Mount & Blade II: Bannerlord

[oldbonebrown]

It is a game that lends itself to dreaming
I just hope that they add more broken toys for me to play with.

 

[Alienman]

Is TaleWorlds new HQ done yet? That is all that matters.

 

[9ted6]

What elements of this game are inferior to Warband?

It's an SP game with MMO grinding. It has a much, much, much, much slower start than Warband and takes an offensively long time to level up. The battle AI's better than Warband ever was, though Viking Conquest comes close, and crafting's cool in theory, but the RPG and strategy sides are boring and halfbaked.

I personally hate how they took the setting from mid-high medieval to more of a dark ages feel. I wanted a remastered Calradia as we had it, not something centuries in the past. Maybe that'll be DLC at some point.

Then there's the clan system that's barely explained and barely works, and unless modders can work around it it's gonna heavily restrict future mods, though more scripting means it mignt not be too big a deal.

 

[oldbonebrown]

takes an offensively long time to level up

We must've played different games or you are grinding XP with skills you've already maxed out

 

[Akachi]

TCs are cool but honestly I'd be happy with a proper vanilla rebalance mod. Essentially "here is what the game would be if the devs were actually competent and good at game design".

The problem with 99% of projects like that is most modders aren't content to just fix the vanilla issues. They have to layer in a bunch of bullshit of their own, half of which is unnecessary or just adds clutter. That's how I always felt about the Floris mod for Warband, for example.

Seconded, contrast Floris with Diplomacy for example, which was the vanilla expansion mod par excellence. It was basically Vanilla+ to the point where every other mod based itself off of Diplomacy.

It's an SP game with MMO grinding. It has a much, much, much, much slower start than Warband and takes an offensively long time to level up. The battle AI's better than Warband ever was, though Viking Conquest comes close, and crafting's cool in theory, but the RPG and strategy sides are boring and halfbaked.

I personally hate how they took the setting from mid-high medieval to more of a dark ages feel. I wanted a remastered Calradia as we had it, not something centuries in the past. Maybe that'll be DLC at some point.

Then there's the clan system that's barely explained and barely works, and unless modders can work around it it's gonna heavily restrict future mods, though more scripting means it mignt not be too big a deal.

Agreed on the rest, but did they improve battle AI since I last played in early 2022? The bots are definitely better at fighting individually, but I played VC recently and Bannerlord last around spring or summer last year and I honestly thought VC's battle AI and formations seemed overall better and more intelligent than Bannerlord's to me. They are a bit janky in terms of controls and movement, which can give the illusion of them being less intelligent than Bannerlord's especially since they take some practice to actually make use of. There were a few improvements, like I know the horse archer AI was way better (VC benefits from not having them in Warband).

I just remember my skirmishers like Battanian wildlings couldn't even skirmish without micromanagement, whereas in VC skirmishers (and archers) know how to engage with the enemy before the main melee and actually skirmish keeping at a range and trying to get hits off with their often more limited amount of ammunition. They will often do this between waves of reinforcements and on retreat too. It can be brutal fighting Picts and Irish even with elite troops if you're playing Anglo-Saxons or Norse and especially if you aren't used to fighting them, their skirmishers will do hit and runs and kite you. I learned the value of getting my own and learning how to use them fast.

VC shieldwall battles are also very historically accurate. They basically all go exactly like this description of Anglo-Saxon warfare, even down to getting to make a speech pre-battle and the special traits you can learn like a war cry:

Spoiler

• Preliminaries – The lines are drawn up and leaders make pre-battle inspirational speeches
• Advance to close quarters – A battle cry would be raised and one or both shieldwalls would advance
• Exchange missiles – Both sides shoot arrows and throw javelins, axes and rocks to break the enemy's resolve
• Shield to shield – One or other side closes the short gap and attacks, using spears and swords, protecting themselves and pushing with shields to try to break the enemy line. If neither line broke, both sides would draw back to rest. More missiles would be exchanged, and then the two lines would close again. This would continue until one line broke through the other, perhaps aided by the death of a leader or capture of a banner.
• Rout and pursuit – One side would begin to give way. A final stand might be made by some, as at Maldon, but most would flee. The victors would pursue, killing all they could catch.

They also know how to use weapons in shieldwalls properly, switching to shorter secondary weapons at the very front and every rank behind the front line each using increasingly longer spears with the longest 2.2m spears at the back, but in Bannerlord my shieldwall seemed to just use whatever and my troops could barely figure out how to use their shields, constantly putting them up, down, up, down, not knowing how to utilise the new shield direction. Spears are really just horrible in Bannerlord based on when I last played, too.

In Bannerlord, it all felt more like fantasy to me than plausible medieval warfare, where Battanians can't skirmish, Sturgians can't utilise shieldwall tactics or even spears very well, and the Romans are better off relying on heavy cavalry and pretending it's the High Middle Ages. Not to mention, archers everywhere despite them not being nearly as common in the era, although maybe they were in Anatolia where Calradia is inspired from (not sure). I was excited it was advertised as more "Dark Ages", but it sure didn't feel like it to me except in some very anachronistic ways, since it's about the same as Warband where heavy cavalry and archers are king and only a single faction relies on infantry. Subjective, but the armour designs were also very disappointingly ugly to me, since I expected some nice Dark Age byrnies, hauberks, gambesons, cloth and whatnot, but instead everyone looks like a homeless savage in leather, fur, and lamellar.

takes an offensively long time to level up

We must've played different games or you are grinding XP with skills you've already maxed out

When I played I had the same issue, the only skill that leveled up easily was Stewardry. I focused on commanding my troops (maybe it doesn't expect you to actually play like a warlord) so my weapon skills never got anywhere, nor did my athletics skill fighting on foot since I wasn't moving enough either. That's not to say I wasn't fighting with my weapons or running around, in fact I probably risked doing so far more than I should have being a commander of an army and with the risk of them all charging rather than using tactics if I die. I also originally tried using a spear, but they are useless in Bannerlord for some reason. Really tedious grind, I don't know why they had to reinvent the wheel and didn't just go with the same skill system as Warband.

 

[thesecret1]

Compared to vanilla warband, I don't think Bannerlord is really all that worse. I feel that people forget how infuriatingly retarded overmap AI was there too, among other things. Balance is definitely worse though, in many areas, and the economy is still fucked AFAIK.

The main issue with Bannerlord is that it doesn't have over a decade of modding behind it to fix these issues, which it why it falls short in comparison. TW seems to be having a hard time balancing the new shit they added, and judging by every single patch being 80% just crashfixes, their codebase is pretty shit.

 

[Alienman]

Akachi
https://kartallar.com.tr/en/proje/hacettepe-teknokent-entertainment-yonetim-binasi-insaati/

 

[Galdred]

Compared to vanilla warband, I don't think Bannerlord is really all that worse. I feel that people forget how infuriatingly retarded overmap AI was there too, among other things. Balance is definitely worse though, in many areas, and the economy is still fucked AFAIK.

The main issue with Bannerlord is that it doesn't have over a decade of modding behind it to fix these issues, which it why it falls short in comparison. TW seems to be having a hard time balancing the new shit they added, and judging by every single patch being 80% just crashfixes, their codebase is pretty shit.

I don't know. I mostly played Mount and Blade vanilla during its "early access", and there were already a ton of very impressive mods at the time (one even tried to redo Darklands in the engine). It is quite possible that the new game is much harder to mod too.

 

[boot]

TCs are cool but honestly I'd be happy with a proper vanilla rebalance mod. Essentially "here is what the game would be if the devs were actually competent and good at game design".

The problem with 99% of projects like that is most modders aren't content to just fix the vanilla issues. They have to layer in a bunch of bullshit of their own, half of which is unnecessary or just adds clutter. That's how I always felt about the Floris mod for Warband, for example.

Seconded, contrast Floris with Diplomacy for example, which was the vanilla expansion mod par excellence. It was basically Vanilla+ to the point where every other mod based itself off of Diplomacy.

It's an SP game with MMO grinding. It has a much, much, much, much slower start than Warband and takes an offensively long time to level up. The battle AI's better than Warband ever was, though Viking Conquest comes close, and crafting's cool in theory, but the RPG and strategy sides are boring and halfbaked.

I personally hate how they took the setting from mid-high medieval to more of a dark ages feel. I wanted a remastered Calradia as we had it, not something centuries in the past. Maybe that'll be DLC at some point.

Then there's the clan system that's barely explained and barely works, and unless modders can work around it it's gonna heavily restrict future mods, though more scripting means it mignt not be too big a deal.

Agreed on the rest, but did they improve battle AI since I last played in early 2022? The bots are definitely better at fighting individually, but I played VC recently and Bannerlord last around spring or summer last year and I honestly thought VC's battle AI and formations seemed overall better and more intelligent than Bannerlord's to me. They are a bit janky in terms of controls and movement, which can give the illusion of them being less intelligent than Bannerlord's especially since they take some practice to actually make use of. There were a few improvements, like I know the horse archer AI was way better (VC benefits from not having them in Warband).

I just remember my skirmishers like Battanian wildlings couldn't even skirmish without micromanagement, whereas in VC skirmishers (and archers) know how to engage with the enemy before the main melee and actually skirmish keeping at a range and trying to get hits off with their often more limited amount of ammunition. They will often do this between waves of reinforcements and on retreat too. It can be brutal fighting Picts and Irish even with elite troops if you're playing Anglo-Saxons or Norse and especially if you aren't used to fighting them, their skirmishers will do hit and runs and kite you. I learned the value of getting my own and learning how to use them fast.

VC shieldwall battles are also very historically accurate. They basically all go exactly like this description of Anglo-Saxon warfare, even down to getting to make a speech pre-battle and the special traits you can learn like a war cry:

Spoiler

• Preliminaries – The lines are drawn up and leaders make pre-battle inspirational speeches
• Advance to close quarters – A battle cry would be raised and one or both shieldwalls would advance
• Exchange missiles – Both sides shoot arrows and throw javelins, axes and rocks to break the enemy's resolve
• Shield to shield – One or other side closes the short gap and attacks, using spears and swords, protecting themselves and pushing with shields to try to break the enemy line. If neither line broke, both sides would draw back to rest. More missiles would be exchanged, and then the two lines would close again. This would continue until one line broke through the other, perhaps aided by the death of a leader or capture of a banner.
• Rout and pursuit – One side would begin to give way. A final stand might be made by some, as at Maldon, but most would flee. The victors would pursue, killing all they could catch.

They also know how to use weapons in shieldwalls properly, switching to shorter secondary weapons at the very front and every rank behind the front line each using increasingly longer spears with the longest 2.2m spears at the back, but in Bannerlord my shieldwall seemed to just use whatever and my troops could barely figure out how to use their shields, constantly putting them up, down, up, down, not knowing how to utilise the new shield direction. Spears are really just horrible in Bannerlord based on when I last played, too.

In Bannerlord, it all felt more like fantasy to me than plausible medieval warfare, where Battanians can't skirmish, Sturgians can't utilise shieldwall tactics or even spears very well, and the Romans are better off relying on heavy cavalry and pretending it's the High Middle Ages. Not to mention, archers everywhere despite them not being nearly as common in the era, although maybe they were in Anatolia where Calradia is inspired from (not sure). I was excited it was advertised as more "Dark Ages", but it sure didn't feel like it to me except in some very anachronistic ways, since it's about the same as Warband where heavy cavalry and archers are king and only a single faction relies on infantry. Subjective, but the armour designs were also very disappointingly ugly to me, since I expected some nice Dark Age byrnies, hauberks, gambesons, cloth and whatnot, but instead everyone looks like a homeless savage in leather, fur, and lamellar.

takes an offensively long time to level up

We must've played different games or you are grinding XP with skills you've already maxed out

When I played I had the same issue, the only skill that leveled up easily was Stewardry. I focused on commanding my troops (maybe it doesn't expect you to actually play like a warlord) so my weapon skills never got anywhere, nor did my athletics skill fighting on foot since I wasn't moving enough either. That's not to say I wasn't fighting with my weapons or running around, in fact I probably risked doing so far more than I should have being a commander of an army and with the risk of them all charging rather than using tactics if I die. I also originally tried using a spear, but they are useless in Bannerlord for some reason. Really tedious grind, I don't know why they had to reinvent the wheel and didn't just go with the same skill system as Warband.

Reminds me, I have to attempt to finish a VC campaign in full.

For raising combat skill in Bannerlord I found soloing bandit hideouts one of the best ways, pretty much the sole reason for them to exist late game. For overall leveling, Smithing is a constant source of experience, and I read using siege engines in battle will give a ton of experience but haven't messed with them.

AI was tweaked in beta branch 1.2 so it fights more defensively, though you won't see formations fight more coherently as in VC, you'll likely only notice the change in tournaments.

I have some hope for Bannerlord. Once Taleworlds finally stops updating the game and it hits a final version, maybe, just maybe, we'll see modders do their best work.

 

[ERYFKRAD]

Reminds me, I have to attempt to finish a VC campaign in full.

You mean the storyline one or the sandbox?

 

[thesecret1]

I finished the story one (siding with the vikings). It starts off really strong, and then just kind of fizzles out once you reach England.

 

[boot]

Reminds me, I have to attempt to finish a VC campaign in full.

You mean the storyline one or the sandbox?

I meant a total conquest. Finished the story a few times. Never sided with the Vikings, though.

 

[thesecret1]

It is quite possible that the new game is much harder to mod too.

I have a sneaking suspicion that the large increase in graphix necessiated a LOT more work on assets (so that they'd look good), which is causing the delay. Why do I think that? Well, if you look at the In the Name of Jerusalem 2 mod, which contains veteran modders from Warband and which started development virtually right after Bannerlord went into EA (making it over 3 years old now), and check what they're doing right now, you'll see this:

Q: What is the status of the mod?
A: We are currently working on game assets and research. We have started some work on dialogue assets. I'd say we currently have a closed beta for testing assets and identifying bugs. Next we will be working on modifying and creating game mechanics Or whatever

In other words, they're spending all that time on assets. Similarly, if you check their dev updates, like 90% of what they post is new assets, and has been assets since the very beginning.

 

[9ted6]

It is quite possible that the new game is much harder to mod too.

I have a sneaking suspicion that the large increase in graphix necessiated a LOT more work on assets (so that they'd look good), which is causing the delay. Why do I think that? Well, if you look at the In the Name of Jerusalem 2 mod, which contains veteran modders from Warband and which started development virtually right after Bannerlord went into EA (making it over 3 years old now), and check what they're doing right now, you'll see this:

Q: What is the status of the mod?
A: We are currently working on game assets and research. We have started some work on dialogue assets. I'd say we currently have a closed beta for testing assets and identifying bugs. Next we will be working on modifying and creating game mechanics Or whatever

In other words, they're spending all that time on assets. Similarly, if you check their dev updates, like 90% of what they post is new assets, and has been assets since the very beginning.

The better graphics are definitely delaying mods. I don't think that's entirely a bad thing though, most of the big mods out for Bannerlord right now look amazing.

 

[oldbonebrown]

If I could wish for a mod, it would be for a framework to add in lines of conversation
I think it should be a community effort to write unique dialogue for all lords in the game.

 

[kris]

I just played this for real. Some impressions.

Positive:
- Sieges are much improved, but still seems a bit easy for factions to take castles and cities. But the actual sieges both look and play better, I am yet to defend though as I sided with Vlandia who steamroll the empire.
- Battles also seem smoother and at least for me throwing seems to work better (might be because I didn't use it much before).
- There seem to be many different quests, felt way more than warband, but often IMO there are to few offered to you at any time, especially with lords and they are quite boring.
- Pack horses, was this in warband? I don't remember it. Might be a bit overpowered when it comes to making money.

Negative:
- Conversations and interactions with NPCs. limits the roleplaying, while I like the system for conversations there are so few things you can say, do and ask them. I expected way more here. There is little agency too and they could at least take some elements from Crusader kings.
- Only one tournament mode?
- to easy getting castles? i mean I managed to get the first taken castle after allying with Vlandia and then managed to barely steal a city too!

 

[Nathaniel3W]

kris pack horses were not in Warband, at least, not in vanilla. You had an inventory skill that you could increase when you level-up. I like how horses and mules work in Bannerlord. But there was some huge bug that was around for a long time and I don't know if TaleWorlds ever fixed it. You have a certain travel speed if your troops are on foot, and another travel speed if you have enough mounts for your infantry to ride, and you can carry more loot if you have pack animals like mules, but if you have too many animals (like if you're leading a big flock of sheep or cows or something) then that slows you down. There was a perk that cut the herd speed penalty in half, but it was bugged and the perk instead doubled the herd speed penalty.

Not sure what you mean by "only one tournament mode." There are team battles and the teams get smaller and smaller as more competitors get eliminated until it's one on one. Different towns give you different weapons and different styles of tournament.

The biggest lack of variety I found was bandit hideouts. Every single one of them is identical. Or rather, there are different versions depending on the kind of terrain you're on. But all of the mountain hideouts are exactly the same, all the desert hideouts are exactly the same, all the coastal hideouts are exactly the same.

Might be a bit overpowered when it comes to making money.

There are a few exploits that trivialize money. The worst is smithing. There's some certain kind of dagger that you can typically buy up to 200 of from a town, and you can melt those down to get a bunch of the best metal. And eventually you start buying all the weapons in every town and you melt down all of the weapons to get smithing supplies and to learn recipes. So you roll into town, spend 500k to buy all of the weapons in the whole city, then you spend the next few days with all your companions smelting and making charcoal while you make the most expensive javelins you can that you sell back to the city at a huge profit, and then you move on to the next town. If you let yourself start doing it, then the game becomes a grind of buy weapons, smelt weapons, forge weapons, sell weapons.

Another technique that doesn't feel as exploitative to me is getting the horse breeding perk. Every animal in your inventory has a 1% chance to reproduce every day. So if you have 100 noble mounts in your inventory, you get 1 new noble mount per day on average. Just in the time it takes for you to travel from one town to another you'll get another couple of noble mounts that you can sell. And thus begins your life as a travelling horse salesman.

 

[ArchAngel]

kris pack horses were not in Warband, at least, not in vanilla. You had an inventory skill that you could increase when you level-up. I like how horses and mules work in Bannerlord. But there was some huge bug that was around for a long time and I don't know if TaleWorlds ever fixed it. You have a certain travel speed if your troops are on foot, and another travel speed if you have enough mounts for your infantry to ride, and you can carry more loot if you have pack animals like mules, but if you have too many animals (like if you're leading a big flock of sheep or cows or something) then that slows you down. There was a perk that cut the herd speed penalty in half, but it was bugged and the perk instead doubled the herd speed penalty.

Not sure what you mean by "only one tournament mode." There are team battles and the teams get smaller and smaller as more competitors get eliminated until it's one on one. Different towns give you different weapons and different styles of tournament.

The biggest lack of variety I found was bandit hideouts. Every single one of them is identical. Or rather, there are different versions depending on the kind of terrain you're on. But all of the mountain hideouts are exactly the same, all the desert hideouts are exactly the same, all the coastal hideouts are exactly the same.

Might be a bit overpowered when it comes to making money.

There are a few exploits that trivialize money. The worst is smithing. There's some certain kind of dagger that you can typically buy up to 200 of from a town, and you can melt those down to get a bunch of the best metal. And eventually you start buying all the weapons in every town and you melt down all of the weapons to get smithing supplies and to learn recipes. So you roll into town, spend 500k to buy all of the weapons in the whole city, then you spend the next few days with all your companions smelting and making charcoal while you make the most expensive javelins you can that you sell back to the city at a huge profit, and then you move on to the next town. If you let yourself start doing it, then the game becomes a grind of buy weapons, smelt weapons, forge weapons, sell weapons.

Another technique that doesn't feel as exploitative to me is getting the horse breeding perk. Every animal in your inventory has a 1% chance to reproduce every day. So if you have 100 noble mounts in your inventory, you get 1 new noble mount per day on average. Just in the time it takes for you to travel from one town to another you'll get another couple of noble mounts that you can sell. And thus begins your life as a travelling horse salesman.

That second way is tiny money. Best way to earn money legally is to be a mercenary with smaller band (around 200) of elite troops and change Lords as soon as your faction is in total peace. Go around, beat all nobles you can find (that your current Lord is at war with) , sell the loot you get from them, sell captured troops and lords in towns and get lots of money per day from your Lord. Since you have no holdings all your money drainage is troops that go around with you.
You can earn many millions this way while leveling up a lot of skills and your clan level. By clan level 5 you got enough money to do whatever (like start your own kingdom and still be able to afford to get enemy lord to join, although if that is your plan you might want to release Lord prisoners instead of taking them prisoner so you get a lot of reputation with their clans).

 

[Zanzoken]

You make more money defeating one medium-sized enemy lord party and selling a few weapons and armor than you earn in several weeks of tax revenue being lord of a wealthy town. Just another example of how the game's economy is fucked.

 

[kris]

You make more money defeating one medium-sized enemy lord party and selling a few weapons and armor than you earn in several weeks of tax revenue being lord of a wealthy town. Just another example of how the game's economy is fucked.

Seems the problem in this aspect is how fielding an army is way to cheap, especially in provisions that never rot.

 

[kris]

Not sure what you mean by "only one tournament mode." There are team battles and the teams get smaller and smaller as more competitors get eliminated until it's one on one. Different towns give you different weapons and different styles of tournament.

As said, one tournament mode. It is always these group battles until last round. Here are some examples of different modes.
- All rounds one of one. (true mode!)
- Using own weapons.
- two formations against each other.
- All use the same weapon all rounds.
- Real jousting.

As it is every tournament feel the same, you just hope you get best weapons...

 

[Zanzoken]

You make more money defeating one medium-sized enemy lord party and selling a few weapons and armor than you earn in several weeks of tax revenue being lord of a wealthy town. Just another example of how the game's economy is fucked.

Seems the problem in this aspect is how fielding an army is way to cheap, especially in provisions that never rot.

You're probably right about that. I think a larger culprit is the insane price of items, particularly weapons and armor. High-level items in the game are worth like 5 figures, some maybe even 6, I can't remember exactly. You only get a fraction of that when you loot and sell them, but it still adds up quickly.

What's even more retarded is you can promote troops who have the exact same gear for like a few hundred gold. Where does the money for the ultra-expensive gear come from? Makes no sense.

Then meanwhile you have massive infrastructure projects like building up your castle walls, new buildings, etc that technically cost nothing, although they get done faster if you "boost" them with 20k gold or so. When in reality these should be extremely expensive projects that take years to fund and complete.

The devs really have no talent for designing any of this stuff though, which is why being a murderhobo merc as ArchAngel described is the most efficient way to advance your power. Ironically once you control land and vassals it becomes much harder to actually get things done.

 

[thesecret1]

Yeah, it feels as though they tried to gamify it instead of sticking with reality, and just arrived at a way worse model than a realistic one would be. Hiring a common thug should be cheap. Turning him into a professional soldier in heavy armor should cost shitloads, but it should also mean he's basically a medieval tank now and thus well worth the money. Money you'd get from villages and towns, which would now actually make more money than their shitty garrisons cost (even if you have a big garrison) and are, by orders of magnitude, more profitable by anything else in the game – hence why everyone covets them so much and why the player wants to get his hands on as many as he can as fast as he can rather than running a 200 men murderhobo gang.

On a positive note, all those things should be fixable with mods. In The Name of Jerusalem 2 already announced they'll be ditching the ridiculous troops trees where you take a bandit and turn him into a heavy cavalryman in two weeks or some shit, instead troops progression will be something like "footman recruit -> footman -> footman veteran". With, naturally, a large cost gap between hiring a footman and hiring a cavalryman.

 

[kris]

I never played in their default setting in mount and blade 1.

I am sure the modded worlds will be better in most ways.

 

[The Great Deceiver]

I never played in their default setting in mount and blade 1.

I am sure the modded worlds will be better in most ways.

When they eventually release.