What do you guys think of the new features being removed?

[jamoecw]

The ability to support a couple hundred men through foraging is very real, but it placed hard limits on how large of a force you could bring and how long that force could stay, unless you had an organized means of resupply.

The true strength of Rome was its ability to put a large army in the field at a considerable distance from Rome, and keep it supplied for as long as necessary to win the war.  Often, it couldn't match the forces initially arrayed against it in the field, so the army holed up in fortified camp until the enemy simply ran out of supplies, and individual elements either deserted and returned home, or else wandered off to wherever they could find good foraging.  Rome could then engage the much-reduced opposition on favorable terms.  As has often been said, tactics wins battles, but logistics wins wars, and Rome understood that.

Castles, as has been pointed out, served not only as a means of protection against enemy raids and attacks, but as a way of blocking enemy supply lines past that point.  The opponent either had to leave enough force behind to cointain the garrison, or else take the castle.  That meant either lost time from a short campaign season, or else a significant loss of available manpower, one way or another.

Fine.
But how will that translate into the game?
As far as we know, there are no supply lines in Bannerlord except for detaching one of the parties from an army on a mission to go and fetch.
How are castles in the game going to be able to make any difference to that? Castles in Warband don't do anything: don't protect supplies or villages; don't control territory; don't impede an enemy army's progress in any way.
Castles are in Bannlerord, but if none of the real reasons for building them are simulated they'll have no strategic relevance - they'll just be scenes for cool siege battles.
That would be a shame, I think.

well they did change the inventory to be based on the units in the party, and this makes a big difference. simply have the troops eat food (decrease food count over time). after some time you will have to dispatch a party for a food fetch quest, and it will have to go to a friendly castle or town. the castle and towns should have a ton of inventory space, allowing one to store food in preparation for a campaign. of course one could raid villages, though one can only do this once every so often for each village. if the army is too big then it won't be able to sustain itself off of raiding for very long. the only left to do is allow for certain units to have different inventory amounts so that one could have carts in a party slowing it down and allowing for a ton of space, at which point you have pretty much everything needed to simulate that sort of thing.

of course all of this depends on how good the AI is at using this sort of thing. if you dispatch an AI party and it gets itself killed every time then you can't really do such. if those in a castle don't run out and kill small parties resupplying the army then it just becomes more meaningless micromanagement. if the castles are too spread apart then one can avoid the castles too easy and they might as well not exist. if the cost of buying food is too high then being able to store up food to actually use a large army becomes too unwieldy and so one probably will find a way to work with a small army so they don't have to deal with sort of stuff.

so a lot of pitfalls, but the main concept is easy enough to do.

 

[TehRalph]

the only left to do is allow for certain units to have different inventory amounts so that one could have carts in a party slowing it down and allowing for a ton of space, at which point you have pretty much everything needed to simulate that sort of thing.

Horses and camels have an equipment slot where you can put saddlebags and leave them in your inventory to increase inventory weight and party map speed.

 

[Dante.]

Until there's an actual game I'm not going to worry about anything.

 

[jamoecw]

the only left to do is allow for certain units to have different inventory amounts so that one could have carts in a party slowing it down and allowing for a ton of space, at which point you have pretty much everything needed to simulate that sort of thing.

Horses and camels have an equipment slot where you can put saddlebags and leave them in your inventory to increase inventory weight and party map speed.

true, but the idea with the carts is to increase inventory capacity and to slow down the party. this makes them supply specific, and makes it so they can't out maneuver another party that spots them and goes after them. though i guess if there is no limit to size or weight and more simply slows you down then this could be done by simply having an overburdened party.

 

[TehRalph]

the only left to do is allow for certain units to have different inventory amounts so that one could have carts in a party slowing it down and allowing for a ton of space, at which point you have pretty much everything needed to simulate that sort of thing.

Horses and camels have an equipment slot where you can put saddlebags and leave them in your inventory to increase inventory weight and party map speed.

true, but the idea with the carts is to increase inventory capacity and to slow down the party. this makes them supply specific, and makes it so they can't out maneuver another party that spots them and goes after them. though i guess if there is no limit to size or weight and more simply slows you down then this could be done by simply having an overburdened party.

A trade off could be Option: Force troops to carry more and forage/raid for supplies = faster speed but lower morale OR have wagons and pack animals carry supplies = MUCH slower speed but more supplies and higher morale.

 

[Brosiedon]

I've come a bit late to the Bannerlord party, but I have the general feeling that less features and more polish would be A-okay. This series has some really strong fundamentals. More features would be nice, but fleshing out what we have already would be my preference.

 

[Ruler of Calradia]

I don't mind if they add them at some point, even if it is post launch.

But if they never add them, that is sad 

I just hope game gets launched in good state - and it would be great if that would be soon, but i rather wait and get good game than be disappointed today.


These days it is easier than ever to add even major updates to games post launch. I hope they do that.

 

[Noudelle]

I've come a bit late to the Bannerlord party, but I have the general feeling that less features and more polish would be A-okay. This series has some really strong fundamentals. More features would be nice, but fleshing out what we have already would be my preference.

Usually the design philosophy that I tend to agree with in video games.

 

[jamoecw]

I've come a bit late to the Bannerlord party, but I have the general feeling that less features and more polish would be A-okay. This series has some really strong fundamentals. More features would be nice, but fleshing out what we have already would be my preference.

Usually the design philosophy that I tend to agree with in video games.

i prefer under the hood support. if a game has **** for features, but good under the hood support then the community can make the features. same goes for polish. if the fans can make the game better, they will. i agree that playing a final product is better with good polish over loads of features though.