• If you are reporting a bug, please head over to our Technical Support section for Bannerlord.
  • We'll be making a number of structural changes to the forums on Wednesday, 06.12.2023. No downtime is expected. Read more here.

Patch Notes v1.1.3

Users who are viewing this thread

You don't have to update your game though. The game offers several versions you can stick to, to ensure it keep work with the mods you have installed. If modders is end of all, then you don't need updates and fixes from TW. Just stick with a version right?

The "poor" console players, is a bad argument, because mods isn't really a thing for consoles at all. You don't buy a game on console for the "amazing" mods... Also, not every player on pc use mods either. The vanilla game in it's current state is functional. There is some annoying bugs going on atm, like issues with sieges, but not really game breaking.


dude just what is the point you want to make?

are you being argumentative for the sake of trolling?


TW should produce a quality working product on its LATEST VERSION. we should not have to roll back to earlier versions to play the game. nor should we have to test the game for them and produce tickets that they ultimately ignore.


but just because i am a stupid fool i will engage in your trolling:


yes i could roll back. but rolling back means breaking other parts of the game that have been actually fixed by the latest patches. for example, the ability to assign companions to formations means i do not have mounted companions charging in with the infantry. there are no mods that fix this. there is bodyguards mods that works around this but the point still stands: MODS ARE NOT MEANT TO FIX A GAME. they ultimately do this due to the sheer TW incompetence.
 
dude just what is the point you want to make?

are you being argumentative for the sake of trolling?


TW should produce a quality working product on its LATEST VERSION. we should not have to roll back to earlier versions to play the game. nor should we have to test the game for them and produce tickets that they ultimately ignore.


but just because i am a stupid fool i will engage in your trolling:


yes i could roll back. but rolling back means breaking other parts of the game that have been actually fixed by the latest patches. for example, the ability to assign companions to formations means i do not have mounted companions charging in with the infantry. there are no mods that fix this. there is bodyguards mods that works around this but the point still stands: MODS ARE NOT MEANT TO FIX A GAME. they ultimately do this due to the sheer TW incompetence.

I agree with you that they should work towards create a quality product on it's latest version. But for those that keep get upset about how updates to the game break their mods.... they should keep play on a version that wouldn't get updated and break their mods. Then wait until mods is updated before update the game. They can't necessary update and fix the game and at same time make sure no mods get affected, it's not their responsibility to make sure any 3rd party software will work with their creation.
 
I agree with you that they should work towards create a quality product on it's latest version. But for those that keep get upset about how updates to the game break their mods.... they should keep play on a version that wouldn't get updated and break their mods. Then wait until mods is updated before update the game. They can't necessary update and fix the game and at same time make sure no mods get affected, it's not their responsibility to make sure any 3rd party software will work with their creation.
That's besides the point, mods should be expected to break until the game is stable/final version - those complaining about that are just mad because their playthrough is ruined. And if they don't really break between the prolonged periods between TW updates, did TW actually do any meaningful changes? Fair point though, TW never gives any updates on the timeline horizons, or even what they are intending to add/fix with anything so there is some validity to their gripes; especially for those that make the mods.

Mods should never be on things that fix the game, which is functional at best in current state - if that is the standard we are holding it to; near half a year into official release and barely any communication. That's how this entire game's features have been implemented since EA - 'functional' (ie the buttons lead to something else and somewhat infrequent crashes).

Not sure about you, I have no interest needing even 20+ (some have 100+; and excluding those 4 'necessary' ones) mods where they are just fixing things, not even barebones QoL aspects which one could still sort of argue are 'subjective' and mod-relegated.
 
I agree with you that they should work towards create a quality product on it's latest version. But for those that keep get upset about how updates to the game break their mods....

no one would get upset if TW produced QUALITY updates.

what do i mean by quality updates? updates that add features / content without breaking half the game in the process.


but TW releases updates with unpopular features that no one ever asked for without proper testing (such as the FOW) and they break a lot of features that were previously working fine.


TW updates do more harm than good. they frustrate the hell out of modders and are of questionable quality.
 
That's besides the point, mods should be expected to break until the game is stable/final version - those complaining about that are just mad because their playthrough is ruined.


really?


T&T released for CK3 and broke a lot of mods. i rolled back to a previous version of the game and I am still playing patiently waiting for the mods to update.


what's the difference? that paradox actually made it WORTHWHILE, and they "break" the mods once or twice a year with updates that don't go breaking half their game in the process.


why don't i do with this with bannerlord? because rolling back isn't that beneficial. i will recover working features that TW broke but I will miss out on stuff they actually fixed. and i trusted their new patch would work properly after being in BETA for 2 months and getting all sorts of feedback and bug reports. I would have to go back and revert 30 or so mods because they didn't give a **** and released it anyway. in short, there isn't a single version of the game that actually works as intended.


i *SHOULD* have been able to have a save going into the third or fourth generation character by now given how long we've had the "official release". that was my expectation at least. i am yet to go through a save where my character actually dies and passes the torch onto his heir.
 
Last edited:
- Voting doesn't work the way you want? Yet you can cheese the voting system by make other vassals spend their influence so in the ned you can ensure you always get your wanted outcome? Nothing on your list make the game "non functional". Non functional would be not to be able to launch the game at all, game breaking crashes etc. There is room for improvements, but to call it non functional is just doom'n gloom..
The intended function of a video game is to be challenging or immersive.
Cheesing the voting system - because it doesn't work how it was intended to normally - is neither challenging (because cheesing isn't hard) nor immersive (because spamming votes to make the most influential clans in the land do what you want would never happen in real life).

Therefore, the voting system has failed at both its possible functions (challenge/immersion), so it is nonfunctional. As are many other mechanics.
- How doesn't it work for what it is?
Peace or war or tribute is declared not based on anything logical from the AI's point of view or beneficial to the player, but to arbitrarily avoid snowballing from a game state perspective, which is why you get nonsense like 4 front wars, or a more powerful kingdom paying tribute to a weaker one. It doesn't work.
- Afaik personality traits affect how other characters react to you and outcome of the "persuation game".
Half of personality traits are literally impossible to get for the player and even the ones the AI has/the player can get don't have any significant effect on anything in the game. This falls extremely short of how they were advertised and still written in the game encyclopaedia as supposedly something that would make a big difference in every aspect of the AI behaviour and player experience.
- If you want to surrender, you surrender. The AI never surrender...
The player has no reason to because it has the exact same penalties as losing, and as you correctly note, the AI simply doesn't. The AI will also never negotiate except in situations you'd obviously win anyway, and even when they do it's at your expense, another useless feature.
Oh joy, I can pay you money to not attack you for 5 days, when I outnumber you 10 to 1? How generous!
If armor doesn't work. Why you use any at all in the game, just go naked right?
I do not use infantry troops because armour doesn't work, correct.
You will never get a perfect balance with so many different unit types and weapons.
- There is ways to cheese it that make it a non issue.
See above. A video game is meant to be challenging or immersive. If the easiest and most functional way to progress is to cheese it the whole way through, it's broken.
- Heirs/deaths become relevant the longer you play the game
Conquering the entire world is quick enough you don't need to, as you said because the game is so easy to cheese, and in fact requires you to if you want to avoid frankly insane grinding.
. Idk what you mean about clones
Play the game or even just read this damn thread where it has already been mentioned 1 page ago.
- Why is minor (merc) factions false advertising?
Don't do any of the special things they were said to do, barely even use their own unique troops, don't even act as proper mercenaries and more like just a reskinned normal clan with a lying dialogue entry. And the unique troops are pointless too since they don't even go to T5!
- Workshops doesn't work, or workshops doesn't work the way you want them to work? In my current campaign I got workshops making between 300-600 a day.
Also I don't see why you try to pick a fight with me in another thread I don't even post in.
You're the one who replied to me first. It's called showing you a long list of examples of why it's ridiculous to say "vanilla Bannerlord is functional". If anything, if it was, there wouldn't need to be so many mods to fix it!
 
The intended function of a video game is to be challenging or immersive.
Cheesing the voting system - because it doesn't work how it was intended to normally - is neither challenging (because cheesing isn't hard) nor immersive (because spamming votes to make the most influential clans in the land do what you want would never happen in real life).

Therefore, the voting system has failed at both its possible functions (challenge/immersion), so it is nonfunctional. As are many other mechanics.

Imho, a player will always find ways to abuse game mechanics when playing games. Doesn't matter if it's Bannerlord, Civilization, Stellaris, CK, Total War games, WHATEVER. Doesn't matter how much challenging or "immersive" the game is. Once you as a player figure out mechanics and how to make the most out of the gameloop, they will do so. Playing the campaign the first time, I rushed to get a fief, kingdom and so on, and had a miserable experience. Every campaign after become easier and easier.

Just because the votes doesn't go the way you want them to go, is the reason why people figured out how to cheese the system. Why should votes always go how you want it? Didn't you want a challenge?

How do you expect the tribute system to work? You STEAL someones land, and then expect them to pay you tribute to leave you alone?

Again; you do use armor and clothes on your character when you play right? You don't run around naked? The question wasn't if you use infantry or not. You said armor doesn't work... Majority of complaints seems to be about the game doesn't work the way you want, or missing things you want to see. Not about actual bugs and issues that need to be fixed, which imho is the most important thing.
 
Just because the votes doesn't go the way you want them to go, is the reason why people figured out how to cheese the system. Why should votes always go how you want it? Didn't you want a challenge?

How do you expect the tribute system to work? You STEAL someones land, and then expect them to pay you tribute to leave you alone?

Again; you do use armor and clothes on your character when you play right? You don't run around naked? The question wasn't if you use infantry or not. You said armor doesn't work... Majority of complaints seems to be about the game doesn't work the way you want, or missing things you want to see. Not about actual bugs and issues that need to be fixed, which imho is the most important thing.
An impulsive, cruel, devious lord votes for peace instead of declaring wars or prolonging them, in CK3 they will abduct and murder every family member of yours along with wanting to fight you.

When you take someones land, you prove you are stronger, and you dont pay reparations to them, they should pay tribute to you so you dont slaughter every single one, in bannerlord you have to do the opposite, while in CK3 this logic does apply.

Armor does work to some extent, though the formula for calculating damage is wrong, speed being the key factor to determining its output. Now if you are running on horseback, at full speed, and some dude throws a rock at you, with all his might, the most you will suffer is a dent in your armor along with some dust from the stone cracking, instead by bannerlord logic it does 20-30 dmg (a hit to the chest), which is around 1/4 of your hp. In CK3 if you manage to have some type of equipment that gives your prowess, you will annihilate the most elite of your opponents without a single scratch if they dont come in a margin of 10 close to yours. (Not really a good comparison since its a roll based game, but I hope you catch my point)

I took CK3 as an example since you mentioned it as well, I do love Bannerlord, I will continue playing it, but its not anything worth calling finished or working, nor to taken lightly with how much time there has been to develop it. And its definitely not a rushed product, but a neglected one, and whoever complains in the proper manner (bugs in game not mods, mods are bound to break) is in their full right to do so. Just as youre in your right to defend it, I will not try to change your mind, nor do I usually complain in forums, but I believe its wrong of you to say that the game is worth all the praise some give it. Ill simply wait for whatever comes next, if you dont agree with me, I respect that.
 
An impulsive, cruel, devious lord votes for peace instead of declaring wars or prolonging them, in CK3 they will abduct and murder every family member of yours along with wanting to fight you.

When you take someones land, you prove you are stronger, and you dont pay reparations to them, they should pay tribute to you so you dont slaughter every single one, in bannerlord you have to do the opposite, while in CK3 this logic does apply.

Armor does work to some extent, though the formula for calculating damage is wrong, speed being the key factor to determining its output. Now if you are running on horseback, at full speed, and some dude throws a rock at you, with all his might, the most you will suffer is a dent in your armor along with some dust from the stone cracking, instead by bannerlord logic it does 20-30 dmg (a hit to the chest), which is around 1/4 of your hp. In CK3 if you manage to have some type of equipment that gives your prowess, you will annihilate the most elite of your opponents without a single scratch if they dont come in a margin of 10 close to yours. (Not really a good comparison since its a roll based game, but I hope you catch my point)

I took CK3 as an example since you mentioned it as well, I do love Bannerlord, I will continue playing it, but its not anything worth calling finished or working, nor to taken lightly with how much time there has been to develop it. And its definitely not a rushed product, but a neglected one, and whoever complains in the proper manner (bugs in game not mods, mods are bound to break) is in their full right to do so. Just as youre in your right to defend it, I will not try to change your mind, nor do I usually complain in forums, but I believe its wrong of you to say that the game is worth all the praise some give it. Ill simply wait for whatever comes next, if you dont agree with me, I respect that.

CK3 is a whole different game though. You don't play CK3 for the battles and fights. Meanwhile in Bannerlord that is what drives the game. If you take someones land in Bannerlord, they should have no reason what so ever to pay you tribute to stop hassle you. You are the one getting annoyed over them doing it right? I never experienced EVER in CK3 an AI faction/lord will kidnapp and murder your entire family though, that is going a bit over board. You as the player on the other hand.. can do a lot of things. Also I don't think it would be to much fun in Bannerlord if you had to start stake claims and get cause beli etc to be able to capture land as you have to do in CK3 (depending on you tribal feudal whatever), also CK3 deal with seveal resources such as renown, piety etc.

You have both Martial skills and proves in CK3 though. Some equipment can improve proves but unless your character is martial focused with high proves to start with they don't fare to well in combat. Take part in some tournaments in the new T&T dlc and easy to see that if you have some mediocre skilled character some extra equipment doesn't that much. In actual battles you have your highest skilled champions/knights lead the army regardless.

The game have flaws and issues, but imho the important thing is to look towards get those fixed. How I would like to see the game is and what features I want, or someone else want doesn't matter. Everyone have their own ideas. I just want the game TW made to work as it should without issues. Not get short changed by bugs etc. To claim the game is not functional is just wrong imho. Some 20k people playing it just now on steam proves that wrong.
 
I love how people say workshops are working right. If you find the perfect shop with high prosperity and and later in the game then a lot can make money. I have been testing workshops since 1.5.7. I test them at day 150, earliest in the game I think the 1.8 dynamic economy has stabilized and it is very hard to find shops to make over 200 when your playing 30k-35k. I could show a split screen of the same shops in 1.0.3 vs 1.1.3 and the shops have dropped by 50% or more. Most dont need shops at day 500+ but early game to help. Most shops now require micro managing and you can't just leave them alone as the output will build up so much that the shops stop running. I know 100% something changed from 1.0.3 to 1.1.0 and beyond and nothing has been done. The devs won't even acknowledge there is an issue. So when people say im making 300-600 a day, most of the have no idea how shops work and get high prosperity towns later in the game when inflation hits and think everything is fine. Try finding a good shop at day 150 that will make 300+ for 100 days without touching........Mission Impossible
 
I love how people say workshops are working right. If you find the perfect shop with high prosperity and and later in the game then a lot can make money. I have been testing workshops since 1.5.7. I test them at day 150, earliest in the game I think the 1.8 dynamic economy has stabilized and it is very hard to find shops to make over 200 when your playing 30k-35k. I could show a split screen of the same shops in 1.0.3 vs 1.1.3 and the shops have dropped by 50% or more. Most dont need shops at day 500+ but early game to help. Most shops now require micro managing and you can't just leave them alone as the output will build up so much that the shops stop running. I know 100% something changed from 1.0.3 to 1.1.0 and beyond and nothing has been done. The devs won't even acknowledge there is an issue. So when people say im making 300-600 a day, most of the have no idea how shops work and get high prosperity towns later in the game when inflation hits and think everything is fine. Try finding a good shop at day 150 that will make 300+ for 100 days without touching........Mission Impossible

Alternatively, SHOULD you find a good shop at day 150 that will make 300+ for 100 days without touching?

Why would you even think that is possible, when the economy is all simulated and linked to wars and towns and the state of the game world? Can we stop and think what you are asking for here?

If TW makes it too easy to find a good workshop, and you buy it, and then never have to worry about it again, people would go "Workshops are so boring and unfinished, you can just find a few good ones and nothing ever changes, it's a perfect money printer, it's clearly unbalanced."

So again it's more complicated than that. Workshops needing micromanaging makes perfect sense as it's a dynamic economy and if the raw materials are starting to raise in price, that workshop SHOULD be in trouble.

Here's what I would ask for: better workshop UI and management in the menus. Allow the user to see better at a glance the raw materials for a given workshop, and the economic status of those raw materials. Are all your villages (that generate those resources) on fire? Make that easy to determine, and make it clear that the player can/should help out for a bit by bringing over raw materials on their own.

This will not only increase QOL but it will broaden the gameplay a bit more and give you a couple more options in how you can play sometimes.
 
I love how people say workshops are working right. If you find the perfect shop with high prosperity and and later in the game then a lot can make money. I have been testing workshops since 1.5.7. I test them at day 150, earliest in the game I think the 1.8 dynamic economy has stabilized and it is very hard to find shops to make over 200 when your playing 30k-35k. I could show a split screen of the same shops in 1.0.3 vs 1.1.3 and the shops have dropped by 50% or more. Most dont need shops at day 500+ but early game to help. Most shops now require micro managing and you can't just leave them alone as the output will build up so much that the shops stop running. I know 100% something changed from 1.0.3 to 1.1.0 and beyond and nothing has been done. The devs won't even acknowledge there is an issue. So when people say im making 300-600 a day, most of the have no idea how shops work and get high prosperity towns later in the game when inflation hits and think everything is fine. Try finding a good shop at day 150 that will make 300+ for 100 days without touching........Mission Impossible

Working, and working right/perfect, two different things though. Some you can just buy and forget about and they do their thing. Others you need to babysit and interact more with, and some isn't worth the effort what so ever. Imho it's a balance issue when it come to demand/consumption.
Any workshop you get that is able to earn back the initial cost in a year is worth it.
 
Working, and working right/perfect, two different things though. Some you can just buy and forget about and they do their thing. Others you need to babysit and interact more with, and some isn't worth the effort what so ever. Imho it's a balance issue when it come to demand/consumption.
Any workshop you get that is able to earn back the initial cost in a year is worth it.
Workshops are ****, I don't doubt Flesson did the due diligence on this stuff - it's just a means to a passive income. Some places generate more consistent than others, solely based on the fixed fiefs nearby (fluctuating only slightly); some just generate 0 denars still for no knowable reason (resources near - no war - no looters).
Workshops 'work' - they don't have a Level 2, you can't feed it resources, etc...you might as well just reduce troop wages across the whole game and scrap that 'feature'. Maybe that way we can get them to better focus on the battles and the setting up for battles that is this games only saving grace.
 
Workshops are ****, I don't doubt Flesson did the due diligence on this stuff - it's just a means to a passive income. Some places generate more consistent than others, solely based on the fixed fiefs nearby (fluctuating only slightly); some just generate 0 denars still for no knowable reason (resources near - no war - no looters).
Workshops 'work' - they don't have a Level 2, you can't feed it resources, etc...you might as well just reduce troop wages across the whole game and scrap that 'feature'. Maybe that way we can get them to better focus on the battles and the setting up for battles that is this games only saving grace.

Lets assume a level 2 workshop would produce more than a level 1... That doesn't fix the issue that a workshop doesn't make any. It's more important to balance them so workshops works as they should to start with. Products need consumption/demand to earn a profit. Supply vs demand is what drive prices and profit. If If you own a town, check the breadbasket and check for daily consumption. If they only consume 1-2 units of something you make it wouldn't make for much profit. Trade can only do so much if there is dozens of other workshop types doing the same as yours. Demand need to increase, would helped if there was more region unique production as well.
 
Lets assume a level 2 workshop would produce more than a level 1... That doesn't fix the issue that a workshop doesn't make any. It's more important to balance them so workshops works as they should to start with. Products need consumption/demand to earn a profit. Supply vs demand is what drive prices and profit. If If you own a town, check the breadbasket and check for daily consumption. If they only consume 1-2 units of something you make it wouldn't make for much profit. Trade can only do so much if there is dozens of other workshop types doing the same as yours. Demand need to increase, would helped if there was more region unique production as well.
It all doesn't matter if the nearby/connected fiefs' productions can't change - what will happen, players will eventually figure out that there's maybe a select few that will always perform better based practically just on their placement on the map.
If one wants to min/max - there's the answer. If one doesn't want to - also doesn't matter. If one wants to do breweries only in a region, also doesn't matter. There's practically no player agency clicking these couple buttons or how it really affects the 'economy' - just an initial, arbitrary amount of denar capital to 'buy' a discount to your party wages. You can't change fief culture and have different level of goods produced, change the produce, impose a policy to change goods, bulk drop off or hoard for better deals, etc...And I don't really care for that for this game. TW struggles enough with the other more 'important' aspects of their game genre - doubt they know well enough how to make trading/economy an actual 'fun' gameplay aspect with even a bare minimum of complexity one would think with a sandbox economy.

It's why they have a restrictive cap limit and having it tied to your clan tier - to 'slow/pace' your character for some unknown reason.
 
Lets assume a level 2 workshop would produce more than a level 1... That doesn't fix the issue that a workshop doesn't make any. It's more important to balance them so workshops works as they should to start with. Products need consumption/demand to earn a profit. Supply vs demand is what drive prices and profit. If If you own a town, check the breadbasket and check for daily consumption. If they only consume 1-2 units of something you make it wouldn't make for much profit. Trade can only do so much if there is dozens of other workshop types doing the same as yours. Demand need to increase, would helped if there was more region unique production as well.
It would make it worse, the more you produce the quicker the output stocks up and drives the price down so the shops stop running. Not you but I love how above comments think making 200-300 a day early game when you invest 30k-35k is too easy, They are a joke. That would take 100-150 days just to get your investment back. Cmon get real jeheil, your the player that buys a shop that makes 100 a day spending 30k so it take almost 4 years to get your investment back? My whole point is something changed from 1.0.3 to 1.1.0/1.1.3 and my question is, is this intended or it is a problem in the code which no dev @Duh_TaleWorlds @SadShogun will confirm. There needs to be a little bit of a profit to be made and not a long term 4 years investment, that is a joke. Either fix the problem, or lower the shop prices back to 14k-16k, then making 100-200 a day is fine as it takes about 70-100 days to make your money back but your not getting rich. I guess workshops working as intended to make 100 a day. guess I'll just go smith millions in the first year, thats balanced right Jeheil?
 
It would make it worse, the more you produce the quicker the output stocks up and drives the price down so the shops stop running. Not you but I love how above comments think making 200-300 a day early game when you invest 30k-35k is too easy, They are a joke. That would take 100-150 days just to get your investment back. Cmon get real jeheil, your the player that buys a shop that makes 100 a day spending 30k so it take almost 4 years to get your investment back? My whole point is something changed from 1.0.3 to 1.1.0/1.1.3 and my question is, is this intended or it is a problem in the code which no dev @Duh_TaleWorlds @SadShogun will confirm. There needs to be a little bit of a profit to be made and not a long term 4 years investment, that is a joke. Either fix the problem, or lower the shop prices back to 14k-16k, then making 100-200 a day is fine as it takes about 70-100 days to make your money back but your not getting rich. I guess workshops working as intended to make 100 a day. guess I'll just go smith millions in the first year, thats balanced right Jeheil?

Smithing is an awful repeating chore to make cash in the game though. However it's not a passive activity. And workshops can't really become so OP that at they will just be passive cash cows that will yield huge income for no effort. You don't really have to get to far into the game for cost of workshops become a pitance. You can can do areans almost right out of the door and chance get a 20k horse in reward. Once you get into the merc business cash not a issue what so ever.
 
Imho, a player will always find ways to abuse game mechanics when playing games. Doesn't matter if it's Bannerlord, Civilization, Stellaris, CK, Total War games, WHATEVER. Doesn't matter how much challenging or "immersive" the game is. Once you as a player figure out mechanics and how to make the most out of the gameloop, they will do so. Playing the campaign the first time, I rushed to get a fief, kingdom and so on, and had a miserable experience. Every campaign after become easier and easier.
Those games can be played normally without requiring cheese. Bannerlord requires you to cheese voting because it literally doesn't work normally.

It absolutely matters whether a game is challenging or immersive, because if it's neither of those things it it NOT FULFILLING THE BASIC FUNCTION OF A VIDEO GAME.
Just because the votes doesn't go the way you want them to go, is the reason why people figured out how to cheese the system. Why should votes always go how you want it? Didn't you want a challenge?
Are you trolling, as someone else asked?

It's not just a matter of "don't always go", you cannot make a difference in 90% of votes no matter how much Influence you spend or how much relation you have with the clan leaders, because they almost always vote the same way. This is not an exaggeration either. The system flat out doesn't work!

If my car didn't turn on 90% of the time, would you call it functional?
How do you expect the tribute system to work? You STEAL someones land, and then expect them to pay you tribute to leave you alone?
I expect the tribute system to work that if I inflict tens of thousands of casualties on a kingdom, have almost all their lords prisoner, capture three castles and towns, and win numerous battles, then my vassals should not vote to pay THEM tribute because they merely have 1 extra raid on a single village when I have literally 40 villages and have already captured multiple of theirs.
Again; you do use armor and clothes on your character when you play right?
There are two intended purposes of armour: protecting against hits in close combat and protecting against arrows.

Bannerlord armour does not provide relevant protection against arrows. In many cases you would literally be no different off if you were naked except you'd be moving faster!

This means the game is drastically imbalanced in favour of ranged troops and there is no real reason to ever upgrade to or use infantry except as a distraction, when you could just spam crossbowmen and archers and horse archers. Making most of the troops in the game useless!

Therefore, it is not functional, like a good third of features in Bannerlord.
 
Last edited:
And workshops can't really become so OP that at they will just be passive cash cows that will yield huge income for no effort.
 
Back
Top Bottom