Recent content by Akka

Did you even check in which forum you were posting ?

(that's a rhetorical question)

I suppose it's an anti-cheating program for MP.
Don't take my word on it, though, just a hunch.

Dejan said:

This is already the case as mentioned by @Hero07911010. Here are the patch notes related to that:

Though admittedly they could have been made even more clear that the penalty gets lower as your level rises.

Click to expand...

Oh, nice, thanks for the info.
Nah it was pretty clear, I just probably have missed or overlooked this.

Dejan said:

We'll be reducing the Singleplayer mounted accuracy penalty with the next patch. Thank you all for providing feedback on it.

The patch is progressing nicely but no ETA on it yet beyond what was already said in the last Community Tales.

Click to expand...

Can't you simply have the penalty proportional to how much the skill is far from 100 ?
So at 10 you have 90 % of the penalty, at 75 you have 25 %.
It would solve everything and is much more logical than just having a huge penalty that suddenly completely disappear because you got a slight bit of experience more than previously.

Bluko88 said:

It's becoming pretty obvious that Bannerlord is effectively an abandoned product, that or there's very serious staffing/management issues preventing development progress.

Click to expand...

"becoming" ?
It was obvious right from the early access, BL spent two years there with barely a change.
Why do you think there is such a caustic atmosphere in the forums ?

Duh_TaleWorlds said:

We are investigating the blocking performance of low level troops. It may be a bug.

Click to expand...

I'd like to repeat the suggestion that each weapon should have a limit to its blocking power depending on its size and the wielder's ability, so that it's not possible to just block a hit that is too strong.

Piconi said:

We have made the following clarification to the Beta v1.2.5 patch notes:

Click to expand...

That sounds like making them artificially stronger due to rounds in tournament, rather than having a strength depending on their stat, which should be the logical way.
Please don't mess up the internal logic, the ability of a NPC should be ONLY based on its stat, NOT on some weird "we're at the third round so this lucky peasant should be stronger than the champion we had the bad luck to encounter at the first round".

Going farther in tournament should be harder just because the weaker participants are progressively weeded out, NOT because of some weird magic making people stronger each round.

Duh_TaleWorlds said:

No, there are general combat AI score calculation changes. Tournament participants in later rounds just receive an additional bonus to their score.

To my understanding, this is not a direct AI improvement either. The score determines how well a character performs (how quickly & accurately they block, how often they feint, etc.) - changing it changes their performance, but not the underlying system.

Click to expand...

This is an absolutely ABYSMAL idea.
Please, seriously, there is enough bug to fixes without adding absurd modifications. I can't believe someone wasted time implementing this nonsense rather than the metric tons of actual improvements still waiting...

Dejan said:

It means the previous loops and hurdles to world map modding have been removed.

Will bring it up.

Click to expand...

Thanks, it's a pretty important point. We have bought the same game as everyone, but we're locked out of a very significant part of what made us buy it to begin with.

Dejan said:

in further polishing of World Map moddability

Click to expand...

Does that mean we'll be able to mod the World Map ?
Will the modding tools be made available for non-Steam customers ?

Piconi said:

Not today.

Click to expand...

Can't help but laughing at seeing "impossible task of killing someone" and "not today" in the same post

Macewindu16 said:

Console players are starving. I know you hate us but if I'm going to be a bit selfish (well, speaking from the many console players' perspective), some solidarity would maybe help. If pc players aren't bothered, then TW will simply put the console players' interests on the back burner and label it as 'not a priority' at the moment. We need allies XD

Click to expand...

Console port dumbed down the game, and it's completely stupid to play such a game on a console considering the mods. No sympathy and no solidarity here, that's a self-inflicted wound.

archaicwarrior said:

I'm sorry Mr. Wonderful, no, most gamers would not find OOP, C++ or C# simple. (unless they have a degree from a University)

Click to expand...

But they would find C simple ?

archaicwarrior said:

That's Piss weak argument right there, setting Up SQL server probably would have already been done by an admin etc "Dealing with SQL queries" ????? common text files ? really.

Click to expand...

Ah yeah, the famous novice gamer who has had an admin set up a SQL server on his gaming machine

Mate, you're just acting like a childish clown and grasping at straws because you somehow don't want to just say "okay okay I was wrong".
I've wasted too much time humoring you, keep being a donkey if it's so fun for you.

Piconi said:

Having a maximum amount of damage a weapon can block would bring some issues, like the player not being able to determine if they can block the incoming attack or not, thus turning it into a gamble, which is undesirable.
However, not being able to block with a dagger as much or as well as with other, let`s say more conventional weapons, makes sense, we`ll bring this up.

Click to expand...

I don't think it's a problem if it follows common sense and is somehow generous. It could actually give an interesting gameplay balance to different weapons, like bladed weapons being more affected by armor, but being able to block more than non-bladed weapons, and smaller weapons being faster but being weaker on block.

The amount of damage blocked could be a base statistic of the weapon (calculated from weight, size and balance, just like the other values are calculated during blacksmithing), and would be increased by the skill in the weapon category, control and strength (with the final total being shown on the character sheet). I don't see how it's more of a gamble than the crush-through, which is already implemented while being weirder, much more obscure and less universal.
At least this mechanism would work for everything and would be easily exposed to the player, while being easily understandable.

archaicwarrior said:

Ok, it's not too complex for Mr Wonderful but novice gamers will have trouble.

Click to expand...

1) Obviously, non-developpers will have a problem with modding that requires developper knowledge. Who would have guessed.
2) The entire point is precisely that C# is simpler than C, while you promote C over C# on the grounds of complexity.
So your whole sarcasm is some sort of shooting yourself in the foot and you seem to have trouble not just with C# but with basic reading comprehension and logical thinking.

archaicwarrior said:

C# is based on C++, a complex language, which is based on OOP, a complex concept. "C" on the other hand is a procedural language, one step after another, simple.

Click to expand...

Saying procedural is simpler than OOP is pretty simplistic to begin with. Like many things in software development, it might be a bit more complex to start, but it ends up making work vastly simpler. I don't even want to imagine how coding Bannerlord in procedural C would be.
Not to add that C# doesn't have to bother with memory management, pointers and other complex safety concerns that C had.

archaicwarrior said:

SQL is a simple procedural DB script language. (you don't need to know any programming language).

Click to expand...

Yeah, because novice gamers won't have trouble with setting up a SQL server and dealing with SQL queries. That's just common novice gamer knowledge.


Mate, just be honest. You learned things in the past for which you got expertise and as such are simple for you, you can't be bothered to learn new things now and as such they are complex for you. That's fine. No problem here. I wouldn't be able nor willing to code anything in Assembly either.
But don't throw BS like "C# is too complex compared to C" or "XML is too complex compared to SQL" (like seriously ?) or implying that "novice gamers" would be able to deal with either modding in SQL or C. All that is just idiotically wrong.

Bannerlords has many faults, but the modding is not one of them, it's absolutely magnificent, and for the very reasons you complain about. Your preferences would make it ten times worse, no more accessible and vastly more limited.

In Bannerlord I can whip up Visual Studio, rewrite the code of any exposed method, make it a mod and change how the game is working.
In 20 mn I can change the damage formula to make armor count. In one hour, I can decide to give my Leadership skill the ability to give XP to my men each day.
Good luck doing this with SQL in a simpler manner.

Hechicera said:

I will try and field this question since I was in computing in the same era. Power and flexibility can be defined by how many layers above the actual hardware you are. [...]
So the statement makes sense. But no one wants to go back to the days where making a game like Bannerlord was coded in assembly on PCs (and every GPU known to man) and each console! Plain C is as close to to that as you can get today.

Click to expand...

No the statement doesn't make sense. Reread the quote : "I can't process how you can praise C about flexibility while complaining that C# is too complex."
Praising a language being more powerful due to being "closer to the metal" is one thing I can understand. But by essence, being that close means being much more complex and touchy to use. So complaining at the same time about the complexity of C# makes no sense. C# is MUCH SIMPLER, because, precisely, abstraction means you don't have to micromanage that much and worry about all the problem of working so close to the hardware.

archaicwarrior said:

I'm 62 .. my brain doesn't work like it use to "teach old dog new tricks' . I use to be a "C" programmer in the 90s, I loved that language, very flexible. Then they developed C++ to stop the flexibility and added OO. I had a tough time getting me head around this concept, never really succeeded. I don't want to learn a new language, my brain won't handle it. I'm a game designer not a programmer.

I understand why C# was chosen for Bannerlord, it is a well respected and powerful language. Just very tough for gamers to become proficient . SQL is very simple language to learn especially for novices. Alot more work can be done, and quicker, with SQL.

Click to expand...

I can't process how you can praise C about flexibility while complaining that C# is too complex.
Like, WTF.

Piconi said:

At the moment, giving the crush-through ability to all the 2-handed weapons would make them too powerful, while further diminishing the shieldless 1-handed weapon experience, which isn`t all too appealing as is.

Click to expand...

Rather than using a special ability, shouldn't each weapon simply have a maximum amount of damage it's able to block (with a skill multiplier so the better you are at using them, the more you can block), with the remainder going through ?
So that daggers can't block heavy hit from polearms, and you can block better with a sword than with an axe ?