there are so many threads talking about how wars can suck in Bannerlord: wars happen too often and against several factions at a time, illogical terms of peace (a losing faction demanding 2000+ Denars as tribute), and how no matter how many armies you defeat another 1000+ army will simply replace it. however, when people on these threads try to explain how to fix it most of them just give vague answers like "the AI is bad" or "too much war" or the famous "nerf Kuziats!" chant. these aren't solutions, they're just restating what they already said and what everyone already knows. now enough small changes will fix it, but I think just one changes can fix this entire problem: recruiting should be made harder for AI. factions seem to be able to conger up entire armies almost immediately after losing them. I was at war with a faction and had beaten them until they had only 2 cities and 3 castle left, but they still were able to pull 1500+ armies out of their butthole. and this is really discouraging for the player; defeating a large army should feel like an accomplishment, like the player turned the tide of the war-saved the kingdom even! but no, the player's victory is brief as several other large enemy armies form and attack the players fiefs, making winning battles near useless. but even if the player constantly wins battles, the enemy faction will still keep up their war efforts. why? well it has to do with faction strength. have you ever noticed that before and after a battle is done the faction strength remain roughly the same? I found this out when I was at war with the Kuzaits and wanted to know my progress over time. I was shock by the fact that after winning several large battles the faction strength of the Kuzaits went down by maybe 1000-2000 when I inflicted about 10,000+ casualties. why? well, the only reason I can think of is that I did reduce the faction strength more, but they are able to quickly recruit back their losses. and this is the problem: war declarations are heavily influenced by faction strength. faction strength is determined by armies' strength. if troops can be easily recruited, then faction strength quickly recuperates leading to minimal changes, leading to endless and grindy wars. therefore, the heart of the problem is the the fact that AI can recruit to easily.
-
If you are reporting a bug, please head over to our Technical Support section for Bannerlord.
wars are too grindy (recruiting should be made harder for AI)
- Thread starter emo_edjiboye
- Start date
Users who are viewing this thread
Paragraphs are your friend. I think there is probably a lot of what your saying up there that is good but your wall of text critted me for 10,000 damage and my eyes are bleeding.
Because
Sergeant
Both funny and true : )
I think ideally they should have more down time before doing aggressive acts such as raiding or joining armies again. They should be made to stay near their factions fiefs and do issues or fight bandits for some amount of time. They should respond to an enemy siege in their territory though and join in for the big fights.
As far as I'm concerned they should spawn with zero troops and have to always take from garrison or risk getting punked by looters while recruiting. If they get caught over and over Good. If they lose too much money and can't pay for any upkeep the troops should immediately leave. Defeated, landless factions should be ruined completely, not parading around forever and ever magically paying for troops still. They shouldn't get gold auto converted either they should have to return to towns. If they're broke and caught they should just stay in jail forever or unless their clan joins a new faction.
Yeah it's a buncha stuff they won't do.
As far as I'm concerned they should spawn with zero troops and have to always take from garrison or risk getting punked by looters while recruiting. If they get caught over and over Good. If they lose too much money and can't pay for any upkeep the troops should immediately leave. Defeated, landless factions should be ruined completely, not parading around forever and ever magically paying for troops still. They shouldn't get gold auto converted either they should have to return to towns. If they're broke and caught they should just stay in jail forever or unless their clan joins a new faction.
Yeah it's a buncha stuff they won't do.
"Fast paced action" takes precedence.
Yeah I love the fast pace of re-loading the game every time something hits me because "armor?""Fast paced action" takes precedence.
That's some amazing action stuff TW, can at least get dodge roll and some healing potions?
Not that I ever got hit unless I wanted to! inb4 "turn down the difficulty" and fake armor history
You joke but it would honestly be way more fun in singleplayer if it was basically dynasty warriors. Considering this is supposed to be a game about horseback combat, you spend a comedically small amount of time actually doing that.
ECONOMY , LOGISTICS and WARFARE SUGGESTION LIST
It is a set of suggestions related to the development of a more strategic and fought war in the campaign map.
They are long threads, they go into detail and they are all connected to each other, in the sense that one synergizes with the other.
In short, there is an overview.
Topics covered:
-logistics and supply lines, camps, all linked to the economy.
-economics of things (production),price balancement, population ,population happiness , social stability and consequences.
- equipment condition, equipment maintenance, army maintenance and wages, price balancement, relationship between these factors and the economy and skill smithing to be redone in order to be useful for all this.
- geographic coverage of armies, marching formations
I'll add a hint about sieges to the list, but I still have to finish it.
Each of these threads took a lot of dedicated time and they don't just make requests, but SUGGEST different METHODS of designing a mechanic and HOW IT SHOULD BE MADE.
There are polls inside, please vote, otherwise the developers won't take them into consideration.
Regarding the diplomatic system, rather than writing a suggestion thread I would first say to the developers: look at the diplomatic system of other games.
From there you have to take what you need.
Games to watch: crusader kings (2-3), total war three kingdoms.
If they have 1500 men, it is because they either recruited them or pulled them from their garrisons. The only AI cheat regarding recruiting is they play on the easy-recruiting setting with extra slots. But that is slated to be changed as soon as relations are set between clans and notables:
It does actually matter, but you have to do it more than once. Probably more than a dozen times in the case of particularly strong factions. The faction strength stays the same (IME) because when you capture a lord, their clan instantly has another member pop as party leader and their very first act is to run to the nearest town (or the one they are already in) and strip it of every recruit they can get. If they are in an owned settlement, they'll pillage the garrison as well. Give them a day or two and they'll have replaced the 60-120 members that they lost that way -- but they'll almost certainly be a worse composition.
Recruiting definitely does happen too fast but the entire game is structured so we fight too many battles, over far too short a timespan. They went from getting into maybe (maybe) a half-dozen stack-on-stack brawls during a normal playthrough of native Warband to getting into that many in a year in Bannerlord.
Playthroughs would be much faster paced if losing a field battle was as debilitating as @AnandaShanti wants. If you would like, I can show you how quickly one faction wins everything under those conditions and it probably won't even take 400 days."Fast paced action" takes precedence.
However, both your Factions AI Lords and you yourself can do the same thing. If one of your parties get knocked out and captured, you can immediately pop another companion into a party and off he goes. You can also grab troops from the garrisons of fief you personally own so I am not sure if there is any sort of real imbalance.
Also, I am not sure how many are aware of this, but as far recruiting goes, at the start of the game and I believe any time after you can actually change the difficulty of recruiting new troop. The default is set at easiest so if you have never notice this option, chances are there are always a ton of recruits available. However, if you feel recruiting is too fast, just reduce the amount of available recruiting in the game on this screen. This setting in the the "Campaign Options" where you also set your damage taken thresholds, AI difficulty and a few other settings.
The Great Grub
Sergeant
The ai should recruit less but recruit better tier troops imo this will solve the problem of it being to grindy and the issue of ai having mostly low tier troops but still have low/mid tier troops in there so they arnt running around with doomstacks
I think the problem that stands out to me is the bottomed out 'defeated' power of factions, like they have no fief, no income, but they are still fielding parties, raiding and even sieging eventually. At rock bottom they still respawn with enough troops/resources to be a hazard to your fiefs, even without spending anytime at all preparing, they just pop out of thin are and head for your fiefs. This goes on indefinitely too as they don't start to join new factions (at least in any relevant time frame), leave the realm or anything else unless you execute them all. And due to having no fiefs, they will want too much money for peace.... because their little parties over no fiefs = war war war to the AI. I'm not saying they're wrong, they've got nothing to lose, but it makes for crappy game play.
Also, I have a hard time believing that the AI can even pay for all their garrisons and parties. I haven't tried to look into it at all but just in general passive income is so petty and low from fiefs that I can't help but think many of them are just bankrupting themselves and living of the cheat money most of the time. You know garrisons won't even dessert so it's really hard to tell without looking under the hood.
Anyways I would love an option to take away all of their cheats completely. I'd rather enjoy 400 days or less of that sometimes then 1000 days of zombie whack a mole.
But doesn´t this option only have affects on the player?
Here's my biggest issue field battles don't make any difference. Losing a few hundred men should sting but it's not devastating but losing a 1K+ should be. But atm all losing lords do is reload and go at it again, that is as far from reality as possible. I get that we want to lessen steamrolling but what TW has done is trivialize field battles to the point of where the player becomes frustrated because they can't make any headway. If I, or my kingdom, win a large battle or even better 2+ large battles that should cause the opposing side to get defensive and hopefully press for peace. That's how you slow down steam rolling not just keep throwing army after army of recruits at me. What we have now is a never ending game of wack a mole, and Idk about you but that gets tedious for me.
My understand of the entire concept of the game is to have the AI lords be bound to the same systems the players is as much as possible. As far as I know, aside form the AI lord starting with a small lets call it honor guard plus the fact it doesn't have to buy horse to upgrade is the only thing different for recruitment. Aside form that they should be using the same recruitment pool you do. This could have changed and I missed it and I have no way to test it since I can't see the lords actually recruiting but I am pretty sure they will have access to less recruits as well.
