What I said was all linked. In Warband if I chose Rhodoks in multiplayer I never felt like I was part of the Rhodoks faction. Now I choose sturgia and there are similarities behind all the troops: All infantry and archers except the final captain style of the infantry rank is light armoured and use axes. The Sturgia horseman feels lightweight too. This is what I mean when I say the faction has a certain personality, and it is this that makes me feel like my faction has an identity to connect with. Graphically speaking a faction’s characters share strong similarities too. To add to this I think Sturgia’s only throwables should be axes, no javellins.That's an interesting take considering that's one of the key problems most people have; Bannerlord's system strips all individual quirks and personality away from players and turns everyone into clones. Bannerlord objectively guts the player's ability to form any ingame personality whatsoever, either through appearance, or unusual gameplay choices.
I'm not sure I understand this one?
Once again; it is Bannerlord that is utterly generic. You have access to specifically generic ""choices"" for which there is no variation. In Warband, you couldn't play a "berzerker" type character with half the factions properly. Some factions didn't have heavy cavalry, some factions had crossbows while others had archers. Some had axes, most didn't, etc. Now in Bannerlord, all of the factions have horse archers, and the remainder of the ""choices"" are bland and uninspired with no different way to approach the game, railroading you into generic and bland classes with no flavour or choice, and restricting the player's ability to choose classes they want to play.