Recent content by Argel

Dhamon said:

Having to perform a 1-month-long code refactoring after 4 months into early access tells a lot about the lack of a clear developing roadmap.

Having an EA tag is not an excuse for this, especially it it comes with an AAA price. Quoting the Steam store page:


A flaw in the code that requires 1-month-long code refactoring does not sound very stable.

That said, I'm happy that they are taking the time to fix whatever trashcode they wrote, rather than continue developing on unstable foundations. But if things continue like this, it seems to me that it will take 3-4 years before the game has some better playable value over Warband.

What disappoints me most is the lack of new features and innovations with respect to Warband. The game feels very shallow, with dialogues exactly lifted from Warband or shabby placeholder dialogue that shows how little effort they are putting into the game ("insert generic backstory").

I expected something more than Warband: better tactical layer in battles, better dialogue options, more immersive, reactive world. Better quests. Not to mention better AI.

What we got? A crafting minigame that has the depth of a mobile phone game. Same old boring quests, some new boring ones - when they do not break. Same stupid AI - except that now can grab ammo from the ground. Same blob fights.
Most of the RPG progression is broken - which for an RPG game, even in Early Access - is ludicrous.

The few new good gameplay elements (more companion options, caravans, ...?) do not offset the general lack of new features.

Hell, they did not even "get inspired" (read: copy successful elements) from great mods for Warband, like Prophesy of Pendor, or the Viking Conquest DLC.
There is not even seafaring in Bannerlord, nor it seems it will be ever introduced (leaving it for some DLC maybe?).
Ship battles in VC weren't the most fun and streamlined experience, but at least they were a fresh novelty from the base game.

Sure, hopefully all the bugs will be fixed and new content and mechanics will come, because - thank god - the game is in EA. But given the current state, surely not within the proposed 1 year.
And from the released "development plans" it does not look like any new content/gameplay mechanics will come.

I am not bashing the game for the sake of bashing it. I really do hope it will get improved in the future. I am just starting to lose hopes on how and when this will happen. The game has potential. Hopefully the developers will act on this, not just the modders.

In the meanwhile, I'll resort to play VC, which even with its 2000-and-late-graphics feels way more immersive and engaging.

Click to expand...

1. How is there no battle strategy after all this time? That's just logical progression for a game where the strength is in battles
   
   
2. How are sieges and battles just blob fests with virtually no AI? The square that forms behind the gatehouse defending sieges just gets picked off from the side. The pathfinding of attackers beneath the gates is woeful.
   
   
3. RPG - as mentioned, skills that do nothing, skills that are barely able to be trained, illogical 'learning points' or you just get absolutely roadblocked from learning basic skills. That's not code, that's bad design.
   
   
4. How are companion and lord interactions somehow even worse than they were in Warband? You can't even ask a lord what they're doing, you can't figure any of it out.
   
   
5. How is diplomacy/war dec still a complete lottery? Playing under Vlandia, they got into a war with Aserai, then Khuzait (standard map gainz) declare war, so what is the logical step that Vlandia take? DECLARE WAR ON BATTANIA. Yeah alright lads, 20k vs 60k strength.
   
   
6. Quests and depth - there is no story, no game, no follow-up, no context, no recognition, no particular benefits of knowing someone or helping them, no indication of real world events (barring perfunctory 'I hear you took castle X' dialogues that have no meaning). Companions don't do anything notable even when they have skills, they're just Mr Potato Head style knights that you get to dress up.

Pizi_G said:

my current game (new game no mods)

1.4.2 Autumn 6, 1087
Asarai 0 wars
Battania 1 against WE
Khuzait 1 NE
NE 2 against WE, Khuzait
Sturgia 0
Vlandia 0
WE 3
SE 1

Asarai war support against :

NE 11%
Khuzait 80 %
Battania 11%
WE 50%
SE 22%
Sturgia 11%
Vlandia 11%

Click to expand...

DainMorgot said:

I am on the verge of dropping the game myself aswell. There is nothing that makes sense or is half-working in the game in terms of mechanics or balance. Armored cavalry stomps everything easily, light cavalry just gets deleted by archers, infantry is useless against other classes, and when infantry vs infantry happens it becomes a kick-fest of who can abuse the animation glitch. Archers are just retarded in the game, they play like call of duty instead of the realism they want with the rest of the classes. 2-handers are lulfeinting with unreadable animation and backpedalling. But I guess we will get clan systems and ranked for all the 10 people who play. Total dissapointment.

Click to expand...

[LEGION] Octavius said:

I personally think cavalry are very balanced right now (aside from the Battanian faction which needs a buff) and if you are at all decent to the game it's pretty obvious where the weaknesses of cavalry are. Most of the issues players are having cavalry right now are just because they are not experienced in the game and don't understand the weaknesses of cav.


This is not true AT ALL. What are you on buddy? Have you ever fought a battle with another cav with yourself as cav? The speed you are traveling most definitely effects the damage dealt both too and from the rider.



This is also incorrect. Cav have the smallest shields in the game. I've been axed in the face may times even though I have been holding up my shield playing as cav.



You can just walk a step backwards, it's not that hard.


It's part of the team strategy. Cavalry is a SUPPORT class. By knocking you down they are helping their team in the infantry fight. I think this is a good feature and taleworlds has actually already nerfed this. In the real world you WOULD get knocked down if you were trampled by a horse it's just how it is. If you are having a problem getting knocked down you aren't staying close enough to your team.


Most of the heavy cav that would do this cost 190 or 200 gold. Most heavy infantry cost 140 or 150 gold. Effectively you are paying 50 extra gold to buy the horse for the class. I think that is fair. Also they aren't overboosted at all, the default cavalry melee weapons just do a medium amount of damage. If you're a good player you can act like a heavy infantry once getting dismounted, sure, but you're no better than a normal sergeant or legionary.



This isn't true at all. It takes a lot of experience playing cav to be able to get around spear infantry. Lances aren't any longer, the players you are facing are probably just better at their angles of attack than you are.


Horses are fast. You should be using your ALT key and looking around you at all times when out of combat. This is just part of the game.

There that's my little rant. Almost every comment about cavalry made is incorrect. You are obviously an inexperienced player with not many hours in multiplayer. I hope that taleworlds does not take these requests seriously.

Click to expand...