Just a note, this ambush system seems easy to implement and probably will add gameplay fun but only downside is it can make catching and raiding caravans (also weak enemy parties, if player make camp near enemy town’s gates) too easy.
Cheers and I agree. I was planning to add this as a precaution actually in the demo - limiting ambushing too close to outside of towns is required. I think setting this is fairly easy as well.
Apart from that, overall mechanics require some form of balancing indeed. I just wanted to show some POC, since I know some people in TW don't like to think abstract and wants to see some visual stuff to have a better understanding (You surely know what I mean )
Ambush success and AI "noticing chance" of ambushed parties can be adjusted based on soldier count and skills. For example, if you are not able to ambush 40 people caravan with 60 people unless you are too good at scouting and roguery skills, then it's not very useful for players and wouldn't be too easy. But if you can ambush 40 people caravan with 20 people, then defending army/caravan can have better odds, and player now forced to have better understanding of ambushing ( taking care of skills he/she has, units in the army - archers are better etc )
But ambushes are all about the risk of loosing and I am afraid that until TW makes loosing a battle by a player more interesting, an ambush mechanic, even if it is fun on its own, will not be something that many of us will be using.
I get what you are coming at, but I think this really depends on the situations which player will be in. For example, it could be that you enjoy ambushing Vlandian parties as Battanian because, on open-field, their cavalry can slash your archers easily. So now with ambushing, you are actually making life way harder for them in forested areas, as well as increasing your chances to win a battle in an unfavored situation. And in another scenario, as Vlandian, now you also have to invest in your scouting skills to avoid getting ambushed by enemy parties while you are aiming to conquer the harsh forested terrain of Battania. If we have to set a gameplay-lifespan range to this feature, I would say it's better to fit for mid-game where you are not too powerful or too weak. But it's also not intrusive since you can also choose not to use it completely as well.
lol again, as a player, I'm giving a Suggestion in the Suggestion subsection.
Also, I don't have to continue mod for a game that is not "what I want". 99% of the player base is giving ideas to shape the game in EA state since this is why we have EA state. And since TW says they want suggestions, I'm giving one like a normal person. Just because I know how internally the company works and how the codewise game works, doesn't mean I can't suggest anything. Simple enough for you?
I can do whatever I want with my code and my effort. I don't have to give my code to anyone or I don't have any obligation to make it open-source. Apart from toxic dudes both from the player community and modding, the rest of the people are dealing quite fine with this. If you have a problem with that, you have to deal with it.
Sinematik olayı temelde güzel olsa da üçüncü kez gördükten sonra sıkmaya başlar diye düşünüyorum. Özellikle bu tarz bir savaşta. Ama denildiği gibi Battle Terrain daha gelmeden bu özellik düşünülürse haritalar buna göre tasarlanabilir ve daha güzel sonuçlar ortaya çıkabilir. Bu tabi çok büyük bir varsayım.
Aslında çoktan entegre ettim. Orada başarı oranın bunlara göre belirleniyor. Aynı zamanda mesela A lordunun bu özellikler senden daha iyiyse sen pusuya yatmış olsan bile seni görüp sana saldırabiliyor ama bu sefer ava giden avlanır durumu olduğu için senin askerlerinin morali bozuk başlıyorsun savaşa vs. Bir yerlere tuzak kurmadan önce iki kere düşünmeni de sağlıyor tabi bu tarz küçük eklentiler. Belki baskına getireceğin asker sayısını falan da ayarlayabilir bu özellikler - elbette bunların hepsi olur da bu tarz bir şey yapılırsa EA içinde dengelenir zaten.
Yeah... no. That's exactly the opposite of what I'm trying to do. I want this to be in native game, as a player.
With this thread, I'm stating the facts that I see from the gameplay and implementation perspective.
- It's not super-complicated as a feature.
- It's not complicated as code.
- It's not interfering with the current game style people have or not forcing them to use this when it's implemented (unlike hideouts btw you have to clear them out, you have no other way).
It's simply creating a new battle style, and adding some value to certain perks.
- Similar feature was already been promised in blogs/pre-release materials, it's not a "surprise" feature for them.
- It's clearly fun - or at least me and several other people are finding this fun.
If they still say no, I would very much like to know why. If they don't even want to explain that, well, nothing I can do about that.
That being said I'm sure @Dejan would be at least kind enough to bring this suggestion to the table
Actually, this is one of the few examples where handcrafted maps can work out better. Currently, I'm picking camp positions and "transit"positions procedurally since there are no "handmade" camp position indicators or path for armies to move. If they can add spawn positions for ambushers and defenders, along with camp/path positions , overall implementation would be x3 times easier. And it would feel better because now you would have more logical moving paths for armies and camps.
If you can see my last video, you would expect army to move in the open path where there are no mountains and/or no forests, but I'm simply drawing a direct line and it's leading them to go to forest path even though map isn't designed for direct paths but more curved path. If this was added in map making process, it would look way better.
Türkçe forumdaki fikirler pek sallanmıyor, forum yapısı uygun değil yüksek ihtimalle bu yüzden.
Ama eğer Pusu/Tuzak mekaniği ve Kamp mekaniği nasıl olur diye düşündüyseniz geçenlerde bunu göstermek için küçük bir demo hazırladım.
Bu kamp halindeki düşmana baskın anı
Bu da gece ve öğle versiyonu - mantık aynı ama ordu sayıları farklı
Bu da uygun adımda belli bir sütun düzeninde hareket halindeki orduya saldırı
İkinci videoda daha belirgin ama acayip bir FPS düşüşü yaşadım başlarda, onun sebebi de High ayarlarda 400 kişilik ordu için pek güçlü olmaması bilgisayarımın. Üstüne bir de video kaydı yaparken iyice CPUya güç biniyor. Bir de tabi meşale ve bayrak eklenince iyice şenlendi FPS düşüşü.
Her şeyi yaklaşık 4 saatte yaptım, bu yüzden mükemmel değil ama genel fikri test etmek çok eğlenceli bence. Zamanında buna eğlenceli değil demiş olmaları absürt geliyor.
Temelde yaptığım şey kamp ve pusu mekaniği eklemek. Kamp mekaniği, oyuncuların birliklerini sabit durmaya zorluyor ama aynı zamanda askerlerini eğitmelerine izin verecek. Yani kamp konumu alarak üst seviye askerleriniz alt seviye askerlerinizi eğitip onların seviye atlamasını sağlayabilir. Bu tabi sizi sabit durmaya zorlayacak haliyle her zaman yapmak isteyeceğiniz bir şey değil.
Pusu ise daha farklı. Pusuda, oyuncular diğer düşman taraflar için bir pusu ortamı kurabilirler. Bu pusunun başarısı, kişinin niteliklere ve becerilere bağlı. Başarılı bir pusudan sonra, düşman ordusunun kampına saldırabilir ve sayıca üstün olmasanız bile kazanabilirsiniz.
Belirli koşullara (çömelme, gece, orduya olan mesafe ve görüş alanı vs) bağlı olarak sizi savaş alanında kolayca görebilirler veya belki de çok geç olduğunda birliklerinizi görebilirler. Fark edilmediğiniz sürece birliklerinizin savaş alanında olduğunun farkına varmayacaklar ve dağınık konumlarına devam edecekler. Bu süreçte oyun oynayan, yatan, uyuyan, uzanan, sarhoş olan, çevreyi denetleyen asker animasyonları göreceksiniz. Tüm "kamplar" otomatik olarak oluşturulur, bu nedenle içerik, birlik kültürü ve sayımı için rastgele ve dinamiktir (örneğin, yağmacıların dış koruma duvarları olmaz) ve tüm arazilerde oluşturulabilir. Kışın kış kampları ve yazın yaz kampları görebilirsiniz. Diğer pusu ise, ordu ilerleme halindeyken saldırmak. Diğer tüm mekanikler burada da geçerli fakat buradaki önemli olay, düşman birlikleri siz saldırana veya görünene kadar sizin nerede olduğunuzu bilmemesi. Haliyle size karşı savaş pozisyonu alamayacak ve sütun halinde karışık askerler ile ilerlemeye devam edecek. Siz farkedildikten sonra dalga dalga tüm birlikler sizin nerede olduğunuzu bilecek ve normal savaş pozisyonu almaya başlayacak fakat sizin yeteneklerinize göre çok geç kalmış olabilirler.
Google Translate iyi çeviriyor gibi.
Ana kısmın kopyala yapıştır kısmını şuraya atıyorum. Oyun EA sürecindeyken belki fikirleri sallarlar, en azından yıllar önce söyledikleri özelliği eklemeye sıcak bakarlar diye düşünüyorum. Bu özelliğin oyun içine rahatça entegre edilebilir olduğunu daha nasıl anlatabilirim bir fikrim yok. TWnin sallayacağını sanmıyorum ama küçük bir ihtimal olduğunu düşünüyorum.
Oyuncunun kampanya haritasında kamp kurmasını sağlar. Bu, kampanya haritasında da bir kamp çadırı gösterir. Kamp yapmak, erişemediğiniz belirli özelliklere erişmenizi sağlar (kamp bölümü henüz demo videolarında uygulanmadı)
- Birliklerinizi eğitin: Bu, birliklerinizi ya eğitim alanında onlarla birlikte eğitim alarak ya da sadece kendilerini eğitmelerine izin vererek eğitmenize olanak tanır (en üst seviyeler sadece alt seviyeleri eğitebilir. Herkes aynı seviyedeyse, bu çok etkili olmayacak)
- Dinlenme: Bu, dinlendikleri için parti moralini artıracaktır. Eğer bir ordudaysanız, bu aynı zamanda uyumu da artırmalıdır, böylece uzun mesafeli kuşatmalar/savaşlar yapmayı hedefliyorsanız durma ihtiyacı hissedeceksiniz.
- Pusuya Hazırlanın: Bu, pusu hazırlığını başlatır. Buna daha sonra geleceğim.
Dezavantajı: Durağan olacaksınız, diğer taraflara maruz kalacaksınız. "Kampı toplama/sökme" süresini (2-3 oyun saati) eklemek de kamp spam'lerini caydırmaya yardımcı olabilir.
AI ayrıca kamp yapabilir mi? Demo videolarında bunu yapamıyorlar. Ancak bir araya getirilmiş orduların sahip oldukları uyum temelinde bunu yapmalarının mantıklı olacağını düşünüyorum. Ordular aslında yolda zaman harcamadan uzun mesafeler gidemediği için bu aynı zamanda kartopu için bir sınır koyar.
Videolardaki ana içerik budur. Aklımdaki pusu fikrinin iki tarafı olmasına rağmen - videolar sadece bir tarafı gösteriyor - düşman tarafı kamp yaparken ve hazırlıksız olarak pusuya düşürüyor. Bir pusu planı oluşturduğunuzda, yakınlarda herhangi bir düşman taraf varsa Saldırı'nın etkinleştirildiğini görebileceğiniz bir aralık vardır. Bunlardan birine saldırmak istediğinizi düşünüyorsanız, tek yapmanız gereken saldırıya tıklayıp partiyi seçmek. Bu pusunun başarısı, niteliklere ve becerilere bağlıdır. Pusu konumundayken, SADECE belirli becerileriniz parti liderinden daha iyiyse, düşman taraflara görünmez olursunuz. Bu, X karakterinin sizi görebileceği ve yetenekleri sizinkinden daha iyiyse, pusuya düşürülseniz bile size doğrudan saldırabileceği anlamına gelir. Bunun sizin için kötü yanı, kurulumunuzu anında sökemezsiniz çünkü zaman alır, bu nedenle AI sizi görür ve size doğru koşarsa, bir avcı avlanabilir. Ancak başarılı bir pusuda düşman ordusunun kampına saldırabilir ve sayıca üstün olsanız bile kazanabilirsiniz. Normal bir savaş alanı haritası açar. Ancak bu haritada, normal savaştan farklı olarak, konumunuzdan ve niyetlerinizden habersiz olacaklar. Belirli koşullara (çömelme, gece, mesafe ve görüş) bağlı olarak sizi savaş alanında kolayca görebilirler veya çok geç olduğunda birliklerinizi görebilirler. Tespit edilmezken birliklerinizin savaş alanında olduğunun farkına varmayacaklar ve düzensiz pozisyonlarına devam edecekler (uyumak, oyun oynamak, sarhoş olmak, yerde yatmak ve keşif yapmak vb.)
Tüm "kamplar" otomatik olarak oluşturulur, bu nedenle içerik, birlik kültürü ve sayımı için rastgele ve dinamiktir (örneğin, yağmacıların dış çitleri olmaz) ve tüm arazilerde - kar, çöl, orman - oluşturulabilir. Ayrıca kullandıkları öğeler açısından kültüre özgüdürler ve bu fikir daha kültüre özgü şeylerle genişletilebilir (kampları nasıl kurdukları, yapı şekilleri vb.)
Oyunun gizli tarafını hissedebileceğiniz yeni bir mekanik.
Pusuya düşürülen düşmanlar daha düşük morale sahip olacak - kaçmaya daha hevesli.
Pusuya düşürülen düşmanlar düzensiz bir durumda olacak ve birlik bütünlüğüne sahip olmayacaklar.
Süvari başlangıçta yaya olacak (bu, demo videoda düzgün bir şekilde uygulanmadı)
Pusuda başarısız olabilirsiniz, bu da aşırı güçlü bir düşmanla savaşmanızı sağlayacaktır. Ve askerleriniz düşük moralle başlayanlar olacaktır.
İnşaat ve demontaj zaman alır. Becerileriniz kötüyse, sizi tespit edip avlayabilirler.
Pusu durumunda gizlenmeyi önlemek için fazladan yiyecek tüketimi ekleyebilir
AI da pusu kurabilir mi? Evet. Demo versiyonunda, bir POC olduğu için tam olarak uygulanmadı, ancak teoride AI aynı şeyi yapabilir. Ordudayken bunu yapmak mümkün olmamalı. Pusu, yapay zekaya ekstra özellikler/beceriler ekleyebilir ve/veya onlar tarafından kararlaştırılabilir.
Varyasyonlar: Demoda sadece kamp pusu ekledim, ancak düşman tarafının askerlerimizi savaş alanında tespit edene kadar veya biz saldırı. Bunu öğlen yapsak daha iyi olur ve kamp senaryosu gece/sabah erken/gündüz geç saatlerde kullanılabilir.
I think you are being too forgiving about this.
How TW decided to implement ambushes is already a "simplification" because the overall idea of being able to ambush/ambushed is out there, suggested by players for a long time ago, so it's known. Also Total War implemented it ages ago and working fine. So someone suggested this to TW, and TW said "Oh okay, this can be tricky, you know what, let's make it less complicated, we already have hideouts, lets use same logic" and then they failed to make it fun or failed to make it work at all and simply abandoned the idea. Well this, unfortunately, is laziness. Especially now no one ever mentions ambushes, it gives me the feeling that they completely removed this feature from their plans.
One thing I can congratulate TW on is "behavior" logic. These behaviors ( whether it's mission or campaign behaviors) grant great flexibility to whoever is writing the code. As you can see, I created a total of 3 behaviors, one for the campaign to check states and logic on ambushes, 2, one for camp ambush and one for on transit ambush. Anyone in TW can do the same, even use the same code that I wrote easily. They are plug-in-play type of code. And a single guy can do that. Literally, task a single person in TW and he/she can write the same stuff ( and in a better way since she/he will have more resources ). Why they are not doing? I don't know. What are they doing if not this? I also don't know. It looks like only a handful of people are actually working on TW to be honest.
One might say "Hey bloc you did this demo but it's not finished, TW needs a lot of testing" and I would say "Show me one feature that they added and worked perfectly that they didn't patched later on". You can't show such an example, it doesn't exist. And this is fine. It's exactly why we have EA. They have to add ideas, try it out, fix it, shape it until it's bug-free. We all know they won't add ambushes or other mechanics into the game after EA is over.
And this is related to what I'm saying above. With behavior logic, it's very easy to create them. Each developer can create their own "behaviors" for these missions, and they can all be added into the game. Although I'm fine with just having normal ambush to be fair, I have doubts that even this will be implemented.
I think this can be fixed on their end easily. But normally it's not as drastic as it looks in the video. The reason why in the video it's dropping fps like crazy is that, there are particle effects for many soldiers because of the torches, and also physic simulations because of banners + my pc isn't a good benchmark to test 400 soldiers on high settings with fairly HD resolution while recording.
Probably will be the last video since I made my point clear for everyone and TW. Rest is up to TW to decide whether they implement it or not. I can even provide the code if they want, it's sketchy but essentially it's just two mission controllers for each ( camp and transit ) which they can use.
I like the volume of that column, however would a group logic be possible? I mean, several rectangular/square formations of agents distributed by troop types in a row and doing the nokia snake. For example: cavalry>>>>infantry>>>>ranged>>>>infantry>>>>cavalry.
That logic would create issues. Because cavalry is always faster than infantry and when I assign them to move position X, they are rushing to that location which is very weird and there is no clear way to cool their speed off as far as I can see ( because Agent class-wise mount and rider are different entities ) But instead I assigned a cavalry to X amount of foot soldiers so that they can be under control of sergeant + enemy not being on formation grants some chance for player to attack.
I also wonder if there is any possibility to reduce "view range" while the target formation is advancing before the attacking position is compromised for the first time. We know that Taleworlds removed the variables that conditioned projectile shooting range to light/weather dependent vision (source). How would this be the case if the player was the ambushed?
It's possible yes. I randomly set it to some value in the beginning and this gets reduced based on - if soldier on horseback ( better vision ) , if attacker party is sneaking/crouching, if sun is set. But if they suddenly get attacked by arrows, then that particular section starts the relay of "message" so that after a certain while everyone gets alerted.
After the deployment phase, it's just the same as how you would lead the battle. I'm showing it without a horse to make it immersive but the player can bring a horse to ambush, along with his horseman. So that part is still there. I think in my first video I wasn't using RTS but only normal camera view. It's still possible to position your units. RTS gives more advantage ofc.
Well now I have something for you and @Piconi - I fixed a bunch of stuff about formations and marching today in my free time.
I'm dropping two videos for you. I'm also explaining both. One of the bigger battles while the other one is small-ambush.
This is another trial for the on-transit ambush. I fixed a bunch of column order and decisions making things. Now each cavalry chaperoning certain units, in big armies looks better because it gives a feeling of chaos caused by marching and order enforced by sergeants.
This is another trial for the on-transit ambush. I fixed a bunch of column order and decisions making things. Extreme FPS drop is happening because I overestimated my GPU power and added too many troops and used torch/banner mod. I also noticed that while soldiers are outside of the boundary, pathfinding is sucking CPU( you will realize that FPS drop is more tolerable after a few seconds when soldiers march into the scene)
I attacked this party by knowing that I was going to get crashed. So don't say anything about that
I didn't know they existed actually, I don't have Modding Tools installed. But I tried it today and apparently they are not created as prefab but only mesh which is causing problems. They are from old_icons where everything was designed in Warband-way ( icon per type )
I'd be interested to know, if your ambush mechanic and a potential extension of it to ai vs ai impacts campaign map performance. Given it's clearly fun, the only other reasonable objection would be re optimisation given Bannerlord's very low minimum pc spec and impending console port.
Both battle and campaign-wise, there is no performance impact. Basically for AI vs AI case, they will lay out their ambush and stay hidden, and while they are ambushing, other parties won't see them ( like how it's happening for player at the moment ) and they will attack to close-by parties, rest is normal AI vs AI battle mechanic ( although simulation will favor the ambusher )
I will be blunt, I think the only reason to call this feature "not fun" should be for covering up laziness. It's fun, it's a different mechanic to already existing features, it's not groundbreaking(although I'm sure people would drop their pants if TW was doing it because people even tears fell down for small features) but it's a new playstyle for players, it's a win for everyone, But all these will need time to implement and they simply don't want to do that, because, well, they are lazy or/and because already working in tortoise pace.
I mean, I'm doing same stuff with 0 know-how from actual developers yet I'm able to demo something. TW have more resources on their hand, example: developer who will develop this stuff will know whom to ask how spawning works but in my case I have to go through un-optimized poorly written architecture to see it. I also don't know if they already wrote helper functions for things that I do. TW dev would know that and save quite a lot of time from his/her development time.
I created a really sloppy implementation of "ambush while marching" logic. Not exactly a sweet on transit like you want @Terco_Viejo but does the trick if you wait awhile to see enemy forms the marching order.
I had to rewrite some of the spawning logic and area calculations, for some reason soldier management, moving people from point X to Y isn't that easy - still idea is very fun to explore. Although it's not clear in the video, I actually implemented a message-delay system, meaning that when marching line becomes too long for big armies, head and tail will not immediately know that they had been attacked and will continue to move forward. After 16 seconds ( 8 seconds each ) entire line will be hostile and trying to organize and take their battle formations.
Reason why they are piling up in the spawn is that I'm ordering them to form a line while marching to keep the cohesion but they designed this formation in a way that everyone gets a magic number and waits for the person in-front of him, which creates a "collider" traffic jam. And if I command them not to form a line, then it looks a like scene from GoT where everyone walks like whitewalkers. ( could be useful for those mods though )
While implementing I realized that they left some code pieces for the previous ambush as well. Literally something called AmbushMissionController or something obviously similar.
It appears to be that they designed that one in a very static manner. It's heavily relying on the scene. But they have some interesting stuff, like ambushers are on the high-ground and throwing boulders ( or rolling boulders not clear ) to passing army. I think it's a static scene like bandit hideouts, where you can take only a portion of your units. And based on what they said in blogs ages ago, I think they had a design where chokeholds/ambush places are already preset in the campaign map which you could go and lay out and ambush.
That's actually the forest bandit hideout icon. Your ambush takes icon of the terrain you are sitting on ( desert bandit hideout mapicon for desert etc )
Thanks to others as well. I also want to see something like that in the game and that's why I wanted to show how doable and actually a good mechanic for players. Even if we won't have it, at least I would like to know that. @Dejan is ambush mechanic in "Nah we are not gonna do it" state or is there a slight chance that we can see it in 2045 (not giving dates just an approximation )?
I'm 99% sure that TW will choose to ignore this idea. But I want to say my bit about this since I had quite a lot of fun while experimenting with it. Let me know what you also think. Also I know some modders might want to add something like this, so perhaps it can be a proof-of-concept.
It could be the case that they are planning to sell certain signs/symbols with currency ( real or in-game currency ) in MP but it's very unlikely that they disabled copy-paste in SP version of banner editor for this purpose.
So I don't think this is the reason why they removed it from SP. They did it most likely because of other issues.
Removing copy paste because it's causing constant crashing is one thing. Normal companies would fix that but TW enjoys taking away customizability ( as we saw in the battle size slider ) rather than fixing stuff and another reason is probably related to how they implemented clan defections. When you have multiple layers, color change is going wild and causing a lot of unwanted effects on uniforms and a lot of other stuff causing banners to look like crap. @Piconi will know what I'm talking about.
I think this last reason is also why they removed the old banner editor as well. It's sad because Old Banner Editor was actually a beast ( not talking about the EA version, Devs know what I'm talking about ) It would be really nice if they bring it back along with this mysterious banner update they are hyping about.
Ah, I see. That's actually one of the places the issue happened to me the most, so maybe it was fixed but something broke it again later? And I actually never thought about that difference before, that could be it, but I feel like the AI in Bannerlord is also just incredibly dumb so it makes the situation even worse. Not being able to control really dumb AI will undoubtedly create these problems.
I didn't check AI side of sieges or battles. Someone with more knowledge can shed a light on that but I think the main reason why they are acting dumb is "Event signalling" and "queueing" logic messed up in Bannerlord.
In Warband, by design, sieges were easier. Everything was a ramp. And this issue I showed in Reyvadin was most likely happening because of poor pathfinding that happened because of navigation meshes were broken or misplaced. This could be fixed by simply changing some structures in the town. As far as AI concern, attacking someone on the walls wasn't so different than attacking someone in an open field because in both cases it's going from point A to B without using any tool.
In siege towers, they had "goals" and they were always standing next to siege tower until siege tower signals troop AI that "everything is done and deployed" and then they were simply attacking like normal soldiers in a ramp-ladder case.
There was no battering ram or whatsoever, so it was either siege tower or ladders in Warband. Hence this also removes issues like "stupid AI waits behind gates while my troops already took over the walls" - because in Warband, all they have to hold is walls.
And since initially queue logic was messed up in Bannerlord, it was causing troops to do nothing and/or not being able to lift ladders up. I think in 1.6.1 this ladder queue issue is now resolved but as OP shows siege tower issue still stands. My wild guess is that AI treats siege tower as a single entity and that's why it thinks as if it's a normal ladder while in fact its a tower with 3 ladders . I think in a couple of updates they can fix this too. They should still find a proper signalling logic for those units waiting behind the gate when walls are taken over though.
That's only you, though. Not everyone is working with the same principles. You can, however, enforce your entire team to do this if you define that as DoD. Otherwise, you have to be a positive thinker to assume that ~50 devs from different backgrounds will do it exactly how you wanted.
I agree that it increases the readability as well and not only for mods since you will now know the main purpose of the function you are working on if it comes to a point where you need to change something. But it could be that they never needed this before as a team and/or perhaps comments inside functions are enough for the team.
If you take a look at the code, you will also see that some functions and classes are not even used anywhere and just floating dead-code pieces. Even this somewhat gives an idea about current code-quality they have. But I think this is normal. Normal in sense of "if you use your shoes too often, it will tear down, it's normal" type of normal. Because they changed this exact codebase throughout the 8 years continuously and most likely without any properly defined guidelines.
Anyway, I don't want to go too off-topic here. You can request this as a suggestion in the modding section. And for the answer to your main question, you should occasionally check TW's documentation to see if they updated it.
I mean in (vanilla) Warband, they'd occasionally get stuck on ladders. It wasn't nearly as bad as Bannerlord, but it happened to me enough times that I noticed it. Was I the only one that experienced that?
I honestly don't remember I ever experience that or perhaps it was so slight that I never bother with it as I did in Bannerlord. Just because I didn't doesn't mean it wasn't there, a quick search yielded some results that they had this issue in certain locations (https://forums.taleworlds.com/index.php?threads/soldiers-stuck-at-ladder-in-siege-event.105613/ ) in the April 2010 version of Warband ( which is initial I guess since it launched on March 30 )
Perhaps follow-up updates fixed the issue. However, being able to actually "control" your troops might also be the reason why I never notice that in Warband because I give commands quite frequently and this probably changed AI behavior. In Bannerlord they are just doing random stuff and ignoring you as commander.
I don't have the exact code change but I believe the issue started to happen after they introduced the budget limit for player parties which probably started to affect indirectly their other clans. They most likely don't have a limit by default hence they continue recruiting more people even though they don't have gold to pay their wages.
Because you see that they are recruiting more people but then they are leaving the army and yet, AI continues to do the same and creates an endless poor-finance management cycle.
Pumping money out of thin air won't solve this problem either since spending logic is flawed. They have to check this carefully and trace back to main reason.
The warband was working fine and there were no issues present about ladders. If you are referring to your soldiers getting butchered by one two-handed who stands on the walls as an issue, then it's something else.
Although in Warband you had only one ladder ( which even meme'd) but even after people added a second ladder it was working fine ( in this mod )
Only difference is, everything was basically a ramp in Warband and it was creating a "pathway" to AI that they can walk.
1. TW programmers are so bad that they can even fulfill this basic requirement, or 2. TW are not even trying to help improve quality of life for the modding community, even though their game relies heavily on work of the modding community.
I don't think the first one is the case, because if this is not defined in their task DoD, then it's not a requirement and they don't have to do that. Even if you are a top-notch engineer, you wouldn't do something outside of the scope of your sprint and enforce your own set of rules. Why this is not in their task DoD is another story though. Only their Tech Leads or PM can answer that, if they have such roles.
About the second one...well they simply don't care if you mod it easily or not ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ I'm sure that half of the team weren't probably even able to mod their own game because they don't know anything about it (I'm talking about modding in a way you and me do, without source code or whatsoever) So expecting a mod-friendly coding style from them wouldn't be logical. And I think documentation would be only become an "important" task for them after the full release, I don't think they care it in EA state.
I think we have substantial evidence that they are working in a chaotic environment and many things are not well-planned but rather ad-hoc things, but if you ask TW, they will say that they enforce good practices and they do want to help the modding community.
If you want them to generate an XML documentation for assembly ( so that you can hover over for function descriptions ) I think you should open a suggestion thread rather than question one in Q&A. Suggestion threads are checked by Dejan ( I guess ).
Bilgi edinebilirsen diye sordum zaten ya, bilmeni beklemiyorum Öğrenebilirsen güzel olur, insanlar genel olarak merak ediyor oyunu daha "canlı" yapacak şeyler olup olmayacağını.
Dejana sorsam 4 yıl sonra cevap alırım çünkü hiç karıştırmaya gerek yok onu