Problem with units, upgrades and armor

TrashMan

Regular
Best answers
0
A simple truth is that 90% of an army were conscripts/levies - troops with equipment that was practically never of quality.
Only nobles had the best armor, everyone else managed how they could. In fact, mercenaries and professional soldiers were the only one with what you could call "good" armor.

Thus, the very idea of taking a peasant and upgrading it for 50gold with equipment worth tens of thousands always displeased me.

Only noble/rich line of units should be able to upgrade to high level (and for a high price). Your average (and most numerous) troops should NOT be upgreadable to that level and with such equipment. Basically, up to lvl 3 or 4. And such expensive armor should actually be very protective, the expenditure of money must be justified.

It would make more sense.
 

TomaSkTemplar

Regular
Best answers
0
nice claims right there, but I would bet you cant provide your claims anything other than your own imagination. Gear never of quality ... lol.

Imagination and impressions do not reflect the historical reality.
 

Owen Wulfson

Knight at Arms
Best answers
0
While I can understand the sentiment expressed by the OP, I would have to concur with TomasSkTemplar that outright labeling 90% of most medieval army compositions as levies with low-quality equipment is more than overly exaggerating. Such a force would be a liability because the need to feed and supply such men would largely exceed their worth against a determined and more well-armed force.

A problem we actually have today with ascertaining the quality of normal armor for soldiers is that most such armors were either made of degradable material (gambeson/aketon made of padded cloth) or were cheaply made and later sold off and melted down. Expensive armor pieces were more likely to survive because many were well-made and even bordered on works of art. Not to mention that their owners likely didn't have to pawn them off to make ends meet. Only recent archaeological finds in the form of a few mass-graves following pitched battles actually gave us much of a peak into what your common foot soldier might have worn.

Lindybeige Medieval Massacre:

As for the M&B formula of "conscript peasant, level to knight," it has always been a strange feature in that a player starting out with rags and pocket change might command soldiers into battle wearing armor well beyond the player's own price range. But that's just how it is - very gamey (almost Pokemon-esque) and a lot funner than fiddling with every soldier's gear.

If you want a game that does take this all into account, Battle Brothers is a great pick. But Mount and Blade will always give you that visceral thrill of wading into battle with your men, and for that joyous moment I will overlook certain unrealistic components.
 
Last edited:

Cèsar de Quart

Sergeant Knight at Arms
Best answers
0
I kinda agree with you here.

Thus, the very idea of taking a peasant and upgrading it for 50gold with equipment worth tens of thousands always displeased me.

Only noble/rich line of units should be able to upgrade to high level (and for a high price). Your average (and most numerous) troops should NOT be upgreadable to that level and with such equipment. Basically, up to lvl 3 or 4. And such expensive armor should actually be very protective, the expenditure of money must be justified.
In Europe 1200 we had several troop trees for each "major culture", so you would recruit "Iberian peasants", or "Occitan peasants", or "Francian peasants", which could be upgraded to militia, but then you'd have specific troop trees in different places, much more faction-specific, like the Vlandian nobility troop tree, essentially.

I'd like to see a peasant troop tree with no specialisations (the main difference here would be skill, level and weapons, but they'd all be lightly armoured), a Burgher tree with militia and sergeant units, more specialised, and a "professional" troop tree, the nobles, highborn, pronoiars and the like, giving the good units.
 

Maximum997

Sergeant at Arms
Best answers
0
I'd like to see a peasant troop tree with no specialisations (the main difference here would be skill, level and weapons, but they'd all be lightly armoured), a Burgher tree with militia and sergeant units, more specialised, and a "professional" troop tree, the nobles, highborn, pronoiars and the like, giving the good units.
I saw this in Rus13th century mod

You can hire pesants from villages and towns, "Burghers" from casstles(if owner is your friend) and professionals only from your own casstle.
 

Cèsar de Quart

Sergeant Knight at Arms
Best answers
0
I saw this in Rus13th century mod

You can hire pesants from villages and towns, "Burghers" from casstles(if owner is your friend) and professionals only from your own casstle.
Good idea. Gives you a reason to care about your castle.
 

Apocal

Knight
Best answers
0
Yes. Maintaining a castle drain a lot of money, but you want them for elite troops. In BL they dont worth anyhing.
Castles have worth because controlling them gives you control of the attached villages. Those attached villages might have access to noble troops. And maybe if you're at the stage of the game where you are constantly broke, the tax income matters but probably not.
 

Maximum997

Sergeant at Arms
Best answers
0
Castles have worth because controlling them gives you control of the attached villages. Those attached villages might have access to noble troops. And maybe if you're at the stage of the game where you are constantly broke, the tax income matters but probably not.
They dont provide anything special. Thats what i mean.
 

TrashMan

Regular
Best answers
0
nice claims right there, but I would bet you cant provide your claims anything other than your own imagination. Gear never of quality ... lol.

Imagination and impressions do not reflect the historical reality.
Comparatively low quality.

Something like a Gambeson is a decent armor and was probably the most common armor used in armies, especially earlier, since it's cheaper and more protective than leather. Chainmail later became more common.

But the point is that good armor was expensive and soldiers most often paid for their own gear, which means most troops had cheap armor. Mercenaries usually had better, especially more famous troops.
Bu you never had a conscripted peasant upgrading to an armored horse and noble plate.

Right now the system is broken. It makes no sense that you pay 50gold for 50K worth of equipment, NOT for a peasant. Noble line troops make more sense.
 

Pejot

Knight at Arms
WBVC
Best answers
0
When I first have read that settlements will contain militia troops I hoped it will be extended to field battles. So for example You run around with Your personal guard of good troops (the better the more expensive) but in time of war You can raise levies/fyrd/militia or whatever that will join You until the war is over and go back to settlements after that.
Those troops could contain some infantry/archers/ light cavalry equipped(numbers of each type would vary depending on region and culture) with random gear (the more wealthy your estate the better gear will show up with higher possibility).
Than we got warband style again and I was disappointed with this.

I think that only noble and merc tree should be upgradable and more expensive both in wages and upgrade cost. Normal troops should be totally random without the possibility to upgrade and the only factor that would decide on what type of troops and with what type of gear You get would be the wealth of place from which You recruit.
 

Kipsta

Squire
WB
Best answers
0
This is definitely one of those areas where the game should give zero ****s about reality and just do what is fun. Levy armies aren't fun.
 

pTivo

Recruit
Best answers
0
his is definitely one of those areas where the game should give zero ****s about reality and just do what is fun. Levy armies aren't fun.
For the AI side, it's cool than lords spawn with peasants and 10% pro troops, sounds kind of realsitic
For player side it's unrealisitic as the OP said. But keep in mind than all players do not play in full realism and high difficulty, but enjoy slashing, economy and smithing, trading...

So i agree with you all, but it's hard to please each gamer. We cannot blame devs for selling a large audience game.
 
Best answers
0
I partially agree with @TrashMan myself. I wouldn't go as far as preventing regular troops from being upgraded to T5, but I think it is undeniable that equipment is way too expensive compared to how much it costs to level a troop with comparable gear. Now I am not saying that the cost of raising a soldier to T5 should be exactly the same as the cost of buying their gear, but the way this is currently handled in Bannerlord is a little excessive in the sense that you can field a full army (or ten) for the cost of a single piece of armor.

My suggestion would be something that was already proposed by someone else in another thread: reduce the cost of gear, increase cost for troops (both upgrading and upkeep). This would address at least partially OP's concern, while also providing a much needed long term gold sink for the game.
 

DrDragonlance

Regular
Best answers
0
This is definitely one of those areas where the game should give zero ****s about reality and just do what is fun. Levy armies aren't fun.
I'm with you. I have no idea why people want to take a simple task you need to do to play that game and make it more complicated, time consuming, and a lot less fun.
 

Saint Jiub

Veteran
Best answers
0
somewhat agree. since we have noble trees now it might make sense if the higher tier troops didn't get past a certain point equipment wise, it is kind of annoying that my troops are better equipped than me and my companions after a couple weeks. not that it really matters atm since as you noted armor doesn't make a huge difference which is its own problem. this would make noble troops seem a little more special too.

that being said 90% of armies were not conscripts/levies. in this time period the majority of (smaller than many might imagine) armies would be a kings retinue, his lords and theirs, and mercenaries, which is somewhat how the game works now. their men would have been paid and might have been wearing gambesons but would have acquired mail if/when they could afford it. this varied a lot depending on time and place though.

this game has a bit of both extremes where our troops start wearing their farm clothes and then we end up with an entire army in coats of plates
 

Parkerg12

Recruit
Best answers
0
The current system is not perfect, but since I'm still playing and loving 1.4. upping the "realism" of recruiting troops can be saved for mods IMO.
 

artemis_entreri

Recruit
Best answers
0
nice claims right there, but I would bet you cant provide your claims anything other than your own imagination. Gear never of quality ... lol.

Imagination and impressions do not reflect the historical reality.
Right. For example, English Longbowmen were often peasants/woodsmen that started training with a Longbow when they were very young. They brought their Longbow with them to war. I would assert that the Longbow we definitely a valuable piece of gear.