General suggestions thread.

Users who are viewing this thread

Status
Not open for further replies.
Thanks, Dynastia, very interesting and meaningful information. How many men would a average "street" consist of?

Also it would be best if you would start a new topic with all this research. So when the time comes I would not need to dig in this topic for all the research and could find it quickly.  :eek:
 
Played this mod for a couple of days and it's good but some things are unrealistic.

1. Mercenaries of a different religion.  The implementation and penalty are too strict, basically I see no reason to even hire them

Historically the first thing a king did invading an enemy land is to find local allies, who would provide scouting, info, some troops etc. It wasn't that hard to do since there are always disgruntled nobles around. But they never were part of the army, always had their own quarters and kept separately. The key here is to keep Merc separately. In Brytenwalda there is a Merc capt that you can hire and lead his own small group. Why not do the same, hire mercenaries but not allow them to join your army but they will follow you., participate in battles and be under our command but also could just run away. This way the Merc will be useful

2. Beginning of the game when you start as a noble with a fief but very little renown and no money. That's hardly historical. Fiefs were either given,or inherited so you should have more renown and some cash to start with if you get a fief, or start as a vassal without a fief and low renown and low money.

3. Too many knights, especially Merc Knights. Knights were nobles, but here you can basically get them from a village, or hire at the tavern. Remove Knights from village recruitment, and Horseman upgrade. Instead you need to build a castle first to be able to recruit Knights from some "young nobles". This recruitment should be very low. Also perhaps it would make sense to allow to have up to 5 Knights free (just room and board) as a personal retinue when a player gets a certain amount of renown. Make any bandit group hire-able as Mercenary group

4. Just curious about javelins, they seem to be too powerful. Also Latin village troops - are they supposed to be running around wit only a cleaver and no shield or any other weapon

5. Too much emphasis on tournament, it's the only sure way to make money and earn renown.

6. Ability to pay some bard, minstrel or whatever to write a song/poem etc about you to raise your renown.

7. Can you plit Farmers (Freemen) into more regional groups? Otherwise generic mercenaries are everywhere.

KUTGW
 
Not sure about the other points, however a young noble raising to a title would not at all be widely recognized. Maybe within his own fief, alright, but they didn't have TVs in Middle Ages :wink: No one would know you outside of your very tiny circuit of relatives and servants. As for money, only merchants and the clergy had real cash, most the rich of a knight or noble was in his land and crusading, fighting in tournaments and battling your neightbor were the only ways to get some actual money, otherwise you just had lots of grain, games, mybe fruits and some tools.

(That could be interesting, if it was possible, to give starting characters something to represent their trade's goods; Merchants getting furs, spices, salt or leatherwork. Nobles getting iron, wheath, tools and perhaps slightly better equipment - A horse, a mail shirt and a decent helm, a shield and a old, cracked lance or something. Just to make it way more difficult for those like me who start with Game Poachers or similar).

Tournaments also were extremely popular in this period of history, so of course there's an enphasy on them. I'm actually very curious to see how they will be revamped because Warband system isn't that faithful to the real thing. In theory, up until later, you could make a tournament simply meeting another bunch of roaming knights and challenging them. It wasn't always something strictly arranged and ruled yet, I think. Find another group of young men willing to battle for ransom and some fame around the countryside and you're done! Big, bloddy, vicious tournament :smile:

Which leads me to another point. Not being overly expert on the matter, unnable to come up with numbers and statistics, I still find the ratio of knights fairly plausible. I see most lord, even kings infact, with rarely more then 2 Miles. I, as the enriched, wealthy, land-owning merchant I am hardly manage to keep 4 in my army during war. (Ye, I waited until I earned over 100k denars before taking up knighthood. Before that, it was always caravan escort and tournaments all over ^^..Anyway...). On the other hand, I recently read that tournaments in William Marshal's time (admittedly much earlier but might still serve as an example) were fought with many hundreds of knights. Even considering they might have come from distant regions, I doubt there were so few, after all. Currently, there are way less then 1 thousand knights in Europe at any time. Which might actually be too few instead of too many, I think.
 
Not sure about the other points, however a young noble raising to a title would not at all be widely recognized. Maybe within his own fief, alright, but they didn't have TVs in Middle Ages :wink: No one would know you outside of your very tiny circuit of relatives and servants. As for money, only merchants and the clergy had real cash, most the rich of a knight or noble was in his land and crusading, fighting in tournaments and battling your neightbor were the only ways to get some actual money, otherwise you just had lots of grain, games, mybe fruits and some tools.

And not everyone was paid wages in that time, room and board was more than enough. And we pay wages to every soldier, and pay cash for all the improvements. If my villagers can build me stuff for food, and my soldiers would fight for loot and food, then yes there is no need for starting cash.
 
Lazyman said:
It does not feel that few when fighting 1k vs 1k though .

Ye, but even then how many Miles are there per side? 100? Probably not even close to it, whereas there would be even more, likely. So I find it's still balanced as it is and as accurate as one can hope to get through a game's mechanics.
 
True knights should be consider tier3(as lesser-poorer knights) and tier 4(as senior-richer knights). The tier1-2 in the European cavalry are either should be seen as some pages, squires, very poor noble and similar "noobs" or either as the knights retinue - peasant with a horse, men-at-arms, knechts, rich freeman, ect. In words the tiers troops should cover a very broad range of people.

So if you want to count the number of knights in the army, you should not only count "Miles".

 
DrTomas said:
True knights should be consider tier3(as lesser-poorer knights) and tier 4(as senior-richer knights). The tier1-2 in the European cavalry are either should be seen as some pages, squires, very poor noble and similar "noobs" or either as the knights retinue - peasant with a horse, men-at-arms, knechts, rich freeman, ect. In words the tiers troops should cover a very broad range of people.

So if you want to count the number of knights in the army, you should not only count "Miles".

Am not sure I understood what you're trying to say. I can hire 13 knights at the tavern. That's wrong. Any peasant-> knight troop tree is wrong.
 
I don't get the issue, really.. for the price of 13 knights, you can hire at least 50 peasants.. probably many more, actually... Of course the player can cheat and have all Miles armies but it'll cost him such a fortune it's barely possible to maintain it for more then a week.
 
JuJu70 said:
Am not sure I understood what you're trying to say. I can hire 13 knights at the tavern. That's wrong. Any peasant-> knight troop tree is wrong.
There's no peasant -> knight tree. But the lower nobility tree covers freeman/knechts/ect as well. As the troops are more split via equipment then just social status. What's there not to understand? And yes hiring knights in taverns is wrong. Thats why there's this being done: http://forums.taleworlds.com/index.php/topic,217551.0.html
 
DrTomas said:
JuJu70 said:
Am not sure I understood what you're trying to say. I can hire 13 knights at the tavern. That's wrong. Any peasant-> knight troop tree is wrong.
There's no peasant -> knight tree. But the lower nobility tree covers freeman/knechts/ect as well. As the troops are more split via equipment then just social status. What's there not to understand? And yes hiring knights in taverns is wrong. Thats why there's this being done: http://forums.taleworlds.com/index.php/topic,217551.0.html

But you hire them from a village! Castle or town is fine, but village?
 
huh?

If you play with the older recruitment system you can only recruit nobles from castles
If you play with the new lance recruitment system you will always recruit a lance. Which is a knight, a squire and his levies.

This does not account mercenaries.

I don't see what the problem is about. I should also note that most villages in the game were actually castles, towns and meant to represent as a center of some region. We are bound to game mechanics.
 
If you play with the new lance recruitment system you will always recruit a lance. Which is a knight, a squire and his levies.

Ok I see it's always the same no matter from where you hire (I only have a village so didn't try recruiting from castle yet)
 
One problem with yet more heavy cavalry would be that it would make them even more powerful, its already all to easy to crush pretty much everything with a handful of top tier cavalry .
 
Lazyman said:
One problem with yet more heavy cavalry would be that it would make them even more powerful, its already all to easy to crush pretty much everything with a handful of top tier cavalry .

I suggest to have less. From your village you can upgrade them to maybe what is now Men-at-Arms, and the knights would only be available from castles in very limited quantity. But hey I am not a programmer so what do I know, apparently you can only recruit one and only type from everywhere
 
First i have to say that this is a GREAT mod! SALUTE! I think it would be nice if we could add scars to our players as an accessory for any face, rather then with the age in character creation. Just sayin. Heres  the kicker... To have a religion. It would work like morale for troops. Say you have all catholic troops you would have to visit a place of worship every now & then to keep it maintained... get what Im trying to say?
 
Is it possible to add the function of the free observation of the battle, like a multiplayer spectator?
For example: I'm going to Europe, I see a battle of two neutral fractions, click on "watch the battle / siege" game does not change just for the beauty and immersion in the game. in the game so many events going on, I think it will be interesting to watch not only for their faction, but also the lives of neighbors / enemies.
sorry for the inarticulately, wrote in a promt.

 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom