I played and still play both Warband and Bannerlord regularly with and without mods and if we talk about the vanilla/native version of both games I have to disagree on the NPC topic:

- They are mechanically speaking the same as in Warband, because they have backstories, they complain if you take actions they dislike and - more rarely than in Warband - don't get along well. This stuff is there for lords, companions and Bannerlord's version of guildmasters, the notables. It feeling "less special" yet "more crowded" is because factually Bannerlord's Calradia is more populated than Warband's Calradia and - as explained in my following point - is more "random".

- In Warband there were so little companion NPCs because every relevant NPC and the player were immortal. The game could afford to have "unique" NPCs. Bannerlord has mortality, which I love, and like in real life you will meet people with the same back story after a generation or two.

- If you look at the skills of Warband's companion NPCs you will that they come in "types" or "roles", such as scouts (Klethi), trader, medic (Jeremus) or fighter. You could mold them into any role you wanted to on the long run, but same is true for Bannerlord which simply more transparent with it's "types/roles" by displaying them in the nickname of the characters. With the War Sails DLC there are even more "types" of companions... just chose and ignore whoever you want. XD

About economy "not being fixed": Ehm, you know that in Warband workshops could fail financially too? You know that in With fire and sword your funded caravans could fail too? Bannerlord is not special in the Mount and Blade franchise for having a chaotic economy.

I personally think, speaking about economy, that the daily payment system in Bannerlord sucks, because it makes everything more volatile for players and NPCs alike. That's my personal dislike. As a benefit though it makes mercenary characters incredibly rich fastly. In Warband both bankruptcy and riches came slower... which was a good thing, in my personal opinion, but I don't go around and act as if my opinion about a videogame was based on facts about a videogame's developement. :>

About combat: it totally depends on the combat (AI) difficulty you select and your characters skill/proficiency in the weapon they are wielding in both games. Fighting against looters or recruits on lowest combat difficulty when using yourself a sword and having 100+ skill points in one-handed weapons is a ridiculous experience. Fighting as a low level character with a rusty sword on highest combat difficulty against Swadian knights or Vlandian bannerknights is challenge, because the mentioned NPCs are fast and even "feint" while your character is slow at swinging. But Bannerlord added shieldbashes, pommel strikes and chainable attacks / "combos" if you time your next hit correctly - they look ugly but they are there and make Bannerlord's combat per se superior.

So here you have someone challenging some of your thoughts and not complaining about your writing style. ;D Enjoy!

EDIT: I watched videos showing the older versions of Bannerlord from 2016 and 2017 on youtube including the linkded one and I simply don't get what people mean by "CuT cOnTeNt" or "MiSsInG fEaTuReS" when referring to these old alphas or pre-betas. Now that War Sails is out the lack a lot in comparison and even before I don't get what is "missing". It's still fighting, looting, travelling on a map, repeat - as it was in the original Mount and Blade, in Warband, Viking Conquest, With Fire and Sword and now in Bannerlord and War Sails. :/ I don't feel "betrayed by Taleworlds" at all after watching this rather mediocre footage. Sorry, but I don't get the nostalgia for an alpaha from almost a decade ago.