I'm quite sure it is a lack of content.
-
If you are reporting a bug, please head over to our Technical Support section for Bannerlord.
Late Game Fix
- Thread starter thomas13
- Start date
Users who are viewing this thread
For me the reason that the late game (after you're the ruler or an influential lord) is bad due to the grind rather than lack of content.
1)Your vassals don't put many units in a newly conquered settlement and don't wait inside the settlement for long, making the settlement very easy to retake by the enemies and then forcing you or your vassals to re-reconquer it, making the process very grindy.
2)Your own vassals being retarded and attempting to declare war on every faction simultaneously. You will eventually not have enough influence to deny their votes and the situation will turn into a full on grind.
3)You can't really finish off factions. Sure they can actually be destroyed if you kill all the lords in every clan but when you're 10-20 years into a game, every clan has like 15 people of age, which makes it a ridiculous grind to kill everyone off.
4)You can't reasonably hire minor factions when you're in early kingdom phase, leaving you only with promoting companions to vassals or being wealthy enough to even attempt to convince a lord to join your faction, and you can only do this a limited amount of times before you go bankrupt. What's worse, since apparently kingdoms can make money out of thin air daily with a low percentage chance and can actually go into negative balance without the minor factions leaving, this makes straggler kingdoms very annoying in being able to form small armies and take newly conquered settlements easily, or at least distracting your armies into coming back to defend/reconquer these newly taken settlements, which makes the game, you guessed it, very grindy.
I do it pretty much every game, what you do is pick off the lower tier (less valuable) first and retreat so you get your arrows back, you can do this as much as you need to. The enemy of course gets it's ammo back too... You will also rapidly gain skill and levels doing this so retreating lets you put on perks and FP before you go back in. TBH I'm not sure if retreating even cuts down your loot score in 1.8 and 1.9, in past versions it did but lately I've felt it was as much as I would expect from the whole party. You certainly seem to get high renown even if retreating in 1.8 and 1.9.
thomas13
Regular
With your logic everything in the game is an exploit. Yes, you can one shot them with headshots on day 1. Renown is relevant to the topic that's the whole reason for going after the Embers early and by yourself. Is there more honor in killing them with an army as opposed to by yourself?
You can get them when you are at war. Convert prisoners faster with perks. Take advantage of troop xp perks for donating weapons and gear. You say your not a noob but you don't sound like have a solid grasping of how to be successful at the game.
It is simple. Before you go after fiefs destroy all armies. Then when you siege all they can throw at you is low tier troops.
Nobody is advocating for it to be free. But in order for lords to field strong armies they need a high enough income to support them. So yes economy becomes an issue.
If applied you'd make the game even easier. You haven't really thought your ideas through. By adding diplomacy you would add an incredible amount of down time and it would ruin the flow of the game. You already complain that the game is grindy and these changes would make it even worse.
You're not creating solutions just future issues. You are not a visionary. Because your ideas don't fit within the confines of what this game is.
It isn't? How many hours have you sunk into the game then? I'll guess probably many. You love the game and you eat it up at every turn. I don't care what people think that's no concern of mine. People will always complain and most of the time their wrong. You want this game to be something it isn't and it will never be.
They scream lack of content but on the inside it's really a lack of challenging gameplay.
Agreed
try it than tell me if it became easier
No, I think the base game's crap and out of balance - most of my time in it was testing and trying to find where the fun part was (dedication doesn't mean love) - I have 14 hundred hours in BL and I think it's crap. Mods are the only thing making it salvageable but even than those aren't yet at "full capacity" - in 1 or 2 years it'll be decent, probably...
If you need to call it something, call love for my money investment - if I pay for something I'm gonna try to make it work. If you like wasting money you should really get my bank account number and send me some instead.
So you also don't care about what other ppl think, that's entitled don't you think?
I want nothing but the game to have a sound and good GD going because I liked WB and saw what mods could turn that game into, BL should have the best WB on it's baseline with additions, as is it has even less than base WB. It may come closer to that ideal GD, it may not - doesn't really matter as it isn't my pockets' on the line.
In the end you're the single person crying me rivers due to my suggestion, are you sure you should be playing games or in forums instead of treating your emotional insecurities?
Last edited:
@Heliozell when posting on the international board it's required to post in English, or at least include a translation along with your post.
Heliozell
Recruit
Constant warfare will always impact troop level, both for player and AI, so peacetime sucks, no, it's needed to recover troops, but players are always going to be unhappy with the game mechanics, I I see complaints that go against what the game offers, radical changes will not be made, the enemy retaking your territory is completely understandable because you do the same, but the AI sucks for doing what you would. Every player has an experience in the game and will have an opinion, even if it is eloquent, this is important.
I posted in English, my browser did the automatic translation and it was in Portuguese.
You can recover troops in wartime as well. But when there's no war you can't do what the game is all about, namely waging war. I've had peacetimes for weeks without any war. So when you say, peacetime is for troop building, that's done in 2 days in my game. Then it's just a matter of raiding a village when you don't have enough influence, and making some companions unhappy. Or wait for a war.
That time is just waiting and waiting.
Dabos37
Sergeant Knight at Arms
I do pretty much agree with this. I mean, new content is necessary, and it is always welcome, but the biggest issue we currently have in late-game is how easy we can wreck the AI.
The current issue is that people hate when the AI gets some cheats, while at the same time people hate nerfs (which I find silly). It is like if some people would love to play at the hardest difficulty and at the same time wreck the AI. Maybe because some people need to feel they are great players to enjoy the game or who knows…
Anyway, if I would have to choose between one of the two options, I think that making it harder for the player is the way to go. For example:
- Every single exploit should be fixed. Including OP units and tactics which make battles excessively easy. Aside from broken units like Fians and Khuzaits nobles, archer units are in general still too good.
- Getting full T5-T6 armies should be really hard to sustain. Wages should not be a joke like currently, and getting full elite armies should be something rare. Increasing wages would hurt the AI harder than the player, so not exaclty sure how to fix this without giving the AI more cheats.
- (While wages should be harder to pay, overpriced armors should go down. Paying +250K for a chest armor is ridiculous and it is probably the worst way for making the game “challenging” for the player. Especially when we can stole our wife’s armor (thanks God), otherwise we would look like a recruit compared to our T5-T6 units in our party we pay wages).
- The current diplomacy and election system is too exploitable. I can get the immortal charm perk and after some time, I am able to get other clan’s fiefs through spamming the same election and draining everyone’s influence. It is funny that I still keep a great relationship with these clans from I am getting fiefs xD. If you propose something, you should be forced to vote in favor at least with minimum influence option.
There are more ways to “nerf” the player, but the above ones would be a good starting point.
thomas13
Regular
You've spent 1400 hrs on game you think is crap? Thanks for providing proof you enjoy complaining for the sake of complaining. Those who in glass houses shouldn't complain of emotional insecurity.try it than tell me if it became easier
No, I think the base game's crap and out of balance - most of my time in it was testing and trying to find where the fun part was (dedication doesn't mean love) - I have 14 hundred hours in BL and I think it's crap. Mods are the only thing making it salvageable but even than those aren't yet at "full capacity" - in 1 or 2 years it'll be decent, probably...
If you need to call it something, call love for my money investment - if I pay for something I'm gonna try to make it work. If you like wasting money you should really get my bank account number and send me some instead.
So you also don't care about what other ppl think, that's entitled don't you think?
I want nothing but the game to have a sound and good GD going because I liked WB and saw what mods could turn that game into, BL should have the best WB on it's baseline with additions, as is it has even less than base WB. It may come closer to that ideal GD, it may not - doesn't really matter as it isn't my pockets' on the line.
In the end you're the single person crying me rivers due to my suggestion, are you sure you should be playing games or in forums instead of treating your emotional insecurities?
If you think your vision is so great go create your own game and put Bannerlord and Taleworlds to shame. I'd welcome it.
strawmann
Recruit
I thought this was an interesting idea, so I made a mod that gives lords 125 medicine skill: https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=2875237021 . I haven't played a campaign with it yet, but I'm looking forward to hearing if it makes a difference for anyone else.
thomas13
Regular
In addition to this give nobles scouting skill. Too many times I see noble armies blindly walking up to larger armies because they don't see them and then they get gobbled up easily.
Fair point on telling me to go make games, should I? Idk, if I were I'd do it for myself, and the time investment required to develop a game is really long, I'd have to build a team (not easy to find) and invest a lot of money, or at bare minimum find ppl who'd invest a lot of money to make it happen. I would not do that just so I could play a game I find good in 5 years... DIY for stuff like feature films or games' not feasible - unless you really intend to make a career out of it and your enjoyment actually comes from the work, not using the end product.
It isn't because you'd like to eat a specific dish that you should become a chef - otherwise your statement would be valid for all consumers over absolutely all things we enjoy
thomas13
Regular
Completely agree. I'm not opposed to new content unless the new content just masks existing issues.
The hardest part is balancing the game to make it realistic but still fun to play. You're right the player is OP. The player is OP because they can access and utilize the fundamental system of the game and the AI doesn't. The player can access Scouting, Medicine and Engineering etc which is a huge boost. I think in order to start to balance the game you need to level the playing field when it comes to attributes and skills. Once that is done and dialed in then start balancing the economy and then the units.
-Fians and KG are OP when in the players hands but when the AI has them they either don't mass enough of them to make a difference or they get used poorly. Kinda like the argument about which is better Fians or KG.. in my opinion if KG can get behind the Fians, KG dominates. If the Fians can prevent the KG from getting behind them Fians dominate. I'd be okay with nerfing them but then they'd have to buff some of their other units.
-Agreed. Either make it more difficult for the player or boost the AI ability.
-Well now with the buffed loot you can get high tier armor for free from battling.
-Yeah, they definitely didn't spend much time thinking out a diplomacy system. I think cause at the heart of the game it's really an arcade style action game. It was never meant to have an in depth diplomacy system. But they should at least try to fix some of the exploits.
However it's done either through nerfing the player or boosting the AI, balance is needed to make the game more challenging.
no quite, balancing to make it realistic's actually easier than you think - the problem with that is that realistic games aren't fun, and that's about it.
The tricky part is finding a good compromise between realism/emulation and fun-factor - and that's where TW failed, because neither does the game feel fun nor does it feel realistic.
To me the problem with the game on a macro-scope isn't details like battles or items or graphics, it's exclusively upon the AI and the lack of immersion it carries - troops behave like bots, Lords behave like bots, rulers behave like bots - it's basically a bot wasteland and as such we do not become invested into the world, instead resorting to head-canon and meta most of the time. What's already in effect are actually features and balancing to mask the existing issues - not my ideas - simply the way they've balanced and shoehorned features to work as slow as snails with endless grinding and unrewarding lengthy mechanics... That's why not everyone's screaming at them for the core issues, it's because everybody who doesn't cheat the game or haven't played long enough were successfully distracted by their masks and didn't really come to realize the underlying problems.
If a guy wastes 50h to level up toons and reach the edges of the Truman town - that person's less likely to notice that they are in a Truman Show...
thomas13
Regular
We both want to improve the game. You believe the path forward is through adding new content and great structural change. I believe it through using the existing structure to tweak the game to be more challenging. I just believe my way is more realistic.
We're speaking the same language with how we see the game.
But there are ways for sure to make the content harder/challenging besides only resorting to AI cheats as the solution.
AI cheats would be the 'bandaid' solution, as they share the 'same' economy we do (from what I'm told - besides smithing abuse), I'm sure there are some more creative ways to make income generation work better for AI while still not making it too easy for players. Something the past ~2 years of EA would've been the best time to try/test, before resorting to just giving them some arbitrary X amount of money to compensate.
Harder difficulty should be more than just x2 HP/x2 damage/x2 money. Albeit, that works for certain genres better (FPS/Doom/etc...), I don't see this being the solution for BL (as they already do that, but reverse with 'reduced' damage anyways).
Yes, wages for troops higher/harder to obtain. I never considered the cost of armor as part of their 'thresholds' for a challenging game - it's just a gold sink (in a game where there's practically none)
Heliozell
Recruit
we can always recover troops, but that's not all in the game, you have other things to take care of, I'll give you an example, if the dev nerf the sale of the blacksmith shop, most would have something to do in peacetime, because they would lack denarios , the game has many possibilities, unfortunately players seek the greatest possible benefit and don't take advantage of the possibilities, trying to make an army of only one culture is more challenging than doing the best for everything, it's how I play and I like to do it.
To me minor factions / mercenary clans should be made stronger by owning top tier units for their exclusives - and the game should get a system for contracts where they become bound to you until the contract expires IF you choose not to renew it, making possible to bypass the renewal or abandon the contract if you go bankrupt or if they hate your guts.
The actual current function of those minor clans' to simply annoy the crap out of the player because they'll join the weakest faction, even if they are bankrupt and cannot pay, than zerg around in mini-parties raiding and attacking innocents & caravans endlessly... Currently the best option in vanilla is to simply murder all of them - problem solved. Issue is that for that to actually work you gotta murder all members of the clan simultaneously otherwise the game spawns substitutes, and you'll get arbitrarily karma bombed by TW's disgusting system for executions, realistically only a couple lords would get mad at that and the OG enemy faction should instead be thrilled... Like, killing those Ghilman or the Jawwal should make Aserai declare a holyday... Or ridding the empire from the Hidden Hand / Legion of the Betrayed / Eleftheroi (all three are traitors to the Empire in-lore) Instead we get the RNG karma bomb - which goes against the own game's lore...
To me it's just an intentional anti-player mechanic - TW has a lot of that bias rolling in BL.
Last edited:
