-
If you are reporting a bug, please head over to our Technical Support section for Bannerlord.
Users who are viewing this thread
Sweynforkbeard
Squire
No.
You are right ofcourse. But, you are going to end up with a pure elite army one way or the other.
With the relative ease of raising good troops these days there is atleast some room for playing with something other than low risk Fians or Khan guards.
xGreedo
Regular
This takes away the satisfaction of having a good elite army doesn't it?
Right now i don't really care about my elite troops in my army because its so easy to replace them.
I would rather they focus on making the noble troops beside fian and khan's guard (cavalry) not so awful in combat first. They already increased them twice from player feedback so, idduno maybe some reduction or change (other requirement or limit) could be good, but it's a weird finicky thing to want more but not too much noble troops. Also keep in mind for some like the khan's guard you can a trade off, only the actual t6 KG is strait up soupier ? to the generic heavy HA. Normal HA has 2 stacks of arrows at tier 3, KKG line only has 1 until it gets t6 and t6 is very expensive, so it's a considerable trade off early game, later when you have plenty of cash you probably get whatever you want anyways.
This is a difficult problem, it doesn't bother me much, the only thing is that at the end of the game there are too many elites, but this is a natural development - you can achieve greater value of elite troops by increasing their maintenance cost with a large player's treasury, with the help of laws and so on.
Sweynforkbeard
Squire
Perhaps, but if the alternative is a convoluted "become lord, gather and army, jog around, get the ONE perk, convert prisoners" then I would much prefer just having the relative easy access we do now.
Until you get a serious rebalance of, probably, both the economy and units the Fian´s and Khan´s are the only sensible choices out there. They are highly effective and they dont die!
With the relative easy access to nobles the, not dying part, becomes a slightly less important advantage of the Fian´s and Khan´s.
I would like them to adjust it just by a little so it's less... But I'm afraid they will go too far and it ends up worse to back when you don't find any noble troops..
So it's probably better to increase their upkeep
So it's probably better to increase their upkeep
Sweynforkbeard
Squire
Lies, not true at all. I use plenty of cavalry to garrison my towns
xGreedo
Regular
Why would you use cavalry to garrison your towns?Lies, not true at all. I use plenty of cavalry to garrison my towns
Just because you do something weird and in my opinion unnecessary that doesn't make me a liar.
Sweynforkbeard
Squire
Sorry, it was not meant to offend (it was meant to be funny).
You can stack alot of cost reduction perks which can heavily reduce your garrison upkeep. For cavalry I believe you can potentially reach something like an 80% reduction in wages.
On a more serious note. I dont really thing cavalry as such loose out. Infantry is the big looser because its only redeeming quality is to be available.
Last edited:
Please no! I remember how hard it was to get those elite units before they´ve changed it. I "abused" the deserters quest to get them "fast". Wasn´t that much fun.
ldgarrett
Sergeant
As MostBlunted said, we've been there and it wasn't a good place to have noble line recruits locked behind specific notables that had to be above a certain power rating. It didn't just incentivise the player to all the other ways to get those troops, it murderously misbalanced some of the AI factions and what armies they could field. c.f. 1,000 man Battanian armies in version e1.4.x with well over 30% Cavalry and 7 or 8... yes, single digits, of Archers.
I'd consider discussing some adjustment, mostly situational. Any flat decrease in availability at this point in the development? Can't recommend it.
I'd consider discussing some adjustment, mostly situational. Any flat decrease in availability at this point in the development? Can't recommend it.
Sweynforkbeard
Squire
The fundamental issue is that quality is valuable. Partly because
- there is an upper limit to how many troops you can have
- fielding a bigger force slows you down thus making it difficult to catch up to the enemy
- it allows you to kill your enemies without suffering attrition yourself
I think it is going to be exceedingly difficult to strike a decent balance where this is not the case. If you push it too fare you end up in a situation were the player will increasingly have to actively make up for the shortcomings off his/her army instead. That is hardly ideal either.
You might slow down the inevitable march towards quality, but you are just not going to stop it.
- there is an upper limit to how many troops you can have
- fielding a bigger force slows you down thus making it difficult to catch up to the enemy
- it allows you to kill your enemies without suffering attrition yourself
I think it is going to be exceedingly difficult to strike a decent balance where this is not the case. If you push it too fare you end up in a situation were the player will increasingly have to actively make up for the shortcomings off his/her army instead. That is hardly ideal either.
You might slow down the inevitable march towards quality, but you are just not going to stop it.
Exactly, I´m using mostly empireal units (like 95% of my army) and before that change is was close to impossible to get imperial noble units. I really like the change. Maybe make the upkeep higher but don´t make it harder to get them as it is now.
To keep the cavalry safe from the non-cavalry units that will kill them easily.
Also if you already have them they don't cost any extra then anything else the same tier and also if you have perks that reduce mounted unit cost and give + security for mounted units on governor it becomes very economical to use all mounted units for garrison..
Sweynforkbeard
Squire
hahahahaa
