Topic: The Missing Features of a Love Child

So by now the influences of franchises such as XCOM and Mount & Blade are quite glaringly obvious (not to mention openly stated by the devs).
I wanted to revisit these two classics in particular to look at whats not yet found its way into Battle Brothers (a game I have little to no doubt will be just as much a classic).

Trade and Economy: in Mount & Blade, trade is a very profitable enterprise. The lack of some goods in one town or village, means that they fetch a higher price than those well stocked in said resource. Although the mercenary band is predominantly occupied by quests, given the nature of their occupation. Trade seems like a good and viable option for making cash on the side. While a crafting system, to me, seems very grindy (and a bit of a chore). Trading seems like a good way to determine the types of items, certain villages, towns and cities have. So for example, a city well stocked in Iron will produce higher quality gear of the metal variety. A town well stocked in Hides will produce more leather based armour for the player to purchase. Looting by NPCs will effect the general wealth of cities, and towns. Draining the town of resources, weapons and even hireable mercenaries. Protecting settlements thus becomes a priority for the player, or it is at least in their interests to protect settlements. The abundance of certain resources could also translate into what types of brothers (and eventually sisters) could be hired. A town well stocked in Iron, may generate more ‘blacksmiths’, one with more hides, may produce more ‘hunters’ etc. So there could be a very strategic (but not overly complex) system for generating mercs and items. The player could manipulate this economy through trade, which would not only reward gold, but benefit the settlements (particularly those that are underdeveloped) in the long-run.

Bases: so in XCOM, theres a Hub – a HQ – that is upgradable. For Battle Brothers to have such a feature would be counterintuitive to the ‘roaming band of mercenaries’ the devs are going for. This has been outwardly stated on numerous occasions, and it makes sense. But, I can understand the counter argument. The key terms here, are ‘progression’ and ‘customisation’. Not just in XCOM, but in Mount and Blade, the player could own property and upgrade these bases, there was a sense of progression because these bases upgraded and to some extent could be customised. So, how then could such a feature make its way into Battle Brothers in a way that matched the theme. I think this could be achieved through the recruitment of NPCs which are unique and upgradable, who’s skills are accessed through a sort of camping mechanic (having followed the forum, I think such a feature is something the devs have very much in mind). These NPCs (Cleric, Bard, Smith, Merchant, Scout, and Emissary) could be upgraded, unlocking skills that benefit the whole party or individual Brothers. The Cleric for example, could unlock a skill that speeds up the recovery of an injured brother, or perhaps a skill that saves a mortally injured brother (one still with a head attached) from death. This Cleric, could also perhaps unlock a skill that is activated in camp which holds a Sermon, temporarily increasing melee and range damage against those of the undead variety (not magically, but rather, or even perhaps a boast to morale via a religious sermon etc). The bard could specialise in boasting morale, and negating the negative effects of the battle brother traits; the smith could upgrade and improve the quality of weapons and armour, and minimise the tools used for repair said gear; the Merchant could improve the buy/sell prices in settlements and interact with trade caravans in interesting ways; the scout could improve the parties vision, alert the party at night when camping, and create ambush opportunities for the player; the Emissary, is key to the next feature on my list of absent features.

Renown/Reputation: In Mount and Blade, the player and his warband has a Renown rating, and a reputation with the factions running the various settlements. If, each village, town and city was governed by a lord, housecarl, or king then this feature could really work – plus it fits the theme. Each settlement would have a governing body, completing quests for this ‘faction’ would increase the renown and reputation of the mercenary band. A Higher reputation means a higher reward for completing quests given be factions that favour the player. Breaking contracts or failing them would have a negative impact on the players reputation with said faction. In XCOM, if a player neglects or upsets (a country in this case) they withdraw support, this could translate to less quests in certain cities whereby the players reputation is dubious. To negate having no quests to complete, there could be two types of quest givers, those of the noble variety and those of the common folk. Of course those of the noble variety may tend to be more rewarding in terms of payout. But quests for the common folk could improve the economic state of a town/city and therefore also have a significant reward in terms of longterm investment. Here Emissarys could work to improve the parties reputation, to repair soured relations, and secure the recruitment of expensive mercs (knights, former nobles, man-at-arms) for a fraction of the price.

A Greater Evil: this feature is from XCOM, and its a planned feature. I think it bears mentioning that the presence of the Greater Evil when it finally materialises could have a significant impact on the economy of the world map, and the actions of the Battle Brothers could feed into the suggested ‘Renown/Reputation’ system.

Thanks for reading, and feel free to comment :D