Sieges, razing, governors, alliances, and land acquisition

[Ettenrocal]

I agree al those things are missing in Bannerlord. Bannerlord completely forget the possibility for player to acquire land by himself buy it, inherit it, or conquer it, then it would be your problem to keep it and defend it yourself as vassal or not. Possibilities of building hideouts would be also cool.

 

[Strat]

Completely agree, I've long forgotten the idea of getting what I want, I get what I can, this is enough anyway... and can still improve with the time passing (more fiefs, etc..)

But is that what you wrote which is your Tamerlane bandit play through ?

Oh I was just saying that it's possible to take a fief and much more even if you're by yourself for an entire campaign. I don't like to post my videos in the forum, but it's the most recent upload if you go to my channel. I haven't quite gotten to the end game yet, but it's coming soon so that's why I said "spoiler alert"

 

[Earth Dragon]

While I understand the idea that there should be a management aspect to the game because as you say, you can't do it all. You have to select where you want you focus. I think that that works fine early and mid game, but late game it becomes very limiting. Who will lead my armies? Who will lead my divisions? Who will govern my cities? Who will make the money to offset all these expenses? Since everything requires companions and you get maybe 6ish late game, it becomes very hard to grow a kingdom. Going from a small kingdom to a large kingdom in this game is the hardest transition because you are so limited. Them maintaining a kingdom is even harder. Please check out the other reply I did where I addressed why this is such a big issue and tell me what you think. If you play a game like crusader kings 3 (I know a very different type of game, but bear with me), the higher up you go, the more vassals you are allowed to have which makes the transition from a small kingdom to a big one less cumbersome. I feel like there is some middle ground here where you still have to prioritize, but its not literally unplayable because of lack of resources.

The game is definitely not “unplayable” because governors come from your companion pool. If anything is, it’s the herky jerky way that kingdom clans bail. That’s the problem that needs to get fixed, not allow the players to circumvent outside relations entirely by allowing them to circumvent span of control aspects entirely. As a community, we ask for a deeper game, yet 75%+ of the suggestions of what to change often cause the game to get more shallow and reduce the impact of the systems meant to give depth already in place.

And let’s be clear: a player’s companion pool includes family members for all practical purposes. There is absolutely a world that you can create where you have 80 bodies to do what you will, but this would take time. What to do with that time is another area the game could deepen, even through mods, so shouldn’t be compromised by changes to the base game on this front.

The game does progress and gives you another companion slot everytime you bump up a clan Tier. It also gives you another Workshop. This is your list of contacts and those loyal to your clan expanding once you hit certain milestones.

Once you hit the top Tier, family expansion is now the main source of growth. You have to marry the fellas, which brings in more Governor candidates and more children (this is also where we can fix folks bailing on your kingdom. Clans with shared family could have heavier ties to the ruling clan). Again, these things take time and SHOULD take time.

Going from a nobody to the ruler of the world, with your immediate family and infallibly loyal contacts controlling everything is just not something that should be obtainable in a single generation. Having a 3-5 fief limit with “loyal” governors (it can’t be stressed enough that garrisons are still managed and taxes are still collect, so there is obviously a faceless governor there without you assigning a trusted individual) causes more need to have good relation with other clans. This is the same system all the AI factions operate in. So relations with NPCs is where things need to get more development, not draining depth from the current build.

 

[Pheonixmaster256]

Thanks for the shout out!! I'll toss my two cents in - the only gripe I have with fiefs and management in general is the slow rate of XP gain for companions. They have adjusted XP gain for a lot of skills recently which made it much easier, but take melee skills for example - It's not hard for a player to farm XP since we can out-fight the AI very easily. However, a companion in combat even at the higher skill levels still make stupid choices and get destroyed. For example: fighting 1 vs 1 a companion with late game armor and 300+ skills makes them formidable. However, insert them into a 5 vs 1 and it's pretty much gg even against low tier enemies like looters. Swap a player into the equation with 0 combat skills and the worst weapons can still effectively win the 5 vs 1 because we don't just charge in to trade blows. We back up, flank, position, etc. but the AI doesn't do this, which usually means they get 1 - 5 kills and then get dunked on lol. This is just one example of how annoying it is to farm XP for companions, I have a whole list like tactics, leadership, etc. for companions.

I understand where others are concerned about with managing fiefs, but with a little bit of planning ahead of time it shouldn't be an issue to manage and maintain fiefs, even without a governor. Passing good policies pretty much eliminates loyalty issues and putting a good governor in place is just an extra bonus.

Good to see you here! Yes, I checked you out on YouTube and you have some very comprehensive videos that greatly helped with balancing loyalty. What do you think about the idea of being able to appoint governors from the town, castle, or village notables once you reach kingdom size? Several have brought up the reason against it being that you can't have everything and that is the point. However, I maintain that the higher you get in in the game and the more land you get, there needs to be a more accommodating system for managing all the aspects of a kingdom. It can't just be me, my 6 friends, and my wife leading all the armies, managing all the territories, leading all the caravans, and leading all the divisions. It would be something similar to a crusader kings 3 feeling where the higher you get, the less you micromanage because the more vassals you have. Also do you have any thoughts on my other suggestions? I feel as if most of the issues I have are very intertwined.

 

[Pheonixmaster256]

1. Problem: An open gate can be close again. The AI seeks to do so at the earliest opportunity, even ignoring combat to do so. This can result in your soldiers being trapped between gates. Fix: The AI will not assault through the gate unless the gate is broken.

2. Your family members typically make good governors, but they also make good everything else. Having to decide which is more important to you is an integral part of the game.

3. Agreed. To get land as a non-vassal you can either become a criminal and siege (aka get rekt unless you cheat), wait for a rebellion to break out and race against the faction that the rebellion is against while hoping you have enough soldiers to take the town/castle (because you can't starve them out), or spend a frankly ridiculous amount of time to level up your trade and save up millions of gold to buy a settlement. You can't even encourage a rebellion, or cause a rebellion without being in charge of the settlement in question.

4. Agreed. Rebelling against your current liege is a time-honored tradition in feudalism. Giving back your land AND taking a huge opinion loss is probably one of the top 5 dumbest decisions that have been made in the development of this game so far.

5. Agreed, except for the impossible to not get crushed part. Smith-for-gold and keep a massive garrison of T2 imperials. Up to the limit if you can. Then you skirmish with the smaller enemies while running from the large armies until the AI gets tired and is willing the send you a peace treaty. If you do enough skirmishing, they'll even pay you.

6. I think you mean villages, and I agree. If you try to raze a village with a small force the village will rise up against you, but they won't do the same against the AI. Having to constantly run around fending off robber-barons is a dumb mechanic.

1. Do you know of a way to stop them from trying to assault the walls all together without just having them shield up outside the gate? For example, what if I want them to attack only the gate or charge through once I open the gate.

 

[Pheonixmaster256]

Sorry but I have to disagree with this one - It's actually not that hard to take land by yourself. I doubt anyone here is watching my current Tamerlane bandit play through (spoiler alert if you are), but I even did a WC with a single clan - no vassal, no recruiting nobles, no promoting companions, etc. And I was at war with everyone on the map from day 1 (No peace allowed). I'm not trying to say "git gud" but there may be some tactics you have not considered using before that are holding you back.
I do agree with you 100% on point 1 - I would love to have more control over units during a siege. I usually put everyone into 2 groups and control them that way, but there should be a better way to do it.

I have not watched this one yet, but I'll give it a look. What I am advocating for is more options. Vassal rebellion would be a good one. I had an idea that if I can beat the decay of influence by being an absolute God at war contribution as a mercenary, I should be able to vote to get a fief for my excellent service. Someone opposed that, and while I don't have a problem with looking for alternatives, I think that there should be SOME way to spend influence as a mercenary. The ways I know to get a kingdom are wait for a rebellion, declare war with massive penalties against a HUGE nation, be a vassal, or buy one after grinding the hell out of trade. Are there others I don't know about?

 

[Old-Bull]

How do you "reset" your character?

 

[Wheem]

How do you "reset" your character?

Talk to the Arena Master in any town's arena while playing the 1.8 beta. It has an associated cost, which I think scales up the more perks you have in a given skill line, but should generally be manageable beyond the very early stages of the game.

One of the biggest reasons most people have issues taking a fief solo is they try to go after the one they want. Unfortunately it rarely works out that way - you have to take whatever you can get Usually waiting for a war to break out, then watching a siege take place. Even if the siege fails, the garrison and militia will be depleted and it's much easier to swoop in to take the fief at that point. I usually wait until a few battles have taken place, that way the kingdoms have lost their top tier troops and usually fighting with tier 1 replacements. Just a lot of little things that can add up quickly and make taking a fief almost trivial!

What's a good way to manage loyalty in the early stages, though? As an example: If you're playing a Vlandian character, and the Vlandians don't start losing fiefs in a war, you'll be limited to taking "wrong" culture fiefs for a while, and that -3 loyalty penalty is pretty harsh. It also seems like the only ways to get a good governor early are to use your brother in that capacity (which is another -1 loyalty since he'd also be Vlandian), or roll the dice on certain spouses with high enough skills having the right perks. Is it simply a matter of getting the Firebrand perk and enacting certain policies solo, with no vassals to vote against them?

 

[Apocal]

I think that that works fine early and mid game, but late game it becomes very limiting. Who will lead my armies? Who will lead my divisions? Who will govern my cities? Who will make the money to offset all these expenses? Since everything requires companions and you get maybe 6ish late game, it becomes very hard to grow a kingdom.

I'm not sure if you know this, but you can use family members as well. There is a companion limit, but no limit on family members, so far as I know. If you're not in sandbox mode, you get a lot of freebies that way. Two brothers, brothers' wives, sister, spouse. If you play for a long time, then you get all the children as well, which can easily add up to over 20 family members. And then get the sons/nephews married so then you have even more.