[parsehtml]<p><img class="frame" src="https://www.taleworlds.com/Images/News/blog_post_107_taleworldswebsite.jpg" alt="" width="575" height="290" /></p>
<p>In this week’s blog, we will be concluding our miniseries of blog posts on sieges by discussing the assault phase, with a particular focus on how the game’s AI evaluates and reacts to unfolding events. </p></br> [/parsehtml]Read more at: http://www.taleworlds.com/en/Games/Bannerlord/Blog/127
Dev Blog 26/09/19
- Thread starter Callum
- Start date
Users who are viewing this thread
Kortze26 said:Here's a link to the forum list of bug fixes.Khraen said:what changes have you done to the game after the beta testing started?
Looking forward to the next update!
https://forums.taleworlds.com/index.php/topic,385489.0.html
Thanks a lot!
Didn't know about this!
JustinTime49 said:Rackie said:
I assume that you haven't seen many gameplay/ threads or played the game as of yet. If so correct me.
Classes: there is a huge debate on the implementation of classes which replaces the old currency system. MANY of the forum users are against the change due to restrictions. Some classes are just so worthless, why pick rabble or peasant when you have access to knights and heavy lancers. 3-1 lives just dosen't cut choosing a literal peasant with a literal sickle. It is neither cool or attractive, which is what made warbands progression system so rewarding.
Horses: even if you are a good Inf soldier, a horseman just has so much power over you. Especially WITH the class system where you can be a knight on round 1, the hp of horses as well as their knockdown abilities are just a bit too powerful, especially in Captain mode where the foot soldier AI is braindead(its a feature).
This is here to stay!
AI and formations: I am going to refer to SP AI here. While the AI overall is superior than warband Native, it is arguably inferior than warband mods. Once again, take Pbod(pre battle and deployement) submod as an example. In battle, there is the implementation of formations, and these formations actually hold formation unlike in bannerlord where they break it to engage the nearest enemy, as well as bug out by holding a formation(shieldwall) which causes them to walk into battle in a scattered broken line.
Banners: "Similar to create your own banner/kingdom mods for Warband", where did you hear that, if that is the case then great! But the reason for the controversy is rather the banners themselves. You would be hard pressed to distinguish the differences between clans in battle due to every single banner sharing the same background and sigil colour. There is no uniqueness other than the sigils, and considering banner in the name of the game, their implementation is rather lackluster, and because of the set colour palette, rather inferior to warband and its mods.
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
cherac said:
Your unique point of view has always perplexed me.
cherac said:
There is many people not happy with Bannerlord for differents reasons (me the first). Just speaking in place of others will not make them like it. And meaning people who don't like it are "not real harcore gamers of M&B" is not an argument but just bad faith. Most of the people who don't like it are long time players or even modders, or very experienced modders. And many people prefer not saying they don't like it everytime cause they are polite and it could become boring at some point and prefer doing constructive criticism or just say nothing when they see their not listened. The multiplayer community (that i don't know much) seems to not like it so mcuh too so...
Let's just hope in one year more people like it !
About what you said on the horses and charge: i pretty much agree, if you want to stop a charge as infantry you need pikes, maybe a very good shield wall could do the job ? I think 90% of time infantry objective is just to try to get the less impact damage from cavalry protecting with his shield.
cherac said:
What....what did you just say ? I hope this is just complimenting TW in hope for a key (that won't work btw), otherwise i must tell you, and by the previous and the following posts by hardcore fans you will see that its pure nonsence, sorry !
I do agree about the horses charge being powerful, but as you ve seen in the gif, infantry had spears, but was waiting that cav charge with swords in their hands, and spears sheated on back. They made infantry brandead purposely (confirmed by a dev) because spearwalls were "too effective" against cavalry. What did they expect, a cav running straight for spears to pass like a knife through butter?
IMO, horse charge damage should remain as powerfull, or a bit buffed, but if it runs to a spear head-on, bye bye horsie !
They could also implement blunt damage to horse if you run with it to a wall or a high rock in full gallop, this way it makes no sence.
Sorry for joining the party, but I would like to tell my perspective. I don't agree with cherac 100% but I stil think we should calm down a little. Or maybe just see what will be, because that cavalry charge seems "realistic" and fine to me. Obviously there should be something more for the ai part, but also consider there was an equal number of inf and cav in that charge, which is something that should not happen (in a balanced game) or maybe just happened because of a great in game strategy (cavalry speaking).
I don't own a beta key so I didn't test the game so far, but I'm here everyday to read what you guys comment about and it's always fun and informative. But it's also true that we have high expectations for whatever we look at. Because if we take one single game mechanic at a time, there would always be a way to do it better, and the forum is full of advices, critics and so on. But if we look at the game in general (fully featured) it doesn't look bad at all. Maybe (and that's also my point of view), everyone expected a great improvement over the M&B series because every single AAA game around is packed by great features and bring new things every year (criticism and cost apart). And we feel like in 2019 we SHOULD expect more.
I think TW, as a team, is proud of what they're trying to achieve and we should be too, expecially considering we all are a small portion of the videogame industry, but we as a community (and also tw should be) are always here to support this kind of devotion. And I'm really looking forward to put my hands over this title and see what a (near) future (further) dev on it could bring.
Also me, a great fan of Warband and NW, mostly for the MP part, I'm losing hype on the game because of all these cricitism I see around. Maybe they're (the critics) right but I'm confident. What you guys think about all the bad things of Bannerlord? Are they so damn bad to let your hype fall? Just curious here (not sarcasm) beucase I was really looking forward to see what TW could bring to our community (and maybe enlarge it with a great game).
I don't own a beta key so I didn't test the game so far, but I'm here everyday to read what you guys comment about and it's always fun and informative. But it's also true that we have high expectations for whatever we look at. Because if we take one single game mechanic at a time, there would always be a way to do it better, and the forum is full of advices, critics and so on. But if we look at the game in general (fully featured) it doesn't look bad at all. Maybe (and that's also my point of view), everyone expected a great improvement over the M&B series because every single AAA game around is packed by great features and bring new things every year (criticism and cost apart). And we feel like in 2019 we SHOULD expect more.
I think TW, as a team, is proud of what they're trying to achieve and we should be too, expecially considering we all are a small portion of the videogame industry, but we as a community (and also tw should be) are always here to support this kind of devotion. And I'm really looking forward to put my hands over this title and see what a (near) future (further) dev on it could bring.
Also me, a great fan of Warband and NW, mostly for the MP part, I'm losing hype on the game because of all these cricitism I see around. Maybe they're (the critics) right but I'm confident. What you guys think about all the bad things of Bannerlord? Are they so damn bad to let your hype fall? Just curious here (not sarcasm) beucase I was really looking forward to see what TW could bring to our community (and maybe enlarge it with a great game).
TheItalianoX said:
This is a valid point, but in bannerlord's case it is the core mechanics which don't work well, and as a result the entire game fails. The threads you see lots of long posts in might seem really nitpicky, but that's because most "subpar" games like this have literally hundreds of small problems where the developers made unwise decisions.
Consider if Super Mario had a slight delay before jumps, and enemies could damage you unless you landed on a specific point at the top of them. The game would be terrible to play, but it would take a long time and a lot of testing to explain why it was so bad. Bannerlord is the same right now.
The core mechanic, as seen in some videos, is the same as in warband but with some adjustments and "improvements" like shield bashing, swinging and swinging back animations etc. (warn me if there are more differences, apart from game modes etc.). So you're telling me that the "same" core mechanic don't work well in bannerlord.
Two question arises:
Of course, it's still possible the third way: the core mechanic in bannerlord would be fine for everyone if only it worked seamlessy without troubles and "things" which ruin everyting (bad timing, etc). What you're also telling me is that bannerlord is and is going to be a "subpar" game (agree on that, if we look at it on the dev/resources point of view). What's an unwise decision? Because I agree that there could be (and there are apparently) hundreds of small problems which cost time and people and testing to resolve (hopefully) and "explain why it was so bad". But, is there a solution to this? Because I really want TW to devote itself on resolving (with the community maybe) those kind of small problems. But I also don't think a "slight delay before jump" problem is obtained after a "unwise decision". Maybe it's just a result of some mechanics put togheter. Then they'll have feedback on that. If they ignore it then MAYBE they have made an unwise decision (ignoring or bad resolving the issue).
Are we at that point, already?
Two question arises:
- do they used to work well in warband? (in my opinion yes, based also on the fact that I was expecting nothing from that game and it surprised me and still keep doing it)
- aren't we just pretending bannerlord to have such an improved core mechanic which would surprise us just like warband (maybe) did with some of us?
Of course, it's still possible the third way: the core mechanic in bannerlord would be fine for everyone if only it worked seamlessy without troubles and "things" which ruin everyting (bad timing, etc). What you're also telling me is that bannerlord is and is going to be a "subpar" game (agree on that, if we look at it on the dev/resources point of view). What's an unwise decision? Because I agree that there could be (and there are apparently) hundreds of small problems which cost time and people and testing to resolve (hopefully) and "explain why it was so bad". But, is there a solution to this? Because I really want TW to devote itself on resolving (with the community maybe) those kind of small problems. But I also don't think a "slight delay before jump" problem is obtained after a "unwise decision". Maybe it's just a result of some mechanics put togheter. Then they'll have feedback on that. If they ignore it then MAYBE they have made an unwise decision (ignoring or bad resolving the issue).
Are we at that point, already?
Talewordls team is reading and listening to everything we say, if we get complacent and tap them on their shoulders the game might come to a point of no return when it comes to core mechanics or AI.
We, the TW forum community members, are to Talewordls what a smart ambitious wife is for her husband.
She must push him to pursue his career further, work harder, make him to not get complacent, always wanting more, being there to advise, but also to criticize, so that what we both get in the end is much more and better than what one of us wanted to make with as little effort as possible.
We, the TW forum community members, are to Talewordls what a smart ambitious wife is for her husband.
She must push him to pursue his career further, work harder, make him to not get complacent, always wanting more, being there to advise, but also to criticize, so that what we both get in the end is much more and better than what one of us wanted to make with as little effort as possible.
Of course remaining in silence and quietly accepting everything TW does about their games is not an option (or maybe not a smart one). It's great that there are many community members which advice, criticize and generally help TW, expecially during the development phase, and I do recognize it should happen.
Apart from core mechanics issues, I see a lot of threads going on about "this is not ok" etc etc, like the video about cav vs inf I was supporting cherac on, which I think should be more grateful to have something than to want to change it to their desire. My fear is that expectation can lead people in the wrong path to follow.
That doesn't mean TW is god and we can't change what they're doing, but also doesn't mean the opposite. TW itself knows about how important is to collect more information now than ever, because it will help them refining bannerlord to almost perfection. I'm just a little bit sad and worried and tired when, below every single thread, people complains. It's just a little bit sad that's all. And now I'm also a little bit worried about those core mechanics faults which seems to set the game as unplayable (sort of, at least unenjoyable).
That being said, I truly hope bannerlord to be as great as my expectation raised to when I firstly see its announcement trailer back in the past. We're on the same boat in the end.
Apart from core mechanics issues, I see a lot of threads going on about "this is not ok" etc etc, like the video about cav vs inf I was supporting cherac on, which I think should be more grateful to have something than to want to change it to their desire. My fear is that expectation can lead people in the wrong path to follow.
That doesn't mean TW is god and we can't change what they're doing, but also doesn't mean the opposite. TW itself knows about how important is to collect more information now than ever, because it will help them refining bannerlord to almost perfection. I'm just a little bit sad and worried and tired when, below every single thread, people complains. It's just a little bit sad that's all. And now I'm also a little bit worried about those core mechanics faults which seems to set the game as unplayable (sort of, at least unenjoyable).
That being said, I truly hope bannerlord to be as great as my expectation raised to when I firstly see its announcement trailer back in the past. We're on the same boat in the end.
TheItalianoX said:
1. Warband was simple, responsive and had clear animations and feedback. Bannerlord has got better since the first beta patch but it is still much worse in all these regards than Warband.
2. I don't think anyone (at this point) expects Bannerlord to be a revolutionary game, especially not in Multiplayer, but the fact that this beta is currently going worse than the Warband beta is worrying. In Warband, Taleworlds didn't care much about multiplayer so they probably just accepted whatever changes people suggested, but now they're trying to turn Warband into an accessible E-sport despite having next to no experience with Multiplayer and not supporting Warband's multiplayer much even to this day.
The problem with trying to explain all this to someone who hasn't played the game yet is just the sheer number of small issues which are difficult to explain. It's a bit of a mess.
Thanks for the great and clear explanation. Guess it's now up to them to listen to the community feedback and adjust things accordingly if they will to do so... I'm worried about that "accessible e-sport" thing because, in my opinion, it also ruined other games. Don't know if you guys are familiar with the MotoGP game series by Milestone, but here's the story short: medium size company, official MotoGP license (exclusive), great expectation (and chance to deliver a great game) -> ended with a strange feeling game with no will to be even remotely simulating a motorbike physic nor to adjust some aspects of the game besides the riding experience. Everything is advertised with every media to bring people to the e-sport thing (which I love, I'm an e-sport driver in some 4wheels sim games) but results in a "meh" game for the most of the people (personal opinion) because they just don't care about some other things and do everything with a goal which is different from the large part of the community.
However, I did not see with my eyes (yet) some decision by TW which could prospect this.
However, I did not see with my eyes (yet) some decision by TW which could prospect this.
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 .
This is from someone who has not yet played the game, see how nitpicking and constant criticism has influenced his view on the game?
And you you're the hardcore fan boy of Taleworlds blinded by his love for M&B that can 't see the things that are bad. There is not only technical issues but also design issues, and yes many things are better done in Warband. So after all this time don't expect everybody to be happy. Keep in your wonderful world and let people with their feelings about the game without telling us what we should think and how we should behave, please.
CKyHC
JuanNieve said:Where is the madafaking devblog?
KhergitLancer80
Banned
CKyHC said:JuanNieve said:Where is the madafaking devblog?
Dont you know ? Devblogs are no more.
cherac said:
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.
cherac said:
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
