搜索结果: *

The Bowman 说:

You can do anything to me, but I terribly want to see am in-game showcase or at least a sneak peek of this:

点击展开...

jacobhinds 说:

Meko 说:

Wow, I didn't know there was so many knee jerk activists on this forum. Attacking people over a perceived metaphorical statement. I better put the kiddy gloves on and use smaller, easier to understand less metaphorical statements in the future. Thanks for the heads up.

点击展开...

Ignore *****slaproof-vest, he doesn't represent the majority of people here.
We're not attacking you, just scrutinising the feasibility of your suggestion. A lot of people would like a larger map, but given that every settlement in warband is unique (even villages), they'd have to make some cuts to quality and detach you from the world even more, and I for one would prefer a smaller, more handcrafted map.
If you're going to make a suggestion on here expect some people to disagree. It's a forum.

点击展开...

Jarl Gunodd 说:

Something I've been thinking about is expanding on being a mercenary captain. I'd love if I could name my company, have it earn renown, be paid based on that renown, choose a banner, maybe make some custom troops and build a wooden fort or heavily entrenched camp similar to a castle.

点击展开...

Aghalen 说:

The game could offer you before you edit the face a choice of body type.
Four or five would suffice. And it will make masses of troops look outstanding.

点击展开...

RoboSenshi 说:

jacobhinds 说:

Some sort of steady stream of new lords that populate the land would help prevent the game from stagnating, and would give meaning to killable lords. You could have periods where there's a huge aristocracy and therefore the threat of a baron's revolt type thing, or a small aristocracy and the threat of peasant uprisings. Obviously killing lords would be political suicide in most cases, but would make the world feel less static.

点击展开...

Only killing lord that you have in captivity should bear any kind of penalty. Lords dying on the battlefield should be fine. In fact personally killing a lord should boost your renown depending on how great the lord is. Of course this should be applied to the player as well. He can be killed in battles or be executed when captured. But of course for the pussies out there the feature can be optional.

点击展开...

Manu_La_Canette 说:

Aghalen 说:

Orion 说:

Aghalen 说:

I would like to see different animations for different armors. An archer wearing light leather runs far more gracefully than a knight with 50 pounds of steel plate strapped onto him.

点击展开...

Plate harness is made to be fought in. In order to fight effectively you need full range of motion. It also mostly rides on the hips, so while it's heavy in an absolute sense it doesn't feel that heavy when you wear it.

D&D has skewed the perception of armor so much.

点击展开...

Allthough plate armour is made in a way to hinder movement as less as possible, it still affects your movements. Things like sprinting, jumping and turning at high speed become a "tad" more difficult.
I do suppose youre right at some point, since you get used to the extra weight, but I cant help feeling odd seing a swadian knight run in the same way as a swadian recruit.

点击展开...

Well you should check some Battle of Nations stuff. Guys there are wearing 14th century plates armor and are dealing high kicks with those 30kg upon their backs. Most of them are doing combat sports aside, which reflects the physical training of a trained warrior or a knight, which was trained since his childhood. What I say is the armour doesn't hinder much 'movements' (the most difficulty imo is the loss of balance) as long as you have a decent stamina and a sportsman training. Still running, kicking, jumping and stuff makes sense in armour for a trained person.

点击展开...

Orion 说:

Improvements to the morale system would have to be two-fold. You would need more ways to affect it on the campaign map before you have more ways it can affect a battle. If low party morale increased your chances of fleeing in battles in native Warband as it currently is, then I would probably lose at least twice as many battles (so, going from "few and far between" to "once a month or more"). This is because maintaining high morale in large parties for the player is quite difficult. Food variety and charisma/leadership/whatnot only go so far. I've wandered around with 30-50 morale in an army of ~100 top-tier troops that had excellent food variety and had recently won a couple of battles. The morale penalty from party size is huge, but if you want to be effective late-game you need a large party to take settlements. The only way to maintain a party of that size is food variety, paying wages every week, and constant successful combat. If you don't have a castle/city and your faction agrees to peace, you're going to have a bad time.

So, you need more ways to improve morale outside of battles. Soldiers love to train, so I think sparring at the training fields (or the equivalent in Bannerlord) should provide a small boost to morale. Training provides confidence and ability, so it makes perfect sense. This is just one example.

Morale's effect in battle is probably obvious. Basically, it should affect a tendency to rout. One way to calculate whether or not a unit routs could involve party morale and the unit's level, where unit level is used as a multiplier of sorts for party morale, and this is inversely proportionate to rout chance. So, a unit with high party morale but low level would have the same, low rout chance as a unit with low party morale but high level. A fight would practically be over before a high level unit routs, whereas a handful of nearby casualties could cause a low level unit with low party morale to run for the hills.

点击展开...

Do not look here 说:

Actually, it could be even developed further to allow some inner movements, as villagers tend to tell you that this or that lord is especially cruel to his men. I like it already when in game rescuing fellow lord from tight spot makes other one cringe. Some frictions inside faction that would escalate in the time of peace might be interesting and could give then something to do for war-thirsty players.

But that aside, some kind of borders would be nice to have, yeah. Although I'm not sure about colourful lines looking right on the world map.

点击展开...

jacobhinds 说:

true dat. It always bothered me how you could march an entire campaign army in a straight line right past a neutral castle and not piss them off. kind of made castles a bit pointless if you couldn't prevent an enemy army and its supply trains from just trudging by.

点击展开...

Danik 说:

The warband SP do indeed seem broken in comparison to the quality of multiplayer part of the game, imo. The AI stupidity in combat and diplomacy might have a central role in that.

点击展开...

*****slaproof-vest 说:

plus it's not irrelevant at all cause if the unfinished, unpolished and terribly buggy political system remains the same in bannerlord, we are screwed....

点击展开...

Antar 说:

Or you can have some fun and tell your troops to attack, too. You know, to have fun in a video game. Besides, I'm pretty sure AI will be greatly improved in Bannerlord so it would be a shame if you could take on a whole army by yourself (That's excluding cheats, of course).

点击展开...