• If you are reporting a bug, please head over to our Technical Support section for Bannerlord.
  • Please note that the developer team will be on leave until 26th of July. All technical support tickets will be handled when we're back in action. Thank you for understanding.

Maybe try to make the game more of a challenge? recruit from your culture only.

Currently viewing this thread:

That's nice for you but it shouldn't be a forced restriction just because it's too easy for you



are you just 1337 gamer trolling?

Viking conquest was insanely hard on the easiest settings, even after using the tweak tool to make certain things easier and more financially rewarding and making food last much longer and improving morale much more, and modding the siege mechanic to make sure none of my guys died during the random events and more of the AI troops died during those events the game was still very difficult. The only truly beautiful thing about Viking Conquest was the fortified siege camp and shieldwall fighting at at the gates of a settlement. But the constant wheeling around of your formation made those things suck in the end as well and after watching a cool shieldwall battle for a while you eventually had to ctrl + alt +f4 the battle because your entire formation decided to turn around and expose it's flank because of 1enemy cavalry unit straying to the side, I really wish we had the fortified siege camp and the current bannerlord formations mechanics, it would be glorious to place your shieldwall at the entrance and watch the shieldwall battle knowing your troops can't be outflanked and it finally comes down to quality of men and the formation instead of numbres

I took over most of the map after around 2,000 days.
 

bodhi

Sergeant
I don't understand the whole "please take away our options" mindset.

Because limited options and restrictions is what defines a game. That's literally how you create a game. If you want a broken game, with no design, use console cheats.

And yes, it makes no sense that you can recruit, as you please, from any village on the map. It's like the British, during WW2, recruiting Wehrmacht infantry from Germany.
 
I like making culturally uniform factions as much as the next guy, but really? What's stopping you from just doing that as you are? There's no need to add some sort of restriction to the game.

At best, I wouldn't mind a morale debuff like they had in Warband when you mixed armies. Otherwise, it doesn't make sense from an immersion perspective.
 

bodhi

Sergeant
I don't think it should be an absolute cultural restriction. Mercenaries, from foreign cultures, was a thing and make perfect sense, fe. But for me to be at war with a lord and be able to freely walts into one of his vassal villages and recruit top-tier troops is just silly. The village elder would be strung-up by the enemy lord for treason and "aiding the enemy", or something.

There are many ways you can make the whole idea of extra-cultural recruitment more realistic and engaging. Right now, its implementation is lazy at best.
 

DooomRider

Recruit
Because limited options and restrictions is what defines a game. That's literally how you create a game. If you want a broken game, with no design, use console cheats.

And yes, it makes no sense that you can recruit, as you please, from any village on the map. It's like the British, during WW2, recruiting Wehrmacht infantry from Germany.

Ahh yes okay so this actually falls apart when you think about it doesn't it? The British could have recruited Germans to fight for them but unlike this game they wouldn't magically gain German equipment and "level up" into Stormtroopers they would actually be equipped with English military equipment.

Yes limits and restrictions define a game but taking my given example, YOU (as in you personally) wish to take MY ability to play that style away just because you can't stop yourself recruiting from outside your culture? This is a sandbox game as in you are free to do what you want, I don't want to take away your style of play but you somehow justify taking mine away for what reason?
 

bodhi

Sergeant
I'm not sure from which realm of reality you're imagining the possibility of mass-German recruitment into the British army during WW2. But I assure you, it's a fantasy.

"Yes limits and restrictions define a game but let's just not have any" Yeah, good idea. Good logic, like it.
 

karijus

Regular
Always with things like that I just get bored after a while, and go recruit some forest raiders to get Battanian archers lol.

Also the ww2 comment makes no sense - if you go back to middle ages you could recruit mercenaries from all over the place. The MONGOLS used GENOESE crossbowmen mercenaries to fight Kievan Rus lol.
 

DooomRider

Recruit
I'm not sure from which realm of reality you're imagining the possibility of mass-German recruitment into the British army during WW2. But I assure you, it's a fantasy.

"Yes limits and restrictions define a game but let's just not have any" Yeah, good idea. Good logic, like it.

I don't believe in mass recruitment of Germans but I was pointing out the folly in your point, the point I was making that even if they did recruit german into the british army (btw some germans did serve in allied forces) they would be equipped like a british soldier not a german one so the whole idea of culture defining your equipment and fighting style is flawed but is a mechanic of the game that some wouldn't want abolished (or else you would lock them out of a significant portion of troop options).

And again try answering the question instead of trying to mock my perfectly valid logic, yes you can restrict yourself through only recruiting culturally appropriate troops if you so wish but where do you have the authority to take away my playstyle? If the developers choose to implement that rule then tough cookie but as a player why do you think you have any right to tell me how I can and cannot play this game?
 

bodhi

Sergeant
Urgh, my God.You clearly have the wrong idea of what a sandbox game means. It doesn't mean a world with no defined rules, where you can do whatever you like. Example: the real world is the most open "sandbox" known to man - yet it has many rules (from physical to social constructs) Anyway, you clearly have your opinion and I have mine. Not getting into a drawn-out "debate" with you about it.
 

DooomRider

Recruit
Urgh, my God.You clearly have the wrong idea of what a sandbox game means. It doesn't mean a world with no defined rules, where you can do whatever you like. Example: the real world is the most open "sandbox" known to man - yet it has many rules (from physical to social constructs) Anyway, you clearly have your opinion and I have mine. Not getting into a drawn-out "debate" with you about it.

Have you ever heard of the French foreign legion? Roman Auxiliary Legions? yes the real world has rules, yes all games needs rules however your predefined notion that recruitment should be limited is flawed. Since you seem to be having trouble answering my questions (which is slightly worrying) I will say this as simply as I can, the restriction can be there if you want it by you having some self control, however the concept of trying to take my playstyle away from me and other people's playstyle away from them because you seem to lack self control is flawed, selfish and morally wrong.

Also next time you decide to tell someone they are wrong try doing a little research:
Sandbox:
A sandbox is a style of game in which minimal character limitations are placed on the gamer, allowing the gamer to roam and change a virtual world at will. In contrast to a progression-style game, a sandbox game emphasizes roaming and allows a gamer to select tasks. Instead of featuring segmented areas or numbered levels, a sandbox game usually occurs in a “world” to which the gamer has full access from start to finish.

A sandbox game is also known as an open-world or free-roaming game.

taken from: https://www.techopedia.com/definition/3952/sandbox-gaming
 
hi,
i've been playing a lot. but in the latest builds i found out that it is possible
to make it difficult, and it's also the style i like to play.
so what i do is f.e if i'm playing sturgia, only sturgian recruits plus mercenaries and searaiders.
if i'm playing aserai only recruits from aserai.
simply if i'm playing a culture, i get an army only from the faction i play, the bandits that develop
to a troop from my culture.

it gives me more of a chalenge, and it obliges me do city-village quests.

This is a good idea for a mod, bad idea for a change that would require the computer controlled lords to do the same thing as a core game change. There's a lot of things that need to be fixed without reinventing the wheel. I doubt they will arrive at this level of complexity before the final product.

IMO
 

sifis172

Sergeant Knight
WB
This is a good idea for a mod, bad idea for a change that would require the computer controlled lords to do the same thing as a core game change. There's a lot of things that need to be fixed without reinventing the wheel. I doubt they will arrive at this level of complexity before the final product.

IMO

i was just saying that IMO the game is far more interesting if i play same culture troops.
it gives me more of a challenge as i have to grow them from recruits, so i tend to
take care of them more.i agree tho that this should be optional. other people
don't like it, and i find it completely normal.

IMO all phantasy, and historical games should have rules predefined to work.
if f.e i play gta i don't want to be flying, or being able to be killed only by a nuke.
or if i played spiderman i wouldn't want him only marching, as also i wouldn't want him
flying like a rocket. there should be always in the back mind that "yeah, spiderman could do that.
you need to have a mechanism believable to the setting you're setting.
perfect example was star wars, and the use of force. it was believable in
the first films. it didn't distract you from the plot. and instead of f.e lifting mountains like
in the last ones. the character would manage to lift a small rock.
this made me commit and be excited in the scene where a ship was pulled.
it showed that it had the potential of great power, but not like the sequels
where idk characters could destroy planets.

it's the "sticking" to the way you predefine the 'x' pbject and what it can do,
and be persistant about it, that makes IMO a phantasy world believable.
whatever the setting, if a film movie starts with something "The 'x' sword that would
create the world or have the power to destroy it by ......... (blablah)"
would be ok for me. because i understand that the sword is vital to the world.
off topic :razz:
 
I agree to a point with what you're saying. Late in the game it becomes really next to impossible to keep a cultured army together, and the inevitable pressure to recruit from other factions and use mercenaries is strong. Do I really want to march back to empire to get more recruits or will these sturgian people do? Do I want to hire mercs in every town and take recruits too?

Whether I want to or not usually on realistic recruiting is so crap getting 1 or 2 recruits per stop that you just take whatever you can get to fill up the party. Takes a while to recruit 350 men when you get wiped. Let's talk about cultural horses while we're at it. Getting 350 horses required a lot of walking around and it's not like I could just get that many anywhere. There were two choices and I had to use them both.

I'm not sure there's a need for a limit, you already can decide not to do it. I guess having the option to do it somehow reduces the realism for you.
 

sifis172

Sergeant Knight
WB
no, i didn't mean it like that, everyone plays the way they want to,
if a game was sustainable in later stages,i would preffer it. but i
totaly understand if someone wants to have all the
awesome units. it could be optional, but in order to do that you'd have to
change the pace of the game. make it slower so you can build relations,
a more diversified gamma of missions too, so you can RP before you get
into real events. and those too must with some mechanism make you
feel like you're carving your path through historical moments that
take place.
 

drallim33

Sergeant
I would do this if it wasn't so tedious to march all the way across the map just to get some recruits. Probably not that bad as Imperial but doing it as Aserai would probably be a real pain.

Also it would be nice if the AI armys stayed a bit more cultured, everyone seems to end up with a bunch of empire troops after a while since they are 3/8 faction and right in the middle. A lot of armies end up being 1-2 each of 100 different types of troops after a while and lose their character.

I'm thinking of a mod that makes it so that there is only one type of recruit, and it upgrades differently depending on the culture of the party leader. So if you give a party to a Vlandian companion, their recruits will become Vlandian troops. I'd probably leave nobles and higher-tier recruit alone, have it only affect the basic recruits.

So you could still have a little flavour in the army based on where you've been campaigning, lords would maintain a bit more of their cultural distinctiveness, your choice of culture would matter more in terms of gameplay, it would be less tedious to try to do a mono-culture playthrough, and it would make cross-culture troops that complement your weakness a bit more valuable or harder to get.
 
And yes, it makes no sense that you can recruit, as you please, from any village on the map. It's like the British, during WW2, recruiting Wehrmacht infantry from Germany.

Something like 10% of the wehrmacht, over 600,000 men, were soviet collaborators. The Allies didn't need to recruit germans in occupied territories because by the time they landed in normandy the war was basically over.

In warband and bannerlord there is no visible difference between the way different factions live, and lords switch factions like crazy, so why even bother trying to restrict who the player can recruit? In real life it was perfectly normal or even preferable to hire soldiers from recently occupied lands. State indoctrination the way we experience it today just didn't exist until relatively recently, and all the sources suggest that average people didn't give a single crap about the king ruling them so long as their own autonomy wasn't infringed.
 
Top Bottom