Your opinion on current game complexity regarding settlement management.

  • Current State is Great

  • Current State is good

  • Current State ok

  • I don't mind about settlement management

  • Current State is meh

  • Current State is bad

  • Current State is horrible

  • I don't like your ideas

  • I like your ideas


Results are only viewable after voting.

Users who are viewing this thread

So this is probably something that already appeared as a solution, be it by the community or the devs. I'm nowhere near being a game developer or knowing anything related to how Bannerlord engine works. All the following are just ideas that come to mind, when thinking about this dropped village managing feature(castle building, and village development) and how shallow the diplomacy/clan system is in the current game state. Anyway, this is how I, a mere peasant on game developing, would deal with that stuff.

Also, I Am fully aware that most of the following features and ideas will probably be deemed as “too complex” for the game. My hopes are to have some community feed back or at least a “**** off” from devs(@Callum @Dejan @MArdA TaleWorlds ) in order to know what is possible or not, and in an ideal world have this features implemented into the game be it officially or as a MOD.

Most of the features could be joint with another list of stuff that I commented on a while back, if you like the ideas I brought here you should definitely check my other post “I miss making Jeremus a Duke

  • Remove bound villages and castles, this would enable the game to have only two types of independent settlements, towns and villages.
  • Casus Belli, A reason/objective to wars would probably solve the town/village ownership dilemma. Said lord/king used some of his own influence to declare a war, with the objective to capture “X’s” settlements. At the end, the faction that loses the war would lose just the said villages/towns. The settlements captured by the other side during the war, would have their status set as occupied(not owned) during the war, and would be returned to the losing side if they are not part of the Casus Belli.
  • Occupied/Raided Settlements status. Settlements would have 2 different status regarding its current situation: Occupied, a settlement occupied by an enemy faction is a settlement that got attacked and lost to an enemy lord/army but is not fully controlled, and now it has to live with an enemy garrison in there till the end of the war, or until someone comes to liberate it. This settlement would still be able to produce to the faction that occupies it, but on a smaller scale, depending on the loyalty to its original faction. A raided settlement is a settlement that has been attacked and can’t produce for “x” amount of time, depending on damage to buildings etc., but still available to be occupied or remain controlled depending on the raider's will.
  • Controlled/Owned/Ruled, Controlled settlement defines the settlement ruling faction where it prioritizes the resource's allocation to its owning faction and allegiance, owned means that the settlement is owned by a “X” CLAN. Ruled, refers to the settlement ruling lord that defines settlement upgrades etc
To better exemplify the above hierarchy in different situations. Imagine settlement “X” is ruled by lord “Ragamuffin”, it's owned by clan “Apple Jobs” and it's controlled by faction “Sweet Pies”.

Lord “Ragamuffin” dies, the settlement goes to its direct heir within the clan “Apple Jobs”, Lord “Bobtail”.

Faction “Sweet Pies” is at war with the faction “Spank me Daddy” and settlement “X” is attacked by an “Spank me Daddy” army. The army can now raid the settlement or just occupies it leaving a small garrison to do so.

Now settlement “X” controlled by faction “Ragga muffin”, owned by clan “Apple jobs'', ruled by lord “bobtail” but all the interactions of these are blocked, because the settlement has its status as “occupied” by faction “Spank me Daddy”.

If the war is won by “Spank me Daddy” and the settlement is a war objective of “Spank me Daddy”, the place goes to the lord,clan,faction of that faction, and its status as occupied is back to normal. Not to be defined during the war as it's in the current game.

Yet to sue for peace a faction must have its objectives occupied or a major war score that would be used to trade for the settlements that are objectives but have not been occupied.

  • Village development, re-enable villages to have 4 areas for new buildings(production related buildings, defense related building, prosperity, militia barracks etc... and a castle/manor bringing castles that are bound to a village as the 2016 Bannerlord) buildings that would actually matter and contribute to a kingdom/clan rise to power.
  • Settlement region. Do not discard the regional map feature as a whole, use it to set settlements regions as a predefined/static thing(as geography usually works on the spam of 1-3 hundred years).
For example, settlements situated on forest region would have one of their slot already allocated to a woodcutting camp, with the option to destroy that reverting to a “clearance area” and upgrading it as the player wanted, this woodcutting camp, would not be available to build on certain regions or would produce a lot less there.

  • Development trees. The same as a troop tree but for settlement buildings, it all starts with a “clearance area”(one of the 4 spots to start building) and it can go up as the player/AI choose, meaning that certain buildings are only reachable through X path. Castles would also have a few slots of their own, related to troop garrison, armory, defenses, siege workshops, lord's influence, food stocks etc.
  • Village production, some buildings and upgrades for villages would be cheaper or available depending on the kingdom/village culture, ruling clan/lord/governor skills, village region. Yet keeping initial villages with a prioritized resource production, based on the region. (A mix of static/dynamized control of production, one to give it a kick-start on the campaign other to allow the player to feel an open and vivid calradia)
  • Town and Villages interaction. Villagers parties would still go to towns to sell their spare production, just like in the normal game, but usually choosing between a calculation of Faction settlement/distance/profit, not bound to a major settlement but yet logically choosing the nearest from the kingdom.
  • Town development, With more internal slots available to build into different paths, the buildings available to the town owner would be related to public/social/defense/political area of the town (meeting halls, public market, public baths, barrack, dungeon, better defenses etc.) while economy/production related building would be under the notables and Town Guild control and not building paths from the town. Towns would have their own developing way, being mostly guided by the town guild economically (miss ya’ Guild master) a union on vote by town notables that would present the town owner with needed changes in order to gain relations with each of the notables. They could offer to pay for some building in order to gain some leverage over the lord.
  • Resources for building, Besides paying for buildings the villages would have to use resources, could it be home produced on the local quarry, woodcutting camps or bought from other settlements, wood, clay, stone, iron all needed in “X” amount to erect a building, making villager parties really needed in order to bring those resources forward, AI/player could also bring those resources to the spot in order to help.
That’s about it folks, please if you agree with these features and want to see a more complex bannerlord, interact with this post.
 

five bucks

Squire
Well if you wish to know what is possible- or more importantly, likely to actually happen- maybe I can give you insight.

Here is a long list of problems with Bannerlord which the community have brought up (and keep in mind, it does not include all the bugs with the game). In a six month time period, Taleworlds have managed to fix about 20% of these issues, with many still remaining. At that rate of progress it will take actual years just to fully fix the problems the game's existing featurebase already has.

So, it is highly unlikely they will add LOTS of features that add to the difficulty of fixing the current problems.

This is a game with a large amount of interlocking simulated systems, most of which barely work. It's a struggle for TW at this point to even implement features which were in Warband, or features that they advertised would be in the game (criminal enterprises in alleys.) Out of those features TW have managed to add about 25% in six months.

If they've explicitly deconfirmed a feature, or a feature idea is complicated to implement, or you can't say that feature has appeal to many players, or a feature is only fun a handful of times and you'll never use it again, or a feature increases the complexity of the game for new players to learn too much without adding actual depth, or a feature requires a high amount of coding effort for little return, I would not get your hopes up about it ever being added. The only time TW does that is with random things nobody asked for but they liked the idea at the time.

To number your list:
1- lots of work changing the game's fundamental systems for minimal increase in gameplay value, highly unlikely
2- mexxico has told us before that complex casus Belli was discussed and rejected in a meeting
3/4-adds complexity without really increasing depth much, very unlikely
5/6- if it was explicitly deconfirmed then unless their reasons for reconfirming it have changed they are highly unlikely to change their stance
7/8/10/11- I can see them adding more options to fief management for buildings maybe, but it wouldn't get more complex than that. You have to ask how it would translate to gameplay; what would making a public baths do other than raise settlement happiness or something? It's not practical to create a complicated system for that in a game where the player can have a large number of settlements to manage. The player can't micromanage every fief and the resources used to build the buildings in each one In a game where you could have 10+ fiefs and are busy warring to defend them. In summary, this is the most likely one to happen but only if it could be simplified, done in a way that was actually fun, and coded in really easily.
9-seems like work changing fundamental game systems for no real payoff other than making it work the way you prefer, so unlikely

Thankfully there are already mods that have more complex fief governing in a way similar to what you describe. I just can't remember what they're called.
 

Hedving

Recruit
I'm personally not a fan of village management. Unless you develop it in such a way that micromanagement doesn't become a thing. It's boring and serves no bigger purpose
 

Madeloc

Recruit
Hello,
I voted 2 and 9 :smile:

Just a short answer about the town management; I think for the towns, one of the main problems is loyalty (which leads to rebellions, in particular when the AI takes a town of a different culture), this problem can be fixed with an adequate governor.

So I recognize it's bad lol, but I use a character manager to build my governors :smile: with the good perks, but still it is a problem for the AI.
One of the key perks for rebellions (only for rebellions, I don't speak about the economy of the town) is "Natural Leader" (Charm governor perk) which add a +10 loyalty (requires 200 Charm) and solves, from my experience, any rebellion problems. There are also several other "lesser" perks adding to settlement loyalty per day.

But just giving the good perks to some nobles (the ones who are not warriors) could help, without any further programming.

Speaking about this, I raise another problem :smile: : take Nywin, from the Battanian fen Derngil clan. The poor...I wouldn't be in her place hehe : on the battlefield, on foot, with 1 in athletics, no horse, no shield, no helmet.. no warrior skills at all. she would rather be better used as governor, skilled with the best possible governor skills she can actually have, than being a poor prey dropped on a battlefield :wink: - last time I had an encouter against her, she was fleeing away, I didn't even had the heart to hit her, so unbalanced ! - there are another couple of noble heroes like her - with even not the minimum equipment required to help survive. They are all women, except once I saw a rebel leader with a poor tunic, and another time a rebel leader with armor but no weapon at all.

That last paragraph although linked to the main topic, might found its real place in a topic about the NPCs I guess, so sorry for this minor annoyance in yours.
 

Madeloc

Recruit
Thankfully there are already mods that have more complex fief governing in a way similar to what you describe. I just can't remember what they're called.
I'm not really fond of counting on modders to have the game working well.
If it's for special features, I do not see any problem with this.
But devs mustn't rely on modders to finish the game.
It would be like if, at work, we were giving our job to do to someone else. Non-sense.
 

five bucks

Squire
I'm not really fond of counting on modders to have the game working well.
If it's for special features, I do not see any problem with this.
But devs mustn't rely on modders to finish the game.
It would be like if, at work, we were giving our job to do to someone else. Non-sense.
My stance is if a game company advertised a feature would be in a game they are selling, or created an expectation it would be present (by making a sequel to an earlier game), then they have an obligation to add that feature (or an equivalent) and make sure it works.

If they did not do either of those things, they have no obligation to work on it, it was never their job, the customer never paid for it, and it's fine in that instance to leave it to modders. Especially if the modders have been given good tools to work with.

IIRC, the fief construction feature was explicitly deconfirmed before Bannerlord even became available for purchase, so it's reasonable for Taleworlds to say they can't do it.

Totally agree that modders shouldn't be expected to finish a game. Modders' role should be to expand upon a feature-complete game which fulfilled the expectations the developers created when selling it.
 

Madeloc

Recruit
Yes I think I caught your thought and agree with it.

As player I must also remain myself of not being too much asking from devs and recognize I am from time to time 🙄

The game as many good features that require focus so as to be complete.
 

Jella

Recruit
So this is probably something that already appeared as a solution, be it by the community or the devs. I'm nowhere near being a game developer or knowing anything related to how Bannerlord engine works. All the following are just ideas that come to mind, when thinking about this dropped village managing feature(castle building, and village development) and how shallow the diplomacy/clan system is in the current game state. Anyway, this is how I, a mere peasant on game developing, would deal with that stuff.

Also, I Am fully aware that most of the following features and ideas will probably be deemed as “too complex” for the game. My hopes are to have some community feed back or at least a “**** off” from devs(@Callum @Dejan @MArdA TaleWorlds ) in order to know what is possible or not, and in an ideal world have this features implemented into the game be it officially or as a MOD.

Most of the features could be joint with another list of stuff that I commented on a while back, if you like the ideas I brought here you should definitely check my other post “I miss making Jeremus a Duke

  • Remove bound villages and castles, this would enable the game to have only two types of independent settlements, towns and villages.
  • Casus Belli, A reason/objective to wars would probably solve the town/village ownership dilemma. Said lord/king used some of his own influence to declare a war, with the objective to capture “X’s” settlements. At the end, the faction that loses the war would lose just the said villages/towns. The settlements captured by the other side during the war, would have their status set as occupied(not owned) during the war, and would be returned to the losing side if they are not part of the Casus Belli.
  • Occupied/Raided Settlements status. Settlements would have 2 different status regarding its current situation: Occupied, a settlement occupied by an enemy faction is a settlement that got attacked and lost to an enemy lord/army but is not fully controlled, and now it has to live with an enemy garrison in there till the end of the war, or until someone comes to liberate it. This settlement would still be able to produce to the faction that occupies it, but on a smaller scale, depending on the loyalty to its original faction. A raided settlement is a settlement that has been attacked and can’t produce for “x” amount of time, depending on damage to buildings etc., but still available to be occupied or remain controlled depending on the raider's will.
  • Controlled/Owned/Ruled, Controlled settlement defines the settlement ruling faction where it prioritizes the resource's allocation to its owning faction and allegiance, owned means that the settlement is owned by a “X” CLAN. Ruled, refers to the settlement ruling lord that defines settlement upgrades etc
To better exemplify the above hierarchy in different situations. Imagine settlement “X” is ruled by lord “Ragamuffin”, it's owned by clan “Apple Jobs” and it's controlled by faction “Sweet Pies”.

Lord “Ragamuffin” dies, the settlement goes to its direct heir within the clan “Apple Jobs”, Lord “Bobtail”.

Faction “Sweet Pies” is at war with the faction “Spank me Daddy” and settlement “X” is attacked by an “Spank me Daddy” army. The army can now raid the settlement or just occupies it leaving a small garrison to do so.

Now settlement “X” controlled by faction “Ragga muffin”, owned by clan “Apple jobs'', ruled by lord “bobtail” but all the interactions of these are blocked, because the settlement has its status as “occupied” by faction “Spank me Daddy”.

If the war is won by “Spank me Daddy” and the settlement is a war objective of “Spank me Daddy”, the place goes to the lord,clan,faction of that faction, and its status as occupied is back to normal. Not to be defined during the war as it's in the current game.

Yet to sue for peace a faction must have its objectives occupied or a major war score that would be used to trade for the settlements that are objectives but have not been occupied.

  • Village development, re-enable villages to have 4 areas for new buildings(production related buildings, defense related building, prosperity, militia barracks etc... and a castle/manor bringing castles that are bound to a village as the 2016 Bannerlord) buildings that would actually matter and contribute to a kingdom/clan rise to power.
  • Settlement region. Do not discard the regional map feature as a whole, use it to set settlements regions as a predefined/static thing(as geography usually works on the spam of 1-3 hundred years).
For example, settlements situated on forest region would have one of their slot already allocated to a woodcutting camp, with the option to destroy that reverting to a “clearance area” and upgrading it as the player wanted, this woodcutting camp, would not be available to build on certain regions or would produce a lot less there.

  • Development trees. The same as a troop tree but for settlement buildings, it all starts with a “clearance area”(one of the 4 spots to start building) and it can go up as the player/AI choose, meaning that certain buildings are only reachable through X path. Castles would also have a few slots of their own, related to troop garrison, armory, defenses, siege workshops, lord's influence, food stocks etc.
  • Village production, some buildings and upgrades for villages would be cheaper or available depending on the kingdom/village culture, ruling clan/lord/governor skills, village region. Yet keeping initial villages with a prioritized resource production, based on the region. (A mix of static/dynamized control of production, one to give it a kick-start on the campaign other to allow the player to feel an open and vivid calradia)
  • Town and Villages interaction. Villagers parties would still go to towns to sell their spare production, just like in the normal game, but usually choosing between a calculation of Faction settlement/distance/profit, not bound to a major settlement but yet logically choosing the nearest from the kingdom.
  • Town development, With more internal slots available to build into different paths, the buildings available to the town owner would be related to public/social/defense/political area of the town (meeting halls, public market, public baths, barrack, dungeon, better defenses etc.) while economy/production related building would be under the notables and Town Guild control and not building paths from the town. Towns would have their own developing way, being mostly guided by the town guild economically (miss ya’ Guild master) a union on vote by town notables that would present the town owner with needed changes in order to gain relations with each of the notables. They could offer to pay for some building in order to gain some leverage over the lord.
  • Resources for building, Besides paying for buildings the villages would have to use resources, could it be home produced on the local quarry, woodcutting camps or bought from other settlements, wood, clay, stone, iron all needed in “X” amount to erect a building, making villager parties really needed in order to bring those resources forward, AI/player could also bring those resources to the spot in order to help.
That’s about it folks, please if you agree with these features and want to see a more complex bannerlord, interact with this post.
tl;dr
but something has to be changed, thats for sure. theriz no micromanagement in dis game at all.
 

five bucks

Squire
Yes I think I caught your thought and agree with it.

As player I must also remain myself of not being too much asking from devs and recognize I am from time to time 🙄
The game as many good features that require focus so as to be complete.
You're right, the game has a long way to go in lots of ways and it's definitely not something modders should be left to fix, not after Taleworlds made hundreds of millions off this game.
 
put your lips on the screen i will also do this and send vibrations so we can discuss bannerlord in morse code
- .... .- -. -.- ... / ..-. --- .-. / - .... . / - .. .--. -... .- -. -. . .-. .-.. --- .-. -.. / .. ... / .- / -.. .. ... .- .--. .--. --- .. -. - -- . -. - / - --- / -- . .-.-.- / .. -. / . ...- . .-. -.-- / ... .. --. .... - .-.-.-
 

danEN

Banned
WBM&BWF&SNWVC
- .... .- -. -.- ... / ..-. --- .-. / - .... . / - .. .--. -... .- -. -. . .-. .-.. --- .-. -.. / .. ... / .- / -.. .. ... .- .--. .--. --- .. -. - -- . -. - / - --- / -- . .-.-.- / .. -. / . ...- . .-. -.-- / ... .. --. .... - .-.-.-
.. / .- --. .-. . . / - .... . / --. .- -- . / .. ... / .- / -- .- .--- --- .-. / ..-. .- .. .-.. ..- .-. . / .. / -.. --- -. .----. - / - .... .. -. -.- / .. / .-- .. .-.. .-.. / . ...- . -. / .--. .-.. .- -.-- / .. - / --- -. / ..-. ..- .-.. .-.. / .-. . .-.. . .- ... .
 
.. / .- --. .-. . . / - .... . / --. .- -- . / .. ... / .- / -- .- .--- --- .-. / ..-. .- .. .-.. ..- .-. . / .. / -.. --- -. .----. - / - .... .. -. -.- / .. / .-- .. .-.. .-.. / . ...- . -. / .--. .-.. .- -.-- / .. - / --- -. / ..-. ..- .-.. .-.. / .-. . .-.. . .- ... .
.- .-. . / -.-- --- ..- / --. ..- -.-- ... / ..-. --- .-. / .-. . .- .-.. ..--.. / -- --- .-. ... . / -.-. --- -.. . / --- -. / - .... .. ... / ... .... . .. - .-.-.- .-.-.- .-.-.- / -.. .. -.. / -.-- --- ..- / .- - / .-.. . .- ... - / ...- --- - .
 

danEN

Banned
WBM&BWF&SNWVC
.- .-. . / -.-- --- ..- / --. ..- -.-- ... / ..-. --- .-. / .-. . .- .-.. ..--.. / -- --- .-. ... . / -.-. --- -.. . / --- -. / - .... .. ... / ... .... . .. - .-.-.- .-.-.- .-.-.- / -.. .. -.. / -.-- --- ..- / .- - / .-.. . .- ... - / ...- --- - .
.. / -.-. .- -. .----. - / .-. . .- -.. / .. .----. -- / -.. -.-- ... .-.. . -..- .. -.-.
 
I like everything but separating villages from settlements, just more control over target destination of goods delivery from the villages and some village upgrades that could be on the main fief page would be enough for me.
 
.. / -.-. .- -. .----. - / .-. . .- -.. / .. .----. -- / -.. -.-- ... .-.. . -..- .. -.-.
.. / -.-. .- .- .- .- / -.-. -.-. -.-. .- -. - - - - - / -- -- --- / -- -- --- --- / -- -- -- / -- -- -- -- ..- .-. .-. / -- --- .-. / / ... . / .. / .- -- / .- .- -- / .- .- / ... - ..- - - ..- .-. . .-.
 
Top Bottom