Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

I wish you luck on your fight. When you are the marshall it's rather easy to take land from other kingdoms... like really easy. However when their marshall rolls up with 9 lords trailing, it gets ugly real fast.

Just finished a siege battle of 1100 mixed Vaegir troops against 300 mixed Swadian Knights, Huscarls, and Nord top tier bowmen that I forget the names of.

Fought for about 40 minutes.

I have 4 men left to guard this castle.

Just the 4.

EDIT:Fixed number typo

I had an epic fight the other day. the enemy sultanate troops decided I was a big threat and took like 1000 troops against my 72 Tier 6 troops.

It took like 2.5 hours, but I won! I got a MASSIVE amount of renown, and repacked like 3/4 of my inv with good stuff.

1. Now i've progressed to another stage of M&B: With Fire and Sword gaming. now i've been invited to join Muscovite Tsardom by the Tsar himself. I did so and has been awarded with a hamlet near Polotsk (can't remeber a name). How can I improve the feif prosperity? if all if five structures are already built and vital positions inside the fief are all occupied.
2. How does siege works? what does Engineering skills do in siege? does it allows player to build cannons of a player is an attacker?

Ugh, the Rhodok empire, who i've been backing, decided to take me out. So Ima need to restart. For the second time. Maybe do some fire/sword

Day 428ish.

Leaving off from the last time, Tulga had just fallen due to an idiotic negotiation on my part and worse yet there was now a 1000-1300 man campaign at Tulga that was untouched. To make matters even worse the Steppes bandit lord was out in full force with a ~1000 man force that my Lord kept running headlong into... idiots. I quickly retreated back to Distar castle to collect my thoughts and prepare for impending siege, but strangely they didn't come... no... They were heading for Ichamur the city I had just captured from them. In a panic I canceled my campaign and restarted it praying for reinforcements before they got to the city. 2 Lords showed up with only about 60 men each, and I had 250. The main enemy force started to siege the castle but the sultan's 660 man force lagged behind. In a last ditch effort I charged at his force, but my two lords retreated at the last minute leaving me along in the fight.

My 250 men vs. the sultan's 660 man force, wow am I an idiot. This was a reallllly ditch effort move, and even if I won there was still easily 600+ men laying siege to Ichamur. However if I didn't stop them I was going to lose everything! Great... -14 advantage and better yet I got knocked out about 5 minutes into the battle. The first wave of the sultans force was high level cav and was knocking out my guys left and right. It wasn't looking good... but as the battle raged on the enemy forces were getting weaker and weaker at a seriously high rate, but since my force was elite I was mowing through them. The battle lasted about 45mins-1hour but I had won!!! Me: 15 killed 58 unconscious Sultan: 58 killed 602 unconscious LOLOLOLOL. I should be named Rob the Merciful after that fight. With that fight won I got a surge of "I can do this!" so I rushed to Ichamur.

The enemy was still preparing for the siege when I arrived and I had guessed right, just over 600 men. I snuck into the city and sold off my prisoners for a nice 16,000 gold payday and quickly hired all the mercenaries in the tavern. I was sitting at about 100 men on the walls and 260 men in my force, with a large portion injured so I rested for a bit. As we relaxed before the inevitable fight my other lords started showing up with abysmally low numbers. This however worked to my advantage as 2 of the siege lords got anxious and charged at them with about 200 men, knowing I wouldn't get this change again I left the city to join the fight on the exposed enemy forces which ended in a clear victory for my side... the enemy was now down to about 400 men as another enemy lord joined the siege. However while I left the city the enemies began their assault on the city against the poor 100 man defenders. I rushed in to assist but my other lords were too afraid to join. Here we go again, my now 300ish men vs. their 400.

This battle was a shear slaughter. With the combined force of my elite slavers blocking the ladders and my archers laying into their men, the fight was literally a game of tower defense as enemies rushed the walls and were mowed down. The enemy force was broken! With Ichmur secured I rested a while to recover my men and my lord started to show up... gee thanks guys. I gave them all some men to bolster their numbers and began my reign of revenge. First stop, Tulga. On the way down I recruited from villages and freed captured me from bandits tossing the new recruits to my other lords. At this point we were rolling about 5 lords deep with 100+ men. Tulga met my wraith in full force, reclaiming my city from the 260ish defenders. I then swept up the steppes into the desert capturing 4 castles in a rage infused fury. Along the way 11-12 enemy lords fell like wheat to my scythe. Two enemy Lords that I had befriended before all this insanity happened were talked into joining me in exchange for 2 of the newly captured castles to include Aeric, the brother of my in game wife!

With my land expanded I approached a truce with the Sultanate who was now FURIOUS at me, but they buckled and agreed having lost thousands and thousands of men. Time for some peace and rebuilding before my next campaign.


Now own: Tulga, Ichmur, Bariyye, 7 castles, and 13 fiefs.

Anyone tried the new (?) Captain Co-op mode for fire & Sword. Its a big fun, a shame there isnt one for warband yet. There should be a none co-op version too.

"Captain Co-op"? omg, we need this for Warband!

BlueDagger: That sounds amazing

 Lynata wrote:
"Captain Co-op"? omg, we need this for Warband!

BlueDagger: That sounds amazing

I also like warband better, but you should try it out!


http://youtu.be/lRwu8PiK4Vk

 Orlanth wrote:
Anyone play it, which version should I get, apparently there are four stand alones currently.

I would bypass Mount and Blade, and go for the kind-of sequel, War of The Roses. It's a lot more fun

War of the Roses is though is kinda Mount and Blade, but doesn't seem as good. Is there a single player?

Yeah, War of the Roses is definitely inferior to Mount and Blade. War of the Roses doesn't even have single player, and hell, it doesn't even have female characters in it. Either one of which would make it inferior to Mount and Blade. Being purely multiplayer makes the game far too repetitive, especially for those of us that prefer the single player aspect anyway. And let's not even get in to the idiocy over not including female characters again.

Plus, as much as I like the improved graphics, that will hurt the modding scene.

I still dont get what should be good about War of the roses. I many instead of a single player, and 7 different factions, you just get an graphic overhaul and two almost identical factions.

It will have a singleplayer, but it hasn't been implemented yet. Also, the game goes for realism, so there were no female knights/warriors

thefarseerofnorthryde wrote:Also, the game goes for realism, so there were no female knights/warriors

Except there were. And whole orders of them.
According to the Bridport Muster Roll, one of the few remaining military records from that time, to this day preserved in the UK Royal Armouries, they were even recruited into the armies for the War of the Roses too - so this game excluding them is actually a historical inconsistency born out of pure ignorance, sexist clichés and lack of historical knowledge, just like so many other "realistic" games that should have some women but don't.

This has been discussed before, so I don't feel inclined to throw a hissy fit about it yet again. Still it's something that people should be aware of. "Historical realism" my ass.
They should've just said they excluded them to save developer resources, that would have been less revisionist.

Even if women weren't involved in combat during the War of the Roses there still wouldn't be any ground for lack of female characters because, lets face it, the game doesn't go for complete realism considering the 'stabby stabby face visor' finishers and so on.

Let us NOT get locked into this feminist vs anti-feminist fight please. Its extremely OT.

If you want to talk about War of the Roses, you're gonna be talking about that, because it's one of the game's many flaws.

Well this isn't the war of the roses thread. Its the Mount and Blade thread. The war of the roses thread got locked because of this arguement, so please if you want to argue, do it on another thread, or take it to PMing.

I just don't want to see the Mount and Blade thread locked.

Do'nt look at me, I'd rather not talk about that game either. It's boring.

Did you saw?

http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/1711512107/chivalry-medieval-warfare?ref=category

 Lynata wrote:

thefarseerofnorthryde wrote:Also, the game goes for realism, so there were no female knights/warriors

Except there were. And whole orders of them.
According to the Bridport Muster Roll, one of the few remaining military records from that time, to this day preserved in the UK Royal Armouries, they were even recruited into the armies for the War of the Roses too - so this game excluding them is actually a historical inconsistency born out of pure ignorance, sexist clichés and lack of historical knowledge, just like so many other "realistic" games that should have some women but don't.

This has been discussed before, so I don't feel inclined to throw a hissy fit about it yet again. Still it's something that people should be aware of. "Historical realism" my ass.
They should've just said they excluded them to save developer resources, that would have been less revisionist.

That was a LOT of links Sorry for any offence, it seems I should have done more research before posting

thefarseerofnorthryde wrote:That was a LOT of links Sorry for any offence, it seems I should have done more research before posting

No worries, and no offence taken - it really isn't common knowledge.
Which is kinda sad when you think about it tho. Even in school, people are taught that all knights = men, no exceptions. Whilst the ratio of female combatants during medieval times was very likely extremely small (for the War of the Roses, it was just about 3% in the Bridport Muster roll for the Lancastrian troops, as far as could be recovered from the text), they did exist, and civilisation simply forgetting this fact does no good to the common perception of the role of women in today's society.

Apologies for sidetracking the thread, too - I just feel compelled to point out stuff like this specifically because very few people are aware of it, due to no fault of their own. Years ago, I would've said the same thing, really.

Dark Scipio wrote:Did you saw?
http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/1711512107/chivalry-medieval-warfare?ref=category

Dammit... The game looks awesome in visual terms, but from what I understood, it's a little like Battlefield or COD just with swords, meaning no unique characters etc - just select a class and jump into the action?
I guess that has some advantages, too, but I'm a sucker for customisation. :(