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.
@@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.)
@@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.
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.
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.
@@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.
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.
@@ismaelgalindo Manor Lord's morale system does not have any additional factors that effect morale that Total War doesn't except for terrain and corpses. If you play the game, recent casualties in Manor Lords doesn't actually have much impact; casualties can accumulate to 70%+. Fatigue, flanking and rear charging also don't effect morale at all, they only effect combat stats. Many of the Total War titles do this WAY better. Corpses and terrain, the only unique addition in Manor Lord's morale system, is completely indiscriminate; it nerfs both sides equally, so it's not interesting from a gameplay perspective at all.
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.
Death casualties rarely reached 30% of an army Actually, most casualties occur only after the army begin to rout. It's when you break formations that the enemy can easily kill your men
Some historians figure that losses would have been as low as 5% during the actual battle with both sides actively fighting one another. Like you guys said, most losses would have been incurred during the retreat of the losing side. Soldiers in battle would have been far more conservative and less risk averse because of the fear of death. When the lines actually met for battle, they’d likely jab here and there with their weapons but rarely commit too much or else they’d expose themselves and risk their lives. Formations would have been extremely important to give the men a sense of safety, and to serve as a literal wall to prevent retreat. In addition, the fighting would have been in bursts rather than in a constant slog as depicted in total war or Manor Lords. The fighting would have been exhausting with the adrenaline rushing when the lines met, causing exhaustion after a short time. Thus, soldiers would have had to back off to rest, replace broken weapons, and replenish fluids and eat. To me these ideas of battle make sense as they account for human physiology and psychology. Exceptions must have existed as circumstances would lead different groups in space and time to risk more or less depending on a lot of factors. But in general, it seems to have been the norm. Unfortunately, games like Manor Lords now don’t provide as much entertainment for me as before with these ideas in mind. The short shows the men throwing themselves at each other in blobs. Bodies are strewn everywhere to the point where the peasants are stepping on them. This seems to be the rule rather than the exception. Morale systems might be more sensitive than previous games in similar style, but in the end are not that dissimilar. Don’t get me wrong I can still enjoy it but it makes me long for something a bit more in line with what I’ve discussed. Whether it would make for a fun game, I am not sure lol
@@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.
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
@@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.
If I remember correctly, it is estimated that in close quarters battles (pre guns) only 6% of cassualties were in combat, while the rest was when the enemy broke or fled (however in some cases it would not be applied though)
Many people's perception of medieval Europe was influenced by Hollywood. Hollywood's perception of medieval Europe was influenced by American-style "Renaissance fairs" (which is ironic on it's own because the renaissance was the period AFTER the medieval period) and nothing is a more unrealitistic representation of medieval Europe than that. Which is just another reason why I love games relatively realisitically representing the medieval period such as Manor Lords, Medieval dynasty, and Kingdom Come Deliverance.
The only difference between manor lords’ combat and pretty much every other medieval game’s combat is just scale. Basically it’s just a smaller version of total war.
Actually it was rare for armies to fight to the last man. Battles were won when with 40-50% casualties/army routes. The routed soldiers then would become bandits in many cases.
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.
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
Duh? My total war rome 2 brain remembers how my super heavy shock cavalry charges into the enemies from behind breaking their morale or how the general dies and the morale breaks...very unique indeed 😂
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.
I see a lot of people comparing this game to total war… but it’s nothing alike. I loooove the total war franchise, but this is like gwent, but with combat mechanics and civ style region claiming. And a lot more focus on city building/management. It’s a tough game but very fun to play
Ngl once I get my town to a point where it self sustains, I feel like i’ve done enough. Closed and uninstalled after that.. can’t be spreading myself across too many games. I almost missed important events in my 2 main games while trying to learn manor lords
This also fails to mention that the vast majority of casualties during medieval warfare was during routs, in which pursuing men would cut down those attempting to flee.
Can't believe Totally Accurate Battle Simulator lied to me
THIS IS TOP COMMENT
But this is not simulator.
😂😂😂
“IT SAYS TOTALLY ACCURATE! SO WHY ISNT IT ACCURATE!”
@@perfektplnot with that attitude
You just explained the mechanic that Total War’s been using for decades.
and that generals have been studying since the dawn of military theory
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.
@@alexlaws5086 yuh unless you play modded
@@anthonycosta8816 If it's modded, it doesn't count as a game mechanic.
@@alexlaws5086 nah Im just saying, I do agree with you. Vanilla total war is pretty arcadey, which is why they make realism mods
Every total war game from 2000s:
Yep, but he got the views and that is what matters :)
Lol....
Until you spam missile Calvary on Every Unit...
The fact that folks keep commenting this knowing that TW has a notoriously superficial morale system is just pandering.
@@blanktrigger8863 Name a single factor Manor Lords has influence morale that Total War has not.
@@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.)
Wow they invented moral system!
Like Total War did...
Total War’s Morale system is garbage, it’s only good when modded like in NTW3
@@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.
@@neurotic3015 yes but it’s not as good as manor lords
@@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.
@@neurotic3015 agreed, TW morale is fine. How about worrying about things manor lords actually does better?
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
@@Steven-cf1ty Most, as in small infighting in the HRE, not the gigantic battles in the 100 years war
There were hundreds of thousands of people fighting in crusades for example. Maybe not at the same place at the same time but thousands certainly.
@@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.
@@TiernanOlearyDxmbComment
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.
😅😂😂 man I can imagine the deflated sigh 😅
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.
@@ismaelgalindo Did you win?
@@Alex-tx2em yes
No general, no moral and in a siege troops lose morale like It never existed
Manor Lords seems cool but come on, Total War already had such a battle system 25 years ago
Game is made by 1 person and you compare it to a triple AAA studio, my God if I didn't think gamers were that dumb, I just keep getting reminded.
@@ChristinaWintherLolk I dont say it's bad or unimpressive, I just say the battle system is not an innovation
@@Nt26417 bc its doesn need to be, there games battle is only an addon to the city building
@@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.
You're right. There is no other game in existence or in history that uses morale. And there never will be.
Apparently you forgot about the Total War series.
That's not true, there are even games that take stress and shellshock into account, like WarGame Red Dragon, for example.
@@trexy6237there’s a thing called sarcasm
@@MrEnric98 Oh WoW, I didn't know Red dragon would count Stress and Shellshock.
@@fattysun1121
We can't tell if he is being sarcastic or not.. No overt indication, and the statement is made flatly.
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....
TW has used a superficial morale system that's functionally irrelevant.
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.
@@ismaelgalindo Manor Lord's morale system does not have any additional factors that effect morale that Total War doesn't except for terrain and corpses.
If you play the game, recent casualties in Manor Lords doesn't actually have much impact; casualties can accumulate to 70%+. Fatigue, flanking and rear charging also don't effect morale at all, they only effect combat stats. Many of the Total War titles do this WAY better.
Corpses and terrain, the only unique addition in Manor Lord's morale system, is completely indiscriminate; it nerfs both sides equally, so it's not interesting from a gameplay perspective at all.
Total War veterans getting confused because this has always been their mindset
Knights of Honor 1 - Lost Battle soundtrack
"Disregard everything you think you know about medieval warfare... except don't because it's right"
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.
Death casualties rarely reached 30% of an army
Actually, most casualties occur only after the army begin to rout. It's when you break formations that the enemy can easily kill your men
Some historians figure that losses would have been as low as 5% during the actual battle with both sides actively fighting one another. Like you guys said, most losses would have been incurred during the retreat of the losing side.
Soldiers in battle would have been far more conservative and less risk averse because of the fear of death. When the lines actually met for battle, they’d likely jab here and there with their weapons but rarely commit too much or else they’d expose themselves and risk their lives. Formations would have been extremely important to give the men a sense of safety, and to serve as a literal wall to prevent retreat.
In addition, the fighting would have been in bursts rather than in a constant slog as depicted in total war or Manor Lords. The fighting would have been exhausting with the adrenaline rushing when the lines met, causing exhaustion after a short time. Thus, soldiers would have had to back off to rest, replace broken weapons, and replenish fluids and eat.
To me these ideas of battle make sense as they account for human physiology and psychology. Exceptions must have existed as circumstances would lead different groups in space and time to risk more or less depending on a lot of factors. But in general, it seems to have been the norm.
Unfortunately, games like Manor Lords now don’t provide as much entertainment for me as before with these ideas in mind. The short shows the men throwing themselves at each other in blobs. Bodies are strewn everywhere to the point where the peasants are stepping on them. This seems to be the rule rather than the exception. Morale systems might be more sensitive than previous games in similar style, but in the end are not that dissimilar.
Don’t get me wrong I can still enjoy it but it makes me long for something a bit more in line with what I’ve discussed. Whether it would make for a fun game, I am not sure lol
@@eds1057 totaly agree !
history militum has made a good vidéo about this. It focused on the roman legions but i think it could have a broader reach.
Reasons such as being cornered without a way out. This is why it's important to give your enemies a way to retreat to prevent unnecessary losses.
Mount and Blade also uses this system, and the size of the battles just feels cooler too.
I just wished this game was like mount and blade as well, an rts but in tps or fps mode or at least you can participate in some of the battles
Nah mere peasants charging into a tier 5 line then fighting till the end is NOT realistic
So... don't disregard everything I think I know about medieval warfare?
I suppose he was referring to the average person who knows nothing about medieval times… who wouldn’t play the game.
☝️🤓
@@alexadamson9959 Except this is like common sense, no shit morale is a thing, even in movies.
@@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.
I love manor lord I am like 100 hours in. But it feels like total war jr
bruh, total war series already introduce tjia moral combat system like 20 years ago
The music is from - Knights of Honor - not 2 if somebody searches for it. 🙂
A morale mechanic? Yes, that is indeed unique. I can't think of a single other battle simulation game which has incorporated a morale mechanic.
Neither can I. Not a single franchise that has been doing it for over two decades.
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
Wow morale for troops is so unique mechanics never existed in strategies before
Being a huge fan of Strong hold and Age of empires growing up- I will definitely be purchasing this art piece of a game
Thank you for implementing Knights of Honor's OST, one of the greatest game soundtracks of all times.
Ck3 mix with manor Lords game is needed
Play total war
@@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.
I get that’s a lot still but I’ve seen battles with over 20,000 and I wanna do that too 😅😂
play total war three kingdoms dude. Its got the ck relationships and ai with the total war combat
I am liking Manor Lords so much. Can't wait for it to be finished.
There were alot of medieval battles that ended before the fighting even started because one side broke and ran before the two sides got to each other
Thank you for using Knights of Honor 1 music, totally underrated! As others already mentioned, Mount and Blade 2 Bannerlord also uses this mechanic
If I remember correctly, it is estimated that in close quarters battles (pre guns) only 6% of cassualties were in combat, while the rest was when the enemy broke or fled (however in some cases it would not be applied though)
Total war players: Now do you realise this?
Many people's perception of medieval Europe was influenced by Hollywood. Hollywood's perception of medieval Europe was influenced by American-style "Renaissance fairs" (which is ironic on it's own because the renaissance was the period AFTER the medieval period) and nothing is a more unrealitistic representation of medieval Europe than that.
Which is just another reason why I love games relatively realisitically representing the medieval period such as Manor Lords, Medieval dynasty, and Kingdom Come Deliverance.
The Templars, though, were known for fighting to the death. The Assassins were another group of people who embraced death.
There was still what was known as "set battles" that were huge, Crècy for example
The only difference between manor lords’ combat and pretty much every other medieval game’s combat is just scale. Basically it’s just a smaller version of total war.
You’re the goat with manor lords content. Keep it up.
Bagpipes make a lot of sense now.
Nice to hear Manor Lords invented battle moral...
What Manor Lords teached me is that it was much more convenient for a local ruler to hire mercenaries rather than to arm its own citizens
This is genius and scary how its close to reality
There was this game called Z, that you had also something like a morale thing that would lead to soldiers to run away if outnumbered.
Actually it was rare for armies to fight to the last man. Battles were won when with 40-50% casualties/army routes. The routed soldiers then would become bandits in many cases.
Forget everything I know? Ok, deleting Total War collection from my mind.
I honestly i love its combat in game
It doesnt make it unique though, as many other games also implement troop morale.
Well Total War series had this system already since, maybe, 2000'ish... But it is nice to see that being applied to Manor Lords as well.
The expression is "further FROM the truth".
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.
Battle is not won by killing of every enemy you see, but it does help not complicate the process
Manor lords is cool camt wait to see where they go with it
Total War Series is the first game that I played using a morale system for the battle.
Knights of honor song 🥰
Scare tactics used by Transylvania to this day 😮
Most casualties in combat back then was caused by the opposing army routing then getting stabbed in the back ☠️
Morale mechanics have been around since the dawn of RTS
Bannerlord and Total War series have been doing it for quite a while
So warfare is just a giant glorified game of chicken?
Surprisingly, people don't wnat to die-- so as soon as you feel like you're losing-- you'd wnat to run
Gorified
@@MAGS-ik5uj hah nice
How are you normies just now realizing this
Even modern warfare, both sides are chickening each other until one disengaged
"forget everything you know about medieval warfare because this game portrays it differently"?
He just described total war
I give you credit for bgm from Knights of honor! An amazing game
"The goal is not to kill every soldier". Proceeds to show 80% of the armies dead on the field and every remaining soldier fighting to the death
The Hegemony series treats ancient warfare identically.
Dig a trench. Build a fence. Sit down. Profit
And all of that by just one dev.
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
Morale ratings in wargames have been standard for decades.
wow thats something completley new. MORAL :D:D
Total War has it like 20 years ago
Total war invented this mechanic like 20 years ago
Actually Total War and Bannerlord's both have morale triggers, they can be modified by the commander and experience of the troop's.
nice aggressive playstyle
80% of strategy's games come with this built in
A whole 60 second short to say the combat uses morale like total war does
I love that type of games (;
Duh? My total war rome 2 brain remembers how my super heavy shock cavalry charges into the enemies from behind breaking their morale or how the general dies and the morale breaks...very unique indeed 😂
Welcome to total war in 2000
the song on this video is my favourite. i know it from knights and honor.
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.
Peeps keep saying Total War has been doing the morale thing but I first learned this from Sid Meier's Gettysburg
in Battle of Grunwald there were 50 tousands men in total fighting only 10 tousands die most of them when they were retreating
"Disregard almost everything you think you know about warfare"
*proceeds to talk about something that people think they know about warfare*
Give us horse archers!🙏🏽
Manor lords was far from the first to include moral and routing. Total War series does it well, Mount & Blade as well
I see a lot of people comparing this game to total war… but it’s nothing alike. I loooove the total war franchise, but this is like gwent, but with combat mechanics and civ style region claiming. And a lot more focus on city building/management. It’s a tough game but very fun to play
Say anything you want about creative assembly but total war does moral total war mechanics are crazy better than manor lords
I haven’t seen one person online that can manage an army in manor lords. The modern nerd mind does not understand the battlefield.
Do one on unit cohesion!
That is why... Archers are BLIND.
Ngl once I get my town to a point where it self sustains, I feel like i’ve done enough. Closed and uninstalled after that.. can’t be spreading myself across too many games. I almost missed important events in my 2 main games while trying to learn manor lords
This also fails to mention that the vast majority of casualties during medieval warfare was during routs, in which pursuing men would cut down those attempting to flee.
No but there were moments where they would indeed fight to the last man.
Yes and there is a monkey that can do ASL...
So unique, just like Total War
Meanwhile in the clip we see 80% of the army lying dead which is unrealistic.
just like in any other strategy game
do people actually think that medieval battles routinely ended in the deaths of every single person on the losing side?
Ceaser 3 had same function we need ceaser 5
The music from knights of honor
Nothing special this has been the core of total war battles for over 20 years
bro has NOT been playing medieval 2
So basically the same as every Total War game over the past 24 years
Music from Knights of Honor
Looks more like a skirmish, there are so few units on the field.