1,065.4 hours played
Written 13 days ago
It feels like there has always been so much potential with this game, but it was never realized.
The combat system is glorious, in my opinion. Mounts and mounted combat handles exceptional compared to other games I played, and melee fighting also feels very satisfying to me. Ranged does its job as well. Only small nitpick, spears are useless, doing barely any damage in most cases, and never got fixed. Attack damage type and armor should matter more. But at least it feels good to hit things!
The problem is, this game should be about a lot more than close combat, and this is where it falls short of what it could have been.
Managing and commanding your party in and for combat is a mess.
You are not able to assign your soldiers into specific formations outside of battle. Only at the beginning of a battle can you set up formations, but you cannot sort specific troops into specific formations, like swordmen into one formation, pikemen into another or dividing bow- and crossbowmen. It only allows you to set formations to "melee", "ranged", "mounted" and "ranged mounted".
Coordinating your troops in combat does not work too well. I understand it tries to simulate the difficulty of having to command people from the ground, but in real life you can much easier tell someone "take position on that hill" than trying to order your troops onto a hill in Bannerlord while you are on the other side of the hill. A quick way to switch between a bird's eye view and controlling your character would be great. it would also be great to be able to switch to companions when your character is knocked out during combat, instead of having to watch the AI battle it out (badly, usually).
The difficulty of commanding troops becomes moot though, since all that usually needs to be done is waiting for the enemy to be weakened by your ranged troops, followed by hitting F1-F3 to win the battle. Because that's what it devolves to in the end anyway, hoping for your side to simply be stronger, with little regards for tactics.
This sadly is not a Rome Total War kind of game when it comes to battles - and the sad thing is, in my opinion, it could have been.
On a grand scale, the game is lacking even more. The low number of towns can quickly cause one side to snowball, as capturing even one or two of them puts the side at a great advantage. It would have been better if there had been more towns, instead of modeling them completely. When have you walked through the interior of them last? I can go a whole playthrough without actually seeing the nicely modeled insides besides the parts used for combat... Same goes for castles.
It would also need more (smaller, land-owning) factions and more actual rebellions to prevent the snowballing.
This results in an even bigger problem for the grand scale - politics are pretty much non-existent. Yes, there will be wars, there will be alliances, but nothing really feels indepth. This is not Crusader Kings, maybe it need not be, but it would have been nice if it provided at least some basic elements of such a game. The potential was there.
The world feels small, and still empty somehow. I think it's because of the large towns/fortresses, but also because villages do not really matter.
World map party handling is another part which could have been improved. It's nice that all parties actually travel on the world map, including other lords, traders, village and bandit parties. Could have used some more variety, but even more so, there are no random events when traveling, you cannot lie in ambush waiting for trading parties or get ambushed. Trying to hunt down enemy parties becomes a long chase, hoping that the other party is slower or the AI makes a mistake and you finally catch up to them. This is even more of a problem when you are in a slow army. Battles only happen when the other side thinks they are stronger, you happen to be faster (usually due to outsmarting AI) or for sieges.
Making money mainly relies on smithing for me. Forget trading, forget trying to rely on workshops. Trading is just tedious, you buy goods, travel to a location you heard has a good price, and by the time you arrived, it either does not anymore, or you sell only a few items and the price drops so much it barely makes profit after the first. Workshops have never worked properly. Though they did change it so you get more loot from defeating enemies, so you can also make good money by defeating bandits and hostiles parties. Towns and fortresses barely pay for their own garrison.
Many of these things are tackled by mods, some are implemented quite well by those, others as well as possible. But mods can only do so much, and many things just should have been in the game to begin with.
I will probably keep coming back to it, just to realize, ever faster with every run I try to do, that there simply is not enough to do in the game, not enough happening. It feels like there is a framework for everything, but nothing is build onto it, though, having made some small mods myself, it also feels very messy on the insides.
A lot of time seems to have been focussed on things that eventually do not matter in the actual game, like the fully designed towns and fortresses, while the mechanics that matter, like politics, are lacking.
Is it fun? Well, I played for over 1'000 h. Most of it with at least some mods, though not with major reworks. Over time, its flaws just outshine its upsides for me.
If you can grab it for a cheap price, it's worth it. You can definitely spend some hours in the game, and there are some good mods out there. It will always have some flaws though.
To me, it just never embraced the potential it had, and with a DLC now looming, I do not foresee it ever embracing that potential. Mods can only do so much, and relying on mod makers to finish your game is just not (always) feasible.