搜索结果: *

cruzader79 说:

and still the BEST medieval sim/combat out there.

so much that haters and fanbois of other titles come here to recruit.

believe you me, I'm a medieval junkie I have them all.

点击展开...

Damn, those must have been some god tier recruiters, because they did an amazing good job of cleaning out the MP servers, managing to fool everyone into abandoning the best combat simulator they've ever experienced and convincing them to play something clearly worse in its stead.

Read the party skill bonuses section. That should answer your question.

Orion 说:

The point of Greed & Lagstro--as I interpret it--is that native BL already has this flaw, so if cRPG2 wants to improve their appeal and be a more enjoyable experience then they should strive to create a new player experience that is better than native, not worse as they currently do.

点击展开...

I wouldn't even go as far as to say that the cRPG new player experience is particularly worse than in native Bannerlord. It's just the same flaw presented in two different ways and affects players of varying skill levels differently, and for different amounts of time.

In cRPG, it's in the form of any new players starting out in the mod being extremely underequipped at the beginning of their character progression, but then eventually being able to reach a point where they are perpetually ~equally equipped or even better equipped than most other medium-long term players, and significantly better equipped compared to new players that try playing the mod.

In native Bannerlord, being extremely underequipped compared to the good player on the battle servers is going to always affect people that join the server after the the first round of a map has already started. For the best players in the server, they'll probably only be forced to play one round as a peasant class in this scenario, as they will probably be able to get just enough gold from kills and assists to be able to afford a better class by the next round, where they will then be equipped to deal damage much easier, and be able to get a larger amount of kills and assists to maintain their high tier class cost. For players that aren't as good on the other hand, they're basically screwed. They are already worse in terms of skill than than the better players on the server, and they will be getting targeted by the better players on the server that are using classes that are far stronger than theirs. The worst players on the server basically just die before they can get enough damage in to get credit for any kills or assists, so they never gain enough gold to get out of the peasant class slump, so they are just stuck in a perpetual state of being fodder for the better players on the server, until the map is over, and the server switches over to a new map and factions, where on the first round of the new map, they will finally be able to play as any class that they want... until they die without getting kills, and then the problem just repeats itself.

So basically, for cRPG, a player of any skill level is going to have an extremely disadvantaged start for the first few hours that they play the mod, and their stat/equipment disadvantage compared to long-time cRPG players will lessen mostly based on the amount of time that they put into the mod.

For native Bannerlord battle, being at a significant equipment disadvantage affects skilled players very little, and only effects them in short, temporary amounts of time (only in scenarios like joining the server late, getting teamkilled, or suffering an unlucky death.) Averagely skilled players have to play with this kind of equipment disadvantage maybe around half the time, as their round to round performance can be quite volatile, resulting in constantly dipping in and out of playing the high tier classes. The worst players (which tend to be new players) pretty much only get to play a high tier class once per map, and then are perpetually stuck playing as very weak peasant classes that get dominated by the strong classes being used by the better players on the server.

Orion 说:

I think the solution is pretty simple, and someone mentioned it already: bump brand new players to a moderate starting level so they can make a build they like to play for any class, and not have to slog through terribly unbalanced fights with classes they don't like. They don't have to be meta or high-end in any way, but you should be able to overcome a gear disadvantage with a skill advantage, and do it as infantry, ranger, or cavalry.

点击展开...

Yea, this would definitely lessen the problem. The new player cRPG experience wouldn't be as egregious if they could start playing the mod with a respectable stat distribution and equipment loadout, as well as be able to play the class of their choosing.

merrrica 说:

The only bad faith arguments I'm reading are the one's somehow arguing that cRPG open beta is more unbalance than what we have native MP now. Case in point at least in NA is going to the GK TDM server, the only server that is populated.

点击展开...

Has anyone in this thread actually argued that?

I'm pretty sure everyone in this thread has been saying that cRPG isn't worse than the current state of native Bannerlord. That should be deducible from pretty much everyone in this thread saying that they would rather play cRPG than the current state of native Bannerlord.

You might be getting confused between the times when we are talking about cRPG vs native Bannerlord, and cRPG vs native Warband.

Native Warband didn't really suffer from this problem we are talking about in the same way, because default 1K gold loadouts in native Warband weren't weak. There was obviously still some degree of equipment disparity that would develop as rounds went on in native Warband battle, due to players gaining more gold to buy better equipment with, based on round-to-round performance. But the key differences were that on the first round of every map, everyone started with the same amount of gold, and that default amount of gold was enough to buy a very solid kit with any class. Even as rounds progressed and some players could afford better gear than others, the actual practical difference between the gear was quite small. The usual equipment disparity you would see between players in native Warband battle was nowhere near the equipment disparity you see between low tier and high tier Bannerlord classes. Remember that melee weapon upgrades in Warband basically just came in the form of purchasing weapons that did like +1 or +2 damage per tier. Ranged weapon upgrades basically just traded away firing rate and accuracy for slightly more damage and projectile speed. All infantry and cavalry classes had access to free shields, and could upgrade them to much better versions quite cheaply. Armor upgrades were kind of all over the place, but high end armors were very expensive and almost no one could ever acquire them, and if anyone ever did, and they died with them, they would likely not be able to afford them again for the rest of the set.

merrrica 说:

Would that apply to mercenaries, PK, and PW? If so, what mod did you consider acceptable in your opinion?

点击展开...

All mods are acceptable in their own way, especially to those who belong to the niche of players that those mods cater to.

To better understand my perspective on this topic, take into consideration that I have been playing native warband competitively for nearly a decade, and I've spent quite some time playing NW and PW over the years.

My personal gripe with cRPG is that it's a mod that makes players who spend more time playing the game artificially better, because they persistently have access to better weapons, armors and stats than newer players.

I haven't played the bannerlord version of cRPG yet, but in the warband version, if you were a new cRPG player, you were, BY DESIGN, just supposed to be fodder for the players that have already farmed up some actual equipment to fight with. As a new player, you started with piss poor stats, peasant clothing, and a sickle that you literally couldn't even block attacks with. Even if you were a genuinely good with M&B combat, you would still lose to an absolutely terrible player who just happened to put a lot of hours into cRPG and wore heavy armor, because you would just glance every hit on them with your sickle. It was at its core, an unfair and unbalanced experience for newer players.

A player who has already spent hours playing a game should have already had extra time to develop a natural skill advantage over newer players. Adding an artificial advantage on top of that (in the form of better stats and equipment) is obscene and unnecessary, and IMO, fails to create a fair, competitive gameplay environment. When you beat another player, it should be in virtue of you having fairly outplayed them, not in virtue of you having had significantly better stats and equipment than them.

Something that I've always liked about native Warband is that whether you had 2 hours in the game, or 2000 hours in the game, you started every map on even footing. The 2000 hours player had absolutely no advantages over the 2 hour player, except for the natural advantages of having more knowledge of the game, and having had more time to develop some skill in the game. Moreover, the default 1K base gold everyone was given at the start was enough to make a very solid build that was also sufficiently fun to play with. A 1K build in Warband had a much better equipment loadout than the peasant classes you are sometimes forced to play as in Bannerlord. In addition, the scenario of someone with basic equipment having to go up against someone with top of the line equipment was very rare in native Warband. In Bannerlord, this scenario is commonplace due to the way the class system was designed.

Ironically, Persistent World was less persistent than cRPG. When you died in PW, you lost all of your equipment, as well as a decent % of your money. Back when PW was first released, it was more about roleplaying than fighting, especially in the times before banks became a thing, when all players had to carry all of their money on them. This made them approach RP interactions very differently than in more recent times, as players had a lot more to lose back then. Old PW servers also used to have a lot of rules of engagement that actually had to be followed, or you'd get banned. Every PW/PK server I have played on recently was basically just a glorified TDM server. Old PW and new PW/PK play out very differently. I'm not really a fan of what the new PK meta became, as it basically just felt like trying to play native TDM, but with extra steps and a lot less actual combat within the same time frame. It just became boring never ending wars between the same handful of clans, and a whole lot of running between castles. There didn't seem to be much else going on besides that.

As for mercenaries, I never played it, so I can't really comment on it.

A few posts ago, you seemed to insinuate that native Warband was not a good enough experience on its own, and that it was basically just a placeholder until MP mods came out, but as far as I am aware (I've been playing Warband since 2011), MP mods never overtook native population-wise, and if I ever missed the time when they did, then they clearly didn't outlive native. The only thing that ever overtook native population-wise for any meaningful period of time was the Napoleonic Wars DLC, and when it comes to the NW DLC, I've known many people who only bought Warband in order to play NW. They never even attempted to play native warband, nor ever had the intention to. Those were people that didn't pick NW over native because they thought native was bad. Those were people that saw NW gameplay either on the steam store or on YouTube, and wanted to play that version of the game specifically from the very beginning. You'd be amazed at the number of people I used to talk to in NW who said that they didn't even know that native Warband had multiplayer. Bannerlord's case is different, everyone who has played Bannerlord knows that it has multiplayer, as it's front and center as one of the two selectable options for Bannerlord on the Bannerlord launcher. TW did a much better job making people aware that M&B had multiplayer this time around, but they didn't to as good a job of making an enjoyable multiplayer experience. I think that's fair to say, considering that Bannerlord has had far more more advertising than Warband ever did, yet the Bannerlord multiplayer population is tragically low compared to the multiplayer population that Warband had in its early years. It's simply a fact that Bannerlord in its current state is not enjoyable enough to retain players to the level Warband did. The SP side of Bannerlord has far more players than the SP side of Warband ever did. Player retention doesn't seem to be a problem for the game as a whole, but it clearly seems to be a problem for Bannerlord's multiplayer specifically. Servers crashing is obviously an annoyance, but I doubt that having to wait a minute for servers to come back up would keep people who love the game from continuing to play. There's obviously more fundamental problems with Bannerlord's multiplayer that are keeping it from growing and retaining a large playerbase. I'd get into it, but I'd just be beating on the same dead horse that people on these forums have been beating on since alpha. This post is also already going to be long enough.

To bring the conversation back to cRPG, the reason why I would consider playing cRPG over the current state of native Bannerlord is because the only game mode I care to play in Bannerlord right now is battle, and right now in native battle, if you enter the server after the first round has already started, you start with less gold than the people who were in the server before the first round started. You also have so little gold, that the only classes you can afford to play as on your first personal round on the server are the dumpster tier peasant classes. Meanwhile, the players that were in the server before the first round started basically start out with enough gold to play any class they want on their first round, and since they can start as the strongest classes on the first round, it's a lot easier for them to survive and deal damage to get kills and assists to secure enough gold to play as one of the strongest classes again the following round. While they can do this, you are stuck fighting an uphill battle with a trash peasant class.

Now let me give you a very frustrating scenario that happened to me recently that perfectly encapsulates why this is absolute dog**** game design. I launched the game again after not having played it in over 4 months. I joined the GK Battle server when it had around 17 people on it. It was Khuzait vs Sturgia on a very open map. I joined Sturgia because they had one less player on their team. Sturgia was losing 0-3 to Khuzait. Once the class selection screen appears for me, I come to find out that the game is only going to give me enough gold to play as either a Sturgian Brigand or a Sturgian Warrior, AKA, Sturgian Peasants. Already, I'm thinking "Hmm... playing as a peasant infantry class against a horse archer faction... this is already looking pretty lame." Then I spawn in, and I see that literally everyone else on my team also spawned in as either a Sturgian Brigand or a Sturgian Warrior. I think to myself, "There's no way these people are dumb enough to pick this class on purpose against Khuzait," and sure enough, I take a look at the scoreboard, and I see that everyone on my team basically has not a single kill or assist, so literally no one on my team can even afford to pick an archer or cav class in order to counter the Khuzait horse archers. The only way we could possibly even deal damage to them is if they were dumb enough to run into us and let us hit them. Sure enough they didn't let that happen, so they just rushed our spawn and rode in circles while shooting down my peasants-in-arms. They quickly massacred us, and then just did the same the following round. There was absolutely no chance of me being able to do anything useful that map from the second I entered the server, or of my team being able to make any sort of comeback, all thanks to the way the game was designed.

Now someone, ANYONE, after hearing that story, please tell me why a new player who would have had that be their first multiplayer Bannerlord experience would have ever wanted to play this game again? I'm pretty sure the only kinds of thoughts going through their head would have been things along the lines of "Who is the absolute smooth brain who hand crafted this dreadful multiplayer experience?" "Who thought it would be a good idea to put players in a situation where they wouldn't even be able to play a class of their choosing?" "Even worse, who thought it was a good idea to create an economic system that would allow for not a single player on a whole team to be able to play as an archer or cav when they deliberately put a faction in the game that has a horse archer class?"

With cRPG (I imagine, because I haven't actually played it yet), at least you would only have to deal with playing with a dumpster tier loadout at the beginning, but once you overcome that hurdle, you will be able to persistently play with a loadout that matches the way you would like to play the game from then on. You would be able to launch the game, join a battle server, and instantly play the game the way you would like to play it. If you launch native Bannerlord right now, and you join a battle server that started without you, you will not be able to play the game the way you would like to play it every single time. You will be forced to play at an immediate disadvantage with a terribly underequipped and boring class every single time. The very thought of it irks me. That and the fact that I generally don't like playing as most of the classes in native Bannerlord are the main reasons why I would seriously consider completely ditching native Bannerlord and play cRPG instead.

The power scaling progression of cRPG characters still bothers me though. I would very much prefer a mod that functions closer to Mordhau's customization system, where all the items in the mod are given point values based on how powerful or useful they are, and everyone is given the exact same amount of points to make a build out of. That way the potential item based power imbalance between players can be minimized, and a semblance of a fair and balanced gameplay experience can be achieved, all while allowing players to look and play the way of their choosing, within reason. I would also adopt Mordhau's take on armors, and just put armors into 3 tiers, light, medium, and heavy, and give them all the same armor values within their tier. It would make balancing armor values and speed values way easier when there are only 3 values to work around, and it would also make it easier for players to make decisions on what armor they choose because now they can focus more on the aesthetics of the armor they want to play in, rather than racking their brain over whether having 4 more armor value is worth not looking as fly. It would also bring with it a feeling of consistency when a player can have a reasonable idea of how many solid hits its going to take to kill a certain player, with a specific weapon of choice, against an armor that is discernably one that fits into one of the 3 tiers of armor.

aekilju 说:

Progression systems are a cancer on mp games but the abomination TW created isn't any better. At least crpg lets you pick your gear.

点击展开...

This. I've made several lengthy posts over the years criticizing the fundamental concept of cRPG in Warband, but native Bannerlord is so poorly designed, that I think even I would prefer playing cRPG in Bannerlord over the current state of native.

Terco_Viejo 说:

from a competitive environment perspective, what harm would such an addition bring to the gameplay-balance experience?

点击展开...

Since that's a specific question you asked, what I would say is that as a standalone mechanic, it sounds like it should be fine at a glance, but taking into consideration Bannerlord's current shielding animations and their limited movement range (thus limited shield coverage), there's a potential problem I can see with this being implemented for high level play, and that is that being able to shoot from a lower height would provide archers with an easier angle to shoot at feet from, especially at closer distances.

I can imagine it being like a reverse problem of archers/xbows/weapon throwers jumping over shield users in warband at close range, and shooting them in the head because shields couldn't be moved high enough to block shots or throws like that. I think this could cause a similar situation, except that instead of it being an unblockable shot from above, it would be an unblockable shot from below.

It's been months since I last played Bannerlord, and I can't remember if you could reach the ground and cover your toes with the smaller shields in the game while crouching, but even if you could, requiring infantry to be constantly crouching down to block foot shots, or especially trying to do so while in the middle of fighting other infantry would probably look and feel just as bad, potentially even worse, than not being able to shoot while being crouched.

Some actual current comp players should chime in on the practicality of something like this in the current state of the game, because things may have changed already since the last time I played, or I may be misremembering how the game worked.

In essence, my position is that being able to shoot from a crouched position would be visually appealing, and would feel intuitive, but given how other aspects of the game are designed (in this case shielding), allowing it could be problematic for gameplay.

I think if shield users were given a higher degree of shield movement range while in a non-crouched position, being able to shoot while crouched would be completely fine, and there would be no good reason for it not to be in the game if Bannerlord already introduced crouching into the game. I do think that not being able to shoot while crouched inevitably leaves a sour taste in every new player's mouth who has tried to do it, as it feels unintuitive and restrictive to be unable to do so. It's definitely a part of a conglomeration of game mechanics that TW (or modders) should look into fixing up all at once so that all the game mechanics can mesh well together.

Blood Gryphon 说:

They don't block all the damage but does reduce damage in bannerlord, at least when the shield is on your back.

点击展开...

In Warband, a shield on your back in SP reduces projectile damage to the back significantly, almost entirely, and it gives you a little text message saying "Hit shield on back!". In MP, it only reduces damage to the back slightly, and it doesn't produce the same message.

However, what I was actually talking about was that in Warband, if you are running around with a shield, NOT holding right mouse button to be actively blocking, the shield will still block incoming projectiles passively. You can even be in the middle of an attack animation, and if a projectile hits your shield, it will absorb the projectile and cancel out your attack, ending your attack animation and resetting you to a neutral position.

A common occurrence of shields blocking projectiles passively in Warband is when cavalry are couching, and archers try to shoot at them but end up hitting the shield instead. Couched lances are the only attack that don't get canceled when the coucher's shield gets hit by a projectile.

The weird thing about it though, is that the area that passive shield blocking covers neither matches the visual dimensions of the shield, nor the area that it would usually cover when being used to actively block with. I don't really know why it is that way.

Philozoraptor 说:

The first good step would be to make shields block attacks passively when you are not in defense animation, right now shields are ghosts with no hitbox when they are not in defense animation.

点击展开...

black_bulldog 说:

Wow I never realized that. Do you know if that holds true for older M&B titles?

点击展开...

I don't remember whether it's a thing in Bannerlord or not, since I haven't touched that game in a while, but I know for a fact that shields in Warband absolutely do block projectiles passively. It's only incoming melee attacks that don't get blocked passively, which makes me think that it was made that way intentionally by the devs.

Greedalicious 说:

Theres too many reasons why multiplayer numbers are low, everyone sorta shares some of the blame on this. Lack of battle didnt help thats for sure, but most competitive players from warband wouldve dissapeared because of the combat.

点击展开...

True, but competitive native players weren't the only people that wanted battle. Battle was also very popular for casual native players, and it was the game mode of choice for the NW scene, whether it be for pubbing, group fighting, or organized line-battles.

Greedalicious 说:

If it cant support a public and a ranked gamemode, it shouldnt have added the ranked version of it. The casual playerbase is much more important to the games life than the competitive base.
Same with adding Battle after Skirmish, they cant co-exist and have a healthy community.

点击展开...

Was the casual player base ever playing skirmish in the first place? IDK if the EU situation has been different, but the 4 times I've tried queueing skirmish in NA in the past year, at what should have been NA prime time, I couldn't find a single match after waiting in queue for hours.

The couple times I've launched the game recently, the NA battle server always seemed to be pretty full, far fuller than the TDM servers ever seemed to be.

That suggests to me that the community wasn't joking when they were saying that the game mode they wanted to play was battle all along.

Skirmish and Battle don't need to co-exist. One of them should have never existed in the first place, and it wasn't battle.

If battle had been in the game since the very beginning, the game probably wouldn't be in as sorry as a state as it's been, population-wise.
The game should have shipped with skill-based matchmaking, to separate the warband veterans from actual new players in 'competitive' game modes from the very beginning, when the game would have had the player base for skill-based matchmaking to have actually been functional. Now there aren't even enough people playing to actually be separated by skill levels.

The fact that they waited until now to add it is kind of weird. Maybe they were hoping to take advantage of the recent surge of players coming for battle mode to start populating skirmish mode again.

KSHMR 说:

I thought regular skirmish was intended by the developers as casual

点击展开...

As far as I remember, Skirmish is what TW had always wanted to force into becoming the premier competitive game mode for Bannerlord. Have they said anything recently to suggest that they've changed their stance on that?

Tork789 说:

I will only agree with this. I was under impression they are going to leave "public" skirmish and just add ranked on top of it, not replace it.

点击展开...

Why would they have two versions of the same game mode when they don't even have the population to consistently fill one? Aren't people already complaining about the queue times?

LES IS MOREx 说:

BSL Season 1*$120.00 prize* (NA) - Challonge

Explore this tournament hosted by LES_IS_MOREx

challonge.com

Every match was either confirmed with screenshots or I personally watched. You hate bannerlord! You've made it perfectly clear you wanted this game to fail from the start.

点击展开...

Every match was confirmed by screenshots sent TO YOU (or as you just admitted, by you watching them personally). That's literally what I just insinuated in my previous post.

The reason to have teams post the results ON THE FORUMS, is so that EVERYONE, including people that don't even play Bannerlord today can have the ability to come back to the tournament thread, and read the tournament history easily, and find all the match results, the dates the matches were played, and the screenshots that show how every individual performed in that particular match.

Also, you're mistaken if you think I wanted this game to fail from the start. I hoped for YEARS that Bannerlord would be a good game. Unfortunately, it just isn't. To this day, I still hope this game will become good and succeed, which is why I am here giving you tips on how to run a better tournament.

It's precisely because I care about this community that I am warning them about how you've run tournaments in the past. It's possible that you have changed, so go ahead and prove to everyone that you have improved your administration skills and can run a good tournament. I wish you the best of luck with your tournament.

Kunshiro 说:

Where is all the proof, please tell me its in the forum so I can read it all

点击展开...

Here's the BSL 1 thread. https://forums.taleworlds.com/index...-skirmish-league-ea-old-guard-wins-na.418293/

The conversation surrounding the finals match starts at around page 6. You can read through the posts to piece together the story yourself.

Though tbh, it's probably going to be kind of hard for someone who doesn't know the people posting, and didn't participate in the tournament, to piece it all together.

Since LES was fine with people just telling him the results of a match through steam, there's generally poor documentation of match results throughout the tournament, so you definitely wouldn't be able to figure out the full progression of the tournament through the forums alone. Only some match results were posted. You might be able to figure out the dates of non-posted match results by the banter posts relating to said match, which were typically posted soon after said match was over. Be careful though, because you could easily get thrown off by random troll posts that you may not be able to tell were troll posts at the time.

LES should seriously consider enforcing teams to post all of their match results with screenshots on the forums this time, so that people in the future can easily look back and know exactly what happened in the tournament.

LES IS MOREx 说:

Concerning the result of the first BSL, it was finished by disqualification because the team "Reign eSports" did not have enough players to play against "Old Guard" on the agreed date, after multiple failed scheduling attempts by the team Captains. BSL 1 for the most part was a resounding success until the final match, almost every other match until that point had been played successfully.

点击展开...

Resorting to outright lying I see.


BSL 1 lore aside, I'm not even suggesting that you don't run another tournament; your money is very welcome. I'm suggesting that you surround yourself with an admin team that can help you run a good tournament and prevent you from making dumb decisions that will ruin another one of NA Bannerlord's few tournaments.

Considering the finals match of BSL 1 didn't even get played, and LES pulled his money out of BSL 2 because he got himself banned from the forums due to racism, people should probably care a little bit about how BSL 3 will be run if what they are looking for is a legitimately run tournament with a guaranteed payout by the end of it.

Is LES reformed now... or is he still a rigging, cheating, scammer?

I can't help but notice that there is no rule against impersonating and playing for another team... you'd think it might be worth adding given that he himself has done it in his own tournament in the past. I can't help but think that he purposefully left it out so he can do it again, and then claim that there is no rule against it

I'd also recommend that the prize money be put in the hands of a trustworthy member of the community, so that LES can't just decide not to pay out the prize pool if a team he doesn't like ends up winning the tournament.

Who else is on the admin team? Will there be an individual or group of individuals with the power to veto any potential shenanigan's LES randomly tries to enforce halfway through the tournament?

Askey 说:

Then where is Battle mode, it was replaced by Skrimish mode - the same rules and building blocks for the mode they used in Warband Esports. Watch some vids on Warband Esports, you will see why people believe that the developers have focused on Esports. The foundations are there.

点击展开...

Don't be that guy. Don't blame this heaping pile of **** multiplayer experience on the competitive Warband community. We've been extremely vocal on the forums when it comes to asking for Battle mode to not only be included as a game mode in Bannerlord, but for it to be the premier competitive game mode over skirmish as well. We've literally been arguing about this since 2018 when Callum told us that there wouldn't be a single-life battle mode in Bannerlord. Don't believe me? Here is an example of the types of conversations that were being had on this topic literally multiple years ago when skirmish was still nothing but a concept https://forums.taleworlds.com/index...dated-info-and-discussion.375184/post-8940391

3-4 years later, still no battle mode. I don't understand where people get this idea that TW is heavily influenced by the Warband competitive community. TW has hardly ever interacted with the Warband competitive community. The one time they did was when they did the Battle of Bucharest, and when they did that, they threw aside the competitive format that the community had developed over many years and decided to run the tournament their own way. Obviously they are allowed to do as they please, but it just goes to show that TW has never really been in touch with the Warband community, and they tend to do whatever they want without really being concerned about the competitive community's thoughts & opinions. I'm not passing judgement on whether that is right or wrong, I'm simply stating how it is.

And just in case you didn't know, most competitive warband players have already given up hope on Bannerlord. Almost none play Bannerlord, and there's only a handful of competitive warband players that even lurk and post in the bannerlord section anymore these days. There's just no point. Everything that had to be said was said years ago. Most competitive warband players have either moved on to other games, or are still playing Warband to this day.

Also... Skirmish and the way competitive warband battle is played are absolutely not the same. Please don't ever say that again. It's actually insulting. I can hash out the fundamental differences between the two game modes for you if you actually care to know, but I've done it so many times at this point, I'd honestly rather not waste my time doing it again if it's just going to fall on deaf ears.

Updating the Nvidia drivers is a temporary solution that only seems to work for some (unless they finally fixed this over-one-year-long issue with their latest driver, which I doubt.) This guy has the best and most permanent fix for this issue that I've found thus far https://forums.taleworlds.com/index...ng-in-menus-and-world-map.437086/post-9718032

This one byte change in warband.exe completely fixes the flickering cursor issue and the associated FPS loss issue on in-game screens where the in-game cursor is present (e.g. world map, menu, inventory screen, character screen, party management screen, battle command screen, etc.)