Recent content by Mikal Manfriedson

Sanctumm said:

- but still - whats the fun of getting the campaign map after a week?

Click to expand...

Well...I guess most of us do not want to and this is a completely different problem not related to battles. We have indeed nothing much else to do than fight battles. This is a problem of the whole game! That replenishing armies makes the game a bit more challenging, because the AI cheats is a rather weak argument. From another point of view I could state: Being vassal in Bannerlord is some kind of whack tower defense with unlimited levels. Because I whack lord stacks. If I capture something, it is gone some moments later either because my braindead liege gave the fief to some landless goon or my prisoners fled or vanished from my dungeons. This clearly working as intended for a sandbox low fantasy game.

Yes, by other names as it seems

I looked at the SP changes and am...how should I say: underwhelmed? MP is fun from times to times, but I bought the game because of SP and the sandbox it offers - from idea. MP is a nice bonus feature that is nice to have in my book but I could cope without as well. And all those 14 GB Steam is loading right now feel like they centralise on number-fapping in MP? Oh....you now have to be hit 3.2 times now with a javelin instead of 3,3 times. Your armor is 4 points higher, but the damage you receive is scaled up as well. You only have to chop a shield 9 times instead of ten times.
Just meta-shifting from the group that baws most to the next one. Last time I looked, it was OP cav, now archers, infantry tomorrow, rinse and repeat.
I might be blind and in real life I wear glasses but am I the only one who feels like SP is not really progressing much?

It is nice that a medic skill now finally works after hideout battles but thanks to the strange leveling system I do not even get that perk! Nice that civillians now have civillian weapons. Yeah...important, for sure. Diplomacy? Trade? RNG elements? Discussion options? I do not read about these.
Feels more like they are developing 'Call of Duty 1200 A.D.'

For instance in the notes for 1.5.8 I read
Governor assignments in the Clan screen will now take place when the screen is closed to prevent unwanted teleportations of clan members.
Great! As if I have the time to run around all of Calradia to collect my captured caravan leaders/ clan members while a vassal and permanently at war. This is not making things better, but even worse in my book without an option to call your mates to a location. New helmet art. Yay! Could it be that this game will eventually stop being enjoyable in SP or my interest will die before full release just because they keep people occupied with MP?

*sighs*

Or am I missing something seriously here?

But I could see this kind of wall frightening horses - even trained ones. Horses do not want to smash into walls. Yeah, you are of course right, in the Testudo you do not need interlocking shields as they are rectangular but it becomes a necessity, when using round shields as in your video. I question the ability of making a proper testudo with round shields.

Askorti said:

Is there even any historical evidence of something like this being done?

Click to expand...

Didn't the Romans use interlocking shields in the 'Testudo' - formation and the Byzantiens used something similar called a 'fulcum' to advance through arrow fire.

Philip Rance: The „Fulcum“, the Late Roman and Byzantine „Testudo“: the Germanization of Roman Infantery Tactics? In: Greek, Roman, and Byzantine Studies. 44, 2004

And those were inspired by the Greek Phalanx where each soldier was covered by his neighbor's shield on his weak side. Just browsing a bit in wiki I find many historical examples from the classic ages and medieval ages.

If I were snarky and sarkastic, I would say 'there is SOME unused potential in the whole game'

That said, I hope, they will do something with that and use it.

To be sarcastic: They already did...

The removal was good in my book. Archers are weak versus CAV. To give them a weapon to nullify this weakness would make them a broken unit. Rambo Cav is NO problem, if one of the infantry players knows about it, takes a spear and protects his team archers versus gung-ho-style maniacs.
Worked often enough for me. Sometimes I got one on my chin, but this was for the team. And often enough I simply speared them from their mount (or speared their mount and have them mauled after that). Archers should be weak versus cav or in general: melee but still need inf to operate right.

I guess this is the disadvantage of early access. When you are not content with where the game development is going, there is no refund.
Otherwise you can always decide with your wallet. If the sales numbers do not meet expectations, that proofs the decisions of the decision-makers were simply wrong and that should have consequences. In EA this is avoided, as the money already is raked in.

Also means drain on your money if you are lucky and get a castle. We should be able to tell them to stop or at least set a limit how big we want our garrison. Big garrison also means less food and hunger, if unchecked.

Looks like Earth went through the wringers with Atlantis added - but still cool

Why, yes - I have a phone. To call people. For gaming I use a PC. Why crouch when you can fly?! Why pay more for less?

That said, this is not the only software studio that has to endure the wrath of the PC users when porting is discussed. I reckon they feel like since project funds are diverted to porting the game to a platform they neither own nor like (insert several valid and non-valid reasons here) the game will be dilluted or 'dumbed down' to access a broader market. This happened before and sometimes it has proven to be a poor decision. What can we do? We? Nothing, since we already bought into the game and have to face the music, whatever it is.

If you do not like consoles then do not spend money for them, tell others they are garbage or whatever. As long there is a demand, sadly there is a market. At least do not forget the proverb: He who hunts two rabbits will get neither.

Although, to be fair, wounding someone could really decrease his battleworthyness, where it in the game makes no difference, whether you are at 100% health or at 1% with lots of arrows sticking in your armor and 4 javelins stuck into your shield. So in that case in the game they 'must' be deadly, because 'partial' kills do not count at all.

You mean, telling your achers to fire at the unarmored troops and not just at anyone? Yes, we are limited a bit, which is part of the problem. But even without being able to direct it is an improvement as I believe it will show, that elite troops indeed have more staying power or are better equipped to battle a certain kind of opponent. What we currently have is somewhat odd.