• If you are reporting a bug, please head over to our Technical Support section for Bannerlord.
  • If you are posting SP feedback without an actual suggestion, please head over to The Keep - Singleplayer section.
  • Please note that we've updated the Mount & Blade II: Bannerlord save file system which requires you to take certain steps in order for your save files to be compatible with e1.7.1 and any later updates. You can find the instructions here.

Should Campaigns be able to go on forever, always with multiple factions?

  • Yes!

    Votes: 201 83.8%
  • No!

    Votes: 39 16.3%

  • Total voters

Users who are viewing this thread


I'm having tons of fun with the game, but have noticed a very common occurrence in single player campaigns. It seems like one faction, often one of the empires or battania will snowball out of control very quickly. This can really put a hamper on a campaign as it ends very quickly, in one of my games battania controls almost the entire map already and there is nothing I can do to stop them as Sturgia. I don't even have a fief yet and my 120+ troops stand no chance against the multiple 400 stack armies (And one ****-off 900 man army) Battania fields. Whenever Sturgia tries to raise an army it is quickly stomped out. Battania took 3 towns and 4 castles in less than a week.
Campaign AI in warband could be a bit dumb often failing to take easy castles or only taking one castle/town and then disbanding the army. In Bannerlord it appears to have swung very heavily the opposite way. Armies will quickly move from town to town sieging them down. Obviously a balance needs to be struck and getting it perfect will be difficult. But maybe for quick-fix for the time being you wonderful devos could put in a cooldown after a faction successfully captures a town/castle so one faction doesn't just rampage through and control everything in 2 years or so?

Edit: Just wanted to add another issue I'm seeing that contributes to this. If a war starts going even a little badly for a faction all their lords start deserting. So suddenly an already losing faction loses half their troops when lords start leaving. I'm getting one notification a day roughly currently of a lord leaving the sturgia faction.

Edit: It appears a few faction snowballing threads have all been merged together, with my main body post and Lucius Confucius's title/poll. Per his request here are some ideas from his thread.

With the poll I mean that the single player sandbox experience should be able to last forever, with multiple factions always present and able to fight each other. As to the single player quest campaign, it should of course have an end.

1. Feasts and Peace.
Bring it back! Have factions at peace for longer times, right now they're just at peace for a few days at most.

2. Resurrecting fallen nations.
If the right conditions are met, have a fallen nation be able to resurrect itself in a city or a few, perhaps with a large army in its control.

3. Introduce Rebellions asap in Early Access.
This will naturally curb expansive nations. Give larger nations more stability issues.

4. Have multiple weaker nations declare war on the strongest until it is made slightly weaker, then peace time.
This is another way to slow down the big boys.

5. Make Campaign AI prioritise defence rather than offence.
Patrol borders, attack incoming armies.

6. Have Campaign AI focus on raiding more when on the offence, instead of capturing castles/towns constantly, make raiding more profitable.
Make raiding great again! This will also naturally slow down the pace of the campaign.

7. Campaigns should be able to go on indefinitely with factions rising, falling, and should always have multiple factions on the campaign at the same time.
This will give actual use for the clan system and inheritance, since now, if one faction conquers all it is game over, and you will have no use for your heirs.

8. Lords should gather in the Capital of the factions for votes on kingdom issues. Thank you @Sithrain
This will act much like a feast and make lords less on the offence. Those who do not show up, do not get to vote.

9. Reinforce all garrisons.
With reinforced and improved garrisons, it will be more difficult for an army to steamroll siege several castles in a row, which is happening right now.

Just my thoughts currently, may add more. What are your thoughts? Please add ways to stop snowballing and I will add them to this topic.

Last edited by a moderator:


I agree, maybe also have lords prefer to stay at home during winter time (aka not campaigning season)


I agree, maybe also have lords prefer to stay at home during winter time (aka not campaigning season)
would absolutley love a mechanic like this feels like there should be a little more attrition or food consumption in winter


Indeed. For me thats gamebreaking at the moment. You are still working on your character while the game is almost over already


Suddenly the crusader kings system starts making sense. Make reason to go to war (fabricate claim) go to war over claim, if wins enough and wargoal is taken, peace can be gotten and the wargoal only is kept. If the one being attacked turns out being the winner they can demand lump sum money, or tribute (money over time)


Are there any allies in game ATM? Because all I see currently are 1v1 wars between factions where one of them suddenly decides to loose by suicide sieges or ignoring enemy army, letting opponent easy victory.


Suddenly the crusader kings system starts making sense. Make reason to go to war (fabricate claim) go to war over claim, if wins enough and wargoal is taken, peace can be gotten and the wargoal only is kept. If the one being attacked turns out being the winner they can demand lump sum money, or tribute (money over time)
Really like the idea behind kingdoms needing reasons to go to war rather than just needless expansion and willy nilly wars being waged for no apparent reasons


I agree with this.Mine was Sturgia,they took control of the whole map in no time.No one could stand against them


Same ****, i joined Vlandia and they crushed everyone, i even dont have to do anything. Someone made dragon banner quest? Is it possible to support with banner some fraction that oposite to overpowered to fix campaign force balance?


My first campaign went something like this.
6 hours in :Vlandia was made to dust by Battania, completely gone.
10 hours in: Western empire was gone.
Then it was a few hours of Battania/Southern Empire and Kuzhait slowly eating up the rest apart from 3 towns of Aserai wich survived to the end but didnt change anything. Then Empire killed of Kuzhait and Battania in like 3 hours and finished with taking the last 3 towns of Aserai.

Not sure what the factor is that makes it so different from Warband. For those who don't know it takes a long time before any faction gets a real advantage where they are a threat to winning the game so to speak. And very rarely does it happen so fast in the game where a faction is killed off.

Edit: Why does it say my name is Artimmenner? :O


Knight at Arms
I agree. As soon as one of the factions get an edge over the others they start to snowball and the game is pretty much over.


Same here..
Vlandia was made to dust by Battania in like 8 hours.
Then the Western Empire steamrolled everything else.


Sergeant Knight at Arms
I think it could be that now the factions are.... actually fighting wars instead of having parties. :razz:
Back in Warband you could have a huge battle, wipe out the enemy army, and instead of pressing the advantage, king Harlaus would go back and throw a party, giving the enemy time to gather new forces. Now after the battle, if the army is still big enough, they go straight for the enemy cities and castles, one after another.


The game should pretty much stay in stasis with small concessions on either side until the player is able to integrate themselves into the war.
Either that new factions should be able to split off from any overwhelming faction to fight for the spoils of the conquest, aka the Greeks post-alexander
Top Bottom