.
Last edited:
-
If you are reporting a bug, please head over to our Technical Support section for Bannerlord.
.
- Thread starter Bernie Sanders
- Start date
Users who are viewing this thread
It's because it lacks what made Warband multiplayer popular and long lasting in the first place. Devs went with different formula and players clearly don't like it. Classes instead of loadout, lack of battle mode and other gamemodes being pretty lackluster doesn't help. At this point I think it's going to be revived to some extent when custom servers will be implemented and mods that make changes that players wanted will be made.
Are you the same guy who keep asking this question once every month? It's even written in the same way.
Also this is a huge misconception. Yes Warband had players that always came back to multiplayer but they where actually few. Warband have only had 3 months over a 8 year period where they have had a higher player count compared to Bannerlords lowest month.
I dont know where people get the idea of Warband being popular or played by many people. Warbands highest ever count was 39000 and this was one odd month and the average is about 13000 (both multiplayer and singleplayer counted) wich is absolutely nothing.
While I agree that Bannerlord has alot to work on and it can become much better I think we all can agree that the Warband formulare was'nt the best either if you look at the data.
There's a saying in the NA community:
"Game's ****"
I think the problem is that people don't find BL very fun. There's a lot of factors contributing to this feeling, but it's really that simple.
"Game's ****"
I think the problem is that people don't find BL very fun. There's a lot of factors contributing to this feeling, but it's really that simple.
Captain mode got it's final deathblow dealt with 1.5. Faction balance is completely skewed still, instead of 2 superior factions and 1 completely useless one, we now have 3 superior factions, 2 useless ones and one that's barely usable.
With shock buffed the only real comps are either 1 shield 5 shock, or 6 shock. Archers used to be a pretty hard counter to shock units, but now that's gone with the archer AI not being able to use bows due to new combat parameters. Cavalry AI was always bad, but with 1.5 they don't even use their lances anymore. Menavlions are not used by menavs units if they have a sword in hand, which means palatine guards are almost useless, and taking a sword on menav units (even if completely stupid) is now a death sentence to the whole unit.
Throwing weapons are also useless because of the same combat parameters that ruined archers, which leads to how skirmishers were always a useless class in captain, just as well as peasant units (discounting Warriors with improved armor and 2h axe, which is more powerful than Berserkers as a choice, and peasant before the billhook got nerfed). The only factions that could make use of the peasant units AS peasant units were Battania, and Khuzait, (battania being the worst lost useless faction out of the 6) and even those only when you could draw the right team comp out of the opposing team, and pulling them in a spot where they could be easily overwhelmed.
Captain has been in shambles for a long time, but the recent changes have made it near unplayable. The community has nesrly died in the span of the last 4 or so weeks that we have been playing this latest patch.
With shock buffed the only real comps are either 1 shield 5 shock, or 6 shock. Archers used to be a pretty hard counter to shock units, but now that's gone with the archer AI not being able to use bows due to new combat parameters. Cavalry AI was always bad, but with 1.5 they don't even use their lances anymore. Menavlions are not used by menavs units if they have a sword in hand, which means palatine guards are almost useless, and taking a sword on menav units (even if completely stupid) is now a death sentence to the whole unit.
Throwing weapons are also useless because of the same combat parameters that ruined archers, which leads to how skirmishers were always a useless class in captain, just as well as peasant units (discounting Warriors with improved armor and 2h axe, which is more powerful than Berserkers as a choice, and peasant before the billhook got nerfed). The only factions that could make use of the peasant units AS peasant units were Battania, and Khuzait, (battania being the worst lost useless faction out of the 6) and even those only when you could draw the right team comp out of the opposing team, and pulling them in a spot where they could be easily overwhelmed.
Captain has been in shambles for a long time, but the recent changes have made it near unplayable. The community has nesrly died in the span of the last 4 or so weeks that we have been playing this latest patch.
You are looking it completely out of it's context. Warband was developed by a small TW studio, with bad graphics even back then, but gameplay made it good.
13000 players on average is a good number all things considered.
Bannerlord is developed by a completely different TW.
Warband COMBAT formula was good.
Warband GRAPHIC formula was not good
Even now warband reaches more players in the MP compared to bannerlord MP.
They went completely other way and have everything good except the actual gameplay
Mute Zarathustra
Regular
As far as siege servers go server problems and lack of content are the reason.
Aprikosenmann
Knight
The Singleplayer Players just never decide to play multiplayer, they have no interest. So how could we give them a reason to try mp...
-Steam archievements for multiplayer
-Unlock Singleplayer items via multiplayer
-Steam archievements for multiplayer
-Unlock Singleplayer items via multiplayer
It's not misconception, you're looking at it wrong. 13k average players over 10 years for a indie studio game that already looked graphically dated when it came out is a great number. It defended itself only with gameplay and the ability to mod the **** out of it. Bannerlord had huge hype leading to it, 250k players at launch and now it doesn't even retain 1/10 of that number and most of them certainly aren't in multiplayer.
I would probably break down the multiplayer scene for MnB into 3 main groups. There is obviously crossover between each but roughly you can split them into:
-Large scale fights and events
These people primarily like the game for the spectacle of having massive multiplayer battles. 100v100 sieges and battles etc. You could compare this to games like Battlefield or the like where it's all about the technical and atmospheric achievement, moments where you're less concerned about winning and closer to roleplaying a big movie fight or something. Siege and Battle was the main modes from Warband for these guys, but Captain can supply some of this.
-TDM, DM, randomers
These people just want to hop in and do some casual, fun stuff for an hour or two. They don't care about balance or the like (although their enjoyment is impacted by it, so it matters) as long as they can have fun. The class system absolutely does not work for these guys.
-Competitive/Tryhards
This is the smallest but most hardcore of the scene. They genuinely enjoy the game at a competitive level, want to get better at the game, and are very opinionated on what needs to change. Skirmish was geared towards these guys, but was not wholly accepted.
So with this in mind let's think about what Bannerlord has done with MP and think about how it impacts each group.
Servers
No private servers or options for hosting means events are out of the question, and that the few game types around that do cater to the large events crowd are wholly reliant on matchmaking and servers with the rules set by admins. Further, these servers kick you out after a game, meaning sometimes long waits between games unless everyone immediately requeues or rejoins. However servers are hosted for TDM which broadly works. For the competitive guys, matchmaking mostly works ok but runs into balance issues in terms of stacks vs solos and new players, which has not been addressed quickly enough.
Gameplay
The game has been heavily criticised by the more experienced players for numerous balance and quality of life issues, while it's likely a minority compared to the actual multiplayer scene, they are loud and impact the general atmosphere. I also personally think they are correct (I've been one of them) and while devs have worked to address some of the complaints, they have done so extremely slowly. It's been over a year for some of them considering beta started pre summer of 2019.
All that said, I do think the game has been playable from a casual perspective for a while now, so this primarily impacts long term play and doesn't necessarily account for the quick drop off of player numbers. It mainly impacts the competitive/enthusiast scene and so the tournaments that could be happening (combined with the server issues above) are not as hype and populated as they could be.
Classes
Classes were introduced to make it easier for players to pick something and get into the game without being unarmoured noobs, and also for balance reasons across all game types. It works fairly well and has had a lot of thought put into it - unfortunately, it also hinders player's who want to take certain approaches or equipment, which doesn't feel satisfying. As a competitive player, I disliked being forced into one class with X equipment or another class with Y - the Warband system allowed for more flexibility. For casual players, it loses its charm quickly and people want to go naked/troll/just spawn with a greataxe, whatever. And for balancing, it's actually does as much harm as good, as relatively simple issues ended up needing large overhauls across the economic and class system, and other measures to try and fix things end up having unintended side effects.
The only thing this does work for is Captain mode, which overall seems to be the most well made game mode, which seems to have a bit of a dedicated following.
Conclusion
The result is one where: large event players have nowhere to go, TDMers have somewhere to go but don't really enjoy it long term, and competitive players are at best, split on whether the game is even good.
So how do we fix this? Well, for me I think the devs need to stop trying a one-size-fits-all approach. Many of these groups need completely different solutions. For immediate actions though:
1) Private servers or at least the ability to host large scale matches via TW dedicated servers. This should have been a priority for day 1 early access, instead the devs have actively blocked it. This will rather quickly repopulate the game and address a bunch of other problems.
2) Scrap the class system for modes where it clearly isn't working or enjoyed. That's TDM, duel, and arguably Battle if something like it ever comes. It cannot be that hard to import the equipment system from SP into a basic Infantry/Archer/Cavalry set up, and to have the MP Armoury switch to that, with classes kept for Captain and maybe Skirmish. I bet a few modders could (and will) do this in a month.
3) Another round of combat testing. The first was successful in fixing some basic issues, but changes from a few hours feedback didn't trickle into the main game for something like 3 months. I know it's not as simple as inputting what 20 random people say on Discord into your code, but it should be a little quicker. I think this comes down to the one-size-fits-all approach, but the balance concerns for PvP are totally different from the concerns of SP or Captain mode - this could allow a diversified approach where you more quickly adjust combat and other balance issues for solely PvP modes.
-Large scale fights and events
These people primarily like the game for the spectacle of having massive multiplayer battles. 100v100 sieges and battles etc. You could compare this to games like Battlefield or the like where it's all about the technical and atmospheric achievement, moments where you're less concerned about winning and closer to roleplaying a big movie fight or something. Siege and Battle was the main modes from Warband for these guys, but Captain can supply some of this.
-TDM, DM, randomers
These people just want to hop in and do some casual, fun stuff for an hour or two. They don't care about balance or the like (although their enjoyment is impacted by it, so it matters) as long as they can have fun. The class system absolutely does not work for these guys.
-Competitive/Tryhards
This is the smallest but most hardcore of the scene. They genuinely enjoy the game at a competitive level, want to get better at the game, and are very opinionated on what needs to change. Skirmish was geared towards these guys, but was not wholly accepted.
So with this in mind let's think about what Bannerlord has done with MP and think about how it impacts each group.
Servers
No private servers or options for hosting means events are out of the question, and that the few game types around that do cater to the large events crowd are wholly reliant on matchmaking and servers with the rules set by admins. Further, these servers kick you out after a game, meaning sometimes long waits between games unless everyone immediately requeues or rejoins. However servers are hosted for TDM which broadly works. For the competitive guys, matchmaking mostly works ok but runs into balance issues in terms of stacks vs solos and new players, which has not been addressed quickly enough.
Gameplay
The game has been heavily criticised by the more experienced players for numerous balance and quality of life issues, while it's likely a minority compared to the actual multiplayer scene, they are loud and impact the general atmosphere. I also personally think they are correct (I've been one of them) and while devs have worked to address some of the complaints, they have done so extremely slowly. It's been over a year for some of them considering beta started pre summer of 2019.
All that said, I do think the game has been playable from a casual perspective for a while now, so this primarily impacts long term play and doesn't necessarily account for the quick drop off of player numbers. It mainly impacts the competitive/enthusiast scene and so the tournaments that could be happening (combined with the server issues above) are not as hype and populated as they could be.
Classes
Classes were introduced to make it easier for players to pick something and get into the game without being unarmoured noobs, and also for balance reasons across all game types. It works fairly well and has had a lot of thought put into it - unfortunately, it also hinders player's who want to take certain approaches or equipment, which doesn't feel satisfying. As a competitive player, I disliked being forced into one class with X equipment or another class with Y - the Warband system allowed for more flexibility. For casual players, it loses its charm quickly and people want to go naked/troll/just spawn with a greataxe, whatever. And for balancing, it's actually does as much harm as good, as relatively simple issues ended up needing large overhauls across the economic and class system, and other measures to try and fix things end up having unintended side effects.
The only thing this does work for is Captain mode, which overall seems to be the most well made game mode, which seems to have a bit of a dedicated following.
Conclusion
The result is one where: large event players have nowhere to go, TDMers have somewhere to go but don't really enjoy it long term, and competitive players are at best, split on whether the game is even good.
So how do we fix this? Well, for me I think the devs need to stop trying a one-size-fits-all approach. Many of these groups need completely different solutions. For immediate actions though:
1) Private servers or at least the ability to host large scale matches via TW dedicated servers. This should have been a priority for day 1 early access, instead the devs have actively blocked it. This will rather quickly repopulate the game and address a bunch of other problems.
2) Scrap the class system for modes where it clearly isn't working or enjoyed. That's TDM, duel, and arguably Battle if something like it ever comes. It cannot be that hard to import the equipment system from SP into a basic Infantry/Archer/Cavalry set up, and to have the MP Armoury switch to that, with classes kept for Captain and maybe Skirmish. I bet a few modders could (and will) do this in a month.
3) Another round of combat testing. The first was successful in fixing some basic issues, but changes from a few hours feedback didn't trickle into the main game for something like 3 months. I know it's not as simple as inputting what 20 random people say on Discord into your code, but it should be a little quicker. I think this comes down to the one-size-fits-all approach, but the balance concerns for PvP are totally different from the concerns of SP or Captain mode - this could allow a diversified approach where you more quickly adjust combat and other balance issues for solely PvP modes.
@OurGloriousLeader amen to that.
I only disagree on one thing, " but Captain can supply some of this. ". In my opinion Captain Mode if it wants to capture the attention of the bulk of the SP quota should bet on increasing the number of bots, provide more complex tools to carry out more advanced tactics and wider scenarios. Considering Conqueror's Blade a much more behind-the-scenes game than Bannerlord, the former offers much more than the latter can presumably provide.
I only disagree on one thing, " but Captain can supply some of this. ". In my opinion Captain Mode if it wants to capture the attention of the bulk of the SP quota should bet on increasing the number of bots, provide more complex tools to carry out more advanced tactics and wider scenarios. Considering Conqueror's Blade a much more behind-the-scenes game than Bannerlord, the former offers much more than the latter can presumably provide.
| Conqueror's Blade | Bannerlord |
|---|---|
Warband mutiplayer as a higher % then Bannerlord mutiplayer % is down. Back in the day there might of been 7000ish players on warband and only 1500ish would be on mutiplayer which isn't much. But Bannerlord might have 12,000 players on but less than 500 on Mutiplayer. Just more people played Mutiplayer for Warband. Nowdays on warband Saturday and Sundays there will still be a few hundred on servers public servers. So yeah get out of here kid. I think there was well over 400 players just on NW public servers this weekend at one time.
@OurGloriousLeader I think Captain doesn't capture the 100v100 feeling because you played 100v100 and saw dozens of actual real players around you. Fighting bots never feels the same as fighting players also.
I don't mind the class system but combat still feeling off, the performance being iffy and it seems to be random. No custom servers and some of the classic gamemodes from warband being removed.
I agree with you both Captain isn't quite the same but it could capture something like the same sort of sense of scale and spectacle without needing servers and networking that can handle 150+ players, something neither BL or WB has managed very well.
I guess it's better as a way for capturing SP players instead of the 3 groups I mentioned - for me the general bot battles in SP or Captain haven't advanced enough to be interesting though.
I guess it's better as a way for capturing SP players instead of the 3 groups I mentioned - for me the general bot battles in SP or Captain haven't advanced enough to be interesting though.
I find the melee combat sluggish compared to Warband. The bad ping (75 for me) plus the odd blocking mechanics really kill the game for me. That and Cav. While I agree cav should be deadly, it's not much fun when so many people can easily grab a mount. Plus being able to ride everywhere with the couch out doesn't really require any skill. I rarely play cav, but when I do I murder everyone and feel awful after.
I stopped playing captain a long time ago. Everyone dies far too quick. If you and a buddy engage two enemy squads and you are 3 seconds behind him, you will both get rect. If they improved the AI to be way more defensive the game could be fun. Then flanking and chokepoints would actually make a difference.
Seriously, just hop on a Warband server and compare the two. Warband usually has me on the edge of my seat the whole time, and after a few rounds I need to take a break to let the adrenaline calm down. In Bannerlord I need to take a break after a few rounds because I'm annoyed as hell. Warband wasn't very friendly to new players, but Bannerlord isn't really either. A proper matchmaking device that would match players according to their skill level would have made a world of difference.
None of my friends that I convinced to get the game are playing anymore. Cav rape, the class system (no individuality) and baffling fighting physics chased them away. Right now I'm waiting for the mods before I tell them to try it again.
I stopped playing captain a long time ago. Everyone dies far too quick. If you and a buddy engage two enemy squads and you are 3 seconds behind him, you will both get rect. If they improved the AI to be way more defensive the game could be fun. Then flanking and chokepoints would actually make a difference.
Seriously, just hop on a Warband server and compare the two. Warband usually has me on the edge of my seat the whole time, and after a few rounds I need to take a break to let the adrenaline calm down. In Bannerlord I need to take a break after a few rounds because I'm annoyed as hell. Warband wasn't very friendly to new players, but Bannerlord isn't really either. A proper matchmaking device that would match players according to their skill level would have made a world of difference.
None of my friends that I convinced to get the game are playing anymore. Cav rape, the class system (no individuality) and baffling fighting physics chased them away. Right now I'm waiting for the mods before I tell them to try it again.
Bannerlord is incredibly harsh to new players. Theres more to learn and nothing to prepare you for it.
Not sure on other people but here are my reasons.
- No outfits/gear to choose from.
- I looked forward to the rumor of 400 player servers, Warband is 240-250 player servers. This game is only 150 player servers unless you were in Beta when they tested a Siege server.
- Server issues and queue, liked warband's style of choosing server.
- TDM spawns no good
- No battle mode or Persistent World where I can siege castles with the Trebuchet, catapult, ram, Ballista.
all in all I just play Last Oasis for time being. I do like Captain but you can only play the same 4 maps so much, needs more variation.
- No outfits/gear to choose from.
- I looked forward to the rumor of 400 player servers, Warband is 240-250 player servers. This game is only 150 player servers unless you were in Beta when they tested a Siege server.
- Server issues and queue, liked warband's style of choosing server.
- TDM spawns no good
- No battle mode or Persistent World where I can siege castles with the Trebuchet, catapult, ram, Ballista.
all in all I just play Last Oasis for time being. I do like Captain but you can only play the same 4 maps so much, needs more variation.
