搜索结果: *

Totalgarbage 说:

I'm curious about why BG3 specifically is treated this way as if it saved the video game industry singlehandedly, I would argue that ToTK is better suited to this "mantle" (but it's possible that I'm being unknowingly contrarian because BG3 is the famous thing now). Similarly, I never understood the amount of praise Witcher 3 got despite playing it a lot and really liking it several years after its release (so it was better optimized and far less buggy).

点击展开...

Its a social media meme, you can see this in any game community right now. 'THE GAME INDUSTRY IS TERRIFIED OF LARIAN ' emoji filled takes directly imported from the most annoying person you can imagine on YouTube.

Its funny people are contrasting it favorably to Star Citizen because the hype generated by probably paid YouTubers is the exact reason millions of people were convinced it would be an alternate space reality and had whales dropping thousands of dollars on space yachts for it.

What bearing does this have on Bannerlord or its development? It was 'complete' as most games anymore on release, it just was and isn't very good. Personally, I was a BG1&2 fan, so I purchased BG3, but I don't really enjoy much about it, it's also full of bugs and crashes for me, the game seems to get worse the further in I go. I suppose I should be spamming these terrible videos in BG3 communities so Larian can show those crooks at Larian how it's done.

why is everyone pretending this game wasn't available in an unfinished state for 3 years

ai archers are a problem too, they just have army templates incongruous with the games mechanics and don't spam them like the player. everyone hates fighting khergit. its absolutely a problem with armor, narrow hp values, bloated raw weapon damage and speed modifiers. the issue goes deeper than just archers and has a negative influence on gameplay diversity generally. but you are right the ai should probably be smart enough to raise their shields and put them up front instead of getting turned into pincushions too.

Apocal 说:

Just FYI, I picked 2010 because that was the year of Warband's release. Anything with words counts as above-average if you include the 80's and 90's.

That's not as relevant as you think. Even with mods that increase armor's effectiveness, sieges virtually always result in companions and named lords being downed, as they always spawn in the first wave and have to face every enemy present on the same HP pool. The only way I've gotten them to survive consistently is by making high-tier armor nigh-invulnerable to most forms of damage.

Obviously, this is assuming a relatively even siege assault. Of course you can just have a laughably outmatched defense, such as a rebelling town, and roll right in without worries any of your companions will die.

点击展开...

companion death really clashes with the all risk little reward nature of combat, well half the games systems do tbh.

I dont think the strategy layer really works at the same time as the battle layer so you couldn't do it in a real sense. might be able to just check if any armies that would normally join the battle are close and then spawn them in after some amount of time.

this would be a pretty big change since a lot of the game seems to operate on the assumption you can pick off lords armies somewhat safely

i dont really care. they are a decent sized company now and there isn't really a point to keep pumping new armor into bannerlord forever. they can make spaceships or whatever. im not doing EA again, i made an exception for bannerlord in the first place.

as the game exists I don't think theres really any point in having crusader kings style "bad heirs". imo it should just pretty much be a potential upgrade, or a chance to switch play styles.

31 been playing since M&B. still got my old beta email from '06 or something lol. spent a ton of time on it and warband. I don't have quite as high an opinion on it as some of the veterans here and see it as a pretty rough gem, but it still stands out for me as a unique experience in gaming and really grabbed me at the time. I already got my money's worth out of bannerlord, but I don't think its something ill be coming back to without some major changes. i still follow here and reddit and I'm holding out hope that after the full release with either patches or mods it will be something i come back to, hopefully off and on again for years like the first one.

i have been convinced by videos of custom battles that don't resemble anything you would see in the actual game that its actually extremely good theres no reason to use anything except archers

i really don't care about the realism of the perk but "you can maybe block some arrows maybe" after like 100 hours of grinding being the extent of the character progression in this game is very depressing. 3% damage here. 5 hp there. this is the kind of progression they do in grindy f2p pvp games so a new person isn't completely outmatched. but we are playing a single player rpg where your character is basically done when you buy a decent weapon with only renown doing much after.

StewVader 说:

I also don't get the this mind set. FIXING perks is not new content. New content would be a MERCHANT Republic play style with supported game mechanics, or being able to control and dictate what your fiefs produced, or the endless plethora of great ideas not included in the game already.

Not already introduced into the game is the key take away here. Perks are already in the game, if you think fixing and balancing them is new content, well that's incredulous to me.

点击展开...

there's a lot of problems with the game, many of its systems are barely implemented and some that are aren't in a good place. do you think a functioning kingdom system isn't a worthwhile addition because you can technically form one right now? clans that aren't afterthoughts. how about if the much talked about crime system existed beyond a simple scripted fight/influence gain and the vague implication of a roguery skill. if that is the case you are unlikely to see any "content" for a while. You understand 80% of the perks that are "in the game" literally do nothing right?

sturgias in even worse shape because one of its cities is out on a peninsula and the other on the opposite side of their region is built into the side of a mountain making it take even longer for help to arrive if its attacked, not to mention a 50% reduction in snow penalty is still a penalty, meaning they generally just move slower on top of already moving slow because of the lack of cavalry, the opposite for kuzait.

aserai shares their other problem of their center of power being as far from other factions as possible, meaning long treks for the majority of their manpower to be on the front.

Sarissofoi 说:

MP already gone this way and it affected SP badly.
TW had/have some dellusions about Bannerlord becoming new E-sport game. Spears being **** and horses charge being low damage is gift from MP beta. Thanks to some MP autists screeching on forum.

点击展开...

they are still complaining about it, even the diminshed state of cavalry now is too much for them. they absolutely must detach MP/SP gameplay if we are going down this path, or we are going to end up with a game where no playstyle is viable besides being a naked guy wielding a greatsword, and the people who like that already abandoned the game because they haven't got private duel servers.

haws3r 说:

Might not work for everyone...
I belong to the group of ppl who believes this heir/inheritance system along with the accelerated time is utter and complete BS and should be optional. I don't want to play with my heir's heir's heir, I want to play with my toon like we did in WB...

点击展开...

its already optional though, just disable death. except maybe if you get too old? never played a campaign that long. they should probably allow disabling aging as well. executions should just be disabled in a static world. there's a reason you couldn't do it in warband.

i like making custom weapons, i really don't like anything else about the system as it exists. if they aren't going to retool it I think I would prefer just being able to purchase a custom weapon for gold instead. also think they missed an opportunity to tie this into the player owned smithies.

i did this because i thought it would be fun to be an early medieval robespierre and end fuedalism with an executioners axe but i really wanted to use a peasant army.

anyway I don't really like all the arbitrary repercussions for executions people are suggesting. instead they should look to make it less powerful by generating new lords, or maybe even having a pool of inactive nobles who step up in these circumstances. and having a proper inheritance system.

and let evil nobles execute me so i have a reason to get revenge with the currently underdeveloped family system.

somewhat agree. since we have noble trees now it might make sense if the higher tier troops didn't get past a certain point equipment wise, it is kind of annoying that my troops are better equipped than me and my companions after a couple weeks. not that it really matters atm since as you noted armor doesn't make a huge difference which is its own problem. this would make noble troops seem a little more special too.

that being said 90% of armies were not conscripts/levies. in this time period the majority of (smaller than many might imagine) armies would be a kings retinue, his lords and theirs, and mercenaries, which is somewhat how the game works now. their men would have been paid and might have been wearing gambesons but would have acquired mail if/when they could afford it. this varied a lot depending on time and place though.

this game has a bit of both extremes where our troops start wearing their farm clothes and then we end up with an entire army in coats of plates

they are blobby in the sense that their formation loses coherence which is fine. they aren't blobby in the mount & blade sense that they like to pack a few square feet so densely that sometimes units can't even damage each other for being to close.

In total war i believe the combat we see is mostly aesthetic, animations represent already resolved simulated attacks, not a physical simulation, so this problem isn't possible. worst case is some ugly clipping, or animations that don't align. it's really not a good comparison.

units in m&b are unaware of the space needed for their own weapons, no respect for even their allies need for space to operate, no concept of friendly fire. how much of this is possible to do without destroying everyones cpu's? I have no clue, but maybe some of it could be faked well enough.

one thing that might help is that it is okay to have units in the back ranks doing nothing, unlike how now charge results in a disorganized mess, and formations collapse on contact with opponents. deep ranks were noted to boost morale heavily, thinner formations might have maximized your active combatants, but broke very easily. they could relieve exhausted or wounded allies and they also provided protection in case of a flank.

Thanks for visualizing it like this OP, its hard to imagine the story since we get it from a dozen people in game.

these two things aren't exclusive and probably not even worked on by the same people