Lords not dying on patch 1.7

Users who are viewing this thread

Have to disagree with that. Before those changes, mentioned above by Dejan, you had a small chance to destroy the whole army with a single kill of its leader. Besides, deaths prevented lords from gathering doomstacks with 2-3k soldiers. Right now, when almost everyone dies only from old age, lord deaths look more like the ability to sit on any chair - it is there but what's the purpose?

Death probability should be raised somehow to become a prominent gameplay element again. One way is to increase it in a mission battles and leave as they are in simulated battles.
giphy.gif

Other way is to let players decide how big will be the probability in their campaign.
giphy.gif
 
After the initial introduction of simulation battle death with a 2% chance (which results in 5-15 deaths per year), we received a range of community feedback denoting that it was too high. After some deliberation, we agreed and adjusted the rate to a level of 2-5 deaths per year on average. Naturally, we continue to review the relevant feedback and may make further balance changes.
I'm confused, I though the 2% was already aiming for 2-5 a year? Is it now lower they a 2% chance when they are downed to non-blunt damage?
Also, related, are you aware that lords/ladies during prison breaks seem to die to non-blunt damage at or near 100% and is this intended?

I kinda like the idea of a little more deaths but also the ability to replace clan members/clans if needed at a resource cost and some diminished effect. For instance the AI lords start the game with high skills (for the party leaders anyways) and if they were replaced after dying with more modesty specked lords it would still have a effect from loosing lords but not be a complete blow out. Likewise it should be a recourse drain to make new clans, so a failing, losing faction cannot just keep making more, but one that just happened to have bad luck with death RNG but is otherwise doing well can recover.
 
Last edited:
So, basically, the current death rate is even lower than 2%, right?
I'm confused, I though the 2% was already aiming for 2-5 a year? Is it now lower they a 2% chance when they are downed to non-blunt damage?
The current death rate is 2% at most (can be reduced by increasing the medicine skill,...). It was 2% before as well but a bug was causing the deaths to move at around 5-15 per year, now it's at the intended level of 2-5 deaths per year.
Also, related, are you aware that lords/ladies during prison breaks seem to die to non-blunt damage at or near 100% and is this intended?
We're aware of it. Will follow up once I can share more info.
 
The current death rate is 2% at most (can be reduced by increasing the medicine skill,...). It was 2% before as well but a bug was causing the deaths to move at around 5-15 per year, now it's at the intended level of 2-5 deaths per year.

We're aware of it. Will follow up once I can share more info.
Thanks for clearing that up, that sounds like a good amount per year.
 
Seems like a good balance tweak would be variation in death rate based on a few factors. I'd reduce it for clan leaders, but after a certain age it should increase over time in general too. And perhaps a few traits would influence it - like fearless, impulsive increasing it, and cautious, calculating would reduce it.

A Bannerlord year is also a weird thing, for some players that's a long time, for others that's nothing. Depending on whether they do lots of autocalculating, smithing, waiting around, longer trade routes and wild goose chases, etc.
 
A good amount which makes the whole death in battle thing not meaningful at all...
Well, the more you defeat the more chances for them to die, so it still has an effect, but you shouldn't feel like the world is suddenly barren on it's own after 10 years. I'm not saying maybe it couldn't be adjusted again the other way too though.
 
Well, the more you defeat the more chances for them to die, so it still has an effect, but you shouldn't feel like the world is suddenly barren on it's own after 10 years. I'm not saying maybe it couldn't be adjusted again the other way too though.
I fight tons of battles, yet none of the lords die there, just because default is 2% and it even can be lowered to 0% for some lords with high healing skill.
The chance is defnitiely needs to be adjusted, I think, making a higher for at least mission battles. Making it age-dependable makes no sense to me - a 60-70 y.o. lord will day anyway soon, so what's the point for making the chance for them higher?

To me, death in battle is a chance for you to get rid of some young lords and also a risk for you to lose your young clan members. But right now, with 2% death rate it feels like Warband again, when after every big battle with 13-14 lords on each side your dungeon gets stacked with prisoners because none of them dies ever.

Those, who says that 2% chance is good and they see "X died in battle" quite often are most likely play early game and never reach the late game. Late game is an immortality age with 1 death in battle in 2 years if you're lucky.
 
Last edited:
Well, the more you defeat the more chances for them to die, so it still has an effect, but you shouldn't feel like the world is suddenly barren on it's own after 10 years. I'm not saying maybe it couldn't be adjusted again the other way too though.
I have defeated the battanians more than 100 times, but they are still living, they should raise the death chance in mission battles back to 10%.

And the procreation is insane in this game, by only 2% chance to die in battle, Calradia is overpopulated after a couple years, it was already overpopulated with 10%.

I think they should adjust the death chance, based on how many adult heroes are living, more living adult heroes higher death chance.
Or make it always 100% for landless factions, so the game can remove this lords.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom