Statement Regarding Plans For MP

[Ikea Knight]

fundamentally there's nothing wrong.

Fundamentally it is also only directional combat. So fundamentally it is Warband.
My issue with the combat doesn't come with the fundamentals, but with a sum of details like the block delay or stances.
And for me personally some of the one handed weapons feel way longer than they actually look like.

 

[Tork789]

Fundamentally it is also only directional combat. So fundamentally it is Warband.
My issue with the combat doesn't come with the fundamentals, but with a sum of details like the block delay or stances.
And for me personally some of the one handed weapons feel way longer than they actually look like.

And I'm not arguing there there are no problems at all, I'm just saying that I think these details shouldn't be a priority right now. I just think it's not worth spending time on them right now, since fixing them can be very time consuming without a huge noticable effect to the game's state compared to adding a new mode, map, feature or ranked MM or even a report function.

 

[RCC_God]

How can someone say the game isn’t fundamentally problematic combat wise when you can’t even get a siege server, player pop is dying, and the only people that play mp constantly ***** about it both on the forums and in game

 

[Terco_Viejo]

And I'm not arguing there there are no problems at all, I'm just saying that I think these details shouldn't be a priority right now. I just think it's not worth spending time on them right now, since fixing them can be very time consuming without a huge noticable effect to the game's state compared to adding a new mode, map, feature or ranked MM or even a report function.

Now seriously (no horse jokes ). But don't you understand that having the combat system (fundamental pillar wherever the game is based) in this state, makes everything else totally secondary? Without the combat system operating 100%, without the blessing and approval of the whole community, you can add 7 new game modes, 200 maps, etc. or whatever you want; without this it won't work. You are asking here what color you want to paint a car that does not have an engine.

 

[Tork789]

Now seriously (no horse jokes ). But don't you understand that having the combat system (fundamental pillar wherever the game is based) in this state, makes everything else totally secondary? Without the combat system operating 100%, without the blessing and approval of the whole community, you can add 7 new game modes, 200 maps, etc. or whatever you want; without this it won't work. You are asking here what color you want to paint a car that does not have an engine.

To me it looks quite differently. I see a fully functioning car, it has minor troubles that would probably require replacement of some parts, but the main engine is solid. Right now it lacks some very important comfort and functional features like a decent salon, doors and even a windshield and I think that's what we should fix first before we move on to replacing some of the parts, since we're going to ride that car for a while now, as well as many other people, many of whom won't even notice if we switch the malfunctioning parts, so it makes sense to put it down on the priority list.

 

[VVyrd]

And I'm not arguing there there are no problems at all, I'm just saying that I think these details shouldn't be a priority right now. I just think it's not worth spending time on them right now, since fixing them can be very time consuming without a huge noticable effect to the game's state compared to adding a new mode, map, feature or ranked MM or even a report function.

Combat is the core and heart of Mount & Blade and should be given all the love and care it deserves. Quite literally, combat is what made M&B what it is. Everything else is just mediocre RTS/RPG aspects tied to it, which is fine, since combat is what makes the game unique.

You are right in that the core is there, and people aren't arguing that it isn't there, but that it is rusty and not really fun. You can make it look pretty but it won't mean it works well. Warband set standards, and they are simply not met in Bannerlord yet, let alone surpassed.

As for maps, modes and so on, those are features that should be handled by different developers not necessarily responsible of combat. Much like websites, some developers focus on the gameplay aspects of the game (front-end, kinda?), others on scenes (art / design, front-end still) and others on the back-end (Server infrastructure, matchmaking and so on). So all of those systems shouldn't be taking time away from combat improvements anyways.

 

[๖Kern]

To me it looks quite differently. I see a fully functioning car, it has minor troubles that would probably require replacement of some parts, but the main engine is solid. Right now it lacks some very important comfort and functional features like a decent salon, doors and even a windshield and I think that's what we should fix first before we move on to replacing some of the parts, since we're going to ride that car for a while now, as well as many other people, many of whom won't even notice if we switch the malfunctioning parts, so it makes sense to put it down on the priority list.

Honestly, you seriously consider Warband melee combat as boring as Bannerlord's one so I don't see why anyone should take your points seriously... Warband had much better options and it wasn't just about block hitting, the way it is in Bannerlord. If you consider a downgrade to combat to be okay then I don't really know what to tell you. It's not like people won't notice that suddenly, the combat will get more skill and reaction-based and will actually allow for proper reactive blocking or that certain changes to damage calculation will actually remove some yolo playstyles from the game. Combat is the very fundamental of the game, not some irrelevant matchmaking system thanks to which you can wank off while looking at your new rank.

Ranked Matchmaking isn't a fix, it's a patch that will help with stomping in Skirmish but won't address the FUNDAMENTAL issues we are facing.

EDIT: How's adding new maps superior to improving combat?

 

[NightC2win]

The bottom line is 3 things in my mind, and it's brief, its been discussed enough at this point
1. Get rid of classes in favor of the warband system of gold and custom loadout
2. Fix the servers being horrible.. crashing.. laggy.. etc.
3. Fix the slow combat and/or the "attack delay" "extra animation" thing.. it makes the combat feel SLOW and laggy... it makes timing things seem awkward and unrealistic, and it means I can't kill as many people quickly in a row as I could in warband. The release of weapons doesn't need an extra animation of the character drawing the weapon even further back before actually releasing his swing.

 

[부부를 넘어서 가자]

...

Are the currently set attribute and skillpoints points for the classes done and working as intended or are they placeholder values.

 

[Caps]

Are the currently set attribute and skillpoints points for the classes done and working as intended or are they placeholder values.

this would be **** if they were placeholder values, since they are something super basic... I just know that the perks are not fully done yet.

 

[AVRC]

this would be **** if they were placeholder values, since they are something super basic... I just know that the perks are not fully done yet.

We are not using the skill system in Multiplayer and this is a design choice.
Perks will keep evolving, there are still some major issues we want to address.
Class system WILL stay for the available game modes.

 

[Caps]

We are not using the skill system in Multiplayer and this is a design choice.
Perks will keep evolving, there are still some major issues we want to address.
Class system WILL stay for the available game modes.

thank god you are not reworking the class system from scratch.

 

[OurGloriousLeader]

We are not using the skill system in Multiplayer and this is a design choice.

What do you mean by this - proficiency numbers aren't active?

 

[Gibby Jr]

We are not using the skill system in Multiplayer and this is a design choice.
Perks will keep evolving, there are still some major issues we want to address.
Class system WILL stay for the available game modes.

Presumably this means proficiencies are irrelevant? I’m aware the idea is to allow all classes to play all roles, but this is already heavily abuseable by organised groups. I’d rather not type how it can be abused publicly, since it’d probably just encourage other players and clans to do the same, but it’s completely broken in the current state.

Perks and the class system would be much better if there were different classes for each mode. This would make balancing far easier and better than it currently is for every mode and would mean every class could be made viable. Right now, there are some class choices that are straight up worthless in skirmish (and presumably in Captain too).

 

[AVRC]

What do you mean by this - proficiency numbers aren't active?

Yes and No. What I meant was it is not exactly like Single Player.

Right now, there are some class choices that are straight up worthless in skirmish (and presumably in Captain too).

Yes, we are aware, that is one of the things we are working on. Same goes for perks as well.

 

[Caps]

they all got nearly the same stats, idk why cpt doesnt get balanced around numbers

at the moment its dominated by heavy infantry with maces or shock inf (which could be easily negated by buffing light infantry unit size and reducing heavy armor values which benefits skirmish aswell)

 

[Fietta]

Yes, we are aware, that is one of the things we are working on.

Great news, but you did ignore the first part of Gibby's post. Having different classes for each game mode would make sense.

Perks and the class system would be much better if there were different classes for each mode. This would make balancing far easier and better than it currently is for every mode and would mean every class could be made viable.

 

[Caps]

cpt would need longer fights (2x the hp) to give archers and skirmishers more time to do work

 

[AVRC]

they all got nearly the same stats, idk why cpt doesnt get balanced around numbers

at the moment its dominated by heavy infantry with maces or shock inf (which could be easily negated by buffing light infantry unit size and reducing heavy armor values which benefits skirmish aswell)

Last patch focused mostly on Skirmish, next patch will be focusing on Captains. Meanwhile we are still working on perks and improving class identities. We want to end the Heavy Inf dominance to give all classes equal opportunity and edge.

 

[Caps]

Last patch focused mostly on Skirmish, next patch will be focusing on Captains. Meanwhile we are still working on perks and improving class identities. We want to end the Heavy Inf dominance to give all classes equal opportunity and edge.

Class identities are nice and theres alot of variation, but then you introduce a super heavy 50 armor unit that trashes all the identity there is. I accept identity as a reason why shock inf doesnt get shields, but for heavy units its a different story.

Infantry - Varyag
The varyag gets better throwables than the skirmisher on top of that 50 armor chunk. It gets a spear aswell making the warrior totally obsolete, except for the mace, but theres no point in going for warrior if you got the mega varyag tank. (which gets anti cav and skirmisher capabilities)

Cavalry
Same for heavy cav it does everything better than light cav, if its supposed to be a heavy bruiser why does it get lances and fast horses.
Meanwhile light cav doesnt get lances, when they are supposed to be the quick ones. (thats why i assume they got no shields) but all they get is spears which doesnt support a surprise high risk gameplay. Their horses arent even faster than the heavy ones.

Archers
Then heavy archers they do everything better than light archers. Its another class that gets fully trashed by something that does everything far better.

Combat
It introduces several combat issues like glances, insane shield health, removes melee counterplay to cav, makes it harder for archers to have impact and oneshots (not sure if this is a valid reason but i see alot of people crying)

Gold - Skirmish
Then the gold system for example sturiga warriors are 100g and varyags are 150g once you commit to them you cant swap to the brigand skirmisher line. Or make other changes at all, dont get me wrong they needed to increase in cost, if they didnt get another nerf.

Conclusion
The variety is there and i think you guys did a great job on the class system but its getting oppressed by heavy armor. The heavy armor values arent good for any gamemode, TDM its just frustrating getting farmed by a heavy armor unit. Siege for similar reasons. Captain mode gets dominated by heavy infantry, where it should fill in for the Total war spear man role.

I hope the heavy inf nerf is a big one, like at least 10 armor off of all heavy inf. (maybe bit more on oathsworn since that unit will do far better then.)