Recent content by Rongar

  1. Rongar

    Dev Blog 30/08/18

    Did I get correct that the game is almost ready, we just have to wait until the end of the 16 years straightforward development of mid and later parts of the gameplay?
  2. Rongar

    Dev Blog 17/08/17

    Ki-Ok Khan said:
    Maybe this? :smile:
    You may find a lot of similar videos about other engines. Such things are important part of communication between developers and rest of the world, they attract but do not answer questions.

    MadVader said:
    Good questions, perhaps you need a custom engine to optimize it for a large number of actors, their animations, AI and pathfinding, and it's not merely a vanity project…
    Osvaldon said:
    A custom engine, created for the needs of a specific game, can provide better performance…
    Usually if you do approximately the same as others it’s impossible to win the race if you started significantly later. Time is very material.
    Having less time you may try to be better in some of aspects but only sacrificing a lot of others. But comparing with competitors we usually have to aggregate and these few aspects may become negligible in the whole picture.
    Working better with some parts of the scene and being poor with all others may leave no chance to achieve good quality and fps for overall scene.

    DanAngleland said:
    … why on earth nobody else is making games with anything remotely near M&B's NPC and real player numbers if that is the case- and player/NPC count is just one facet of M&B.
    The question «why do not others do that» makes sense only under very specific conditions.
    If they are not met the short and straightforward answer: they don’t want.
    There are a variety of games that similar to different aspects of WB, some have horses, some have a lot NPC or players, some have melee fights, some are sandbox, and the fact that they are not copy of WB do not make them that unpopular.

    DanAngleland said:
    extensively modifying it before eventually running into brick walls.
    Osvaldon said:
    But the most important part of having a custom engine is that there are no limits to what you can do with it when developing your game.
    Yes. That’s usually one of the main point of redevelopment — control over source code, no limit etc. Even opensource projects if they are huge do not give enough control and freedom. Understanding and changing the code that is not yours is a difficult problem. However developing from the scratch you also  may eventually run into a wall, because limits exist anyway. And if for a stable engine this wall is from shiny brick and well-documented, your personal wall will be from vague strained glass appeared suddenly from «nothing».

    Harmi said:
    Why didn't they do it then? They wanted to keep the rich modding culture going on.
    Some of games on mentioned UE have very rich modding culture too.

    kalarhan said:
    which is better? Again that would be a boring business discussion, not something for a reply on a blog discussion.
    Yup, that’s why I don't ask to compare new BL engine, UE and Unity from the point of whole business process. Reformulating my question I'm interesting how opinion of developers changed for 5(I'm not sure here) of developing. My question is not about business but about personal feelings.

    It was the start of the way. And you took a hard decision. Now after a long way making final steps, what are the thoughts about the first steps? Are their now completely the same? 
  3. Rongar

    Dev Blog 17/08/17

    > such as the new engine we built from scratch

    Working in a company that also decided to develop from scratch what others had been developed already 20 years, I can not refrain from asking personal questions:
    What were main reasons for that decision?
    Are these reasons still valid since 5 years?
    Are there any advantages of that new engine (assuming that it will be available) for an external developer over rivals?

  4. Rongar

    Mount & Blade II: Bannerlord Old Discussion Thread

    RoboSenshi said:
    warpowerfull said:
    I'm a bit worried about being able to defend your territory as it becomes bigger and bigger. Since you can't be everywhere at the same time the AI controlled armies that are in your kingdom need to be able to be smart enough and capable enough to defend your territories. Like if there is a huge enemy army coming controlled by a marshal, your AI lords need to get together and face them as a big army and not just run away from them individually, which happens in Warband a lot. I hate not having the abilities to adequately control my borders and just getting harassed by the AI in games. Recent example being in Total Warhammer where AI just raids and runs away without you being able to catch up to them.
    I completely agree. I also hope the AI is coded to attack and fight at each other's borders rather than target settlements way too far away. It would be so annoying if the AI in BL go on and seige a town on the other side of the map and ignore the one on its border. I hated that so much in Warband.

    A lot of rulers in the history also hopped that invaders would stick at the border fortified settlements instead of going into deep of the country to raid undefended ones. 
    The only thing that can prevent an invader from bypassing border fortresses is a risk that supply to its army can be cut off. But many armies were able to operate quite long without direct supply for their metropolis.

    Also, there were a lot of historical situations, when defenders failed to gather together to face joint enemy army.

    But I can not disagree that history is annoying.  And in the game I would prefer to see valor battles instead of that realistic cheating.
  5. Rongar

    Modding Q&A [For Quick Questions and Answers]

    troycall said:
    2. I'm getting an error at line 10, group ID error: 25, any idea on what might be causing this?

    Code:
    (agent_get_division, ":class", ":agent"), #Group ID error
    (class_is_listening_order, ":player_agent", ":class"),
    Are you sure? I would assume that line 10 is
    (class_is_listening_order, ":player_agent", ":class"),
    class_is_listening_order  wants a team, not an agent.

  6. Rongar

    Modding Q&A [For Quick Questions and Answers]

    meminimina said:
    where do i actually do this.?
    sorry im kinda new to these kinds of stuff sorry. :oops:
    In the code, which you are investigating.

    Did you read this https://forums.taleworlds.com/index.php/topic,240255.0.html ?
  7. Rongar

    Mount & Blade II: Bannerlord Old Discussion Thread

    In WB each regular trooper has "DNA", that is persistent. That defines (seeds random generator) its face and a choice of equipment.
    The variety of equipment depends on rank and type, but the final choice depends on DNA and restrictions or overridings.
  8. Rongar

    Modding Q&A [For Quick Questions and Answers]

    meminimina said:
    can you explain to me how?
    In case of mystery, first, that is good to check is if the code even is called.
    Adding
    (display_log_message, "@my debug message"),
    may help a lot, especially if it's not displayed.
    Later, you may yield some critical vars, to check effects of the code.

    (assign, reg24, ":value"),
    (display_log_message, "@{reg24}"),
  9. Rongar

    Modding Q&A [For Quick Questions and Answers]

    Khamukkamu said:
    What's the best a good way to test triggers (simple or regular triggers)? Bind it to a key click then see if it triggers? Anyone have best practices?

    Thanks
    To test I usually used shortened timings for simple triggers, keys for battle tirggers and global vars (that allow skipping conditions) and menu for regular ones.
  10. Rongar

    Mount & Blade II: Bannerlord Old Discussion Thread

    «Suboptimal» is a nice word. Now I got to know how to use it properly.

    Next time being too late at my work, I'll say that «my route was suboptimal».

    The only how I may imagine MB coop is completely asynchronous battles and global map. Other to my mind does not worth efforts.
  11. Rongar

    Mount & Blade II: Bannerlord Developer Blog 12 - The Passage Of Time

    Stromming said:
    Rongar said:
    TheBarbarianGamer said:
    Rongar said:
    TheBarbarianGamer said:
    you should not be able to turn your head 180 degrees and even more... 
    There is not ablity to turn a head 180 degrees in WB or even in MB. However unability to turn head 180 degrees it does not mean that it's not possible to look back.

    In the video the person did turn the head 180 degrees...
    No. The person turns all torso, not just head.

    Yeah it is still not possible. Silly people trying to defend silly things is just silly
    If it's not possible for you, it does mean that it's not possible for a normally physically developed person.
    And he even did not use the stirrups to stand up that could help to turn even further.
  12. Rongar

    Mount & Blade II: Bannerlord Developer Blog 12 - The Passage Of Time

    SenorZorros said:
    Rongar said:
    For M&B they definitely were reading suggestions. And I believe that they implemented those of them that were reasonable in sense effort-result.
    But since that I don't think they need to read new suggestion because amount of suggestion that were made in time of M&B betas enough for 4-5 games. And frankly, I don't see really new suggestions.
    then why haven't they already implemented the option to switch out troops :wink:
    I could guess that because it requires efforts but it's doubtful feature for game play.
  13. Rongar

    Mount & Blade II: Bannerlord Developer Blog 12 - The Passage Of Time

    TheBarbarianGamer said:
    Rongar said:
    TheBarbarianGamer said:
    you should not be able to turn your head 180 degrees and even more... 
    There is not ablity to turn a head 180 degrees in WB or even in MB. However unability to turn head 180 degrees it does not mean that it's not possible to look back.

    In the video the person did turn the head 180 degrees...
    No. The person turns all torso, not just head.
  14. Rongar

    Mount & Blade II: Bannerlord Developer Blog 12 - The Passage Of Time

    KuroiNekouPL said:
    Quidfit said:
    I just want to put out how I think a coop mode should work in bannerlord. I know it's unlikely to be considered but is there anywhere to submit suggestions?
    I don't think TaleWorlds even reads suggestions. They didn't seem to before Warband launched.
    For M&B they definitely were reading suggestions. And I believe that they implemented those of them that were reasonable in sense effort-result.
    But since that I don't think they need to read new suggestion because amount of suggestion that were made in time of M&B betas enough for 4-5 games. And frankly, I don't see really new suggestions.
  15. Rongar

    Mount & Blade II: Bannerlord Developer Blog 12 - The Passage Of Time

    TheBarbarianGamer said:
    you should not be able to turn your head 180 degrees and even more... 
    There is not ablity to turn a head 180 degrees in WB or even in MB. However unability to turn head 180 degrees it does not mean that it's not possible to look back.
Top Bottom