Arrows don't inherit the lateral velocity of the riders that loose them

Users who are viewing this thread

Remember guys. The base game kind of or sorta needs to accommodate the least common denominator. I have a friend who I thought would absolutely love this game because he is just as much into the middle ages warfare as I am yet he only played around 40 minutes before quitting the game for good. I asked him why and he said, "This game just requires too much twitch, hand eye coordination. I just didn't have any fun because I couldn't ever hit anything with my weapons."

Point is, make it too much "skilled based" and there are a lot of people who will bail and/or just not by the game.
I'm terrible at combat; but part of being terrible is that I accept I shouldn't be able to fire a bow accurately from a charging horse, too. I can play commander, stand still protected by troops and fire a bow at massed ranks, and swing wildly with a two hander while frantically backing away if I get caught up in melee. (Occasionally I'll forget I'm terrible, and charge with my borrowed troops to take out a band of looters, and get embarassingly knocked out while the raw recruits save me). The game shouldn't simplify combat mechanics to the point of pointlessness just to let me think I'm actually good at something I'm not - because that doesn't reward skill improvement (the ingame skill, or player coordination skill). Nothing puts people off a game more than feeling that the game isn't responding to your development and improvement.

Needing a break from Bannerlord, I looked through some unplayed Steam titles a couple of days ago, and tried Witcher 2 (again). I gave up after five minutes. That's a combat mechanic at which I'll never be remotely adequate.
 
Needing a break from Bannerlord, I looked through some unplayed Steam titles a couple of days ago, and tried Witcher 2 (again). I gave up after five minutes. That's a combat mechanic at which I'll never be remotely adequate.
Abuse rolling a lot when the going gets tough.
 
Please note that the lateral displacement value I have taken was to dramatise the effect and make the "physics simulation" noticeable. For me, the range of "optimum zone" would be between 1.5 and 1.0.

This effect is also transferred to other projectiles. I've been testing with the javelins/jereed and the necessary aiming correction, in my eyes it would be an incentive to raise the skill in terms of mounted combat and projectile throwing.
Nerd Mode ON.

They are still railgun slugs though, the trail is direct in horizontal plane and lateral lead is linear while it should go kind of hyperbolic tended to straightening . But it's surely better with this than without.

Nerd Mode OFF

Thanks for finding and sharing.
 
Nerd Mode ON.

They are still railgun slugs though, the trail is direct in horizontal plane and lateral lead is linear while it should go kind of hyperbolic tended to straightening . But it's surely better with this than without.

Nerd Mode OFF

Thanks for finding and sharing.
Definitely, in fact it could be adjusted more towards a more realistic effect by adjusting the friction values of the arrow (time of flight/drop) and the velocity of the projectile itself as an item (in this test was a bodkin arrow with a value of 10 (native) would perhaps work better with a lower value). As for javelins the same, a tweak and such an effect could be achieved on long distance lateral throwing.

You are welcome, much appreciated :wink: .
 
But what if it's raining or snowing. Surely this needs to be modeled as well. And let's not forget about the elephant in the room, the wind. :razz:
 
But what if it's raining or snowing. Surely this needs to be modeled as well. And let's not forget about the elephant in the room, the wind. :razz:

You're going to laugh at this; there is that option too :lol: . Just as I was surprised that Taleworlds implemented that variable for lateral velocities, there are also those that interfere with meteorology. This is a piece of code that Dejan shared here.

bool rain = scene.GetRainDensity() > 0.0f; bool snow = scene.GetSnowDensity() > 0.0f; bool badWeather = rain | snow; bool badVision = scene.GetFog() > 0.0f; Mission.Current.SetBowMissileSpeedModifier(badWeather ? 0.9f : 1.0f); Mission.Current.SetCrossbowMissileSpeedModifier(badWeather ? 0.9f : 1.0f); Mission.Current.SetMissileRangeModifier(badVision ? 0.8f : 1.0f);

The discouraging thing is that such effects were disabled at the drop of a hat in previous patches.
e1.0.4 said:

Combat AI
  • Night debuffs, visibility limitation and extra aim error of ranged units have been removed
That said, the option is available both for Taleworlds with an official implementation or via community modding ?.
 
They were not lacking in ambition, very interesting. As you said, more things to do for the modders.
They were probably dropping debuffs like this because they didn't want to increase the difficulty, so filthy casuals wouldn't ragequit and refund.
Edit: It doesn't make sense to me if they are just temporarily switched off to test ranged combat without modifiers, because then they are not testing ranged combat in bad weather. But Taleworlds may think otherwise.
 
Last edited:
I wonder what the real-life value is on that. I'd expect it to be 1.0, if they have their physics right, but who knows how much effort there was to get the system working right (before they intentionally dumbed it down).
 
They were not lacking in ambition, very interesting. As you said, more things to do for the modders.
They were probably dropping debuffs like this because they didn't want to increase the difficulty, so filthy casuals wouldn't ragequit and refund.
From what was said by devs in Discord, months and months back, it was disabled because it was generating a huge number of bug reports along the lines of "my archers won't fire in hideouts."
 
From what was said by devs in Discord, months and months back, it was disabled because it was generating a huge number of bug reports along the lines of "my archers won't fire in hideouts."
Thanks for that info. So they disabled it because they were annoyed by bogus reports. That's like the battle size slider story, short-sighted and motivated by pure convenience for their sensitive souls. Even then, they could have disabled just the range penalty (low visibility), and not the accuracy penalty, which should not generate such reports.
Alternatively, they could have explained what's going on and let the forum users and moderators spread that knowledge, quashing such bogus bug reports coming through here.
 
Well, it's the same as with the AI system. I don't have the tidbit at hand (thread/comment), but iirc it was commented that the nerf to the AI in the short post release period was motivated because some user(s) complained that the tournaments were too "difficult".

I have advocated scaling the difficulty levels so that a new player new to the franchise will find a "basic" gameplay experience and get gut upon there. However, for both veterans and players who need a more challenging experience, the currently defined top difficulty mode falls short.

Hell, I've even read complaints about the maps with comments along the lines of "tHeRe ArE tOo MaNy TrEeS"... ffs :facepalm:.
And with this leading up to the topic of this thread, leave the pew pew robin hood straight bullseye for the lowest difficulty and the challenging ones include the kind of factors we've been talking about.
 
Hell, I've even read complaints about the maps with comments along the lines of "tHeRe ArE tOo MaNy TrEeS"... ffs :facepalm:.
And with this leading up to the topic of this thread, leave the pew pew robin hood straight bullseye for the lowest difficulty and the challenging ones include the kind of factors we've been talking about.
this
 
Alternatively, they could have explained what's going on and let the forum users and moderators spread that knowledge, quashing such bogus bug reports coming through here.
You have way more faith in this forum's ability to disseminate information than I do. I was watching some streamer decide to siege a fief on the opposite end of Calradia from his other holding because he didn't realize distance was the biggest factor in whether you wind up on the selection ballot. I even mentioned it in chat and he said something like, "I don't think that's how it works" then was all pikachushocked.jpg when he was left off the list. "That's gotta be a bug."

:facepalm:

Most people playing Bannerlord don't do anything but boot it up and go. I'm not even sure that in-game messages are enough considering all the people who still don't realize Merciful companions complain when you raid villages while they are in your party.

(But curiously enough don't complain when you sack towns :unsure:)
 
I was talking about a situation where bug reports come through this forum. A newbie starts a bug/whine thread and is quickly ridiculed for his ignorance answered by the friendly users. It's why players congregate on game forums, to share knowledge of the game.
As for the jungles that are Youtube and such, **** those losers you can't save everyone.
 
I was talking about a situation where bug reports come through this forum. A newbie starts a bug/whine thread and is quickly ridiculed for his ignorance answered by the friendly users. It's why players congregate on game forums, to share knowledge of the game.
As for the jungles that are Youtube and such, **** those losers you can't save everyone.
Oh, that fix was back in the days when they pulled bug reports from every source imaginable: Twitch streams, Reddit, Steam forums, random people *****ing in the comments section of YouTube videos, etc. It came super-early in EA, around the same time as they took the guidance section off of looter's rocks.
 
Last edited:
Oh, Yay!
Gimme, gimme!!
One useless fan who would like to see those hidden parameters (lateral, wind and stuff) activatable via option menu.

But seriously, I am amazed right now.
Also, I want trampling back, like it was in M&B (Because I am a wonder of coordination and still struggling with blocking after about 500 hours). Those new horses wouldn't hurt a Chinchilla if they walked over it.
 
Back
Top Bottom