Recent content by Ask

Finally a good patch?

I'm extremely surprised that they did decide to change armor, even after going all "making armor stronger doesn't fit the game's vision". I'm even more surprised that the entire required change was just tweaking a couple parameters. Did we really need to wait so long just for that?

Being able to reset perks and other quality of life changes here and there is good, it's nice that we won't need mods to add basic functionality that should have been in the game since day 0

Big economy, skill leveling and smithing rebalance too, among many other changes. Yeah, well, that's cool. I want to be more hyped for the game, but I'm not really all that interested anymore, sadly. Too little too late, I guess.

Can we get a bonus experience slider too, by the way? So that we don't have to rely on mods to go past the horrendous grind.

A little disappointing that the only change hired blades and mercenary swordsmen had were the helmets, the rest of their armor could have done with some improvements.

Terco_Viejo said:

Well said ?

---
To whom it may concern:
If you are also an upset subset player, here is your badge

Click to expand...

You're a king

Ah, shoot. This thread made me facepalm all the way back to stone age.

I'm just gonna join all the players that simply quit the game, and I might return if it's ever released to play in a more stable version with mods.

But honestly, what's the point of engaging in an early access game to give feedback if the biggest and most requested changes are rarely ever taken into consideration? We get that TaleWorlds has a vision, but is the game programmed for the higher ups to play or for the players that purchased the game? If we are the ones quitting, was it really worthwhile sticking to it at the cost of losing a big chunk of the playerbase?

No hard feelings with anyone, I understand that some people simply have to take orders and carry them out. But what is me, I'll just end up leaving a negative review, be salty that I can't refund the game, and move on from this. It simply just isn't worth it anymore.

MadVader said:

Do you like watching people do useless stuff? lmao

Click to expand...

He's not doing it for me, he's doing it for himself. If it's a valid example for his homework, good for him. You sure seem to be super worried about what other people do with their free time, so unless you're his teacher, why are you watching him do stuff?

MadVader said:

You are trying to solve a problem that no one has. Find an actual problem, like trade route efficiency or something.

Click to expand...

Are you his teacher? Lmao

Here's a post that has a map with all the settlements. Since it's just a picture you can use the positions of the pixels as coordinates. Do you plan on ignoring the terrain? There's a lot of impassable terrain.

I've had companions like this in game before, the explanation I read is that companions are spawned with no perks/attributes/focus points assigned and they get them randomly assigned after a day has passed, so if you're lucky enough to catch one right after being spawned you can pretty much fully customize that.

It should be the norm and not a "bug", though.

Ananda_The_Destroyer said:

The problem I think is that the person (I assume) looking at the damage/protection is just looking on paper and seeing "Oh this armor is 10% more numbers then this one it's better" and not understanding that in the game dying in 2.5 hits or 2.75 hit isn't a noticeable or useful difference cuz you still get l killed in 3 hits.

Click to expand...

This is it in a nutshell. Looters die from 2 arrows to the chest, Fian Champions die from 3 arrows to the chest, and we're talking one guy is wearing rags and the other some of the most expensive armors in the game.

If one of the biggest gaps in armor strength makes a difference of literally one arrow, what can you even expect from all the other armors in between.

You know, forget I asked.

darksoulshin said:

But both the developers and the fan base insist on looking for quick solutions that don't work.

Click to expand...

Aside from your entire reply which honestly is just tiring to go through anymore, this point keeps sticking out to me. How do you know your system is better and that others won't work? Do you have a proof of concept somewhere? Did you copy the system from another game that is similar to Bannerlord and makes it work? Or is it just your theorycrafting?

darksoulshin said:

Result: the archer has to AIM WELL from near and from a distance he has to rely partly on luck, as well as on aiming.

Click to expand...

So not only you want to revamp all the hitbox system but also the aiming AI for archers, and also rely on it to work properly.

darksoulshin said:

If something is not done, their options are very limited, so a suggestion would be to "make the shield heavier and bulky for every darso or arrow that sticks to it"

Click to expand...

And you want to overhaul the movement system to take into account ouch-rain stuck into targets.

darksoulshin said:

the three (archer and the two warriors) will have to aim well in the weak points because the spam of the attacks will end up making him hit the armor and not the covered puntis.

Click to expand...

So the AI needs a much more sophisticated approach for attacking to take into account hitting the less armored parts of their opponents, while in the middle of a jiggly moshpit when two lines of infantry collide.

darksoulshin said:

I deal with blunt damage in the thread and generally help against those with such heavy armor by giving you the chance to be less accurate in hitting them, although hitting them accurately also helps.

Click to expand...

So your entire rework is just "be more accurate to deal damage, be less accurate and deal less damage". This works, in theory, fine for the player in combat with less soldiers. But are you aware that the AI can't land stabbing attacks to save their own lives, and in the front lines attacks can be interrupted by hitting other troops? You really want them to be, or believe they can be, more accurate in a 300 vs 300 fight that currently is just a mess? Except for blunt of course, that you propose to be strong regardless of aiming at strong points, which means stones would still be as strong as they are now and maces will dominate since the AI can't aim properly

If they suck at being accurate, which is very likely to happen given the jiggly moshpits that infantry fights are, or with cavalry knocking everyone around, or archers that prefer to aim at cavalry circling around them instead of a mass of infantry approaching, all you're doing is reducing the damage everyone will do, except for the lucky few hits that end up hitting a good target.

Essentially all you did was reduce damage dealt by everyone in a very convoluted way that the AI will rarely, if ever, benefit from, because the AI simply doesn't have the same skill level a player does. And if you also want to overhaul the combat AI so that they learn to aim better and make the system work as you intend it to, there's a ton of other things you'll need to fix too, like the AI deciding to aim at circling cavalry, or the jiggly moshpits, or commands like advance/fall back working like ass, and shields soaking way too many hits, etc.

Look, don't get me wrong, like everyone else I want a smarter AI, and it would be really cool to have different skill level of AIs depending on troop tier, and stuff working properly as they should in general. But at this stage of development I doubt they can (or care) to fix any of these things or start implementing new, bigger, more complex systems, given that they've already scrapped lots of much simpler systems that were going to be in the game.

All they have to do is make armor prevent more damage, that's it. They aren't going to re-do all the AIs to work better in a more complex hitbox system, which yes, it'd be fancy and cool and whatever, but would require changing and fixing lots of stuff about combat that they haven't even bothered going at yet. It simply isn't realistic, TW can barely keep a 3 month update going without introducing more bugs and fixing important things, and you want them to implement this huge overhaul? Are we looking at the development of the same game?

darksoulshin said:

Hard to understand?

Click to expand...

Didn't say that buddy, just that it's unnecesarilly complicated . Warband's damage calculations worked just fine and were simple enough.

In the long run, I couldn't care less about how accurate it is to real life models, or how detailed it is, or whatever. I just want an armor system that makes the game fun. It sure as hell wouldn't be fun to have the game thrown into another early access year to develop some overly complicated model that would require rebalancing every single armor piece in the entire game . The current hitbox system isn't bad, just the damage formula used to calculate damage

Just making blunt and ouch-rain ignore less armor would go long ways, no need to re-do all the hitboxes in the game for that, right?

Also yeah, quit derailing the thread with your model, you already have an entire thread dedicated to that

That's like how much, 300k worth of armor?