High tier armor prices still too high

[Dabos37]

They dont make a damn bit of difference. What matters is Numbers; it is nearly totally irrelevant what you bring to a siege as long as you bring plenty of it.

And there are no other goals worth pursuing early game; other than building and army that can trash everything. Maybe decent prices on gear could help solve that problem.

“They dont make a damn bit of difference”

Currently in holidays. When I be back I will easily show you why you are totally wrong. It won’t probably be enough for stopping you repeating the same wrong argument about fians are not OP or changing your biased opinion, but I enjoy running these tests. I am going to show you how decisive 200-300 fians are against +1000 men army (composed of a good number of high tier units), compared to 200-300 Cataphracts.

Keep an eye on the Khan’s Guard and Fians OP thread in two days my friend.

 

[Sweynforkbeard]

“They dont make a damn bit of difference”

Currently in holidays. When I be back I will easily show you why you are totally wrong. It won’t probably be enough for stopping you repeating the same wrong argument about fians are not OP or changing your biased opinion, but I enjoy running these tests. I am going to show you how decisive 200-300 fians are against +1000 men army (composed of a good number of high tier units), compared to 200-300 Cataphracts.

Keep an eye on the Khan’s Guard and Fians OP thread in two days my friend.

Yes, by all means lets have more of these irrelevant experiments.

Lategame means sieges. The time it takes to prepare a siege primarily depend on the number of men you bring. You dont bring 200 of anything, you bring 2.000! Now, try to see how little difference it makes.

 

[Dabos37]

Yes, by all means lets have more of these irrelevant experiments.

Lategame means sieges. The time it takes to prepare a siege primarily depend on the number of men you bring. You dont bring 200 of anything, you bring 2.000! Now, try to see how little difference it makes.

There is a big difference on bringing 2000 men army with 300 fians, compared to bringing a 2000 men army without fians.

Sure, all experiments are irrelevant and the only which we should keep in mind is an OP units’ lover who says that fians are not OP, because if you bring 2000 men to siege a town it does not matter (it actually matters, you are going to lose less men if you do not bring OP units).

We are talking about unit balancing, and if your only argument to defend your point is that you can outnumber the enemy, it makes zero sense to me. It is not like if I would be complaining because this game is hard without fians, because the truth is that this game is too easy, even if you put tons of limits on yourself to try to make it harder. It is just about you feel that you are wasting money if you recruit something different to archers, especially if you are not recruiting fians or Khan’s Guard.

Of course, if you conquer the whole world and you already own all fiefs, it does not matter if you have fians or other units in your army, but it matters when we think about the way for achieving it.

Yes, in the same way I do not use smithing because it is broken, I do not recruit fians or OP Khuzait nobles, but I am tired of having to avoid some features and units in this game because they are clearly broken and not fixed. So I have to giving it up on purpose because the game is poorly balanced.

 

[Sweynforkbeard]

There is a big difference on bringing 2000 men army with 300 fians, compared to bringing a 2000 men army without fians.

Sure, all experiments are irrelevant and the only which we should keep in mind is an OP units’ lover who says that fians are not OP, because if you bring 2000 men to siege a town it does not matter (it actually matters, you are going to lose less men if you do not bring OP units).

Sure, you might loose 10 men instead of 5 men!!! Its terrible..

The real benefit of personally bringing archers to a siege is that you can hold back the army and rack up kills for a better portion of the loot.

We are talking about unit balancing,

Except this thread had absolutely nothing to do with unit balance whatsoever. But... why should this thread be any different from every other damn thread around...

and if your only argument to defend your point is that you can outnumber the enemy, it makes zero sense to me.

It makes every sense possible. The optimal strategy in the game, for handling a siege, IS to bring as large an army as possible! This is how you terminate a faction quickly and effeciently.

What you are on about is the equivalent of debating which color makes a racecar the fastest.

It is not like if I would be complaining because this game is hard without fians, because the truth is that this game is too easy, even if you put tons of limits on yourself to try to make it harder. It is just about you feel that you are wasting money if you recruit something different to archers, especially if you are not recruiting fians or Khan’s Guard.

There is zero difficulty whatsoever. If you are playing the game for a challenge then I am sorry to disappoint you; it never has nor is it ever going to be challenging one way or the other.

Of course, if you conquer the whole world and you already own all fiefs, it does not matter if you have fians or other units in your army, but it matters when we think about the way for achieving it.

Yes, in the same way I do not use smithing because it is broken, I do not recruit fians or OP Khuzait nobles, but I am tired of having to avoid some features and units in this game because they are clearly broken and not fixed. So I have to giving it up on purpose because the game is poorly balanced.

It affect the speed at which you can achieve your goal. Now, personally I would be fully content, for the time being, if a t6 infantry unit was made available!

 

[geala]

I try to avoid late game (often successfully), so my experience is meagre, but from that and from what I watch (I like to watch Youtube videos during breakfast on Sundays), there does not count that much except numbers. Quality maybe saves you a bit time, but it's grind all over, and a bit time won does not make rhe grind much better.

I prefer to stay longer in the earlier game phases, having no op troops is a help. For example I have removed T5 from the normal troops and T6 from the nobles, and T2 has 80 skills.

What I really miss is Improved Combat AI mod which doubles the combat level of each troop, without it tournaments are boring.

BTW, a bit on topic, I don't mind the high prices of top tier armor. The prices of most armor and of all weapons are ok, and I like to dress my companions with it, the new loot system is good.

 

[xdj1nn]

just download RBM and be happy - these discussions are starting to get annoying

 

[Dabos37]

Sure, you might loose 10 men instead of 5 men!!! Its terrible..

The real benefit of personally bringing archers to a siege is that you can hold back the army and rack up kills for a better portion of the loot.

Except this thread had absolutely nothing to do with unit balance whatsoever. But... why should this thread be any different from every other damn thread around...

It makes every sense possible. The optimal strategy in the game, for handling a siege, IS to bring as large an army as possible! This is how you terminate a faction quickly and effeciently.

What you are on about is the equivalent of debating which color makes a racecar the fastest.

There is zero difficulty whatsoever. If you are playing the game for a challenge then I am sorry to disappoint you; it never has nor is it ever going to be challenging one way or the other.

It affect the speed at which you can achieve your goal. Now, personally I would be fully content, for the time being, if a t6 infantry unit was made available!

1- You are reducing late game to 100% siege battles, when the truth is that you still have to fight tons of field battles. While Fians are also OP in sieges, field battle is where it is much more evident.

2 - You are reducing everything to a stage of the game where most of the people do not even reach ever. You are talking about pretty late game when you are already able to outnumber enemies by a relevant margin. Even if you would be right about Fians are not OP in late game (which I disagree), this does not change the fact of this unit being OP and allowing the player to progress too faster.

3- Even if we are not arguing in the right thread, we are arguing about if Fians and Khan’s Guard are OP or not, so we are actually talking about unit balancing. Read your own posts…

4- It is not like arguing about the color of a racecar. You have actually admitted that Fians make the grinding lords in mid game faster and easier, and they allow you to avoid getting losses in battles. The color of a racecar has nothing to do with the car performance, and we are 100% talking here about unit’s performance. We are not talking about if Fians look cool or not.

5- The game could be more challenging is devs would fix exploits. This is a fact I have had the opportunity to confirm myself when do not using exploits.

6- Again, you are admitting that Fians are OP when saying that they affect the speed you can achieve the goal. This is exactly what I find them wrong and the reason because Fians and Khan’s Guard should be nerfed. Smithing also affects the speed you can achieve the goal of conquering the world, and this is exactly what makes smithing OP.

just download RBM and be happy - these discussions are starting to get annoying

I do not like RBM units. No one is forcing you to read.

 

[xdj1nn]

1- You are reducing late game to 100% siege battles, when the truth is that you still have to fight tons of field battles. While Fians are also OP in sieges, field battle is where it is much more evident.

2 - You are reducing everything to a stage of the game where most of the people do not even reach ever. You are talking about pretty late game when you are already able to outnumber enemies by a relevant margin. Even if you would be right about Fians are not OP in late game (which I disagree), this does not change the fact of this unit being OP and allowing the player to progress too faster.

3- Even if we are not arguing in the right thread, we are arguing about if Fians and Khan’s Guard are OP or not, so we are actually talking about unit balancing. Read your own posts…

4- It is not like arguing about the color of a racecar. You have actually admitted that Fians make the grinding lords in mid game faster and easier, and they allow you to avoid getting losses in battles. The color of a racecar has nothing to do with the car performance, and we are 100% talking here about unit’s performance. We are not talking about if Fians look cool or not.

5- The game could be more challenging is devs would fix exploits. This is a fact I have had the opportunity to confirm myself when do not using exploits.

6- Again, you are admitting that Fians are OP when saying that they affect the speed you can achieve the goal. This is exactly what I find them wrong and the reason because Fians and Khan’s Guard should be nerfed. Smithing also affects the speed you can achieve the goal of conquering the world, and this is exactly what makes smithing OP.



I do not like RBM units. No one is forcing you to read.

Dabos:

relax otherwise it never slides - RBM's actually pretty good, and it's the only balance mod available atm. Swallow your tears and just go for it.

 

[Sweynforkbeard]

1- You are reducing late game to 100% siege battles, when the truth is that you still have to fight tons of field battles. While Fians are also OP in sieges, field battle is where it is much more evident.

No, you dont.

2 - You are reducing everything to a stage of the game where most of the people do not even reach ever. You are talking about pretty late game when you are already able to outnumber enemies by a relevant margin. Even if you would be right about Fians are not OP in late game (which I disagree), this does not change the fact of this unit being OP and allowing the player to progress too faster.

3- Even if we are not arguing in the right thread, we are arguing about if Fians and Khan’s Guard are OP or not, so we are actually talking about unit balancing. Read your own posts…

4- It is not like arguing about the color of a racecar. You have actually admitted that Fians make the grinding lords in mid game faster and easier, and they allow you to avoid getting losses in battles. The color of a racecar has nothing to do with the car performance, and we are 100% talking here about unit’s performance. We are not talking about if Fians look cool or not.

5- The game could be more challenging is devs would fix exploits. This is a fact I have had the opportunity to confirm myself when do not using exploits.

6- Again, you are admitting that Fians are OP when saying that they affect the speed you can achieve the goal. This is exactly what I find them wrong and the reason because Fians and Khan’s Guard should be nerfed. Smithing also affects the speed you can achieve the goal of conquering the world, and this is exactly what makes smithing OP.

No, I am not admitting that Fians or KGs are OP, I am saying the rest are still a tad UP!

Archers work well in the hands of the player because they offer alot more tactical opportunities to exploit the AI. In contrast, no matter what tactical moves you might make, at the end of the day, your infantry is still going to have to close in and duke it out with the opposing side. But it still works better than in Warband where you could just get the whole opposing party to tack on to you, ride circles around them and have your archers shoot them to pieces.

I do not fear archers in the hands of the AI and so I do not consider them OP.

 

[sh1ny4]

Dabos:

relax otherwise it never slides - RBM's actually pretty good, and it's the only balance mod available atm. Swallow your tears and just go for it.

It's not the only balance mod though, there is also warbandlord and an other one whose name I forgot (damage calculation or something similar) which all rebalance armor, thus archers.
Differences are that RBM also improves the AI and the archery, but it also modifies troops thus needing a patch for a lot of other mods

 

[Dabos37]

No, you dont.

No, I am not admitting that Fians or KGs are OP, I am saying the rest are still a tad UP!

Archers work well in the hands of the player because they offer alot more tactical opportunities to exploit the AI. In contrast, no matter what tactical moves you might make, at the end of the day, your infantry is still going to have to close in and duke it out with the opposing side. But it still works better than in Warband where you could just get the whole opposing party to tack on to you, ride circles around them and have your archers shoot them to pieces.

I do not fear archers in the hands of the AI and so I do not consider them OP.

What do you suggest for making the AI better against OP fians? Should TW make infantry able to dodge arrows?

I do agree with AI still needs work, and yes, the AI uses missile units pretty poorly, but it does not change the fact of Fians or Khan’s Guard in the player’s hands are able to delete the enemy, and there is not much the AI is able to do to avoid it.

Dabos:

relax otherwise it never slides - RBM's actually pretty good, and it's the only balance mod available atm. Swallow your tears and just go for it.

I am relaxed. Not sure why you are thinking I am not.

 

[HalfMetalJacket]

I do not like RBM units. No one is forcing you to read.

In fairness, you don't even have to use RBM units. You can just turn them off in the menu.

Even then though, you're going to be in for absurdity. RBM simply doesn't work right for regular M&B troops. De Ri Militari is almost needed.

 

[Sweynforkbeard]

What do you suggest for making the AI better against OP fians? Should TW make infantry able to dodge arrows?

I do agree with AI still needs work, and yes, the AI uses missile units pretty poorly, but it does not change the fact of Fians or Khan’s Guard in the player’s hands are able to delete the enemy, and there is not much the AI is able to do to avoid it.

No, there are limited options as to improving how the AI can handle an archer heavy force. A few minor tweeks might help.

As it is, the AIs infantry formation will target your infantry formation which allow you to easily move to outflank their formation.

1) What the AI would need to be able to do is to assess what is the bigger threat and not so readily expose itself.
2) It also needs to be able to split its infantry formation into multiple formations to counter the player using multiple archer formations.

 

[five bucks]

I'm not HMJ but:
1. A baseline 66-150% increase for the wages of troops.
2. Decrease the income gains from loot (XP gains are fine) down to around a third of what they are now.
3. A modest increase in income gains from fiefs.
4. A blanket 50-75% decrease in garrison wages, off the top, before any perks are applied.
5. The Charm and Leadership passive effect reducing troop wages by a certain percent.
6. Each supporter of the player clan in a fief or its attached villages reducing garrison troop wages by 3-5% or so.

Napkin math and ballpark figures but the sum total effect would be to make a running an all-T5/T6 power party financially unsustainable. Fighting lords constantly is far less lucrative (from loot selling) and running such a party is cost prohibitive. As the player gains fiefs, they have incentive to garrison troops in them, which creates a sort of peacetime "demobilization" and opens the space up for small party quests and actions to remain relevant. Gaining supporters to further reduce the wages in times of peace would create an environment where long-term fiefs became more financially lucrative while conquests have to be invested in before they create a return. But it would be worth the effort because there would still be a progression if players couldn't go all-T5/T6 out of the gate.

The decrease in garrison wages would also help the AI from going broke and faceplanting as a result.

Sounds good to me.

 

[Dabos37]

In fairness, you don't even have to use RBM units. You can just turn them off in the menu.

Even then though, you're going to be in for absurdity. RBM simply doesn't work right for regular M&B troops. De Ri Militari is almost needed.

Problem with this is that RBM is balanced around its units. If you turn off the units in the menu, the mod is even more unbalanced than vanilla.

No, there are limited options as to improving how the AI can handle an archer heavy force. A few minor tweeks might help.

As it is, the AIs infantry formation will target your infantry formation which allow you to easily move to outflank their formation.

1) What the AI would need to be able to do is to assess what is the bigger threat and not so readily expose itself.
2) It also needs to be able to split its infantry formation into multiple formations to counter the player using multiple archer formations.

To be honest, I think this is not going to happen. Plus, archers and xbows are able to artificially shoot too fast, and do more damage against armor than they should. I do not believe that waiting for an AI fix miracle is something realistic, especially when there are easier changes which could be applied for making these OP units more balanced, and at the same time make them feel more “realistic”.

 

[Sweynforkbeard]

Problem with this is that RBM is balanced around its units. If you turn off the units in the menu, the mod is even more unbalanced than vanilla.



To be honest, I think this is not going to happen. Plus, archers and xbows are able to artificially shoot too fast, and do more damage against armor than they should. I do not believe that waiting for an AI fix miracle is something realistic, especially when there are easier changes which could be applied for making these OP units more balanced, and at the same time make them feel more “realistic”.

Yeah. 1.8 was great.

"They brought 100 cavalry to the fight, perfect!"

Lets repeat that with archers.

"HA ha, they brought archers to the fight, noobs!"

 

[xdj1nn]

It's not the only balance mod though, there is also warbandlord and an other one whose name I forgot (damage calculation or something similar) which all rebalance armor, thus archers.
Differences are that RBM also improves the AI and the archery, but it also modifies troops thus needing a patch for a lot of other mods

warbandlord doesn't touch most stuff, it only gives WB feels to BL, it's an improvement, but suffers from the same critical issues the base game carries, like weap imbalance and OP archery.

 

[Ananda_The_Destroyer]

If you bring 1k man army the siege camp gets built much faster then if you bring 200 fians (or anything).

 

[Agroplode]

If Bannerlord wants to truly find a way to balance economy, then first Calradia have to be a far more dangerous World and travelling the map should also be full of dangers. We are all discussing the bad economy but part of the truth is that the world is not dangerous for us. When was the last time you got robbed on the road or destroyed in battle. Safe travels and a winning streak is what truly makes us able to steamroll.

 

[Apocal]

6- Again, you are admitting that Fians are OP when saying that they affect the speed you can achieve the goal. This is exactly what I find them wrong and the reason because Fians and Khan’s Guard should be nerfed. Smithing also affects the speed you can achieve the goal of conquering the world, and this is exactly what makes smithing OP.

I haven't found them to be that overbearing in the late game (which is basically most of the game if you're trying to conquer the whole world) because the tradeoff is taking time to find more, even with very low losses. That isn't as good as simply taking 4-5 worse troops immediately then going onto the next siege.