I'd like to see something like unlock trees for similar components within the weapon classes. So like each T1 component would feed "unlock XP" towards one or more T2 components, and each T2 component would feed "unlock XP" towards one or more T3 components and so on. That way you could specialize in certain weapon classes and component types, and maybe the component types could be categorized by culture or style or something. So if you're only making like two-handed swords with Battanian blades and Aserai pommels, you'd make progress towards other Battanian 2H blades and Aserai 2H pommelsTL;DR : Smithing in 1.8 is still broken and is now painfully unfun, plus my Enter key has taken some real punishment since its release.
Brace yourselves, Smithing rant incoming.
I would like to start by remembering a classic opening scene in one of my favourite movies that launched the career of a previously unknown Austrian. It begins with a rumbling battle hymn, heavy drums, and portrays a darkened medieval room where the only light is provided by red hot molten steel being poured into moulds and then labouriously hammered into shape by a strong man (supported by an equally strong woman btw.) with long hair and an unkempt beard.
(Can you guess the film?)
My point here is that smithing is cool, making weapons with fire and sweat and hammering steel, very cool right. Many Youtube channels displaying such endeavours have literally millions of views. So it's fair to say there is a general interest in this area.
It is for this reason that it is important to get this ingame system right.
In previous versions of this game, provided you had the materials available, and were fortunate with the unlocks, craft an absolute Kromm-level sword/axe/polearm in a reasonably rapid timeframe. After which, you could merrily enjoy using/swinging said weapon at whoever took your fancy over the course of your playthrough whilst levelling your character to demi-god levels of martial skill (which does take some time, especially 250+). Funtimes, i know.
Now the current problem emerges.
In the current version, 1.8, progression is limited by tier unlocks i.e. to unlock idk, say t4 pommels, you need to unlock every single t3 beforehand with idk say Two-handed Swords having hundreds of components each requiring 20-ish crafts to unlock 1 new component.
I get it, "you need to invest time and effort into it to eventually make great weapons", it's a reasonable position to have for real life....
This is not real life though, and making crap-tier trash that will only end up being melted back for materials or sold is just not satisfying, or more importantly, fun.
And having to repeat this process literally thousands of times to unlock all components.....well, i hope my problem with the current system has been made clear.
Thank you for reading.
I'm not particularly familiar with all the factors and systems in place, but I wonder if the autocalc system needs to be more fleshed out and robust? In theory, a spear-heavy army should generally beat a horse-heavy army, an archer-heavy army should generally beat a shieldless infantry-heavy army, and certain infantry-heavy configurations should beat other infantry-heavy configurations.What does Sturgia need changed in order to not suck? Is it its geography that's the fundamental problem or something else?
This is a great idea that should be relatively easy for TW to implement. Would improve roleplaying for sure IMODevs are there any plans to improve sandbox character creation?
It would be nice if the player could pick their starting home town and the player spawns at that location. Even if the options are limited to the culture you pick. This is important for Vlandian characters because of the way clans names are in the campaign for example dey Praven which mean from Praven. I like to start small and work around my home town and it gets old starting at Sargot every time.
Engineering from catapults/trebuchets and athletics from siege towers and battering rams are excellent ideas! +3Agreed, makes no sense for it to be bow. I was thinking the same thing. Also throwing skill from catapults is cool and all, but it would make more sense to gain engineering skill... If I throw a rock/pot by hand then it makes more sense to be throwing skill. Also if I'm pushing a ram/siege tower, I'd like to gain athletics. Just some ideas
This idea makes too much sense. I think they'd have to reskin a lot of parts though, like the higher tier handles and guards that have gems and stuff in them, they'd have to re-skin lower tier versions of those. But I like this idea a lotHere is an idea that will help with there being too many parts to unlock, and help prevent cheesy speed leveling, plus allow people to be more likely to make what they want. Seperate material and weapon shape. There doesn't need to be a seperate warsword to unlock for each material, instead it would just be a warsword blade. Then, depending on smithing skill level, you can use any material that you're skilled enough to use to make that weapon shape. You'd unlock the ability to use different metals when you hit the level with the perk to smelt it, so crude iron at 25, iron at 50, steel at 75 and so on. Before 25 you could only make the wood versions. Using better material would just improve the base stats of the weapon. That would make for less parts to unlock while making more different things you could actually make, since a number of weapons aren't available in different materials.That way, let's say someone really wants a falx, but the only have 25 in smithing, they could make one from crude iron which wouldn't be as good as the fine steel one, but it would give their character the weapon look they want. Also since smithing level unlocks materials, they can't super power level smithing if they get lucky to unlock a few high tier parts early, they could only make cheaper lower stat versions that would give less exp.
Thank you! I read Bloc's posts, but didn't see the rest
This would be huge for community confidence. Just give us something other than "we're working on it" or "we're looking into it". Give us a glimpse into the progress of that, please!Maybe a thread or a dev update on where sieges are right now explaining the challenges and the coming fixes would be helpful. Just an idea.
IMO the combat feels more accessible than Chivalry or Mordhau, and Captain mode has the potential for more epic battles. I've never played M&B multiplayer and most likely never will, but I can see the appeal over other games. Plus, if other people are like me, I don't necessarily want to fill my harddrive with a bunch of similar-but-not-quite-the-same gamesi do not understand the appeal of Bannerlord MP when there are like half a dozen better Medieval Combat MP games out there.
I'd love to see:These are kinda the same thing to the game so I'll try to answer. The game spawns an amount of hide outs, which spawn both looter and a bandit type. Every daily tick (or something) the game checks how many hideouts and bandit parties thier are and makes more. It makes more the less there are and less the more they are so it stay close to certain amount (which is MANY) but will still increase. SO, AFAIK the game just keeps making bandits/looter and hideouts regardless of things like security of towns or looted villages or such stuff. It's not as manageable as in warband (in which wiping out a hideout temporarily halted bandit spawning) and ti doesn't seem like TW intends for us to be cleaning up all the bandits or such.
The size of bandit and looter parties increases as the character main level increases, however they will sometimes take on or free prisoners and become very large even when player is still low level.
Things I don't: How the game initially spawns everything and why there's sometime outrageous amount of some bandits/looter or some oversized parties at the very start of the game?
Hideouts appear at specific spot only, but does a bandit also have to walk up and "activate" it? I agree it sometimes looks like bandits "Make" a new hideout, but supposedly this isn't actually the case.
AFAIK the AI only will clear them if they are part of a quest issue, which a NPC has chance of clearing when it visits the fief that has the issue. I don't think they ever directly attack hideouts. This means many hide outs will never be cleared by a NPC and in fact you will see many hideout remain very deep into the game.
Your 10 guys would ****ing die horribly if you sent them in auto-resolve to most bandit camps. I don't think it's something planned.
Not that I know of.
What I'd like is to be able to send a Clan party to patrol and area and clear hideouts and such, but TW seems stubborn about letting us MAKE npcs do anything.
I bet if you keep complaining that'll speed things up!So it has been over a year in EA since TW began their tinkering with this game, which has mainly consisted of fixes for bugs introduced and various minor adjustments. What workshops are more profitable this go round lol? Seriously, there are dozens of mods with better content than this team has managed to put out in over a year. Want to stash items in your castle? Here's another menu page; some of the laziest ham fisted crap I have ever seen in gaming.
I first noticed it in...ahh it was either 1.5.8 or 1.5.9. Would be nice to know if something had actually changed.
Oh thank you for this info.
Now I understand why AI behaves more like RBM in 1.5.10, though I'm not using any mods...
It's possible that they just increased some lord's tactics stats, unlocking those strategies.I didnt noticed it in the patch notes but maybe TW has fixed some ai commands that were bugged or unlocked them at lower tactics level? i remember from the realistic battles mod page that it said most advanced ai commands were locked behind pretty high tactics skill that most commanders wouldn't have so they usually only had basic advance/charge moves to play in battle (the mod unlocked those commands regardless of tactics level so the ai behaved much smarter using the mod)
I've only participated in 3 or 4 large battles in my current playthrough, but it has been interesting. One battle in the rocky highlands, the defending minor faction set their 20 or so archers and infantry on top of a small hill on the cliff-side while their cavalry engaged ours in and around the valley. It was honestly pretty sweet.Some times - in large battles, maybe on specific maps? - it does feel like the AI is actually doing some good work. Like the two lines of infantry will move towards places that make sense for them to defend/attack, archers will skirmish, infantry will attack and regroup. But it happens less often in party battles. And still some army battles become the reinforcing-attackers slowly streaming towards the blob of defenders after the initial fight.
While I share your sentiment, I'm not quite sure you understand how software development works (or at least QA and bugfixing). In order to fix a bug, you have to be able to reproduce it in a debug environment where you can follow the process through the code. Without a reproduction case, fixing a bug in a large project is very difficult to near impossible. Without being able to run through that reproduction case in a debug environment, fixing a bug is also very difficult to near impossible. The problem with a bug occurring in a live environment but not a test environment is that there is no way for the devs to be able to determine where in the code it is occurring, which makes it a needle in a haystack. So owning a Steam copy and testing it on there should be a part of their QA workflow, but it only helps them to be aware of problems, not to actually fix them.Maybe you should then also test the Steam build? I´m sure that most players bought the game on Steam and I´m also sure you can "buy" your own game from Steam so you have the same setup as most of us players when testing new releases?
Or just keep releasing untested versions, that´s fine too of course.
Roadmap for bugs incoming?