Game being extremely easy

Users who are viewing this thread

Apocal

Grandmaster Knight
It would help push the player into thinking somewhat strategically which is sorely lacking in the game. The game needs some limitations otherwise everything is completely arbitrary.
It isn't really interesting to play maximum safemode, even if you're thinking strategically about it.
 

JunKeteer

Veteran
I think the punishment that's lacking is the AI's willingness to kill the player combined with the player's low chance to die (especially with good armor and medicine).
The issue with upping death chance and possibilities for it is the time scale balancing. Those work for rogue-like games, or games actually designed for that in mind - it's more an afterthought in BL.

In BL, you have to invest a lot of hours (no other option) to your clan leader character - so ideally you only die from old age (probably 40+ RL hours or something?). Death from battle is novel at first, but unless you have a spouse (forced playstyle) and/or child of age (which still requires a good decent amount of play hours), that playthrough is scuffed.
The systems in BL are designed for a very linear progression - from 'rags to riches' so there's never any real setbacks which forces players to the late-game quite easily which is very boring/unchallenging.
 
The issue with upping death chance and possibilities for it is the time scale balancing. Those work for rogue-like games, or games actually designed for that in mind - it's more an afterthought in BL.

In BL, you have to invest a lot of hours (no other option) to your clan leader character - so ideally you only die from old age (probably 40+ RL hours or something?). Death from battle is novel at first, but unless you have a spouse (forced playstyle) and/or child of age (which still requires a good decent amount of play hours), that playthrough is scuffed.
The systems in BL are designed for a very linear progression - from 'rags to riches' so there's never any real setbacks which forces players to the late-game quite easily which is very boring/unchallenging.
This is very true, but I'm not suggesting the death chance to be increased where it becomes very common, just to a point that the average player will experience it a few times in a playthrough (though it depends on how long of a playthrough it is ofc). What you're pointing out can theoretically be offset by also increasing the exp gain rate for the player and companions (which imo should be done regardless) as well as shortening the day/night cycle or lowering the days in a year. Also, even if we die, we can play as a family member if we have any that's of age, so it's not that big of a deal.
 
What would make the game more challenging?
Mods already do.

Aren't most people here Warband vets. Am I wrong? I'm one too.

Mercenary clans don't make the game harder though. They're almost always with low number of troops. And it's just a single clan, kingdoms have about 20 clans. I have two mods that adds independent clans. They've declared wars against me so many times that I can't tell. 20? 50? Beats me. I guess I'm near end game (Autum 1093, 29 towns and 32 castles in my kingdom).

What makes game easy, is field battles where you can use your character and companions to charge the enemy solo. They can kill masses of enemies alone (I've killed over 100 enemy cavalry just with one guy, but probably average is around 30 or 50 because I take crazy risks, edit: oh, I have RTS Camera mod that allows playing another char when army leadrr gets knocked down). That's a guaranteed victory. Hardest field battles are those, where the enemies attack right away or soon. In sieges you don't have that edge, so they can be harder to win.

Want it harder? Play army commander staying behind your troops. Unarmed, is better still.

What makes the game hard is the A.I. of your kingdom's NPC parties. I mean, they ride straight in traps, attack enemies that have lower number of troops, but flock with many similar parties. The result is that your NPC doesn't have superior numbers in the battle they started. Yes, and starving. They waste troops and cause serious forehead slap moments.

The thing that ruins the game and much of the difficulty, is armies though. As soon as you get one. Regular parties go defend their towns and castles, and you kill masses of them with your army. And if you meet as big (or bigger) army in the field: slay them with one character solo attacks.

Edit: I play e1.8.1 version game though, so if you play full release, things may be different.
 
Last edited:

JunKeteer

Veteran
This is very true, but I'm not suggesting the death chance to be increased where it becomes very common, just to a point that the average player will experience it a few times in a playthrough (though it depends on how long of a playthrough it is ofc). What you're pointing out can theoretically be offset by also increasing the exp gain rate for the player and companions (which imo should be done regardless) as well as shortening the day/night cycle or lowering the days in a year. Also, even if we die, we can play as a family member if we have any that's of age, so it's not that big of a deal.
The thing with how they set this game up, we can't really experience it a few times in a playthrough and only if you have a wife (1st option), and multiple kids after waiting 18 years first; provided your wife doesn't die from childbirth too (and fortunately, children can't die from complications or while growing up). Then the gap if you takeover for your kid and redo that with the spouse/kids and waiting for those grandkids to come of age; and rinse&repeat in order to have your backups.
So, unless they speed up time/XP significantly, which I'd prefer not (given the lack of any dynasty/politic/endgame/kingdom management elements to make it worthwhile), really not much that can be done.

A simple solution to up the death% so it feels more 'risky' is by also allowing the option to take over companions, as you could essentially always have one to spare so it's not only dependent on wife/kids; particularly with the updates recently. So that same 'playthrough' (and player RP story) isn't wiped - but is more akin to a mulligan (with some mid stats) vs having to redo entirely new start again.
Or for this game, really, just have death possible only if you have a backup; it's not realistic but is more just one of those things sacrificed for better gameplay.
 
So, unless they speed up time/XP significantly, which I'd prefer not (given the lack of any dynasty/politic/endgame/kingdom management elements to make it worthwhile), really not much that can be done.
Interesting, the reason I want time to be sped up is due to the lack of dynastic gameplay.
 

JunKeteer

Veteran
Interesting, the reason I want time to be sped up is due to the lack of dynastic gameplay.
The only reason I think people want game sped up is for any sort of dynastic gameplay; but there's not enough 'CK3-like' game systems to make that even worthwhile.
Or they want it sped up solely to have it somewhat make sense with the growth of your clan vs how easily you can own half the map before you're 50; something that should 'realistically' take generations if even. But I guess we're all Alexander the Greats.

I think that's why those 'be a recruit' mods tend to be very popular, as it further expands/delays that progression from 'rags to riches' to something more realistic. IF a mod (base game ideally) further expands on something like that entirely where all facets of the very early game systems are enjoyable (afaik, think that Roman overhaul mod comes close), that would be a good point to make an increased death% an enjoyable challenge.
 
Last edited:

geala

Squire
One thing I'm more curious about, how many people have had their main character die? Only one of my characters died and it was due to old age in a playthrough I actually attempted world conquest. Even my companions died only a handful of times after the death rate was changed to 2ish% chance. I wish they would modify the death chance in battle (not auto-resolve) to 5%. I found 5% as the sweet spot between making death likely to occur a couple of times over a playthrough while not too often as it was with 10%.

I died three times as player in battles till now, in different campaigns. However I really don't like the "generation dynasty" aspects of BL, I don't marry and don't have children most of the times. I like the pressure that your companions (from whom some for me are kind of "friends/lovers") can die, so I always play with deaths enabled, which sadly starts the "getting older and get a family" mechanic. Detailed Character Creation saves me from the nonsense partly.

Before the modder sadly disappeared, I used "AI Values Life" and "Heroes Must Die" mods with higher death chances, so the AI (lords, companions) had a more dangerous life but lords also often avoided combat when having no chances. I did not start a new campaign after the death of my player character but reloaded, for me Ironman is not a challenge, but stupidity.


To OP: I don't think that the game is that easy. It is sometimes too easy and sometimes too harsh. It's surely boring and grindy after some point, and having big difficulty could make that even worse. To make games of a difficulty that very good experienced players see a big challenge is very difficult in itself. I'm not such a player and not a Warband vet (ok, I played it a bit, mostly 1257 AD) and I'm not very good in combat, especially without a shield, because I cannot parry well.

There is not much one can do to make the game more difficult (or interesting). Using Diplomacy and Separatism mods is self-explanatory, isn't it?

What else?:
1. I play on Bannerlord difficulty.
2. I use full RBM mod but without tournament module (so fully armored high tier enemies in tournaments from start, these bastards).
3. I upped T1 to T3 troop's skills and gave recruits shields, because AI often uses them.
4. T5 from normal and most T6 from noble troops are gone, to even the field and make the typical op player army more rare. Sometimes I read about problems with Filans or Crab Guards or so, don't know what that is.
5. I made me a custom faction (using Tetsojin mod, sorry) with a kind of Maya/Aztec/Toltec vibe, and I only use faction troops (10 foreign troops per party are allowed). My "Toltecs" have no to very few armor and no cavalry (with the exception of the top tier noble unit, medium armor and sitting on a giant armored war camel; party limit for this unit is 10).
It's (a bit) more difficult to win with such troops.

I don't think that "interesting new units" would change the field considerably. Only the addition of extremely op units (PoP style) or of fantasy elements, like magic, could have such impacts.
And even then it has to be a massive change. For example I gave soldiers with firepots (from OSA mod) to the Empire and the Aserai who can easily kill 10 to 20 troops with one throw. It's "funny" to suddenly see a big area of red fonts appearing, and it's just one enemy soldier. Sometimes they kill their own troops too, the morons, hehehe. There is no big impact to gameplay however (except the player gets a firepot and can use it in siege defenses ...).

What would change the game, as said by others before, were deeper tactical possibilities in battles. It needed a good AI first.
 
Last edited:
The only reason I think people want game sped up is for any sort of dynastic gameplay; but there's not enough 'CK3-like' game systems to make that even worthwhile.
Or they want it sped up solely to have it somewhat make sense with the growth of your clan vs how easily you can own half the map before you're 50; something that should 'realistically' take generations if even. But I guess we're all Alexander the Greats.

I think that's why those 'be a recruit' mods tend to be very popular, as it further expands/delays that progression from 'rags to riches' to something more realistic. IF a mod (base game ideally) further expands on something like that entirely where all facets of the very early game systems are enjoyable (afaik, think that Roman overhaul mod comes close), that would be a good point to make an increased death% an enjoyable challenge.
I completely agree with you. Those are the 2 main reasons I want time to be sped up, and you're right, there aren't enough mechanics nor enough peace time to make the dynastic gameplay feel fulfilling.
 

danEN

On probation
M&BWBWF&SNWVC
what do you expect the game was designed around being accessible for the 2 hours after work console gamers and the constant action fortnite generation
 
I mean, if the game is too easy for you, try to solo every battle on hardest difficulty and never savescum.
If that's still too easy, only wear dresses and no armor and only use a cracked blacksmith hammer with no shield.
If that's still too easy, delete your savefile every time you get hit.
If that's still too easy, go into the games files and lower the blacksmith hammers damage and reach to 1 and change it's weight to 100, so it slows you down.
If even that is still too easy, play as infantry without a horse.
 
3. I upped T1 to T3 troop's skills and gave recruits shields, because AI often uses them.
Yeah, that's a move I might do too, recruits, looters and low tier are too easy cannon fodder.

How long did upgrading them took? A week?

Edit afterthought: it would be cool if someone made a mod (and uploaded to Nexusmods) that upgrades vanilla game low tier troops and looters!

5. I made me a custom faction (using Tetsojin mod, sorry) with a kind of Maya/Aztec/Toltec vibe, and I only use faction troops
I do that too. I used Custom Troop mod to create own troops of Egyptian style much as I could. After I recruit, I dismiss them, and replace with my own troops of the same tier, but often I dismiss troops of much higher tier and keep the recruits, because the mod allows direct easy transformation of other faction recruits into my faction recruits. Hence recruits always make majority of my prisoners.

However, these are both mod related ways to make the game more difficult. Vanilla game is not offering these possibilities.
 
The only reason I think people want game sped up is for any sort of dynastic gameplay; but there's not enough 'CK3-like' game systems to make that even worthwhile.
Or they want it sped up solely to have it somewhat make sense with the growth of your clan vs how easily you can own half the map before you're 50; something that should 'realistically' take generations if even. But I guess we're all Alexander the Greats.

Absolutely! That's what's been bugging me for a while. I've been able to conquer half the world and become a dominant faction before I've even reached 55. And heck, I've been playing really slow. Was a vassal for a long time.

Bannerlord difficulty, Ironman mode, no save-scumming and still feel like I'm cheesing through it most of the time.

I have all these awesome stats assigned to my children and companions and yet I'll never be able to play any of them. I'm even thinking about leaving the faction I created just so I can start a rival faction and try the same thing again (not sure if that works though).

I'm wasting a ton of time assigning stats just to never play with any of them? I'd love for BL characters to age quicker, maybe even get to a third generation.
 

JunKeteer

Veteran
Absolutely! That's what's been bugging me for a while. I've been able to conquer half the world and become a dominant faction before I've even reached 55. And heck, I've been playing really slow. Was a vassal for a long time.

Bannerlord difficulty, Ironman mode, no save-scumming and still feel like I'm cheesing through it most of the time.
Feel like the only handicap left for most vets is just playing on console, but then they also have smaller battle sizes so that immediately cancels that out.
I have all these awesome stats assigned to my children and companions and yet I'll never be able to play any of them. I'm even thinking about leaving the faction I created just so I can start a rival faction and try the same thing again (not sure if that works though).

I'm wasting a ton of time assigning stats just to never play with any of them? I'd love for BL characters to age quicker, maybe even get to a third generation.
Which is why I have yet to play beyond a single-generation, even if my kids come of age and I fall in every battle. They went with the basic/dismissive bandaid fix for that issue by just putting in that 'disable death' toggle option; which completely throws away any dev work they put with whatever 'dynasty' system or tangential balance adjustments to date that deal with that.
 

Cullam

NotBlunted
Regular
The game is easy when you understand the game / AI mechanics. But I guess a lot of new players, that haven´t even played Warband, struggle in the early/mid game.
 
The game is easy when you understand the game / AI mechanics. But I guess a lot of new players, that haven´t even played Warband, struggle in the early/mid game.
Yes, this is the gist of it. Even moreso, Bannerlord is imo much more mechanically transparent and intuitive than Warband was. For example, I learned from watching Reformisttm that having up to 6 spare horses in your inventory speeds up your party movement speed after 6 or so years of playing WB.
 
I was shocked TW didn't have a choice for month length in the game. A 7 day month would probably give you what you want.
What's even more shocking to me is that this sandbox game has no option for the players to start as a bandit, trader, merc, vassal or ruler nor the option to start with a wife & kid(s).

I think that fixing the late game grind, adding more diplomacy & criminal options/features, a messenger system, the option to change the length of the day/night cycle or months as well as adding different game starts are the most essential things this game needs to be completed. Other features such as custom troops or serving as a soldier would be nice but not as necessary.
 

Cullam

NotBlunted
Regular
What's even more shocking to me is that this sandbox game has no option for the players to start as a bandit, trader, merc, vassal or ruler nor the option to start with a wife & kid(s).
I don´t think this would fix a lot of the late game issues. It´s not the start that is lacking in my opinion. I mean sure, bandit playthrough would be cool and different but it doesn´t seem like we will get it. At least not in my definition.
 
I don´t think this would fix a lot of late game issues. It´s not the start that is lacking in my opinion.
Oh it definitely wouldn't do anything for the lategame, it's for roleplaying and character creation variety more than anything. I just find it shocking because it seems like a no brainer to have in a sandbox RPG.
 
Top Bottom