Thinking about a no-companions run with realistic saves. (Just thinking!)

[bakters]

You are right.  I'll edit the title to make it clearer.

 

[Jedesis]

Yes that title suits better. I really do like to solo by myself, taking on anything I can win over (I play on maximum difficulty) or I just quit soloing and train an army off 25% Rhodok Sharpshooters and 75% Nord Huscarls. I find this army composition very OP, especially capturing castles/defending, but not so good versing an army consisting of Swadian Knights (unless the terrain is to my advantage!).

 

[bakters]

I'm grinding again.  Right now I'm around the lvl 20 and I switched from soloing to having a small army.

This time around though, I follow the advice from this thread and I tried to do a bit of bandit questing on top of bandit hunting.  It works surprisingly well.  I just take the quests for lairs or troublesome bandits whenever they appear and finish them on the side, which is an obvious improvement.  If I'll fail some, I won't care. 

What makes this way significantly better?  For once I get to use my crossbow during lair quests, which helps my weap. profs..  I should not need to miss every other shot during my first siege, which was the case before.  Much better.  Another advantage is that I actually get some XP instead of some scraps from bandit fights.  Soloing levels you up quickly, but field battles don't do much for my build, so that's a help too.  Another indirect by probably helpful consequence is that I'm forced to travel between bandit lairs after I clear them, which brings me in contact with fresh, big packs.  I think it should increase the renown per day yield.  I'm not exactly sure, but I suspect it quite strongly. 

Small optimizations, but that's how things go with this type of playing.  Thanks guys for helpful suggestions. 

 

[Jedesis]

Yes that's the exact level I to changed from soloing to having an army. (12 Huscarls, 8 Rhodok Sharpshooters) And yeah I also fight bandits like that (the guild masters quests for them give 2000 exp and 1000 denars, and on top of that loot which is around 500 denars.) And I do any tournament I come across (and bet 100 denars each round) But right now I'm focusing on building my renown (which is 636) and getting positive relations with lords.

I am pretty wealthy in my opinion, with 78k denars but with troop costs of 500 denars I can easily build a profit because of bandits (mainly Sea Raiders and the quests)

I don't know whether to build economic enterprises in towns or not, I'll have to research and I don't really get the trading in M&B or in that matter at all.

I hope Calradia smiles upon you in your quest of domination! And I'm glad to help you!

 

[sirocco]

I fail to see the challenge in what you guys are talking about.
I understand this rush to become king concept is a challenge but by doing it with the most optimal build and troops you people are basically robbing yourselves of the fun and challenge.
You use the most effective methods to gain wealth, beating wimpy sea raiders that while are pathetic enemies, drop the best loot in game.

You haven't played mount and blade, until you beaten 200 khergits with 50 huscarls on foot.
Staying alive on foot and possibly without a shield is what makes this game a challenge.
Lets face it. Infantry sucks. Cavalry is powerful as long as it is on a horse, and it is the only thing beating the OP archers of the game.

I consider the use of crossbow troops cheating because archers in general are so ridiculously overpowered. I try not to use them at all if possible, but sharpshooters are just that much more OP (I have been shot off a moving horse in heavy armor wearing a winged bucket on my head from great distance, causing 74 points of dmg).
I tried to get by without cavalry but I must have at least some to lead them around and counter the OP archers shooting my infantry to pieces.
So I get the challenge by mainly using infantry, and fighting on foot myself, with either a 2 handed weapon or a polearm and no shield.
I rage a lot, because sometimes even 3 rows of huscarls are not enough to stop cavalry getting through, and if its swadians following sharpshooters, Im kind of guaranteed to die, as without a shield or at least on horseback you cant avoid those headshots, and for a game where you can die from getting shot in the foot, archer dmg is way too much and all range weapons are way too accurate as well.

 

[Jedesis]

I fail to see the challenge in what you guys are talking about.
I understand this rush to become king concept is a challenge but by doing it with the most optimal build and troops you people are basically robbing yourselves of the fun and challenge.
You use the most effective methods to gain wealth, beating wimpy sea raiders that while are pathetic enemies, drop the best loot in game.

You haven't played mount and blade, until you beaten 200 khergits with 50 huscarls on foot.
Staying alive on foot and possibly without a shield is what makes this game a challenge.
Lets face it. Infantry sucks. Cavalry is powerful as long as it is on a horse, and it is the only thing beating the OP archers of the game.

I consider the use of crossbow troops cheating because archers in general are so ridiculously overpowered. I try not to use them at all if possible, but sharpshooters are just that much more OP (I have been shot off a moving horse in heavy armor wearing a winged bucket on my head from great distance, causing 74 points of dmg).
I tried to get by without cavalry but I must have at least some to lead them around and counter the OP archers shooting my infantry to pieces.
So I get the challenge by mainly using infantry, and fighting on foot myself, with either a 2 handed weapon or a polearm and no shield.
I rage a lot, because sometimes even 3 rows of huscarls are not enough to stop cavalry getting through, and if its swadians following sharpshooters, Im kind of guaranteed to die, as without a shield or at least on horseback you cant avoid those headshots, and for a game where you can die from getting shot in the foot, archer dmg is way too much and all range weapons are way too accurate as well.

Yes I'm sort of lost on the challenge myself(mainly me playing for solo as long as I can and then transition to making my own kingdom) And who said I was rushing? That was just the quickest time I've ever did it.

And I took myself up on your challenge in a Custom Battle mode (I lost to the Khergits, and the game wouldn't give me all Huscarls, only Nord Warriors.) But I don't consider myself to be that good yet, even with the high ground of the Oasis map, the Lancers are really powerful.

And yes there has been many a time when I've been forced from my horse and having to result to fighting on foot with a broken shield, many times one, many times lost.

And Infantry does suck, unless the terrain is in their favor.
And yeah in my opinion I think the damage values should be changed for flying projectiles, as how can an arrow that does 34 damage to the foot compare to only getting 10 damage to the chest?

And Cavalry will always be OP, they can move the fastest, are the strongest, a modern's tank in medieval's past. (a relevant comparison)

I've played over 1000+ hours of the M&B series, but even as a tactical, strategical, intellectual human being (relates to all of us) no one can be prefect, only get (a little) better with practice.

 

[HolgerHardrada]

I fail to see the challenge in what you guys are talking about.

I think it's just like playing an arcade game and trying to get a high score.  There's really no objective way to compare peoples individual games except for those "days played" when that conquered screen comes up. 

As for me, I really like the idea of this challenge as it really tests peoples ideas about "powergaming."  If you think about it, how do you determine whether your style is "powergamer" or not?  I would think it would be how fast you can conquer Calradia.  Most of the guides I've read about powergaming say that intelligence is the weakest stat to focus on, but these playthroughs generally prove that wrong. 

 

[sirocco]

If they would lower horse HP in general, and armor of the heavier horses. Also on foot you experience a lot of cheating thrown against you.
Troops blocking my overhead chops from behind. (Im a sneaky bastard, I try to outflank the enemy on my own and cut down the archers fast, unless I get shot in the face!) This cheat benefits cavalry even more since they tend to wade in my sea of huscarls blocking 80% of the hits, instead of just drowning in them.
Ive learned to stop a charging horseman, mostly works and devised a super secret anime special attack I call jump chop. With that I can 1 hit kill or at least severely wound even the heaviest knights.
I admit mameluks are a nightmare.
But the best battles I survive are blood baths.
The rest is a rage. I got 1 shot many times behind 3 rows of huscarls, !!!before the fight started!!!
And if archers start focusing you, your good as dead. Can dodge a while but a stray horsemen or infantry will end the fight.
But even thrown weapons have way too much accuracy.
Still I did all the dirty tricks on horseback. Fighting on foot is much more dangerous, but it also raises my dps considerably.

 

[bakters]

I fail to see the challenge in what you guys are talking about.

  I think you have to try it to really understand.  Keep in mind that my personal best time is 162 days till all Calradia is red, and try it yourself.  It is really not an easy way of gaming, however you cut it.

Now, about voluntary challenges.  I did a bunch of those too, but without the clock constantly ticking they were just making this game slower, not really more difficult.  This however is a game changer.

 

[bakters]

Day 65, lvl 26.

I'm with Khergits and hold Dhirim and Reindi Castle.  I maxed out Tactics and saved some points on First Aid, which is not crucial.  Thanks to that I'm doing fine.  I destroyed several armies, took and retook, and retook castles and so on.  Overall it's working.

But I'm not particularly thrilled about it all any more.  Once you develop your character according to the task at hand, the rest is just plain old grind, which I did over and over again.  I lack the time to play right now, and it will get only worse later, so I'm not sure if I want to pursue it to the finish.  Well, I did stuff like that already.  Lower trainer and no backup medics will slow me down, probably by a few months, but the problem seems solved to me.

Now, about realistic saves game, I'm quite sure I'm not interested in it.  To do it "properly" I'd have to finish this run just for training.  Then I'd have a chance of making a good progress in decent time with realistic saves.  Otherwise you either get captured a lot or play extra carefully, which both results in a very slow game.  Makes no sense to play slow if the goal is to be quick.

Any other way of doing it I see is to start another save just to try every map I'm about to enter.  Both ways are lots of work and not much fun to me.  I like solving problems.  Trying again and again and finding this one winning strategy to take this one castle or win some pitched battle despite the odds.  Realistic saves simply do not suit my taste and style.  I just don't want to do it badly, or to do the work required to do it well, so I'll probably not even start.

I may finish my current playthrough if I'll have the time.  We'll see.