搜索结果: *

  1. SenorZorros

    Dev Blog 15/08/19

    The_BlackThorn 说:
    Mirabelle 说:
    I don't know how to feel about that. 10 years in development and they will release the game in early access? And even worse it's not this month or the next month but 7 months in the future.  :ohdear:
    点击展开...

    Don’t worry it will be a lot more complete than most other early access games you have likely played.

    So excited!  :party:
    点击展开...
    you have sources for that? Most early access games also have several years of development after release.  At this rate the 2025 release is becoming more and more plausible...
    And that's without mentioning the inherent anti-consumer practices in Early-access publishing.
  2. SenorZorros

    Early access - Whats your comment?!

    Resounding meh.
    The last early access game I bought was planet coaster. Made by a studio which has far greater acclaim than Taleworlds. And left me rather disappointed. I've been burned enough times to know better and expect better. Taleworlds isn't a cute little indie team any more. If you want people to Beta-test your game hire testers or organise a public beta. But don't expect the community to pay for the privilege of fixing your bugs.
    On the upside at least I now don't feel like I have buy on day one and can wait till the price drops.
  3. SenorZorros

    Dev Blog 18/07/19

    People seem to miss an upside of the influence system which is easily overlooked but essential to the game which is:
    Computers understand numbers. They can work with them. They can have an AI behave according to it. They can have two AI's use the system when dealing with each other.

    A pretty large flaw in Warband is that the computer works on different rules. They don't just cheat which would be fine if not to blatant. They don't play the same game as the player. This generally ends up in a situation where for the player it's beneficial to ignore the other lords as much as possible because they tend to just be in the way.

    Taleworlds seems to be focused on creating a game where the AI actually behaves like a player would, has the same goals and has the same means. So you don't feel like you are playing a different game and actually can deal with lords in a constructive manner. Bringing in clear point levels which are known by every agent allows the AI to make these choices without them having knowledge the player doesn't have. of course I still expect the AI to cheat but that's fine as long as it makes them have about the same abilities the player does.
  4. SenorZorros

    Dev Blog 04/07/19

    vicwiz007 说:
    Yes exactly. But dont be too discouraged. If Napolean could become a great leader, so too can the vile manlet beggah. You dont need to woo any ladies if you can rain denars on them
    点击展开...
    1. Napoleon was about half a head taller than average for his time. The idea he was short came from the fact he had even taller bodyguards. something the English used for propaganda to their hearts content.
    2. According to historical records Napoleon was a dreadful lover.
  5. SenorZorros

    Dev Blog 04/07/19

    my guess would be ally enemy?

    What I wonder is how this plan will play out. will it be an autoresolve or can you take the lead of the charge?
  6. SenorZorros

    Dev Blog 04/07/19

    I don't know. Whether these features work tends to be more dependent on execution and the feel rather than the raw amount of features. In the assault phase you might use stats and elements like having different siege weapons or destructible walls as well as possible traps and the like to give an impression of how many options there are. In this case it can really go both ways. we may get an interesting case of politics under pressure with difficult communication and treachery abound leading to a game of personality judgement, bluff and educates guesswork of the highest degree. Or we get Warband with two additional buttonss and finally a higher chance of the defenders starving out instead of the attackers. both are still possible and anything in between. So I can't say I'm more confident or more educated about the game as I was before... 
  7. SenorZorros

    Dev Blog 20/06/19

    KucukEniste 说:
    SenorZorros 说:
    Good to see there are more options for harassing your opponents. However, in medieval times knights generally harassed every village regardless of allegiance. Will there be an option to levy troops and collect "special tithes" from your own fiefs? and if so, will villages treat you different depending on how much you demand. I'd love to see villages and towns become uncooperative and maybe even rebellious if they think they have a weak lord which will let them get away with not paying their tithes and taxes and not supplying the required levies for the lord's army.
    点击展开...

    In campaign logistics blog they mentioned this:
    Commanders can send out forager parties which will scour the countryside for food, confiscating any resources they come across. They can also send out raiders to attack villages directly, which will not only loot resources but also wreak havoc on the region and damage its economy.
    点击展开...

    I hope it answers your question.
    点击展开...
    This seems to be more aimed at raiding enemy villages though and mostly as a part of a campaign. I was talking about oppressing your own peasants instead of helping your enemy oppress theirs.
  8. SenorZorros

    Dev Blog 20/06/19

    Good to see there are more options for harassing your opponents. However, in medieval times knights generally harassed every village regardless of allegiance. Will there be an option to levy troops and collect "special tithes" from your own fiefs? and if so, will villages treat you different depending on how much you demand. I'd love to see villages and towns become uncooperative and maybe even rebellious if they think they have a weak lord which will let them get away with not paying their tithes and taxes and not supplying the required levies for the lord's army.
  9. SenorZorros

    Dev Blog 13/06/19

    I also wonder who determines which divisions are made. I'd assume the high commander would do that but there is no clear answer.
    I hope the player and the ai lords have the ability to refuse to share command and instead command their own troops maybe even having their own subdivision. This of course bearing significant political ramifications and causing significant distrust if the commander's reputation is high. Though if the commander is not respected it might be a more acceptable choice.
    On that note, Will we be able to betray our allies and switch allegiance mid-battle? Large medieval battles were known for their politics with allies often being unwilling to commit to a battle until they were certain of victory and merchenaries switching sided mid-battle if they were offered more by their new masters.
  10. SenorZorros

    Dev Blog 07/06/19

    If I recall correctly a week is a month though all of this is dependent on how long a day takes.
  11. SenorZorros

    Dev Blog 07/06/19

    [SOTR] Roy 说:
    jacobawesome7 说:
    Suggestion: Make it so you can capture the lords and torture them to try and force them to give up gold or settlements. Also, you could make it so if they are weak and you torture them enough they will become your servant and pledge allegiance to you and your king. Kinda like what Ramsay did in Game of Thrones when he tortured Theon and made him become reek.
    点击展开...

    This would be way too overpowered. Capturing a lord means a couple torture clicks and you get free land.
    点击展开...
    Free land with consequences. People don't really look kindly to a lord that tortures his peers and would probably retaliate if they have an option. Also, don't expect any mercy if you are captured. Forget ever getting any help and beware if your former captive becomes part of your faction and starts politicking against you.I don't see an issue with (public) torture to teach your opponents a lesson as long as it has proper repercussions. At the same enemy lords shouldn't be piñatas which drop gold when you hit them. Rather, the public torture is a way to... convince, their family that accepting that rather hefty ransom of ceding a part of their lands might be the better option after all.
    the torture into submission part seems to be a bit silly and unsuitable. The proper way to "convince" a prisoner to become your vassal is not by torturing them until they break but by trading them for hostages which you then treat generously as long as your vassal does the same with you.
  12. SenorZorros

    Dev Blog 07/06/19

    I now hope that that screenshot is indeed the "are you sure you want to execute" screen and there is another inbetween that and the prisoner screen where you can decide them amount of kill per execution. Or even arrange for a public one.
    Also then talking about lobbing of body parts. will there also be a way to punish lords whose family was... less than forthcoming... with the ransom? (if you only want to pay 80% you'll only get 80% of your uncle back)
  13. SenorZorros

    Dev Blog 07/06/19

    BayBear 说:
    SenorZorros 说:
    save scumming.
    点击展开...

    Off with your head
    点击展开...
    HEY, I'm not the one who proposed it. Don't decapitate the messenger...
  14. SenorZorros

    Dev Blog 07/06/19

    that's where the other new addition, the heir system, kicks in.
    well... that and indeed save scumming.
  15. SenorZorros

    Dev Blog 30/05/19

    nah, just two to five points of the change log every week and we'll be set for years.
  16. SenorZorros

    Dev Blog 30/05/19

    KucukEniste 说:
    I was being sarcastic about that. I was suprised by the people, who get furious because of clothes which had extra leather on wrong part of the dress in a game which 'visual immersion' is not that important.

    But maybe im blind and can't see the flaws you see. Or because im a guy who would choose a bikini over a baddass plate armor if bikini has better stats.
    点击展开...
    1. people aren't angry, just worried. and bored because of the lack of new info. Bored people have more time to get worried
    2. don't worry mate, I'd also choose the bikini armour. But that wouldn't preclude me from ranting about it's lack of authenticity on the forums :wink:. Hell, I modded my sword sisters to have Armour without helmets because having top tier troops which die to a single well placed shot aren't fun gameplay even if it would be realistic.
    ...
    also, to be honest, bikini armour is in the same league as dinosaurs in that it's obviously not meant to work and therefore the questionable details don't look as odd in the context.
    Also, the sword sister doesn't make any historical sense anyway and I'm not talking about them being women. A high to late medieval warrior wouldn't ride into battle without a lance and a mounted crossbowman?... woman? I guess man but with man as a shortening of human rather than addressing the gender. anyways, they wouldn't have such expensive armour. Keep in mind the game is set at the time that the first plate armours are just being introduced. Also, why do they have a full crossbow instead of a light one? That's just dumb. I mean, they could be mounted infrantry but the game doesn't really support that due to the small scale of the battles. It's also a bit bizarre they use unarmoured horses in a setting where adding armour is quite common though I couldn't verify horse armour was that common during the high middle ages and lastly their equipment seems to be a mishmash of italian and arabic styles.
  17. SenorZorros

    Dev Blog 30/05/19

    KucukEniste 说:
    SenorZorros 说:
    I mean, at least dino's aren't usually clad in biker gear wielding weapons from the bronze age so from a realism standpoint I'd be fine with them...
    EDIT: beyond some sarcastic joking I genuinely have less issues with dinosaurs than with fake armour. Dino's are egregious enough that they break with reality and thus are sensible either because of lore reasons or because of the rule of cool.
    点击展开...
    I disagree. I would  have viking helmets with horns or leather scraps on chain mail armor over something that would take medieval theme from game.     
    Bad clothing however falls into the uncanny valley where it is not absurd enough to break with preconceived notions but also feels too wrong to be added without an explanation. If you add large fantasy elements the lore automatically warps around those but if your details don't make sense they feel out of place because the lore doesn't deal with them.
    点击展开...
       
    Hmmm. You want lore huh? Calradia has unique fashion taste that a dress is beatiful as how unrealistic and expensive to make.  Thats why empire has purple uniforms.         
    Do you like the clothes now ?     
    点击展开...
    1. Why does that matter if the medieval+dinosaur theme is just as well executed?
    2. Actually purple being cheap is pretty easy to handwave with exotic plants. the problem is that your explanation doesn't make sense when the simple peasants also dress in clothing which would not only be expensive but even more uncomfortable when they need to work. also, how did that fashion happen. Regardless of arguing to which degree headcanon matters. I fail to see how that explanation covers it.
    for the purple there is actually a way easier handwave which is "calradia has different pigments and purple is one of them". There, done. Also, because the purple has an actual gameplay use of differentiating between troops, people can suspend their disbelief. 
    When people complain about realism they don't complain it's not as reality. They complain thet the world doesn't feel real. That it isn't coherent. That it feels like a filmset which is revealed to be nothing but plywood the moment you look to the side. These clothes are not logical. Therefore they seem unreal.
  18. SenorZorros

    Dev Blog 30/05/19

    I mean, at least dino's aren't usually clad in biker gear wielding weapons from the bronze age so from a realism standpoint I'd be fine with them...

    EDIT: beyond some sarcastic joking I genuinely have less issues with dinosaurs than with fake armour. Dino's are egregious enough that they break with reality and thus are sensible either because of lore reasons or because of the rule of cool. Bad clothing however falls into the uncanny valley where it is not absurd enough to break with preconceived notions but also feels too wrong to be added without an explanation. If you add large fantasy elements the lore automatically warps around those but if your details don't make sense they feel out of place because the lore doesn't deal with them.
  19. SenorZorros

    Dev Blog 23/05/19

    Nox_Tenebris 说:
    Im going to hijack this blog to put out some idea to make castles more useful. If another army can march straight to another faction's city and take it, then what is even a point of a castle? To just be there?

    The little amount of medieval knowledge I posses tells me that castles/forts were used to scout enemy movement, to host a lord's family, to stand as a border between an invading army and the faction, to harass enemy armies by attacking their forager parties/scouts and so on.

    Imagine this: Canada and the US go to war. Canada launches an invasion, and instead of making progress down South, they just straight up march do Philadelphia and boom. Philadelphia is a Canadian city now. Doesn't matter that it's still surrounded by hostile territory.

    And that's exactly what happens in Warband. A faction takes a city from another faction, and you just have this weird blub when looking at the minimap (If u use a mod that allows you to do that)

    I also don't get how armies can literally pass trough castles without anything happening. It would bring so much more depth to the game if castles kinda blocked armies from passing near them, allowing factions to hold chokepoints, like in canyons, between rivers or mountains, bridges.

    I think that there should be something done about this. It would make invading another faction so worth so much more planning, rather than just clicking on a city with your superior army.

    Some ideas:

    - Castles would have this "defensive circle" whose raidus would depend on the number of men holding it, which would prevent any army from passing near it. So a commander could make two decisions: He could march around the settlement's "defensive circle", which would prolong his way or potentially block it if the settlement is placed between two natural barriers, or he could march straight to the settlement to take it.

    - Entering enemy territory would instantly start harming your army. The longer you staid, the lower the morale of the army would get. Your food supplies would drain more quickly than usual. There would be a chance of your army getting harassed by enemy skirmish parties. So - the longer you stay in enemy territory, the higher the chance of your army being collapsed by the lack of food and low morale.

    ​
    点击展开...
    No, that's actually pretty much how it works. castles were regularly passed if they were not worth taking due to cost/gain and if you had a large traveling army there was, and still is, no reason not to pass by. The main issue with passing by castles is that if you have a supply train they can raid it as well as possible merchants and other travelers. While I think it might be interesting to implement features relating to land usage, plundering and scorched earth as well as some automation of patrols I don't think a magical barrier is the correct option. A castle couldn't project it's power except by using it's garrison which is already in the game.

    again, the only exception may be castles that are built at and block mountain passes, bridges, crossings or other natural obstacles but otherwise ignoring a castle should be fair game.
  20. SenorZorros

    Dev Blog 16/05/19

    In any case we need to be very cautious about the writing of the game. After all, if they can't get their ordinary trees right how can we trust their dialogue trees will be correctly rooted?
后退
顶部 底部