The whole "buy horse to level up troops to horsemen" thing is illogical

Users who are viewing this thread

I think the good solution for time being might be an option like with death and no death settings from the start of new campaign to have also option to have horses individually required by player as it is now or horse would be in level upgrade included like "gear", same as in predecessors.

I understand that to make AI to take care of horses same way as player and in some regions where are no horses produced (Sturgia) would take much more work to figure out that than this option to choose.

I even would welcome to have "noble" units optionable either as we have now or having option to make T5 unit into noble line perhaps starting as T3 with possibility to level up ofc. (Main reason Batania - archers, and Empire - unlike other bandits the looters will not change to viglas.)

When seeing such different behavour of leaders of factions toward their nobles - like some never giving any fiefs so nobles (for me Sturgian leader seems worst) leave I would like also an option to have "deafult" behaviour for faction leaders or unique as we have.
 
Last edited:

mexxico

Sergeant Knight
Need of horse to upgrade horseman troops is a good feature in many ways.

If this rule was not be there most players would try to reach horseman troops all the time because they have several advantages compared to infantry troops both at combat and at map (speed bonus). By this rule we made reaching horseman troops a bit harder.

You can say why we are not paying other equipments of troops and answer of this question is making that kind of system needs so much work and balance. To allow this high tier equipments needed for one troop should cost 2K at most. First we need to make these equipments so cheap and player will be able to buy them from 10th day of game with first quest earnings (which is not good for gameplay). Also as player we should pay this cost to upgrade each troop and maybe we can get 1-1.5K as return from old equipments. Still in this case you need to pay about 1K per troop. This can be a design choice another game can try something like this but this system make Bannerlord completely different game. As player you need to earn 10Ks denar each day to be able to pay these upgrade costs if this is the case. Maybe in this scenario we can give all equipment from killed troops without applying a ratio as loot. However doing this make winning a battle totally a very profitable action then you will not need any trading actions or tax from settlements and also kingdoms lost several battles will left so weak aganist winners which would make snowballing problem worse.

As I said some other game can try this but it will have completely different gameplay from M&B series and it will have different dynamics.
 
Last edited:

Stromming

Sergeant at Arms
WBWF&SNWVC
Need of horse to upgrade horseman troops is a good feature in many ways.

If this rule was not be there most players would try to reach horseman troops all the time because they have several advantages compared to infantry troops both at combat and at map (speed bonus). By this rule we made reaching horseman troops a bit harder.

You can say why we are not paying other equipments of troops and answer of this question is making that kind of system needs so much work and balance. To allow this high tier equipments needed for one troop should cost 2K at most. First we need to make these equipments so cheap and player will be able to buy them from 10th day of game with first quest earnings (which is not good for gameplay). Also as player we should pay this cost to upgrade each troop and maybe we can get 1-1.5K as return from old equipments. Still in this case you need to pay about 1K per troop. This can be a design choice another game can try something like this but this system make Bannerlord completely different game. As player you need to earn 10s denar each day if this is the case. Maybe we can give all equipment from killed troops without applying a ratio. However doing this make winning a battle totally a very profitable action then you will not need any trading actions or tax from settlements.

As I said some other game can try this but it will have completely different gameplay from M&B series.
I think most people are fine with players buying horses for troops. I like it too.
What I think most people have a problem with is the fact that AI cheat and don't need to buy horses / pay more for cavalry, and that we don't get horses back on upgrade to warhorse.
 

mexxico

Sergeant Knight
I think most people are fine with players buying horses for troops. I like it too.
What I think most people have a problem with is the fact that AI cheat and don't need to buy horses / pay more for cavalry, and that we don't get horses back on upgrade to warhorse.

I hope we can get rid of this AI cheat in future. I want to remove it too. If approved it can be removed in future patches.
 

ImperialDane

Regular
Honestly i like the idea. Makes sense and makes getting the cavalry feel a bit special. If anything it would be interesting to see similar requirements for higher tier stuff. Ie get X level armour for them for example. Though logistically that might be too much of a pain in the posterior.
 

Julio-Claudian

Knight at Arms
I'd like to see more of this actually. I wish it were way more expensive or difficult to upgrade infantry to the top tiers. Can upgrade costs be easily edited in the game files?
 

mexxico

Sergeant Knight
I'd like to see more of this actually. I wish it were way more expensive or difficult to upgrade infantry to the top tiers. Can upgrade costs be easily edited in the game files?

It can be done easily. However problem is there is actually no big power difference between low tier troops and high tier troops. For example at simulations 1 x tier-5 troop is equal to 3 x tier-1 troop thats why sometimes you lose your high tier troop to a looter (it is also related to how simulations work it seems, i have less control over there). Also tier-5 troop wage is 12 / day and tier-1 troop wage is 2 / day. In these conditions if we make upgrades more expensive people can stop upgrading their troops. First we need to make high tier troops much more powerfull than low tier troops in both simulations and missions then we can increase upgrade costs / recruit cost of high tier troops.
 

Stromming

Sergeant at Arms
WBWF&SNWVC
It can be done easily. However problem is there is actually no big power difference between low tier troops and high tier troops. For example at simulations 1 x tier-5 troop is equal to 3 x tier-1 troop thats why sometimes you lose your high tier troop to a looter (it is also related to how simulations work it seems, i have less control over there). Also tier-5 troop wage is 12 / day and tier-1 troop wage is 2 / day. In these conditions if we make upgrades more expensive people can stop upgrading their troops. First we need to make high tier troops much more powerfull than low tier troops in both simulations and missions then we can increase upgrade costs / recruit cost of high tier troops.
LOL really?

1 T5 is equal to 3 T1? :grin: Should be a bigger power difference.
That being said, I am not against making them more expensive and harder to get to justify the power difference :smile:
 

Askorti

Sergeant Knight at Arms
WB
It can be done easily. However problem is there is actually no big power difference between low tier troops and high tier troops. For example at simulations 1 x tier-5 troop is equal to 3 x tier-1 troop thats why sometimes you lose your high tier troop to a looter (it is also related to how simulations work it seems, i have less control over there). Also tier-5 troop wage is 12 / day and tier-1 troop wage is 2 / day. In these conditions if we make upgrades more expensive people can stop upgrading their troops. First we need to make high tier troops much more powerfull than low tier troops in both simulations and missions then we can increase upgrade costs / recruit cost of high tier troops.
If a T5 troop is merely 3x as strong as a T1 one in simulations, then it is the simulation that is very clearly botched.
Because in field battles it is very clear that T5 troops are much stronger than that. And dont get me started on T5 cav or T5 archers vs T1 infantry, because then it gets downright silly.

In my opinion T5 units should be stronger in simulations, but also more expensive across the board. I think T3-T-4 should make the bulk of most armies, the player's included.
 

Lord Irontoe

Master Knight
It can be done easily. However problem is there is actually no big power difference between low tier troops and high tier troops. For example at simulations 1 x tier-5 troop is equal to 3 x tier-1 troop thats why sometimes you lose your high tier troop to a looter (it is also related to how simulations work it seems, i have less control over there). Also tier-5 troop wage is 12 / day and tier-1 troop wage is 2 / day. In these conditions if we make upgrades more expensive people can stop upgrading their troops. First we need to make high tier troops much more powerfull than low tier troops in both simulations and missions then we can increase upgrade costs / recruit cost of high tier troops.
This is something folks have been complaining about since day 1. I'm glad you're also seeing it on the dev side. I'd love to see a much bigger power difference between the tiers with more expensive high tier troops. It should be viable to run with a small elite force that can compete against bigger mixed armies.
 

Ananda_The_Destroyer

Master Knight
First we need to make high tier troops much more powerfull than low tier troops in both simulations and missions then we can increase upgrade costs / recruit cost of high tier troops.
I will be glad to see it! Although a few types of troops really benefit form their upgrades to t5-6, I'm very surprised how well you can manage with just mostly t2-3 troops.

Because in field battles it is very clear that T5 troops are much stronger than that. And dont get me started on T5 cav or T5 archers vs T1 infantry, because then it gets downright silly.
High tier Cav and Infantry get killed by recruits all the time if I let them attack how they want in live battle. Ranged units are a bit safer and useful ... because of the range. I think a lot of it has to do with damage calculation awarding too much speed damage boost sometimes.

My 1 concern with making stronger/ more expensive troops is of course make the AI actually pay for them too. IMO there needs to be a big consequence from missing garrison and party wages too, they need to immediately lose troops if they can't pay. Right now I bet 1/2 the lords are actually bankrupt if you take away their money cheats.
 

mexxico

Sergeant Knight
My 1 concern with making stronger/ more expensive troops is of course make the AI actually pay for them too. IMO there needs to be a big consequence from missing garrison and party wages too, they need to immediately lose troops if they can't pay. Right now I bet 1/2 the lords are actually bankrupt if you take away their money cheats.

They have nearly no money cheat. Which cheat you mentioned? They only do not need horses to upgrade to horseman troops.
 

Ananda_The_Destroyer

Master Knight
They have nearly no money cheat. Which cheat you mentioned? They only do not need horses to upgrade to horseman troops.
Any cheat money :razz: I don't know the specifics of what they do, but often I feel lords have more men then they should be able to pay in the long run. Many of these guys do nothing but wander around and lose fights, it seems to me they must subside solely on free money.

Look at this guy here, he has almost no money, no fiefs for faction at all but yet what's that behind him? Khans guards? He's broke but he persists with a 100+ man party, including some t6 units! I wish he would help solve my village issues or something :razz:

Also just to be clearer, having better units is much more important to me then any AI/ money balancing. I'd rather have the better more expensive units and put up with the AI also having them when they don't deserve them.
 

D0c1

Knight at Arms
Look at this guy here, he has almost no money, no fiefs for faction at all but yet what's that behind him? Khans guards? He's broke but he persists with a 100+ man party, including some t6 units!
is he the clan leader?
clan leaders are responsible for the finances of the clan.
 

Bluko88

Regular
I actually like it but I do hate that lords don't need to worry about providing horses. I get that if TW didn't do it, it would really screw with the economy. But imo lords should have to pay extra to cover the cost of the nonexistent horse. That way they have some kind of restriction when leveling up a troop to a cavalry unit, just my 2 cents.

Agreed.

I really dislike it when the A.I. effectively plays by different rules. Honestly I think it would be better if the A.I. were required to get horses to create horse troops again.

The A.I. should participate in the economy more then just consuming food. I mean what's the point of weapon/armor production if Troops can get everything they need from a magic rental shop? Honestly Horse production is very lacking at the moment, with only a select few villages and cities ever having a healthy supply. Frankly the worst thing about losing a battle, isn't losing your troops - it's losing the dozens of horses which will take literal dozens of hours to really replenish - and that's if you have the money.

IDK I feel like A.I. Calvary is way too prevalent. It can make some Minor Mercenary Factions ludicrously OP when they're rocking a predominantly Calvary party. I don't have a problem with Calvary being powerful, but when all these Parties are able to get "easy/free" Calvary it's just not fair to the player.

While I'm okay with horse requirement for basic Calvary, the War Horse requirement needs to go because:

1. War Horses really aren't common at all
2. They are extremely expensive
3. You're spending over 1000+ Denars to get a unit that will probably just get itself killed plowing into a shield wall or during a siege battle.

I mean why bother with Elite Calvary anymore? You're much better off getting a few Tier 6 Infantry units. Easier to acquire, cheaper to upgrade, and you can get more for effectively the same cost.
 

mexxico

Sergeant Knight
Any cheat money :razz: I don't know the specifics of what they do, but often I feel lords have more men then they should be able to pay in the long run. Many of these guys do nothing but wander around and lose fights, it seems to me they must subside solely on free money.

Look at this guy here, he has almost no money, no fiefs for faction at all but yet what's that behind him? Khans guards? He's broke but he persists with a 100+ man party, including some t6 units! I wish he would help solve my village issues or something :razz:

Also just to be clearer, having better units is much more important to me then any AI/ money balancing. I'd rather have the better more expensive units and put up with the AI also having them when they don't deserve them.

As @D0c1 said only clan leaders are responsible from finance of clan. So leaders make payment to members each day to make their budget 5000 again if they have lower than that amount. However in some rare cases if clan leaders have less money they stop making payments and AI lords start to get morale penalty same as player and troops start to desert after a morale thresold.

Also clan leaders get payment from kingdom budget which is not feature for player kingdom yet. However all these kingdom budget is collected from clan leaders which has more than 100K money at same kingdom (1% of exceed from 100K daily). This collected money is distributed to poor clans slowly.

In screenshot that is a rebel clan and it is new feature so there can be some problems with their economy maybe (something like starting game with 0 money).
 
Last edited:

brognar

Sergeant at Arms
It can be done easily. However problem is there is actually no big power difference between low tier troops and high tier troops. For example at simulations 1 x tier-5 troop is equal to 3 x tier-1 troop thats why sometimes you lose your high tier troop to a looter (it is also related to how simulations work it seems, i have less control over there). Also tier-5 troop wage is 12 / day and tier-1 troop wage is 2 / day. In these conditions if we make upgrades more expensive people can stop upgrading their troops. First we need to make high tier troops much more powerfull than low tier troops in both simulations and missions then we can increase upgrade costs / recruit cost of high tier troops.
An increase in armour effectiveness would go a long way to make high tier troops more powerful. Metal armour needs to be buffed and shouldn't show up until T4-5 on troops. No kind of mail should have less than ~35 armour rating.
 

stevehoos

Banned
An increase in armour effectiveness would go a long way to make high tier troops more powerful. Metal armour needs to be buffed and shouldn't show up until T4-5 on troops. No kind of mail should have less than ~35 armour rating.
Mods. They are not changing this.
 

Ananda_The_Destroyer

Master Knight
As @D0c1 said only clan leaders are responsible from finance of clan. So leaders make payment to members each day to make their budget 5000 again if they have lower than that amount. However in some rare cases if clan leaders have less money they stop making payments and AI lords start to get morale penalty same as player and troops start to desert after a morale thresold.

Also clan leaders get payment from kingdom budget which is not feature for player kingdom yet. However all these kingdom budget is collected from clan leaders which has more than 100K money at same kingdom (1% of exceed from 100K daily). This collected money is distributed to poor clans slowly.

In screenshot that is a rebel clan and it is new feature so there can be some problems with their economy maybe (something like starting game with 0 money).
Okay fair enough. I actually like the wandering rebel factions and will be sad to see them go. What I would like is if poor clans would go to my towns and seek work, rather then subsisting on Calradian social security forever :razz:

It would be a full role reversal, where the player, now landed and powerful dillys out petty jobs to the poor, broken AI Clans :smile:
Seriously I need their help to collect the 40 cows and 30 tools villagers need every other week!
 

Phwoar

Recruit
Instead of removing the requirements for horse troops, I'd actually like to see them implement requirements for other troops too. Maybe new items like "generic level 2 armor" "generic level 2 weaponry" etc, that can be either crafted or purchased, that are required to upgrade other troops.
 
Top Bottom