Philozoraptor
Sergeant
Thats why I am trying to mobilize people on discord and nexus as well (and with bit of luck on youtube too).
-
If you are reporting a bug, please head over to our Technical Support section for Bannerlord.
Do you want more complex features, such as proper formation behaviour in Bannerlord?
- Thread starter Philozoraptor
- Start date
Users who are viewing this thread
Sergeant
I would personally love to have these features in vanilla, if not well I suppose we can always use these mods instead.
bestmods168
Sergeant at Arms
There are a few people or certain groups that if you can successfully whisper into their ear, TW will go out of their way and implement it within a few weeks.
If TW goes down the path of "Realism", Bannerlord won't be officially released until 22 .....3022 ..
Lets just get this thing released.
.
Lets just get this thing released.
.
Why would you want it released as a husk? If it takes longer but becomes a better game, you should want that... gamers these days.
Calm down and check the poll. @archaicwarrior voted the same way as the rest of us.
I actually didn't know you could see who voted for one, so there's that. And I was calm? It just seems like you didn't like the message I was saying, doesn't mean I wasn't calm but whatever you want? ?
A simple strategic game for kiddies on console ..or new players .. then when they mature, they'll download all the "realism" mods to make it an addictive game..
.
CrazyElf
Sergeant
I believe that these features are essential for the game. I do not believe that without more complex formations the game is truly complete.
Personally, I would go further than @Philozoraptor - I would like to see Realistic Battle Mod outright integrated into the game. That's because right now there are no other real alternatives. For the developers to make their own features would take months and many patches to master.
Looking at the videos, it is pretty much night and day.
Yes, RBM has many features - I think that there is a case to be made for adding 1 more video showing these.
The one issue is that the Philozoraptor didn't want to add too many in order to not make this into a wall of text. I think one more video in this case won't break the bank, so to speak.
I think that the best computer games follow a formula of "easy to learn, but hard to master" - in other words, it's easy to understand the basic,s but to become truly awesome as a player has a steep learning curve.
Certainly, the core game needs polish before it can progress, but it is good to have the conversations now because it sets the stage for the future. Keep in mind that development will go on for years after release in the form of DLCs, expansion, etc. If the developers want this game to be successful, they will need this type of feedback and engagement.
People are often critical of TaleWorlds not because they want them to fail or for the sake of criticism, but because they want the game to succeed. A case could be made that for some posters, the tone should be a bit more constructive, but there's no denying the desire for a great game.
I would hope the developers add this eventually or even integrate RBM into the game. I don't think this will happen right away, but it is a very worthy long term goal.
It would seem the author would want something of comparable capability added to the game.
Personally, I would go further than @Philozoraptor - I would like to see Realistic Battle Mod outright integrated into the game. That's because right now there are no other real alternatives. For the developers to make their own features would take months and many patches to master.
Looking at the videos, it is pretty much night and day.
Yes, RBM has many features - I think that there is a case to be made for adding 1 more video showing these.
The one issue is that the Philozoraptor didn't want to add too many in order to not make this into a wall of text. I think one more video in this case won't break the bank, so to speak.
I think that the best computer games follow a formula of "easy to learn, but hard to master" - in other words, it's easy to understand the basic,s but to become truly awesome as a player has a steep learning curve.
Certainly, the core game needs polish before it can progress, but it is good to have the conversations now because it sets the stage for the future. Keep in mind that development will go on for years after release in the form of DLCs, expansion, etc. If the developers want this game to be successful, they will need this type of feedback and engagement.
People are often critical of TaleWorlds not because they want them to fail or for the sake of criticism, but because they want the game to succeed. A case could be made that for some posters, the tone should be a bit more constructive, but there's no denying the desire for a great game.
I would hope the developers add this eventually or even integrate RBM into the game. I don't think this will happen right away, but it is a very worthy long term goal.
Last edited:
I'm all for it, and I think it's possible.
I recall I've got surprised when TW added the city icons mod to vanilla (which I actually dislike, but can live with it).
Therefore, I don't see why not...unless there are reasons beyond my (poor) technical knowledge.
I recall I've got surprised when TW added the city icons mod to vanilla (which I actually dislike, but can live with it).
Therefore, I don't see why not...unless there are reasons beyond my (poor) technical knowledge.
Bazza_ov_da_Norf
Recruit
Getting more example videos out there for people to see how poor the combat is in vanilla VS RBM is probably the best way to sway more minds on this (and hope one of the bigger YT content creators picks up on it). A good example video would be a line charging a shield wall in vanilla VS a line charging a shield wall in RBM.
I don't think TW will do anything without pressure from beyond this forum, they already have our money. We're not the ones who need to see these videos. Its potential buyers who are waiting for the full release who need to see these videos. It's been 1.5 years, the combat is the base of the game and have TW have done absolutely nothing but tinker around the edges with it. They've done nothing to create the kind of combat experience that we've been asking for since day 1. We've just gotten generic "we will continue to improve the combat and listen to your feedback" which has translated to minor changes that are barely noteworthy.
So yeah, I don't think anything will change until eyes outside of this forum start paying attention to what the combat is now, and what it could be. Good quality, explanative examples videos on YT are probably the best way to go about that.
I don't think TW will do anything without pressure from beyond this forum, they already have our money. We're not the ones who need to see these videos. Its potential buyers who are waiting for the full release who need to see these videos. It's been 1.5 years, the combat is the base of the game and have TW have done absolutely nothing but tinker around the edges with it. They've done nothing to create the kind of combat experience that we've been asking for since day 1. We've just gotten generic "we will continue to improve the combat and listen to your feedback" which has translated to minor changes that are barely noteworthy.
So yeah, I don't think anything will change until eyes outside of this forum start paying attention to what the combat is now, and what it could be. Good quality, explanative examples videos on YT are probably the best way to go about that.
one big streamer promotes the mod....
Looking back and seeing all that time span where time and time again BASIC implementations have been advocated is really funny to me.
As much as we may dislike console gamers and think that console port development has destabilised pc development, it's absurd to think that console gamers are going to complain about having more "complexity" implemented. What console peasant is going to feel overwhelmed with balanced protection-damage formula systems (very much in line with RBM) - pricing, cohesive formations (RBM + Save battle formation) and no jittering when agents collapse, targeting tools (focus enemy), weapon usage switching tools, group selections by role/behaviour, etc ? In my eyes it's all SO BASIC.... -but hey Terco, I still feel overwhelmed.... -ok son, so your warrior path is F1-F3 or straight up F6.
Why the player who wants to engage in an experience like the one advocated in this thread (thanks RBM guys) doesn't have his/her alternative to F6 with micromanagement tools like the ones previously commented?
Well, all this and more has been commented literally FOR YEARS...
One example of something basic that hasn't worked since the 2019 alpha-beta period (still not working nowadays) and for which many of us have given feedback is a basic battle order, the fallback.
A console peasant is going to complain about his/her bot formation acting in this way? I don't think so... well, with all the above mentioned it''s the same thing.
It is said that you don't know what you need until it is shown to you.... well, there are hundreds of feedback threads that are still shining gold mines in this forum remaining in the dark. The ball remains in your court Taleworlds.
Love to the RBM team ??
As much as we may dislike console gamers and think that console port development has destabilised pc development, it's absurd to think that console gamers are going to complain about having more "complexity" implemented. What console peasant is going to feel overwhelmed with balanced protection-damage formula systems (very much in line with RBM) - pricing, cohesive formations (RBM + Save battle formation) and no jittering when agents collapse, targeting tools (focus enemy), weapon usage switching tools, group selections by role/behaviour, etc ? In my eyes it's all SO BASIC.... -but hey Terco, I still feel overwhelmed.... -ok son, so your warrior path is F1-F3 or straight up F6.
Why the player who wants to engage in an experience like the one advocated in this thread (thanks RBM guys) doesn't have his/her alternative to F6 with micromanagement tools like the ones previously commented?
Well, all this and more has been commented literally FOR YEARS...
One example of something basic that hasn't worked since the 2019 alpha-beta period (still not working nowadays) and for which many of us have given feedback is a basic battle order, the fallback.
A console peasant is going to complain about his/her bot formation acting in this way? I don't think so... well, with all the above mentioned it''s the same thing.
It is said that you don't know what you need until it is shown to you.... well, there are hundreds of feedback threads that are still shining gold mines in this forum remaining in the dark. The ball remains in your court Taleworlds.
Love to the RBM team ??
Last edited:
I also think that console peasants won´t be overwhelmed with more complex games. Stellaris, Cities Skylies (not that complex but compared to Butterlord...). Just a few examples, it´s not like that console peasants only play Fifa or CoD.
Still:
Still:
While I seriously want more complex features in Bannerlord, I'm not as concerned about proper formation behavior as I am with the sorry state of diplomacy, the economy, and a host of other issues which I feel are more pressing. Improvements in combat formations and NPC combat behavior would certainly be welcome, but are further down my list of priorities.
The battles might be more enjoyable with such changes, but without a better fleshed-out background to give the battles some sense of purpose, I find the game shallow and unfulfilling. Win a dozen battles....so what? It changes nothing.
The battles might be more enjoyable with such changes, but without a better fleshed-out background to give the battles some sense of purpose, I find the game shallow and unfulfilling. Win a dozen battles....so what? It changes nothing.
Lesbosisles
Knight at Arms
Agreed. Improving combat and war elements in general is good and always welcome, since they are a one huge inseparable part of the game, yet the elements, which should be there in the game during peace time, like feasts, need at least the very basic implementation. RIght now you've nothing to do during peace time, aside from grinding quests, there is no interaction between your lords inside of the Kingdom, no plots and rivalry among the clans of the same Kingdom - the inner policy part in the game is indeed very shallow and needs a huge improvement or a total overhaul.
One more part of the game I am very concerned about is the faction diversity. Sure, they look different and have different troops... but that's it. Their inner structure is the same (yes, their lords and rulers have different names, yet, it changes little), the laws (e.g. policies) are always the same for all factions. TW could've at least given some unique policy or two for each faction, but alas. I've made a few suggestions on how to improve the overall immersion through some unique faction quests and all that, but I have doubts that it will be implemented at some stage.
That would be amazing indeed, every faction functions as some copy-paste oligarchy now with a basically figurehead monarch since the clans are the ones calling the shots always, from the feudal Vlandians to the republican Northern empire or the military dictatorship of the western empire, every single one of the factions works the exactly same way and we know from leftover files in the game that initially they had planned more distinct laws beetwen factions.
For that reason one of my favorite mods is succession that implements different succession laws for each faction like hereditary, elections, oligarchy etc and some are more stable than others so factions can be split into civil wars for the throne when the old ruler dies, it's amazing and add some much needed flavor to them.
Details like being able to have your fief produce something that's in short supply, having the price and availability of goods actually matter for purposes of prosperity and income, having recruitment reduce the number of peasants available to produce food and other products, and other basic economic concepts and mechanics seem to either be totally lacking or else broken by the constant destruction of caravans.
Having relations matter in terms of friendly lords agreeing to assist, or friendly lords in opposing factions at the very least not targeting your villages, would go a long way toward making diplomacy interesting. Having lords with personalities which affect how they act would make it less obvious that they're randomly generated non-entities.
Having wars fought for REASONS like contested border claims, competing products in nearby markets, or personal rivalries between lords would be a huge improvement over random short wars and random short-term peace declarations for no reason other than "the RNG rolled a 1".
Compared to those, having your band of trained soldiers surge forward in an undisciplined mob is no big deal.
Having relations matter in terms of friendly lords agreeing to assist, or friendly lords in opposing factions at the very least not targeting your villages, would go a long way toward making diplomacy interesting. Having lords with personalities which affect how they act would make it less obvious that they're randomly generated non-entities.
Having wars fought for REASONS like contested border claims, competing products in nearby markets, or personal rivalries between lords would be a huge improvement over random short wars and random short-term peace declarations for no reason other than "the RNG rolled a 1".
Compared to those, having your band of trained soldiers surge forward in an undisciplined mob is no big deal.
Fully agree with the sentiment and the mechanic displayed.
But I have no idea why this is labelled as a "complex" mechanic, perhaps it is more complex under the hood, but from a gameplay perspective it is not so.
The reason I point this out is because adding complex mechanics can be ignored because of the "danger" of making the game not welcoming to newcomers. But the comparison between vanilla battles and RBM's, isn't simple vs complex. Vanilla battles look buggy, unrefined, illogical, poorly paced, and unfun. Those are the reasons to add this mechanic to vanilla, not complexity.
If you are actually trying to argue for complex mechanics, this poll and thread aren't a good way to do it. Instead it gives an impression of the people who want the mechanic in the OP.
But I have no idea why this is labelled as a "complex" mechanic, perhaps it is more complex under the hood, but from a gameplay perspective it is not so.
The reason I point this out is because adding complex mechanics can be ignored because of the "danger" of making the game not welcoming to newcomers. But the comparison between vanilla battles and RBM's, isn't simple vs complex. Vanilla battles look buggy, unrefined, illogical, poorly paced, and unfun. Those are the reasons to add this mechanic to vanilla, not complexity.
If you are actually trying to argue for complex mechanics, this poll and thread aren't a good way to do it. Instead it gives an impression of the people who want the mechanic in the OP.
Philozoraptor
Sergeant
The word "complex" was chosen intentionally, and it applies to both under the hood complexity and observer complexity.
