Recent content by Noviix

My hype was for MP. While SP is fun it's just a little too bare bones for me atm to keep me coming back. I was really excited for MP's potential and that kind of fell off quick. It's not that there's no chance the game will get to a great point in both SP and MP, but I don't really see the potential or the drive from the devs when it comes to MP specifically. There's just been such blatant lack of focus on MP whether that's because of time restraints or whatever else it doesn't matter. Lack of battle, they have to use TDM as the duel mode, it's just kinda baffling coming from where Warband MP was at. Call me wrong because it's a beta, but Mordhau was early access too and had most of this stuff down at EA release, Bannerlord also had Warband as a template. No excuse anymore imo.

Callum said:

In my opinion, Warband's system was quite limited. There are optimal purchases that you should make, with the majority of gear being simply ignored. It is also possible to eliminate most of the drawbacks of any of the classes (inf, ranged, cav) by swapping gear with teammates (and please don't get me wrong, I love the teamwork and communication involved in gear swapping, I'm just not a fan that there are few, if any, downsides to it).

The class system presents you with a meaningful choice that you have to make with each spawn, taking into account your own team composition and that of the enemy. This choice can then be further tailored through perks.

Obviously, perks and classes still need some work, there is no doubt about that, but eventually, I think they will provide players with a fairer and ultimately better MP experience.

I feel that the only missing ingredient is the visual customisation that Warband offers, allowing players to inject their own personality into their character.

Click to expand...

I suppose I can see your point, however, on the flip side I see the class system as limited. While I understand the gear swapping argument I feel as if that could be avoided with a stat system similar to that of Warband. Archers shouldn't be as good with one handers as a melee class just as the melee class shouldn't be able to use a bow that well. Cavalry in my opinion is the only class that should be able to ride majority of horses and utilize polearms on them adeptly, or bows if they're a faction like Khuzait and pick that class. I feel as if the class system in it's current state does not satisfy fulfilling drawbacks. A good chunk of the high level archer classes are huge melee contenders and carry some of the best weapons on the field a lot of the time, i.e Palatine Guard w/ Imperial Polearm, Fiann w/ Highlander Sword, Veteran is just a good class all around, etc. Where's their drawback? A lot of melee infantry are armed with javelins, a shield, a polearm, and a sword/axe, again they've got just about everything they need but can also pick up a crossbow/bow or get on a horse and basically fulfill the role of another class. My point is the classes just don't feel terribly different in terms of strengths and weaknesses and if anything I think Warband's three role system emphasized it more. The cav class was meant to be on a horse and could ride the higher tier horses while the other two could not, the archers could use the bows while the other two could not, and melee classes were the best swordsmen on the map no doubt and could use high tier two-handers w/ heavier armor. It was pretty structured.

Unfortunately I don't think many people are looking at team comp when picking a class, maybe in Skirmish but rarely. People typically will pick the class that is easiest to get points with and then pick their actual desired class. Like on Empire I don't pick recruit thinking it'll benefit my team, I pick recruit knowing it's the cheapest and I get an OK loadout to go attempt to get Legionary with. If I'm on Sturgia I just pick the Berserker as soon as possible knowing I'll likely be able to earn enough for a higher tier class, or worst case default back to Berserker. It's not really about team comp for a lot of people especially on a casual level, people want to play what they want to play. In Skirmish/Captain I get it, but every other mode it feels like a detriment. If Battle were in the game, it'd feel infinitely more stale than in Warband.

I understand and have confidence that the class system will improve, however, I don't know if I am ready to say I agree that that's the direction I think MP should be taken, at least not completely. A lot of the MP aspect of Mount and Blade is the community/casual/free flowing aspect of it. The more match made MP is, the less of an appeal it has to the aforementioned idea of MP that a lot of people have.

The visual customization would be awesome don't get me wrong, however, that also goes against a lot of the points initially made to keep the class system around. Now I'm not saying it can't be done, but, if one class can look 4 different ways it may take away from that "see a class and know exactly what it does" kind of gameplay. Especially with varying armor perks which would have different visual choices. I just think it's leading into a slippery competitive vs. casual slope.

Callum said:

I also have over 1500 hours in Warband MP alone, and while I liked the customisation of Warband's item selection system, I can see that the potential of the Class system outweighs what was previously on offer.

Click to expand...

Could you possibly explain this potential that I, and I imagine a lot of other people with my opinion, aren't seeing?

I'd personally prefer something similar to the Warband system, although very refined, I don't see nearly as much potential with this class system especially with the way it's being balanced.

TrashMan said:

I suggest the number of troops be tied with time of day and the CHA skill..whatever the name for the rouggish skillset is, I keep forgetting.
The better you are at that stuff, the more men you can bring.

Also, since the enemies are never clumped up together, starting with smaller group is not an issue.
8-10 is more than enough if you play it smart (and dont' have troosp that suck).

Click to expand...

Yeah but fighting all those troops especially at night you can get unlucky or lose troops to ranged units. More than once I've been shot square in the face and instantly killed losing the entire raid.

It's also really dumb that every single time I want to raid a bandit hideout they're sleeping. I should be able to just charge through into their hideout, if they pack up and leave because they saw me coming than whatever but that should be an option.

Being strong armed into ambushing every single time with 8 men to play through the exact same scenario over and over again is just annoying.

TrashMan said:

Probably because the bandit lookouts might spot a big group and the bandits would disperse?
Hence why a small group night raid (tough troops should NOT be random. You should be able to pick by simply arranging their order in your party)

Click to expand...

The same bandit lookouts that are sitting around every single time you do a hideout raid. These hideouts are sometimes filled with an equal amount of bandits to my party but if I can only take in 8 people I’ll surely lose. I get it if it’s a small number of bandits but it should probably scale or have tiers. If the bandits have 20+ - 30+ guys I should be able to take more than 8 men.

TheSoulReaver03 said:

I still find the lack of engagement with the players a bit disappointing. Even the "Suggestions" thread was hidden.

Understandably, nobody wants to read through thousands of threads, work out which suggestios make sense, which can be implemented, and whether it's worth implementing. But honestly, they should have people assigned to this task, even if only one or two guys. It is well worth the effort, as we have already seen how listening to players' constructive feedback can make even the most garbage games into something actually very enjoyable (i.e No Man's Sky).

Having to restart the game every day is just not something most people will want to do.

Click to expand...

I've made tons of posts regarding some of your points here and tend to agree on some aspects. Although I believe in giving credit where credit is due, even though MP is kind of getting disregarded they are fixing SP pretty steadily. Whether or not half of these changes should have already been ironed out is another story but it's pretty meaningless to get into at this point.

And on your point about restarting, I haven't had to restart for most of these changes to take effect. Armors started showing up in my day 1 campaign and the snowballing issue was never too prevalent in my current game so I haven't really felt the need to restart. That's exactly what they've been trying to avoid if I'm not mistaken.

I know I've been pretty critical on the forums but you're doing a great job with the constant patches.

Well done!

Tastesslikevictory said:

You talk about realism, yet your okay with naked men using two handers swinging like ballerinas?

Click to expand...

Realism in terms of team damage and realism in terms of what people wanna wear are two different conversations, if you can't notice that I don't feel the need to argue about it.

Do you need to restart your SP campaign for the armor changes to take effect?

Snowballing is simply the idea that once a lead is gained over another player or group of players it becomes far too difficult to stop their exponential rise to power. It's still very much so present in Bannerlord and easier to achieve in Bannerlord.

While Snowballing WAS a problem in Warband, the lengths you needed to go in order to actually accumulate that much gold were pretty rigorous for most players. Sure there were exceptions as there were certainly people out there that could run battle servers for the entire day without any competition. That's in almost every game and cannot be prevented unless you handicap players.

Snowballing in Bannerlord is now a few simple steps:

1. Pick the best class for your money, if you can dominate with the recruit it's even more ideal due to affordability.
2. Kill one person and get a bunch of assists because they're worth more (or were in the beta, I've really avoided multiplayer since release)
3. Pick the best class for your money again, you can probably get a pretty broken class now.
4. Dominate with said class.
5. You should have enough money to rebuy that class, and dominate once more.
6. Repeat steps 4 and 5.

I believe there was a point made about each class having strengths and weaknesses, I'd like to dissect that.

The only weak class in reality, is any melee class. Let me explain. If you pick melee, you are likely not going to pick up a bow or ranged weapon, you probably won't take a suitable lance, you're pretty much stuck on the ground.

The strongest class is probably archer or better yet the horse archer for Khuzait. Not only do most of the better ranged classes get absurd melee weapons better than any melee class. but they also get complete ranged capability and can get on a horse and ride it just like they were cav.

Cav is pretty good because worst case you get dismounted and you're just infantry.

There's really just no depth here. Pick the best class you get the best result. It's not creative for the player, no one feels unique, it doesn't feel more immersive considering no army of the time period was standardized to my knowledge.

RussianFluff said:

The legendary Bunduk has appeared...

Click to expand...

Bunduk Recruiting and Co.
Definitely not the Imperial Military TM

sniparsexe said:

It did,

DayZ, was extremely buggy in early access, the majority of those bugs fixed in the release
H1Z1, were extremely buggy in early access, the majority of those bugs fixed in the release
You didn't like DbD so, PUBG, were extremely buggy in early access, majority of those bugs fixed in the release.

He didn't said

Click to expand...

H1Z1 and DayZ were survival games based off tried and true templates that had years of development already blasted into them and they still somehow managed to **** them up severely.

DayZ mod to this day is a superior game in my opinion, and the opinion of many of my friends who played both DayZ mod and Standalone quite extensively.

DayZ is still buggy and not that fun without mods.
H1Z1 is dead because it killed off it's one money maker, Battle Royale.
PUBG was fantastic at release aside from bugs which were quickly fixed, the content was there and it wasn't $50 dollars unlike Bannerlord.

Imperium Verum is recruiting, we're NA based and play based on the Empire faction.

We have teamspeak and discord but primarily use discord for announcements regarding events or for organization of documents and the like.

If you'd like to join feel free to PM me and I can get you on TS and recruit you.

sniparsexe said:

There is no point? I just answered Kentucky's question. He said: name me 3 games, I named 3 games.

Click to expand...

Yeah that didn't fit the criteria he listed.

sniparsexe said:

majority fixed for DayZ, I don't care about H1Z1's player count, he didn't ask about it. OF COURSE YOU DON'T GOT WHAT YOU PROMISED FOR THIS IS AN EARLY ACCESS.You can complain if you won't get what you are promised for when game full releases. I don't care about complicate fact, he/she didn't ask anything about complicated games.

Click to expand...

I'm completely lost as to what your point is.