Low Tier units vs High Tier units

Users who are viewing this thread

I disagree to be honest. If the result of battles is this easy to determine then it might as well be autoresolved.

I've said this a trillion times elsewhere but my favourite battle system is Rome 2 Total War. The expensive units in that game are extremely good, but only when supported by cheap light units. The cheapest spearmen can out-manouevre and javelin elite cataphracts to death, and the cheapest slingers can beat the most expensive infantry. You end up with about 20-30% of the army being heavy infantry, with maybe just one unit of elite infantry.

The problem is that battles in bannerlord are mostly just doing as much damage as quickly as possible. Flanking does almost nothing and wastes valuable grinding time, rear charges just get your own cavalry killed, the only tactic that reliably works is to mass archers and kite the enemy in front of them.
yes, this game is still under development and not finish product, it have many issues.

even you have the best armor, a group of 15 pesaant looters can still beat you with rocks, folks
 

five bucks

Squire
And that's not going to make 1 T5 outlast 10 T1 in combat as some of the players would want.
I said 1 T5 should be able to (barely) outlast 5 recruits.

I'm not sure if you've misunderstood me, but to clarify, Swadian Knights each being able to kill 10 Recruits is just an example of what a powerful-feeling high tier unit looks like. I'm not actually saying T5 units should be able to kill 10 recruits each, just half of that.
 

Maximum997

Squire
but I think the biggest reason because high-tier units do not feel as strong as they should, is because the equipment is simply 200% more relevant than skill in this game.
It is true.

Remember Sturgian t4 spearman? He wasnt able to win against t3 archers in melee fight.
 

froggyluv

Grandmaster Knight
NW
Morale is another system that should work together with this. Stamina should correlate with how much you fight, morale should corelate with how much punishment you take physically and mentally (think enemy cav being nearby, enemy cav charging you, enemy showering your shields with arrows in addition to actual damage taken). Tired units generally should have reduced morale, but units with low morale can be fresh and full of energy, two systems that pertially overlap.
Love the stamina idea for this game. I know alot of people oppose it and I can understand multiplayers not wanting to be bothered by it - but make no mistake - stamina and conditioning is paramount in fighting. We had a saying at my old boxing gym “ everyone can punch hard…for a minute” . And that’s mostly true, the most untrained fighter if motivated is formidable until the second you see that labored breathing come into effect / than it’s game on for the experienced fighter.

what a great system that would work to introduce a better differentiate quality of fighter - let them attack hysterically and with real chance of inflicting damage even upon a high tier troop - but it’s a gamble if it fails as they slow down and become a punching bag
 

Octanoz

Regular
Love the stamina idea for this game. I know alot of people oppose it and I can understand multiplayers not wanting to be bothered by it - but make no mistake - stamina and conditioning is paramount in fighting. We had a saying at my old boxing gym “ everyone can punch hard…for a minute” . And that’s mostly true, the most untrained fighter if motivated is formidable until the second you see that labored breathing come into effect / than it’s game on for the experienced fighter.

what a great system that would work to introduce a better differentiate quality of fighter - let them attack hysterically and with real chance of inflicting damage even upon a high tier troop - but it’s a gamble if it fails as they slow down and become a punching bag
I was screaming at my screen when I was first overwhelmed by troops in fire & sword with just having pneumatic arms. "How am I supposed to ever counter that?!" I have since learned a trick or 2 but I'd say it's definitely worth exploring putting a stamina system in place. I'm always laughing when my companions lose to some stupid tier recruit in the tournaments and it's only because they got the first hit off.
 

hruza

Knight at Arms
even in real life, angry peasants with rocks and folks can't hurt that much on a skillful full armor knight

I am pretty sure that rock landing hurts regardless of skill. As for armor, unless it's full plate it won't protect 100%. And plate armor is not in the game. And even in full plate, 10 guys throwing rocks isn't probably going to be a pleasant experience.

I said 1 T5 should be able to (barely) outlast 5 recruits.

I'm not sure if you've misunderstood me, but to clarify, Swadian Knights each being able to kill 10 Recruits is just an example of what a powerful-feeling high tier unit looks like. I'm not actually saying T5 units should be able to kill 10 recruits each, just half of that.

I know, I did not mean you specifically.
 

vota dc

Sergeant Knight at Arms
M&BWB
I would imagine a single t6 will have more stamina than a single t1 unit.
The t6 will kill the t1 before stamina Is an issue for that t1 but would lose stamina in the process in addition to HP, so fighting 4 t1 in row will be more difficult than before: chance of being hit and lose hp and will always lose some stamina.
Unless stamina Is used for very superficial wounds like Stones against mail that could deal few damage but sometimes deal zero damage and drain stamina, in this case the t6 would be in advantage against many t1 in row.
 
And of course there could be troops switching. We kinda did it in RBM, threatened troops generally run to the back of formation. If there was stamina on top, it would buff better troops vs worse troops even more because they could rest in the back of formation. Obviously the stupid pushing behaviour of the troops would have to be removed too, again we did it in most of the situations, and this resulted in longer battles even with just AI module alone.
 
Top Bottom