The intention is for players be able to tell them to stop/follow.
We generally explore new features for new quests. So, yes, there is a possibility.
-
If you are reporting a bug, please head over to our Technical Support section for Bannerlord.
Prison breaks are AWFUL
- Thread starter Lesbosisles
- Start date
Users who are viewing this thread
I take it back. I was able to sneak behind guards.
And I found bug - you can't go upstairs crouching, player character get stuck on every step.
So that's why I didn't get any rescue quests, that sucks.
I got few sugestions:
1. Let me start quest on city map
2. Add option to free more nobles than one at once
3. Add option to demand payment after succesful break (less relation boost)
4. Add city run through especially since sneaking actually works. I think it would be cool to check best city routes without guards and exploring city would make sense.
And one question. Do prison guards act like bandits in hideouts? Am I able to throw dagger near them so they turn around and walk to check what made this sound?
Lesbosisles
Knight at Arms
Well, as I see it, this can be done either by a default order menu, only for 1 person (more convenient, as for me), or via dialogue option - as it was in Warband (less convenient, but still better than nothing).
You may have your own opinion, of course.
That would've been nice, since right now there is not much profit in getting prisoners out of dungeons.
And also this. In WB it was a cool feature, in Bannerlord, with all that complex city designs it may be even cooler!
I think, having just "stop" and "follow" orders will create frustrating situations. We should have a command to make the prisoner wait where we think is safe for them. Otherwise we have to go to the safe place when the prisoner is following us and tell them to stop there which is boring and could be dangerous to do while enemy is chasing us. For example we noticed an archer and want the prisoner to go to a safe place. I want to be able to do it with a single command instead of leading the prisoner to that place.
Oh, please. You NEED to have AI stand by? Just put Jeremus up to the task. He'll slaughter them with his walking stick.
Dabos37
Sergeant Knight at Arms
Yes please, add a quest where clan members ask for rescuing imprisoned family members. Currently there is not any incentive for rescuing prisoners.
That is what I think too. In my eyes, the most basic commands for these situations would be to have:- F1
- F1 - Move to position
- F2 - Follow me
- F3 - Stop
?
Calabanar
Sergeant at Arms
Do it, Taleworlds!
Lesbosisles
Knight at Arms
Couldn't have said better myself.
If not, we already know what happens when the AI decides for the player...
- F1
- F1 - Move to position
- F2 - Follow me
- F3 - Stop
If your looking for new features for quest and the community is literally starving for a real reason to walk around/visit a town or village scene - for the life of me I can’t figure out why you won’t consider dynamic npc’s who wander around towns to initiate new quests, fights or events
it’s literally a win/win
Only thing this game does well is performing decently with so many entities on screen. Otherwise it's veeeeeeeeery bland. The AI is especially bad, they're just as tunnel vision as they were in warband.
Bratok
Regular
Might as well put these words in a frame and hang on a wall...(sigh)
Lesbosisles
Knight at Arms
Warband had a few (two, I think) radiant quests which could be triggered through town scene only. The drunkard who could bate you to fight him and a peasant looking for help against raiding bandits.
Bannerlord could go even further and make unique radiant stuff for different factions, to make them feel actually different not only visually, but also... well, internally.
Death2Tyrants
Veteran
I've read that but I was referring to the details. Allow me to contribute some ideas:
Prison Break
How I'd build it would be somewhat along the lines of attacking hideouts. We camp outside the city until nightfall and then we start from outside the city gate and the lower the rogue points, the more guards there will be. (Is there a point to crouching? What about sound? Does gear have a "sound" quality? Like perhaps Suede boots produce 0 sound but Plate Lamellar Boots produce 10 sound and the more overall sound value you have, the easier it is to attract attention.)
The objective would then be for the player to attempt to break into the city (scale the walls, do a lockpicking mini game, bend the bars, bribe etc using Control, Rogue, Vigor or Charm attributes/skills respectively) and then either fight their way to the prison or sneak there.
Additional things I'd add are the chance to start fires and/or other distractions.
Rebellion
A more complete version would include consequences. For e.g on capturing a town, the player could be confronted by representatives from the neighbouring kingdoms along the lines of "Hey that's a nice town you have there. A pity if someone were to ransack it".Or "Thanks for liberating MY town. I'd like to have it back."
And refusal will naturally lead to war. That'd force the player to either sell the town, give it up, join a faction or go to war.
Without these consequences, a player can slowly conquer the whole map without having to defend their possessions.
Diplomacy (Campaign vs Sandbox)
In Campaign, we have the back story from the Folly quest. Vlandians betrayed the Empire etc etc but we don't see the grudges play out.
Why doesn't Mesui seek revenge? I can't remember the rest of the story because it's so forgettable. Make it affect how the game initially starts out and it'll be more memorable. Introduce some options to the main quest where we can choose to help patch up misunderstandings or relations. Or even trigger a civil war in Aserai because of that feud.
Otherwise, what's the point of the story?
Food/starvation
That seems to be something TW is fixated on - having a constant boom/bust cycle. It's very annoying from a player's stand point. I put good troops in my garrison with the full intent that it'll be there where I need it. Having troops starve and desert because of some mechanics that the player has absolutely no control over isn't good design. There are many ways around this:
1. Kingdom Policy - The spice must flow - caravans from hostile factions are free from molestation and as such, they will continue trading uninterrupted.
2. Dynamic values for orchards, make it a function of prosperity so as prosperity increases, so does food production. You can set limits so prosperity will approach 0 gain without causing starvation.
3. Allow players to provide food separately for the town and for the garrison. Towns can be done via quests. Say give x amounts of food and gain y amount of town loyalty. So even during starvation, the town would not rebel because we'd have quests that would give temp boost to loyalty. And a stash for garrisons so we can just dump lots and lots of food there.
Death2Tyrants
Veteran
Clans
It would be a very nice feature/mod if clans were actually linked to one another either by blood, ties or fiefs and this would affect their votes accordingly.
This can be achieved thusly:
By blood, once the parent dies, an heir is selected and the remaining siblings will break off and form their own clans.
By ties, through marriage or the current relationship system.
By fiefs, any lord that owns multiple fiefs should be able to grant those fiefs to fiefless lords in exchange for their fealty. Nominally, they'd all be part of the same faction, but their loyalty would not be to the Faction leader.
How should this play out? Well for one, there should be less bot like voting patterns. Currently, the entire faction votes in sync. Lords will abandon the defense of their fiefs to adventure on the other side of the map. With blocs within a faction, I'd envisage parts of a faction who would be against the war and should it pass, not participate at all. This could be coded by making it extremely more costly in terms of influence to recruit a lord into your army. Any lord that has his or her fief threatened should also abandon the army at the cost of taking a hit to relations and poorer relations should affect the cost of recruiting lords into armies.
Lastly, this should open up the opportunity for internecine battles. Civil war or just squabbling between blocs.
While we're on the topic of relations, I note that if we choose mercy upon capturing a fief, it's possible that we might take a hit to relations with certain lords. In Warband, every decision you take would improve some relations while decreasing other relations. This is not the case in Bannerlords which is a major shortcoming.
It would be a very nice feature/mod if clans were actually linked to one another either by blood, ties or fiefs and this would affect their votes accordingly.
This can be achieved thusly:
By blood, once the parent dies, an heir is selected and the remaining siblings will break off and form their own clans.
By ties, through marriage or the current relationship system.
By fiefs, any lord that owns multiple fiefs should be able to grant those fiefs to fiefless lords in exchange for their fealty. Nominally, they'd all be part of the same faction, but their loyalty would not be to the Faction leader.
How should this play out? Well for one, there should be less bot like voting patterns. Currently, the entire faction votes in sync. Lords will abandon the defense of their fiefs to adventure on the other side of the map. With blocs within a faction, I'd envisage parts of a faction who would be against the war and should it pass, not participate at all. This could be coded by making it extremely more costly in terms of influence to recruit a lord into your army. Any lord that has his or her fief threatened should also abandon the army at the cost of taking a hit to relations and poorer relations should affect the cost of recruiting lords into armies.
Lastly, this should open up the opportunity for internecine battles. Civil war or just squabbling between blocs.
While we're on the topic of relations, I note that if we choose mercy upon capturing a fief, it's possible that we might take a hit to relations with certain lords. In Warband, every decision you take would improve some relations while decreasing other relations. This is not the case in Bannerlords which is a major shortcoming.
five bucks
Knight at Arms
This is actually a good thing because it makes civilian outfit mechanics (and the Roguery perks related to them which buff civilian weapons/clothing armor values) more important and makes the fight feel like higher stakes and more challenging.
Agreed 100%.
I'm just glad they added it since it's optional right now and it can be fixed as they go. It's a good addition.
maybe in the near future
Maybe some modder do copy-paste from VC, who knowsmaybe in the near future
Yes please =D
Similar threads
