Villages Before Castles (Please)

[stevepine]

Does anyone know if TW plan to implement this - so that you don't just get given a huge castle straight away, you get a village first?

I really liked this in Warband. It made me excited just to have a village. I was SO protective of it and loved upgrading it.

 

[Lesbosisles]

Does anyone know if TW plan to implement this - so that you don't just get given a huge castle straight away, you get a village first?

Never heard of this TBH. On the contrary, in their blogs they always presented it as a new cool feature.

I really liked this in Warband. It made me excited just to have a village. I was SO protective of it and loved upgrading it.

Actually, what we have in Bannerlord now makes more sense from historical and logical point of view - villages usually had a castle for the lord to live there, for the garrison to protect people from raiders and enemy troops, and for the people to hide themselves there in case of a raid or attack.

But that upsets me that the garrison of the attached castle can't help villagers to defend their village.

 

[Kentucky 『 ＨＥＩＧＵＩ 』 James]

That's the problem though, if we're talking history the castle should be part of the village, not out in the middle of nowhere. Also historically fiefs could be anything, from a plot of land, to hunting rights, to tax farming on certain districts of a city.

 

[ste636]

I agree, I am not really liking how BL is a watered down, simplified version of WB...

This game for some aspects is a massive upgrade from the previous, but in all the "deep" and interesting mechanics we had a huge regress. I mean, it seems like all the stuff that make you work or think has been wiped from the game...

 

[OlderThanBefore]

I would love upgrades and more controls on the villages. True that i miss that from Warband and like you op, i was overprotective too.

Would have chased the lord who raided my village in hell if possible :p.

I didn't checked if it is already posted in the " suggestion " forum. It's a good idea op.

 

[dannazgu]

I don't miss at all, like @Lesbosisles said.. Historical point of view, a lord never got a Village to rule, it was a castle, town or city, depending on your status. In medieval historial the "lord" of villages were mayors or tenants and they weren't noble. Now, if TW implement tenancy then yes, i'd love to see it back. I like warband too, but a village didn't make you feel a lord at all, rp and immersion speaking. Of course, depends on the culture you're playing too. I usually goes too Empire and Vlandia, as i see in game that culture implement has no place for tenancy.

 

[black_bulldog]

I agree, I am not really liking how BL is a watered down, simplified version of WB...

This game for some aspects is a massive upgrade from the previous, but in all the "deep" and interesting mechanics we had a huge regress. I mean, it seems like all the stuff that make you work or think has been wiped from the game...

I don't feel like this is watered down, just different. I personally hated getting villages in WB. It took weeks to get anything built and it never felt worth doing, add to the fact that every lord and his dog targeted my village to raid and it became pure frustration for me early as a lord. Once I got a castle or town I never went back to the village.

 

[Slithy]

I also like the change they did with bannerlord. I wouldn't mind having more ability to do upgrades more specifically on villages, but I think it makes more sense that the villages go with something more defensible.

 

[Magello]

I really think they need to introduce different levels of vassals, so when you first join you are a tenet who just gets a village but you could get more influence and then become a lord with his own castle with villages, then a baron for multiple castles, and eventually a count or duke for towns.

 

[Tacostrom]

I agree as well. I don't think current vassalization provides enough space for small lords. You get a castle straight away which feels pretty bad in my opinion. Kings should be able to give fiefs first and then castles later like in warband.

 

[Argentinian_Juan]

When they add the modification tools (less than 5 months) this will be solved

 

[ZydrateTheSmoothCriminal]

Actually, what we have in Bannerlord now makes more sense from historical and logical point of view -

Historically, continents didn't solely consist of six very distinct cultures / factions, each of which have a pathetic average of five to six cities.

 

[Apocal]

Village fiefs were one thing I disliked very much about Warband.

 

[Lesbosisles]

Historically, continents didn't solely consist of six very distinct cultures / factions, each of which have a pathetic average of five to six cities.

Also historically, the Earth is round and in the game it is flat, yeah... I beg you not go to these extremes since they make no sense here.

 

[ZydrateTheSmoothCriminal]

Also historically, the Earth is round and in the game it is flat, yeah... I beg you not go to these extremes since they make no sense here.

The fact that they make no sense is why I brought it up in the first place. Directly applying specific historicities absolutely without regard for other vitally significant factors (and conditions which made them in the first place) does not make sense if we're to harmonise fun gameplay and historical authenticity.

 

[Lesbosisles]

The fact that they make no sense is why I brought it up in the first place. Directly applying specific historicities absolutely without regard for other vitally significant factors (and conditions which made them in the first place) does not make sense if we're to harmonise fun gameplay and historical authenticity.

I see not a single reason how the "castle-village" system harms the fun you gain from the game. But if this system touches you so badly, I suggest you waiting for the mods which will return the WB system back.

 

[Apocal]

This game for some aspects is a massive upgrade from the previous, but in all the "deep" and interesting mechanics we had a huge regress. I mean, it seems like all the stuff that make you work or think has been wiped from the game...

There weren't any deep mechanics for holding a village as your fief. It was literally just a ****ty fief you could recruit from and actually sticking around to protect it was a mug's game that would prevent you from doing things to increase your power. To which they added the kick in the nuts that if you did actually get your village to Very Rich (which took a long goddamned time) it was extremely likely that it was the richest village in Calradia and therefore raid target numero uno. So whole marshal campaigns of 400+ dudes would show up to pillage your village, setting you right back to square one (0 prosperity).

Best of luck fielding a party that could protect against that, while holding a single village as your fief.

You were better off going with the marshal and/or king then schmoozing after battles and sieges until they supported you for a town. Or just finding solo parties to knock around for loot and prisoners. Or even basic trading; village fiefs were so bad you could trade on everything but the thinnest margins and make more money.

 

[paladinx333]

I like the new system of villages being linked to towns an castles. It's one of the few things that I like about Bannerlord in it's current state.

 

[shades_o_grey]

I find that I prefer the BL system of fief distribution over WB's.

That said, i would like to see more depth to both the improvement of our lands and relationship building with the people.

 

[BlackRainZ]

In Bannerlord, you are no longer that one "lord" and the same goes for the other lords. They are clans now, so it makes more sense to be given a castle with villages for your "clan". The members of your clan can be considered the minor nobles, same for other clans.