Author Topic: Dev Blog 26/09/19  (Read 11385 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

JustinTime49

  • Regular
  • *
    • View Profile
  • Faction: Vaegir
Re: Dev Blog 26/09/19
« Reply #120 on: October 10, 2019, 11:17:26 PM »
Have you ever seen a horse before? Much less a warhorse ? I don't know about you ,but no matter how hardcore and well trained you are , a warhorse smashing into you would leave very little for you to do , Spears? it was massed PIKES that stopped horse don't make statements inspired by hollywood , and let taleworlds work on their game in peace , We wanted early access , now we have it, so whats the complaining? If they waited another year, you will be same people complaining , I am sure majority of real hardcore mount and blade fans are happy with bannerlords so far, I reallyhope taleworlds does not listen to people like you . And in terms of where they hire their staff, and the staff's experience you have no right to critisize , game development is not a Joke , a game like mount and blade is at the top of hardest video games to make, that is why you don't see devs everywhere making it, so please stop WHINING and let the devs work in peace with positive vibes, you are complaining like they have made a complete pile sh*t , when this game is definitely a gem

Well people have said enough about your comment. But as for horses, they're making a game. People can't use history only when it conveniences them. In this case, the horses act TOO MUCH like actual war horses, which is a problem as in SP the player can just amass these and easily conquer. I like the way horses are currently, but thats not the point. Counters to cav charges would be large formations such as schiltron used by scotts or a densly line of inf. If we were to refer to history, then most horses, even war horses would not smash into a steadfast infantry line. Unfortunately, not only is there no simulation of this combat(understandable), the current counters to cav are very lackluster(not very understandable).

The devs need feedback, and treating criticisms as whines is such a silly argument.

Some of you guys are not getting my point, I keep seeing comments of people complain about how bad the current game is,and how its worse than warband , Seriously? even though these are simply technical issues and in some cases the devs have given reasons why they are so, like the infantry vs calvary issue, they know what is up and they'll find a way to fix it in their own time , continuously criticizing and nitpicking on the game is just creating bad PR for bannerlord , a true hardcore Mount and blade fan wouldn't do that, Some posts even say how they are disappointed in taleworlds , we need to appreciate what they are doing,you can criticize, just don't nag and bring the spirit of the devs down by making it sound like they are being lazy and putting out a bad game , GAME DEVELOPMENT IS NOT EASY just relax buy your early access copy, report bugs and lets have fun, PS. I am not sucking up to the devs for a BETA , I won't have a lot of time to play it even if I got it .I'm just a guy who doesn't like people trampling on hard work and passionate projects .


Oh boy, now you're one of those. The almighty one who speaks for all hardcore M&B fans huh. As for PR, this is the forums. Its 2019, a lot of people don't look to the forums to decide whether or not they should purchase a game. Criticizing games allow for growth and larger perspectives. Accepting the game now its in current state, with things slightly inferior to warband and its mods would be foolish. The difficulty of game development is obsolete in this argument, as they are selling a product. Do you go to your boss and complain how hard your job is? Please, enough with your ignorance, bannerlord has many features that exceed warband by exponential amounts. Sieges, graphics, UI, role-playing, perks and skills as well as all the features we haven't explored in depth like issues and crime. We as a community are providing our insight, so being disappointed and worried about current implementation such as braindead AI should not be hidden
« Last Edit: October 10, 2019, 11:42:31 PM by JustinTime49 »

dr4gunov

  • Regular
  • *
    • View Profile
  • Faction: Neutral
Re: Dev Blog 26/09/19
« Reply #121 on: October 11, 2019, 09:05:15 AM »
Well people have said enough about your comment. But as for horses, they're making a game. People can't use history only when it conveniences them. In this case, the horses act TOO MUCH like actual war horses

Do not listen to him.
Historical sources clearly say that full head on charge did not work against a shieldwall. Funny eneough, there were some formation that head charged later on against pike squares (with huge succes). But generally speaking, no. Full frontal assault is not a purpose of cavalary.

Also, early medieval horses were much smaller than today's horses. Which is not to say that Calradian horses were. They can be wahtever world creators wish.

It was repeated here many times over, but apparently some people do not acknowledge that, because "hav u evr seen a horsie, dude?"

Ettenrocal

  • Grandmaster Knight
  • *
    • YouTube - UClD6-YQKbuKFa_YMDMKl8Fg
    • View Profile
  • Faction: Bandit
Re: Dev Blog 26/09/19
« Reply #122 on: October 11, 2019, 11:44:59 AM »
Yeah i'm not an expert on this but i think too a good shield wall is quite dangerous for cavalry and will be very hard to break, i think they would do this most of time if they have no choice. Maybe rare times they they will break shieldwalls. Also there is different type of charge through time, not every cavalry was charging like Knigth Templars.

Mirabelle

  • Recruit
  • *
    • View Profile
  • Faction: Neutral
Re: Dev Blog 26/09/19
« Reply #123 on: October 11, 2019, 05:34:37 PM »
Does anyone know if a devblog will be published today?
Time is the only true purgatory.

RedBandit

  • Recruit
  • *
  • King of the ButterLords
    • Steam - RedBandit
    • View Profile
  • Faction: Swadian
  • MP nick: RedBandit
  • M&BWBWF&SNWVC
Re: Dev Blog 26/09/19
« Reply #124 on: October 11, 2019, 06:22:57 PM »
Does anyone know if a devblog will be published today?

From the man himself.

My apologies for the delay, it will be posted ASAP. My mum came to visit so I was spending as much time as I could with her while trying to keep her and my partner from gossiping about me too much!
“If they are out of bread, let them eat butter.” – King Harlaus

maverick47

  • Sergeant
  • *
  • Only this, and nothing more.
    • View Profile
  • Faction: Nord
Re: Dev Blog 26/09/19
« Reply #125 on: October 13, 2019, 06:28:36 PM »
I want game now please ok thanks
wait for M&B 3. it will be a KAMMORPGWSAHAOAM !(KICKASS MMORPG WITH SEX AND HORSES AND OGRES AND MAGIC)
I present you my Bob army! Be afraid, be aware! He will soon dominate M&B Forums!
☻/ ☻/  ☻/ ☻/ ☻/☻/☻/☻/☻/☻/☻/ ☻/                                    
/▌  /▌   /▌  /▌  /▌ /▌ /▌ /▌ /▌ /▌ /▌  /▌                       
/ \  / \   / \  / \  / \ / \ / \ / \ / \ / \ / \

Azhael

  • Veteran
  • *
    • View Profile
  • Faction: Swadian
Re: Dev Blog 26/09/19
« Reply #126 on: October 14, 2019, 12:15:52 AM »
Overall this is looking pretty good, but there are some things that concern me a bit. There are a couple of issues in sieges, in my opinion, namely:

1) Some of the wooden protections built by the attackers are way too close to the castle walls. How could they build them so close under arrow fire from the castle's defenders? I think you should remove this wooden protections and leave the ones near the siege engines, which make more sense, since they are pretty far from the castle. Not only it's unrealistic to have those protections so close, but also they give the attackers a huge advantage they shouldn't have.
2) Archers shooting from the castle don't protect themselves behind the merlons between shots, they just stand there exposed in the gaps that protect only half of their bodies, which kills the whole point of crenelations in a castle and undermines the advantage of defense they should have. It would be amazing if you could program the AI to try to hide behind merlons or whatever protection they have nearby between each arrow fired, making them harder to hit.

This two things would make taking a castle much harder, which it should be. Castles were very expensive and took a lot of work and effort to build, but they were worth it! The advantage they gave made a pretty outnumbered garrison able to defend effectively from much larger forces, and an attack against the walls a pretty risky move. That's why many of the historical sieges revolved around starving the defenders to death by depriving them of resources rather than striking head on, or trying different tactics like sneaking in during the night and then opening the main gates from the inside. That is not to say taking a castle by force should be impossible, but it needs to be harder in my opinion. You should outnumber the defenders heavily, or wait for their morale to lower as days pass without recieveing new supplies, or exploit some weakness in the castle design, etc. I believe all this would make the strategy side of sieges more important and fun.

Also, I've got this gripe with the crosshair: it looks too modern. It even has those diagonal lines that appear when you hit someone, which makes it seem like a modern fps. I'd love you to go back to the classic aiming reticle in Warband. It worked fine and had a better design considering the medieval setting of the game.

Finally, in the raid against that village I found it absolutely ridiculous that they tried to defend themselves. They were around 50 villagers or recruits with pitchforks against almost 500 trained soldiers with cavalry and archers. Those villagers would have actually run like hell when they saw such a strong force attacking their village. Even if some brave ones wanted to fight to death, those would've been a minority and most of them would've tried to flee.

I hope these suggestions are taken into consideration and help improve the game we all love and are looking forward to spend countless hours in.

Cheers!

PS: Also the banners! Every banner of a faction sharing the same colors is absolutely horrible and ridiculous! Make the faction have the colors of the king's banner, but each lord should have his own colors and more varied design. I'd rather have the original Warband banners (which I liked mostly) than this minimalistic approach.
« Last Edit: October 14, 2019, 12:24:44 AM by Azhael »
"What am I doing? What does it look like I'm doing? I'm a prisoner here!"

Ettenrocal

  • Grandmaster Knight
  • *
    • YouTube - UClD6-YQKbuKFa_YMDMKl8Fg
    • View Profile
  • Faction: Bandit
Re: Dev Blog 26/09/19
« Reply #127 on: October 14, 2019, 11:47:29 AM »
I agree with you Azhael and i've created a thread on this problems, that might interest you: https://forums.taleworlds.com/index.php/topic,386327.msg9148129.html#msg9148129

The wooden protections can be build far and then if not too big some men can carry them during massive assault and left them there or bring them at night ? Same problem for fill an emptry gap near walls, they were probably doing it at night or even during massive assault when defenders are too occupied at defend the walls.


This two things would make taking a castle much harder, which it should be. Castles were very expensive and took a lot of work and effort to build, but they were worth it! The advantage they gave made a pretty outnumbered garrison able to defend effectively from much larger forces, and an attack against the walls a pretty risky move. That's why many of the historical sieges revolved around starving the defenders to death by depriving them of resources rather than striking head on, or trying different tactics like sneaking in during the night and then opening the main gates from the inside. That is not to say taking a castle by force should be impossible, but it needs to be harder in my opinion. You should outnumber the defenders heavily, or wait for their morale to lower as days pass without recieveing new supplies, or exploit some weakness in the castle design, etc. I believe all this would make the strategy side of sieges more important and fun.



Totally agree with this, one dev said you need 3/1 ratio to take a castle and was thinking it was a big number but as we can see in gamescom videos seiges look quite easy to storm a castle. But i would clearly think 5:1 ratio would be more near reality and maybe even that big. Taking a castle, it depends which one, but it was not an easy task. as you said it. Also normally you need quite some time to build siege engines, towers, ram protections etc... I hope they take this in account. If you want to storm a castle just ladders why not but that would cost you big losses in your army.
« Last Edit: October 14, 2019, 12:41:25 PM by Ettenrocal »

NUQAR'S Kentucky "Nuqar" James XXL

  • BioAfrikaner
  • Duke
  • *
  • 🖕IF YOUR EASILY OFFENDED...GROW SOME BALLS...!!🖕
    • Twitter - yaqobhyndes
    • View Profile
    • Artwork Gallery
  • Faction: Khergit
Re: Dev Blog 26/09/19
« Reply #128 on: October 14, 2019, 01:18:39 PM »
The problem is that because of the lack of meaningful manpower, high losses just slow the campaign down rather than making it more interesting or skill based. If you have to spend half an hour ingame just scrounging soldiers together for a grindy assault with guaranteed 5:1 casualties, the game just becomes a slower version of the already horrendous warband grind. Imagine having to amass an army of 600 men just to beat a 100 man garrison, only for the majority of them to die.

The player in warband is the most active person in the entire game, doing sieges on their own and carving out a kingdom etc. There is nothing wrong with this, but you then need to make sure the actions the player has to repeat more than the AI don't punish them for taking the initiative. Making sieges (which the game basically railroads you into partaking in) wipe your army out is anti-player.

Ettenrocal

  • Grandmaster Knight
  • *
    • YouTube - UClD6-YQKbuKFa_YMDMKl8Fg
    • View Profile
  • Faction: Bandit
Re: Dev Blog 26/09/19
« Reply #129 on: October 14, 2019, 02:21:39 PM »
By "losses" we have to think that they are not all killed but taken out off combat (it will just reduce your army size for some days or weeks), i think many soldiers were just badly hurt during sieges but could recover (with arrows and rocks but armors are done to handle this at some point). You need a quite massive army of well armored man at arms, to storm a castle, and good siege engines. If you have a good doctor probably much of this men can get back to combat soon ! Also there could be other ways to take a castle by negociatons after defenders start to starve or by offering other things with the Bannerlord barter system or ruse? Also you could just wait you have build max number of siege engines and plan well your assault, to have less possible losses, and take the castle without too much harm; the fact that Bannerlod allow a far batter battle size could improve the fact the we could assault the castle from every side. So it could be worth it to gather a really big army to be at 5/1 and take the castle faster with not too much harm, than getting a 3/1 attackers army and take the castle with big losses. Castles are hard to take it's a reality.

But if you have ingeniors (speeding up the sieges engins building) and doctors (less casualties) with you, you could handle far better the negatives impact of a siege and don't ruin your army number of troops. Reuniting a big army for a campaign should be easier than in Warband by the possibility of calling vassals.

So if you plan well your siege it should not cost you too much losses but if you attack it stupidly it could punish you. I never said every siege should be a slaughter but when you take very bad decisions the game should punish you. And i think a siege should me more complex than just saying yourself "oh i have a 3/1 ratio against this defenders castle i'm gonna storm it !" :iamamoron:
« Last Edit: October 14, 2019, 02:32:43 PM by Ettenrocal »

TheBerserk

  • Recruit
  • *
    • View Profile
  • Faction: Swadian
Re: Dev Blog 26/09/19
« Reply #130 on: October 16, 2019, 08:56:08 PM »
Glad to see that there are people who dare to say things, that Bannerlord has problems and is not perfect, and that taleworlds has to listen to his community about his felt; what I did no see during the last dev blogs
A company that listens to itself will only kill itself and his creations, and everyone will lose.

As for seats I ask myself a lot of questions:
- Is the AI smart enough to take different positions to defend the entire walls, or use seat weapons by itself ?
- will he still have the rocks or bombs to launch to the attackers that can be seen in the video of the E3 2016 ?
- normally by reading all the dev blog I had heard that one could only destroy the merlons with the help of the weapons of seats, is it that it counts later to make so that the whole walls can be destroyed in full battle ?
« Last Edit: October 16, 2019, 09:07:54 PM by TheBerserk »