid reasoning the AI bots do! I don't need to be artificially sandbagged! I do not want it!

Have any Devs ever even played an actual game this far?

EDIT:
This goes for anyone wanting to defend these mechanics, show your late game maps or your non-opinion speculation is just hot air.
If you haven't experienced the system then why should anyone care what you think about it?

What was your positive experience in the late game regarding vassals voting for peace or war in rapid succession?

Was there a time when you felt the game was better because you couldn't set a target for your vassals to siege?

Is there a time the game was more rewarding and interesting because you vetoed a vassal proposal only to have them make the same proposal in a short time anyways and/or contrary proposals such as wanting both peace and new wars?

Have you used the new Clan creation system and did you find it useful compared to vetoing vassal proposals with your influence?

When/if you reach the power threshold where all factions will declare war on you, did you like that vassals will still calculate to vote for peace and release all prisoners, even though this peace is only a few days and dramatically benefits the other factions over their own?

Edit: A couple compromising ideas
What I would really like as a compromise is a bounty/reward system where the player/ruler can set a soft target for siege to encourage it's capture so vassal may choose the players desired target over one the AI score favors.

I think a reward/alternative to a strait veto would work too: I counter propose this peace proposal with a war bonus from my treasury to compensate!
 
Last edited:

RalliX

Count
M&BWBWF&SVC
I remember back when having players and AI working off same systems seemed like a good idea.

Not always the case, it seems.
 
Every day Ananda takes one step closer to Tamerlane.

I remember back when having players and AI working off same systems seemed like a good idea.

Not always the case, it seems.
It works very well when the AI is remotely competent, and it should be what all systems should aim for. Having to think "can I do X or Y, or will the AI just bypass it" is something no player should have to consider. Just removing a feature like this is a bandaid solution to irrational AI.
 

FizCap

Regular
WB
That's life and even though bannerlord barely does anything right, the voting system is something they do right because it shows the player that they have no power because they're just a petty nobleman.
 

RalliX

Count
M&BWBWF&SVC
That's life and even though bannerlord barely does anything right, the voting system is something they do right because it shows the player that they have no power because they're just a petty nobleman.
Unless as is happening to Ananda, you are a powerful lord or king of your realm, and it presents an insurmountable problem.
 
Depends on what government you have ?? Democratic ? Monarchy ? Dictator ? Progressive ? ..oh Wait !

BL political system needs a total rewrite ..

.
 

Poddicus

Knight at Arms
M&BWBWF&SNWVC
Depends on what government you have ?? Democratic ? Monarchy ? Dictator ? Progressive ? ..oh Wait !

ADiREgj.png
 

Ananda_The_Destroyer

Master Knight
This is what happened that set me of today! I give my vassals what they want, but I have my plans to expans and I know what's best, so I'm getting in the one last siege before the war ends (because they voted a 3rd war and then of course want to vote to end the 1st and 2nd...) and then I get knocked out being funny in the siege and I go to send troops to finish the keep battle (I have 250+ tactics...) but.... oh **** it makes me vote on peace when I press SEND TROOPS! Normally it won't do this until you access the kingdom screen OR actually finish the active siege.
^You see this, getting dumped out of the near empty town by the peace declaration! Not having it, re-load!

^The we go, now I completed my out wall of fiefs from the S.Empire and have the influence to raise another clan! Mission complete, but I mad about having to do that! I wanted to ride the horse in first and go on a murderous stupor!

That's life and even though bannerlord barely does anything right, the voting system is something they do right because it shows the player that they have no power because they're just a petty nobleman.
I'm no mere lord I'm the maker of Lords! I have raised up 26 strong brave Female headed clans by my own hand! I crushed the Khuzait into the dirt and dug them all out again under my wing! I made them all and I can un-make them if I need to! I retain 1 fief for the storage and prison functions, but make no mistake, the whole map is mine! vassal or enemy, they only posses what I'm allowing them!

Every day Ananda takes one step closer to Tamerlane.
 

Veracheg

Banned
I JUST WANT TO PROGRESS THE GAME MY WAY

If something like that happens in one of my playthroughs, I just use the console and give myself enough Influence to bypass the problem and win the vote.
In Erdogan Turkey you don't play a game, the game plays you...
...until I use the Console, then the game goes " OH sh-" and it doesn't play me.
Since Bannerlord isn't finished, I don't call it cheating, I call it User Testing Priviledge.
 
I always play as Dictator / King (my own kingdom) because I don't trust AI

QUIZ 1 - what is the main difference between a King and a Dictator ? ( and don't say a Dictator is across between **** and potato - Dic 'tata )

.But if I played as part of a democracy then I would expect poorly timed decisions, out of my control.

.
 
Last edited:

Delinard

Sergeant at Arms
WBNW
There are only 2 possible reasons this feature is even a thing for player kingdom:

1. It would be too "micro-intensive" to manage Diplomacy yourself somehow...

2. It's a way of forcing the player to always fight somebody and make late game more annoying.

Normally you would create a kingdom in previous games so you could be.. you know, the king. But I guess not.
 

murtega

Knight at Arms
Come on, what's the importance of a new town, completely trashing the enemy or this continental dominance you talk of when enemy pays us considerable amount of tribute... daily!!! I can now continue to keep on recruiting and dumping new troops.
Regards,
Your vassal.
PS: Since our entire force is lurking here in South, how about we declare war to that faction up north?
 

vito397

Knight at Arms
WBWF&SNWVC
I think votes should be revamped not removed. Firstly make every clan elligible for the vote, even the ruling and the poorest. Secondly the time to make the decision should be greater, like 10 to 14 days. Thirdly we should be able to talk to lords on the campaign map and convince them through dialogue or bribe to vote for the player. If they accept, the influence cost is lowered, if they refuse it should stay the same. And nobles with good traits should be less prone to bribes and dislike you for that, and those who are dishonourable are prone to accept. Fourthly, make an artificial minimum peace period after the treaty. For example, one season/20 days. In doing this, the player can do the vote politics in peace. I will repost this to the suggestions forum
 

TengriBless

Regular
Progressive Government is very much like socialism, full of Moral officers, making sure the people do / say / think correctly.

.
Wha?
I doubt you know what either of those terms mean old chap, either that or you're an american who thinks any word can mean anything you want it to.
 

stevepine

Knight
That's life and even though bannerlord barely does anything right, the voting system is something they do right because it shows the player that they have no power because they're just a petty nobleman.
Agreed.

So, you had a bad gaming session in Bannerlord ... and something really annoying and frustrating happened. Yeah well - welcome to early access Bannerlord!

There are SO many fundamental things in this game that need fixing. This needs a few tweaks and adjustments... but it's not major. Not in comparison to so many other Bannerlord problems.
 
Last edited:

Emperor1997

Squire
I think votes should be revamped not removed. Firstly make every clan elligible for the vote, even the ruling and the poorest. Secondly the time to make the decision should be greater, like 10 to 14 days. Thirdly we should be able to talk to lords on the campaign map and convince them through dialogue or bribe to vote for the player. If they accept, the influence cost is lowered, if they refuse it should stay the same. And nobles with good traits should be less prone to bribes and dislike you for that, and those who are dishonourable are prone to accept. Fourthly, make an artificial minimum peace period after the treaty. For example, one season/20 days. In doing this, the player can do the vote politics in peace. I will repost this to the suggestions forum
They should forbid clan leaders and the ruler who are in prison from voting in kingdom decisions.
They are in prison, they can not vote, they should forced to abstain.

And in prison faction leader should be force to abdicate the throne and the faction should be forced to surrender in all wars.
 
Top Bottom