There isn't, it's all bad calls from the upper management, the devs themselves are more than capable enough to implement indepth features but they can't without authorization and they also lack a strict project guideline from start to finish, they are developing as the management seem fit, scraping and adding content on their whim instead of having a clear project from the start with everything the game would contain.
we've been talking with the devs here about the development of the game for more than a year now, many took our suggestions serious and even agreed with some and took them to their internal discussions only for the management to shut them down again and again to the point Mexxico said something on the lines of "look guys i could code that in a week but they will reject anything too complex, i can only do small tweaks here and there."
He even talked about them wanting to dumb down ai calculations to improve consoles performance and a few months ago he also said they wanted him to move on to work on the consoles port while he was discussing with the community how to improve the snowballing problem.
Remember that kickass castle-building feature that was shown in the dev blogs and later scrapped? his design aswell that was shutdown and replaced when it started getting too complicated for the ai to handle (aka they didn't wanted to "waste time" improving the campaign AI and reverted to a system even simpler than warband's one)
This is frustrating for me.
TW wants to make more and more casual and shallow games, which means that many of the features we've been promoted in advance, the ones we've been making purchases, won't come back.
In fact, TW has already received many suggestions and requests, but rarely responds.
In rare cases of response, the words "not a priority", "too complicated", and "not pleasant to the player" are repeatedly printed like a broken printer.
Remember Bannerlord's early mounted archer AI?
At that time, the mounted archer did not charge the enemy directly, but went round and round and shooting.
There's no movement like that now, and I think this means simplifying AI.
Anyway, you can't get money from someone who's already paid.
It's a reasonable business in the short term.
But in the long run, it's the same as CDPR.
I pre-purchased Cyberpunk 2077 and was disappointed like everyone else.
Of course, there are people who claim Bannerlord is worth it. As some argue that Cyberpunk 2077 is interesting enough.
In my book, the problem is that the advertised element does not exist.
CDPR has obviously made a fortune, and Bannerlord has.
The difference is that CDPR's Cyberpunk 2077 is a full release and Bannerlord is Early Access, so there is a slight grace period.
However, if TW does not act on period, it is meaningless.
Eventually, even if CDPR's products come out in the future, people won't buy them. TW can be treated the same way.
Even if they release DLCs, including Nordic invasions or naval battles, to selectively sell "too complicated elements" that fall into the game, I wouldn't buy.
Once again, the sentence may be a little awkward because I am using a translator. I am rechecking but my English ability is not reliable.
I remember the economic system of 1.0.
I miss it so much.
Of course, 1.0 was fraught with errors in the bug, but the economic system reacted violently to what I was doing.
So I was able to immediately notice the impact of my actions and was excited to think that I was interacting with the world.
Even in Warband, when caravans and villagers were attacked, it had an economic impact on my city or village.
I was delighted to see that this was more in full swing. Even though I thought it would be more meaningful to wipe out bandits, Bannerlord's bandits now seem to appear endlessly in certain places to maintain a certain number.
One of the expectations for Bannerlord was the recruitment system.
I liked the idea that the lord no longer receives troops in the air like Warband, but competes with players by conscripting himself from the village.
The lord now shows up with 60 troops from nowhere like Warband, and at least in Warband, it took longer to gather and grow troops.
The recruitment system is much different from what I expected.
The number of troops provided by the recruiting officer is very small, but I expected a country with a lot of undestroyed villages to have a stronger power as a kind of Manpower concept was implemented.
As a result, I wanted to feel strongly that the player's looting behavior had an impact on the world and interacted with it.
The developers would have judged that this was related to the snowball problem.
The snowball problem is essentially caused by the lack of a proper diplomatic system in Bannerlord.
Because the concept of manpower can unilaterally make a large country stronger, wars must have Warpoint and justification systems, thereby limiting the benefits of a single war.
Also, in Warband, when a country grows unilaterally, neighboring countries attack it and reject peace agreements. It was also a system in vanilla.
This simply prevented the snowball problem.
Of course, detailed adjustments will be needed, but TW does not seem to have inherited past lessons or experiences.
