If you don't like realism (weird as this game if you haven't noticed is trying to depict reality) then consider that it's just a square unfair advantage to have xx amount of horses in your party without there being *any* downsides to it. So it's from a realism and from a gameplay perspective problematic imo. On the other hand I love that I have the option of customizing the size of my inventory and gamespeed with this mechanic. I am not asking for a huge punishment though. Don't get me wrong.
-
If you are reporting a bug, please head over to our Technical Support section for Bannerlord.
SP - World Map Suggestion: Horses should be fed
Users who are viewing this thread
If you don't like realism (weird as this game if you haven't noticed is trying to depict reality) then consider that it's just a square unfair advantage to have xx amount of horses in your party without there being *any* downsides to it. So it's from a realism and from a gameplay perspective problematic imo. On the other hand I love that I have the option of customizing the size of my inventory and gamespeed with this mechanic. I am not asking for a huge punishment though. Don't get me wrong.
Well i'm just saying 'realism' isn't really an argument in a game with so many specifically designed shortcomings to it's realism.
I mean we've got mixed period weapons and armor, with mixed period armies and such. And a lot of that to seemingly make cavallery less powerful.
But i'm in favour of rebalancing on map party speeds. Because let's face it on-foot peasants in Khuzait territory just getting eaten up by unchaseable Steppe Bandits is just bad...
So do you want an accurate camel train? Half your herd carrying fodder. A quarter carrying gear the other quarter carrying jour trade goods?
Naah... it's a game.
Although I miss the camping at night mod. But the AI wouldn't camp.
Naah... it's a game.
Although I miss the camping at night mod. But the AI wouldn't camp.
As someone else said then there should be higher wages to be paid to people who lead your horses+to account for higher food intake, even if the horses are not hacking away at your grain.
Last edited:
alexpro618
Recruit
-1 I think it's pretty grindy already
I remember when I have over a thousand horse (from using cheat and defeat tons of cavalry) I have a big speed penalty from have herd. So unless I am mistaken, having too many horse do have downside. And your suggestion to make horses eat food is not effective to counter the having too many horse compare to your party size. It just encourage people to keep even more horses because the capacity of each horse is reduced, due to the food have to carry. And depends on the penalty of not having food for the horse, it can total destroy AI cavalry. By the time you have too many horses to be reasonable for your party, I can hardly imagine needing a little more food will have any impact. The feature will only bring more hardship for early game, where you have little money. So as a whole, I don't see any reason for the horse food feature.
+1
I think before TW do something about it, we should use easy setting for party speed. With the path-finding skill gone, it is impossible to catch-up with any riding party, and the perks from scouting and background feats is almost useless at the moment.
Good suggestion. A good basis in realism and would help balance one of the current issues in the game.
However, I do wish AI parties would buy less horses. It's a bit unfair in the early game to be chased down by every enemy lord and being unable to escape because you don't have a bunch of money to spend on horses yet.
However, I do wish AI parties would buy less horses. It's a bit unfair in the early game to be chased down by every enemy lord and being unable to escape because you don't have a bunch of money to spend on horses yet.
Maybe this should just be an easy solution: the horses need only a bit food, but it stacks up that when you have over a hundred sumpter horses that you have to feed an another army. Maybe even raise the need exponentially and make it a selectable option in the campaign options.
Don't they eat grass? Seems too much to me to require feeding them only in the desert or heavy snow.
Desert, snow, forests, high mountains. That's only half of the map.
Realism aside, that would help keeping kingdoms to their homeland, and slows down snowballing. Khergits can't go too deep into Sturgian lands with all those horsies.
Question to all the people who think it's tedious: would you like food and wages removed, as they are exactly as tedious, and serve the same purpose?
+1 from me.
Realism aside, that would help keeping kingdoms to their homeland, and slows down snowballing. Khergits can't go too deep into Sturgian lands with all those horsies.
Question to all the people who think it's tedious: would you like food and wages removed, as they are exactly as tedious, and serve the same purpose?
+1 from me.
KergitHorseArcher
Recruit
Steppe horses can manage only with grass. Most of the other horse types requires grain to stay alive.
PenisMightier
Recruit
Have you ever owned or traveled with a horse? I'm sorry but you seem like you don't know what you're talking about.
Tedious ? I've never add issue with it and it's too easy to handle.
Horse need a food cosumption and some sort of food (like meat) need to degrade.
The problem here is that while the player usually manages their food fine, armies do not. So if you degrade or do anything to make the food system harder for the player, it will destroy all the AI. So until they fix the AI behavior, you would make things worse, not better.
Of course the AI needs to be adapted for it, but they're already having to buy food, this is just a modifier they need to adjust.
