-
If you are reporting a bug, please head over to our Technical Support section for Bannerlord.
Here's why you're not getting that castle.
- 主题发起人 World's Coolest Old Guy
- 开始时间
正在查看此主题的用户
White Ahroun
Banned
I never had problems with not getting stuff i siege... because i play as merc until i want to actually start a kingdom
its not worth being a vassal, the freedom of mercenary work and the control of being a king are both superior, so i just skip the vassal stage
You and me, bro. Lapdog just ain't for me. Gotta get that glory and it's all in my own name. If some king wants glory, he can get it himself.
thats why i said absolutism. that is the whole shtick of absolutism. the king/emperor controls ALL the fiefs and armies, nobles are basically glorified officers and bureaucrats.
THIS! Exactly the same in my current playthrough. Conquered 10 Towns, 17 castles. Never get even on the list of persons to vote for even when i took the city on my own (only with parties of my own clan).
But when I take a castle i am on that vote list most of the time, maybe 2/3 of the time. But got only one castle so far and i just wiped out the northern empire (took all their cities and castles as a vassal of Sturgia. so far i got one castle. thats it. While the kings clan and the second biggest clan has what... around 20+ or so?).
This system seems to be broken right now. Or it works completly different as stated. It's not really transparent to me. And if the distance to your first settlement plays a (negative) role in that decision process it becoms even less likely to ever get a second one because the travle distances increase due to the kingdom expansion.
Guess I will go the "create your own kingdom" way because beeing a vassal really feels not rewarding at all.
A fundamental theme of the Middle Ages compared to the empires that preceded and the nation-states which followed was decentralization, privatization, and personalization of pretty much all aspects of human society; politics, economics, culture, etc. Plus, the European medieval period lasted roughly 1000 years (depending on what start/end dates one prefers). So "feudalism" functioned (or dysfunctioned - is that even a word in verb form?) quite differently in different times/places. Strong kings remembered today (Charlemagne, Otto the Great, William the Conqueror, just to throw a couple out there) are still remembered at least partly because their strength & success...and the centralized authority of their monarchies...were relatively rare. And even these stand-out personalities' regimes often degraded fairly rapidly after their own demise.
Another fundamental ongoing theme of this period was the basic tension between monarch and nobility. In some times/places, the king dominated such as described in the OP post (the "Charlemagne" model, if you will). In other cases, the nobility pretty much held all the meaningful power and the king was merely a titular non-entity ("late Merovingian" comes to mind). Probably the most common situation was some sort of uneasy compromise. (and of course the church was an integral player in all this too, but that's outside the scope of Bannerlord's mechanics).
Re Bannerlord and this thread topic, all the differing - even opposing - views have some historical justification on how the fief-award mechanics should work. The OP's concept (dominant king, subservient vassals) certainly occurred in multiple cases. Other scenarios (nobles largely divvying things up themselves - sometimes at swordpoint, while ignoring or even bullying a weak monarch in the process) also happened a lot.
Lol I don't know if I have a real point to contribute, just that's been my thought as I read through the various posts here.
Another fundamental ongoing theme of this period was the basic tension between monarch and nobility. In some times/places, the king dominated such as described in the OP post (the "Charlemagne" model, if you will). In other cases, the nobility pretty much held all the meaningful power and the king was merely a titular non-entity ("late Merovingian" comes to mind). Probably the most common situation was some sort of uneasy compromise. (and of course the church was an integral player in all this too, but that's outside the scope of Bannerlord's mechanics).
Re Bannerlord and this thread topic, all the differing - even opposing - views have some historical justification on how the fief-award mechanics should work. The OP's concept (dominant king, subservient vassals) certainly occurred in multiple cases. Other scenarios (nobles largely divvying things up themselves - sometimes at swordpoint, while ignoring or even bullying a weak monarch in the process) also happened a lot.
Lol I don't know if I have a real point to contribute, just that's been my thought as I read through the various posts here.
Well it may be a side effect of civil war/rebellion not being in the game yet
Earth Dragon
Sergeant
It just needs adjusting. The bottom line is it’s not your call who get the castle in a feudal system. Your name means a lot of your name will need to swim around for awhile before you get yours
I married to Elys and my name was pretty much always in the list so i got 6 cities in Vlandia while i ignored all castles that i could get several one of them too before establishing my own kingdom with my fiefs ofc after i became a king i couldn't get my name on the list even once so far, perhaps because i have 6 cities and like 15 villages while my lords have much fewer fiefs. Anyway i think political connection to the king is also very important for getting fiefs..
Unfortunately, the existence of this thread shows that it is not adequately communicated to the player that this is the case, leading to undo frustration and the creation of threads asking the same question many times.
I still think it would be better if the candidates were just made up of the leader of the siege, the king, and an influential noble. That would be far more rewarding and straightforward to understand, and probably less of a headache to setup from a dev perspective.
Admiralsexy
Recruit
TIt's not like taking a castle and seeing the king give it to someone else (or keep it for himself) is a new thing; this happened all the time in Warband, and was in fact one of the pretexts for rebelling to start your own kingdom.
What is new is the different kind of transparency of the vassal opinions. In Warband, you had to talk to the other vassals to see who they supported and usually there was at least a couple who believed it should go to the person who took it - so even though the king could over-rule, or someone else had more support for other reasons, you always had a sense that you were at least a consideration for it. Also, those who supported someone else always gave a reason why.
But here, with the way the voting works you get a clearer picture of who the realm supports, but not the why - and this can leave people wondering when they didn't even make the short list. It's one thing to see your peers vote for someone else, or even see the king ignore the vote and hand it to some random, but another entirely to visually see that you're not even under consideration after putting in all the work. (Which you might not have been in Warband either, but there wasn't a visual list making that obvious.)
TLR version: I have no complaints about how it works, but I can understand why some are thrown by the way it's presented.
If you have tried to talk to lords like i have their seems to be signficant portions of text missing specfically under the can i ask you a quick question prompt as there is nothing there it might still be added to the game.
You can rebel vs your king. But I think he/she takes all the fief and stronghold you "oversee" and you take a huge rep hit as well as going to war with the whole faction, maybe more then one.
If we're talking about realistic stuff. you should be allowed to stage a coup. I think in a way you can right now.. but It's not detailed that way at all.
If we're talking about realistic stuff. you should be allowed to stage a coup. I think in a way you can right now.. but It's not detailed that way at all.
True, that's a pretty blatant placeholder and it's about where this kind of stuff was located in Warband so it would make sense that something 'more' is coming in this field.
