搜索结果: *

What's your battle size?  Smaller battles favor high-level troops.  Take it up further if you can, or download a battle sizer mod to allow bigger battles.

Option 2, play Prophecy of Pendor.

Captain_Octavius 说:

I'd buy one with 2 gig video memory. Not because you necessarily need it for Mount & Blade, but because it won't be long before it's the standard and newer games might make good use of it. The infrastructure of the GPU is the most important though.

点击展开...

Only if you're running some sort of crazy dual-screen setup.  Oversized video ram only makes a difference if you're running very high resolutions (well past 1920 X 1200).  Otherwise, a waste of money.  Just look at benchmarks for the vchip with lowish ram and hi ram.

The game itself makes little difference, to vram.

nox 说:

That said though, war trained horses need to kick and trample.  I know, everyone would cry how overpowered they are - and guess what?  They were hated by infantry in the period because they were truly a holy terror.

点击展开...

Agreed.  A lot of people complain about cavalry being overpowered in Warband, on a one-to-one basis.  There's absolutely no problem with that- it should be like that. 

The problem is that Warband makes it way to easy/cheap to field an army of all heavy cavarly.  They should be uber-powerful, but also uber-rare.  Warband got the uber-powerful part mostly down.  It made availability way too high.

caddux 说:

I'm sorry, I just based my comments on the comment you made.

点击展开...

Did you read his actual comment?  Did you find fault or fallacy in his statement that your evidence of three patches is really just one substantive patch, followed by two language patches?  He was pointing out that the evidence you pointed to was not what you made it out to be.

caddux 说:

Well, if fanboyism is to really enjoy something, then I think it's ok for you to call me that. And as I said, look back to the release of Warband. Look at Warband now. Can you see the diference? (if you can't, stop reading now) If so, you can be pretty sure that WF&S will get the same attention from the developers. The game's just been released. Warband took some months to be as good as it is now. People like yourself just never have the patience it takes to fully enjoy unique things like a M&B game. You don't see games like this everywhere. As a matter of fact there is no other game in game's history like them. So, if you are an impacient person, you just don't belong here. If you do have some patience, you will be enjoying WF&S fully pathced and enhanced in the next months.

点击展开...

Here's where I think you're off-base.  You're in a thread discussing the review of the game, as it exists.  But instead, your whole opinion is based on past experience and faith and extrapolation from that.  Your opinion is, in fact, completely divorced from the actual game that F&S is and yet that's what is actually being reviewed.

Everything you've said, everything you base it on, would be exactly the same if F&S arrived simply as a blank box with an empty CD in it.  "Oh, don't worry, they'll fix it over time."  In fact, it's clear that your opinion of F&S was fixed before you ever experienced the game, because it is soley based on faith.

That's fine if you have that much faith in the devs.  It just isn't a position that has any relevance to the game, as it actually is.  Nor is it an opinion that has relevance to the reviews the game is getting. 

Instead, I'd label your position as your views on the M&B franchise and Taleworlds, and not really any observation on F&S.  Now, all that faith may end up being justified and F&S may turn out to be a great game that gets polished over time.  That'd be great.  However, that has no bearing on what reviews the game should get, now.

nikokarst 说:

I got a quest to bring 6 hussars to Tsar, but i have a limit of 5 prisoners. How can i have bigger party, more prisoners..?

点击展开...

Increase your prisoner management skill.

nox 说:

F&S had a specific purpose, which was to present a historically replayable perspective of a period in history.  For that, it does what it intended to do.

点击展开...

As a global release product, I think this was one of the issues: the period selected is very much an unknown to most of the world.  So, the sense of historical reenactment just really isn't there for an audience that doesn't have a high degree of familiarity. 

I'm going to project from my own experience and say that the major draw for most players (at least those who come from M&B or Warband) was the new features, especially the firearms.  Having the firearms turn out to be merely re-skinned crossbows (from a coding/mechanics perspective) really disappointed.

As to the other new features (e.g., caravans, mercenaries), they are all currently still suffering from a number of bugs.  The lack of any rudimentary QC process is pretty evident.

Beyond the bugs, the biggest thing lacking in F&S is polish.  By that, I mean non-bugged code that are failures of game design.  Almost all of the new features have not been balanced in terms of gameplay (e.g., the economy is incredibly broken) and the overall experience does not capitalize on the new features effectively.

Basically, F&S could have been a very good product, but as a paid one, rather than a mod, it should have focused on things that no modder could bring- more fundamental, engine-based changes in the game's mechanics and a focus on polish and iterative game design, which are the usual hallmarks of a good, professional product.

So- F&S could have used a solid beta period, whether internal or external, where some experienced Warband players put in some time and provided some useful criticism.  For example, it would not have taken long to realize that economy is busted and that the recruiting mechanisms are out of wack. 

Hopefully, Taleworlds/Sich will treat the initial months of the release as the overdue beta and dedicate the time needed to fix the game up based on the feedback.

igod 说:

Ive been playing for about a week now and according to the manual intelligence is supposed to give more skill points. When I level up I only ever get one skill point, yet I have 14 in intelligence, is this right or have I got a bug.

点击展开...

As Darmoth mentioned, you would have to put an attribute point into INT to get the extra skill point.

So, if you raised your INT to 15 at level up, you will have 2 skill points to use (1 from the level up, 1 from adding to INT).

nox 说:

I think given the bones of what we have, you could come up with a pretty good mod that would really broaden playability.  I like the guns and bombs for sure.

点击展开...

By guns, do you mean the art assets?  Because my understanding is that the guns are just the crossbows from Warband, from an engine perspective.  If so, I do agree that they did a good job on the art for the guns.

Thanks for the providing the modder perspective.  It's good to hear that some of the new stuff is useable- I was disappointed to find that almost everything new was broken in one way or another, with the exception of the guns (which relied heavily on crossbows).

nox 说:

F&S doesn't bring a whole lot to the table that's done right.

点击展开...

I've been very curious about this: what does an expert modder see in F&S, what potential?

From my lay, non-modder perspective, I'm thinking "not much."  But, I'm admittedly woefully ignorant about modding.

It just seems that they haven't added a lot of core, fundamental system changes that would provide more hooks for a modder, other than the art assets that you have mentioned.

So, if F&S is, itself, just a mod of M&B, what is going to motivate modders to tackle this (currently rather buggy) base rather than just going from the more refined Warband? 

Archonsod 说:

Stepsongrapes 说:

  That said, that creates certain reasonable expectations about what the game is or isn't. 

点击展开...

Consumers responsibility to look at what they're buying. Or would you rather they assumed the user base were idiots?

点击展开...

No one is talking about asking for a refund or what legal recourse is available.  Rather, Taleworlds is going to take a deserved hit to its reputation, which will have an impact on its business. 

The whole point of this thread is whether the criticism that F&S is deserved or if it is one pissed off guy with a bot.  Note to OP: it ain't one guy with a bot.

F&S has some serious issues, the lack of certain Warband features is only part of those issues.  To pretend otherwise is to be an irredeemable fanboy, which is the the flipside of what OP is complaining about, a negative troll.

Archonsod 说:

Stepsongrapes 说:

  Taleworlds certainly did not do a lot to inform people that this was not a Warband expansion. 

点击展开...

That's cuz they consider it a Warband expansion. You may not disagree with that terminology, but since you aren't selling it that's pretty much moot.

点击展开...

That logic is . . . interesting.  People who thought it was a Warband expansion were thinking about it wrong and had false expectations, but the devs also consider it a Warband expansion, and that's alright.

Which one is it?

The devs are perfectly free to consider, and to advertise it as, a Warband expansion.  That said, that creates certain reasonable expectations about what the game is or isn't.  The criticism on this forum is a result of those expectations.  As I mentioned in my post, it is pretty uncommon to have a later-released expansion actually go backwards and drop gameplay features from the game it is supposedly expanding.

Einarinari 说:

Now, does F&S have MORE problems on release than other games averagely has? No it hasnt.

点击展开...

Seriously?  Seriously?!

The cheap argument- reasonable.

An argument that F&S's release state is better than average- no, just no.

PANTERA. 说:

Funny, I wasn't lead into believing this was anything but a mod ported over to the Warband engine. An older mod at that.

It states that in the Questions and Answers page.

People should have played Civ 5 on release if they think this game is bad. And it was $50.

点击展开...

Unfortunately, the text below is what is actually stated on the main page for F&S.  Taleworlds certainly did not do a lot to inform people that this was not a Warband expansion.  In fact, what other game do you know of where an expansion went back to a previous version, after the newer version was released?  The assumption, which Taleworlds did not dissuade, was that this would be an expansion of Warband.

As to the OP, this game forum certainly doesn't rank as the most critical game forum I've been on (see Hellgate: London).  In this case, I think the vast majority of the quality criticism is deserved.  Baseless rants should be ignored, just like 90% of the internet. 

[quote author=F&S WEBSITE]M&B: With Fire & Sword is now on sale!

May 03

The much awaited 'stand-alone expansion' to the award-winning M&B:Warband, Mount & Blade: With Fire & Sword is NOW available for purchase from the TaleWorlds web store!  Seasoned players and new-comers alike can now experience this thrilling new addition to the Mount & Blade series.[/quote]

Bluepheonix 说:

TBH they could have balanced muskets better as well. Im in late game so it doesnt affect me as much since i can eat like 3 or 4 shots (which granted they arent all to accurate) but still. musket = high damage slow reload. okay then. 20 musketeers can easily level any sort of charge and for that matter i could shoot start reloading then others could shoot and could cause a non-stop rain of bullets until none are left.

点击展开...

I get this feeling, too.  Basically, it feels like they dropped in these super-crossbows and the grenades, but didn't really bother to consider how they affect the player's playstyles (the commands issues I mentioned above) or how those two affect the rest of the gameplay and items.

In other words, I keep coming back to the feeling that not a lot of actual development thought, development time, and development effort went into the key parts of this new product. 

Caba`drin 说:

I think the OP's point was to identify if there were other ways that firearms should be distinguished in the game, as aside from their particle effect, there isn't anything to distinguish them. Perhaps there needn't be.

点击展开...

Yup, I was really hoping for this game to make firearms shine, in terms of gameplay and game design.

At a minimum, I think the devs could have implemented a fire-on-command.  The fire-at-will is completely inadequate for the uber-slow firing firearms given how the AI does not usually fire immediately or even switch weapons immediately.  You really, really need to make the first volley count.  I was hoping for this, and other things that would show that the devs put thought into how a super-powerful, but uber-slow weapon would affect the M&B battlefield.

I really expected the devs to address firearms as the central focus of their design and ask themselves "how can we make firearms in M&S feel different/special?"  I'm disappointed to find that their answer was "particle effects."  Basically, I'm flabergasted that the devs didn't come into this project and this game with the clear goal of making firearms a centerpiece of how F&S differs from Warband. 

Comrade Temuzu 说:

Also, how are the muskets re-skinned crossbows? Thats like saying crossbows are re-skinned bows

点击展开...

Uh, what?  Crossbows and bows always differed in the skill requirement, the horse/non-horse ability, lack of a reload for the bow, hold time, etc.  In terms of in-game functionality, there are clear differences between the crossbow and bow, beyond looks and numbers.

How are muskets anything but re-skinned crossbows: no skill requirement, no limited hold time, requires reload, etc.?

Seriously, which part of firearms in F&S made you say, "ah!  here's how it is different than a crossbow" other than the graphics and the stat changes?

PANTERA. 说:

I agree with most of what you said in your first post, but bayonets weren't even common in  most Western European armies until 1650' and 60's.

I would really like to see some sources saying that anyone used the bayonet extensively during the Russo-Polish War.


I like 1,2,and 5. Good ideas.

But misfires and jams? Have you ever shot a musket, or had one misfire?

It really sucks to have to dig the ball out with the ramrod. That takes some pretty good time, and most people are going to say " fun over realism".

点击展开...

I have very little attachment to any given suggestion.  Really, what disappointed me most about F&S is the clear lack of actual work that went into implementing firearms, beyond graphical tweaks.

If one were to drop all historical discussions, I think you could still think of things that the designers could have done to implement what is clearly the central distinction of F&S: the firearm.  To see it in-game as nothing but a re-done crossbow is really, really disappointing.

With all games, even ones with amazing mod communities like M&B, one of the things that is great about official expansions is the work that is done on the engine in ways that modders can't.  Not only does this provide a good base expansion, it provides modders with new tools to make mods even better.  I really don't see Taleworlds/SiCh handing out much for the firearms that makes you go "Ah!  That's new!"

dulahan 说:

Well, the first thing to say is the Bayonet had not yet been invented, and it's a pretty major innovation in warfare.

Second, Firearms were not yet the dominant force they would be in 50  years or so, and that is in part because of the lack of bayonets.

Nor is the firing in ranks and volleys thing a tactic so far.  It was invented in Japan, but not used in Europe for a few decades either. 

点击展开...

This has been knocked around several times.  There are many conflicting reports on both.  All of the things I mentioned had certainly been invented by 1648 (the source material's time period).  There are discussions on how prevalent each was in Eastern Europe by that time, but their existence was pretty certain.  For most, they were certainly employed in at least Western Europe, with some prevalence.  Those things certainly came into play by the end of the time period spanned by Sienkiewicz's novels.

Just do some googling, including the wikipedia pages for "musket", "bayonet", "Thirty Years War", etc.  The usual disclaimer on wiki pages apply, of course.

Finally, rather than descending into another historical accuracy discussion, ask yourself what gameplay changes they could have done to make firearms more unique, that would make this purchase more than a mod.

As to being less accurate than crossbows, that is a stat tweak, as I mentioned. 

Basically, ask yourself what was done on the game design/programming level to make firearms unique in this game.  I think the clear conclusion is "not much": re-skin and stat tweaks.  In other words, there is little engine/core changes done for the firearms.  Just modding changes.