Beta Patch Notes e1.5.6

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 3 (members: 0, guests: 3)
menuisier100 said:
Death enabled is just so unfair to the player. Lords only die in player battle so his kingdom gets depleted the fastest. Multiply that by the fact the player need multiple companions that die easily more than lords. Maybe if lords needed companions instead of being majorly good at everything ( where the player struggle to get just ONE stat decently high )

My suggestions:
-Death in battle at lower rate but applied in simulations.
-Companion "death" could instead be replaced by long period of recovery/unavailability. Maybe death still possible but starting from non-existant and scaling up with the number of times they we're severely wounded?
Click to expand...


I agree with the disadvantages of needing companions but I don't agree with lords dying only in player battles. I saw at least 10 times lords dying in battle Ai Vs AI. Vlandian king died in such battle on my current playthrough.
 
I was messing around with the console and I noticed something.

If we set a skill to a certain value, we do not get the skill points needed to reach that value added to the hero level.
(even after refreshing the level by adding XP we do not reach the same level)

This means that the hero's level is lower with the same total skills points, therefore the learning rate is higher (permanently).
The only way to add skill points and have a normal level would be to use the add XP console command instead of the Set level to.
 
Pocho Azul said:
I agree that having an ever-growing pool of immortal aristocrats would be non-fun. On the other hand, having my newly recruited siege experts, surgeons, and other totally inexperienced newbie companions repeatedly getting killed on their first battle is also non-fun (and pretty unrealistic--people like that would have been kept away from the the front lines in any historical situation). It was especially annoying since it was impossible, in game terms until yesterday. I started my campaign with "hero death" checked off, and lost three companions (with all their gear) before figuring out what was up.

There are solutions to this, I can assign companions to an unused troop slot, along with some tough troops to keep them out of trouble and send them to the back. This will probably work, and might even be arguably more "realistic" in some way (although I am not sure how they will make much progress that way). It will also be time-consuming and not at all fun. Dysentery and extreme body odor might seem more "realistic" for the period too, but I am not looking forward to the day they can be included in a game, either.

In the long term, having some way of culling an infinitely growing pool of nobles might be needed. In the short-term, having no better and less distracting way of keeping vital support NPCs alive than fiddling around with micro-managing their non-participation in a battle seems less than optimal.
Click to expand...
Oh you mean that time consuming field battle that barely lasts 4-6 minutes or that time consuming siege that takes 10-15 minutes.Bannerlord now with your so called consuming time litteraly plays like mobile game.The only time it took field battle more than 10 minutes is when AI stood back and didnt aproach or if i PERSONALY stalled the battle by doing manuvers/tactics.If field battle of 5-10 minutes and siege battle that barely lasts 10-15 minutes is time consuming to you then SORRY but you realy need to find some other type of game like for example mobile games or some fast paced FPS games.

To make some matters worse i even played some mobile games that took way more time,more planning,more coordination than what Bannerlord gives and you are saying that its time consuming.Game like MB Bannerlord should MINIMUM have field battles last about 20-30minues while Sieges should last minimum 30-50 minutes and not like it is now where you get castle in like 10-15 minutes and it only takes that much bcs of siege engines/ram to be pulled otherwise it wouldve lasted even shorter.Then when the siege is over you are IMMIDIETLY greeted with MAGICAL TELEPORT out of nowhere message where you alredy chose/vote who gets the castle bcs all of that instant teleport magic stuff is ONE of the reasons why they/we have this HUGE snowbaling issues its bcs everything is instantanious,everything is given on silver plate,everything is done as quickly as possible like you are playing some medieval FPS or mobile game.
 
menuisier100 said:
Death enabled is just so unfair to the player. Lords only die in player battle so his kingdom gets depleted the fastest. Multiply that by the fact the player need multiple companions that die easily more than lords. Maybe if lords needed companions instead of being majorly good at everything ( where the player struggle to get just ONE stat decently high )

My suggestions:
-Death in battle at lower rate but applied in simulations.
-Companion "death" could instead be replaced by long period of recovery/unavailability. Maybe death still possible but starting from non-existant and scaling up with the number of times they we're severely wounded?
Click to expand...
It's unfair as a boon to the player too :smile: Your enemies die and you can re-set if you really want to save an allied lord. Not to mention husband harvesting for amazing gear! Gear that can go onto companions so they don't die easily....
I will say it is awkward in a previous game I ended up with mostly vassal clans that had 1/2 their members dead, not because they died as my vassals but because I had killed them in combat when they were enemies, but because I had built relations by letting them go and de-fiefed them, they were ripe for the picking of early vassals! Though now with clans reproducing's it would be okay as eventually they would make new lords!

Almost forget, you can assassinate an allied lord with friendly fire! Haven't tried in 1.5.6 but it worked in 1.5.5 for sure.
Why would we do that? So we could marry their spouse of course! AHAHAHHAHAHAHAH!
 
Gandamula said:
It seems that with this death mechanic, the companions will be even more unnecessary, I lost two surgeons and a wife in my Party. In the next game I won't even bother to recruit them, they are completely useless, since they last so little time. The developers are ruining a feature that was interesting in the game. Now it's a waste of time.
Click to expand...
no ist just you dont bother to keep them safe aka you are that type of f1 f3 player and you done.Being able to DIE makes player CARE more for its companions/family members more and be more cautious,more tactful when aproaching battles.The way it was aka Ai being Warband Ai without using any tactics at all and things/stuff being way to easy makes you not care at all for companions/family members BCS they are immortals and all you do is just f1 f3 and all done.Thats where lies the problem aka the way people play certain games and also backwards looking at things like you bcs ITS BEING ABLE TO DIE WILL make you CARE MORE and be more focused on the battle and making sure your companions/family members that you care about dont die and keep them alive and not caring is when they are walking immortals who are constantly killed all the time yet you dont feel anything for them bcs you know they are immortals.
 
Is anyone encountering big framerate spikes and drops with 1.5.6?

The game for on 1.5.4 had areas where my framerate tanked, but consistently so, but otherwise it ran around 30 fps.

Now, on 1.5.6, almost no matter the scene, world map or menu, my frame rate keeps jumping to 50+ than dropping to low 10s or below, constantly, making the game basically unplayable.

I run Bannerlord on medium settings with shadows turned completely off and 1080p resolution. Here are my specs:
GeForce GTX 1050
Intel i7-7700HQ
512 GB SSD Drive
16 GB RAM DDR4
Windows 10 Enterprise
 
Itisausername said:
I disagree hardly with this if every battle was at average this long it would not be fun for me field battles should take 15 mins average and sieges 25 mins average
Click to expand...
well i see you love that f1 f3 everything quick as possible type of play.well MB game isnt and shouldnt be that type of game.MB should be what it is a long running sandbox game.The only thing that can prolong the battles is if Ai actualy worked properly and if Devs actualy added the feature they showed/presented at gamescom and other pannels where there were tactics involved and lords commanding you telling you where to go who/what to attack.Just that implementation that was shown/said/promised would alredy increase the battle time what will you then quit the game bcs it isnt 15min quick f1 f3 anymore?I would rather them makeMB game as it should be and then if you want your quick f1 f3 then use some mods in futur ethat would do that for you rather then making a MB that is supposed to be a long log runing sandbox game be made for battles to last so quicly without anything any tactics,any slightly inteligent Ai and then have people complain about how game is way to quick to beat,how its to easy,how the game is snowballng,how its so easly and quick to conquer all of Calradia in a matter of like few days not even a week.
 
GrandiousBrain said:
no ist just you dont bother to keep them safe aka you are that type of f1 f3 player and you done.Being able to DIE makes player CARE more for its companions/family members more and be more cautious,more tactful when aproaching battles.The way it was aka Ai being Warband Ai without using any tactics at all and things/stuff being way to easy makes you not care at all for companions/family members BCS they are immortals and all you do is just f1 f3 and all done.Thats where lies the problem aka the way people play certain games and also backwards looking at things like you bcs ITS BEING ABLE TO DIE WILL make you CARE MORE and be more focused on the battle and making sure your companions/family members that you care about dont die and keep them alive and not caring is when they are walking immortals who are constantly killed all the time yet you dont feel anything for them bcs you know they are immortals.
Click to expand...
To be fair he has a point. Maybe there needs to be balance made to how easily companions/npc die, maybe introducing other less drastic penalties like losing some skill or slowing the progression rate of learning skills... and make death happen more rarely and in away that you can predict the situations that conduct to death (e.g. capture and execution, death by a strike with 150+ damage, headshots...) and thus proactively try to avoid those situations.
 
GrandiousBrain said:
well i see you love that f1 f3 everything quick as possible type of play.well MB game isnt and shouldnt be that type of game.MB should be what it is a long running sandbox game.The only thing that can prolong the battles is if Ai actualy worked properly and if Devs actualy added the feature they showed/presented at gamescom and other pannels where there were tactics involved and lords commanding you telling you where to go who/what to attack.Just that implementation that was shown/said/promised would alredy increase the battle time what will you then quit the game bcs it isnt 15min quick f1 f3 anymore?I would rather them makeMB game as it should be and then if you want your quick f1 f3 then use some mods in futur ethat would do that for you rather then making a MB that is supposed to be a long log runing sandbox game be made for battles to last so quicly without anything any tactics,any slightly inteligent Ai and then have people complain about how game is way to quick to beat,how its to easy,how the game is snowballng,how its so easly and quick to conquer all of Calradia in a matter of like few days not even a week.
Click to expand...
So because I don't agree with you I just f1+f3 my guy if you want 3 hour battles that ain't gonna happen I literally want longer battles yet most of your suggestions about how long they should be sound like complete ****
 
Lusitani 5th Empire said:
To be fair he has a point. Maybe there needs to be balance made to how easily companions/npc die, maybe introducing other less drastic penalties like losing some skill or slowing the progression rate of learning skills... and make death happen more rarely and in away that you can predict the situations that conduct to death (e.g. capture and execution, death by a strike with 150+ damage, headshots...) and thus proactively try to avoid those situations.
Click to expand...
Yes there deffinetly needs to be a balance/tweeks.I just somehow find it funny how someone cares more when companions are immortal and dont care when they can die.
 
Itisausername said:
So because I don't agree with you I just f1+f3 my guy if you want 3 hour battles that ain't gonna happen I literally want longer battles yet most of your suggestions about how long they should be sound like complete ****
Click to expand...
Did i ever say to last 3h heck no (you are goin with extreme numbers) i specificaly said minimum (wich i would personaly be fine with) is 20-30 mins for field battles and 30-50 mins for siege battle.I dont see 3h here can only see possibility of additional 10 maybe 20 more minutes on top of that IF player PERSONALY played more tactfuly and trying to realy be more immersed into battle and try to do more realstical play by not just simply doing f1 f3 as soon as game/battle starts but realy trying to prolong it him/herself but even then Ai (if Ai is not barebones like it is now) will be forcing player to act and resolve the battle faster by attaccking teh player.
 
GrandiousBrain said:
Did i ever say to last 3h heck no (you are goin with extreme numbers) i specificaly said minimum (wich i would personaly be fine with) is 20-30 mins for field battles and 30-50 mins for siege battle.I dont see 3h here can only see possibility of additional 10 maybe 20 more minutes on top of that IF player PERSONALY played more tactfuly and trying to realy be more immersed into battle and try to do more realstical play by not just simply doing f1 f3 as soon as game/battle starts but realy trying to prolong it him/herself but even then Ai (if Ai is not barebones like it is now) will be forcing player to act and resolve the battle faster by attaccking teh player.
Click to expand...
Its called hyperbole friend if you want them to last that long sure as I said I would much prefer 20 min field battles and 25 min sieges rather then having to drain my eyes every battle I would say if battles did last that long I would just auto resolve everything
 
Itisausername said:
I am actually getting better fps with 1.5.6 but my PC is a beast of a machine so I dont think it really matters much
Click to expand...
That was my big hope for trying 1.5.6, as any performance upgrade helps me quite a bit, since my laptop is subpar at best. What confuses me is the constant framerate spike and drop. I would understand if it was low all the time, but the fact that it keeps bouncing tells me there is something wrong with 1.5.6 that maybe is not as perceptible on good machines.
 
guiskj said:
That was my big hope for trying 1.5.6, as any performance upgrade helps me quite a bit, since my laptop is subpar at best. What confuses me is the constant framerate spike and drop. I would understand if it was low all the time, but the fact that it keeps bouncing tells me there is something wrong with 1.5.6 that maybe is not as perceptible on good machines.
Click to expand...
Mabye I have bannerlord on my laptop too which could run 1.5.4 on medium and low at a constant 40fps I will see how it does in 1.5.6
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Piconi
  • Sticky
Patch Notes v1.2.9
15 16 17
Replies
339
Views
32K
TheGreatAIA
Dejan
  • Sticky
Patch Notes v1.2.8
6 7 8
Replies
155
Views
18K
pekka05
New Strategies for a more difficult game
Replies
10
Views
346
Count_Morfetico
Count_Morfetico
Back
Top Bottom