Recent content by lunelune2413

MArdA TaleWorlds said:

Forwarded to the QA team for further investigation. We will reach out again if we need more information. Thanks for reporting and sorry for any inconvenience!

Click to expand...

Thank you

Hopefully after they fix the defection bug amongst others

Sexiest army:
Cataphracts and Banner knights = sexy flankers to kill disgusting enemy cavalry.
Legionaries and sturgian heavy axemen = lines of sexy men to hold off against disgusting peasants.
Fian champions = Sexy men go BRRRRRR

A great patch for modders, especially when it comes to TC mods. Finally we can have custom races
The unit armor changes are interesting, but I don't know how much it'll actually make in terms of actual gameplay.
Bug fixes? Always needed and beloved.
The AI changes for the campaign map is always welcomed,naturally.
Prisoner interactions? Keep coming with those diplomacy options! But great so far

Though saddened to see no new scenes, banner system and especially with the lack of claimant questlines. Personally would've loved the long awaited claimant system with even a civil war mechanic (Would love it even more if civil wars were Dynamic).

MArdA TaleWorlds said:

Were you able to see the crash uploader tool? If you can upload your crash to us we can check it out. Please don't forget to copy the Crash ID and write it here so that we can find it.
More info about the crash uploader tool can be found here.
Have you checked out these threads about our Crash Checklist and Common Issues and Workarounds? They can help you find a solution as well.

Click to expand...

I did see it, but didn't send it at first. Good luck that since it's really easy crash to replicate, I did it just now and here is the crash ID for it.
2021-12-16_15.23.28_60b6d0e347e3808bdc60234bd1dd2475

Do I like Bannerlord? Yes.

Do I like it as it is now? No. It still needs some time in the oven.

kreamy said:

It seems that there is very often a disagreement on the forum about the state of the game, so let's put it to bed.​

We are all on the same team but there is a distinction to be made about the game playing well and playing enjoyably.

Without a doubt, TW has quashed bugs, increased performance, and generally delivered a more stable game over the last year - I know, I have over 500 hours in game.

​

BUT, the game is NO MORE ENJOYABLE THAN IT WAS AT RELEASE.​

This is why I have stopped playing, this is why I am frustrated, and this is likely why many others are as well.

To clarify - the game is not enjoyable, especially not without mods (the modders have made the game bearable).

​

There is a vast difference between repetitive, shallow gameplay that 'works' and varied, deep gameplay that 'rewards'.​

Bannerlord IS NOT the latter.

Having said that, please feel free to respond - but more than anything, please keep this in mind when debating on the forum - we are stronger together, so let's compare apples to apples when we discuss the state of the game, and TW's progress.

Click to expand...

What I've seen as a trend on these forums is that people complain more for the sake of complaining rather than actual constructive feedback.

Managing to get 100-200 especially 200+ hours on a game is an amazing feat in its own right and I think the reason why people are so upset on the forums is that after those 100-200 hours people start craving for more.

Sieges are broken, and wonky at the best of times. Stuff from Warband is missing. Patches are rather slow to come out. Combat AI even on the hardest difficulty is still wonky at times. There are a good number of issues.

But despite all that, I've still personally enjoyed my nearly 100 hours in the game and I still find myself wanting to play when I get the time. If you look at the player numbers too, they have been stable if not increasing since July.

We all want a better Bannerlord, and I think Taleworlds is slowly getting there. It's 100% better than the launch I spent 30 hours onat the very least

Riffraff99 said:

Yes, thats something i dont understand, even with a moved city and probably population it makes no sense why they would move into northern area of the map.

Click to expand...

The only explanation was that the nords was like "They used to have a city named this. Lets just take it and use it ourselves"
Sadly Sargot was originally planned to be on the coast, but they messed up when it came to placing it.

quietresolve said:

I feel the dev is finally heading to the right direction. Vlandian cities used to be always feels out of place, they looks like high/late medievat towns while others were more like early or dark age. Now the new vlandian settlements finally looks not so out of place.

Click to expand...

I feel sad about Sargot not being moved. But since both the city in Warband and Bannerlord are made out of wood, I guess an arguement about the old Sargot burning down and Sargoth being made by the Nords could be made.

black_bulldog said:

On the list for a year you mean. This is one of those things that is a huge bugbear for me, so I'm well beyond impatient more like pissed off.

Click to expand...

It was just put on a the list of features they're gonna focus on.

Warlord123123 said:

Dear Lune,

First of all - everything that you put out in public, you test it, not like nitty gritty detailed testing, but at least big things, that's a good practice.

Second - Steam also allows closed betas, thus anything that is put forward as an open Beta can be tested before you make it a public beta. So saying that Steam build is at fault is a weak excuse.

Third - playing game is not really testing, its wannabe testing. Most players don't report anything and those that do mostly report known bugs (or just their opinion of HOW game should be), but its better than nothing, sure.

But you can't do wannabe testing if the game doesn't work. Hope they'll have a good old retrospective after this is over to figure out what went wrong.

Click to expand...

1. That's what I was refering to in the first place.

2. When did I ever say that it was the Steams fault? Or are you refering to someones else comment right now? I just said that it's a betas job to be tested, even if it doesn't work.

3. It is by the very definition that you're playing the beta version. When playing the beta version in my opinion, you're obligated to report any bugs you find. If you were playing a release build I would say "Report the bug if it's gamebreaking or a big annoyance to you".

Brocephus said:

I would say you are an imbecile but I don't want a warning.

Click to expand...

"Inappropriate language".
Seems like you failed on that front mate.

I spent many years testing various custom maps for Warcraft 3 that involved a lot of triggers and triggers that would only work if certain trigger conditions were met. I remember playing Alpha/Beta versions where if you did certain things, your game would crash and having to then spend hours of finding out the reason on why it suddenly crashed. Because of that past experience...If you play a beta version of a game and you're like "I'm not having fun. Fix your game" instead of "This caused the game to crash/glitch out. I better report it and find out what other thing causes issues". Then you shouldn't play any beta version of any game/mod in my opinion :/

cadadr said:

On 1.5.7, since a few days, I see armies attack without towers nor rams nor any siege weapons built. Also, another new problem is troops climb on towers but then stop midway.

A youtuber that goes by STAN games has made an interesting remark in a video: just replace ladder towers with ramps until ladders are fixed.

Click to expand...

The siege tower ladders being borked is a very well known issue and has been since EA started. Hopefully they'll soon fix the pathfinding for them soon

Brocephus said:

No, it's not what beta branches are for. Beta branches are testing and finding bugs. 1.5.8 is an unplayable pile of **** that most people are not testing. Calling something a beta doesn't let a company off the hook for recurring, complete ineptitude.

Click to expand...

If no one is tests it, then how will the bugs in 1.5.8 ever get fixed before the patch launches?

He is also correct. Betas are meant to be tested for bugs like these, even unplayable betas are meant to be tested so that the developers that can what's causing the issues.

Thirdly. You're playing an Early Access game that allows it's players to participate in the beta building of their next patch. These beta patches aren't meant "To be enjoyed", but to be tested