Recent content by HotPie

Agreed. I have mega curly hair irl and for some reason there's hardly ever any good options for me in video games. It is a small gripe, bust stuff like this does make a big difference

I kinda feel that this problem is part of the whole "eco-system" of problems if you like.

So, I kind of agree with you on some levels, I really enjoy the large battles, but you do come to realise that defeating an army of 2000 has absolutely no reward. Ideally wars should consist of many small skirmish battles and village raids along the border, with a handful of large battles, in which the victor of said battles will practically win the war allowing them to go unhindered to siege a settlement or be granted land in a peace agreement. This is where we come across the first problem of the eco system...there is little to no diplomacy options.

Secondly, this may cause wars to be shorter or lack the constant battles that fill up the game. Here the second problem of the eco system crops up, there is very little to keep you occupied outside of battles. So as of now, the large battles are what keeps us occupied with the lack of content elsewhere. If it's fewer, but more impactful, battles that you want, first we must address what the alternative is. We need a full rework of interacting with fiefs, a governing system, political manoeuvring/intrigue, useful political alliances etc. Just something that will keep us occupied during peace time other than trading grain or winning your 600th tournament.

Was reading through the empire ones to this tune

Anyone played a bridge battle yet?

I made a stupidly long suggestions post about a year ago, please modders feel free to pick out some things, it's all sectioned into different categories.

Bjorn The Hound said:

Do we have a number on that? I mean how much of the people who bought BL did not play WB prior to release of BL? Maybe this is something obvious to understand but I am very doubtful on that.

Bannerlord is better at battles(except armor/damage formula), ui and graphics which is something to be expected out of the box. I guess og fanbase wanted improved version of honor, marshall, controversy, right to rule systems too but what we got dumped down version of them.

Click to expand...

Even if we did it may be difficult to calculate because prior to release they announced that people who owned warband would get something like 15% off bannerlord, WB was on sale too I'm pretty sure so I think it actually worked out cheaper buying both games rather than just BL.

Either way I reckon there'd be a decentish percentage of people who owned WB who only bought it a couple of months before BL. Even then I reckon its only a small number of people who bought WB over the years who can be considered as active WB players so the idea of WB owners being the "core fan base" may still be construed.

TLDR: It's too difficult to quantify who the main fanbase are.

Tryvenyal said:

It almost hurt me nowdays to enter the suggestions forum and read all these great suggestions, your included, that has got no dev response or attention.

But the idea of this thread is "Right now, what addition whould mean the most to you?" where the devs can see and think "Hmm... Number 4 in this poll is easy. Alot of happy players for alittle peice of work." Atleast that´s what I hope they will think So the more broken down the options are, the better our chanses to get it should be! After the vote, we can allways add to the top candidates, flesh them out into a real suggestion.

Click to expand...

Yeah I think what you're doing is more important as we can't afford to overload them with requests, rather streamline what is more important.

Having just read through my old post after like a year I realised most of the things on their are very minor or would require a large amount of work. I can still onlh hope though.

Tryvenyal said:

I do like the idea of civil wars but I would have added it even if I didn't. This thread is not ment to reprecent what I want but what we all want There will be a poll in a few hours

Click to expand...

Fair play, link attached on my comments is a massive suggestion post I made ages ago. Many of the ideas are just fanciful, some having been implemented since I posted it, but if you have the time feel free to take anything from it that you think are interesting/broad enough for the poll.

Tryvenyal said:

Thanks @HotPie, Civil war will be added to my list!

Click to expand...

Ayy cheers bro, glad you liked it

I think diplomacy especially alliances would make the game more enjoyable. If we're to go on the recent news/rumours then the seige AI had been fixed and will be in the new update.

One thing I'd like to see the most though are civil wars. If clan X has minus relation with ruling clan a chance for them to rebel should arise. Should be a very simple feature, the mod Separatism did it quite well.

Though it could be more detailed. A system of high ranking Lords should be introduced, so a tier 5 clan who owns a town should have a large amount of influence over the tier 2 & 3 clans who own castles in their surrounding lands. When the tier 5 rebels, so do the lower clans. If the lower one's have a much higher relation with the monarch than the lord then they could potentially side with the monarch but it would put them in a very dangerous position. Rebels can convince other Lords to join too.

War exhaustion should play a part in the outcome of the war. If one faction has say double the amount of kingdom power by the end of the war (both have exhaustion of 100 and a peace is signed) then they should absorb the other faction into their own, whether that be the reblels or the loyalists. The Victor can decide whether to have the rebel leaders; exiled, executed, keep their lands but have them pay substantial reparations or just completely forgive them for an honour and relation boost. If however both Kingdom strengths are close to the same by the time peace is signed then the rebel faction can form their own independent kingdom.

Now I don't expect these things to be added, I'm just spit balling and getting ahead of myself. Also sorry for not keeping this relevant to the thread lol I just wanted to mention another feature and ended up writing way too much. So sorry bout that. But yeah civil war feature in one way or the other should be something TW strongly consider.

TengriBless said:

I think it goes without saying who the ingrates are when the community - who hyped up their game over the course of a decade (which played not an inconsiderable part in its high sales number) - had their opinions discarded when the developers found catering to the subspecies of human I will simply name "casuals" folds more profitable. Bloody long sentence, but I'm sure your divine intelligence will prove fit to dissecting it.

I would acknowledge the soundness of this advice, were it written in the first months of [EA] release, or even a year if we're being generous and that's if you didn't take part in or witness the previous testing stages; but with all the constant positive feedback, suggestions and well-reasoned, level-headed criticism having next to no influence on the development or their communication with the community, I would like to hear what else you come up with as an alternative to what you consider ungrateful whinging. And blindly praising failworlds has been tried before unfortunately, so that's crossed out.

I can't speak on what the OP was referring to, but this game's issues in development goes way, way deeper than bugs. They're fun to pick on, sure, but it's not what broke the spirit of hope in here. Sounding a tad dramatic there but you know what I mean.

Click to expand...

I'm not even going to try and discect what led you to such an aggressive response in which you refer to people who play games and also have a life as "subspecies of human" (also ofc they're gonna try and appeal to a larger audience how else would they make money the og fan base was too small).

But seriously man, go outside once in a while. It s a f*****g video game.

MostBlunted said:

I´ve shown you that your argument is invalid in the same post. But fanboys gonna fanboy I guess.

Click to expand...

It's not your human right to be entertained. This is like when GoT season 8 released and people signed petitions for it to be remade. The game is what it is, it's not exactly what we all hoped for, but it's still fun. If you don't like it don't play it.

I know you're only writing this because you care, but remember that real people are effected by these comments, developers read this, for you to say their work is a waste, or wrong and not what you in particular wanted is only demoralising for them. What do you think they released an unfinished buggy game intentionally? And if they did that was the developers decision? Ofc they didn't.

The more negetive we are constantly on this forum (and I've been one of them before) the less we deserve and will get. If you're a developer and reading these comments, why would you want to strive to get content out for such a bunch of ungrateful crying toddlers? (I'm not calling you an ungrateful crying toddler BTW, just referring broadly to some of the more... colourful members of this forum)

Horked said:

I would love if we had destructable walls but I also understand the complexity tied to this. Mainly why I havent suggested it. Im no programmer but I imagine that actual destructable walls is a challenge in itself but not only that, also the aftermath: Attacker wins and must spend time and resources to repair the damage she caused and until the damage is fixed the castle is vulnerable. Building a wall takes a lot of time (I imagine) and resources. It just doesnt go from ruin to shiny new wall, it has steps, steps that must be modeled and coded. AI needs to be enabled as well and it must choose to destroy or not to destroy on its own. Eventhough Im not a programmer Im getting abit dizzy thinking about this

Click to expand...

I meant knocking down the walls in the campaign map, I understand knocking them down in the siege battle would be too complex. To piggy back off your other point though, it should take a long time to repair knocked down walls after you take a settlement, making you vulnerable to a counter siege. Should make the player think twice about just trebucheting their way through the map.

Ananda_The_Destroyer said:

Some of them are much much easier. For me I notice a big difference in where some maps will let you deploy right up to the wall, sometimes easily even in position to avoid siege weapons. Like this here, many imperial fiefs will let you just put your troops right where you want em, saving you from eating a couple ranged siege weapon strikes at least from skipping the approach.

Click to expand...

Kinda feel as though that's not working as intended. I get your point though. Just seems to be more of a bug than a feature

julijs said:

where my grunwalder-esque castle??

Click to expand...

That was a bad boy castle