Leveling is cringe-worthy

Users who are viewing this thread

  • Remove hard skill/level cap and learning rate decay, keep diminishing returns on individual skills. You only need one progression cap system not three
  • Increase effect of skill points on learning rate by factor of ten, to make differences more meaningful
  • Make attributes do something else, or remove them entirely, right now they are redundant

Pretty much this.
 
While I agree with most of the stuff in this thread I just have to pose the following question: "Why try to level at all when all you get is more grinding?" your characterlevel itself isn't really useful in any meaningful way that I can tell so far and all it does is give you attributes and focuspoints but also offsets this by nerfing your learningrate as you level. I feel like this "one step forward, one step back" mechanic is somewhat of a practical joke against powerleveling players... Personally I want to level because I'm curious about the effects of higher skill levels on my actual gameplay experience but once you realise that roughly half the perks in the game doesn't appear to be implemented at all yet that gets a bit old.
 
While I agree with most of the stuff in this thread I just have to pose the following question: "Why try to level at all when all you get is more grinding?" your characterlevel itself isn't really useful in any meaningful way that I can tell so far and all it does is give you attributes and focuspoints but also offsets this by nerfing your learningrate as you level. I feel like this "one step forward, one step back" mechanic is somewhat of a practical joke against powerleveling players... Personally I want to level because I'm curious about the effects of higher skill levels on my actual gameplay experience but once you realise that roughly half the perks in the game doesn't appear to be implemented at all yet that gets a bit old.
With the current skill system, there really isn't much point in leveling up, except maybe being able to ride a better horse or use a better bow. Perks are broken or underwhelming and the performance advantage from higher weapon skills is barely noticeable. For me, I work at leveling up because it's such an integral part of the M&B experience, which is why this new skill system feels like such a letdown.
 
Honestly i agree with alot of the points being made here but as a casual gamer i don't see how the skill gain is problematic. Yes the hard cap should not be there. Someone mentioned 0.25xp gain as minimum. Sound fair. Also an adjustable slider for xp gain would also be appreciated if you just want to play a "quick" game.

Other then that i think alot of casual players trying this out for the first time (not everyone) try to rush it way too much. Warband was increadible slow compared to this title. I can see why people like to rush it. There's nothing to really do in the early game other then farming bandits, training troops, farming renown, trading and doing same missions over and over for what feels like an eternity. The lack of diplomacy, the much talked about "create gang in towns" and other features is holding back alot of the fun but then again it's early access and alot of features are not in yet. Right now i treat it as a battle simulator basically since you will be doing several hundreds of those before reaching late game. I often feel forced into joining a kingdom just to save them from being overrun or because i'm just bored of farming.

To get back to the point of xp...if you take your time then the xp gain is not that bad (except the hard cap) but i definetly feel that an xp slider would be nice just like you can adjust how fast you move on map and how much dmg you take etc. More variations in missions and even more interactions with lords to increase/decrease relations would be nice so you can eventually join a kingdom where everyone likes you from the start. Then again..early access.

Skill tree has alot of traits that currently do nothing. Extra arrows/throwable is one i think. Some boosts and other specialised ones that i currently can't think of. You don't decide when to declare war is a big issue i'm having including captured towns/castles that i can't decide specifically who gets. Instead i'm having to hunt down the specific lord just to find out he's on "an adventure" across the map to Saurons lands to hug a hobbit or something. If i could take every captured place and easily give to through a menu. I don't think the "voting" should be restricted to only a couple of lords. Everyone should be selectable BUT you still should have some who think they are entitled to it. I really wish the encyclopedia was updated with the lords location atleast once a day so i could track his movement or atleast give me access to him through a menu or by sending someone to fetch him. Create army works though if you got the influence.

Ah, skills, yes. In the early game fighting skills are important. I see no reason to put skills in any other place other then maybe smithing or trade. Roguery would be nice if the gang thing in towns were implemented. Soon...please. It kinda makes all the decisions you do in character creation obsolete since you will only focus on fighting skills to be most effective. Mid/late game is where you need leadership,tactics and steward skills and honestly i never see my level gain slow down until i reach near lvl 20 because i level leadership, steward, tactics, fighting skills and even charm at the same time. I do think there should be an opportunity to cap a castle early game though. One thing that could make it viable is to make loyalty matter. If it drops too low it could rebel and be owned by rebels which is fair game to kill without invoking the fury of empire sized armies. Sure, kings might not like that you as a low rank peasant owns his castle but the huge amount of cash you're sitting on might "persuade" him to turn the other cheek unless you're a charming little puppy with big eyes. If we had any viable way too improve relations with lords then he might even look the other way if friendly enough.

Edit: Oh one more thing. The support button in your kingdom. I hate it. If i could click it and the current clan was still selected then i would be fine with it but got damn it's annoying to try and boost a -100 relations clan to positive.
 
Last edited:
Gaining levels and thus attribute and focus points has to be untied from skill level progression.

We need to get general XP we get for doing things such as winning battles, killing enemies, trading, negotiating, finishing quests, etc. That general XP should be used to get us level ups and thus the two aforementioned points.

The skill levels would simply be earned by applying that skill. So trade skill would be gained by trading, fighting skills by fighting, etc.
 
I agree. It doesn't even feel rewarding either. I guess the devs were trying to avoid the character from becoming a super soldier like in Warband, but it feels so pointless when you waste your time trying to level up some skills for a few % bonuses or a useless perk.
Dude that's the worst part though. You basically start as a super soldier. The only skills that have a meaningful impact are athletics, stewardship and medicine. Weapons are super imbalance. Anything that uses two hands basically one shots everything especially since speed matters way too much now. Leveling skills is meaningless in Bannerlord right now.
 
Leveling in Bannerlord feels un-organic, unrewarding, and extremely grindy. Very few perks have effect on playstyle, ie I got a 3% to weapon speed, whoopty do. That kind of progression of weapon speed should either come from better weapons (which can only be equiped by higher skilled characters) or be like Warband where it comes naturally as you level up your skills. It's so frustrating that your forced to level up skills you're not interested in, and feels like TW tried to make a new system while shoehorning in ideas from Warband. It's quite possibly one of the worst leveling systems I've ever seen.
 
Although I would like a new skill/perk/leveling system in general I'll say my main problems with the current system.
1: Learning speed reduction for all skills at each level gain. This makes planning what skills you actually want very difficult because although it may appear you will be able to reach a certain skill level..... you wont because of the slow down and eventual learning cap changing and any late game skills will be so much slower to raise even though you never touched them (and couldn't) such as engineering (no siege till mid game) and Leadership (no army till vassal).

2: Learning limit visuals and tool tips are inconsistent. What is the green area supposed to mean? I wanted the 275 riding perk so I chose almost all endurance during character creation, giving me max 240 learning limit with 10 endurance 5 FP, according to green meter/tool tip. Well my Riding is now 305, I'm glad I was able to reach 275 but I would have used less endurance if I had any way of knowing exactly how high I could get riding. What's the point of the green area if it doesn't show where learning stops and nothing else does?

3: Skills vary greatly in ease and speed of leveling. Want to be the medic but know how to play M&B..... you're not going to see much medicine skill gain since you need wounded troops to raise it..... guess it's good you can use blunt arrows to knock out your own troops..... not only is the gain slow but you have to play badly or knock out own troops to even be able to raise it. On the other side, Riding goes extremely fast and illogically. With equal FP and attributes in endurance and control, staying still on a horse and shooting guys with arrows gives much more/faster riding skill then bow skill, even when riding has significantly surpassed bow. And engineering is just plain slow especially considering the campaign time being eaten up by siege preparation.

4. Later Attribute points are worthless. The increase in learning speed they give is so little once you're level 16 or 20 (because of global learning speed reduction per level) that you might as well not have got them.

5. Can't not-gain some skills you don't want, thus bloating your level prematurely and reducing your growth in things you do want and making the whole concept of character building go down the toilet.

Basically Learning speed reduction per level and learning limits are garbage and medicine need to be raised another way.
I'm all for a new system, maybe skill up/FP for active skills and "just spent my points" for passive skills.
 
Not sure if this was a mod from warband or vanilla but you could buy skill books from vendors which boosted/gave you skill points when you finished reading them. They were pretty expensive though. Would not mind having that implemented in Bannerlord
 
I hope they go back to warband system because grinding sucks and having every character the same also sucks.

I personally much prefer the level-through-use system, it is so much more organic. The whole points-based system is an anachronism dating from tabletop RPGs as far as I'm concerned. The problem is that people who grind spoil it for everyone. Some kid spends 5 hours continuously grinding and becomes a god, prompting a knee-jerk nerf from the devs who don't want you to become OP in such a short amount of time. Now everyone is forced to grind in order to make progress.

Edit: I should add what I would like to see: remove focus points and attributes entirely. Make every skill have an independent xp curve that makes it progressively harder to progress in that particular skill, but doesn't affect others.

Edit2: also, remove perk choices and just grant all perks automatically as you level the skill.
 
Last edited:
I don't understand why they added that penalty to learning the higher level you are, it adds nothing, if you learn to be a one-handed swordsman, why would it be much harder to learn how to be two-handed swordsman later?
"It's hard to teach an old dog new tricks"?
 
For me the problem is not that it gets harder to level up a skill with time but that each level up makes it harder to level up every skills. It's stupid.
I actually think it is a bit immersive. Obviously the smartest engineer in your group isnt going to be the best warrior. So in a way it sort of creates a way to specialize characters. Though, being specialized in OneHanded shouldnt slow down twohanded but should, say- engineering or medicine.
 
I actually think it is a bit immersive.
for immersion, please, do tell us how we can reach the proficiencies of T6 units, in some cases 3 x 220-280 multiple skills. Also, how do we reach T6 units level, being 31. Also, lets not limit ourselves to troops, I would bet that the Lords have way better stats even.

So, how does the player reach any of those ? I mean, I will be conservative, and say that 220-280 skills are fine.

I would like to see the immersive 280 athletics. With sufficient 220 one handed skill.
Grind 275 crossbow skill while youre at it.

Do tell how immersed you felt when you do it.
 
I think some people in this thread are confused

Skills don't cost more when the player is a higher level, only when the skill itself is higher

I just checked because I thought you guys were wrong and yep, at character level 15 it takes me 41 xp to get throwing from 1 to 2, and it still costs 41 xp at character level 16
 
I should add what I would like to see: remove focus points and attributes entirely. Make every skill have an independent xp curve that makes it progressively harder to progress in that particular skill, but doesn't affect others.
Yeah if they insist on a "you use you get" system I'd like this too. They could fine tune and make additional uses/activities/bonuses for skills as need be without unintentional **** ups.... hopefully.

I think some people in this thread are confused

Skills don't cost more when the player is a higher level, only when the skill itself is higher

I just checked because I thought you guys were wrong and yep, at character level 15 it takes me 41 xp to get throwing from 1 to 2, and it still costs 41 xp at character level 16
No you are the confused, LEARNING RATE is not "exp to next level".
 
for immersion, please, do tell us how we can reach the proficiencies of T6 units, in some cases 3 x 220-280 multiple skills. Also, how do we reach T6 units level, being 31. Also, lets not limit ourselves to troops, I would bet that the Lords have way better stats even.

So, how does the player reach any of those ? I mean, I will be conservative, and say that 220-280 skills are fine.

I would like to see the immersive 280 athletics. With sufficient 220 one handed skill.
Grind 275 crossbow skill while youre at it.

Do tell how immersed you felt when you do it.
Yes, i find it realistic that a general wouldnt nessesarily, be well versed in engineering, trading, medcine, etc. Those skills should be harder for someone to learn if they have spent their life studying combat & tactics. The opposite is true of an amazing enginner. Elon musk is never going to be your go to swordsman no matter if he dropped all his companies and practiced sword fighting till the day he died. Now, i didnt say anything as to reaching high levels in skills ur player should be good at. I was specifically refrencing how i believe leveling up one skill SHOULD limit another. Just use the console if it soooo immersion breaking for you. Or does that ruin the immersion too?
 
You shouldn't be. It's really the wrong system for a game like this. It means every character will play the same for the first 2/3 of the game. Every character starts out bad at leadership and engineering, and it's basically impossible to level either until mid-late game. By that time the story of your character is already mostly written. Every character will have high steward, because it's almost impossible not to. Every character will have either high riding or athletics, for the same reason. Every character will have low-mid scouting and medicine, again because they just level up passively. There is almost no differentiation between characters, they will all be the same.

It promotes grind and degenerate gameplay, that weren't present in warband. Just look at what some people report doing:


And because of the attribute system, you are encouraged to grind levels in skills you don't use. It's just not a well designed system.

The two systems they tried to mash together (the elder scrolls grinder and warband point assignment) are fundamentally incompatible, they need to pick one and go all in.
I hope they go back to warband system because grinding sucks and having every character the same also sucks.
i am fine with learning by doing absoluetly but not of it is going to be ubserd..
like they should remove those focus points and after you hit a softcap of 200 it should take longer like in warbands..
there are for example too less ways to level up ceratain skills as you said and some that are all the time present,for example rogurery needs more possibileties to level up it cnat be the sense of just bribing guards recruiting looters and raiding villages to raise the skill.

same goes to scouting it takes really really long to levelp up this skill just from spotting hideout,why not adding extra options like ambushing etcetc

Or leadership ..

I think the idea of the new lv system is nice but as i thought its like becomming exponetially harder to level up with every skill you take due to the focus points and your attributes which are just there to higher you learn ability of something .

sorry for my bad english
 
Yes, i find it realistic that a general wouldnt nessesarily, be well versed in engineering, trading, medcine, etc. Those skills should be harder for someone to learn if they have spent their life studying combat & tactics. The opposite is true of an amazing enginner. Elon musk is never going to be your go to swordsman no matter if he dropped all his companies and practiced sword fighting till the day he died. Now, i didnt say anything as to reaching high levels in skills ur player should be good at. I was specifically refrencing how i believe leveling up one skill SHOULD limit another. Just use the console if it soooo immersion breaking for you. Or does that ruin the immersion too?
as far as I am aware, Musk is an oligarch who probably never really worked hard anywhere. He is a demagogue, receives a lot of state funding, likes to fearmonger with tomorrow, with the unknown, with the AI, while seeking to make money for it, or wants to use all that for hopes to get into power. Burns through it and thats it. He is a public speaker, he was using outdated techniques when producing his cars. An overblown, rich oligarch. A state company can do much more without all the fuss and costs to keep shareholders and CEOs happy. Serious research is best when youre not forced into profitability, as this usually leads to squeezing workforce, firing them while the greedy get too much money for no work done. He is basically a public front for US state, except given an opportunity to squeeze the US state because he has the right connections to get some kickbacks. Corruption. He basically accomplished nothing a state company couldnt do, however state company needs also good oversight, because when you work for the state, money is almost literally endless, so you could end up not efficient either. He accomplished nothing, whatever the companies did, it was the human resources that did all the work, not a public front face, who blabbers because hes got rhetorical skills. If his businesses got looked into seriously, he might end up behind bars btw. Or the laws are made in ways to prevent the rich from getting hit with the hammer of law, same with warmongering politicians who arent getting punished for things way worse than an ordinary person can do.

not all people are the same, some people can learn many things both physical and mental work. Some are pure theoreticians, some are small people, literally, who try to beat above their real weight through their willpower and tongue. When this doesnt work, they fail hard. Some people are crowd controllers, manipulators, some are not the group people, or groupthink managers. Extra/introvert, introverts tend to learn and know many more things than the social butterflies who are nobodies on their own. Introverted people tend to not require a group of glorifiers to feel confident, to be in the flow of the social bubble. An extrovert tends to be all talk, little real expertise, the other side tends to underplay their real skills so these days, when the herd person, the extrovert is supposedly the cool thing, it is about loud incompetent people. Gimme people and Ill do it. Some people are brave only when in numbers, some dont need numbers.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom