Mercenaries will no longer join if "cruel" etc????

[BSide]

So two threads for the price of one from me today.

As we all seem to accept, it is impossible to make any traction at all in the game without executing lords as you'll just get zerged by 500+ armies of peasants and recruits if you let them live for 3 seconds.

However, as executing them earns you negative character trait thingies it makes people not like you. Now since the latest patch I've noticed 2 absolutely ridiculous, nonsensical changes:-

1. What is mentioned in the thread - mercs suddenly have weird moral compasses apparently?!
2. Factions / clans that DISLIKE the person you just executed will gain negative relation to you when you execute

These are both new changes and I honestly can't understand any justification for them

 

[Nickname]

I executed a couple of annoying dudes and was going to donate captured soldiers to a nearest castle.. And it turned out that lords of my faction banned me from entering

 

[Rconner]

It is very touchy.
You execute someone you are a pariah.

 

[avenger1024]

So two threads for the price of one from me today.

As we all seem to accept, it is impossible to make any traction at all in the game without executing lords as you'll just get zerged by 500+ armies of peasants and recruits if you let them live for 3 seconds.

However, as executing them earns you negative character trait thingies it makes people not like you. Now since the latest patch I've noticed 2 absolutely ridiculous, nonsensical changes:-

1. What is mentioned in the thread - mercs suddenly have weird moral compasses apparently?!
2. Factions / clans that DISLIKE the person you just executed will gain negative relation to you when you execute

These are both new changes and I honestly can't understand any justification for them

It's almost like there's gameplay consequences for being an evil murdering bastard who chops off the heads of surrendering prisoners. Who would have thought?

 

[mamastoast]

It's almost like there's gameplay consequences for being an evil murdering bastard who chops off the heads of surrendering prisoners. Who would have thought?

But you need to execute people to make victories mean anything at all it seems.

 

[Nickname]

It's almost like there's gameplay consequences for being an evil murdering bastard who chops off the heads of surrendering prisoners. Who would have thought?

Its more like consequences for an idiot who keeps attacking my village 3 minutes after I let him go or captured him (which is the same thing in this game).

 

[BSide]

It's almost like there's gameplay consequences for being an evil murdering bastard who chops off the heads of surrendering prisoners. Who would have thought?

Have you actually PLAYED the game?

As the others have said, you cannot make any progress without executing people.

I am clan tier 3, I have my own party and two small extra parties.

Vlandia has 10+ clans underneath it, all with multiple lords with their own parties.

If I fight Vlandia, I may end up fighting as many as EIGHT lords ALL with parties against my piddly little group.

I'm fine with in-game consequences as long as it's avoidable. It is not.

So please take your condescending attitude elsewhere.

 

[metzger23]

If enable death option actually did something I'm sure the penalty for executing enemy lords would be more sensible. If you could kill the enemy lords in battle you probably wouldn't need to execute imprisoned lords so often. The hard part of course would be making sure you have many heirs ready to take your place in the case that you die in battle or are executed by an enemy lord.

 

[Razdv]

You can catch lords one by one and retake fiefs they got from Surgia. As I did yesterday and created my own kingdom. I'm always releasing lords after battles. Yes there about 10 of them including mercs. Are you losing people in battle so much? Or what? They are eating arrows and javelins to the death, 0 or few casualties, replenished almost instantly from prisoners. I'm using sturgian troops mostly and filling casualties with brainwashed prisoners

 

[karijus]

You can catch lords one by one and retake fiefs they got from Surgia. As I did yesterday and created my own kingdom. I'm always releasing lords after battles. Yes there about 10 of them including mercs. Are you losing people in battle so much? Or what? They are eating arrows and javelins to the death, 0 or few casualties, replenished almost instantly from prisoners. I'm using sturgian troops mostly and filling casualties with brainwashed prisoners

It's not the losses, it's the strategic situation. I'm late in the game now, tier 6, army of 700~ quality troops from my companion parties etc. So now it's me (Sturgia) vs Souther Empire with the map split around 50/50, the rest are more or less gone. For some reason Sturgia has way fewer clans than Empire, like 1/3rd of the amount, which means that even if I win every battle and siege with 0 losses, the enemy is going to siege 10 things at once while we do maybe 3~ or something, and there is just no way to turn the tide without massacring enemy lords en masse.

Even if we had similar amount of clans, it would end up being just an endless siege/counter siege cycle of peasant warfare. I would love to defend our constantly besieged towns at least, but if I defend something AI avoid it like the plague. Have to catch them and get rid of them there is no other way.

 

[Razdv]

It's not the losses, it's the strategic situation. I'm late in the game now, tier 6, army of 700~ quality troops from my companion parties etc. So now it's me (Sturgia) vs Souther Empire with the map split around 50/50, the rest are more or less gone. For some reason Sturgia has way fewer clans than Empire, like 1/3rd of the amount, which means that even if I win every battle and siege with 0 losses, the enemy is going to siege 10 things at once while we do maybe 3~ or something, and there is just no way to turn the tide without massacring enemy lords en masse.

Even if we had similar amount of clans, it would end up being just an endless siege/counter siege cycle of peasant warfare. I would love to defend our constantly besieged towns at least, but if I defend something AI avoid it like the plague. Have to catch them and get rid of them there is no other way.

I see your point. Are you started your campaign at earlier version? Seems that you may be suffered of "already fixed" snowballing issue, described in patch notes.

 

[Badcritter]

For some reason Sturgia has way fewer clans than Empire, like 1/3rd of the amount, which means that even if I win every battle and siege with 0 losses, the enemy is going to siege 10 things at once while we do maybe 3~ or something, and there is just no way to turn the tide without massacring enemy lords en masse.

Not to discount the issue of the futile grind-fest of battles caused by insta-recruit swarms and AI that doesn't know how to do anything other than start wars then smash settlements relentlessly until their fists are a bloody pulp (and the rest of their bodies as well, if you happen to be constantly curb stomping them)...

But FYI there is an alternative to executing lords to even up the odds of the number of lords on each side of a fight. Ironically you do exactly the opposite and make them love you, then convince them to switch sides.

I love to fight, and min max, and build my settlements and power base in Mount & Blade games, but in the end I found the most effective way to "win" Warband was to do those things in the service of grinding rep so you could recruit all the lords worth a damn. Due to the underdevelopment of the kingdom management features in Bannerlord at this stage I haven't attempted to conquer the world in this new game yet - but I've flipped lords for fun and similar principles look like they will still apply.

 

[CyberianK]

Executing Lord is NOT necessary.

Even if you would get attacked 5 times a day by fresh respawning lords (which you don't) you can easily absorb that with a Tier5+6 large party without meaningful casualties.
This on Realistic diff.

Only need to get to unbeatable army with decent companion parties and a few garrisons for replenishing reserves in bad situations. Then you can paint the whole map.

 

[karijus]

But FYI there is an alternative to executing lords to even up the odds of the number of lords on each side of a fight. Ironically you do exactly the opposite and make them love you, then convince them to switch sides.

I tried that earlier in this same campaign, and it just didn't work. Even with high charm is was very random, and now I can still recruit them sometimes if I'm lucky lol, which I do try when I can. I think charm system is broken or something.

 

[Badcritter]

I tried that earlier in this same campaign, and it just didn't work. Even with high charm is was very random, and now I can still recruit them sometimes if I'm lucky lol, which I do try when I can. I think charm system is broken or something.

You're quite right that the charm system has issues and feels more random than it should. Grinding rep and raising Charm makes me feel like I'm improving my odds of flipping lords, but an analysis of actual outcomes would probably reveal in the system's current state it is more about luck.

 

[bantad87]

It's not the losses, it's the strategic situation. I'm late in the game now, tier 6, army of 700~ quality troops from my companion parties etc. So now it's me (Sturgia) vs Souther Empire with the map split around 50/50, the rest are more or less gone. For some reason Sturgia has way fewer clans than Empire, like 1/3rd of the amount, which means that even if I win every battle and siege with 0 losses, the enemy is going to siege 10 things at once while we do maybe 3~ or something, and there is just no way to turn the tide without massacring enemy lords en masse.

Even if we had similar amount of clans, it would end up being just an endless siege/counter siege cycle of peasant warfare. I would love to defend our constantly besieged towns at least, but if I defend something AI avoid it like the plague. Have to catch them and get rid of them there is no other way.

You already identified the issue you're having. They have more clans then you, so you're always going to be lacking manpower. So use your wealth and seduce the enemy lords to defect to your faction and flip the numbers against them. The mechanics ARE there for you to change the situation without executing lords.

Also FYI, when your charm skill is high enough, the game highlights which options are likely to succeed.

 

[Lesbosisles]

This execution relationship penalty must be seriously overhauled as it doesn't make sense in its current state. It doesn't matter if you execute a person, who is described as 'mad, bad and dangerous to know' with a giant list of enemies or a person who is known to be generous and kind - the consequences are always the same. Your will lose relations with ABSOLUTELY EVERYONE, even with the merchants and gang leaders in some towns, EVEN WITH THE LORD'S ENEMIES (!!!!!!). After a few executions you are hated by EVERYONE in Calradia, I bet even looters hate you now more than ever.

Why the heck am I being hated by the enemies of executed person when I'm literally doing them a favour by taking an enemy of their way? Moreover, these enemies can also be a vassals of a faction which is at war with the executed's faction, but these people will still hate you. Absurd.

 

[karijus]

You already identified the issue you're having. They have more clans then you, so you're always going to be lacking manpower. So use your wealth and seduce the enemy lords to defect to your faction and flip the numbers against them. The mechanics ARE there for you to change the situation without executing lords.

Also FYI, when your charm skill is high enough, the game highlights which options are likely to succeed.

I had 87~% chance on some rolls before, now I still get like 57~, but it barely made a difference. I try to recruit every time, but I still can execute 20 lords for 1 recruited lol. It's an addition to improving the situation rather than alternative.

 

[SimonDoesntSay]

It's almost like there's gameplay consequences for being an evil murdering bastard who chops off the heads of surrendering prisoners. Who would have thought?

Yes, executing an enemy you've been at war with for years whose only purpose in life seems to be to raid your villages 5 times a day and is a constant thorn in your side is being an 'evil murdering bastard'.

Between imprisoning a lord who escapes the next day and lobbing off his head before the next sucker comes along, I know which one most people are taking.

Take that condescending attitude elsewhere kid.

 

[humility925]

When kill someone ect, other people less trust you, even you executioner evil lord (but if in fair count, not on battlefield, and as long you are not one excutioner and someone had to do it, then you can still well liked by people as long you don't do dirty work and fair in count (like not kill him on battlefield but count, rather) because kind of you lower level as they are if you are killing unarmed lord on battlefield or even worse.

People love honroable, compassion leadership, but not like cruel tyrant and won't respect tyrant or killer, but real reason, in medivel time, most people stay away and had nothing to do with executioner, executioner mostly didn't choice job, and stuck with it, not had a good life or rich life, even trouble to get women to marry, unless that women are crime and want to save her life from executioner, I guess executioner offer women death for her crime or marry executioner as executioner knew lawful women won't want and had nothing to do with them. so you see executioner are not well loved and well like, but looked down as lepers and prostitutes, maybe even worse than lepers and prostitutes. Based what I understand history, all that.
Often Excutioner are like begger, by loot on crime they executioner without anyone know it, try make rich by.

People, Lord, town tried to keep executioner far far away from them.

Lession is that don't be executioner if you want to be well liked and well respect, otherwise you lose quicker of people's respect even thought it's may be justice it.

Most people had no problem lord killing lord when it on battlefield, but not after. when life is not in danger.
If enemy lord alive, taken to and gave to count by people and if count said death to lord by approved by people, they had someone a dirty job, executioner, not lord or soldier.

Of course lord and soldier could kill lord without anyone know and got away, but other people or even soldier who saw it will question and tell tale to their lover or wife, then so go on, and will find out.