Statement regarding Plans for Singleplayer and Engine III

[Apocal]

I can't speak for others, but I have always maintained that they are pending another related feature.

It was Callum, back in October, who said banners were low priority.

Where can we buy this game?

It looks awesome!

When @Kentucky 『 ＨＥＩＧＵＩ 』 James wrote that hype sells games, he definitely wasn't wrong, lol.

EDIT: Also not coming from warband i have no idea of what the feast mechanics where there but it does sound like something that would breath some life into immersion

Lords had relations with their vassals in Warband but there was a (semi-hidden) mechanic of -1 or -2 relations penalty per fief lost. Eventually, a disgruntled vassal would seek to defect, joining another faction with their holdings if possible. The ruler had two counterplays for this. The first was indicting the vassal, stripping them of their lands and expelling them from their kingdom. The other was boosting relations via feasts. Unfortunately, this led to a situation where a faction would lose a town (town + two or three villages = big relations drop) and the AI would see its relations were low with a bunch of vassals and decide to throw a feast. Naturally, they'd lost that fief for a reason and generally that reason was still in the field, besieging another settlement so the faction would lose another fief, leading to them finishing their feast and immediately rolling into another feast. It led to ridiculous death-spiral for Swadia (WB's version of Vlandia) in particular as the King kept throwing feasts and losing fiefs, while vassals were still getting pissed off and defecting.

The actual feast mechanic was a bunch of lords spawning in the hall. I don't know why people think of them as immersive because that was literally it, without any exaggeration or embellishment: you just walk up to a lord, press talk and get a minor relations boost.

 

[Mad Vader]

The actual feast mechanic was a bunch of lords spawning in the hall. I don't know why people think of them as immersive because that was literally it, without any exaggeration or embellishment: you just walk up to a lord, press talk and get a minor relations boost.

True, feast mechanics were unimaginative. But a feast was a chance to talk to your kingdom crew in one place, and they usually commented on some recent action of yours according to their personality and the action (and you got bonus -+relations) - that gave some immersion to an otherwise drab feature.
It's still better than talking to robots and worse than a more imaginative take on relation mechanics.

 

[five bucks]

I don't know why people think of them as immersive

You don't know because you aren't reading the reason we keep giving: it's more immersive for lords to do something once in a while in their yearly schedule that isn't murder. While the feasts themselves were quite static, it still added to the immersion at a glance to see a bunch of the kingdom's nobility gathered together in the hall, as well.

 

[Warlord123123]

True, feast mechanics were unimaginative. But a feast was a chance to talk to your kingdom crew in one place, and they usually commented on some recent action of yours according to their personality and the action (and you got bonus -+relations) - that gave some immersion to an otherwise drab feature.
It's still better than talking to robots and worse than a more imaginative take on relation mechanics.

In Crusader Kings 3 feasts are kind a alright.
They always present a moral dilemma and some dialogue options to choose with real consequences.
This could be copied perhaps.
Even with lord duels if someone offends the other lord.

 

[Mad Vader]

In Crusader Kings 3 feasts are kind a alright.
They always present a moral dilemma and some dialogue options to choose with real consequences.
This could be copied perhaps.
Even with lord duels if someone offends the other lord.

Random outcomes just encourage save scumming. One way to counter this is to have series of connected events spread over time, so your previous decision's outcome is not known until further in the game. It's also much better for immersion - a series of events gives you a narrative. (= the best feature of King of Dragon Pass)

 

[Warlord123123]

Random outcomes just encourage save scumming. One way to counter this is to have series of connected events spread over time, so your previous decision's outcome is not known until further in the game. It's also much better for immersion - a series of events gives you a narrative. (= the best feature of King of Dragon Pass)

This is why you have ironman mode.

Crusader kings (and anything from Paradox) same as Bannerlord is too easy and not that exciting without brutal consequences.

One way to counter this is to have series of connected events spread over time

Or this. Yes.

 

[Apocal]

You don't know because you aren't reading the reason we keep giving: it's more immersive for lords to do something once in a while in their yearly schedule that isn't murder.

I ignored that explanation because they do this already in Bannerlord. People just never notice, unless to bug report it.

 

[Sithrain]

Really? What exactly? I have never seen it.

 

[Warlord123123]

Really? What exactly? I have never seen it.

Going into castles and appearing in tournaments.

That's all. Rest is a murder spree and children spawning.

That's why we really need peace time and rpg elements introduced.

 

[RandyOglestein]

True, feast mechanics were unimaginative. But a feast was a chance to talk to your kingdom crew in one place, and they usually commented on some recent action of yours according to their personality and the action (and you got bonus -+relations) - that gave some immersion to an otherwise drab feature.
It's still better than talking to robots and worse than a more imaginative take on relation mechanics.

Yeah, everyone saying "wHeRe ArE fEaStS" like it was some amazing, immersive feature. I'm not against feast implementation, but would love to see some value (and real immersion) added to it. I think it could be cool to make kingdom policy voting happen at feasts (or at least noble gatherings, which could include feasts). Only those present would get a vote, and it would make it something worth doing other than just running up to each lord to say hi and get your relation bonus.

 

[helari]

As a gameplay mechanic feasts were essentially a money skin that allowed players to quickly increase relations with lords in their kingdom by spamming them. I think Brlord aims to have a tighter, more coherent set of features centered around, you guessed it, warfare and playing as a lord, with less early game fluff like freelancer or throwaway features like feasts.

Of course there's a lot of hope for more immersion and increased npc interactions. The dialog and follower selection for example is obviously unfinished.

edit: I think crusader kings, which is a fun game despite most content being locked behind dlc, is a good example of a game with relatively simple base gameplay and tons of immersive fluff, working to a varying degree, on top of that. The fluff becomes the centerpiece of the game with the core gameplay being kind of barren, unlike bannerlord where the core gameplay of combat is supposed to be the main dish.

 

[vonbalt]

Yeah, everyone saying "wHeRe ArE fEaStS" like it was some amazing, immersive feature. I'm not against feast implementation, but would love to see some value (and real immersion) added to it. I think it could be cool to make kingdom policy voting happen at feasts (or at least noble gatherings, which could include feasts). Only those present would get a vote, and it would make it something worth doing other than just running up to each lord to say hi and get your relation bonus.

In my case it's more that i expected bannerlord to take warband as a base and just build upon it like they had done with the move from classic to warband.

Feasts were barebones? yes but they were there and i hoped they would grab that and many other features and rework/expand upon them instead of scraping everything they could not fit into boring buttons and menus.

 

[Apocal]

Really? What exactly? I have never seen it.

Their armies will occasionally (edit: during peacetime or when fighting a really weak faction) plow into a town and sit there a good long while, generally coinciding with a tournament. You get a packed full lord's hall as a result plus a good chance of nabbing a few juicy quests for easy relations. And not that piddly +1 but banging out 20+ relations just because you happened to have 13 horses in your inventory.

But people keep ****ing bug reporting it and every time they do TW adjusts the AI decision-making so that parties and armies spend less time in town.

 

[RandyOglestein]

In my case it's more that i expected bannerlord to take warband as a base and just build upon it like they had done with the move from classic to warband.

Feasts were barebones? yes but they were there and i hoped they would grab that and many other features and rework/expand upon them instead of scraping everything they could not fit into boring buttons and menus.

I generally agree, I was hoping Warband would be the foundation on which Bannerlord would be built, not a reworking of the foundation.
I think the primary problem with Bannerlord (aside from combat/siege AI) is the lack of interesting things to do. I think expanding on the campaign interactions in meaningful and immersive ways would drastically improve the game. Just spitballing some ideas:

• Noble gatherings where kingdom policy is determined (similar to a feast, but for business, unrelated to tournaments)
  • Would be similar to how the marshal system worked in Warband where lords would congregate before going to war, just a political version of that
• Feasts centered around tournaments where lords can congregate and build relations
  • Could act as essentially a roving quest hub where kingdom-impacting quests can be taken/turned in (scouting, soldier training, taxation gathering, etc.)
• Build on the lord relation system
  • Create more interaction with the lord relation system (similar to the "I think we should go here", "Patrol here", "I want to marry your child" stuff from Warband)
  • Increase utility of lord relation system (adoption into other clans (sandbox mode only), seek favors (money, soldiers, gear, influence, position within clan, etc.)
• Build on campaign effects of quests
  • Right now it seems like quests only really affect your ability to recruit soldiers from notables
  • Would love to see more tangible campaign effects of quests (scouting, soldier training, taxation gathering, gear smithing, etc. impacts/drives AI decisions or improves fief/kingdom in some way)
• AI patrols created from city and castle garrisons to hunt looters/bandits/small enemy parties
• Build on AI personalities and traits
  • Similar to Total War/Civ/Age of Wonders, the personalities and traits of AI lords and kingdoms should affect their decisions in meaningful ways

 

[PaTi6op]

I generally agree, I was hoping Warband would be the foundation on which Bannerlord would be built, not a reworking of the foundation.
I think the primary problem with Bannerlord (aside from combat/siege AI) is the lack of interesting things to do. I think expanding on the campaign interactions in meaningful and immersive ways would drastically improve the game. Just spitballing some ideas:

• Noble gatherings where kingdom policy is determined (similar to a feast, but for business, unrelated to tournaments)
  • Would be similar to how the marshal system worked in Warband where lords would congregate before going to war, just a political version of that
• Feasts centered around tournaments where lords can congregate and build relations
  • Could act as essentially a roving quest hub where kingdom-impacting quests can be taken/turned in (scouting, soldier training, taxation gathering, etc.)
• Build on the lord relation system
  • Create more interaction with the lord relation system (similar to the "I think we should go here", "Patrol here", "I want to marry your child" stuff from Warband)
  • Increase utility of lord relation system (adoption into other clans (sandbox mode only), seek favors (money, soldiers, gear, influence, position within clan, etc.)
• Build on campaign effects of quests
  • Right now it seems like quests only really affect your ability to recruit soldiers from notables
  • Would love to see more tangible campaign effects of quests (scouting, soldier training, taxation gathering, gear smithing, etc. impacts/drives AI decisions or improves fief/kingdom in some way)
• AI patrols created from city and castle garrisons to hunt looters/bandits/small enemy parties
• Build on AI personalities and traits
  • Similar to Total War/Civ/Age of Wonders, the personalities and traits of AI lords and kingdoms should affect their decisions in meaningful ways

I would definitely like to see all of the above in the game.

 

[vonbalt]

I generally agree, I was hoping Warband would be the foundation on which Bannerlord would be built, not a reworking of the foundation.
I think the primary problem with Bannerlord (aside from combat/siege AI) is the lack of interesting things to do. I think expanding on the campaign interactions in meaningful and immersive ways would drastically improve the game. Just spitballing some ideas:

• Noble gatherings where kingdom policy is determined (similar to a feast, but for business, unrelated to tournaments)
  • Would be similar to how the marshal system worked in Warband where lords would congregate before going to war, just a political version of that
• Feasts centered around tournaments where lords can congregate and build relations
  • Could act as essentially a roving quest hub where kingdom-impacting quests can be taken/turned in (scouting, soldier training, taxation gathering, etc.)
• Build on the lord relation system
  • Create more interaction with the lord relation system (similar to the "I think we should go here", "Patrol here", "I want to marry your child" stuff from Warband)
  • Increase utility of lord relation system (adoption into other clans (sandbox mode only), seek favors (money, soldiers, gear, influence, position within clan, etc.)
• Build on campaign effects of quests
  • Right now it seems like quests only really affect your ability to recruit soldiers from notables
  • Would love to see more tangible campaign effects of quests (scouting, soldier training, taxation gathering, gear smithing, etc. impacts/drives AI decisions or improves fief/kingdom in some way)
• AI patrols created from city and castle garrisons to hunt looters/bandits/small enemy parties
• Build on AI personalities and traits
  • Similar to Total War/Civ/Age of Wonders, the personalities and traits of AI lords and kingdoms should affect their decisions in meaningful ways

Exactly! this is more or less how i think things should have naturally evolved in bannerlord and it would have created a legendary immersive game.

Warband had the base even if some features were barebones, they should have improved on this instead of throwing all their cards in the combat and axing features from the rest of the game.

I would absolutely love these kind of features where the king has to summon his court to discuss politics and the like, would be perfect for intrigues and all kinds of cool stuff, it's like they learned nothing from the years of experience with classic/warband's community and the success of mods + viking conquest once the bugs were ironed out (still my favorite mod/dlc to this day for the added immersion and overall polished experience)

 

[Mad Vader]

it's like they learned nothing from the years of experience with classic/warband's community and the success of mods + viking conquest once the bugs were ironed out (still my favorite mod/dlc to this day for the added immersion and overall polished experience)

One of the hardest things to grasp about Taleworlds staff, particularly the current bunch, is that the new ones didn't play Warband at all and the veterans certainly didn't play with mods (with minor exceptions). This explains some clueless decisions and the overall lack of improvements that look obvious and necessary to actual veteran players.
Wading through player suggestion threads with very uneven quality or relevance is not a substitute for hands-on experience.
If Armagan does an AMA at some point, I would like to ask him if he ever played with mods and what did he like about them. I suspect he didn't and may have took mods as an implicit criticism of HIS game and design skill.

 

[froggyluv]

One of the hardest things to grasp about Taleworlds staff, particularly the current bunch, is that the new ones didn't play Warband at all and the veterans certainly didn't play with mods (with minor exceptions). This explains some clueless decisions and the overall lack of improvements that look obvious and necessary to actual veteran players.
Wading through player suggestion threads with very uneven quality or relevance is not a substitute for hands-on experience.
If Armagan does an AMA at some point, I would like to ask him if he ever played with mods and what did he like about them. I suspect he didn't and may have took mods as an implicit criticism of HIS game and design skill.

that would explain alot and i'd urge long term fans to be very vocal about not buying more TW products until they get back on the same page as us. Sadly in the end -its only revenue that will effect these types of decision. Sure casuals bought a bucketload of Bannerlord but that was based off of the long term fans hype leading to PC gaming sites hype etc... If the base fanbase pull away so will go the casuals as well -this aint COD

 

[Warlord123123]

that would explain alot and i'd urge long term fans to be very vocal about not buying more TW products until they get back on the same page as us. Sadly in the end -its only revenue that will effect these types of decision. Sure casuals bought a bucketload of Bannerlord but that was based off of the long term fans hype leading to PC gaming sites hype etc... If the base fanbase pull away so will go the casuals as well -this aint COD

Well, judging from Steam statistics not more than 10k players are usually online... out of 5 000 000+ copies sold, meaning - all the casuals are already gone and only the hardcore fans remain (hardcore enough to torture themselves with beta testing).

TW has this naive idea that casuals and console players will buy more copies and DLCs in the future, but its the other way around. Fans are the ones that will stick with mods and DLCs for years to come, thus focus should be on us not some Mordhau players who bought this game only judging from the fake siege trailer that hyped up the youtube.

 

[Nalgasucia507]

One of the hardest things to grasp about Taleworlds staff, particularly the current bunch, is that the new ones didn't play Warband at all and the veterans certainly didn't play with mods (with minor exceptions). This explains some clueless decisions and the overall lack of improvements that look obvious and necessary to actual veteran players.
Wading through player suggestion threads with very uneven quality or relevance is not a substitute for hands-on experience.
If Armagan does an AMA at some point, I would like to ask him if he ever played with mods and what did he like about them. I suspect he didn't and may have took mods as an implicit criticism of HIS game and design skill.

+1. I am pretty sure you are spot on, and I agree with all comments below yours. Thinking about, its crazy that TW does not make them play Warband with maybe popular mods (part of the orientation process, and at least 2 times a year, for at least a week). That game, and its mods is what made TW and provided the demand for Bannerlord.

Leadership is way over their heads. I really hope some competition comes along...