Mount & Blade II: Bannerlord Old Discussion Thread

[AreJohn]

Wooden walls were incredibly easy to build in comparison to stone walls, which is one of the reasons it took so long for stone castles to get their startup.

For a wooden wall/fort you need a 4-8 dudes and a carpenter.

For a stone structure you need an architect/mason, quarry, dozens of workers along with the issue of stone transport to the construction location.

I'd wager a stone fort could be built by 20 dudes in a matter of a couple weeks, stone forts however, months, years, often more.

With your vast experience in building walls and forts. 

 

[Ettenrocal]

I hope we can burn woodden walls or doors with many fire arrows in Bannerlord 

 

[AreJohn]

I hope we can burn woodden walls or doors with many fire arrows in Bannerlord 

i no rit we kn burn da sheelds ppls r caryin XXXXXXDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDD

 

[Mamlaz]

With your vast experience in building walls and forts. 

I did build wooden forest forts when I was a kid.

 

[cherac]

If you take a good look at the battanian castle in the gameplay video , it looks very tough and wet , I don't think its wall can easily be broken  nor its wooden supports be burnt with medieval artillery . Anyway its just my thoughts . Here are a few things I recently noticed after performing my daily bannerlord video watching ceremony  : A weird object probably for boiling oil and arrows , also bleeding on hit area.

Spoiler

 

[kraggrim]

Another little interview with not much new. Seems like they're not working on Bannerlord for consoles atm, but would like to at some point in the future.

 

[Kentucky 『 ＨＥＩＧＵＩ 』 James]

How would wooden walls be stronger than stone walls?

Stone walls of the same height and depth as wooden palisades were probably weaker to catapult missiles and the like, but since ranged siege engines and even offensive sieges weren't too common a threat in the early middle ages, the main purpose of walls was just to prevent people from walking in.

 

[Mamlaz]

...don't you mean stronger?

 

[AreJohn]

Depends, i've heard stories of wooden walls/defences being pretty decent at defending against certain missiles due to the flexibility of the materials used.

 

[Mamlaz]

If that was the case, nobody in their right mind would ever switch to stone.

 

[AreJohn]

Wood requires to be replaced when it degrades. Stone takes longer, is more managable and is easier to maintain because it's not biological matter.
Also, if you live in a place with few trees, good luck finding sufficient materials to build a wooden wall.

 

[Mamlaz]

Yeah but, wooden houses can last over a 100 years, earth backed wooden fences probably longer and they can also be replaced after a few decades.

Also, people switched to stone all across Europe, even though they had tons of wood.

 

[AreJohn]

Yeah but, wooden houses can last over a 100 years, earth backed wooden fences probably longer and they can also be replaced after a few decades.

Also, people switched to stone all across Europe, even though they had tons of wood.

Easier to get the required/ideal shape for building with I guess.

 

[Mamlaz]

Sorry, what?

 

[AreJohn]

Trees don't grow naturally in ideal shapes for building in, they grow in long, often tall and wildly varying shapes, shaping these into the ideal shape will remove their protective layer of bark, causing the material to be more at risk to the elements and other things the wood could be degraded by. Stone can be shaped into suitable shapes without these drawbacks.

 

[Mamlaz]

Oh.

 

[AreJohn]

That's my Lindybeige-style-guess anyway, I have no idea why people started using different materials, I wasn't around then.

Maybe people just ran out of the larger trees usfule for building walls with? 

 

[Mamlaz]

That's my Lindybeige-style-guess anyway

Were all beige, once the lights go out.

Maybe people just ran out of the larger trees usfule for building walls with? 

Nah, I stand firmly in the conviction that stone is just better, but wood/dirt is easier to build forts with.

Caesar built his humongous Rhine river bridges in less than 10 days lol.

I will look into this topic a bit later, I am very curious as to how long it took to build wooden forts in comparison to stone ones.

 

[cherac]

It is even known that wooden walls fared better against canon balls than stone walls . I think the stone walls were more of a trend  than a technical standpoint . These walls were build for their neatness and owning one carried a much more offensive aura to the attacker than the wooden counterpart  . And the ones like the battanian castle had sand filling which absorbed impact , making them very strong indeed.

 

[Cpt. Nemo]

It is even known that wooden walls fared better against canon balls than stone walls .

I'm going to need a source for that. There is a reason why star forts were made of stone, not wood.

I think the stone walls were more of a trend  than a technical standpoint . These walls were build for their neatness and owning one carried a much more offensive aura to the attacker than the wooden counterpart  .

No. Stone walls were not built because they looked cool and intimidating. Stone was preferred because it was extremely stronger. Stone walls were far more expensive and time consuming to create than wooden walls, requiring a different set of skills to gather raw stone, cut it into shape, transport it, and build.
And of course, they were filled just like wooden walls were.