How to give a "soul" to this game?

Users who are viewing this thread

Nawari

Veteran
yup, being saying that for the past 8-10 years here in these same forums...

Warband lacked a lot but was ultimately fun, although boring overall. That was fixed by modders to the edge of their engine limits over the years. Bannerlord theoretically should be a better modding platform with a, at bare minium, base game quality on par with the best mods for Warband, but rn it's actually less than Warband in most aspects, the only thing we have more is grind and boring chores. Their perk system has been needing a total revamp since it came out, they need more unique memorable NPCs, including companions (which are currently 100% RNG generated with most skill rolls being Culture + gender locked). We lack diplomatic choices, there's absolutely no intrigue system. Crafting's poorly designed since EA release (apparently changed for the first time just now with 1.8 - yet still probably not good). The list goes on and on.

From major detractions, we lost the ability to hold villages as isolated fiefs, reducing the noble ranks to only mere 2 levels besides the kings, and the possible noble hoster to the number of castles and towns you own. Bad move. Instead of widening the depth by turning village lords into their bound castles / towns, and castles bound to their closest towns (which would open the possibility of having Dukes, Barons and Thanes) we were reduced to all direct vassalage and villages being ruled by the owner of their bound fortification. idk, feels bad, wrong, feels less... Warband one of the best moments was swearing allegiance and receiving a mere village to take care of, having to build a manor so you could spend time there watching over it while paying reduced wages for your party, building it up to improve income while indirectly buffing your bound castle owner's wealth in the process... Good times...
One thing is certain: I will never give money to TW again. Even if they release the addon of the century. At 50 Euros, we must have a complete "real game". It's bull****. They need to stop making fun of people. They released this EA just because they needed to raise funds. But that is not our problem. Our problem is to have a functional and fun game. However, it is neither one nor the other. This game is a joke.
And continuing to defend Bannerlord and TW is dishonest.
Saying that you "have to buy Warband", but Warband is as wonky as Bannerlord, except that at the time, we forgave because the game was new.
No, TW was supposed to release a real game, they are releasing a wobbly game yet again. It's too easy and unforgivable. You have to stop lying. This game is a scam.
 
Last edited:

MostBlunted

Banned
One thing is certain: I will never give money to TW again
Reaction smileys when? @forummods @Erminas

Answer the real questions at least...

EDIT:

Oh wait, it was trolling of course...(Trolling is totally against this forum rules)

EDIT II:

This is not my alt account, I had created one, after I was banned "back then", but this isn´t me.
 
Last edited:

Nawari

Veteran
Reaction smileys when? @forummods @Erminas

Answer the real questions at least...

EDIT:

Oh wait, it was trolling of course...(Trolling is totally against this forum rules)

EDIT II:

This is not my alt account, I had created one, after I was banned "back then", but this isn´t me.
Do what you want...
 

xdj1nn

Knight at Arms
WBWF&S
One thing is certain: I will never give money to TW again. Even if they release the addon of the century. At 50 Euros, we must have a complete "real game". It's bull****. They need to stop making fun of people. They released this EA just because they needed to raise funds. But that is not our problem. Our problem is to have a functional and fun game. However, it is neither one nor the other. This game is a joke.
And continuing to defend Bannerlord and TW is dishonest.
Saying that you "have to buy Warband", but Warband is as wonky as Bannerlord, except that at the time, we forgave because the game was new.
No, TW was supposed to release a real game, they are releasing a wobbly game yet again. It's too easy and unforgivable. You have to stop lying. This game is a scam.
I simply disagree, Warband's a good game for it's time and a ground-breaking innovation to the industry as a whole. It somehow originated: Chivalry, War of the Roses, Kingdom Come: Deliverance, Mordhau, etc.

It also showed how mods can completely transform a game, all their DLC for Warband's actually done in the same ground as mods are, so Viking Conquest's simply a mod for Warband with a few engine updates. Seriously, they hold all the cards to make yet another ground-breaking change with BL but to do so they must step up and at bare minimum provide a improved experience under the same grounds as Warband did. It's still worth as a game and I'd buy it again no questions asked, BL on the other hand I've been skeptical since 2014 about, gave them a shot when the EA was released, kept giving as much feedback as I could to try and help shape it, but ultimately just gave up because I don't believe any of my feedback was ever read / listened, so now I'm back just to shrug boredom off, but if 1.8 stable doesn't cut it (because make no err, I'm modding the crap out of the game, that's why I'm doing 1.7.2 atm) I'll be off again for god knows how long (last break I took was almost 2 years straight with 2 weeks of playing in 2021).

I hope they do whatever it takes to make this game good, be it delaying it for 10 more years or making another engine, I don't care how long it takes at this point, just that it be good.
 

Nawari

Veteran
I simply disagree, Warband's a good game for it's time and a ground-breaking innovation to the industry as a whole. It somehow originated: Chivalry, War of the Roses, Kingdom Come: Deliverance, Mordhau, etc.

It also showed how mods can completely transform a game, all their DLC for Warband's actually done in the same ground as mods are, so Viking Conquest's simply a mod for Warband with a few engine updates. Seriously, they hold all the cards to make yet another ground-breaking change with BL but to do so they must step up and at bare minimum provide a improved experience under the same grounds as Warband did. It's still worth as a game and I'd buy it again no questions asked, BL on the other hand I've been skeptical since 2014 about, gave them a shot when the EA was released, kept giving as much feedback as I could to try and help shape it, but ultimately just gave up because I don't believe any of my feedback was ever read / listened, so now I'm back just to shrug boredom off, but if 1.8 stable doesn't cut it (because make no err, I'm modding the crap out of the game, that's why I'm doing 1.7.2 atm) I'll be off again for god knows how long (last break I took was almost 2 years straight with 2 weeks of playing in 2021).

I hope they do whatever it takes to make this game good, be it delaying it for 10 more years or making another engine, I don't care how long it takes at this point, just that it be good.
Sorry, i was a little bit too mucha anger. But yes, it's not a bad game, Warband, i liked it too much for the same reason as you.

To return to Bannerlord:
I tested the 1.8.0. I didn't play since 2020. I admet 1.8.0 is very stable in comparaison with the first. And many new details are interesting.
I tested a second time "Land of Sika", i stopped, but that seems a very good mod. But I don't have the patience to play long games anymore.

I play dumb games in "sandbox" with "dumb" mods just for fun.

Mod "Fourberie" (Roguery) :
I tried the "fourberie" mod (https://www.nexusmods.com/mountandblade2bannerlord/mods/2969). This mod allows to have a kind of "base" in a "hideout". It allows a certain number of small actions (assassination, blackmail, etc.). It's a good idea but there would be a lot to "fix" or "improve" or "simplify".
This mod also allows you to make an "army of bandits" by ordering troops of bandits to join your own group. It's not bad, but it often bugs after a fight.
This mod allows progression in a "bandit career" with specific actions that gradually open up.
There is a really good idea, and I thought it could be advantageously added to the native version by correcting it and simplifying certain aspects that are a little wobbly.
Add to the native version, we would thus have the possibility of having a "Role Play" bandits if however we added some "npc" dialogues and a "career bandits" modality.
Version 1.8.0 of this "Roguery" mod is functional. I don't know if the developers of TW are in contact with the modders developing it, but I find this mod promising provided it is made a little more "hergonomically" pretty.
I think this is a good mod for someone who would like to start Bannerlord with a bandit/mercenary career.

There are a few things to clear up in this mod because the impact of our bandit actions on our relationship with a "Target Realm" isn't always explicit. Perhaps because it is still poorly integrated into the whole process.
There would probably be some balancing work to be done.

This mod deserves the design of a tutorial, but I know, it's complicated to do.

But I find this mod promising.

I have a proposal to make for "Roguery" mod. I know it is probably not easy to implement.

- "Roguery" offers to earn some money by having servants and slaves. Ideally, it would be nice if the mod offered a choice: "Do you want to be a slaver or fight slavery (slightly reminiscent of "Land of Sika"). If so, the player has a permanent "charm" penalty and becomes "Cruel" and "manipulative", and gets a significant bonus in Roguery. If not, the player has a permanent and significant bonus in "charm" and becomes "honest" and "generous".
Other consequences, if the player chooses "yes": the "slave" function is blocked, but he obtains a compensating bonus in the "trade" line and a bonus on the "vanilla market" prices. (Ideally, it should be possible to employ "free workers" instead of the "slave" function. The Hideout would then be transformed into a sort of Robin Hood village).
On the other hand, if the player chooses "no": the "slave" function is open and he has a small "trade" malus but obtains a bonus on the "black market" but none on the "vanilla market".

Ideally, if we choose "yes", we would become the target of "soft-hearted" Nobles (generous, honest traits...) and our hero could more easily be executed if he is imprisoned. On the other hand, if we choose to be "anti-slavery", we would be more the target of nobles with "hard hearts" (cruel, dishonest), and we could be executed by them if we are a prisoner. .

The mod's conspiracy functions would not change.

Still "ideally", it would be great if we could have several "hideout" bases, one in each "bandit faction". This would allow you to play totally bandits for a whole game for fun.

I tested "Improved Garrison":

I did not like. The first reason: it has hardly ever served me.
The second reason: I had a problem with limiting garrison expenses. I could no longer pay these expenses. Did I make a mistake? Bannerlord's built-in system for limiting garrison spending no longer worked.
I find it too complicated with too many functions that are useless to me.
I tested "Improved Garrison":

I did not like. The first reason: it has hardly ever served me.
The second reason: I had a problem with limiting garrison expenses. I could no longer pay these expenses. Did I make a mistake? Bannerlord's built-in system for limiting garrison spending no longer worked.
I find it too complicated with too many functions that are useless to me.

I tested "recruit everyone":

I like the idea of being able to recruit anyone, as a companion, in the tavern or on the street. However, the problem is the recruited companion's stats. All companions recruited with this system have the same starting stats with a few points to distribute.
Ideally, there should be npc whose statistics correspond to their job, for example:
- the waitress of the tavern: a higher "charm", "trade", "stewardship" statistic,
- the owner of the tavern: a higher "trade" statistic.
- a Vlander citizen: a slightly higher "smithing" stat, a good "crossbow" or "pike" stat...
- a "merchant": a good trade stat essentially,
- etc.
+ the bonus points to distribute.

I think this "mod" brings a "Role Play" dimension to the game. Recruitable NPcs as well, it would be interesting to offer them "special companion" dialogues. Example :
- a recruited tavern waitress: "What I don't like about men is that they think they can do anything. A former waitress tells you, a drunk and vulgar man is an understatement. "
"Would you like me to make you taste what I have found lately during our travels, a magnificent wine!"
"I had to do many jobs in my female dog of life, but I admit that since I met you, everything has changed."
etc
"I worked in a tavern in "Lycaron", I never saw worse customers than the rich customers of the Empire. They don't respect anything, not even their wives."
etc

Small randomized dialogues (appearance only once, otherwise it becomes spam).

I don't know what could "provoke the dialogue": perhaps parking in a city, when you are "waiting", it would be the best.

This mod works pretty well. I paired it with: Unlimited CAP

This mod allows you to recruit as many companions as you want. I don't recommend it. It was just for fun. But I think it destabilizes the game because you no longer respect the speed of progression. (You can recruit many companions from the start, it is the player who sets the number in the options). Why not ? But as a result, there are no longer any rules and it can quickly become destabilizing. The cost of companions can ruin the novice player very quickly and discourage him.
On the other hand, I can't see this mod in a native version because it breaks all the rules of progression.
But otherwise, in a "sandbox" game, it allows to have an infinite number of companions, which could be fun, if indeed the companions each brought a lot of "RolePlay" interactions.


The biggest gaps in rpg mods:
The biggest lack in this game is indeed the lack of "Roleplay", "inteactions fun with npcs", features of the companions.
I don't understand why modders aren't doing anything to change that. I find a lot of silly and useless mods, and nothing for the RPG of companions, lords, and other npcs.

Too many mods just for the "aesthetic" side, but not enough for the "rpg", "interactions", dialogs side. There are absolutely no mods that add really fun dialogues to companions, in particular, but also to every possible npc.

What i imagine :

It is true that these dialogues could weigh down the game with unnecessary interactions.
More reasons to make an effort to write, these interactions must be fun. If in addition, they trigger actions, or an interesting "quest", then it's the icing on the cake. But I understand that it is complicated.
It must not be repetitive, each npc should have a specific dialogue, they must be randomized without being repetitive, they sometimes also bring new features to the gameplay (an action: a fight for example to save a companion of an attempted murder, or, a party that ends badly in a tavern with a fight, or even participating in revenge by killing a slave trader, or even finding the parents of a companion in a village where, for RP reasons, he will be badly received, forcing us to fight against the villagers, etc.), deliver a relative from the companion in a hiding place of bandits,

I'd rather see these "interactive" companions and npc's brought into the game in a slow, incremental way so everyone gets deeply worked on. Better to work hard on a single companion for weeks on good dialogue and good dialogue-related events, than to have a lot of them in series haphazardly.

search for a treasure lost by a companion by looking for clues everywhere, from stage to stage, with fights on the road, fights, battles to be won to pass the next stage, until finally finding the "right map".

It would be interesting if these "Role play" events were automatically noted in a role play "logbook". But that is in the realm of dreams. Yet such a logbook would be structuring.

However, such a logbook would be structuring because each "Role play" novelty would have to be integrated into the logbook.

Example: start of a new roleplay interaction with an important "npc": the logbook is triggered and registered:

"Today I recruited a new companion to my troop. He told me about a strange affair. He is said to have amassed a fortune in recent years, but I suspect he was involved in dark conspiracies. He maintains that X stole his share of the loot from him. I don't know if I should trust him, but, my curiosity outweighs reason." New Quest : *First clue* find "X" in Lycaron at the market and interrogate him.
etc

Integrate small rpg games and "big boss" to kill:

"You find a coded message. To find the code, you have to beat X at Y's game at Z's tavern. If you beat him, you will have the code.
Obviously, there, it becomes more complex to develop.
But these are the kind of elements that would make the game more "alive".
So with a puzzle system, it would be possible to get to the end of fairly complex and entertaining investigations if they are well written.

Poorly written Role Plays tire quickly. Better one RP character with one well-written plot than many poorly written characters.
Then, from year to year, it would be a question of enriching the play of new characters Role Play interesting and well written.

For that, we would have to find the simplest possible procedure so that motivated modders can write "Role Play" stories with a simple tool. Even if there are fewer integrated actions possible, but good plots.

And I forgot the essential "big boss" that must be beaten at some point while respecting certain constraints to pass the next stage of a story or to finish a story..." An RPG...

And there should have been all the originality of this game:
The big boss to defeat is not a "monster", but a "special" armed troop with exceptional statistics. So we ourselves would have to prepare a suitable troop to defeat them. Even if it means having to try several times before managing to have the troop that works.
Killing this type of "boss in an armed troop" should be the originality of this game.

I remove my nasty and useless remarks, sorry, friends sometimes take over the keyboard...
 
Last edited:

Nawari

Veteran
I was forgetting the stupid mods that only aim to raise the level of the game by making the fights more difficult. Many believe that this will make the game more attractive. It does not change the "repetitive" side of the game except that it makes it even longer to play and more painful. I believe it is:
- "Calradia Rising Armory": it adds branches to the troop trees,
and of
- "additive", which diversifies the possibilities even more, by making the troops of looters, etc. of all the "stronger" branches.

It doesn't change anything except that you have to wait a little longer to be the strongest and have larger troops when you fight a battle. But the mechanics of the game are exactly the same and we are just as bored.
It is true that one dies more easily during a battle and therefore one can "game over". It adds a bit of spice, but doesn't take away from the totally silly side of the game.

When playing an RPG, leveling up skills is used to skip stages of a story.
Here, skills are only used to become the most powerful. It is not used to pass stages. That's the whole point of this game. There are never any surprises. It is not because we put stronger troops that the game becomes better. A good game is when you know why the troop is stronger : it's a 'boss', you have to beat it to continue your progress. There must be a rule in a game, without rules there is no game. It is the basis of any game.

Addictive machine but not a game : make our children stupid
When the only goal is to repeat the same thing over and over again until you reach a vague goal, it is not a game, but an addiction machine.
When humanity will have grown up, will have become adults, this kind of game will disappear and we will find the "rules of the game". , the joys of playing together around a table. Video games are just jerk off.

To end this lecture:
So. It was the sociological lesson of the day from anthropo-sociology professor Luis Armstrong.
Thank you for your attention, I can autograph my book "video games and jerking off" after the conference if you wish. Please do not stain the cover. Thank you.
 
Last edited:

xdj1nn

Knight at Arms
WBWF&S
@Nawari the reason mods are so limited rn is mainly because the game's still getting massive updates too often that break everything, so applying too much time and sweat into a mod will either consume too much time (because you'll be constantly updating it) or it may completely break due to feature additions due to redundancy, either way the mod creator will be wastingn a lot of time for no reason.
That's why most of the major mod creators from Warband have been postponing porting their mods, those will come if those guys survive the slow-development of the game, and new top quality mods will only really appear once the game's fully released.
 

Nawari

Veteran
the reason mods are so limited rn is mainly because the game's still getting massive updates too often that break everything, so applying too much time and sweat into a mod will either consume too much time (because you'll be constantly updating it) or it may completely break due to feature additions due to redundancy, either way the mod creator will be wastingn a lot of time for no reason.
That's why most of the major mod creators from Warband have been postponing porting their mods, those will come if those guys survive the slow-development of the game, and new top quality mods will only really appear once the game's fully released.
I understand. But despite all the nonsense we were saying in the thread previously, there are some interesting mods.

"Roguery", in particular, is my favorite. Even if it is (very) imperfect, it is very promising. And a few others... Roguery allows me to not only play "war" but I often get killed before I can go up. And as I play without saving (finally with the system (only one saving), it is often game over.

Finally, the fact that some mods push the difficulty of the fights (with crazy stats), makes the game a little more "adventurous". In "sandbox" mode, it's playable, for the career, I've never tried, but it must be complicated. I have to be more careful during battles about what I'm doing.

I also like the fact that I can recruit "citizens". On the other hand, I would like modders to do it for good reasons (not systematically, but for exceptional and surprising bosses to kill, I like to lose without immediately understanding why).

I also like the fact of starting with a husband or wife (with good skills). It makes the game more dynamic. And the children arrive faster, it's interesting.

As for the mod that allows you to recruit almost anyone in town (as a companion, mod "recruit everyone"), I noticed today that the more expensive the "citizen" is to recruit, the more skill points there are to redistribute (often "young citizens "whose price to recruit them varies between 500 and 300000). So far I haven't been able to recruit one at this price, I'm at the start of the game and I don't have the money (and I don't use cheats). The principle is good because they make you want to know more. Plus, it gives a new twist to having a lot of money. And I even think it should be included in the basic version. This could be the solution to killing a boss, if you know what I mean, the companion(s) very expansive with abnormal stats for the final boss. Something like that. As long as you use it well...

This all together bugs (I think I have conflicting mods, especially regarding "companions") every 3 hours, but it makes the game a bit more fun.
 

xdj1nn

Knight at Arms
WBWF&S
I understand. But despite all the nonsense we were saying in the thread previously, there are some interesting mods.

"Roguery", in particular, is my favorite. Even if it is (very) imperfect, it is very promising. And a few others... Roguery allows me to not only play "war" but I often get killed before I can go up. And as I play without saving (finally with the system (only one saving), it is often game over.

Finally, the fact that some mods push the difficulty of the fights (with crazy stats), makes the game a little more "adventurous". In "sandbox" mode, it's playable, for the career, I've never tried, but it must be complicated. I have to be more careful during battles about what I'm doing.

I also like the fact that I can recruit "citizens". On the other hand, I would like modders to do it for good reasons (not systematically, but for exceptional and surprising bosses to kill, I like to lose without immediately understanding why).

I also like the fact of starting with a husband or wife (with good skills). It makes the game more dynamic. And the children arrive faster, it's interesting.

As for the mod that allows you to recruit almost anyone in town (as a companion, mod "recruit everyone"), I noticed today that the more expensive the "citizen" is to recruit, the more skill points there are to redistribute (often "young citizens "whose price to recruit them varies between 500 and 300000). So far I haven't been able to recruit one at this price, I'm at the start of the game and I don't have the money (and I don't use cheats). The principle is good because they make you want to know more. Plus, it gives a new twist to having a lot of money. And I even think it should be included in the basic version. This could be the solution to killing a boss, if you know what I mean, the companion(s) very expansive with abnormal stats for the final boss. Something like that. As long as you use it well...

This all together bugs (I think I have conflicting mods, especially regarding "companions") every 3 hours, but it makes the game a bit more fun.
The recruit anyone doesn't appeal much to me, I prefer the Distinguished Service. It's a bit spammy when you arrive at a point where you're fielding an elite army after any massive battle be it a siege or army vs army, but I like it. I simply draw a line where I only allow myself to create new companions from troops that get 15+ kills, otherwise I close it and don't do it.
 

Nawari

Veteran
The recruit anyone doesn't appeal much to me, I prefer the Distinguished Service. It's a bit spammy when you arrive at a point where you're fielding an elite army after any massive battle be it a siege or army vs army, but I like it. I simply draw a line where I only allow myself to create new companions from troops that get 15+ kills, otherwise I close it and don't do it.
I like the functions that remain "Role Play", that's why recruiting inhabitants seemed interesting to me, especially if they already have skills. It's more immersive. Some "good characters" (could be better, usually their skills are out of proportion, it's just a mod...) are sometimes hidden in a cave in a port. It really adds to the "gameplay" side, looking for the right recruit.
All mods that directly invite me to create everything and break the immersion, I avoid. I just watched "Distingued service", it is indeed interesting to be able to choose a soldier as a companion. But not 1.8.0 yet.
 

Terco_Viejo

Spanish Gifquisition
Grandmaster Knight
The recruit anyone doesn't appeal much to me, I prefer the Distinguished Service. It's a bit spammy when you arrive at a point where you're fielding an elite army after any massive battle be it a siege or army vs army, but I like it. I simply draw a line where I only allow myself to create new companions from troops that get 15+ kills, otherwise I close it and don't do it.
Feedbacking on this has become tiresome and it seems that Taleworlds is not interested in some rework. In my opinion, in line with other users who probably belong to this "vast subgroup", a solution for recruitment would be to distribute the options for the three types of settlements.

VillagesCastlesTowns

Common troop / Minor faction trees by regular notable

Criminal troop trees by mafia notable
Noble troop tree by sargeant-castellar/noble notables
Militia / Guards / Mercenary / Minor faction (only those native in settlement origin) troop tree by regular notable

Criminal troop trees by mafia notable
(source)

And absolutely in favour of mechanics like the one introduced by Distinguished Service, where you get recruitable companions in that way... companions with much better stats than the random dirtbags that are generated in the native.

Furthermore, I'll go further by saying that an ideal Bannerlord in my eyes would be the sum of a group of around 20 warband-style companions (defined and available in each playthrough in an unaltered form) plus Distinguished Service's system.

That hybrid of warband + Distinguished Service companions along with those three avenues of troop recruitment would be what I would like Bannerlord to be in that regard.

However we all know the odds of that happening.

Cheers mate hope all is going well for you.

giphy.gif
 

xdj1nn

Knight at Arms
WBWF&S
Feedbacking on this has become tiresome and it seems that Taleworlds is not interested in some rework. In my opinion, in line with other users who probably belong to this "vast subgroup", a solution for recruitment would be to distribute the options for the three types of settlements.

VillagesCastlesTowns

Common troop / Minor faction trees by regular notable

Criminal troop trees by mafia notable
Noble troop tree by sargeant-castellar/noble notables
Militia / Guards / Mercenary / Minor faction (only those native in settlement origin) troop tree by regular notable

Criminal troop trees by mafia notable
(source)

And absolutely in favour of mechanics like the one introduced by Distinguished Service, where you get recruitable companions in that way... companions with much better stats than the random dirtbags that are generated in the native.

Furthermore, I'll go further by saying that an ideal Bannerlord in my eyes would be the sum of a group of around 20 warband-style companions (defined and available in each playthrough in an unaltered form) plus Distinguished Service's system.

That hybrid of warband + Distinguished Service companions along with those three avenues of troop recruitment would be what I would like Bannerlord to be in that regard.

However we all know the odds of that happening.

Cheers mate hope all is going well for you.

giphy.gif
totally agree. Creates both immersion and meta utility of which allows us, much like in Warband, to shape the character properrly knowing for certain which companions we need at each stage of the game for each of the gaps we need to fill with companions. As of now I just cheat with mods, extra focus, extra attribute + better attributes. This has been making the game better overall, yet even doubling the pts per level doesn't make me enough of a jack to surf through the game without the need of companions. Crazy, because in theory we need 3 to 4 party leaders, at least 6 caravan leaders (traders), at least 1 smith, 1 scout 1 surgeon 1 engineer 1 steward, than specific culture steward + engineer combos (at bare minimum) for each owned fief.

Considering that at a medium we get 3 fiefs as vassals on average, that translates into 18 companions, all overly specialized at key skills, and the game always fails to provide enough of them. You're always 1 man short at something party level (either due to slow leveling they get because they were arbitrarily chosen to start at ridiculously high levels with bad focus and att. distribution, or simply because the RNG decided to not give you enough of X type of character). So we need 18 minimum + captains if we really wanna min-max. It's just not feasible without mods.

But yeah, I just started 1.8 and got sight of the still present weapon floating parts for crafting. Two years of slow-paced turtling...
 

Madeloc

Regular
Yes, battles alone are not enough to have a complete game.
Currently in a playthrough where I made an "old" character (sandbox) who doesn't die (not that I want to die lol, but I wanted to that the bright concept of playing our children can be used) which makes our siblings useless...
And always this poor strategy of the AI who has lost (I mean greatly weakened realms), consisting of permanent harrassment, raiding villlages here and there...

There is a big lack of diplomacy depth, the fundations are made, but unused (all the lords tell you that they'll repay you one day, erf... my @ZZ).

So in that playthrough (like the dozens previous ones) I spend my time chasing weakened clans who are neither able to negociate something intelligent, nor make war so they strike everywhere where I am not, and it's very frustrating, annoying. I take pleasure to train my children, but as it has already been said, for what?

Plus the combat is already not perfect at all, in melee, AI abuses of the scrum technic, surrounding you, preventing you to hit, blocking all, in addition to be unrealistic, it's unfair and boring.

So we have a game in which we cannot ask our archers or riders "attack that type of troops" - while the AI does exactly that - and in which diplomacy is an illusion. As the AI is, example : our strength is 12000, we are Aserai, and since our strength is superior to Khuzait's (4500) and Vlandia's (6000) , we are going to declare war to them while our armies are all in the Southern Empire, against which we were (or we are) at war, meaning that all the castles/towns from east and west will fall withtout being defended... I personaly recognize the face of stupidity, through such decisions...

I often agree that simplicity is efficient but not simple as it is right now.

It is sad to have a such bright idea - to the creators of the game - and to waste it like that. Of course it is needed much more than the only the battles, I love battles, but all the economic, diplomatic, RP, fantastic dimensions have been thrown to the rubish-bin. In foavor of what? money? an "agile method" that has been altered to serve financial interests? F-O !!!!!
 

Nawari

Veteran
Yes, battles alone are not enough to have a complete game.
Currently in a playthrough where I made an "old" character (sandbox) who doesn't die (not that I want to die lol, but I wanted to that the bright concept of playing our children can be used) which makes our siblings useless...
And always this poor strategy of the AI who has lost (I mean greatly weakened realms), consisting of permanent harrassment, raiding villlages here and there...

There is a big lack of diplomacy depth, the fundations are made, but unused (all the lords tell you that they'll repay you one day, erf... my @ZZ).

So in that playthrough (like the dozens previous ones) I spend my time chasing weakened clans who are neither able to negociate something intelligent, nor make war so they strike everywhere where I am not, and it's very frustrating, annoying. I take pleasure to train my children, but as it has already been said, for what?

Plus the combat is already not perfect at all, in melee, AI abuses of the scrum technic, surrounding you, preventing you to hit, blocking all, in addition to be unrealistic, it's unfair and boring.

So we have a game in which we cannot ask our archers or riders "attack that type of troops" - while the AI does exactly that - and in which diplomacy is an illusion. As the AI is, example : our strength is 12000, we are Aserai, and since our strength is superior to Khuzait's (4500) and Vlandia's (6000) , we are going to declare war to them while our armies are all in the Southern Empire, against which we were (or we are) at war, meaning that all the castles/towns from east and west will fall withtout being defended... I personaly recognize the face of stupidity, through such decisions...

I often agree that simplicity is efficient but not simple as it is right now.

It is sad to have a such bright idea - to the creators of the game - and to waste it like that. Of course it is needed much more than the only the battles, I love battles, but all the economic, diplomatic, RP, fantastic dimensions have been thrown to the rubish-bin. In foavor of what? money? an "agile method" that has been altered to serve financial interests? F-O !!!!!
I must be the rare player who will say that combat AI is perfect for me because I am not looking for complication in this area. I don't care a bit, I find the combat AI a lot of fun even when it "goes off the rails". I'm a "good customer" in this area, I find the fights spectacular and fun enough not to complain.

No, what annoys me the most in a game is the lack of meaning. It's when a game loop seems to me to fill a void or create an illusion. The loop of war and peace shows that diplomacy is nothing but a hoax. The war is on, and that's it.
When there are no "rules of the game" to give consistency and intelligence to a game, it feels like a hoax. And this game lacks a lot of that. So yes, it definitely feels like a hoax.

Diplomacy is barely non-existent or illusory.

I think we would all like "trade", "diplomacy", "political decisions", personal relations with Lords (and not clans), marriages, to cause wars. But it will never be because in this game the war is endless. And that's all.

If I'm wrong, then the game should explain why a war is voted on apart from the "expansionist" fact. The game only aims for the expansion of each faction, and that's it. It's very limited as motivation. And that's not enough to make a game.

I'm afraid that this "war loop" prevents any other possibility of development of the game.

Politics, diplomacy and marriages have only been thought out for "aesthetic", "plastic" purposes, but it is impossible, I think, to change the mechanics of the game. If we break these "war loops", we break the Game. So I think there will never be anything other than this expansion war loop.

It's just a game of conquering towns and castles. The rest is a hoax.

True or False ?
 
Last edited:
True or False ?
True and the war loop gets really boring. I like the combat too it doesn't need to be altered apart from armour effect that is. Trading/quests/bandit hideout/ smithing :sleep: i hate simthing, arena. meh .The interesting stuff diplomacy", "political decisions", personal relations with Lords (and not clans), marriages, to cause wars. Not been worked at all or so it seems.
 

Nawari

Veteran
True and the war loop gets really boring. I like the combat too it doesn't need to be altered apart from armour effect that is. Trading/quests/bandit hideout/ smithing :sleep: i hate simthing, arena. meh .The interesting stuff diplomacy", "political decisions", personal relations with Lords (and not clans), marriages, to cause wars. Not been worked at all or so it seems.
Diplomacy, trade, relations, have almost no impact on the course of the game. The war is on a loop, and that's it. Even voting is a charade.
It was already like that with Warband. The war was on. That's why it was so hard to mod over it, because if you break the loop, you break the game.
It is for this reason that the mod "Viking conquest" was full of problems. Because it was necessary to regulate the game so that the wars start when it was necessary for the history. Very difficult. Above all, the player must not deviate from the story.
 

Nawari

Veteran
But I don't understand why, besides the loop war, they didn't develop other activities in the game to compensate. I would have preferred to be a band of bandits in the midst of war trying to survive with their companions. Suddenly, the war in a loop would have made sense. And we would have crossed it during the campaign with the only concern: not to be a victim of barbarism.
It would be a very good mod for a total overhaul of the game: a "survival" mode in the midst of stupid barbarians. Me if we limit my group to 20 units and give me good and intelligent companions with real dialogues and my quest is to survive while following a real deep and documented quest, I would take much more pleasure than having an army of 1000 morons..

"Military intelligence is a contradiction in terms" Groucho Marx
"That a man can take pleasure in marching to the rhythm of a military band is enough to make him contemptible to me." Albert Einstein
"We must not despair of imbeciles, with a little training we can make soldiers out of them." Pierre Desproges
"You want to know what I think of jerks parading to military music?? Ah the answer is in the question." Coluche
"The worst of all despotisms is military government." Robespierre
 
Last edited:
Top Bottom