-
If you are reporting a bug, please head over to our Technical Support section for Bannerlord.
If the devs wanted to make changes to the campaign map, are you ok with that? POLL
- Thread starter Blood Gryphon
- Start date
Users who are viewing this thread
Yeah no doubt im causing sturgia to survive longer and thus have higher tier troops and more cav. Khuzait def needs a look at due to their massive cav advantage, i have no idea what their homeland economic situation is like but i would hope it was the worst of everyone, as Khuzait are a nomadic people (hence all the horses), to compensate for their military power.
Last edited:
I believe the same or similar, the map is small I do not think it will cost them much to enlarge it and put a few secondary factions, there is more than one empire they could do something similar with the other factions and make the cities bigger too, it happens as in skyrim more than a city they seem villages if it is for performance the sieges could be in stages
if there is a translation error sorry i am google's fault
if there is a translation error sorry i am google's fault
Sturgia=Wet Cement Khuzait= Steamroller
StewVader
Honestly we need a bigger map with more fiefs and more fief types.
What about leave factions imbalanced and plausible as they are now?
this.
paladinx333
Sergeant at Arms
The map is actually very large. The current playable area is just a chunk in the middle of a much larger map. Perhaps some of these unused areas are meant to form the basis for an expansion of some kind.
If they added ship Trading Caravans/Travel/Ship combat a lot of Asarais and Sturgias problems may be fixed. Sturgia has a port or 2 that can go right to beaches and ports and the Asarai Have multiple port towns that could go right to beaches or towns.
Last edited:
Mountainhorse
Regular
The game is in EA. It would be scary if they don't change or add anything to map at all.
If they want to fix the economy of the game's factions they need to fix the way workshops spawn, from what i read they don't spawn dependent on what the settlement's available resources are, the game should measure the resources that are available in a settlement's territory, then measure the resources available in neighboring territories (or the general area as one would say) and assign bigger and smaller values to each workshop, then add a random component on top of that value, to make it much more likely that the economy works on its own.
After they fix that they can go on to fixing the map if they want to.
After they fix that they can go on to fixing the map if they want to.
it probably isn't (drastic geographic changes are not needed), all they have to do is to either boost the amount of villages and add at least 2 more castles to Sturgia, or, cluster**** their fiefs without the need to change the map layout. Doing so would probably leave some empty void in the map (cluster****ing the fiefs), but, they could always feel said gaps with some extra fiefs. Thing is, that would be the non-optimal solution. Simply allowing Sturgia to have more sources for recruits and grounds for prosperity gain, would definitely fix their issues.
Supposedly, they should move faster in their own territory, but snow detection is not working, along with that Mexxico has said something about giving Sturgia an extra cultural feat of paying less soldier wages, if both are combined they'd fair very well by late game, given they survive early game.
Some geography along with fief distribution in Sturgia are quite retarded. There are a few villages that are never able to successfully trade with their closest town because they have to go around ridiculous amounts of distance to reach said towns. Meanwhile most nations benefit from 3 villages bound to each town, while sturgia is stuck with only 2 per town... I think if we count the villages (never done it, too annoying), Sturgia might be the kingdom with the least amount of villages, and being all so spread apart makes it the worse area to own any fiefs.
Last edited:
They should add Zendar as an ancient Sturgian city or something. Something like Stara Zandora.
But yes, Aserai and Sturgia are too long, to isolated. Some of their city and castle positions make little sense. Like, what strategic position is Nevyansk Castle accomplishing? There's no ships or sea travel, so what's this nonsense about a castle isolated in the middle of Vlandian territory, unconnected to anything?
When it comes to tactics, the Vlandians have more towns, more clustered territory, no enemies on the sea side, and they already surround one Sturgian castle. Raganvad then comes rolling in with 150 guys, gets stomped by 300 Vlandians, and the ball starts rolling.
But yes, Aserai and Sturgia are too long, to isolated. Some of their city and castle positions make little sense. Like, what strategic position is Nevyansk Castle accomplishing? There's no ships or sea travel, so what's this nonsense about a castle isolated in the middle of Vlandian territory, unconnected to anything?
When it comes to tactics, the Vlandians have more towns, more clustered territory, no enemies on the sea side, and they already surround one Sturgian castle. Raganvad then comes rolling in with 150 guys, gets stomped by 300 Vlandians, and the ball starts rolling.
I still think that the best strategic Kingdom Start is Battania, they simply have the best potential for defense, army recovery, and potential prosperity over all other nations in the game... I seriously have the impression that TW has some bias in favor of Battania tbh, if only their castles and towns looked better (they currently look like ****, but maybe that's just personal taste)
The aesthetics on battanian towns aren't bad and some of them are setup very well for defence the way the walls overlook the gate etc.
And yeah its like ive said about sturgia their economy is utter trash and needs fixing before any other tweaks are made.
Khuzait can have economic problems caused by OP Steppe Bandits making a mess of villager activity.
The result of this poll is unsurprising. I don't think the issue was ever concern about player willingness. Changing a map which has been polished to a mostly finished state is expensive (ie. a lot of work that has been done gets thrown out and has to be done again) and a lot of things get built based on assumptions about what the map layout is. I expect that is why changing the map is not something the development team is eager to do.
It is evident some changes will need to be made however. Just a question of how much.
as I've said "personal taste", my pet peeve with them is how their keeps look (like some fancy cavemen abortion). The towns are okay (civilian constructions, walls, etc.)...
This. i was surprised this was missing on day 1 of release.
as far as I'm aware, it's not gonna happen, at least not anytime soon... It was implied (for the best of knowledge) that if they do that, it'll be far (and I mean FAAAAAAAR) in the future, long past the game has been officially released. I'd bet it'll probably come as some sort of DLC
Similar threads
