_COS_
Recruit
What do you think about class system in battle mode and how will you try to balance it? @badbuckle
Every match of battle mode, I see the same substantial group of players getting killed in the first round, then spending most of the remaining four rounds stuck as peasants, languishing in trash class hell. I almost feel bad for them, but I quickly forget about their plight as I ruthlessly farm them for a score of 27-0. The whole Bannerlord Battle experience must be maddening for those poor souls, but for me....
Yes but game balance isn't a black and white thing, it's a matter of degrees.There will always be some "top tier" go to stuff for each troop. The same thing as for perks right now.
The Warband gear system is easier to balance because the armours work in “tiers”. Each more expensive piece of armour is better than the preceding cheaper one. The complexity is in choosing which part of the body you want to spend your gold on upgrading and how much armour you want to trade-off for your weapon of choice. Most weapons work in tiers as well, at least the primary weapon type for each faction does.To be honest, trying to argue over and over again that being able to choose from 50 items is easier to balance then to choose from 6 perks is just overall wrong. Everyone would obviously prefer the Warband equipment system because it was obviously nicer cause you could customize your character and choose specific weapons which u liked / were good with etc. . Thats a fair point etc. but it defenitly does not lead to easier balancing. There will always be some "top tier" go to stuff for each troop. The same thing as for perks right now.
I know that TW will not go back to an equipment based system, my point is simply that an equipment based system is much easier to balance for Battle than a class system is.If thats your point then its less about a gear system or class system then but about the general decision to give all body parts the same armor values.
Aside of that it would be easily fixable by reducing the start gold drastically. So a class system can work but you have to earn a lot of gold to pick better classes. That will lead to a Warband like effect but just gives you less options in total.
Obviously other factors affect these problems too. Like not having heavy inf on Aserai for example. Its obviously not fair for them since gold will be useless for infantry players anyway.
Taleworlds stated multiple times that they are not going back to the equipment system, even tho they could obviously easily do it by increasing the perk amount to 4-6 and adding like 6 perks of gear to each "perk" + cost, but thats not gonna happen.
I don’t agree. In the games Super Smash Bros (64) and Super Smash Bros Ultimate, there are a wide variation of characters. The first has 12, the latter has 89 (currently). There is still a short list of useable characters in competitive, and a vast majority are seen as completely unplayable. This is the same with every iteration of the series. So, no, balancing isn’t made easier/harder by having more variables, some will always rise to the top while others will be garbage unless massive changes are made. That’s just how it is.Bannerlord's class system is easier than Warband's equipment system for balancing battle since there's significantly less variables. That makes it worse in a number of ways, but easier to balance.
This comparison is nonsense since Smash was never originally designed or marketed as a competitive game, but as a party game for children. It's the characters themselves and their gimmicks that they are being put in the game for, with no promise for competitive viability.I don’t agree. In the games Super Smash Bros (64) and Super Smash Bros Ultimate, there are a wide variation of characters. The first has 12, the latter has 89 (currently). There is still a short list of useable characters in competitive, and a vast majority are seen as completely unplayable. This is the same with every iteration of the series. So, no, balancing isn’t made easier/harder by having more variables, some will always rise to the top while others will be garbage unless massive changes are made. That’s just how it is.
I don’t agree. In the games Super Smash Bros (64) and Super Smash Bros Ultimate, there are a wide variation of characters. The first has 12, the latter has 89 (currently). There is still a short list of useable characters in competitive, and a vast majority are seen as completely unplayable. This is the same with every iteration of the series. So, no, balancing isn’t made easier/harder by having more variables, some will always rise to the top while others will be garbage unless massive changes are made. That’s just how it is.
It doesn’t matter how a game was designed or the target audience, if there’s a competitive scene for it, then it’s competitive. There’s a competitive scene for Melee, a two decades old game, in which there are clear S tier and bottom tier characters.This comparison is nonsense since Smash was never originally designed or marketed as a competitive game, but as a party game for children.
That’s my point. Differences in equipment, playstyle and/or character won’t ever be “even”, and if it was, it would be boring as there’s no skill to it. The beauty of it is different things countering others, although as with pretty much every game, most of it will be invalidated by the meta. You can change values here and there, and that may change the meta, but there will always be a meta, assuming it isn’t one type of weapon vs. the same. Which I don’t think anyone wants.Neither of those games are balanced for top tier competitive play.
And yet it’s still a pile of ****.Again, I’d prefer if the game was more complex. But it’s not, and as a result it’s easier to balance.
I don't think you understood what I said. I didn't say it's not competitive, I said it wasn't designed to be played competitively, which is exactly the reason why only such a small number of characters ended up being played by the best players. In BL everything can be adjusted with statistics and feedback of competitive players, eliminating a situation where certain classes are totally unviable (assuming the work is actually done).It doesn’t matter how a game was designed or the target audience, if there’s a competitive scene for it, then it’s competitive. There’s a competitive scene for Melee, a two decades old game, in which there are clear S tier and bottom tier characters.
Smash bros ultimate is balanced for competitive play tho. ? Didn't read the discussion tho so I'm just shouting things from the back row.Neither of those games are balanced for top tier competitive play.
The person said that only a small number of characters were viable at the top level, so I guessed that Ultimate is balanced for a more general audience than the peak 0.001% of players. (I could be wrong.)Smash bros ultimate is balanced for competitive play tho. ? Didn't read the discussion tho so I'm just shouting things from the back row.
this game isnt balanced, warband was ALOT more balanced. Now im forced to play as a character with a specific weapon that I dont want to use. Maybe my melee character wants a 1 handed mace and not a sword, maybe my melee wants to have a strong head piece cause I keep getting pelted with arrows around my shield there. The fact that im forced into a certain melee weapon type and like 3 to choose from makes the game un fun and unbalanced for me and others since I cant play what im best at and ill keep snowballing since im un able to play my playstyle.Bannerlord's class system is easier than Warband's equipment system for balancing battle since there's significantly less variables. That makes it worse in a number of ways, but easier to balance.
this game isnt balanced, warband was ALOT more balanced. Now im forced to play as a character with a specific weapon that I dont want to use. Maybe my melee character wants a 1 handed mace and not a sword, maybe my melee wants to have a strong head piece cause I keep getting pelted with arrows around my shield there. The fact that im forced into a certain melee weapon type and like 3 to choose from makes the game un fun and unbalanced for me and others since I cant play what im best at and ill keep snowballing since im un able to play my playstyle.
currently theres meta "classes" and there will always be meta classes over others no matter what you do. If we made this like every other game on the market where i pick my "archer" class or "melee" class and give me options of 10 weapons in tiers and armor based on cost, now i can start out as a mace and shield with a crappy mace and upgrade to either a better mace or better shield or better chest piece when i get some kills and adjust the cost accordingly. your character levels in SMALL increments while now you get some kills and go right to the best class!