-
If you are reporting a bug, please head over to our Technical Support section for Bannerlord.
What do you want Bannerlord to be?
- Thread starter ZydrateTheSmoothCriminal
- Start date
-
- Tags
- discussion opinion
Users who are viewing this thread
Mofaji
Banned
But then my money should've went to actual competent people like those modders. Why pay taleworlds
Honestly the thing i'm most looking for is mods such as Prophecy of Pendor and ACOK (i really wanna execute Joffery) for Bannerlord.
There was plenty of features that i liked in those two mods.
This game has huge potential and honestly i hope that i wont be disapointed when devs finish with adding content to the game.
There was plenty of features that i liked in those two mods.
This game has huge potential and honestly i hope that i wont be disapointed when devs finish with adding content to the game.
I want bannerlord to be fun! Guess I'll have to wait a couple of months for that to be the case.
D.O.A.
Recruit
why haven't your competent modders just built their own entire game by now? The game is far from finished but still a lot of you act like you bought this as a finished product.
bah, we just need the base game ready before jumping in on what to add or not. Adding stuff without knowing how things work as a whole is just stupid, but then again I'm not the one in charge of that, who knows, they may add stuff at random for no logical reason.
Also, there's a "for yesterday" thing missing on your list: fixing the basic mechanics like perks and cultural passives, how tf didn't you even mention that?
Happy to hear that someone shares my relation towards Mount & Blade (even despite my broken english
). To be honest it's somewhat of a relief, because while reading the forums it often feels like we are in the minority with our dreams and demands.
More practical attack animations, especially on foot.
I want it to be a perfect Dark Ages simulator sandbox which is a basis for many mods to customize gameplay and contribute replayability. So for me №1 is honest, proper, bugless and balanced simulation. If suceeded, later on many enthusiasts would add a lot of content.
Think it's time to revive this.
This, then modded.
agreed. I was surprised to see the date of this thread. I thought it was new today or post 1.4 patch. Coming back from a few days away here, its nice to see more post sharing this opinion. not in a majority dont like the game type of way, but more of a "i hope the devs are seeing these threads to understand their audience" viewpoint. I guess im just trying to remain hopeful we'll see improvements.
Aren't we all?
I would say yes and no. some's "improvements" are pretty much just bug fixes and what i can only describe as vanilla basic when EA is over. I'm not here to attack anyone on that stance. However, I've seen it here with people okay with the current state just release the game for mods to take over, or are satisfied with the current game.
Because
Sergeant
Agreed, get the base game working, if it does very little bar being a better looking warband, but what they have built is accessible, functional and has good modding support then the game will be great.
With warband the excellent work done by the community meant that I could get a game doing more or less what I wanted and it was easy enough for me to go in and make the final tweaks to mod it to my exact tastes from there. If I can do the same with Bannerlord that will be me happy for some thousand+ hours
I agree with most of you guys.
Mount&Blade is a crossover between a classic roleplaying game, CK2 type strategy and total war battles from ego perspective.
Whilst it didn't do any of the above great (it cannot do them all great since it does them all at once) every aspect of the game was just about
good enough that it kind of worked. This crossover made it unique and revolutionary. The only thing that it did great was the combat system and the fact that you could have armies of up to 200 on each side whilst fighting yourself in ego-perspective.
So naturally Bannerlord should improve in these three aspects.
Roleplaying:
-more early game content (quests, quests, quests, better tournaments, deeper companions, more stuff to do)
-better atmosphere (animations, scenes, sounds, graphics)
CK2 strategy:
-deeper characters (more character attributes: what they like and don't like and how they act)
-deeper relationships between characters
(Other characters like/despise you depending on their attributes and your actions. This should be less of a grind and more dynamic. Also relationships shouldn't be static but also change over time due to players actions. From good to bad and vice versa.)
-more ways to influence other characters / the kingdom / other kingdoms.
(This could be simply using your influence to ask people to do something for you up to quests started by the player to get things done. For exemple starting a revolt by talking to somebody who doesn't like the king either. Then starting a quest to find as many followers as possible.)
-more politicing inside the kingdom and outside
(making truce, peace, trade agreements (trade taxes), alliances and so on including the barter system(trade taxes, reparations etc.))
total war:
-better campaign AI
(prioritising defence over offence, trying to get regions that are close to own ones, making peace when nessecary, making alliances when nessecary)
-better battle AI
(skirmishing, troops actually holding formations, AI being able to use basic tactics like skirmishing, flanking, using hills and forests to their advantage)
As of now I see that Bannerlord is trying to get into all of the above. But currently it seems more like two steps forward one step back.
As some features point in the directions listed above other features in Warband are still missing or are downgraded.
Mount&Blade is a crossover between a classic roleplaying game, CK2 type strategy and total war battles from ego perspective.
Whilst it didn't do any of the above great (it cannot do them all great since it does them all at once) every aspect of the game was just about
good enough that it kind of worked. This crossover made it unique and revolutionary. The only thing that it did great was the combat system and the fact that you could have armies of up to 200 on each side whilst fighting yourself in ego-perspective.
So naturally Bannerlord should improve in these three aspects.
Roleplaying:
-more early game content (quests, quests, quests, better tournaments, deeper companions, more stuff to do)
-better atmosphere (animations, scenes, sounds, graphics)
CK2 strategy:
-deeper characters (more character attributes: what they like and don't like and how they act)
-deeper relationships between characters
(Other characters like/despise you depending on their attributes and your actions. This should be less of a grind and more dynamic. Also relationships shouldn't be static but also change over time due to players actions. From good to bad and vice versa.)
-more ways to influence other characters / the kingdom / other kingdoms.
(This could be simply using your influence to ask people to do something for you up to quests started by the player to get things done. For exemple starting a revolt by talking to somebody who doesn't like the king either. Then starting a quest to find as many followers as possible.)
-more politicing inside the kingdom and outside
(making truce, peace, trade agreements (trade taxes), alliances and so on including the barter system(trade taxes, reparations etc.))
total war:
-better campaign AI
(prioritising defence over offence, trying to get regions that are close to own ones, making peace when nessecary, making alliances when nessecary)
-better battle AI
(skirmishing, troops actually holding formations, AI being able to use basic tactics like skirmishing, flanking, using hills and forests to their advantage)
As of now I see that Bannerlord is trying to get into all of the above. But currently it seems more like two steps forward one step back.
As some features point in the directions listed above other features in Warband are still missing or are downgraded.
