bannerlord just have war and nothing else.
combining Crusader Kings III with it will be fantastic
combining Crusader Kings III with it will be fantastic
-
If you are reporting a bug, please head over to our Technical Support section for Bannerlord.
We need alliances
- Thread starter lukaseee
- Start date
Users who are viewing this thread
Dr-Shinobi
yeah but also be expensive and time demanding af to produce...But it would be cool if they both merged it and i would def have bought it since its the best of two worlds
Anushtegin
Sergeant
what's the medieval precedence of a non-aggresion pact? this isn't hearts of iron. i would like this not to be turned into one of those anti-historical p'dox games...
Wolfmensch007
Banned
Maybe marriages between rival Families to ensure peace. Or taking hostages from each other so neither side will risk a war.
2epicpanda
Recruit
IMO we dont need alliances, but maybe non aggression packs like we had in warband. It helped give you security for a time from being attacked and prevented snowballing.
Alliances could become a clusterfuk to be honest if they gang up on others, and i don't think would make sense for some factions like the imperial factions which are supposedly in a civil war.
Alliances could become a clusterfuk to be honest if they gang up on others, and i don't think would make sense for some factions like the imperial factions which are supposedly in a civil war.
2epicpanda
Recruit
Warband literally had non aggression packs, i dunno how you think that one feature makes this worse?
Actually wasn't in the vanilla, the mod Diplomacy added that in for Warband. I've got no problem with them tho
Dr-Shinobi
was an good mod to warband
Gotta give credit where it's due, I never played without that mod after trying it for the first time. It made the kingdoms in Warband feel much more alive and politicalwas an good mod to warband
Native had the basic 20-day truce after peace treaties though. Even just that little bit helped keep struggling factions going.
New tribute system does essentially the same thing. The main issue is not so much kingdoms surviving, as it is that once a faction begins to rise in power there is nothing to stop them from snowballing. Like this entire thread has been about, there needs to be some kind of reaction from the game to stop snowballing whether that be alliances, civil wars, or like I said earlier in this thread increasing the defensive nature of weaker kingdoms.
Nalgasucia507
Squire
Pretty sure civil wars/separation/intra-faction conflict between clans will achieve that goal.
I like the idea of civil war, but then I start to think about the game with a bunch of tiny kingdoms. So what should be the limit on civil wars? Does it require a certain massive power level to split? Is it just going to be based on bad intra-faction conflict? What happens if a kingdom gets giant and all the lords are happy? There are a ton potential issues with it just like alliances.
Nalgasucia507
Squire
Yea, lot of things for TW to figure out!
The much bigger thing that kept factions from getting wiped in Warband was lords respawning with full parties of tiered-up troops in one of the remaining settlements. It was extremely rare for the AI to even attempt an assault on the last two holdings of a faction, beause they'd be packed full of parties.
Anushtegin
Sergeant
expanding empires always fragmented into rival contenders vying for the throne and often broke up into independent entities after inconclusive succession wars, so it's the most logical counter-balance to snowballing. everyone with at least a remote claim to the throne wants to inherit a big ass empire.
Similar threads
