搜索结果: *

Interesting idea, definitely makes castles WAY more useful. After all, there's no point in getting a castle over a town when a town can cover the cost of wages of its garrison. I wonder what else could make castles more useful? I thought of a couple but it wouldn't really work nor make sense

There's no doubt that when Bannerlord releases it will be superior to Warband in every way possible. Based on the forum posts, videos, and other commentary on the game we've seen/heard/read we know it's practically a graphically-improved, engine-improved, and feature-improved Warband, which is much needed and I can't wait. But my question for the man working on the campaign is this:

Will we see a co-op campaign?

It's been asked before and I know it'll be hard due to the world going to have to be CONSTANTLY running (time will always be passing), but I think it should be added if possible. You can make it so that the host of the "save" file has the master control of the "time" and can pause the server at any time. As for battles/sieges/"strolling through town"/inside castle doors, make the world map time suddenly pass by in half (or whatever percentage the map battles take) and have a message come at the top of the screen saying "<player name> has entered a battle." The "wait here for some time" would pass at normal map speed rather than super fast, unless the all players, including the host, is waiting for some time or using "ctrl+space" also.

Mainly the reason why i want to see this is because I want to play with friends and we've already talked about how if those features above were made true, we'd deal with it. On you guys' end you could have a pop-up menu come up when they press "start new co-op campaign/join co-op campaign" that warns of the host being in master control of the time. If they don't like it, then they won't play it. They'll just stick to singleplayer, which is perfectly fine. The people that want this feature of a "co-op campaign" know it's played together, where you're already talking to each other LAN or using some internet-based voice chat program.

Of course, there are a lot of features that would need to be added when it comes down to interactions. Such as, who has commanding authority, etc. but those features wouldn't be hard to add in my opinion as you'd have to just brainstorm all the events one person could take by themselves and ask yourself how would another person influence that event.

Thanks for listening, I'd love to see this in some way. At the very least have some way to where a "random stranger volunteers to join you army for no wage" pop-up comes up and your friend(s) are now in your party able to see the world map and watch what you do. This way they can just communicate together where the party should go next, etc.

I can't wait for Bannerlord to release based off what we've seen. Speaking for the larger part of the community, I believe we can all wait for the game to release as long as feedback is given to the community on the development. Waiting another six months, as we did once, for another devblog would be really irritating, I, personally, enjoy seeing multiple devblogs within a month.

I personally only want to see one main improvement moving from Warband to Bannerlord besides what was expected from a video game sequel: A co-op campaign

I understand that that would be hard to do as the in-game time would have to constantly be running, leading to problems for the players when they enter towns, battles, etc. These can be solved if the background screen is removed when you enter a location, and the UI replaced with a transparent background. As for battles, even in singleplayer, these should take time to complete as logically a battle involving 300 men on each side would take time and wouldn't end instantly as it currently does. Or, perhaps, a battle would have to be queued on the server, and only available to occur when no other battles are underway. Public campaign servers would be hindered by this, although I am only referring to co-op campaigns which involve oneself and his/her friend(s). In my case, the campaign would only involve myself and another. The server host would have complete control over the ingame time also, he/she would have the ability to play/pause. In a case involving friends, the host having the ability to stop the game at any time would cause little/no hindrance as the pause would likely be communicated ahead of time. Also, putting one or multiple disclaimers when starting a co-op campaign outlining the risks/annoyances/quirkiness the game mode entails would satisfy me. Only a select few would consider the game mode to be, for lack of a better term "dysfunctional", and at that, the singleplayer experience will still be phenomenal.

Keep up the work and as Sundeki stated above, a beta would allow many M&B fans to test the game and spot any bugs for the developers. I believe Vince Lombardi said something along the lines of: "Nothing will ever be perfect, however, by pursuing perfection we achieve excellence". You must understand that your fanbase already knows your game is excellent and we don't want perfection, otherwise we'd never get to play it.