"Fleched out" contra "Busywork"

Users who are viewing this thread

Tryvenyal

Squire
I have seen lots of(and written some) suggestions that´s been dismissed as "busywork"/unessessary micromanagement by other players, even when affecting core areas as troops/items/charachter development.

I would like to discuss what areas/type of features you would like to see that counters "Barebones" but not becomes "Busywork/Micromanagement".

I understand that players likes different aspects of the game more and others less. For some, ugrading gear is essentional, to others, it´s just minmaxing(More protecttion = autoequip. Why is there no button to autoequip best gear to me and my companion?!) Others spends all his/her denars on THAT particular gearpart that looks awsome together with THIS other part :smile: Same with troops, charachter development and all other aspects of the game. Is this the easy answer - we find the game both barebones as "our prefferred area" is not enough fleshed out but also "A lot of busywork" as non-preferred areas are to detailed?
 
A lot of things are personal preference.
I for one do not engage at all with smithing, don’t care about it, and besides my very first play through, haven’t tested it. But I hope that it is improved for players that do.

I would like more kingdom management en village management. As is clear for everyone on the forum the late game is empty. I think there should be three different stages of progression. Merc-vassal-king. With each stage having new ways of interacting with the world and other characters.

I would like to get a notification that a fief is under attack with a question if I want to fight the battle in the character of the governor. I was surprised in other threads that other people didn’t like this idea.

As a trader I would like to setup specific trade routes and connect them to the workshops.

a lot of things can be considered busywork, that others would find enjoyable and immersive. These things should be option.
 
Last edited:

Ananda_The_Destroyer

Master Knight
I would like to get a notification that a fief is under attack with a question if I want to fight the battle in the character of the governor. I was surprised in other threads that other people didn’t like this idea.
Oh yeah, this would add so much value to who you put as a governor and what you put in your garrison if you could take control if they were under siege and your MC was elsewhere! I would sally out and beat them into dirt every day! Oh hey you guys building some trebs? Oh don't me and my 120 khuzait raiders interrupt you, they're just t3 what could possibly go wrong?

I think one important things for new features is that they can be optional and also that they can co-exist with other parts of the game. However that's not to say we should dismiss good new features because of existing bad and ill received features that conflict. For instance I hate the election system as a ruler, I would love to replace it with being in full control of everything as the ruler. It could be an OPTION when you make a kingdom, do you want nice guy elections or bad guy I'm the boss if you don't like it I'll destroy you? Personally I don't see any point to vassals if I can't command them to patrol or attack what I want the objective to be.

SO I think 1, add things that can be an option OR that the player can ignore if they're not interested. 2, if the player MUST do things make sure the player CAN do those things, for instance more quest that sap security and loyalty, make sure the AI has to do all of them too so there's enough time in-between battles so the player can do all the 'busy work'. 3 make thins also effect the AI, the AI doesn't do anything but war, this should be changed, they should be spending a lot of campaign time just maintaining thier lands (issues) and building troops (killing bandits and such), any new things added the player has to spend time on the AI needs to MADE to spend equal time doing too. That said, I have no confirmation that TW agrees with my want for the AI to spend actual time doing things other then war or for there to be more time for the player do do tings in between attacks.
 
I would like more kingdom management en village management. As is clear for everyone on the forum the late game is empty. I think there should be three different stages of progression. Merc-vassal-king. With each stage having new ways of interacting with the world and other characters.
Absolutely. I always thought that Bannerlord (and WB as well) have all the options open way too early for the player, taking all the sense of accomplishment away.

For instance, you just start the game and you're able to take quests from the king marry his daughter, providing you hit off. That's just wrong, the women (or men) shouldn't even accept to talk about marriage if they're not the same status, or close enough. Likewise, the ruler of a faction shouldn't just trust someone who he's never seen before to do the job - especially collecting taxes in his behalf!

Also hiring any companion is just too easy. It would be far more interesting to have certain conditions to be met, especially for the best companions...like, completing a specific quest; have a certain skill level; having some other companion in the party, etc. Very unlikely it's gonna happen, but this is the micromanagement and complexity I was hoping for.

Regarding the mentioned election system - I think a cool way to do it is according to the laws you have enacted. If you wanna be a despot and do everything you want, you should have something like Sacred Majesty, and that would come at a cost; currently, we have a sort of elective monarchy, but it would be great to change the way you do things according to the laws. Same for the sucession laws. I know the Deva are planning a revamp for the policies, so let's see. If not, one can dream mods will manage somehow.
 

Moton

Squire
I would like to get a notification that a fief is under attack with a question if I want to fight the battle in the character of the governor. I was surprised in other threads that other people didn’t like this idea.

How are you gonna balance this? I think this one change would make the game ridiculously easy and you would allmost never have to fear losing a town or a castle again. Unless they beef upp the AI and make them cheat hard they will never stand a chanse with their low tier units vs my usually alot better equiped army in a defense scenario.
 
How are you gonna balance this? I think this one change would make the game ridiculously easy and you would allmost never have to fear losing a town or a castle again. Unless they beef upp the AI and make them cheat hard they will never stand a chanse with their low tier units vs my usually alot better equiped army in a defense scenario.
the garrison would not change. only your playable character. Your main character would not be teleported with his army, but you take charge of the existing garrison with your selected governor as playable character.
 
the garrison would not change. only your playable character. Your main character would not be teleported with his army, but you take charge of the existing garrison with your selected governor as playable character.
Its an interesting option but there are some major drawbacks.
For instance, you just start the game and you're able to take quests from the king marry his daughter, providing you hit off. That's just wrong, the women (or men) shouldn't even accept to talk about marriage if they're not the same status, or close enough. Likewise, the ruler of a faction shouldn't just trust someone who he's never seen before to do the job - especially collecting taxes in his behalf!

Also hiring any companion is just too easy. It would be far more interesting to have certain conditions to be met, especially for the best companions...like, completing a specific quest; have a certain skill level; having some other companion in the party, etc. Very unlikely it's gonna happen, but this is the micromanagement and complexity I was hoping for.
And yeah! There are so many requests for a more advanced diplomatic system, it was one of the most downloaded mods for warband and yet its still so very basic. No chamberlain, no chancellor, no way to send messengers, no depth.
But perhaps this one day will be added, either thru a mod from the workshop, but if TW is on top of their game, they'll release it as a DLC.
 

Tryvenyal

Squire
the garrison would not change. only your playable character. Your main character would not be teleported with his army, but you take charge of the existing garrison with your selected governor as playable character.
The ability to be there any major events your clan is underdoing is very tempting! To play familymembers and maybe companions would be a grand addition!

Its an interesting option but there are some major drawbacks.
Please elaborate :smile:

if TW is on top of their game, they'll release it as a DLC.
Diplomacy as a DLC? Sounds like a horrible idea. That´s really corner-building and forking.
 

black_bulldog

Knight at Arms
WBWF&SVC
How are you gonna balance this? I think this one change would make the game ridiculously easy and you would allmost never have to fear losing a town or a castle again. Unless they beef upp the AI and make them cheat hard they will never stand a chanse with their low tier units vs my usually alot better equiped army in a defense scenario.
This was in Warband. I never saw anyone claiming it made the game ridiculously easy. I think you're making mountains out of molehills.

Diplomacy as a DLC? Sounds like a horrible idea. That´s really corner-building and forking.
I have DLC horse armor for only 2.50, what a deal. :iamamoron:
 
Please elaborate :smile:

It'd an interesting mechanic allowing you to fight uncertain battles. But it would have little added benefit since you wont reap the rewards (loot, xp, renown, influence). And since the way the AI is setup they take a long time to prepare for an actual siege battle. Most of the times you are able to get to your town in time and join the defences with your own character and troops.
And if the mechanic is introduced it'd be wasteful to only use it for towns, why not castles as well?

Its interesting but perhaps theres a different way to implement it. As it has been proposed it doesnt really deliver any added benefit. If you'd want to play an uncertain siege defense with different troops then your own you could always open up the Battle Simulator. But thats just one mans opinion.

Diplomacy as a DLC? Sounds like a horrible idea. That´s really corner-building and forking.

True! But to be fair its also the best we can hope for. Not to be a pessimist because I do like the game and where its headed. But if the most downloaded mod from the earlier game hasnt even made it to the roadmap I dont see it being added anytime soon.
 

Tryvenyal

Squire
It'd an interesting mechanic allowing you to fight uncertain battles. But it would have little added benefit since you wont reap the rewards (loot, xp, renown, influence). And since the way the AI is setup they take a long time to prepare for an actual siege battle. Most of the times you are able to get to your town in time and join the defences with your own character and troops.
And if the mechanic is introduced it'd be wasteful to only use it for towns, why not castles as well?

Its interesting but perhaps theres a different way to implement it. As it has been proposed it doesnt really deliver any added benefit. If you'd want to play an uncertain siege defense with different troops then your own you could always open up the Battle Simulator. But thats just one mans opinion.
The suggestion as is it stands is for fiefs - not only towns. I would like to extend it to the battles of ANY clanmember. This includes caravans and secondary parties. True, you don't got the reward but you are likely performing better when in lead, you learn to play different scenarios when fighting with a band you have not built on your own and with a different charachter. IE, you get MORE than you get from fighting your own battles(instead of pressing send troops).


And since the way the AI is setup they take a long time to prepare for an actual siege battle. Most of the times you are able to get to your town in time and join the defences with your own character and troops.

And I ment only the scenario itself, not the map-sieging part, meaning you can still run for it!

True! But to be fair its also the best we can hope for. Not to be a pessimist because I do like the game and where its headed. But if the most downloaded mod from the earlier game hasnt even made it to the roadmap I dont see it being added anytime soon.
For a second I though I was on the Paradox forums. I we will get only 1-3 DLCs, Diplomancy could very well be one of them! :smile:
 

Knochenstaub

Regular
M&BWBWF&SVC
For instance I hate the election system as a ruler, I would love to replace it with being in full control of everything as the ruler. It could be an OPTION when you make a kingdom, do you want nice guy elections or bad guy I'm the boss
Would be interesting to have this accessed through a kingdom policy, so they can use it with an existing gameplay mechanic. It then could cost a ton of influence for balancing- or immersion-reasons. Or, if they would finally upgrade their diplomacy and dialogs (I still get angry just thinking about: "I have a quick question" -> "Never Mind"), you would have to persuade lords/clans beforehand into the benifits of your supreme dictatorship :twisted:
 
Last edited:
Top Bottom