Even with all the horrible decisions, bannerlord is the best game of all time (or warband)

[Jesus__is__Lord]

even with the class system

even when they took out battle mode(i know they are adding it eventually but they are not adding it for matchmaking which is terrible imo)

even when they started changing the mechanics of units (making shield infantry obsolete by adding a very large speed penalty to all shields so that shield bearers would be surrounded by non shield bearers no matter how light their gear was making archers the most powerful unit in the game (imo))

i kept playing

but when they added passive perks destroying the fundamental basics of combat (swing speed bonus especially) that was the "last straw" for me

i tried playing another game

i tried: chivalry 2, mordau, New world,last oasis, Narake:bladepoint, warhammer 2 total war, super smash bros, etc (the last couple weren't really melee games i know)

but they were all terrible (or just not what i like anymore after i got used to the mount and blade series)

i know bannerlord isn't what we wanted and it seems to be going in a very wrong direction

but there isn't another game that even comes close to what this series has accomplished

the beauty of taleworld's combat system isn't something any other game can replicate

we shouldn't worry about the new designs because we will all probably play some modded version instead anyways that wont have all this perk nonsense etc

at the very core of this new engine is a good combat system, however much crowded with bad outlying designs

so this just an appreciation thread

your games are great and bannerlord will be getting better

thanks taleworlds, and keep up the good work

 

[Kunshiro]

no

 

[Tork789]

That's actually kind of sad too, I really wish there were a lot of games comparable to M&B at least combat-wise, but Jesus is right, everything else isn't even on the same level, not even close.

 

[Greedalicious]

Played alot of Mortal Online 2 these last few days, which made me appriciate Bannerlord alot more. Which is also infuriating when I know of some pretty simple ways to change the game for the better.

 

[trafon]

Which is probably why devs dont care about their game. The only real alternative to bl is warband and they know people will just come back to play bl even though it's a bad game

 

[DeathBG]

I don't consider the game bad. Personally I spend 1600 hours playing multiplayer on that masterpiece and I know the class system like the back of my hand. I am making good suggestions that don't require a lot of efforts to be implemented or raher they gotta change a couple lines of code to balance 2 broken passive perks and make a new model with more lenght for an axe that nobody uses (Axe on Vlandian Sergeant). All this work can be done in a day and will make the experience of the people 50% better.

The question is why are devs not giving me any feedback and why are they not giving feedback to the rest. Here we talk about balancing the current game not implementing battle mode, custom servers etc. I am beyond dissapointed that we have to suffer due to lack of balance in some factions.

I want to see devs hosting a stream or some kind of event where we can discuss balancing the units and perks around the class system to make the game more enjoyable.

Just in case some dev reads that post let me give my suggestion on things that must get fixed:
1. Aserai needs at least 30 armor on their tribal warrior to stand a chance vs the other 5 factions.
2. Vlandian sergeant needs to have the one-handed axe reworked and get additional 9 lenght so it can be competitive vs the other heavy infantry units in the game
3. All swing speed related perks must be removed from the game.

If by any chance devs listen and take my advice you will be one step close to balance the game.

 

[Poddicus]

I just woke up thus I can't tell whether this is real or whether I'm still having a nightmare
By the nature of the thread and its OP I'll assume the latter

 

[Mr_Shestak]

no

 

[jon01]

Mount & Blade used to be like the Mario of Medieval games, as well as an exemplary franchise for PC gaming. The "imitators" of Warband (e.g. Mordhau, For Honor, Chivalry, Last Oasis, Mortal Online) might have been worth a look-in, but they were always weak in comparison. They didn't have quite the same joys or hit the sweetspot as wonderfully as Warband did. Now it feels like M&B2: Bannerlord is merely one of those weak imitators, rather than the proper follow-up that's been expected since 2012. It could potentially get a lot better (in a matter of years), but the initial release last year was a massive disappointment (regarding the MP), and it continues to look for all the world like a soulless, dumbed down console port in many aspects.

The "horrible decisions" are precisely what prevents it from being the greatest game of all time.

 

[Kunshiro]

Mount & Blade used to be like the Mario of Medieval games, as well as an exemplary franchise for PC gaming. The "imitators" of Warband (e.g. Mordhau, For Honor, Chivalry, Last Oasis, Mortal Online) might have been worth a look-in, but they were always weak in comparison. They didn't have quite the same joys or hit the sweetspot as wonderfully as Warband did. Now it feels like M&B2: Bannerlord is merely one of those weak imitators, rather than the proper follow-up that's been expected since 2012. It could potentially get a lot better (in a matter of years), but the initial release last year was a massive disappointment (regarding the MP), and it continues to look for all the world like a soulless, dumbed down console port in many aspects.

The "horrible decisions" are precisely what prevents it from being the greatest game of all time.

You are comparing ONLINE games with a singleplayer game. As far as I know there's no sandbox M&B imitator. Just because you are fighting with swordsdoesn't mean its similar.

 

[jon01]

The sword part is mostly what I was getting at.

 

[greedogre]

bull****

there is not even a argument to argue about, if you have question just check multiplayer population

 

[Byas]

Last Oasis is so much better when it compares to Bannerlord.

But if Bannerlord ever did get fixed & servers stay up and running on 250 player servers it may be as good if not better then Warband.

Right now though... I treat Last Oasis to have better melee combat.



I also rather just jump on Persistent Kingdoms if servers are still alive after these years.

 

[Roadpork]

I am okay with some random nerds design the mechanism.
but better get real game players to design the gameplay. Obviously whoever designs skirmish does not have much gaming experience.
otherwise, they would have been immediately realized 6v6 is horrible for a battle emulator(even before they launch the project). The fewer players we have, the worse for rock-paper-scissors design. plus they enhanced the rock-paper-scissors design by the class system.

Nobody will question that BL has the best mechanism.
but a good game? hmmmmmmm

 

[Greedalicious]

I am okay with some random nerds design the mechanism.
but better get real game players to design the gameplay. Obviously whoever designs skirmish does not have much gaming experience.
otherwise, they would have been immediately realized 6v6 is horrible for a battle emulator(even before they launch the project). The fewer players we have, the worse for rock-paper-scissors design. plus they enhanced the rock-paper-scissors design by the class system.

Nobody will question that BL has the best mechanism.
but a good game? hmmmmmmm

Its 6v6 because its their competitive gamemode. The more players you add into a fight, the less competitive it becomes, for many reasons.
1), You cant account for everything on the field, making it more random. Try keeping track of 6 cavalries, 2 infantry and 3 archers in a fight. You wont.

2) Getting 6 dedicated players are tough, getting 10 is impossible. In a class based system like Bannerlord, and Warband for that matter, you need spesific classes, and if you have a match where its 30 vs 30, you'll never have the classes you want. And your individual skill is irrelevant.

3) If they want an esport, logistically anything more than 5 becomes a nightmare. Imagine a 10vs10 LAN tournament, even an invitational of 4 teams thats 40 people. Thats an insane cost, and no studio can hold 10 people on each side.

4) Viewers cant keep track of everything, and they cant learn the names of players. Esports is all about the viewing experience, if the viewers are confused about whats going on, then it'll lower the enjoyment they'll have. Especially because Bannerlord doesnt have anything flashy.
Not knowing the names of players means sponsors wont care as much, because nobody will be worth their time and money.

Theres more, but skirmish is their competitive mode, for people who want large scale battles, siege exists, and I'm assuming the new one life mode will be more aimed at events and the likes. Events like shield wall etc are not competitive, theyre fun events.

 

[Roadpork]

Its 6v6 because its their competitive gamemode. The more players you add into a fight, the less competitive it becomes, for many reasons.
1), You cant account for everything on the field, making it more random. Try keeping track of 6 cavalries, 2 infantry and 3 archers in a fight. You wont.

2) Getting 6 dedicated players are tough, getting 10 is impossible. In a class based system like Bannerlord, and Warband for that matter, you need spesific classes, and if you have a match where its 30 vs 30, you'll never have the classes you want. And your individual skill is irrelevant.

3) If they want an esport, logistically anything more than 5 becomes a nightmare. Imagine a 10vs10 LAN tournament, even an invitational of 4 teams thats 40 people. Thats an insane cost, and no studio can hold 10 people on each side.

4) Viewers cant keep track of everything, and they cant learn the names of players. Esports is all about the viewing experience, if the viewers are confused about whats going on, then it'll lower the enjoyment they'll have. Especially because Bannerlord doesnt have anything flashy.
Not knowing the names of players means sponsors wont care as much, because nobody will be worth their time and money.

Theres more, but skirmish is their competitive mode, for people who want large scale battles, siege exists, and I'm assuming the new one life mode will be more aimed at events and the likes. Events like shield wall etc are not competitive, theyre fun events.

For other 6v6 e-sport games, we have healers to keep the battle for a while. at least long enough to tell audiences what is happening. Medieval games don't (and shouldn't) have that. 6V6 is not only about numbers, it's a system. I think currently the e-sport idea in BL has flaws.

from the e-sport aspect, we need something steady.

If I want to improve the audience-watching experience, I will downplay the impact of class. use "builds" instead. Which combine with their armours. players can't change the armour when they die. but they can change weapons from a range of selections (based on the original builds).
the in-game strategy will be based on weapon customization.

by this method. ppl still dies but they revive as a similar character. which somehow keeps the battle consistant.

 

[Sigaretovic]

even with the class system

even when they took out battle mode(i know they are adding it eventually but they are not adding it for matchmaking which is terrible imo)

even when they started changing the mechanics of units (making shield infantry obsolete by adding a very large speed penalty to all shields so that shield bearers would be surrounded by non shield bearers no matter how light their gear was making archers the most powerful unit in the game (imo))

i kept playing

but when they added passive perks destroying the fundamental basics of combat (swing speed bonus especially) that was the "last straw" for me

i tried playing another game

i tried: chivalry 2, mordau, New world,last oasis, Narake:bladepoint, warhammer 2 total war, super smash bros, etc (the last couple weren't really melee games i know)

but they were all terrible (or just not what i like anymore after i got used to the mount and blade series)

i know bannerlord isn't what we wanted and it seems to be going in a very wrong direction

but there isn't another game that even comes close to what this series has accomplished

the beauty of taleworld's combat system isn't something any other game can replicate

we shouldn't worry about the new designs because we will all probably play some modded version instead anyways that wont have all this perk nonsense etc

at the very core of this new engine is a good combat system, however much crowded with bad outlying designs

so this just an appreciation thread

your games are great and bannerlord will be getting better

thanks taleworlds, and keep up the good work

Every time you post a silly thread i wonder what you will come up with next time. You my friend have outdone yourself and have exceeded my wildest expectations.

 

[Greedalicious]

For other 6v6 e-sport games, we have healers to keep the battle for a while. at least long enough to tell audiences what is happening. Medieval games don't (and shouldn't) have that. 6V6 is not only about numbers, it's a system. I think currently the e-sport idea in BL has flaws.

from the e-sport aspect, we need something steady.

If I want to improve the audience-watching experience, I will downplay the impact of class. use "builds" instead. Which combine with their armours. players can't change the armour when they die. but they can change weapons from a range of selections (based on the original builds).
the in-game strategy will be based on weapon customization.

by this method. ppl still dies but they revive as a similar character. which somehow keeps the battle consistant.

Healers?
Bannerlords esport has definite issues, like the fact that it doesnt exist, and cant possibly exist without spectator tools and a healthy scene, the list of what we'd need is a big one and its not a priority for Taleworld, it might never be.

Hard to say what will matter, builds are often incredibly important, and in Warband you could screw yourself and your team by picking the wrong equipment, from the looks, classes will matter more than perks in Bannerlord. Again, difficult to say, we'll have to wait and see how things develop both on the TW side, and the community.

The respawning system will add complexity for sure, but possibly not a good one. Im not against the idea of respawns, I've always thought the buyback mechanic in Dota is incredibly interesting (atleast surface level, it has some issues deep down) but the equipment system limits it.

Would be nice to see Warbands equipment system, with a buyback method if you can afford it. It'll heavily reward talented players, and people can decide if they want a 1000 gold with a potential respawn, or a 2000 gold with no respawn.