Mount and Blade 2 - Suggestions

[Alpha]

The Quest System. When I have to report to a Marshall who is moving around the map faster than I am, or I can never have current information for where his location is frustrates me. Or when he assigns me on a mission and I go off to do it, only to never be able to find him again and fail the quest is in my opinion, kind of broken. Would love to see some fixes to the quest system in the next game, and of course, new quests too.

As a suggestion, maybe the ability to dispatch a messenger to deliver the news that completes the quest, or a " scout " of some kind who can survey the area and discover where a Lord is at.

[Calriddian]

Better physics

What is wrong with M&B physics?

The physics is good, but it could be improved.

[Lord Tim]

Calriddian, when I read your name:

(click to show/hide)

[Calriddian]

Calriddian, when I read your name:

(click to show/hide)

Yeah sorry about that   

[zemdu]

I thinkthat there are 5 things that they should really enhance

- the envoirment (looks awful, woods, plains, deserts etc etc)
- sieges (improved siege warefare, rams, catapults etc etc)
- better formations (for example the new DLC battle formations)
- naval warfare (I don't know how they did'nt implement it in warband when there were lots of mods that did it)
- more realistic animations (including death, cheer, impale, run, walk and combat animations)

most of these things have already been done by modders but I for one think that it is really frustrating that the devs have left such important aspects out of the original game 

[Jezze]

Hm, I look forward to M&B 2, especially since we don't know what we can expect .

I mostly hope on better AI for in single-player, and with more features so it becomes more interesting to play. You see more and more mods made for multiplayer these days, which goes to the cost of the single-player mods sadly.

[DanAngleland]

I thinkthat there are 5 things that they should really enhance

- the envoirment (looks awful, woods, plains, deserts etc etc)
- sieges (improved siege warefare, rams, catapults etc etc)
- better formations (for example the new DLC battle formations)
- naval warfare (I don't know how they did'nt implement it in warband when there were lots of mods that did it)
- more realistic animations (including death, cheer, impale, run, walk and combat animations)

most of these things have already been done by modders but I for one think that it is really frustrating that the devs have left such important aspects out of the original game 

What DLC has new battle formations? As far as I know the only DLC for any M&B game is the multiplayer only Napoleonic Wars DLC, and any multiplayer game can have 'formations' since it is entirely up to the players, not AI, to make them. Besides which, M&B has always been about skirmishes, and it is only the ability to increase the battle size that makes formations desirable- large battles are a bonus if you like, rather than being the core of the game. And medieval warfare doesn't have such a great need for formations beyond a tight group of melee infantry or a spaced out line of archers, which we can do already. Admittedly a square formation (to protect archers in the centre) or a circle would be nice for large infantry armies to protect themselves from cavalry.

And naval warfare; I don't think there is any mod which has done ships in a meaningful way- i.e, not just making a scene with two static ships side by side to fight over.

I agree about the environment and siege though. Rams would be a good, simple improvement for sieges. Anything to get away from everyone cramming up a single ladder and the AI one track mind (always heading for the nearest enemy even when it means running into walls or pushing people off ladders).

[Asadron]

-Improved walking and fighting animations. Maybe even changing facial expressions (if that's possible).
-Moving environment such as waving grass, leaves, etc. This is seen in the Deluge mod for Warband.
-Currents in rivers

[Econo_Jam]

The graphics could be tweaked up a degree, maybe to the level of something like War of the Roses, but I'm playing Floris Mod right now and I like the way it looks.  I think the UI could use an overhaul.  Troop/Inventory management could be much easier.  I think that the combat in M&B is great, but the AI could be improved and I would like larger armies to be easier to manage.  I wish they would add more complexity to the social/political side of the game.  I enjoy the fact that you had to cultivate and manage relationships with other lords, but I would like to see that turned up. Seasons, pestilence and civil uprising could all be fun.

Things I hope they don't focus on:
Multi-player.  I'm selfish because I consider M&B to be a single player game.  I feel like War of the Roses (another Paradox Interactive release) will fill the multi-player niche.  I hope they don't worry about fluff like voice acting or cut-scenes, because it's obviously not the reason that M&B has such a diehard fan base.  It's so hard now to find a satisfying and complex sandbox game like M&B and I hope they accentuate what they already have rather than trying to be more mainstream.  Being a niche game is not a bad thing.  In other words, I don't want anything taken out, just more levels of complexity added on top.

[DerFührer]

I think the roleplaying aspect of this game should be improved , for example , there should be voiced actors , and moving lips, new facial animations.
The cities and towns should be made more life like. Example => SKYRIM !
These are all little things but overall they will greatly improve the game .

[Econo_Jam]

I think the roleplaying aspect of this game should be improved , for example , there should be voiced actors , and moving lips, new facial animations.
The cities and towns should be made more life like. Example => SKYRIM !
These are all little things but overall they will greatly improve the game .

But the thing is, TaleWorlds isn't a studio that can afford to undertake a game like that with cutting-edge graphics and academy award nominated voice talent.  This is an indie company that makes PC games, not a behemoth like Bethesda which makes most of its money from console sales. To me, I feel like game depth and freedom facilitates "roleplaying" more than graphics and voice acting.  Looking at the Elder Scrolls franchise, I personally feel that Morrowind has a lot more depth (*read roleplaying potential) than Skyrim, even though Skyrim is a beautiful looking game.  Honestly, what built up the fan base for M&B?  It wasn't the graphics. 

[MadocComadrin]

You actually don't need that many people to get immersive voice acting: what you need is a fair amount of dialog, which quite frankly, Skyrim could have had more of. Also, since M&B tends to be rather storyless, there's no storyline to be thought up and voice-acted, so more time can and should be spent on voices and features for town walkers and other encounters.

Better physics

What is wrong with M&B physics?

Considering it's Havoc, nothing except the fact that it's poorly integrated and underused.

[Econo_Jam]

Adding voice-overs sets a lot of things in stone.  If you're someone who enjoys mods and you want to add new dialogue to the game or change the current dialogue of a character, it's not going to be consistent.  I don't mind some general greetings and flavor text to be voiced, but I wouldn't be a fan of having a lot of the companion or lord dialogue voiced.  Personally, I like to read the dialogue.  There are times when bad voice acting ruins a game for me (first Witcher/in some regards Oblivion), but I can't think of a time where text has ruined a game.

[Calriddian]

I think adding voice actors would work, but you would have to have a set surname, or first name, like Sheppard in ME, so characters could refer directly to him or her.

[MadocComadrin]

KOTOR got away with not saying the player's name. As did Skyrim, Fallout 3/NV, etc.