Search results for query: *

  1. Horse kills?

    Well... Uhh... I can't but disagree again. First of all, killing the guy's horse isn't so much of a deal - it's often much easier than killing the warrior riding it. Also, it sort of balances things out that you get to steal kills too. Aim at the rider if you want experience!

    I'm sure it's annoying, but giving experience for killing a poor animal doesn't sound fair.
  2. Awesome game- thanks for going historical and not fantasy!

    All right, I think I'm done with this thread. Your attempts to prove the need of a dragon were quite amusing, but I see this "discussion" is getting absolutely nowhere.
  3. Make this an online game! (sometime)

    As the world is still very lacking, a lot of trouble could be saved by simply transforming this game into a MMORPG and letting the players populate the world with their guilds and factions.

    Despite the bad experiences that people have of WoWs and other games, I think this is begging to be made into an on-line game.
  4. Frustration to the max

    i want to have some idea where the best horses would show up

    I think that having to look for good equipment is part of the play. It's nice when you finally come by that reinforced coat of plates while you're looking for armour. If I could buy everything in one place, it wouldn't be half as exciting.

    However, it could be nice if there were some places that were known to produce good sets of armour, like a famous smithy, weapons, horses (perhaps a horse market?), bows, arrows, but these should be spread out all across the country. How they would work is that there would be an increased chance of finding something of a good quality in these places renown for their goods. They should not be made too powerful, so that the "going shopping" feature would not be lost.
  5. Have you noticed this?

    This is a thread about assholes that won't listen to the opinions of others.

    You seem so worked up that you have to have a few examples. Besides, what is this "listening to the opinions of others"? Is it backing down from your own opinions instead of reasoning them to other people? With so many individual suggestions and members around, there has to be voices for both yes and no on just about every topic. One has to be able to take differing opinions and discuss his own views!

    The other alternative is that the suggestions thread is full of suggestions from a to z and then everyone would just clap their hands and say: "Amazing, cool, great idea!" How smart would that be? How will it help anybody make any decisions?
  6. Awesome game- thanks for going historical and not fantasy!

    First of all: clean up your language, Worm. I can assure you that swearing will not help you bring home your point. On the contrary, it only makes you look immature.

    Secondly: A dragon does need a story - unless you make it an Easter Egg, in which case it is not worth the trouble in this phase of development.

    Thirdly: IMO the world needs more depth rather than creatures. The factions that exist must become more than just "groups of enemies". That's why I was brainstorming. At least somebody is, instead of whining about the lack of creature X. It's easy to implement more and more creatures until the game becomes D&D, but it takes skill to make a good, immersive gaming world. Also, how long do you fancy fighting that dragon until you learn to fight it the same way over and over again - just the way you learned to fight those guys on foot and on horses?

    And don't tell me it's just a dragon. It's a huge step from the apparent "realism" that is so captivating in M&B at the moment. Changing that just to implement one creature with no function or background story would be folly. From there, it's only a short road to spells and magic potions, like Dark Underlord proved.

    For more variety, look at the unconventional characters thread. If you're bored of riding around sticking people with a lance or shooting them down with mounted archery, then how about doing something different for a change? Don't blame the game if you lack imagination.
  7. Frustration to the max

    As a level 40 character it takes a lot of combat to gain any significant experience, so I attack groups of dark knights and sea raiders for high XP, preferably alone.

    As a result, I play dead in fields very, very often.

    Uh. Sounds like "I'm playing on Difficult, but the game is too hard. Make the game easier!"

    How about playing it on Easy?

    I don't think it's the game's fault if you want to go solo against the toughest guys in the game, and they beat you up. High rewards = high risk. Whether you want to take that risk is all up to you. If you want to commit suicide, go ahead.

    If you're feeling suicidal, and you want a back door in case things get too tough, enable quitting without saving!

    In other words, my opinion is that there should be no way to insure your weapons and armour, because it encourages suicidal actions.

    Actually, a way to do this already exists in the game: enabling quitting without saving.
  8. Your Most Unconventional Hero:Throwing Knives? Staffs?Rocks?

    Well, my unconventional hero is Crag, a barbarian with a club. He doesn't wear any armour, but I'm not sure if it's because he's been very unsuccessful or whether it's his style. :wink:

    If only an unconventional hero weren't easily tracked or spotted then
    it could be easier to move without backup but I suspect that my hero's going to need a horse and companions.

    Now there's an idea for a Stealth skill! Raising Stealth would make you hard to spot and track, unless you were in big company, in which case the effects of your stealth would be divided among your party. Stealthy characters would have little use of their skills in big groups, but then alone they could pretty much choose their battles.
  9. Awesome game- thanks for going historical and not fantasy!

    Regardless of how much history we go after I think we're still going to have me killing loads of Vaeg'ers or Swads. If they could write a good enough rival that'd be fun.

    This is not at all what you have been insisting upon earlier. Unless you mean a good enough, fantastical rival (evil overlord, dragon, daemon, squid man).

    You're saying that there are only two factions? Let's take a look at those that already exist:

    Vaegir:
    Easterners / Byzantines rarely seen in other games. Very nice.

    Swadians:
    The basic European faction. Can't live without 'em.

    River Pirates, Forest Bandits, Mountain Bandits, Steppe Bandits:
    What is a medieval world without bandits? It's nice that some of them are rather powerful.

    Sea Pirates:
    Men of the North. A refreshing change after beating up the other pirate/bandit groups. They bring a lot of good looking equipment into the game.

    Manhunters:
    Organized, independent bounty hunters specializing in human trade. The slaver faction. That's something new!

    Black Khergits:
    IMO, these have a lot of potential. Along with the Steppe Bandits, they could be the Golden Horde of M&B and as such make an excellent enemy to all established civilization. Think Scourge of God.

    Dark Hunters:
    IMO, these guys should go back to D&D. What they need is a name change and a reasonable goal. At the moment they're just being evil for evil's sake.

    --

    What more could there be? I'm in a bit of a hurry so I will do a quick brainstorming.

    First of all, at least according to the constable in Zendar, there is a god. In that case there could be a religious faction, the church. Anything from pilgrims to crusaders could be implemented through a church faction. Of course, pilgrims and crusaders would have to have somebody to fight against, perhaps nomads, although it would be a small world if every corner of the earth was represented, or then they might be crusading against local pagans.

    Thus, we could have "barbarians" still stuck in the dark age somewhere in the wilderness, away from civilization. These could be the pagan faction.

    The church could be split into two or more different sects, each with different interpretations of their religion. One of these could easily be branded heretic - enter the inquisition!

    What more? Organized urban crime lords, militarily powerful organized trading factions (think Hansa League), rebels, usurpers, conspirators, an army of escaped slaves (Spartacus), perhaps even a weird cult worshipping gods from the dark age (no, no daemon summoning is necessary)... The possibilities are endless! And no, no dragon is necessary for this game world to become exciting. At the moment it's bland, but the potential for it to become a believable and dynamic world is already there.
  10. Hand to Hand fighting?

    Well, the link you provided gives more reasons to kick low, even though it does introduce the roundhouse kick into the picture. However, Gene is not talking about fighting in armour, where maintaining your balance and footing at all times is a matter of life and death, but his focus seems to be on rapier techniques.

    So, like I previously stated, kicks should do little damage but open a window of opportunity similarly to barging into somebody with your horse, or, indeed, by breaking their shield.
  11. Reduce "Knock Back" affect - perhaps with a skill?

    It frustrates the hell out of me to see "speed of attack" play such a far superior role to strength. I've just been beaten up too many times by 3 or more peasants (admittedly I've been doing a lot of fights with them lately to test some theories out). While I don't mind getting beaten up - in a bizarre way that's the great thing about the game - I do get seriously pissed that I can't even get one lousy swing in!

    I just think "something" needs to be done about it. Either a skill or even a difficulty setting that you can tweak akin to the damage or battle size settings.

    Take a look at the Hand to Hand Combat thread. I think implementing quick secondary attacks could help to solve your dilemma. Also, if you're using two-handed weapons, you would in reality have a spare hand for grabbing and punching because your secondary hand doesn't have to be glued to the shaft of your sword all the time.

    These quick secondary attacks could do very little damage but function similarly to a collision with a horse in that it would interrupt any attacks. Of course, you'd have to be close to launch these secondary attacks, but because these attacks would be natural, they wouldn't be the slaves of attack speed like melee weapons are.

    As to strength being more important than speed in medieval combat, I disagree. Technique is much more important than brawn. A person who knows how to use the lever of a sword to his advantage, hit with the correct part of the sword (where the power is centered), time his attacks perfectly, and harness the entire power of his body will hit much, much harder than a person with a lot of strength who is lacking in technique. This is the first thing you learn when you start practising with the sword - or any other martial arts for that matter.

    Power comes from the earth, from the twisting movement of the body, not from upper body muscles. Swordplay is all about lever, timing and the body twist (volto stabile).

    It may be frustrating, but it's the truth. OK, admittedly the peasants you mentioned wouldn't know a thing about correct techniques, but I wanted to educate a little.
  12. Hand to Hand fighting?

    While I think that a complete system for Unarmed combat is a bit too much for this game - after all, the swordplay isn't realistic either - I do agree that a quick attack button would be useful. This would also help in the Knockback dilemma. If you are attacked by a multitude of people, you could still place a few quick jabs here and there and perhaps get a moment's relief from their attacks.

    These quick attacks could be attacks with the shaft of the weapon, the pommel or even the crossguard of a sword, or secondary attacks such as an attack with a shield, fist, elbow, knee (even headbutt)... A common factor to all of these would be the fact that they are all short-ranged, quick attacks that do little damage but can buy you some time. Attacks could be randomized similarly to existing melee attacks.

    I do not fancy implementing karate or other martial arts, or kicking people in the chest. Like I said before, kicking high in armour is very dangerous - to yourself!
  13. Necromancers?

    Wait, you know that DarkLord went off to a diatribe where he tried to illustrate a huge ripple effect where anything fantasy at all leads to Magic Missiles and Heal Potions, right?

    I think he had a very good point there. If there's a dragon, it needs to be vanquished. To vanquish a dragon, you need more than muscle. This is where magical items and healing potions usually step in.

    Well, it would breaks the illusion for the people who are imagining themselves as a character in historical times. Though I think being able to be a female warrior breaks that illusion just as much, let's not fool ourselves.

    That's one sorry counter-argument. Tolkien had a female warrior yet he didn't have mecha stomping on the Uruk-Hai. Why is that? Why is Eowyn a good plot item, while mecha were not? Just because something is not realistic / historical doesn't mean that it has to go 100% looney in fantastical elements.

    Yeah, I think it's getting to the point where it's going to be the game that includes nothing if anyone listens to you guys.

    I disagree. I have many exciting (this is a matter of perspective, of course) ideas for this game. Not one of them is a dragon, though. I am not a Beta purist, who says that the game is now perfect and that every change is for the worse, just because I don't want to increase the number of fantasy elements in the game.
  14. Awesome game- thanks for going historical and not fantasy!

    Yeah, and that's what the History channel is for. I just don't believe a purely historic game is going to translate well to an action game.

    Okay. In that case I completely disagree with you. I think history is full of interesting and exciting stories that would make enormously entertaining video games on their own, without a flying, dragon-breathing lizard.

    Because someone is going to get bored of the story arc that (at the current level of development I am aware of) can only result of you killing enemy units, getting items, or knocking out enemy units and enslaving them.

    Curiously enough, what you just described is the heart and soul of all the other CRPGs with dragons, witches and whatnot: killing enemy units / monsters / evil overlords and getting their stuff. M&B differs in that you can knock out enemy units and enslave them.

    Okay, so you'll get bored without there being a dragon. I couldn't really care less. There are dozens of games for you with magic and monsters.
  15. Tell us about your character!

    Let's stay on topic, GreenKnight. This is a sticky thread.

    Indeed, there is no crime. I don't really care if you cheat your head off, but I would never applaud anybody for cheating. That's all I have to say. If you want to continue this discussion, take it to another thread, please.
  16. Necromancers?

    Let's not turn this into a political thread. Other forums are full of that.

    Can you just tell me to **** off, rather then writing all this ****? Honestly you piece of garbage, can you just insult my mother because this "OMG I HATE FANTASY [-----------------------------------------------------------------] <-that much" diatribe has almost as much worth.

    Ah, the first one to lose his nerve often loses the discussion. You tell other people that they can't prove that you're wrong, yet you use any means at hand to try and prove them wrong. It's sad.

    The one dragon you long for could totally break the illusion of a real, living world. Why didn't Tolkien include a huge robot in his stories, just because titans/mecha are k00l? Because it would've destroyed the believability of his story. IMO, even one dragon can totally upset the balance in a similar way to the immense robot smashing down the gates of Golotha with laser and missile.

    That is why everything that is not on par with the elements that already exist in the world needs to be considered carefully. And that is why there should be a reason for any deviations of style. At the moment, M&B does not look like a game that should include dragons. Not even the one Grendel.
  17. Awesome game- thanks for going historical and not fantasy!

    Ming, this is the discussion forum. That means that we can discuss here, and not just idly wait for another version to appear. I don't suppose in the least bit that Armagan is going to choose one from the suggestions written here, but a vivid discussion might provide him with some ideas.

    Yeah aztec samurais riding persain war elephants.

    Now that's just ridiculous. Hey, I wasn't the one who suggested trolls and dragons... Besides, I don't need samurais, I get enough kicks from a seemingly realistic medieval "Europe".

    it's just a freaking dragon

    Yes but why is it there? If there's something as fantastical as a dragon, I would like to know why. Just because classic fantasy has dragons terrorizing lands? I wonder if the dragon has read any classic fantasy?

    Hey, classic fantasy also has gnomes and leprechauns and other horrors. Let's implement them too! Hey, it's just one freakin' Snow White.
  18. Necromancers?

    You're just taking the polar opposite of current fantasy games simply because you thought they were bad, so the opposite just *has* to be good right?

    Wrong. I've been playing (pen & paper) role-playing games for years and years, and my gaming style has evolved into one that favours low fantasy. I just don't get any kicks out of magic and dragons anymore. I get a lot more out of interaction between people and different cultures and moralities instead of ready-made racial conflicts.

    Besides, there are already dozens of games with magic and dragons, but very few without them. So why should this have to be like the majority of CRPGs?
  19. what about adding an ultra-rare armor and weapons class...

    in a game like mount and blade, like in real life, the weapon doesnt matter one bit.

    Oh OK, then that must be the reason why the military has not in the least bit tried to invent new weapons and armour...
  20. Awesome game- thanks for going historical and not fantasy!

    First of all, Worm, don't tell me when I'm spazzing out or acting insane. I think we can continue this discussion without degrading eachother.

    Exactly! I just cannot see how this game is going to become more than a Taipan! remake if they don't add new content. Any different nationality or culture is going to feel like Dark Riders dressed up in different armor, you'll go about the fights the same way and thats that. Persain war elephants and things like that could be cool, I just don't know how much more there is down that road to where you are milking everything historical, war dogs, seige weapons, so on and so forth.

    Frankly, I can't see how green hued Dark Riders dressed in furs or Dark Riders with squids for heads will make it any more different... Unless you want spells and miraculous effects, at which point I stand up and cry: "Halt! This is not the way to go!"

    And hey, why should we not milk everything historical, and milk everything fantastical instead? At least the historical cow still has fresh milk in it.

    Don't get excited, just because I told you that even fantasy can be done in style, if it's done with moderation. I still don't want to see your Dragonmount & Flameblade. I see no place for dragons in this game, and putting one as a "final boss" would be silly to say the least. And why oh why does every game have to end in a world-saving scenario?
Back
Top Bottom