Tackling the captured lord issue.

[NordicWill]

Hello all! New to this site but am a vet with warband. I'm excited that Bannerlord is here with us but i hit a dry point in the game (i understand its EA).
I feel fighting the same lords attacking the same villages over and over again makes the game feel stale at this point. I haven't played the single player in like a week. Executing a lord/king shouldn't imo change too much (please don't make this the topic of this thread)at the moment. I think instead the focus should be on the captured lord/king instead.

I think when a lord is defeated and imprisoned they should ONLY be let go/freed when.

1) ransomed back for $.
2) traded for a vassal of your kingdom that is also locked up.
3) Has a high enough skill to escape (cunning, athletics, and intelligence required).
*this should also matter more if prisoner to a party or in a dungeon.
4) Diplomacy- To end a siege, end war, terms of peace, AGREED TO NOT ATTACK MY VILLAGE (for a set time frame), etc.

When a captured lord is freed. They should lose relationship points within their own kingdom. The lord/king lost a battle, their reputation is weaken imo. Now maybe not when you are fighting in a last stand kind of moment. Solo defending a city or castle that you are outnumbered 4:1 should give you a boost in the good relations.

Here are some things i think should happen when the lord is free again.

- Escorted back by enemy lord to their castle/city, their kings city, or picked up by a lord from own faction. (which gives you enemy or friendly better relations as well)
- Once back with faction (either settlement or party). they must stay within that settlement/party for a week. Their health is low and they need proper rest.
- Once rested, given 30 troops to set off again. Not all recruits, give them balance.
- Defeated lords, depending on trait, should either become more defensive minded or eager to rebound in war campaign strategy. Maybe they stay at their castle or area to rebuild and patrol.

Side note. I think bandit parties and looters need to be addressed also. I know the hideout issue is one thing but too many lords are lost to bandits far too common in my game play. I know the game is all about battles but ive been in far too many at this point with the same lords that executing them shouldn't be the only option.

Would love to hear feedback to this and hear what other think and would add to this.

 

[TheChewieShow]

I mean.. yea you nailed it. I made a post about the exact same issue. Fo me the two main issues are the random war declaring by my Kingdom (Conspiracy quest repeating itself) and that lords are just ninjas that slip away instantly when captured and come back with 100 troops after 2 days or so.

I also think that executing lords should only give you bad relationship with their family and members of their faction/ good friends. I hate it when I execute a lord and get a bad rep with one of their own enemies or a guy that left their faction has rep of 0 with them.

Also if you execute a king or a ruler of the faction, the factions should go into chaos... something like a civil war, or at least have some kind of internal conflict that would affect their readiness for war.

 

[NordicWill]

I also think that executing lords should only give you bad relationship with their family and members of their faction/ good friends. I hate it when I execute a lord and get a bad rep with one of their own enemies or a guy that left their faction has rep of 0 with them.

Also if you execute a king or a ruler of the faction, the factions should go into chaos... something like a civil war, or at least have some kind of internal conflict that would affect their readiness for war.

Those would great compared to our current gameplay. I remember killing a king for one of the empires and nothing changed. Like the war didn't end. No one spoke of peace. I was so bummed.

 

[TheChewieShow]

Those would great compared to our current gameplay. I remember killing a king for one of the empires and nothing changed. Like the war didn't end. No one spoke of peace. I was so bummed.

Yea. like i get it its Early access but still... the modders on Nexus already done some pretty interesting stuff while only working on the game for a month, the devs had 10 years and the game is not much different than Warband was when that came out (In terms of gameplay)

 

[NordicWill]

Yea. like i get it its Early access but still... the modders on Nexus already done some pretty interesting stuff while only working on the game for a month, the devs had 10 years and the game is not much different than Warband was when that came out (In terms of gameplay)

Agreed. I feel the same way but i try to be careful with my wording because i see all the "defenders" swarm in at any critique or realistic review of how much is left out when Viking conquest should have been the model from the get go.

 

[TheChewieShow]

Agreed. I feel the same way but i try to be careful with my wording because i see all the "defenders" swarm in at any critique or realistic review of how much is left out when Viking conquest should have been the model from the get go.

You gonna see simps and white knights in any community, so for me it doesn't really matter lol

 

[BlackRainZ]

Agreed. I feel the same way but i try to be careful with my wording because i see all the "defenders" swarm in at any critique or realistic review of how much is left out when Viking conquest should have been the model from the get go.

But why would Viking Conquest be the model from the get go? Taleworlds didn't make Viking Conquest. You don't even know how much involvement they had in it at all, maybe they hardly had any. Only technical stuff.

 

[Kniggit]

Yes, just yes. Nailed it

There is so much more that could be done with prisoners from a diplomatic stance that is just not in the game currently.
- When 2 factions negotiate a peace, prisoner exchange should be part of that agreement.
- Having them be bound to cease-fire orders for a time period if you let them go would be ideal.
- The "cooldown" period you suggested of a week where they can't leave their settlement would also be nice.

With that stuff in place I wouldn't feel compelled to execute every lord I defeat and capture. I believe ideas like this are in the future, what we have in the game now is not feature complete by any means, so I'm hopeful.

 

[Midnitewolf]

The problem is that lords actually need to be able to escape or else eventually your playing a game where all but 3 lords are locked up rotting in a dungeon. This doesn't mean their can be a ton more content and game play added around the defeated lords mechanic, but at the end of the day, a good amount of the lords do actually need to be actively in play to make the game fun. Honestly, I think the simple fix is just to make it harder for lords to escape and/or make it harder for lords to recover from defeat. I also think there needs to be a much more complex war attrition mechanic added where factions actively look at their capability to engage in and win a war. Hopefully that mechanic allow stops factions from declaring war against another faction unless it actually borders that faction as well as has factions actively trying to avoid war on multiple fronts among other things.

 

[black_bulldog]

OP I like a lot of the things you're saying but there needs to be a way for lords to return after a certain amount of time. If you can hold lords hostage indefinitely that kind of breaks the game. Holding lords indefinitely is just a less harsh way of executed a lord without the hit to your rep.
Obtw as far as point 3 there's no need for that because if there is minimum requirement for them to free themselves then TW could just give every lord a minimum in one category.

 

[NordicWill]

- Having them be bound to cease-fire orders for a time period if you let them go would be ideal.

I like that idea. Yeah i totally understand the EA title and hope most of these features will come along.

 

[NordicWill]

The problem is that lords actually need to be able to escape or else eventually your playing a game where all but 3 lords are locked up rotting in a dungeon. This doesn't mean their can be a ton more content and game play added around the defeated lords mechanic, but at the end of the day, a good amount of the lords do actually need to be actively in play to make the game fun. Honestly, I think the simple fix is just to make it harder for lords to escape and/or make it harder for lords to recover from defeat. I also think there needs to be a much more complex war attrition mechanic added where factions actively look at their capability to engage in and win a war. Hopefully that mechanic allow stops factions from declaring war against another faction unless it actually borders that faction as well as has factions actively trying to avoid war on multiple fronts among other things.

Yeah i get that and im sure a counterbalance of the Lord's appointed "next in command" for if they were to be locked up would be difficult to add. I think the battles should be more controlled with aspects like attrition, morale, logistics, camping, ambushing, etc to handle overall control of easy sweeping out of a lord less kingdom. I feel battles are too common and large armies going 3 castles deep to take out a capital without any counter of ambushing camps, cutting supply lines, men abandoning campaign, needs to be also added. Maybe add that if you refuse to give up a captured lord and your king supports the deal that was purposed to you, you run the risk of traits loss or changing, with also negative relations within your kingdom. That and maybe the Kingdom also makes offers you would be dumb to refuse. Like post war tax revenues for the next "insert weeks of __$" or goods that Lords villages produce. These are ideas i know aren't likely to happen but man a boy can dream lol.

 

[NordicWill]

OP I like a lot of the things you're saying but there needs to be a way for lords to return after a certain amount of time. If you can hold lords hostage indefinitely that kind of breaks the game. Holding lords indefinitely is just a less harsh way of executed a lord without the hit to your rep.

Yeah i can understand that and my reply to Midnitewolf i feel can maybe help fix further issues. Idk i don't develop games or mods so i understand this is a lot to task.

Obtw as far as point 3 there's no need for that because if there is minimum requirement for them to free themselves then TW could just give every lord a minimum in one category.

Fair enough. I was hoping maybe different lords escape different ways. Like you get a report while in your castle resting (which i think should be more of a thing that is impacting for you and your party) that a lord is attempting to escape and you must pick a few troops from your keep to assist you in fighting them within your castle.

 

[NordicWill]

But why would Viking Conquest be the model from the get go? Taleworlds didn't make Viking Conquest. You don't even know how much involvement they had in it at all, maybe they hardly had any. Only technical stuff.

Yeah you're right i didnt know that. my bad. Still think they could take things from that and "adjust lol" to make it their own. Im clearly speaking out of wishful ignorance in all this.

 

[NordicWill]

You gonna see simps and white knights in any community, so for me it doesn't really matter lol

True m8 lol

 

[Agroplode]

I played with some mods and without noticing it at first, the game just felt good.There are many good mods, if they can make it work, there is hope TW will make it work.

 

[Hugo_Stiglitz]

Hello all! New to this site but am a vet with warband. I'm excited that Bannerlord is here with us but i hit a dry point in the game (i understand its EA).
I feel fighting the same lords attacking the same villages over and over again makes the game feel stale at this point. I haven't played the single player in like a week. Executing a lord/king shouldn't imo change too much (please don't make this the topic of this thread)at the moment. I think instead the focus should be on the captured lord/king instead.

I think when a lord is defeated and imprisoned they should ONLY be let go/freed when.

1) ransomed back for $.
2) traded for a vassal of your kingdom that is also locked up.
3) Has a high enough skill to escape (cunning, athletics, and intelligence required).
*this should also matter more if prisoner to a party or in a dungeon.
4) Diplomacy- To end a siege, end war, terms of peace, AGREED TO NOT ATTACK MY VILLAGE (for a set time frame), etc.

When a captured lord is freed. They should lose relationship points within their own kingdom. The lord/king lost a battle, their reputation is weaken imo. Now maybe not when you are fighting in a last stand kind of moment. Solo defending a city or castle that you are outnumbered 4:1 should give you a boost in the good relations.

Here are some things i think should happen when the lord is free again.

- Escorted back by enemy lord to their castle/city, their kings city, or picked up by a lord from own faction. (which gives you enemy or friendly better relations as well)
- Once back with faction (either settlement or party). they must stay within that settlement/party for a week. Their health is low and they need proper rest.
- Once rested, given 30 troops to set off again. Not all recruits, give them balance.
- Defeated lords, depending on trait, should either become more defensive minded or eager to rebound in war campaign strategy. Maybe they stay at their castle or area to rebuild and patrol.

Side note. I think bandit parties and looters need to be addressed also. I know the hideout issue is one thing but too many lords are lost to bandits far too common in my game play. I know the game is all about battles but ive been in far too many at this point with the same lords that executing them shouldn't be the only option.

Would love to hear feedback to this and hear what other think and would add to this.

Great concepts. I hope someone is listening! Please copy and paste this post to Single Player/Suggestions/Campaign

 

[xdj1nn]

Agreed. I feel the same way but i try to be careful with my wording because i see all the "defenders" swarm in at any critique or realistic review of how much is left out when Viking conquest should have been the model from the get go.

Viking conquest is decent, but it's not exemplary. If you're talking about "sea-battles", well, that **** doesn't even make sense in the map of Calradia...

VC does right by copying succesful mods in some areas, in others it's their own creativity that is exemplary (spears for instance) Though they did turn Bows into cushion slings, which's not good design (they've done the same with Brytenwald, their mod). In fact, VC is basically an improved Brytenwalda capitalizing over the success of Vikings TV Show.

They use Diplomacy OSP mod for Warband, along with Formations OSP mod, so on so forth... They did a pretty good job on sea-battles, though. But most of it is a frankenstein stich-up project of many functional mods for Warband. Don't get me wrong, I admire the effort, but VC is an amateur job, not a professional one.

 

[SmattlePattle]

Don't get me wrong, I admire the effort, but VC is an amateur job, not a professional one.

Yet it still put out a product that feature wise is more expansive, engaging, and gameplay rewarding than BL at present. It just suffers from being on a 10year old base game.

If that's what amateurs can do, TW as professionals should be progressing past them, not sitting in their dust at present. The fact that BL's formations are worse than the formations OSP mod for warband, is a glaring sign about TW not paying enough attention to what other people can accomplish with their engine.