Something is rotten in Calradia

Users who are viewing this thread

StewVader

Sergeant
I'm starting to get the feeling that Bannerlord is just poorly designed from the ground up. The core gameplay loops are really tedious and unrewarding for the player. Additionally, there really isn't any immersion or player agency in the game, making the experience hollow and linear. I know its EA, but without substantial changes, I can't see playing this game in the future.

I gave the e1.4.3 beta a solid chance (no mods), and the game is just so tedious (unless you exploit smithing for gold). I chose not to do smithing because exploiting smithing just ruins the game for me. What's the point of anything if you can just bankrupt an entire town selling a pack of javelins? So I started off trading, then got 3 caravans (in cities with high prosperity) then I got 3 workshops and built shops that should be good for those locations (ex. Brewery in Zeonica etc). To my great dissatisfaction, I can honestly say, the ability to make gold outside of exploiting smithing is either not working as intended or terribly implemented. With 3 caravans, 3 workshops, 1 castle and 2 villages I was losing money (only funding a 100 strong garrison of mostly level 3/4 troops) and a army of 98 (mix of 3/4/5). How does that make any sense? The most any workshop made was 120 and many days Caravan's weren't making anything (while traveling I suppose). So in order to stay a solvent I had to run around and kill/sell everything I could hoping to gobble up a weak lordling for his loot.

Additionally, defeating huge armies, only to see them again shortly after is very discouraging, and I think this is the core problem with Bannerlord - the endless war and nothing else to do. If the AI had other stuff to do, maybe endless war wouldn't be necessary? The endless war is just so unsatisfying and immersion breaking. Why can't the game have campaign seasons, with an attrition mechanic if armies are on offense during that time? Something to slow the world pace down so the player can actually enjoy the total experience, rather than be rushed around before the whole map is conquered.

Snowballing is not fixed, it just takes a little longer. What is the point of a succession system if the game is fundamentally over in a characters lifespan? I don't want to even get into the influence system, but in my experience, the problem with influence is, by the time you have enough influence to support other lords and play politics, the game is fundamentally over because of snowballing, and kingdom ruler greed.

I could go on and on, but right now after a couple small play throughs on the beta and one concerted effort, it just seems like the game is fundamentally flawed and the design decisions indicate that they wanted the vanilla game to be very shallow, not immersive and arcade like. This is just my opinion and experience.
 

MostBlunted

On probation
Don´t waste your time, TW doesn´t care at all. But the fanboys will tell you it´s EA.

TW already got the money, they´ll release the game again in 10 months. The only thing we can do is a Steam review of this.
 

Svang

Sergeant at Arms
Don´t waste your time, TW doesn´t care at all. But the fanboys will tell you it´s EA.

TW already got the money, they´ll release the game again in 10 months. The only thing we can do is a Steam review of this.

Already left a negative one, but it's drowned in a sea of ****ty memes and fanboy praise. I do it because I want them to improve, but so many players are content with this and I don't get it.
 

Qwezz

Sergeant at Arms
I'm starting to get the feeling that Bannerlord is just poorly designed from the ground up. The core gameplay loops are really tedious and unrewarding for the player. Additionally, there really isn't any immersion or player agency in the game, making the experience hollow and linear. I know its EA, but without substantial changes, I can't see playing this game in the future.

I gave the e1.4.3 beta a solid chance (no mods), and the game is just so tedious (unless you exploit smithing for gold). I chose not to do smithing because exploiting smithing just ruins the game for me. What's the point of anything if you can just bankrupt an entire town selling a pack of javelins? So I started off trading, then got 3 caravans (in cities with high prosperity) then I got 3 workshops and built shops that should be good for those locations (ex. Brewery in Zeonica etc). To my great dissatisfaction, I can honestly say, the ability to make gold outside of exploiting smithing is either not working as intended or terribly implemented. With 3 caravans, 3 workshops, 1 castle and 2 villages I was losing money (only funding a 100 strong garrison of mostly level 3/4 troops) and a army of 98 (mix of 3/4/5). How does that make any sense? The most any workshop made was 120 and many days Caravan's weren't making anything (while traveling I suppose). So in order to stay a solvent I had to run around and kill/sell everything I could hoping to gobble up a weak lordling for his loot.
Making money isn't really a huge problem-it can be fixed with a couple of tweaks. I don't think it's as big as a problem as you make it out to be.
Additionally, defeating huge armies, only to see them again shortly after is very discouraging, and I think this is the core problem with Bannerlord - the endless war and nothing else to do. If the AI had other stuff to do, maybe endless war wouldn't be necessary? The endless war is just so unsatisfying and immersion breaking. Why can't the game have campaign seasons, with an attrition mechanic if armies are on offense during that time? Something to slow the world pace down so the player can actually enjoy the total experience, rather than be rushed around before the whole map is conquered.
Ah yes.I agree with this and there's a magic feature that just might fix this problem-FEASTS.Honestly though I think that addition of features such as feasts along with diplomacy fixes may be the solution.
Snowballing is not fixed, it just takes a little longer. What is the point of a succession system if the game is fundamentally over in a characters lifespan? I don't want to even get into the influence system, but in my experience, the problem with influence is, by the time you have enough influence to support other lords and play politics, the game is fundamentally over because of snowballing, and kingdom ruler greed.
Is it really "snowballing" if its slower?Doesn't the term refer to a "rapid" progression of events? I'm sure it can be slowed down even slower still but If you'd prefer the game never progress without player influance I think that's impossible.
I could go on and on, but right now after a couple small play throughs on the beta and one concerted effort, it just seems like the game is fundamentally flawed and the design decisions indicate that they wanted the vanilla game to be very shallow, not immersive and arcade like. This is just my opinion and experience.
None of the complaints you presented here expose a "fundamental flaw" of the game, and all can be fixed with relative ease later into the the development.All of them have been mentioned before on the forums as well and the devs have acknowledged them and started working on them.
I don't wanna sound like a TW shill, cause they definitely ****ed up the launch but honestly most of the pepole on the forums seem as if they've given up and come to forums to vent thier frustrations and blow every single problem of the game out of proportion.
 
It's fast paced RPG action. :iamamoron: :iamamoron: :iamamoron:

But seriously, I agree, the fundamental design of the game is flawed. Gonna take a heck of a modding effort down the road for me to continue playing.

To the above post:

TW has not show any indication that they plan on fixing nor have they acknowledged the vast issues with immersion in this game.
 

Timmortal

Knight at Arms
Yet another negative rant post from StewVader and MostBlunted is here aswell, i really dont understand why you spend so much time here just posting bile, move on if its so bad.
 

StewVader

Sergeant
Making money isn't really a huge problem-it can be fixed with a couple of tweaks. I don't think it's as big as a problem as you make it out to be.

Ah yes.I agree with this and there's a magic feature that just might fix this problem-FEASTS.Honestly though I think that addition of features such as feasts along with diplomacy fixes may be the solution.

Is it really "snowballing" if its slower?Doesn't the term refer to a "rapid" progression of events? I'm sure it can be slowed down even slower still but If you'd prefer the game never progress without player influance I think that's impossible.

None of the complaints you presented here expose a "fundamental flaw" of the game, and all can be fixed with relative ease later into the the development.All of them have been mentioned before on the forums as well and the devs have acknowledged them and started working on them.
I don't wanna sound like a TW shill, cause they definitely ****ed up the launch but honestly most of the pepole on the forums seem as if they've given up and come to forums to vent thier frustrations and blow every single problem of the game out of proportion.

I hope they fix it, however, the available dev comments indicate otherwise. They have actively moved to cap and reduce workshop / caravan income. The outcome of this decision is the player having to just kill/sell kill/sell ad nauseum. Which is boring, tedious and unrewarding gameplay.

Snowballing is a problem in a game that advertises a succession system. As I said, what is the point of a succession system if the game is essentially over in one characters lifetime?

I listed a few major issues. I believe the game will need a massive overhaul.
 

StewVader

Sergeant
Yet another negative rant post from StewVader and MostBlunted is here aswell, i really dont understand why you spend so much time here just posting bile, move on if its so bad.

Eh, I actually haven't posted in a while, cause I took a break from the game. But I gave the new beta a chance, and here is my experience. Also, last time I checked this was a forum? Maybe don't click on it if you don't want to read it?
 

Qwezz

Sergeant at Arms
I hope they fix it, however, the available dev comments indicate otherwise. They have actively moved to cap and reduce workshop / caravan income. The outcome of this decision is the player having to just kill/sell kill/sell ad nauseum. Which is boring, tedious and unrewarding gameplay.

Snowballing is a problem in a game that advertises a succession system. As I said, what is the point of a succession system if the game is essentially over in one characters lifetime?

I listed a few major issues. I believe the game will need a massive overhaul.
Them tweaking the workshops and caravans shows that they're trying to balance them. In your previous post you said there's no point if you can get infinite riches by selling 1 pack of javelins so why should you get infinite riches from a couple of workshops and caravans?

Snowballing has already been toned down.If they continue as they have I'm pretty sure we can get a couple lifetime's worth of gameplay in a single campaign.

Again, none of these issues are that major and in need of a overhaul.There are some that do (crafting perks etc.) but you didn't list any of them.
And again-this feels like you just venting your frustrations and blowing the issues out of proportion.
 
Money
Yeah it's a shame you can't have a passive income at all in early game, but you can rack up millions just beating up lords or of course if you unlock proken priced javelin parts. For me though, beating lord into the dirt all day is the core of the game and always has been, for me. I appreciate that I can choose to not do that and smith a few 2 hardens from traveling funds, if I want. Of course the prices need a fix, but I think you should always be able to make a profit by smelting down weapons and re-forging them.

snowballing
I think it's much better in 1.4.3 after hotfixes. Seems a reasonable pace of expansion and take back of fiefs. I beat down the khuzaits and they actually lost fiefs to other factions and seem weakened even after I mad peace with them.

Lord respawn
I think this is better too. I've seen them having to waddle around with little garbage parties for awhile before they try to mess with my villages or such. I don't know exactly what changed in 1.4.3 but I hope it was intentional because it's a big improvement to see defeated lords out of action for a bit. They also seem to stay in my prisoners longer.
 

StewVader

Sergeant
Them tweaking the workshops and caravans shows that they're trying to balance them. In your previous post you said there's no point if you can get infinite riches by selling 1 pack of javelins so why should you get infinite riches from a couple of workshops and caravans?

Snowballing has already been toned down.If they continue as they have I'm pretty sure we can get a couple lifetime's worth of gameplay in a single campaign.

Again, none of these issues are that major and in need of a overhaul.There are some that do (crafting perks etc.) but you didn't list any of them.
And again-this feels like you just venting your frustrations and blowing the issues out of proportion.

I never said I want to get infinitely rich from workshops or caravans. Please don't argue things I didn't say. In fact, I think the money you make from caravans/workshops should make sense. As I stated, it currently doesn't.

I guess we will just have to agree to disagree. However, the amount of post similar to mine on the forums currently and previously, indicate that many players are concerned, and do believe the current game's fundamentals are flawed.
 
Last edited:

MostBlunted

On probation
Already left a negative one, but it's drowned in a sea of ****ty memes and fanboy praise. I do it because I want them to improve, but so many players are content with this and I don't get it.
Yea, a lot of "players" think this game is good because it´s EA and TW is a small indie company (they aren´t) and that for the small price of 49,99€
 

Magello

Sergeant
I agree, you have summed up a fundamental flaw with the game and that is a sense of time. I had actually done a thread about implementing seasons so we have a kingdom building time with feasts and tournaments and then a raiding/planting season.

I think part of the issue with why some feel the game is balance to their play style. I always liked the game for the ability to play multiple ways and still find a way to succeed. Most of these suggestion/idea post always deteriorates down to this is how you need to play it. Isn't this supposed to be a sandbox game, if not then why have the kingdom/trading/rogue skills in there if they are not a practical way to play the game. And I know it is EA and these may become available down the road.
 

guiskj

Squire
"Variety is the spice of life"

In Bannerlord, fighting is really fun. But it is the only fun part of the game. And only in the early-mid game as afterwards your army is so large that you are forced into a commander role.

All the other gameplay features in the game are some form of a Skinner Box.
  • Village Issues are terrible and allow for almost 0 roleplay. Honestly they are in the same level of fetch quests in MMO to me.
    • Look at Skyrim's radiant quests. They are as shallow as fetch quests or Village Issues, but they reinforce the game's core mechanic of exploration and, therefore, are actually meaningful.
    • I use that as an example to showcase that Village Issues add nothing to the game except yet another Skinner Box to fool the player into thinking the game has content.
  • Economy is complex but that does not automatically mean fun. The economy is mostly manipulated through passive means (caravans and workshops) instead through player agency. Worst of all, it is convoluted from the players perspective and it does not tie itself back to any other system of gameplay in meaningful ways.
  • Diplomacy is similar, the system seems complex enough to handle interesting scenarios but it fails for three main reasons:
    • 1. Very little player agency until late game
    • 2. Many many policies with very small impacts. At one point I was in a kingdom with half of all the policies active and it felt 0% different than if none of them were active.
    • 3. It, again, does not tie into any other mechanic in the game.
      • Why as one of the most powerful merchants in Calradia I cannot affect Kingdom policies accross multiple factions?
      • Why as one of the most powerful lords in my faction I cannot "punch above my clan weight"?
  • Role playing is impossible outside of player imagination. None of the game mechanics really support RP focused play. This is fine if it is by design, but if you want to be an Action game with RP+Strategy features sprinkled in (leveling system, character creation, troop tactics), make sure that these supporting mechanics actually, you know, support your core game mechanic (Action). Throwing mechanics in game because it feels like they should be there is poor game design.
    • The traits are something particularly egregious (honour, devious, etc). Nothing ties into this from a player perspective.
  • Disjoint game mechanics. I have touched on this in my points above but it really needs its own bullet. NONE of the game mecahnics interact in meaningful ways.
  • War is CONSTANT and therefore BORING
  • Character progression does not introduce any new player mechanic, it is ALL passive apart from very few perks like the "everything has a price". (I dislike that perk for RP reasons, but at least it unlocks something new)
  • The world does not tell a story. There is very little sense of history or the impact of the passage of time. This is different from having a Main Quest line. Games can tell a compelling story without having a predefined narrative, just look at CK2.

And I agree that all the games mechanic are not fully impemented (Economy, War, Diplomacy, Leveling, Troop Tactics, etc.), but even at their partial state it is evident that there is little connective tissue between them.

It feels like the game was "designed" by a group of people saying "Oh, mechanic X is cool, lets add that" instead of "What is the essence of Bannerlord? OK, let's add mechanics that reinforce that".

Anyway, I'm in a Zoom meeting and should get to work :wink:

[edit for cleaning]
 
Last edited:
"Variety is the spice of life"

In Bannerlord, fighting is really fun. But it is the only fun part of the game. And only in the early-mid game as afterwards your army is so large that you are forced into a commander role.

All the other gameplay features in the game are some form of a Skinner Box.
  • Village Issues are terrible and allow for almost 0 roleplay
  • Economy is complex but that does not automatically mean fun. The economy is mostly manipulated through passive means (caravans and workshops) instead through player agency. Worst of all, it does not tie itself back to any other system of gameplay.
  • Diplomacy is similar, the system seems complex enough to handle interesting scenarios but it fails for three main reasons:
    • 1. Very little player agency until late game
    • 2. Many many policies with very small impacts. At one point I was in a kingdom with half of all the policies active and it felt 0% different than if none of them were active.
    • 3. It, again, does not tie into any other mechanic in the game
  • Role playing is impossible outside of player imagination. None of the game mechanics really support RP focused play. This is fine if it is by design, but if you want to be an Action game with RP+Strategy features sprinkled in (leveling system, character creation, troop tactics), make sure that these supporting mechanics actually, you know, support your core game mechanic (Action). Throwing mechanics in game because it feels like they should be there is poor game design.
  • Disjoint game mechanics. I have touched on this in my points above but it really needs its own bullet. NONE of the game mecahnics interact in meaningful ways.
    • Issues/Quests have no real effect appart from very small effects on village/town economy and recruiting through notable power tanking. So technically it ties into war and economy, but in such a small way as to not be there at all.
    • Economy and Diplomacy, as noted above, are almost completely separate systems
    • War is CONSTANT and therefore BORING
    • Character progression does not introduce any new player mechanic, it is ALL passive apart from very few perks like the "everything has a price". (I dislike that perk for RP reasons, but at least it unlocks something new)
  • The world does not tell a story. There is very little sense of history or the impact of the passage of time. This is different from having a Main Quest line. Games can tell a compelling story without having a predefined narrative, just look at CK2.

And I agree that all the games mechanic are not fully impemented (Economy, War, Diplomacy, Leveling, Troop Tactics, etc.), but even at their partial state it is evident that there is little connecting tissue between them.

It feels like the game was "designed" by a group of people saying "Oh, mechanic X is cool, lets add that" instead of "What is the essence of Bannerlord? OK, let's add mechanics that reinforce that".
Anyway, I'm in a Zoom meeting and should get to work :wink:

Get back to work! Some good analysis here thou.
 

froggyluv

Grandmaster Knight
NW
"Variety is the spice of life"

In Bannerlord, fighting is really fun. But it is the only fun part of the game. And only in the early-mid game as afterwards your army is so large that you are forced into a commander role.

All the other gameplay features in the game are some form of a Skinner Box.
  • Village Issues are terrible and allow for almost 0 roleplay. Honestly they are in the same level of fetch quests in MMO to me.
    • Look at Skyrim's radiant quests. They are as shallow as fetch quests or Village Issues, but they reinforce the game's core mechanic of exploration and, therefore, are actually meaningful.
    • I use that as an example to showcase that Village Issues add nothing to the game except yet another Skinner Box to fool the player into thinking the game has content.
  • Economy is complex but that does not automatically mean fun. The economy is mostly manipulated through passive means (caravans and workshops) instead through player agency. Worst of all, it is convoluted from the players perspective and it does not tie itself back to any other system of gameplay in meaningful ways.
  • Diplomacy is similar, the system seems complex enough to handle interesting scenarios but it fails for three main reasons:
    • 1. Very little player agency until late game
    • 2. Many many policies with very small impacts. At one point I was in a kingdom with half of all the policies active and it felt 0% different than if none of them were active.
    • 3. It, again, does not tie into any other mechanic in the game.
      • Why as one of the most powerful merchants in Calradia I cannot affect Kingdom policies accross multiple factions?
      • Why as one of the most powerful lords in my faction I cannot "punch above my clan weight"?
  • Role playing is impossible outside of player imagination. None of the game mechanics really support RP focused play. This is fine if it is by design, but if you want to be an Action game with RP+Strategy features sprinkled in (leveling system, character creation, troop tactics), make sure that these supporting mechanics actually, you know, support your core game mechanic (Action). Throwing mechanics in game because it feelslike they should be there is poor game design.
    • The traits are something particularly egregious (honour, devious, etc). Nothing ties into this from a player perspective.
  • Disjoint game mechanics. I have touched on this in my points above but it really needs its own bullet. NONE of the game mecahnics interact in meaningful ways.
    • Issues/Quests have no real effect appart from very small effects on village/town economy and recruiting through notable power tanking. So technically it ties into war and economy, but in such a small way as to not be there at all.
    • Economy and Diplomacy, as noted above, are almost completely separate systems
    • War is CONSTANT and therefore BORING
    • Character progression does not introduce any new player mechanic, it is ALL passive apart from very few perks like the "everything has a price". (I dislike that perk for RP reasons, but at least it unlocks something new)
  • The world does not tell a story. There is very little sense of history or the impact of the passage of time. This is different from having a Main Quest line. Games can tell a compelling story without having a predefined narrative, just look at CK2.

And I agree that all the games mechanic are not fully impemented (Economy, War, Diplomacy, Leveling, Troop Tactics, etc.), but even at their partial state it is evident that there is little connecting tissue between them.

It feels like the game was "designed" by a group of people saying "Oh, mechanic X is cool, lets add that" instead of "What is the essence of Bannerlord? OK, let's add mechanics that reinforce that".

Anyway, I'm in a Zoom meeting and should get to work :wink:

Ha-see you had your Bullet Point Button hot and ready. Agree with post though -well thought out, delivered and presented. You're hired!
 
Snowballing is a problem in a game that advertises a succession system. As I said, what is the point of a succession system if the game is essentially over in one characters lifetime?

As I've said in lots of other threads they really just need a dynamic solution to this, like rebellion. "snowballing" will always happen eventually, so there needs to be a way to make sure the wars are always churning, and that means that empires are going to need to splinter somehow.

The alternative is having kingdoms that pretty much never change due to ineffectual wars, which is just kind of boring.
 

Clanker

Regular
As I've said in lots of other threads they really just need a dynamic solution to this, like rebellion. "snowballing" will always happen eventually, so there needs to be a way to make sure the wars are always churning, and that means that empires are going to need to splinter somehow.

The alternative is having kingdoms that pretty much never change due to ineffectual wars, which is just kind of boring.
They could include an alliance system or temporary ones that happen if one faction gets too strong too fast. A coalition war essentially.
 

Bob Gnarly

Sergeant at Arms
In Bannerlord, fighting is really fun. But it is the only fun part of the game. And only in the early-mid game as afterwards your army is so large that you are forced into a commander role.

Couldn't agree more with this statement.

For me, the most fun is at the start when I'm still forming a small warband and doing no more than 50 v 50 battles. As soon as the larger battles start, this is where the fun starts to fizzle out.

And I agree that all the games mechanic are not fully impemented (Economy, War, Diplomacy, Leveling, Troop Tactics, etc.), but even at their partial state it is evident that there is little connective tissue between them.

These mechanics need to be implemented and polished asap. Without these, we have to rely on mods to get that variety in gameplay we're looking for. Where's the civil wars? Where's the threat of power from mercenary clans? Gangs should play more of a role. So much more that could be added and improved on.

All the other gameplay features in the game are some form of a Skinner Box.
  • Village Issues are terrible and allow for almost 0 roleplay. Honestly they are in the same level of fetch quests in MMO to me.
    • Look at Skyrim's radiant quests. They are as shallow as fetch quests or Village Issues, but they reinforce the game's core mechanic of exploration and, therefore, are actually meaningful.
    • I use that as an example to showcase that Village Issues add nothing to the game except yet another Skinner Box to fool the player into thinking the game has content.
  • Economy is complex but that does not automatically mean fun. The economy is mostly manipulated through passive means (caravans and workshops) instead through player agency. Worst of all, it is convoluted from the players perspective and it does not tie itself back to any other system of gameplay in meaningful ways.
  • Diplomacy is similar, the system seems complex enough to handle interesting scenarios but it fails for three main reasons:
    • 1. Very little player agency until late game
    • 2. Many many policies with very small impacts. At one point I was in a kingdom with half of all the policies active and it felt 0% different than if none of them were active.
    • 3. It, again, does not tie into any other mechanic in the game.
      • Why as one of the most powerful merchants in Calradia I cannot affect Kingdom policies accross multiple factions?
      • Why as one of the most powerful lords in my faction I cannot "punch above my clan weight"?
  • Role playing is impossible outside of player imagination. None of the game mechanics really support RP focused play. This is fine if it is by design, but if you want to be an Action game with RP+Strategy features sprinkled in (leveling system, character creation, troop tactics), make sure that these supporting mechanics actually, you know, support your core game mechanic (Action). Throwing mechanics in game because it feels like they should be there is poor game design.
    • The traits are something particularly egregious (honour, devious, etc). Nothing ties into this from a player perspective.
  • Disjoint game mechanics. I have touched on this in my points above but it really needs its own bullet. NONE of the game mecahnics interact in meaningful ways.
  • War is CONSTANT and therefore BORING
  • Character progression does not introduce any new player mechanic, it is ALL passive apart from very few perks like the "everything has a price". (I dislike that perk for RP reasons, but at least it unlocks something new)
  • The world does not tell a story. There is very little sense of history or the impact of the passage of time. This is different from having a Main Quest line. Games can tell a compelling story without having a predefined narrative, just look at CK2.
These are all on point (y)
 
Top Bottom