#manorlords #gaming Unlike most games where you have to rely on pure brute force, in Manor Lords, there is a unique mechanic that many games do not have.
Except in Total War, armies still generally take upwards of 75% casualties in almost every battle. It takes a ridiculous amount of bodies to rout a unit, which isn't realistic at all.
@@flyingsquirrell6953 That’s too general a statement- in some of the TW games it’s fine, in others it’s pretty bad. Like in Attila, it’s decent, in Napoleon it’s pretty bad.
@@flyingsquirrell6953 Arguing it’s better is dumb because from a gameplay perspective the morale system in Manor Lords wouldn’t work well for Total War. 90% of people don’t want their troops to break after 20-30% casualties.
@@chosenrubric7308 The challenge should have been, describe how TW's morale system is superficial. A superficial morale system can overlap with a robust one in terms of checklist features without the system itself mattering that much. I've played a recent enough number of years ago to remember what the battles were like. Breaking comes after so much damage is dealt that breaking may as well not even be a mechanic. (The exception to this was targeted flaming artillery fire and maybe arrow fire in the back, but I've watched a lot of tournaments on Pixelated Apollo's channel, and even arrow fire in the back is quite shaky. From my memory, that's including fire arrows, which are supposed to be specifically for lowering morale.)
@@ChristinaWintherLolk Man, again with the "One person has done it." No, on paper one person has done it. He had countless help from modelers, sound artist, hystorian etc. The game is fantastic and all, but it was not done by a single person.
@@Nt26417Nobody was saying it was an innovation as a game mechanic. The narrator was saying it’s different than movies because of realistic morale penalties.
Medieval battles in movies: Massive battles with 1000’s of people where everyone is in plate and has a sword and heater shield with terrifying Knight charges, with casualties reaching the 1000’s (Most)Medieval battles in real life: A small skirmish between 20 men because Sir Charles Wilhelm Fredrick Louis Karl Fartberg the IV count of Fartberg didn’t give the King a Boat, with only 3 injured and the two “Armies” had a ceasefire in the middle of the battle because everyone got tired(Historians say it was the most bloodiest battle in the Fartberg war)
Read your histories again. Medieval battles were very organized things with a lot more people than you'd fit in a movie. Small skirmishes were far from the only thing happening at the time. As well, cavalry charges were very much still the crux of a battle as they were before the fall of Rome and as they would be after the enlightenment
@@TiernanOleary you wouldn't typically include the small scale robberies done in feuds. Gotz von B. is remembered for his campaigning against Czechs and Swiss or with the peasant rebellion, not for the time the emperor scolded him for robbing a bishop he feuded with.
Think I read somewhere that after around 30% of the enemy army dies, they usually retreat in fear. Nobody wants to die, after all. But there are times when people fight to the death for a reason.
I'm not all that smart, George, but even I know that the Total War series has been doing that morale thing for like 24 years in which they introduced in their very first game, Shogun. Loop dee loop dee loop loop doop doop doooooo....
I think it refers to the fact that it is more complex since you have more things to take care of, for example in TW the only things that cause a strong loss of morale are: losing 70% of the soldiers in the unit, being surrounded, in some cases special abilities and lose the general Here you can have a unit in practically perfect condition that ends up escaping because it has many corpses around it, is very tired and is fighting in a territory different from its own.
@@ismaelgalindo Tell me you've only played Rome 2 or Warhammer without telling me you've only played R2/WH. I mod for Total War, so let me inform you. The following impacts morale: - Casualties from 10%-90% - Sudden casualties aka 'morale shock' (ie volley fire, gunpowder, artillery, shock cavalry) - Fatigue state - Losing/winning combat - Friendly fire - Rear/flanking - Fleeing enemies - Fleeing allies (chain routes) - Defending town/fort - Defending town center/plaza These are all factors which are (mostly) still present even in newer titles, they've just been atrociously watered down to basically have zero impact (seriously, in the WH trilogy friendly fire is a -1 debuff, in a game where even trash units have 20-30 leadership) Play some of the older titles or modded to emulate old morale mechanics and you can get a feel for how good the franchise *used* to be.
@@chosenrubric7308 I say strong loss of morale I know what things causes morale lost, And btw i have play * Shogun2 * Medieval 2 *Rome 2 * Rome * Atila and just to clarify in most old titles you have more units fighting to the death than I have seen in videos of the WH trilogy I have had a single unit of spearmen that stays to fight until the end, holding out longer than the entire unit.
@@tingispingis casually rates for medieval battles where around 5% for the winning side and around 30% for the losing side. This is because most of the death happens after the other army starts to run. One unit breaks, then the one next to is less inclined to fight and breaks even sooner, and on and on until we reach a critical point of mass routing. Moral is huge. Take 2 seconds to think about and you realise when people are loosing a fight to the death are more inclined to decide to go home. I’ve noticed this with total war games. I end up killing 4/5 of the army before I win. If you want to simulate actual combat you need to assassinate the enemy generals first. And even then you need to bee fighting a triple army so the enemy get 3x the moral debuff and make them walk all the way across the map to get to you so they get another moral debuff from exhaustion. I’ve looked for mods that nerf moral, but tragically I found non.
Total war has taught me lesson more times than I’d like to admit. lol I had a large army facing an enemy army and a cannon ball bounced at just the right angle and took out my general way in the back. All my men saw this and put up very little resistance before breaking.
once playing total war shogun 2 in a siege battle with someone who was micromanaging his infantry a lot so he was distracted so I managed to infiltrate a light cavalry to the backs of the army and in a single distraction I managed to charge against the general killing him in the charge, it is worth saying that this person had a much larger army than mine given the difference in funds.
Oh wow a mechanic that TOTALLY no other game or any form of media has represented before, that's so crazy thanks for telling us about that we had no idea that's what happened in battle's
When the enemy routed was when the vast majority of casualties would take place. Cavalry would be used to chase down fleeing soldiers. It was a bad and terrifying experience if you were caught on the side of an army that shattered.
@@ahegaomemnon2059I like total war but I hate how in total war Rome 2 the armies feel so small, is it because my PC isn’t powerful enough? I can only get like 10,000 troops max on the map.
And also not every battle is this massive 5,000 soldier battle. Most of your fights will be much smaller scale until you’re taking the last couple of regions
I feel like Manor Lord on my machine is completely different game. Every single combat I fought was fought until last one enemy soldier died. I never saw any enemy soldier run from battle.
This game CANNOT FALL into the Total war Jr category just because of the “moral system” and “ battle system” -- when your literally BUILDING a CITY to conquer more territories with the army you establish.
and the lie in Hollywood is using swords in medieval wars theyve usen spears more because its long spears can penetrate some different armors like chain but swords cant
And the combat in ML is more of a side note to the game. Only reason it's in the game is so you have a reason to build the swords shields and armor and bows.
people saying total war had morale before yes it had ot gave each unit a set number for morale that could be affected by being flanked or having a commander newar them, manor lords moral is affected by their happiness as population, how much rest they get, their quality(militia have less morale i believe while retinue have more) and their morale affects their efficiency, meaning a militia with high morale can beat a retinue with low morale total war doesnt have that.
I mean ya thousands of troops did fight in battles. But they almost never ended up in a total loss for any side. Most armies didnt even send in their full forces either. A little here. A little here. Gauge ur losses, retreat or advance.
I think the morale is way too quick to drain. You end up only getting half the value of a mercenary unit or end up utterly crushing the other army, but not being able to kill off the army. I know it's technically bad to have more bodies to clean up. But when I've managed to perfectly surround a couple of units, and then they all rout and just run through my battle lines without getting touched, it feels a bit pointless. You should at least have the option to kill retreating enemies like in total war. When ai city building is a thing, it will also be a strategic choice to reduce their population and production.
Murder, even in war was frowned upon between fellow christians, so killing retreating enemies was not that common, especially in small feuds like the ones in this game.
@jamie_d0g978 sure. But human instinct and heat of passion has led to so many atrocities throughout human history. If the guy that killed one of your friends earlier is fleeing the battle, you're not going to just let him go because it would be the Christian thing to do.
@@spaghettimkay5795 So your pro human atrocities? Thats wild bro. Nothing wrong with not killing fleeing enemies. Its only really in video games that we are f'd up like that. lol
Tu ejército son o: A: milicias, no son tropas profesionales, les falta entrenamiento y disciplina, por supuesto que huyen pronto. B: mercenarios, luchan por dinero, si mueren no les vale el dinero de nada. Claro que las batallas acaban rápido.
I spend 500h watched the entire down fall of rome and the 100 years war beteewn the frank and briston and many more in history marches. I can confirm this is realistic.
It was thousands of.... Remamber on Rome. Holy German Empire... French English War. Thousands vs thousands. And Mount and Blade or Total War have "same" combat system.
Funny how the video is targeted (in his language) to people who dont sit and play medievel games all day and total war games. Normal people who actually dont consider moral and such. But of course it gets recommended to a bunch of nerds (including me) and its just a massive moshpit of yesmen.
It generally was thousands of soldiers though, don't hinge your argument of the game being historically accurate on something that has everything to do with the technological limitations, and nothing to do with historical accuracy.
There are things this game excels at, but combat is not one of them. These systems are cool, however, the AI just isn't good enough. Archers are much faster than other units and can effectively retreat indefinitely. You can literally sidestep a point-blank charge with them, it's hilarious. You hold aggro with multiple archer battalions and pick off the rest with more archers. You don't even need a frontline. Bows are also extremely easy to make, so you also never really run out of resources. The combat definitely needs a bit more TLC at this point in early access.
