Something is rotten in Calradia

Users who are viewing this thread

Battles are leading class, leaving others in the dust.

Strategic game play needs work and depth, true, well known. Wait 12 months, hopefully modders can add a lot more depth .. and breadth ..
 
I wasn't really around to hear the feedback when the last major patch came out, but reading the patch notes, it seemed grossly underwhelming considering the what, almost two month wait? For what seems like some bug fixes and crash fixes, with pretty much no notable new features or overhauls? To be fair I haven't wasted my time trying to play this game since early May, but correct me if I'm wrong.
 
I wasn't really around to hear the feedback when the last major patch came out, but reading the patch notes, it seemed grossly underwhelming considering the what, almost two month wait? For what seems like some bug fixes and crash fixes, with pretty much no notable new features or overhauls? To be fair I haven't wasted my time trying to play this game since early May, but correct me if I'm wrong.

Nope, you have not missed much. 1.4.3 has introduced a lot of bugs to old systems that were working, I expect we will be here in this beta for quite some time before there's any content besides hot fixes.
 
I wasn't really around to hear the feedback when the last major patch came out, but reading the patch notes, it seemed grossly underwhelming considering the what, almost two month wait? For what seems like some bug fixes and crash fixes, with pretty much no notable new features or overhauls? To be fair I haven't wasted my time trying to play this game since early May, but correct me if I'm wrong.
The reason for the long turn around is they performed a major code refactor.
 
Well I think gameplay wise it's suppose to feel like your transitioning from a rag-tag group of mercenaries, of which you lead and fight with, to a general who is there for combat but takes on a larger role. I imagine ideally this transition would mean shifting the enjoyment you get from personally fighting yourself to maintaining and organizing huge armies and eventually entire fiefs and then inevitably entire kingdoms.

The problem lies in the fact that everything beyond 3rd person combat is shallow, lackluster, and mostly tedious as opposed to fun. The amount of control you have over your army is negligible and/or unwieldy in combat, the fief management is boring and linear, the kingdom management is non existent, politics also doesn't really exist, companions are copy paste, and playing the economy is just exploiting whatever ****ty (smithing) disconnected system you can.

In order for the system to work, transitioning from mostly participating in combat yourself to managing your army/kingdom in all facets should be fun. But the games mechanics, from the ground up right now, just don't facilitate that fun. That's why you see so many people wanting perks and character progression and easier to get equipment. The actual strategy part of the game is ankle deep and what is there isn't even that fun, not really difficult, just tedious. And that's a problem that strategy games trying to be "good" often struggle with. You can have a relatively non-complex strategy game that's great as long as the enjoyment and difficult curve is there, but difficult does not mean tedious or boring, that just makes a bad strategy game.

I think the game has a long way to go in order to make that strategy element get even close to the personal combat element.
 
Last edited:
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.

tbf StewVader's post is actually fairly on point and well constructed. Most of what he talks about are issues. However most of what he talks about have also already been acknowledged by TW as something that will be addressed through additional content released before the game leaves EA which does make it somewhat pointless.

Agreed MostBlunted is just his usual self though with his usual fanboy ad hominems and launching personal attacks on TW.
 
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.
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.
Introductory paragraph serving as a high-level overview.

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)...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)...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.
Specific, detailed use cases and current bandaid solution. Sets the context well. States that even with so many sources of passive income, he still can't pay the upkeep of his moderately sized, average tiered army.

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.
Focused feedback on AI respawn mechanics. Not embellished whatsoever, impartial, even offers ideas on adding new mechanics to fill in the void.
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.
More feedback on the end-user experience. Unfortunately, due to poor integration with other systems, the game has effectively concluded by the time the player has accrued notable amounts of influence.

This is the type of specific feedback that companies would love to receive from their focus groups, and what I presume TW is looking for in this EA phase. I'm disappointed to see "If you don't like it, move on" be so frequently espoused. TW is incredibly fortunate to have players as passionate and patient as @StewVader take their time to write out their experiences in such a fashion. Even if not all the posts we've seen thus far are as well-constructed, volume is a quality in its own right. One person writing that a system feels bad can be a troll, but if dozens of people echo the same sentiment? That's something worth looking into.
 
@StewVader how many companions did you have in your party? I found having too many of them before you have stable income can cause major issues (they ****ing cost 20-40 a day, your own brother costs 44/day). I'm on my 2nd run through (of 1.4.3) and at the point i make 1k-3k daily owning 3 towns, 3 caravans and no workshops (no point in investing in them right now) and now i have 3 party leader companions (because the family bug wont let them lead anymore) and 1 surgeon. I refuse to smith to gain money. Now i will admit my first run through i couldn't become financialy stable because i had too many companions and too high tier (anything above tier 3) an army even with only 50 of them. 2nd run through i spent the beginning not leveling my army past tier 3 and only getting caravan companions, running around the map doing tournies until I could pay for my meager tier 3 army before advancing to create my kingdom. Also being a mercenary for a high paying faction can help in the start (got 330 a influence from battanians on 2nd run through). Proof
 
Last edited:
I had 400/influence point on my khuzait playthrough by mercing for the North empire before I was ready to join the khuzaits. They ended up in a war against the khuzaits, west empire, and for whatever reason vlandia. I think the battanians eventually joined in too but at the point they peaced out someone. If you can find a nook where you can pick on newly respawned lords and bandits you can rack up influence really quick and at one point I think I was brining in over 2k in net income per day, not including spoils.
 
"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
  • Disjoint game mechanics. I have touched on this in my points above but it reallyneeds 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)
Anyway, I'm in a Zoom meeting and should get to work :wink:
@StewVader how many companions did you have in your party? I found having too many of them before you have stable income can cause major issues (they ****ing cost 20-40 a day, your own brother costs 44/day). I'm on my 2nd run through (of 1.4.3) and at the point i make 1k-3k daily owning 3 towns, 3 caravans and no workshops (no point in investing in them right now) and now i have 3 party leader companions (because the family bug wont let them lead anymore) and 1 surgeon. I refuse to smith to gain money. Now i will admit my first run through i couldn't become financialy stable because i had too many companions and too high tier (anything above tier 3) an army even with only 50 of them. 2nd run through i spent the beginning not leveling my army past tier 3 and only getting caravan companions, running around the map doing tournies until I could pay for my meager tier 3 army before advancing to create my kingdom. Also being a mercenary for a high paying faction can help in the start (got 330 a influence from battanians on 2nd run through). Proof

To answer your question I had 3 companions (all caravaners), wife and brother. The problem is obviously that workshops and caravans have been over tuned and do not provide nearly enough ROI. For some reason TW must think passive income = bad, and selling over priced items= good. I just don't get it. Perhaps when they fix the stewardship perk (which they should prioritize since its the best skill) things will be better?

Separately, what day are you on for your 2nd play through? And are you using mods? In my overall experience, being awarded towns doesn't really happen until endgame (clan level 5) or if you get really lucky timing. Clan level is a big part of the award calculation.
 
:roll: They already said they are working on fixing workshop and caravans to be profitable again.

Can you actually site where? Because the last dev comment I saw said they were satisfied with keeping workshop income low and even capped. So not sure where you read that.
 
To answer your question I had 3 companions (all caravaners), wife and brother. The problem is obviously that workshops and caravans have been over tuned and do not provide nearly enough ROI. For some reason TW must think passive income = bad, and selling over priced items= good. I just don't get it. Perhaps when they fix the stewardship perk (which they should prioritize since its the best skill) things will be better?

Separately, what day are you on for your 2nd play through? And are you using mods? In my overall experience, being awarded towns doesn't really happen until endgame (clan level 5) or if you get really lucky timing. Clan level is a big part of the award calculation.
Right now im day 582 half way through clan lvl 4. No mods, i did edit the banner color file to replace the black hex code with the purple you see in the pic. My caravans have been doing great (i agree on the workshops), I also started them all on separate parts of the map (Aserai, Khuzait, Sturgia and you can see in the pic they range from 100 - 1k a day). I got all three of my sturgian towns as a vassal of Valandia and made sure before each siege i had 100 influence to vote on myself and ensure I got it (I was only clan lvl 3, make sure to join as a vassal right before they siege the town you want to start with that way you have the no fief bonus, i was mercenary in their army beforehand, other towns will be easy if close proximity and you are leading the army).
 
Can you actually site where? Because the last dev comment I saw said they were satisfied with keeping workshop income low and even capped. So not sure where you read that.

And I think the hotfix they released today is the one that included it:

  • Default trade penalty (buy-sell price difference from average) is reduced to 8% from 10%.
 
Agree with the sentiments of this thread. Bannerlord is the only game I afforded myself to buy into the hype for, and I was sorely disappointed for doing so.

The game in its current form is not worth purchasing, at all. And very unfortunately I'm not 100% sure Taleworlds is capable of changing that. If the game is truly moddable and the modding tools are good, then some good people can down the road make Bannerlord a good and fun experience, but considering the shallowness of the game right now.. no, it's not a good game.
 
Jesus christ. I have been away from the forums for ages, but I can't believe how spoiled people are. There is so much negative feedback. Do not buy, do not play if you don't like it.

What is with the whole negativity? If you have something to contribute, go ahead and suggest. Why try to break the dev's morale? What is the point of this toxicity?
 
The game in its current form is not worth purchasing, at all. And very unfortunately I'm not 100% sure Taleworlds is capable of changing that. If the game is truly moddable and the modding tools are good, then some good people can down the road make Bannerlord a good and fun experience, but considering the shallowness of the game right now.. no, it's not a good game.

The disclaimer flat out said if you were looking for a finished game to wait for the final release.
 
Jesus christ. I have been away from the forums for ages, but I can't believe how spoiled people are. There is so much negative feedback. Do not buy, do not play if you don't like it.
Best argument!

But if I don´t buy and play it, how can I know that Bannerlord is "bad"? Seems legit.
 
Back
Top Bottom