Search results

  1. ParagonWelken

    In Progress Attacks randomly ignoring block

    Still playing a save on 1.6.0, and I can confirm this happened to me several times in Bandit Hideouts. I can send a save file is more information is needed. But, in the situations where this happens, its about 1 in every 4 hits seems to completely bypass the shield and cause damage, even if I am walking with the shield held up. As the OP stated, weapon blocks do not seem to be affected. Seems to be restricted to just shields.
  2. ParagonWelken

    In Progress Wanderer companions have 10 Vigor

    Curently still playing 1.6.0. I've not found any Wanderers/Companions that have this issue, but both siblings rescued in the main storyline start with 10 Vigor every single time. I can add a save file, if you need.
  3. ParagonWelken

    Battle Spawn Points Need to Change Dynamically

    The reasoning behind reinforcements mechanic is tied to game engine's limitation. If we had the capability to deploy all our units at once without any performance hit then there would be no problems at all.

    So we shouldn't look at this mechanic as "reinforcements" but the developer's workaround for game engine's incapability.

    I'm fine with that workaround as long as it makes sense.

    Indeed that is the case, so whether you choose the moniker of "reinforcements", or "additional troops", or "limitation management", the issue is that currently, they often tend to spawn on top of one's party, instead of entering the battle from some pre-determined point. My argument was that I would like to see some place set up for this, because that opens an extra layer of strategy to allow for competent players to send a group of soldiers to intercept the "reinforcements" before they can reach the main body.

    Similarly, if you have "reinforcements" approaching the battlefield, it would be equally wise to fall back and rally with them rather than just letting them free run across the battlefield and potentially be picked off. At this point, the AI doesn't have the level of detail to make those decisions for themselves anyway, so the topic I bring up is moot at the current point.

    All I speak of is the strategic playstyles that could be incorporated with that pre-determined "spawn point". If the system were not limited to having to manage how many troops were on screen at one time, the "appearance" of random troops would not be an issue.

    But, it is, so a managed system for the introduction of these additional troops would be nice to avoid the clustering that takes place now, often causing random death due to the AI confusion when troops suddenly appear in their area of influence and start massacring troops that realistically should be able to hold out better.
  4. ParagonWelken

    [1.4.1 - Hotfix May 29] Vlandia declares war on me every day.

    The save I was working on had a similar issue. After the 1.4.1 hotfix, I loaded my save and noticed that whenever I go into the Diplomacy tab and click on a nation it immediately declares war on them from my faction (merc for the Northern Empire in this save).

    Whether I use the console to set or use influence to vote for peace, clicking on the nation banner in the Kingdom Menu, Diplomacy tab immediately declares war again every single time, regardless of how many wars are being waged currently (Northern Empire is warring with Sturgia and Khuzait at the time of this notice.)
  5. ParagonWelken

    Game is really repeating itself

    that would be a mistake, although still a possibility. The only "correct" path is for them themselves add substance to the game and allow mods to be, well, mods, not fixes.

    For sure, I certainly would like that to be the case, considering the devs are likely the ones who have the best picture of what the end product should look like.

    As I said before, only time will tell.
  6. ParagonWelken

    Game is really repeating itself

    If going off the old games is any indication, TW will leave the broadening of gameplay to the modders and focus strictly on core stability and functionality. I could be wrong, and would be perfectly happy to be shown otherwise by the devs. In the end, their contribution will allow, either directly or indirectly, for such new content to become possible.
  7. ParagonWelken

    Why the hell is the Tannery so overpowered?

    So buff the other workshops maybe? I can't think workshops are working as intended right now as it is. If they're supposed to be equivalent with caravans right now, and based on the clues in the design of the game it looks like they are, then they're failing spectacularly and badly need a buff.

    I'm with you on this, but I am starting to think that, as many have said before, that workshops are not fully/properly implemented. There is nothing but conjecture at the moment, but with the workshops having possible Levels to advance, they probably don't intend for Lv 1 workshops to be on par with caravans, especially as workshops are generally safer in terms of potentially controllable loss. I imagine these higher levels will come with some kind of increase, as @Badcritter said, the caravans will still likely outperform workshops due to the higher risk factor.
  8. ParagonWelken

    Battle Spawn Points Need to Change Dynamically

    It's definitely an issue, especially when your troops are under AI control and you can't actively direct the battle.

    I've seen several proposed fixes for this, and all of them had merit in some form. I personally like the idea of troops projecting from some area of the red zone and heading to your main army. Sure, this begs the question of whether or not this would be exploitable, but no solution would be perfectly sound.

    Furthermore, from a strategic standpoint, would it NOT be smarter to send a small group to tackle reinforcements before they reach the main body and thus further solidify your chance to bring down your enemy? Or, from the opposite side, rallying the troops to a spot to meet up with the reinforcements before beginning the attack again?

    No matter the choice made on how to fix this, it definitely needs fixed, because it lends to a frustrating and rather uncontrollably annoying issue in battle.
  9. ParagonWelken

    The shops in Aserai kingdom are not profitable

    Caravans and Workshops are FAR from useless, as they do assist with passive income until you can start gaining more prosperous fiefs and gaining income that way, but they as well as the overall game economy need a solid overhaul.

    As for the aserai, I can see the OPs point, but there are a few ways around that, caravans being one of them. There really is no clear safe way to make money as almost all of it revolves around some form of potential loss. I think that some balancing of the workshops and caravans would help matters, as long as they are not made to be so ridiculous that nothing compares. That just begs to be nerfed and takes precious time from forward development.
  10. ParagonWelken

    "Thanks" for the fief...

    I was wondering if it was just me or if this is just the norm with the rulers of the kingdoms but I only ever got my first fief when my faction took over a castle, then they preceded to give me control over it, which is awsome and nice and all buuuuuut.....

    1.I dont have the income to support the garrison stationed there
    2.By the time I get there, its already been sieged by the enemy

    I know its early access and thats why im hoping by mentioning this here we could maybe change it back to how it was in warband, where you recieve one of the numerous towns that your king possess and isnt entirely in danger of being sieged or raided right away

    I can see where this is annoying in many cases. I would say my counter to that is to remain a mercenary until you feel more comfortable in being able to manage the war scene and political landscape. I don't make absolute bank as a merc, but early on, its less of a required dedication, and I am free to switch allegiances without any penalty. This has saved me some headache when kingdoms I allied with were being sorely beaten and I did not have the power yet to sway that outcome.

    Like said by others, take your time to get into your seat properly and focus on the sustainment and survivability of your own army. AI troops get generated far faster than we can rightfully obtain and upgrade troops, so unless you're strong enough to face enemy lords and take prisoners to convert the troops you want, its usually starting with T1 fodder and hoping most live long enough to grow into something competent.

    I'd not further inhibit that by jumping into vassal state only to be given a task you're not quite equipped to handle yet. Just my thoughts.
  11. ParagonWelken

    Why the hell is the Tannery so overpowered?

    The anomaly is that TW hasn't gotten around to nerfing them yet.

    I mean, pottery in a key handful of cities used to make bank. It was nerfed.

    There's actually a few really high ticket things to spend money on. Buying loyalty and fiefs. Those run into the millions of coins, and fiefs ALSO require what becames an intensely tedious grind.

    But, like, the best way to make money is fully exploiting the crafting system. If you utilize a full party, the inputs of crafting are drastically cheaper than the outputs, and you easily end up with like a dozen 30 to 50k swords in a couple days(ignoring super priced javelins as an obvious bug). And those swords ARE worth that much and always have been. But, hope you like crafting.

    I don't buy workshops until I am in the endgame because I am neurotic about losing them if I go to war with the faction I put them in, so I simply wait until I literally own the cities I workshop.

    I have never had trouble running a profit. But I also craft.

    The real complaint is the lack of balance in the economy. I doubt many are complaining that crafting is a viable method of profit making. Hell, I'd argue that I'd love to see armor crafting as well, and perhaps the means to custom arm my elite troops as well.

    The issue is, unless your intended playstyle is 24/7 warmongering, there remains a large gap in ways to properly generate income in the early stages of the game. I struggled for awhile to get enough money to start getting workshops, coupled with the desire to watch and see which cities were relatively safe in my playthrough before investing, as I wanted a more dedicated source, only to find that the 45k I sunk into 3 workshops struggled to keep me afloat when weighing in the armies of myself, my spouse, and my companion.

    I'm not suggesting we nerf Tanneries, because as I've said before, nerfing one thing while ignoring the need to balance the rest is not a fix, its a bandaid or stopgap method. Why try to repair the wounded leg when we can just chop off the working arm and give a reason to cry about something else?

    To truly be sandbox, all methods of income need to be viable, even if some are intrinsically better than others, that's all I'm saying. TW has been struggling to keep up the pace they're making, but have shown no signs of stopping, so I am confident they WILL address the issue. It is more a matter of when, I believe.
  12. ParagonWelken

    Bannerlord is mis-advertised by the devs on Steam (yes, even taking into account Early Access)

    While late to the post, I agree with many. The game is perfectly playable, if albeit rather incomplete. The fact that they openly expressed this on the sales page leads me to believe there was no misadvertisement. The overall jazz about the game mechanics is exactly what they intend to deliver.

    I'll go so far as to say that they should be held accountable for the clear lack of a general progression plan, because if you could see where they planned to implement X feature, you'd be less inclined to blindly attack them for the "subpar" game and feel more invested in the development structure.

    Larger company or not, they're not some AAA studio capable of whipping out some stellar project from the gate, and yet they've done more development on this game in the past month or so than most large scale companies do in their first year.

    Please try to acknowledge that developing a game is as much about balancing the game as it is about balancing the workload and intentions. They have every intention of making this the game you hoped it would be, its just not going to be quite as fast as you hoped.
  13. ParagonWelken

    Bannerlord is mis-advertised by the devs on Steam (yes, even taking into account Early Access)

    But the real question is....what did you do with all your AOL disks? :mrgreen:

    They make decorative coasters, and interestingly enough, solid conversation starters. 😆
  14. ParagonWelken

    Miserable mid-game, new(ish) player perspective

    Found your problem.

    In current EA state, proceeding to independent kingdom is asking for tears. The kingdom management, diplomacy, and a host of other mechanics for that stage of the game just aren't there yet. Not merely "only partially implemented" or "poorly balanced"; not there at all. They told us as much pre-release in devblogs. Of the 8 bulletized points you listed, I think this explains at least 4 or 5 of them.

    I am NOT suggesting that you somehow made a mistake or played poorly by creating a kingdom. Instead, I criticize TW for allowing kingdom creation in the first place. They knowingly (and, to be fair, openly) left a void in the game...and in EA, I don't necessarily have a problem with that in itself. But then they gave us a door (via the main quest) through which the player can step into that void anyway. That's the decision I find completely inexplicable. (and now in 1.4.1 they've given us a "sandbox" route to do the same thing even that's gonna help...).


    I agree, that in its current state, the game is a skeleton.. a shell. I don't mind, persay, I knew I was getting into an EA project, and not a completed work, but this is 100% agreed that they should not open the door if the path is not finished. You get stuck halfway down and left with a sour taste for the process since it was given to begin with.

    I truly believe TW is trying their best to appease the desire for new content while also addressing the crashes and bugs, but it seems to be stretching them thin, and considering their devs teams, they would likely be better to make it known that they're throwing 100% of their effort into full game stabilization before approaching balancing and content generation.

    This would mean focusing on the crushing of bugs and errors in code that cause crashes and other game breaking issues, then tackling the existing content to full before implementing new/currently unavailable features. This is NOT a process the end gamer would want to endure, unfortunately, so it lends to some difficulty on the development side to keep a paced schedule.
  15. ParagonWelken

    Um..the so called "Road Map" doesn't actually mention any new content....

    Well, gotta pull your leg here... Game Development is not as easy as you're putting it, if it was, I'd ask, why then doesn't any random fellow create incredible games?
    I know answer, and I bet you do to... It's never simple... Something that works on paper doesn't necessarily works on practice. It's easy to have uneducated ideas for games or even movies, but in practice you must know what you're going to face on production. From my PoV (and I am already really REAAALLY harsh on TW), I think they've lost it, they've made some mistakes, there were logistical issues, and they didn't really plan their own brain-storm (original idea). During production there were a significant amount of announced cuts, but I bet that there were even more non-announced that nobody knows about, and I'm being harsh just to be saying this. I still find the game to be in a okay direction, but I doubt it's as bad as you're painting. Creatively speaking, you sir, are more likely to be the clueless one than they are.

    As for me? I'm the idea man, it's like my profession since always, and I have both the academic formation to do that and know about these things called Game Development due to a thing called Bachelor, and what I see here is that mostly it's bad implementation rather lack of. At this point they can't fix some things that I believe to be wrong in the game, because it's on a really late stage, but their game is in a much better shape than most EAs that have achieve incredible success (like that ridiculous Space something EDIT: researched, that No Man's Sky)

    What saddens me, as a fan, is that this game will take a long while to be good, cause as of now, it's just bare bones, so they need to give meat to the game before it can be complemented and given fashion looks and other nonsense. Considering some factors, my best guess it's that it'll take from now, at least 6 up to 12 months for the base game, and at least 6 more for some cool additions or "cut recoveries"

    This. I agree here. As a fan of the series, I hope this moves along before the steam generated by the release fizzles. I would like to see TW turn this into an even greater cult following than original M&B, and draw even more into the series. More faithfuls is good for everyone.

    I knew going into this that an EA meant a lot of unpolished but hidden gems, and what I see is the potential to surpass what they've done before. The system in place definitely speaks to a great chance of that. The issue here is not whether or not BL will become something great, but when that will be. Will it be in a short enough window to keep current fans satisfied and new fans interested? Only time will tell that, sadly.

    It's hard to wait that out, especially if you're someone who had your sights on this from the beginning. As a latecomer to the series, I have grown a near fanatical love for this, and am torn because of how unfinished it all is, but I have been through EA/Beta test scenarios before, and its nothing new, really. This process takes time, because if you DO want to appease the larger majority of your fans, you have to do it right and not randomly throw things at the wall to see what sticks.

    I won't openly praise TW as game dev gods, but I will give credit where credit is due and state that this is a LOT more smooth and progressive than many other EA/Beta projects of which I've been a part.
  16. ParagonWelken

    Game is really repeating itself

    The problem, I believe, is the expectation vs the intent. I have every belief that TW wants to make this another cult favorite that easily surpasses Warband and the others. I believe they have the system in place to do that, given the time to stabilize the game, and flesh out more features and content.

    The playerbase was informed that this was to be an EA game with focus on improving through fan interest and request, but in the end, I think most of the disgruntled fans simply were not aware of how off things were with this until they sank their fangs into it. There is nothing wrong with being frustrated over the lack of progress, just don't let that distract you from the fact that there is progress.
  17. ParagonWelken

    Game is really repeating itself

    Perhaps it needs restating, but the game is still in Early Access, with the devs focusing on game stability before anything else. I'd wager, both from their original plans, and from what feedback and suggestions they've received from fans that they have plans to flesh out more of the game in time and add more to it. It is honestly more of a skeleton right now, but with time, hopefully we'll see more to content.

    That said, what kind of things would YOU like to see in order to get more fulfillment from the game? I'm sure the devs want to hear those things, as well.
  18. ParagonWelken

    Why the hell is the Tannery so overpowered?

    The end of the day, the option to play either style (merchantile vs Lord hunting/looting) should be equally viable. If your playthrough is one of ease with your methods, I don't believe that means its inherently bad. Mine has been more of a struggle, but worthwhile when I finally achieve my milestones needed. The overall economy needs to be balanced, and I agree with some about making income less as a whole and making money more worthwhile.

    I am currently working on getting the T6 gear for my PC, and we're talking 40-75k per piece for the imperial which is still not a drop in the bucket like it sounds like you guys have at your disposal. The problem I have with nerfing outright is the idea that one style of play should suffer over others, when, as many have said, nerfing the tanneries in this case does not solve the overall economic problem.

    Adding the option to smith armors to reduce cost of armoring yourself and your companions, or adding a trade penalty for war spoils (which could be overcome somewhat with perks) or adding more variety and function for the passive income is ways that you can look into properly balancing the economic situation without directly nerfing the few "OP" means of money gain.

    The nerfs that have happened already, as said above by xdj1nn, have made aspects much more annoying to endure, so unless you're exploiting certain methods to push through early game and get to the point where you CAN snowball things, its more a lesson in futility and an artificial means of inflating "Difficulty", which is just pointless to me.
  19. ParagonWelken

    Why the hell is the Tannery so overpowered?

    not challenging, no. It's boring, if it was challenging it'd be comparable to "Dark Souls 1" which is quite a fun game, atm it's comparable to a chore. The rest of your point I kind of agree, not completely though, obviously I believe that my strategy to balancing BL would work better, but I'm not in charge nor am I working for them as GD consultant, so there's no point on me dabbling too much in it. And even though I do believe that, I do not know the full scope of the game because I'm out of the loop, maybe they are onto something and these questionable balancing changes are being made as a band-aid until the game gets done.

    We agree that change is needed, and what exists now is not that change. I only hope you're correct and the real system is in the works.
  20. ParagonWelken

    Is this meant to be a sandbox game? (Realistic difficulty, forced starting strats)

    Thanks matey.. bought a bunch of troops.. riding around disatisfied that yet again.. forced to start the same way every play, over and over.

    My whole post was built around lack of choice for a game purporting to be sandbox, and everyoneseems to be keen on either saying spend your cash on a bow and arrows or.. buy troops and be safe.

    I just figured, it being early access, now was a good time to explore dynamic starts, or ways to add value to the travel system/Scouting if you want to embed more value in that perk

    I hear what you're saying, but it doesn't seem to be a feasible system.

    That said, what would you suggest, if to be fair, they gave you the option of starting your empire of coin from the very beginning (which, I have and often DO until I have the funds to start focusing on my warband in earnest)?

    You speak of immersion, but wouldn't being auto-paused every 10 seconds be anything but? I imagine the people who are counter to your thoughts are speaking from their own playstyle preferences, but even still, I can't see a feasible way to allow you to travel around with relative safety to encourage merchant playthroughs without incorporating the same sense of danger that exists for everyone else.

    Sure, it is sandbox, and you are not forced to become a mercenary/vassal/king to play the game. But, unless you can propose a system to make it more "Enjoyable", I can't see how you would be able to go solo as a merchant and NOT be a target for bandits/raiders/etc.
Top Bottom