Recent content by Ruthven

  1. Ruthven

    Minor MP customization changes request

    They could add a headshot dmg multiplier for a helmetless option and players would still take it.

    Lots of helms are pure cosmetic already so giving a nohelm option even with the same stats fits the system TW designed and decided on. It would definitely be annoying to hit a bareheaded heavy class and have them absorb 50dmg but, gotta sleep in the bed you made.
  2. Ruthven

    The PC route of TW needs to end...

    Those are different things.
    A chat filter is necessary in any game to prevent offensive assholes, like those who like to complain about PC, to harass other players.
    Removing death count is simply a mystery until Taleworlds says why they did this and there's absolutely no evidence that it's because they don't want frequent diers to be embarrassed.
    The death counter in skirm actually is a bit misrepresentative since the game is balanced around unequal respawns. Aserai inf for example will usually have the most deaths in a match since they are weak, always triple spawn, and have to be in harm's way. Archers and cav rarely get a 3rd life and have way more disengagement opportunities, so usually have a much higher kdr even if inf are doing just as much work. Getting extra respawns is also the big "reward" for winning, so after round 1 both teams can go even in k/d and the ones with the extra gold still win convincingly...

    I guess the reason to remove it was similar to removing the loss counter from the main menu, trying to undercut toxic tryhard need2win attitudes or salty losers, I dunno. If kills are worth tracking along with score, you would think deaths should be as well...

    I hope they put it back and let us get detailed stats in a dropdown/expand list, like dmg dealt by weapon type, horse stops/dmg/kills, kills/deaths by weapon, shield breaks, etc... but we all know that ain't happening.

    The scoring system in general is probably super well designed from the backend view but it's so obtuse for players. Like the score counter in TDM where both teams are at 35827 and are playing until one side gets two million points or some malarkey. Warband had this pretty straightforward scoring system that would always increment by 1, but I guess numbers under 1000 are for babies.

    I think chat filter is fine as it is, they should actually expand it to include more non-offensive words. Typing a coherent message should be like a mini game to itself.
  3. Ruthven

    Bannerlord Duel Ranking Official (North America)

    Why did you update this in the middle of an ongoing duel tourny? It's already outdated
  4. Ruthven

    Abuse of the votekicking system needs serious attention

    It would be cool if people could freely join as spectators for the 6v6 modes, and teams who drop players could vote spectators into the match.

    If you can't solo carry in a pub queue it is you who is bad, no need to kick the newbies.
  5. Ruthven

    One-life mode

    I wish the main screen queue would send people to the Battle mode by default. Having a scalable population size mode will mean no need to wait for 5mins (or perpetually in the case of NA). The 6v6 competitve modes should be the ones on the secondary screen IMO, with Siege and Battle being the main draws for bannerlord MP, and the modes tied to level/stats/skin unlocks etc.

    Having Battle mode tied to the queue will also help turnover, try to start a match asap with at least (20 or 50 or whatever) players, if wait time exceeds 1 minute, send them to a match in progress with a big onscreen message telling them they will respawn when one team is defeated. This way if you have eg a 50v50 match, the first 50 who die can leave and start a new match, and any odd ones out will be filled into the oldest match to spectate until the next round rather than stare at the little patch notes horseman on the home screen.

    Ideally the servers would also reset without kicking everyone, which at this point I think should be obvious how important that is for player retention and fostering an online community. This way if you are surviving to the end of most or all rounds, you can stay in the server as long as you want, and others who die early can quickly leave and jump into another match.

    I think skirmish and captain modes have their place and are well designed to eliminate some of the boring aspects of 6v6 Battle, but its time to admit they cannot be the mainstay of MP. Large scale Battle and Siege mean more players can use fewer servers, scalable player counts mean no waiting an hour with 11/12 and no 3v3 matches in a mode designed and balanced around 6v6.
  6. Ruthven

    Bannerlord was a grift

    Bannerlord Online, with a small dev team (pretty sure just that Russian guy) achieved not only co-op, but a massive MMO. TW said after 10 years of development co-op was impossible. That just shows they are either incompetent, unwilling or simply don't want to implement things the fans want. Which one doesn't really matter, all three are pretty pathetic.
    BLO is very impressive but their method is not something a professional studio could use, the player to player desync is unacceptable for a paid product. TW could have changed their focus to make an MMO, or significantly redesigned the entire SP flow to fit with ~2 player coop, but they decided to stick with their simpler proven method of fully SP gameplay with quick match MP. And guess what, the platform they created was robust enough for a mostly lone modder to create a pseudo MMO, with other modders working on 2-player coop. So TW clearly made the right call there, didn't they?
  7. Ruthven

    Battle Joy perk is broken and needs to be removed.

    If only there was some other way to make it so some classes had access to faster weapons, or some kind of item or device that would both reduce damage and also be visually recognizable. Sadly I cannot imagine any such system, oh well.
  8. Ruthven

    Passive perks are not distinguishable enough

    Bannerlord: where the stats are made up and the equipment doesn't matter
  9. Ruthven

    Bannerlord was a grift

    Community interaction is always up to the company. Usually when fanbases run wild with toxicity it indicates a gulf between the company and their players; people get insulting because they don't have anything human-like to empathize with. There are countless steam reviews (literally thousands upon thousands) especially on Indie games that are incredibly rude and toxic, as soon as a developer replies and shows that they are listening the original angry reviewer walks back their mean comments and says some positive things. It's also easy to look at all companies as soulless corporate entities, even if it's really just 2 poor passionate hardworking devs trying to compete. Nobody knows how down to earth and passionate you are about your game unless you... show them.

    Pretty much all game companies suck at community management to be fair, it's hard to maintain a level of necessary professionalism when most gamers want devs to be relatably non-professional and not get canned responses to their complaints. It's a double edged sword though, if you give all your devs leave to comment and interact as they please, they might say some minor comment that gets blown way out of proportion. Iirc this has happened here before with some of the devs whose English is weaker, weighing in on things that aren't their specific wheelhouse and having fans jump to wrong conclusions.

    If you look at the suggestion forum for MB1 beta from 2005-2007 you will probably fall in love with armagan. But of course he can't keep being the forefront of community interaction forever.. I think TW could do better bridging that gap though, and if they did more people would stick up for positivity even amidst the complaints. It's also true that swears, hyperbole, and "dealing in absolutes" are simply tools to make written complaints feel grander and more impassioned, for example @Terco_Viejo manages to keep his words quite civil by expressing his feelings with gifs instead :wink:

    My untested non-professional theory is that maximizing dev/community interaction is actually better overall: Its the Donald Trump method of communication, if you lie 1000 times a day people start to ignore the lies and only pay attention to the 1 thing that's true. If you post 1 comment a month as community manager, you'd better be 100% right every time since each word will be stretched and analyzed to death. I feel that TW are so worried about saying something misleading they prefer to say nothing at all, putting their own feet directly in the crosshairs whenever they do try to share something.

    At the end of the day, if discussion sections of the forums are not good for the game or the community they could shut it down and have this be exclusively a tech support forum (maybe with the off topic retirement home perhaps.) If the direction the game is going is not in line with the expectations of the Warband community, tw should be upfront about that; if they want it to be they can change the game according to suggestions, if not they can find their new audience. It's like breaking up with your fiancé instead of just ghosting them after planning the honeymoon for the last 8 years. (And that analogy is not even a stretch with the way a lot of people treat this game)

    The thing that bothers me the most is how much amazing feedback was generated in the first alpha/beta that was mostly ignored. Imagine a company was making a flagship game title, and they had access to playtesters who had 10k+ hours in that exact niche game type, who left pages and pages of in depth feedback with videos, graphs, you name it... Any wise company that could afford it would pay out the nose, and pay keen attention to every issue raised. But since TW grew their own community, it made it easy for them to overlook the value, and easy to assume they would automatically get the same kind of dedicated community again regardless of how their new vision was received by the old one. It's easy to write off the opinions of the hardcore fans as only applying to the opinions of other hard-core fans, but turns out people who have played the game for a million years actually know exactly what made the game worth it.
  10. Ruthven

    1.6.1 new perks

    25MU.gif
  11. Ruthven

    What happened?

    Don't bother, he's not one of the bright ones and isn't worth your time. They don't even see they have conflicting arguments and they still refuse to understand. No matter how many times you point out their flawed logic, they will just prepare another text-salad for you. I found what I expected to find, I'll just let them circle jerk here in peace, lol.
    i hope u hungry bb

    I don't really care if they use a detailed inventory like WB, the perk "system" is fine, the issue is that at the moment there are so few choices, no round-to-round progression, and the tradeoffs are always being decided by the devs, and not by players (e.g. Spear and Shield perks being in the same slot for an infantry unit...) It is so much more difficult to balance this way, all these flaws and future problems were visible miles off, and now 2 years later devs are finally starting to capitulate - the concepts behind their new equipment system did not hold water like they thought they would. The other problems will also need to be addressed eventually, and now the devs need to do some 2000IQ balancing act - look, we have different perks for Skirmish and Captain gamemodes, different unit prices in Siege and TDM, they had to stop heavy cavs from being able to double spawn in Skirmish... The more they try to stick with the system they have, the more they will need to whack-a-mole these problems and the more issues they will create for themselves down the line. They could have saved themselves a big headache if they used simple inf/cav/archer classes with equipment progression.

    The idea of fixing snowballing is cute and might work for competitive matches, where good team coordination can help you win 1+ engagements and maybe even up a life deficiency. At low levels, snowballing is even worse. A better player can grab heavy cav instantly, go **** on people in their spawn, and then next round the worse players have to get like 18 kills with only 12-15 lives, and worse units. It's like, yeah Swads in WB getting mail round 2 was tough, but the BL system decided to stop that by instead giving them Brigandines and an extra respawn. Like what???

    IMO the best way forward would be to add a lot of equipment perks for all classes, where you choose 2-4 in the Armory to take in a match as your options, and all perks have some small cost... eg Full Helmet +15g, longer spear +10g, etc, also with the option to not equip any perks in a given round. This would give us:
    - something to do in the Armory while waiting for matchmaking
    - round-to-round progression, of which there is currently none at all
    - more individual builds and playstyles, more depth to economy
    - not needing to pad an inventory screen with "unnecessary" upgrades like boots and gloves or +1dmg swords

    This isn't the main reason I don't play BL anymore but it's a big symptom of their diseased design philosophies.
  12. Ruthven

    What happened?

    What is that you want to do and you can't with the class system? In terms of armor, if you wouldn't go full naked, you unequipped gloves and boots because it was "unnecessary" weight and faster movement was a good trade-off, yeah no thanks, I don't want that BS in this game. You have sword&axe&mace&spear options for heavy inf, some unique weapons for the light inf, for shock troops you mostly have pikes and 1-2 choice in 2h weapons. The level of customisation is pretty much the same in terms of weapons.

    Anyways after reading the replies you gave to the other people, I see this about going naked BS... *sigh*
    - light/medium infs across all factions: Decent shield, decent melee weapon, decent spear, pick 2 1
    - spear "options" are mostly: take this ****ty spear as a perk or don't have one
    - heavy inf classes heavily underperform in melee if they don't take their designated meta weapon perk
    - confusing, conflicting, or outright useless perks for bows and horses
    - 0 options for light armour with good helmet and shield
    - 2 handers are now a class which means no 2handers + armour + decent shield
    - forcing peasant classes to exist and be played while being weak by design but still trying to fit them into the meta :oops::oops::oops:

    worst of all:
    - cannot take off my helmet on any class

    bonus:
    - you can't even keep your looted items to work around this system
  13. Ruthven

    Kick button

    Will cav get picked at all in serious matches if they can't rambo?

    Edit: also what is meant here by "leashing"? If your units actually follow you in near lockstep that would be amazing, if it means you step 10 paces from your last inf and your damage output goes down to 10%...
  14. Ruthven

    Kick button

    I was bored so I did some maths

    Bannerlord went into EA on March 30th 2020. That was 491 days ago.

    4500 wins, divided by that = 9.2 wins per day (rounding up)

    Checking your Steam profile (make it private old chap!) you have 3300 hours in the game.

    This is 6.72 hours per day (every single day) for 491 days.

    In monetary terms you could have earned £29,000 at UK living wage (roughly).

    In hourly terms you could be reckoned at a 'Advanced' level on the guitar for the time spent.

    I would gently and politely suggest that you consider:

    A more productive hobby
    A job that helps your life have meaning
    A relationship?

    I sincerely hope there is someone or something in your life that can take you away from 7 hours day, playing this one game. If you are struggling with social phobia then please consider contacting the group on the link below.

    Best wishes and I hope you get healthy soon.

    If only he had put those hours into something productive, like warband multiplayer :sad:
Top Bottom