Parties - One Option missing

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 2 (members: 0, guests: 2)
MostBlunted

MostBlunted

Banned
Steam
I really like the option to have 3 stances but the problem is that all of my parties are constantly in some army. So they get killed a lot of times and I can´t beef them up.

I would suggest to just add one option: "Don´t join army"
 
Or at least give us the option to force them to join our army even if they are already enlisted. At the moment it´s really hard to catch them not beeing in any random army.
 
Explain this to me please:

Screenshot-2022-04-22-200557.png

All of my parties are set to "defense", my small and new kingdom is in the upper left corner. And this 65 troops party decided it would be a good idea going to a ****ing 998 troops army that is sieging a NEUTRAL castle? What the **** are they defending down there? My whole kingdom has maximal about 600-700 troops combined (they have about 10.000 troops)!

My war strategy is of course also set to "defensive"

Is the leader maybe high on cocaine or what is the AIs decision making here while in DEFENSE stance!

I just want to build up my kingdom and not fight stupid fights that are impossible to win (without cheese). They should just patrol the small encircled area while in defense stance, there is nothing else on the whole map that belongs to me. Just DEFEND my ****ing kingdom please...it´s driving me nuts! I don´t want to babysit them all the time. If they get assaulted while patrolling in MY KINGDOM then fine, but this is just stupid.

EDIT:

So this is what happended (I just stayed there as far away as I could and still able to see them there):
My other 2 parties (~80 troops each) start going into the direction of the besieged NEUTRAL castle while my cocaine party just stood there enjoying the siege. The siege was won of course and the castle was taken. After that my cocaine party went away but not far, the enemy chad army went west. My cocaine party went up north to avoid them. Chad party passed them and my cocain party then thought "Why shouldn´t I follow this chad party?" My other two parties were still trying to catch up with the cocaine party as it seems. Luckily the chad party wasn´t interested in a fight (and maybe also too slow to really catch them and that´s why they didn´t even try). After a while the chad party went south and my cocaine party finally travels back to my kingdom area.

And the Southern Empire even offered peace, maybe they thought that they don´t want to **** with a crazy kingdom of kamikaze warrios.
 
Last edited:
I don't get why Taleworlds doesn't understand the frustration that this causes players. There is no good reason we don't have better control of our clan and kingdom, even the argument of we don't want to overwhelm new players isn't valid. The default option could be one of neutral party actions and if someone wants a kingdom to be more or less aggressive they have the option. But unfortunately Taleworlds doesn't see it that way and as we've been told many times "it's their vision" whatever the hell "the vision" is because I really don't know. :cry:
 
There's no point in selective a stance, any lord will snatch up your troops regardless of what you select. Truly lacking.
 
In a time with faceless men everything is possible!

Also have you seen some of the face gestics NPC make? There are only two options: Posessed by the devil or doing drugs.
 
MostBlunted said:
Explain this to me please:

Screenshot-2022-04-22-200557.png

All of my parties are set to "defense", my small and new kingdom is in the upper left corner. And this 65 troops party decided it would be a good idea going to a ****ing 998 troops army that is sieging a NEUTRAL castle? What the **** are they defending down there? My whole kingdom has maximal about 600-700 troops combined (they have about 10.000 troops)!

My war strategy is of course also set to "defensive"

Is the leader maybe high on cocaine or what is the AIs decision making here while in DEFENSE stance!

I just want to build up my kingdom and not fight stupid fights that are impossible to win (without cheese). They should just patrol the small encircled area while in defense stance, there is nothing else on the whole map that belongs to me. Just DEFEND my ****ing kingdom please...it´s driving me nuts! I don´t want to babysit them all the time. If they get assaulted while patrolling in MY KINGDOM then fine, but this is just stupid.

EDIT:

So this is what happended (I just stayed there as far away as I could and still able to see them there):
My other 2 parties (~80 troops each) start going into the direction of the besieged NEUTRAL castle while my cocaine party just stood there enjoying the siege. The siege was won of course and the castle was taken. After that my cocaine party went away but not far, the enemy chad army went west. My cocaine party went up north to avoid them. Chad party passed them and my cocain party then thought "Why shouldn´t I follow this chad party?" My other two parties were still trying to catch up with the cocaine party as it seems. Luckily the chad party wasn´t interested in a fight (and maybe also too slow to really catch them and that´s why they didn´t even try). After a while the chad party went south and my cocaine party finally travels back to my kingdom area.

And the Southern Empire even offered peace, maybe they thought that they don´t want to **** with a crazy kingdom of kamikaze warrios.
Click to expand...
Actually this is not very unwise. I'd rather see my parties do these kind of stuff rather than aimlessly patrol around settlements and murder one or two packs of looters that are too slow to catch up with any villager party anyway. AI is surprisingly talented tailing roaming armies and initiate a battle when enough reinforcements show up. In your case it could be a Northern Empire army if they actually came for defending the castle. It is quite close to your territory as well, your cocaine party might have spotted them even before they started the siege. Defending AI is rather an Einstein compared to conquering AI imo.
 
I strongly disagree that it´s wise that a 65 troop party, set to defensive, is trying to engage a 998 troop army when there is nothing even close that belongs to me that can be defended.

The best case in this scenario is that no battle happens and my party can flee, which luckily did happen. The other case is a battle between them and guess the outcome.

I would be ok with their action if they were set to "aggresive" or even "neutral" if you like but not "defensive". This is not a "defensive" action but a suicide try, even all my parties combined wouldn´t been able to beat this army (without cheese). I don´t see any "defensive" part in this action taken by the AI.

And it´s not "quite close" to my kingdom, it´s a damn neutral castle which I don´t give any ****s about. Even if it would have been only 65 vs 200, I don´t care. Those both kingdoms can weaken each other, that´s what I want and in the meantime I build up my own kingdom and only defend what already belongs to me if attacked. At least that would have been my plan if I would have any ****ING control over the AI.

I even waited to declare war until the SE was also in war with the WE. (ALLIANCES PLEASE!) Because if they would have been only in a war against me they would have just stomped me.
 
I had a mod some versions ago that offered this option and I agree, should be possible in vanilla.

But that´s not a major issue for me, as far as I know equipment doesn´t matter for them in simulated battles.
 
Camping near a neutral siege and waiting for possible reinforcements to engage in a battle against the common enemy is a valid defensive action for me but there'll always be debates on how AI should behave until some modders give us the ability to issue direct commands to vassals. Among all the things they dropped from Warband, this is the one I can't get my head around.
 
I guess we both just have a different definiton of "defensive action", what would happen if I set them to "aggresive"? Would they just roam the whole map and engange every enemy on sight no matter the odds?
 
MostBlunted said:
I had a mod some versions ago that offered this option and I agree, should be possible in vanilla.

But that´s not a major issue for me, as far as I know equipment doesn´t matter for them in simulated battles.
Click to expand...
in theory, it is not, but I tend to create a party quite early in a game, so over time they get some skills and with better weapons they can improve much faster

no sure is it still in bannerlord, but in warband good lords never raid a villages, so... 'aggresive' could mean, that they will try to siege castle/town rather that raid or loot caravans
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Totalgarbage
Lords and Garrisons should have a chance to surrender
Replies
10
Views
784
Tabbot
Valtoin
unreal wars
Replies
5
Views
638
Tabbot
I pray for micro battle management
Replies
5
Views
567
Dejan
Dejan
Back
Top Bottom