The Class System was Introduced so they could Monetize on the Skins

[Brandis.]

They thought the max number of combinations classes and perks provided would work out, but didn't account for the often oppressive "feel" the system provides.

In Warband, even if the equipment meta was solved, you were switching through different items and (frequently) had different upgrade paths based on how much money you got.

In Bannerlord, even if there's multiple viable perks, you're doing less micro-managing so it feel less complex.

I doubt there's a plan to charge for skins because the base price of the game is so high.

 

[Askey]

If they don't plan on changing the system they could at least ease up on the grind. Just seen this topic which is a fine example.

Loot System needs fixing

Really? 16 loot from 55 kills and 28 assists in tdm. It would take me 63 games at that rate to get the 1000 loot gear. It is rare enough to get a lobby this full anyways with how often the servers crash. It did crash on that match even. That is approximately 21 hours straight of playing with...

forums.taleworlds.com

 

[Einarcf]

I think you could have warband style system. You have the normal wb system, so you can modifiy builds real time, then you have "suggested" noob friendly builds. Like a prebuilt 1000 gold spearman, 2000 gold heavy inf, 600 gold peasent etc.

You would also be able to build as many configurations as you want in the armory. So I could build a naked archer with longbow and 60 arrows for 700 gold, an armored hybrid xbow for 1450 gold. Etc.

It would look a bit like Total War Warhammer MP, for those who are familiar with that.

I feel like there is a huge missed opportunity to have not have an "Armory Minigame" with metas and such.

(And we can also get away from where major perks and minor perks have to be roughly equal, it opens up more design space.)

 

[Danny5]

I think you could have warband style system. You have the normal wb system, so you can modifiy builds real time, then you have "suggested" noob friendly builds. Like a prebuilt 1000 gold spearman, 2000 gold heavy inf, 600 gold peasent etc.

You would also be able to build as many configurations as you want in the armory. So I could build a naked archer with longbow and 60 arrows for 700 gold, an armored hybrid xbow for 1450 gold. Etc.

It would look a bit like Total War Warhammer MP, for those who are familiar with that.

I feel like there is a huge missed opportunity to have not have an "Armory Minigame" with metas and such.

(And we can also get away from where major perks and minor perks have to be roughly equal, it opens up more design space.)

+1 to this, similar to how mordhau was, with 2 options, either having prebuilt classes, that would be easier for new players or have another option where players can customise troops.

 

[OurGloriousLeader]

Because they designed this system early on already, it would be ridiculous to say the skins did not affect the way they approached the class system when you consider they are putting the skin system as a long term grind/option for the multiplayer to "lengthen" it's life, indicating this decisions was done early on.

Those points they put may have been relevant at first, but as you can see they did not work out. It's especially hard to redesign your software to accommodate a new class system when you have already created a system on top of it, which is the skin system in this case, same for the perks.

I didn't say skins didn't have an impact - although as others pointed out, skins work fine with the WB system as well - just that you keep claiming they used "competitive" as a basis for their decisions, when that's not true based on their claims.

A grindy game where you unlock skins isn't even competitive. That's simply most multiplayer games now. Again, that's not necessarily good, but I dunno why you insist on calling it competitive.

 

[Younes]

I didn't say skins didn't have an impact - although as others pointed out, skins work fine with the WB system as well - just that you keep claiming they used "competitive" as a basis for their decisions, when that's not true based on their claims.

Two gamemodes which are clearly designed around competitive play and are both constantly having their class system reworked to accommodate balance seems like a big hint to start with.

They put a priority on the clan system to allow clans to compete with each other, hell it even has a leaderboard.

Warband is completely irrelevant and i do not know why you keep bringing it up. No taleworlds did not design warband back in 2010 to be competitive. It would have been a hell of a lot different if you compare 2010 games to 2020 games.

A grindy game where you unlock skins isn't even competitive. That's simply most multiplayer games now. Again, that's not necessarily good, but I dunno why you insist on calling it competitive.

I never said the grind part was part of the competitive side of the game. I said it's a way for them to cover up the fact the class system has terrible depth.

 

[OurGloriousLeader]

Two gamemodes which are clearly designed around competitive play and are both constantly having their class system reworked to accommodate balance seems like a big hint to start with.

"clearly" how - I see 2 game modes designed around matchmaking and needing less players, again consistent with almost every other game out there.

They put a priority on the clan system to allow clans to compete with each other, hell it even has a leaderboard.

This was after release and based on community feedback.

Warband is completely irrelevant and i do not know why you keep bringing it up. No taleworlds did not design warband back in 2010 to be competitive. It would have been a hell of a lot different if you compare 2010 games to 2020 games.

We're talking about Warband vs Bannerlord.

I never said the grind part was part of the competitive side of the game. I said it's a way for them to cover up the fact the class system has terrible depth.

Sounds irrelevant then!

 

[Karnage King of Archery]

I thought the main reason why they did the class system was to make it so that gold hoarders can't be invincible death machines like they could in Warband. Ideally, a low-cost unit could still have a fighting chance against the 200 gold heavy cavs.

In practice, it's apparent to me that TaleWorlds has snuck in some intentional imbalances so that certain factions and units will for the most part, perform better than others, while peasant units in some cases will actually punish you for dying as an archer, skirmisher or shock trooper.

I think we all know that this game will be in Early Access forever.

Gold hoarders weren't invincible all you need is skill and you can instant kill them with a one handed weapon.

 

[Younes]

"clearly" how - I see 2 game modes designed around matchmaking and needing less players, again consistent with almost every other game out there.

I'd love for your to bring up a game that is played by all the top skilled players constantly, has ranked in it's name, is played by teams instead of hordes of 20 players, has tournaments between clans, has a planned or already has a skill based matchmaking, and call them not even in the slightest competitive.

Ofc TW took the route of adding the casual side of things, but saying they have not tried the game to be in the slightest competitive is a big lie.

This was after release and based on community feedback.

Sounds like bs, i have never seen things like that discussed on the forums, i will need proof on that.

We're talking about Warband vs Bannerlord.

No, we're talking about taleworlds and their incompetence at making a good class system. This post isn't to compare a 10 year old game developed by a significant smaller studio to today's standard.

Sounds irrelevant then!

It's relevant to the class system part.

 

[OurGloriousLeader]

I'd love for your to bring up a game that is played by all the top skilled players constantly, has ranked in it's name, is played by teams instead of hordes of 20 players, has tournaments between clans, has a planned or already has a skill based matchmaking, and call them not even in the slightest competitive.

Half of these were community driven, the only thing TW added from the beginning of their design was the modes and classes, and never has their stated intentions for these been to focus on "competitive".

Ofc TW took the route of adding the casual side of things, but saying they have not tried the game to be in the slightest competitive is a big lie.

Luckily I never said they never tried in the slightest. You claimed "they didn't do Warband system because they wanted to make the game competitive", I'm just pointing out that wasn't their main goal going by their own explicit reasoning.

Sounds like bs, i have never seen things like that discussed on the forums, i will need proof on that.

If you don't know what you're talking about that isn't my fault. They added clan matches for example, because prior to that nobody could have a match without randomly queuing and hoping.

No, we're talking about taleworlds and their incompetence at making a good class system. This post isn't to compare a 10 year old game developed by a significant smaller studio to today's standard.

See your quote: "they didn't do Warband system because they wanted to make the game competitive".

 

[Firunien]

Well it doesnt really matter what they tried to achieve, their management decisions show they had 0 connection to MP when designing anything combined with huge incompetence.


No battle, no servers and no customization (gameplay wise).. its just incompetence really.

 

[Aurex]

I don't believe that skins are going to be monetized, because Tw has stated many times that it's not going to happen (once there was a "maybe" answer if I remember correctly, but that's that).

Many companies have stated that, only to go back on their own promise in half a year or so. I don't see it as impossible, maybe just a little bit unlikely given the awful multiplayer experience and the fact servers are mostly empty. Not much money to be made from 1500 players.

 

[cruzader79]

no problem with monetizing or class system, I have a problem with crashing servers, TDM and Siege need a fix

I want 1.7.0 now with cool custom items for MP.

relaunch the game in NA, invest with popular gamers, pay them to stream skirmish tournaments. See if it takes.

 

[flashn00b]

relaunch the game in NA, invest with popular gamers, pay them to stream skirmish tournaments. See if it takes.

I doubt that will accomplish much if Taleworlds still insists on certain classes being overpowered or underpowered. Friendly reminder that Bannerlord is a tactical shooter with a medieval coat of paint, rather than actually being a medieval combat game.

 

[Einarcf]

At the very least, TW could advertise streams/participation of multiplayer tournaments. Rather than sharing information about Yule goats and Singleplayer screenshots.

 

[Horked]

I have no opinion about class system and perks.

The only perks I use is movement (5%), cav-breaker (damage bonus vs horses), marksman, looter (t1 that get bonus coins), die hard (t1 with shield) and perks that gives (throwing) spear. I find the other perks irrelevant (for me). Im not sure what use they are to other people.

I would still pick these bonuses regardless of their name or form being a perk option or part of a unit/class.

Edit: The actual system as such is fine I suppose but its the strange bonuses that I cant justify to pick over any of the previous mentioned. 10ish more armor (as far as I remember) vs 5% movement is a no-brainer pick. 6-10 more armor isnt a lot, its a joke bonus if Im perfectly honest, utter waste of a perk. Then theres the throwing perks, also strange bonuses IMHO. I always thought it was an odd system with odd bonuses across the board for all factions, some kind of "that will do it for now" placeholder, something that eventually was going to be made proper/reworked.

Edit 2: I feel the issues is tied to the fact that its a complex/deep game with many viables, Im not sure you can make it as simple as the system suggest without running into issues. I think the system could be made a little bit less simple and still be simple. This is why a famous jazz musician said "simplicity is the ultimate sophistication". Its very difficult to make simple things, good.

 

[Firunien]

Many companies have stated that, only to go back on their own promise in half a year or so. I don't see it as impossible, maybe just a little bit unlikely given the awful multiplayer experience and the fact servers are mostly empty. Not much money to be made from 1500 players.

That number would be tenfold if they had released servers, battle and ranked for their competitive modes on start of EA.
The playerbase is of their own making, there were thousands ready to play just to be utterly disappointed by lack of anything which mad Warband great.

At the very least, TW could advertise streams/participation of multiplayer tournaments. Rather than sharing information about Yule goats and Singleplayer screenshots.

Well, i´d agree if they had spectator/streamer mode. They said its almost finished a year ago, but it seems other unasked for stuff like removing deaths from scoreboard take priority.

 

[cruzader79]

Well, i´d agree if they had spectator/streamer mode. They said its almost finished a year ago, but it seems other unasked for stuff like removing deaths from scoreboard take priority.

word

Bannerlord is far superior to mordhau, chivalry 1 or 2, for honor, kingdom come, etc. Bannerlord have a superb sandbox experience for single player but also a very small player base.

devs are letting us multiplayers down

EDIT: steam charts

21,138
playing 4 min ago

24,641
24-hour peak

248,034
all-time peak

where are those 21K? not in multiplayer

 

[Helz]

They didn't do warband system because they wanted to make the game competitive and make it easy to add skins. Warband class system just wasn't good enough for competitive.

Warband was very competitive. People played it for years and the skill ceiling was ridiculous. There is nothing about Skirmish mode that is more competitive than Battle mode was.

Counter Strike was competitive long before they added loot boxes to attract the suckers who think grind=skill.

 

[TengriBless]

The consensus has always without exception been that BL's class system's downright terrible and that it's better to copy paste the Warband system than keep BL's as it is.
What is the point anymore.