Agreed. It's a pointless requirement, seemingly just there for the sake of it.
-
If you are reporting a bug, please head over to our Technical Support section for Bannerlord.
Upgrading soldiers requires equipment in the future?
- Thread starter NamingIsHard
- Start date
Users who are viewing this thread
Agreed. It's a pointless requirement, seemingly just there for the sake of it.
I'd actually like to change the whole system with troop upgrades, instead of having the person's culture being in charge of what kinda unit they magically turn into, i'd love to have a system where other factors could play a role, i prefer homogeneous armies, but unfortunately more often than not i end up having to level other kinds of units because of a lack of recruits, and once i do level them i just don't bother with the lower tier of the troops i actually want because now they are just that much stronger.
It would also be really ****ing cool if a severe lack of shields made lords create armies with longer spears, two handed swords or something instead, but it would take a lot of coding so i'd say its certainly something to think about, after the game is otherwise finished.
It would also be really ****ing cool if a severe lack of shields made lords create armies with longer spears, two handed swords or something instead, but it would take a lot of coding so i'd say its certainly something to think about, after the game is otherwise finished.
Maximum997
Squire
How it will be:
In every town when selling loot you are just buying this crap. And you will end up with like 1000 of them. So after that point you just dont care.
It is like how they totaly spoiled food mechanic:
In warband:
1) You have limited invemtory slots. So you should choose - more food or more loot.
2) You are really need a food to maintain high morale and high troops number. So you have a great reward for using food mechanic right!
3) in this game i just dont give a crap. High morale is doing nothing, and i have 125 leadership to keep it high.So i just have 1500 units of grain in my inventory and dont give a crap about food anymore.
Only reason to watch the food is to lvl up steward, becouse it is the only way. My companion has 160 Steward and i just dont want spend amy time to get another 10 guys to my 200+ party and 500+ army.
Last edited:
It's not just 'spend more money for upgrade'. It makes the cost of upgrading more reasonable, and provides sources for loots from killing opponent soldiers.
As I have mentioned at the very begining of this thread:
If the problem of void-manufactured loots remained unsolved, the so-called dynamic economy system does not make sense.
You should read more carefully. I mentioned at the very begining that this requirement is for the sake of dynamic economy sytem.
.... is that an insult? I mean if you're trying for an insult, that needs polish. When did people get scared of challenge?
This thread isn't even complaining about difficulty its a thread to talk about an idea for a mechanic involved in upgrading troops. where did you get the idea that his thread was about challenge?
Wehveechen
Regular
That's a great example for a horrible idea. Maybe Lord Butter, owner of 5 cities and 6 castles, king of Butterland, gets a fun kick out of this moneysink. But early game with such a mechanic? Please. Don't.
Sorry if this sounds overly aggressive but this sounds so incredibly unfun.
Sorry if this sounds overly aggressive but this sounds so incredibly unfun.
well, as I have mentioned, this aimed at solving economic problem caused by those void-manufactured equipment loot from enemy, which means, you can still obtain equipment for upgrading soldier as loots from battle. What you need to do is decide whether to sell looted equipment for denar or upgrade your soldier.
Another point I have mentioned, in order to make children/family system meaningful, we do want to make the game to go slower.
Thats making the game not fun and a lot slower. Not even CK2 forces you to do something so obnoxious. CK2 lasts for 600 years because casus belli are limited for most characters and the game accurately reflects feudal law. In Bannerlord, war is declared for the sake of making war. CK2, you need a reason to declare war. CK2 lasts 600 years because you can spend those 600 years trying to inherit claims on empires and kingdoms just so you can make said war. Hell its very easy to make money in CK2 if you know what you're doing. Now imagine if instead of adding religion overhaul features, crusades, Paradox one day decided to make trade posts worthless. I don't get the reasoning behind nerfing money making other than making it grindier for a pair of socks. The best way to expand the games longevity per campaign is more features like complex diplomacy, casus belli, religion, culture being more than an insignificant bonus to map speed, etc.
I would prefer the vanilla of the game to be immersion focused. With modders doing their work to make the game more streamlined for people that want it more arcade-y. Which isn't wrong by any means. But vanilla should be high tier immersion with mods used to allow turning thing down.
Wehveechen
Regular
Tbh this feature sounds rather like something a mod should add. I always had the impression mods mostly cater to people who, for one reason or another, enjoy everything that makes their life harder. (That comes from someone who played Warband for 500 hours without ever touching mods.)
I feel like such things only stand in the way of vivid imagination.
Maximum997
Squire
Yes, for example right now we have such system with a horses. And guess what - it only makes upgrade cost a little bit higher. And thats all
ERICdb
Recruit
Yes, I agree with this idea, especially since it's already half implemented with cavalry. I think it would make the game much more immersive, but it should require certain changes.
1. Reduce the exponential cost variation between different tiers of armor. It makes no sense that certain equipment cost 100 vs 400000. The price progression should be smooth and more similar to a line and not exponential, so that we can afford buying equipment for all our troops, while still being expensive to upgrade a large amount of them. It also doesn't make sense that you pay a ridicule small amount of gold for a unit upgrade that has equipment worth 1M.
2. Increase the variation of stats that different gear provides, thus making such gear meaningful and relevant. This is not so much a problem for certain armor, but many items in this game are very marginal upgrades that deter equipment upgrades, especially with the current costs. This should make different tiers feel stronger along the progression and justify the increased player attention.
3. Increase availability of such equipment across most settlements, but keep the highest tier equipment in the specialized towns, so that it makes sense to fight for iron deposits and towns with smiths. This would make elite troops something that has to be fought for and that requires some investment (they'd be more powerful, too), and would make strategy more important.
1. Reduce the exponential cost variation between different tiers of armor. It makes no sense that certain equipment cost 100 vs 400000. The price progression should be smooth and more similar to a line and not exponential, so that we can afford buying equipment for all our troops, while still being expensive to upgrade a large amount of them. It also doesn't make sense that you pay a ridicule small amount of gold for a unit upgrade that has equipment worth 1M.
2. Increase the variation of stats that different gear provides, thus making such gear meaningful and relevant. This is not so much a problem for certain armor, but many items in this game are very marginal upgrades that deter equipment upgrades, especially with the current costs. This should make different tiers feel stronger along the progression and justify the increased player attention.
3. Increase availability of such equipment across most settlements, but keep the highest tier equipment in the specialized towns, so that it makes sense to fight for iron deposits and towns with smiths. This would make elite troops something that has to be fought for and that requires some investment (they'd be more powerful, too), and would make strategy more important.
Nope, you're just playing the wrong game, that's all.
Apparently so are you, it would seem. A shame.
No mate, I'm good thanks, this is exactly the game for me. You're the one complaining about challenge. Why don't you take up real fencing? Surely you aren't afraid of a challenge?
Maximum997
Squire
Pay another 100 dinares from millions that you have.
In 2020 players call it "challange"...
In 2020 players call it "challange"...
Similar threads
