Perks that affect simulation battles.

What do you think about Tactics skill tree?

  • It is absolutely fine, no need to change anything.

  • Simulation perks should be removed from tactics tree, and replaced by perks that benefit any battle.

  • We need a choice between two perks, one for simulation and another one for real battle.

  • I dont care, skill system is meh anyway.

  • I have my own concept(please share).


Results are only viewable after voting.

Users who are viewing this thread

XT-ended_2L

Regular
WB
Fellow gamers, I want to know your opinion about perks that affect simulation battles(mostly Tactics tree). Dont you feel they are more like a filler?

I mean, for me personally, they break immersion from the game, because what the hell is simulation from perspective of our hero? Virtual reality?

Also, the skill tree is not rewarding for the most part, as you can perform a lot better during normal battles than with 300 tactics skill simulation anyway.
Another point, why am I granted tactics skill points during normal battles, and end up obtaining perks that are useful only during simulation?

They could create perks which affect both type of battles anyway, or at least give us two choices like it is implemented in other skill trees to give us a variation, one for simulated battle and another one for real battle.

Just my thoughts. I will gladly listen to the opinion of community.
 
Last edited:

Maximum997

Squire
Fellow gamers, I want to know your opinion about perks that affect simulation battles(mostly Tactics tree). Dont you feel they are more like a filler?
First - none of them work.
Second. Even with 250 tactic i cant autoresovle 200 v 20 battle against looters without casualties, so tactic is useless. It has only one potentialy useful perk "one step ahead"
 

Mikey

Sergeant at Arms
Simulating shouldn't be considered a separate game mode to "real battles", it should be something you use for convenience, or when your character is injured. As it is, it's WAY too punishing compared to playing the game "live".

However it's a feature that at least exists, and I'd much rather TW focus on getting more features/systems into the game than on trying to continually polish tiny features that cannot be properly balanced while most of the game is still missing anyway.
 

XT-ended_2L

Regular
WB
First - none of them work.
Second. Even with 250 tactic i cant autoresovle 200 v 20 battle against looters without casualties, so tactic is useless. It has only one potentialy useful perk "one step ahead"
Oh, really? I thought they at least work) But yeah, damage calculation in simulation battles are ridiculous. Considering the same amount of money spent to build up and upgrade top-tier army vs peasants on the other side. I bet peasants will win))
 

XT-ended_2L

Regular
WB
Simulating shouldn't be considered a separate game mode to "real battles", it should be something you use for convenience, or when your character is injured. As it is, it's WAY too punishing compared to playing the game "live".

However it's a feature that at least exists, and I'd much rather TW focus on getting more features/systems into the game than on trying to continually polish tiny features that cannot be properly balanced while most of the game is still missing anyway.
I know maybe it is too early, to think about such things, but I think if these perks are not working anyway as Maximum997 said, it is better to reconsider them now, than changing them later.
 

Nosmith

Recruit
In Warband your tactics was compared with the opponent which determined the starting numbers for the battle. Is this not so in Bannerlord?
 

durbal

Sergeant
Tactics skill as a whole should just be removed.

1. It overlaps with Leadership and Steward.
2. It's mandatory for NPC leaders.
3. It's useless for players.

Just get rid of it.
 

Lord Irontoe

Master Knight
Tactics skill as a whole should just be removed.

1. It overlaps with Leadership and Steward.
2. It's mandatory for NPC leaders.
3. It's useless for players.

Just get rid of it.
They can't get rid of it because it will leave a hole in the Cunning line. They'd have to come up a whole new skill just to avoid leaving an empty space.

That's another one of the problems with this skill system. Its too neat, with exactly 3 skills per attribute. What if you want to add another Intelligance skill? Where would it fit?
 

durbal

Sergeant
They can't get rid of it because it will leave a hole in the Cunning line. They'd have to come up a whole new skill just to avoid leaving an empty space.

Then they'll have to come up with something different. They'll have to when they remove the silly Smithing skill too anyway.
 

AfLIcTeD

Sergeant at Arms
The whole tactics skill as it is, is terrible. The skill should effect, you know tactics in battle. It could still effect auto resolve for the AI, but for the player it should determine how well your troops do in battle. Maybe at first most formations will be locked. Unlocking perks could unlock more formations. Maybe have perks that give your troops buffs while they maintain these formations.
It could also effect how well the AI do when they take over. With low tactics they may not use formations or they will be terrible, making stupid decisions. Once you increase tactics the AI will make use of formations and make better decisions during battle.
 

vota dc

Sergeant Knight at Arms
M&BWB
Tactics skill as a whole should just be removed.

1. It overlaps with Leadership and Steward.
2. It's mandatory for NPC leaders.
3. It's useless for players.

Just get rid of it.

Naaah, they just need to rework it.
Leadership should help with cohesion, campaign morale (also with how much morale a battle start), training and other aspects outside battle. Tactics should work in battle. It should unlock more advanced formations and should help with morale during battle and formation AI, if your character have very low tactics a a wise idea would be to attach your companion with high tactics as a sergeant for your troops.
 

XT-ended_2L

Regular
WB
+1 to advanced formation idea. Maybe even with mixed troops, like shields in front, harbeldiers and pikemen right behind them, and archers at the third row. Imagine square formation, which consist of such rows, with archers in the middle - defensive formation for case if the enemy surrounds.
 
Last edited:
Top Bottom