I do want to nitpick some if that's ok I am not a historian so I can't really speak to any accuracy debates. I do know some about physiology of strength, though, and it always irks me how strength is mainly seen as a function of muscle mass which is extremely simplistic. Muscle mass is very relevant for maximal strength, yes. Other important factors include physiological cross sectional area, moment arms at the joints, neuronal factors such as fatigue or activation of inhibitory pathways and fiber recruitment, and most importantly skill. Strength is generally exercise specific with suprisingly little carry over to even similar exercises at top levels. The draw weights for even the strongest bows you listed are well within the physiological range attainable (for men and women) even without much gain in muscle mass. I'd imagine that, for men and women alike, in medieval times strength gain was mostly a function of factors other than gaining muscle mass because it is very hard to facilitate protein synthesis without regular caloric excess.I dont want to be neatpicker but bow is probably worst weapon for women (it requires specific upper body muscle, department where males differentiate most from females), crossbow makes much more sense (because you can use goat lever, other body muscle etc).
You are being needlessly antagonistic. As I said in the original post, this is not about the quality of gameplay but about the differences in technical performance, i.e. crashes, fps drops for different players. I was also making a point about my experience with sieges where I have yet to experience the problems you describe. I am not saying that they aren't real problems and TW doesn't need to fix them. I was just wondering how it happened that in my game (with no mods) soldiers so far climb ladders and towers just fine while other people report major problems. Maybe I haven't played enough or just got lucky lol no need to get your panties in a bunch.That's a wrong statement and I don't think it's even subjective. Warband's siege AI was working. It had basic siege functionalities in it, you can say that sieges are almost like more "elevated" version of regular battles. But that doesn't mean it was broken or dumb.
Whereas, Bannerlord isn't like that. If the entire army waits in front of the inner gate for you to break it, it's dumb. If a big chunk of soldiers waits in front of the ladder doing absolutely nothing, that's dumb. If attackers already put siege tower on walls but your defenders still waiting behind the game where no enemies are coming from because they don't even have siege ram, that's dumb. tldr; Bannerlord's siege AI doesn't function properly. That's not related to hardware. TW knows it, TW needs to fix it.
I am not talking about that, though. I am talking purely on a technical level. I am not really interested in the "broken promises" debate that to me seems to be relatively unfruitful. What I am wondering is how come some people are able to play the game from start to finish, not technical issues whatsoever and others have crashes left and right, severe fps drops etc... The devs are apparently very concerend with improving performance and stability and are therefore not working on any features which is obviously very frustrating to people who have had a very stable but shallow gaming experience for months. Other people have their game broken by every patch even without mods. It is very baffleing to me how the performance differences can be so stark and apparently so unrelated to hardware quality.Some people have prior experience with WB and expected upgrade not shallow sidegrade with better graphics. Some people play games for 4 hours, and say this is so cool and then move to next thing. Some people have standards while other seem to love when devs are treating them like trash (I assume buyers remors, justification for spending money / time is at play here). Some people wants complex gameplay while other are OK with cutting few looters to pieces from horseback. Some people wnat more realism while some want more arcade gameplay. Some people want very simple (so they can feel good instantly by mastering it) combat system while others want learning curve so they can feel like achieving somethihing that required actual training.
AKA people are different and average person (no offense, but most of buyers are gonna by average due to bell curve) is probably going to have average needs / demands / satisfaction threshold.
Edit: also lot of stuff was promised during the years prior to release and people were hoping it is actually gonna be in the game. In my case for example I see all the potential of the game and I am extremely dissapointed with how it was fulfilled up to this point, how slow the development is, how amateurish it is (I am talking from the experience just look at visuals of castles during release and their Frankenstein state now), how in wrong direction from deisgn perspective it is. For example if 90% of your gameplay is fighting, first thing you should fix is issues with fighting, be it balance, AI, combat system etc. Adding half baked features that will not be properly balanced and finished for months should be of secondary concern. We are talking here lack of common sense on management level. Obviously I am looking at the stuff from perspective of creative person that also creates not just consumes so I am not good "sample" I guess.
Again, we're not in disagreement, I don't think. I probably could have worded it better, I'm not making a judgement on whether the forum is objectively annoying or not beneficial. You are making normative claims. TW should do this, CMs should do that. Well, they don't and they probably have a reason for it. And my guess is, the reason is that they, subjectively (and possibly falsely), do not see the benefit in enganging right now. That goes both as a business decision (i.e., we need to finish this game as is before looking at suggestions) and on a personal level (e.g., I don't want to post the patch notes for the sheep textures because I will get bullied, I'll do it later or not at all).Let me rephrase it. You said the forum doesn't have any benefit. And I told you that's wrong because the forum is the only reason why you have Bannerlord. You said it's annoying and I said it's not, because forum is the only place you get feedback for the game and this feedback loop did indeed helped this game in the past and even helping right now.
People, especially regular people don't care if management wiped their arse with those suggestions or considered. They will continue raising their concerns about the aspects they think it's not a good implementation and such. You cannot know "hard" limit for considering issues. It can be 1000th message, can be 100000th message. Depends on the company and how they view something as a problem.
CM has to engage with the community - and if 1000th siege ai when comes in then he has to at least make a statement about their crappy messed up siege AI because at least 1k individuals are complaining about that. CM should talk to whoever the dude is posting Facebook videos and tell him that it's not funny to post a video about siege AI abuse since this is a really stupid bug they failed to fix - And this is the tip of the iceberg - because not all people who hate some feature or encounter a bug comes to the forum and writes. So if there are 1000 comments about something, it's very likely that it's affecting everyone and it's in a bad shape because real affected user count can be 100 times more than that.
You can get annoyed as an individual, you can get sad, you can punch the wall - I don't care. Individuals can have feelings, companies cannot. Especially if your company is charging AAA price, people expect AAA game and when they cannot find it, they have the right to complain. And if your title is Community Manager, you have to address these complaints and issues. As a CM, If you are ghosting your own community because you are "annoyed" - community that made that title worth something, then you have don't know what you are doing and you shouldn't be a CM.
Honestly, I can imagine the TW guys being pretty burned out themselves on this project. Especially the employees may just want to get it done so they can add a shipped game credit to their resume. Not in software but I had to make similar decisions to just reduce the scope of a project because people want to get on with their lives. You can say that just proves the original project outline and project management was bad, and I know that in my case it was certainly true and I've learned from mistakes, but what's done is doneOr until they have enough resource (man and time) to handle new requests. That's the thing. There are times to receive feedback, and there are times to sit down and work. You can't be receiving and working on feedback all the time. Let alone do it fast. Just take a look at this list. They need to work on their original plans, core mechanics, bug fixes (which constantly comes in and needs to be dealt with), and features on top of that long list of suggestions.
No you didn't. You just said it wasn't like that in the past which may or may not be true. There are multiple posts by devs and CMs on this forum indicating that suggestions have been brought up and got shot down by management multiple times. To me, that indicates that at this point in time management does not want the feedback, i.e., does not see the benefit in receiving the feedback on here. The annoying part is just speculation but if I were a CM and got the 1000th "siege ai when" reply after pointing out multiple times that it is already on the list I'd certainly be annoyedAnd I explained that it's not annoying and provides benefit.
Don't really understand how this is supposed to be contradicting what I posted. They don't want to communicate right now, that much is clear and no 5000 post thread, no matter the tone, is going to change it. I'm not saying you can't post whatever critique you see fit. My guess is just that the people who are in charge have this place muted and will not care about your posts untill the game is done at least.
When they "want" to get ideas, they are not asking Facebook or Reddit lickers, they are asking to the forum.
I don't think anybody at TW would care for your or anyone's sympathy. That's hardly the point. They don't want to communicate with this forum because it's annoying to do so and provides no benefit for them and that's all there is to it.TW promised lots of user engagement and to work directly with us during the EA. Backing off of that because a few are too mean for them is not something I have any sympathy for.
Which they DO! Have you tried calling customer service for anything lately? Last time I did (with my phone company, hardly a small business) there was no human contact at all just a computer. It's an absolute waste of time and resources to provide emotional punching bags so people can vent the frustration your (faulty) product causes. Coming here and replying to these kinda posts litterally only has downsides lol why in the world would they do that.Yeah, I think you may be right in some ways here. If your idea is right though... about Taleworlds Devs mostly avoiding these forums because of negativity.. that's kind of like a commercial company shutting down it's Customer Services department because they don't like the phone calls they keep getting from angry customers.
Well, there you have it though. They post on FB every day. Sure it's just marketing but as I said, I can't really blame them. This forum at times is like customers yelling at a store clerk. The difference is that the store clerk kinda has to put up with you as long as you stay somewhat civil. The TW store clerks can just not go on the forum and why would they. They probably have no decision making power and chances are, since all discussions here are moving in a big old circle, that they have brought up all suggestions multiple times already to management and got shot down so what are they supposed to do? Just stand here and take the abuse while telling you "no"? Don't really see the point...If you want to see a different world - go check out the facebook group.
https://www.facebook.com/mountandblade/ 1/4 Million followers.
Happy cheerful content from regular players.
Then there is reddit - which while it does critic TW; is much more civil and friendly;
r/mountandblade: A subreddit and community for the Mount & Blade series, created by TaleWorlds Entertainment.www.reddit.com
Basically this forum is for the diehards; and like any diehards they tend to be the most passionate about the game. It's a safe space for (and let's be honest here) complaining. Because on facebook you can't hide behind a username; and on reddit you get downvoted into oblivion.
Creative Assembly pulled out of their forum - they just post announcement there and use reddit/discord/facebook as they primary communities.
Forums remain the best place to receive real feedback - but you would be wrong to think the majority of the fanbase is represented by this forum.