Instead of expensive AF weapons and armor...

[Apocal]

...why not give us reasonably priced gear with a degradation mechanic?

If TW is so worried about player power expanding far too early that they have decided to lock high-tier stuff behind cost and non-market gates, why not provide a method for that power to steadily whittle down? There are already negative modifiers in use, so that would be nothing new. Obviously, items that are looted would be a little bit worse for wear, but it wouldn't need to be universally applied as currently (1.4.1/e1.4.2) because overall gear costs -- and therefore resell value -- would be much lower. You would finally be able to buy the gear your Cataphracts are wearing without modding the game.

It would also give another balance factor for weapons/armor that are seen as objectively better than all the alternatives. You could have some items that wear out more slowly than the better alternatives and become relatively more useful in at least one respect. That Imperial lamellar is good. The Imperial lamellar with skirt is even better though... except there are a lot more lames to look after, oil up and keep laced so it needs to be replaced quicker than the one without the skirt.

Obviously, I'm not suggesting this apply to the troops, only player and companion gear.

On a note regarding I M M E R S I O N, over a very long-duration campaign or mercenary contract, far away from your usual home, maybe your stuff would wear completely down to the point where it is better to equip looted or locally procured items on yourself and your companions. If you were a Sturgian merc clan fighting in Vlandia for two years solid, maybe your character and companions would start off looking like a Vikings re-run but come back looking like Vlandians from all the local stuff you'd replaced your old gear with.

 

[Kentucky 『 ＨＥＩＧＵＩ 』 James]

Having a game with such large variations in scale always comes across this contradiction, where you have control over an entire state's resources but there is still a linear gear progression tied to wealth. This ends up in odd scenarios where the top level gear costs more than half your kingdom.

I think the personal wealth system should be decoupled from buying armies. Being able to spend 20 denars getting random guys to follow you until they die is insane, and a sign that the money-based recruitment is never going to work along with the gear progression. Recruitment should be something more feudal and less capitalist, where villages would produce large numbers of lord-only recruits instead of tax, but you get those guys for free. Non-lords should be able to hire bandits and companions with personal wealth.

This would mean that only merchant characters would amass the kind of ridiculous wealth that plagues the lategame, and gear costs could stay fairly low to account for the fact that most lords aren't going to have a massive regular income. A balance to this might be that kings would get annoyed or even hostile if you're a merchant walking around flaunting the best gear (which you can afford) which is what happened historically.

 

[Ananda_The_Destroyer]

Nothing is expensive, money is easy to get. I want more money sinks. I want more stuff to do to improve my Char and my forces.
The gear not showing up at all is more of an issue. I would also like to see masterwork/lordly gear that is REALLY EXPENSIVE.
Of course armor needs, bear with me ?, to actually REDUCE DAMAGE. I know it does reduce damage, but you know they will add in lordly armor that cost 5million denars and is 5% better on paper but let you survive zero% more hits in battle. Somebody has a big ****ing problem discerning what numbers look like in data and what actually happens in the game when you get hit.

Recruitment should be something more feudal and less capitalist, where villages would produce large numbers of lord-only recruits instead of tax, but you get those guys for free. Non-lords should be able to hire bandits and companions with personal wealth.

I like this. I love 1257 AD and Lords of Calradia mods so much! They wont do anything like in the base game though. Mods to the rescue someday!

 

[benefactr]

this ain't zelda!

 

[warpowerfull]

Weapon/Armor degradation is a really annoying mechanic in every game I've played. Please no. Pricing is fine. Later in the game you'll have so much money you won't know what to do with it.

 

[black_bulldog]

Having a game with such large variations in scale always comes across this contradiction, where you have control over an entire state's resources but there is still a linear gear progression tied to wealth. This ends up in odd scenarios where the top level gear costs more than half your kingdom.

I think the personal wealth system should be decoupled from buying armies. Being able to spend 20 denars getting random guys to follow you until they die is insane, and a sign that the money-based recruitment is never going to work along with the gear progression. Recruitment should be something more feudal and less capitalist, where villages would produce large numbers of lord-only recruits instead of tax, but you get those guys for free. Non-lords should be able to hire bandits and companions with personal wealth.

This would mean that only merchant characters would amass the kind of ridiculous wealth that plagues the lategame, and gear costs could stay fairly low to account for the fact that most lords aren't going to have a massive regular income. A balance to this might be that kings would get annoyed or even hostile if you're a merchant walking around flaunting the best gear (which you can afford) which is what happened historically.

Wow that's a really nice idea.

Weapon/Armor degradation is a really annoying mechanic in every game I've played. Please no. Pricing is fine. Later in the game you'll have so much money you won't know what to do with it.

I wholeheartedly agree constantly repairing weapons/armor gets old really fast.

 

[Captain_Octavius]

Neither. Personal gear shouldn't be the main money sink, recruiting, upgrading and paying troops should be.

For gradual gear progression, lock the high tier gear behind access to master blacksmiths that work on commission for castle/town owners or even Kings. Much more of the game should be gated by social status rather than money. This includes top tier troops.

 

[Kentucky 『 ＨＥＩＧＵＩ 』 James]

Yeah, it's ridiculous that a blacksmith would make armour that only kings can buy and just leave it sitting in his shop waiting for someone to buy. Imagine your local corner shop stocking caviar and 300 year old champagne.

 

[FarmingIce]

Yeah, it's ridiculous that a blacksmith would make armour that only kings can buy and just leave it sitting in his shop waiting for someone to buy. Imagine your local corner shop stocking caviar and 300 year old champagne.

What, so have market gear low to mid tier at lower prices and then have the option to commission a blacksmith to make a high quality piece of gear for the player at a high cost and long wait time? ?

 

[warpowerfull]

There are some good ideas here, but I feel like those would fundamentally change the game, which I'm guessing is not going to happen. Maybe mods will make it or if someone makes a spin off version of the game like Viking Conquest or something.

 

[eddiemccandless]

I would prefer higher troops wages and lower cost for gear myself. I feel that moving the balance slider to the right spot on that aspect would fix many of the unbalance that is present in the game and it would be very easy to do.

 

[Lord Bryggan]

Having a game with such large variations in scale always comes across this contradiction, where you have control over an entire state's resources but there is still a linear gear progression tied to wealth. This ends up in odd scenarios where the top level gear costs more than half your kingdom.

I think the personal wealth system should be decoupled from buying armies. Being able to spend 20 denars getting random guys to follow you until they die is insane, and a sign that the money-based recruitment is never going to work along with the gear progression. Recruitment should be something more feudal and less capitalist, where villages would produce large numbers of lord-only recruits instead of tax, but you get those guys for free. Non-lords should be able to hire bandits and companions with personal wealth.

This would mean that only merchant characters would amass the kind of ridiculous wealth that plagues the lategame, and gear costs could stay fairly low to account for the fact that most lords aren't going to have a massive regular income. A balance to this might be that kings would get annoyed or even hostile if you're a merchant walking around flaunting the best gear (which you can afford) which is what happened historically.

This kinda makes sense. It would make the starting game a little more difficult unless they add peasant worthy troops into the taverns. Street Urchins? Beggars? Teen age hooligans?

 

[Kentucky 『 ＨＥＩＧＵＩ 』 James]

I mean at the start of the game the player is one of the looters. You as the player should be basically scrounging for money, not riding around massacring the naked guys who are basically your social and economic equals. I think the criminal / gang system should be completed ASAP along with some less unscrupulous options so that the start of the game is more about actually climbing through social structures to make some money and fame rather than just grinding a bunch of stats.

I think that after you become either a criminal leader mafia city level 99 boss, or become a decent trader, money shouldn't matter at all. It's never mattered anyway, but removing money from the lord / kingdom part of the game would allow the game to be balanced around only making small amounts of money, and thus allow them to completely remove the passive income systems like businesses and caravans from the game. Those mechanics are just stupid anyway, they're just there to justify the immense money sink that is the lategame forever wars.

Imagine owning a workshop which is doing well for itself, then some rich prick of questionable character barges in and demands to buy your entire business, with the condition that you continue to work there and pay him all of your income forever.

"So what do we get out of this?"
"Literally nothing. Just shut your traps and keep working. Maybe when I sack the city I won't kill you. I'll never talk to you ever again btw, just keep paying me"
"..."

 

[Grandburger]

Viking conquest had a similar feauture, however the items weren't ridiculousy priced and you could repair them.

 

[Gambles]

I'm seriously hesitant to ask them to implement any new feature they aren't already planning, no matter how seemingly simple in design.

 

[Apocal]

A balance to this might be that kings would get annoyed or even hostile if you're a merchant walking around flaunting the best gear (which you can afford) which is what happened historically.

Having actual in-game sumptuary laws would be amazing but so many players would get mad about it.

Weapon/Armor degradation is a really annoying mechanic in every game I've played. Please no. Pricing is fine. Later in the game you'll have so much money you won't know what to do with it.

I thought it was handled pretty well in Battle Brothers, along with other consumables, but that game is much more punishing than Bannerlord.

Those mechanics are just stupid anyway, they're just there to justify the immense money sink that is the lategame forever wars.

I'm actually making money from all the wars right now, as of 1.4.1. Playing as an Aserai merchant, I've gone into the business of distributing Imperial weapons, armor and horses. Much more lucrative than running eight caravans. The equipment costs being outrageous is absolutely the reason why I'm able to fund three full clan parties at an average of Tier 3 and 200+ T5/T6 in my own party while turning a profit during wartime.

I would prefer higher troops wages and lower cost for gear myself. I feel that moving the balance slider to the right spot on that aspect would fix many of the unbalance that is present in the game and it would be very easy to do.

The main problem with that is the AI is playing by (mostly) the same wage rules as the player is. It already struggles with that occasionally and putting too much more stress on the system (via higher wages) will definitely start to break other things. I suppose that could be fixed by simply cranking their bonus income even higher but I don't think the AI getting boosts is all that popular...