Non-existing balance in multiplayer and another problems

Users who are viewing this thread

1) I have played a lot of Warband multiplayer (2k hours), and I think we can all agree that it was a failure. It never reached the playerbase of a game like CS:GO. Bannerlord, in it's first week of release, did have those numbers. So, yeah, Bannerlord clearly has something Warband never could've.

Never ever saw you on Warband. Your 2k hours are either roleplaying on NW or being unnoticable on TDM. If you come from NW then I can understand why you think they games mechanics were not as good. NW as a module was not designed for balanced gameplay. It was always about the big linebattles.

Warbands mechanics are just better versions of what we have now. Until recently, Blocking was infinitely better on Warband. Shields functioned better as shields on warband. Spears worked better as spears on warband. Kicking was implemented better on warband. Every 1.5 change that was good was an improvement because it made the mechanics I just mentioned more like they were in warband.

Mechanics that allow for player aggression and a higher skill ceiling were simply better implemented in warband. Some of these things were recently reintroduced to Bannerlord but they need further tweaking to be fully refined. The movement directly leading to the ability to be more aggressive is finally a part of the game, but the hilt spam associated with it needs a stun to allow counterattacks and be as clean and smooth as it was in warband.

The washed up boomer and afraid of new things arguments make absolutely no ****ing sense when all the "boomers" are way outperforming the people making these claims. Do you really want to sit here and tell me that you have a better grasp of the games mechanics than me or Alyss or any other Native player? Like really? What stat, skill or class ability even remotely gives you that idea?

If you think Skirmish is a better gamemode than Battle then you are beyond help. I dont even need a counter argument. Just mentioning that you hold that opinion is enough for nobody to take you seriously.
 
Last edited:
Never ever saw you on Warband. Your 2k hours are either roleplaying on NW or being unnoticable on TDM. If you come from NW then

I played in Australia, you buffoon. It hasn't even been a year since I moved to NA.

Once again, you reveal how narrow your thought process is. Though your perspective is valid, it is not the objective truth. Were you to acknowledge this, you'd understand that Bannerlord is an excellent sequel. Arguably, it surpasses warband in every respect.
 
I played in Australia, you buffoon. It hasn't even been a year since I moved to NA.

Once again, you reveal how narrow your thought process is. Though your perspective is valid, it is not the objective truth. Were you to acknowledge this, you'd understand that Bannerlord is an excellent sequel. Arguably, it surpasses warband in every respect.
Bannerlord can absolutely surpass Warband, but to suggest that is already has in mind numbingly naive and just downright biased.

Id like to turn this into an actual discussion and have you tell me what about skirmish and the class system is actually balanced or an aid to competitive gameplay. It certainly isnt the multi life system, because that makes it very difficult to balance spawns and flags, and also removes the value from early round pick plays. It isnt the flags either, because they are extremely similar to how the flags worked in battle. Teams play it the exact same way. One goes to one while the other goes to the other, and they both have a big fight over whichever flag is the one that pops as the "final"

I dont know what you see in the class system. Its nice for captain mode, but completely ruins customization and makes skirmish and TDM/Siege very difficult to balance. Running around as a cheap class and having a heavy cav role up and gank you is not good for the new player experience, and certainly isnt good for expecting any kind of balanced gameplay for competitive modes. The warband class system was great because every class was expected to have an equal upside. Cav mains were never more dominant than infantry mains who were never more dominant than archer mains. Just being good at the game mattered so much more than what class you were good at, and that is often lost with the current class system. The classes are literally better or worse than each other by design.
 
1) I have played a lot of Warband multiplayer (2k hours), and I think we can all agree that it was a failure. It never reached the playerbase of a game like CS:GO. Bannerlord, in it's first week of release, did have those numbers. So, yeah, Bannerlord clearly has something Warband never could've.


Let me look at the numbers..

oh oopsie ???
 
Back
Top Bottom