Are you talking about the thread from around three weeks ago?The statements in the topic don't "explain away keep battles not existing for player defenders". The discussion is about future improvements.
I actually cannot find where you say something specific like "I have no control over whether this gets in", which honestly I assumed anyway.And the very thing you are referencing is quite clear that my opinion isn't the deciding factor.
Sounds about right, industry standard stuff. I just find it a little odd that you are more or less pulling the 'we did not have time to complete the feature' card on an 11 year project for a basic Warband mechanic, which was a 2 year project.these things are not developed in isolation. That is to say if we pursue one thing, we do so by not pursuing something else. Similarly, if we chose to not pursue that one thing, we do so in favor of something else. All of these options can enhance the sandbox experience and must be prioritized according to their assumed costs and benefits.
In Warband you could control your random teammates in tournament fights. Control your own soldiers in a keep in it's sequel? Impossible.A question to those that are interested in defensive keep fights. Would you feel that the current offensive set up would offer an enjoyable defensive experience to you? That is to say - no control over your troops, no reinforcements for your side and generally a mission that you are quite likely to lose (or, well, are intended to lose - since another challenge may be players exploiting the terrain to simply 1on1 200 bots and basically mean that no siege has to be lost anymore... encouraging that very approach). If not, how do you imagine it should work?
That is great to hear. It is genuinely good to know, thank you for bringing that to my attention.TLDR - Feedback is being read by the relevant people and potential improvements will be explored for the feature.
I recall hearing that in medieval japan road building was actively discouraged to make it harder for peasants to travel to other villages, where one might see that the local lord treats his peasants better and want to stay there. I feel like TaleWorlds would also benefit from this system.Because it is assumed to must be so. It makes my blood boil when I think that Conqueror's Blade, a ****ing free to play game, has all that implemented.
Maybe not exactly what are you were talking about, but this mod exists.I think a cool feature that would enable this could be a Battle Plan phase before each battle
Mounted combat is not in a great place right now not just in balance but not even as a basic mechanic. Cavalry vs cavalry combat is more like two drunken hornet nests fighting than anything else. "We just engaged now let's spread out to kingdom come, make pretty circles and run into trees while everyone else does a battle or something!"Right now you spend so much time on useless crap like closing distance and chasing this one last horse archer
They do the butterlord's work.Good to know, keep up your good work.
If the game was stable/polished enough I would use it but too many of my campaigns have been spared from a game-breaking bug by going back to an earlier save point to see this as a viable option right now.Save scumming is my weakness, I'm glad that they put in ironman mode so I don't have the choice.
They need to add keep battles for defenders, it's a rather basic feature. And yet they explained away keep battles not existing for player defenders as them not being worth the time as too few players would ever experience it, which sounds like they just gave up.IMO now that keep battles are implemented retreats on defense should just skip you straight to the keep battle.
Now you get it.everything being left to rot.
*Crassus Intensifies*I use this constantly with horse archers in an open field.
The 2000 unit hard limit is annoying, especially that it counts horses. I have not crashed at 1500 in awhile, luckily CEK does reduce Khergit cavalry spam a bit which previously made some of the wheels fall off.Unfortunately it's the limitations of the game.
One easy way you can fix the exploit yourself is by simply not using it... I know, crazy right?
This game needed a 4 year development span at best. At this point it is very much a source of schadenfreude.TW should spend as much time on this game as it needs.
Release windows mean nothing to them as we have seen time and time again, and it really seems as though they cannot work at a faster pace, so it will go on for years more without any doubt.I don't care whether they call it Early Access or Release. What matters to me is getting fixes, improvements and new features. I doubt that approaching release date will speed anything it up. And if calling it Early Access means that they will keep on working on it for longer, I'm fine with them extending it until Mount&Blade 3 if they decide to continue the series.
That goes against what the developers themselves have actually said:I actually it was announced in 2012 because of copyright issues with paradox. They started pre-production after that year. Currently, this version of the game is in development for 4 years. This is at least 3rd version of the game. They completely erased other versions (maybe not completely but some big part of the game).
Pretty much, a vast majority of the stuff we will not see for another 6 to 7 months is already a mod.I´m not a modder but isn´t this just some XML stuff? Like creating some templates that AI lords will use for recruiting / upgrading troops? At least to me it doesn´t sound like this should take a lof work to add it to the game, I could be wrong though.
Criminal empire stuff was scrapped a long time ago as far as I know. Even before EA release.
This. The top management behind this game is holding it back.I would love if they just gave a few of their most senior developers full permission to add whatever they think will be cool, imagine 2-3 full time Bloc adding stuff like proper vassal system, minor factions settlements, perhaps re-instate the old upgradeable villages and so forth.
Encroaching 12 years of development, I too feel they should keep going for at least another decade, then the game would be really good.I don't mind the game being in early access for a long period. They should take their time with this game. Make it good before releasing it to the wolves.
An incomplete shell of a game compared to what we were promised, a shell of game compared to it's predecessor.I don't understand why people are getting upset or critical about missed targets? You can play the game right now. Better to let them take their time and release a very good game.
I see this get repeated frequently but development actually started in 2010 right after Warband was released, so by the timeRelease a very good game? Lol. If I make a guess, only a handful of people still expecting something "good" from Taleworlds after this empty 8 year of development + 1.5 year early access.
A lot of features they are planning to add already exist with mods, but are broke with every single patch by TaleWorlds, some never to return due to the workload forced on them to keep it working. The best thing that could happen to this game at this point is for TaleWorlds to stop development on the game itself and just work on modding tools.Yup, to me they can delay as long as they want if it means they'll keep working and improving the game.
The current version is still missing things while others need improvements, forcing a release earlier would just mean no more big improvements and i'm sure no one wants that.
That is a good question, they are their own publisher/distributor as far as google says but they are a publicly traded company, though.That was a good read.
Do you know if CDPR was contractually obliged to deliver on specific dates (like in a publishing deal)? Because Taleworlds had no obligations to finish Bannerlord and they can keep dragging their heels indefinitely, especially as they are a private company unaccountable to public investors.
If CDPR didn't have contractual pressure, more power to them for prioritizing efficiency (and therefore optimizing costs) in their development, which is where Taleworlds is failing.
"How dare you behead those guys over there you monster." ~ CaladogDoubt its working that way. I only executed a bunch Aserai nobles and now whole Battanian realm hates my character just as much as Aserais
While Cyberpunk 2077, train-wreck that it was, was announced in 2012 CDPR did not start full development on it until after Hearts of Stone/Blood and Wine was completed for the Witcher 3.Bannerlord is just Cyberpunk 2077, took just as long to make, but with potato faced npcs and an early access label to excuse a lack of progress or pace. Honestly, EA is a gift to all the lazy or grifting game developers.