搜索结果: *

Technech 说:

The problem in the game is that the momentum of the charging horse is magically lost when its poked with any stick.

点击展开...

Exactly. Maybe the pitchfork kills the horse (probably, if it's not very well armoured), but the horse almost certainly kills the peasant. Momentum and impact damage from horses needs to be a thing in the game. You could balance it by having the horse take damage when it hits a person as well, that way it doesn't become a tactic people want to use.

This would be a great feature. The rest feature in VC was nice, but I like the idea of rest in castles and cities being more important (say, morale can only be replenished by resting in a city or a castle). That would really increase their importance and make long trips into enemy territory difficult (as they were in real life).

I have the same laptop. I had the exact issue as you, even on very low I was getting lag (even in menus). I upgraded to 16GB of ram and it fixed it. The game runs fine now (although my laptop still gets hot enough to cook me while I'm playing!).

Edit: I can now run it on Med settings comfortably, or High with a bit of slowdown in big battles

Rice lover 说:

These features could be made optional.

点击展开...

I 100% agree. In VC I played with all of the optional stuff turned on and it made it much more immersive.

It is confusing, but I read it as 1). So a cleave attack does 40% more damage to the second person hit.

R4MPZY 说:

VC was a mod published by TW, so they cant just take things from it without consent from the Brytenwalda team unless they have the rights? but who knows for sure, Naval combat will be in eventually, after release as they have said but decapitations is a no for age ratings obviously, if they would have added it it would have been before EA, but its to late now unless they do it with a dlc.

I do hope that naval warfare would bring back the epic beach landing battles inside coastal cities that VC had

点击展开...

I'd be very surprised if TW didn't have a clause in their EULA that says that they own the rights to any features added by mods. And they would have a contract with the VC team that surely gives them ownership of everything in VC. I think it's more likely that VC had some fairly controversial and niche features that some players (including me) love, but a lot of players don't. Like having to rest, for example, it's great from an RP and immersion perspective, but a lot of players hated it for slowing down the game.

I think naval combat is unlikely, as the map doesn't have any islands and not a lot of water. I'd like it to return though.

SmattlePattle 说:

That is true, the combat scope was toned down and its easier to balance that.
Now, personally speaking, I don't mind lack of perfect balance if things function decently. Like cavalry might ultimately be the better meta than infantry, but if infantry at least worked properly it might be more fun to play. Given the seemingly hard limits on AI its always possible for a skilled player to out-strat an AI with an arguably inferior army, just needs to be fun to do.

点击展开...

Agreed. The fact is (for example), horse archers should be a pain to deal with, and crossbows and heavy cavalry should have an advantage over infantry heavy armies like the Sturgians. It just adds more challenge for the player (and tactical considerations, like avoiding field battles with the Khuzait and going straight for sieging, etc). I do think that giving each faction a core of low tier, shield and spear infantry good for defence but not much else would vastly improve things. This would do a lot for battles by making them slower and more predictable for the AI. All the other cool units then become how you or the AI gets an advantage.

Also, one other thing that I love about VC is the bandit system. There are a lot more types, they have a more graded difficulty curve (looters - bandits - brigands - reavers - Vikings), and they remain a threat into the mid-game without being much of an annoyance. It's really fun to practice your tactics against a band of sixty or so brigands and reavers before moving on to fighting lords.

Plus one to all of this. I'm replaying VC at the moment and it's awesome.

Also, in VC you could have a dog!

One thing I would point out though is that while the battle system works really well in VC, a big part of that is that the armies are all very similar and there are fewer troop types. Most infantry is shielded and there is very little cavalry. There are no horse archers, jav cav suck, and there is very little melee cavalry (and no real heavy cav). Skirmishers and archers are only useful to harass the enemy and soften them up. The only way to win a battle in VC is with Heavy infantry.

One of the problems Warband always had with combat was balancing vastly different combat styles, and Bannerlord seems to have the same problem.

CyberianK 说:

I prefer the Musical

点击展开...

Thank you for bringing this into my life!

As others have said, accuracy against moving targets should get nerfed, that also goes for any projectile weapons at the moment. Try soloing looters with a horse and spear, and then load up Warband and do it. Those rock-throwing swine will almost kill you in Bannerlord, but in Warband you'll barely get scratched.

Javelins should do serious damage, and they should destroy shields. The trade-off should be that they are short-range, you're vulnerable when throwing, and you need a high skill level to be accurate with them.

Ody_cz 说:

Main problem is how fast can AI create new armys. You can defeat 5 lords and if you dont kill them they will make full stack of new recruits in like 2 days. If you kill them they will be immediately replaced by mercenarys. It is dull. Actions you make have no consequences ,,

点击展开...

Bramborough 说:

I think this "too many Recruits in lord's armies" issue isn't really a fundamental problem in itself, but rather the symptom of other problems. The recruitment & troop-development mechanics might actually be all right, except they're overstressed and distorted by the never-ending warfare. Another factor: all Calradic lords are escape artists who rarely spend more than 1-2 days behind bars when captured. Which means all the lords are constantly sucking up all available recruits from settlements, to the point where it can even be hard to even find a lot of Recruits in some areas, let alone higher-tier troops.

点击展开...

This is the main problem that I can see. When a lord is defeated, whether by the player or AI, they should be imprisoned for a long time before being ransomed. Escape chance should be tiny, and basically not happen unless another lord attacks the army/castle that they're in and frees them. That way, every defeat would hurt the faction.

War is just boring at the moment because it's playing whack-a-mole with trash armies that have little hope of even causing casualties, let alone beating the player.

Somereally good suggestions in this thread. It seems to me that spears should be fast, low-damage weapons. So the speed should be a lot higher. Against cav, some kind of passive brace mechanic (which is pretty much what was really done in the spear wall - in real life). And some kind of fudge to remove spear collision from troops behind you. Those three changes seem like they'd fix spears pretty much.

Another one I'd like to see, but which might be bad for weapon balance, is for spears to keep shields up while attacking. I'd actually like to see that with all thrusting attacks from all weapons as it seems the most realistic...but it might make combat boring and super dofficult.

I voted no. It's not a simple situation. You should definitely lose relation with the Lord's friend and clan when you execute them, but members of other factions shouldn't lose relation (I killed an Asseri lord today and lost 10 relation with the Khergit clan...). Bannerlord needs a reputation meter like Warband had. Executions should lose reputation and mark you as cruel or evil. The current system is too punitive though.

h1zchan 说:

F1 - F4

点击展开...

This. Put them in shield wall, then order them to advance (F1-F4). They'll move forward in formation and engage the enemy. It works pretty well.

DocShotgun 说:

This is a really good point. I remember a campaign where I was sitting on 1m+ denars, but the barrier to maintaining an elite party was more so finding noble recruits and promoting them rather than the costs. The "too much money lategame" problem is much more from the lack of finding anything to spend it on.

点击展开...

Exactly. Once you get big enough to take on lords, money becomes a non-issue and progress is limited by other factors. Mainly getting noble recruits (which is a bit too random at the moment), upgrading soldiers or farming influence. Money basically becomes meaningless after you have a fief or two and reach clan tier 3ish.

The biggest downside is that it puts you at war with that faction. And you can't join a faction that is not at war with that faction, which can be a pain. To make peace with them will cost several thousand gold. Theoretically, if you destroy all the caravans coming to a city you could hurt the local economy... but, if you are based in Vlandia and raiding caravans in Asserai territory (for example), you shouldn't notice it.

I haven't found it too worthwhile, but that's because there seems to be something going on with the loot you get from battles, it seems like the value is capped in some way, so you never get that much. (in my experience).

Ettenrocal 说:

What would be really interesting is empire faction has different cultures settlements/villages on their borders. Different troops trees with auxilliary troops from the border cultures.

点击展开...

Snap! You read my mind and posted it (more clearly than I did!) at the same time!

I answered: 'different troop trees'. But even that I think is too much. I'd rather have a couple of unique units for each Empire faction, as others have said. This would represent the culture of the lands they occupy and what auxiliaries would be available. So maybe:

• Southern Empire - Horse archers, since they encounter the Khuzaits and Asserai a lot
• Northern Empire - Shock infantry, because of all the Northern Barbarians in the region
• Western Empire - Dunno, they already have heavy cavalry and crossbows. Maybe limit crossbows to the Western Empire only and make them more elite like the Vlandian version.

Aevann 说:

-snip -

点击展开...

Iraeis 说:

Seems to me like it might be a cop out to criticisms of sexism

点击展开...

Wow

D.O.A. 说:

This reminds me of when the original mount and blade was released as a pre-release before that was even a thing. We are playing with a foundation at the moment that's a long way from having the right structure on it. (see warband for that) I won't be on the edge of my seat waiting for anything tho or even play this game at this point in time with a serious face on, you'll end up burned out before this even begins to shine.

点击展开...

I think this is a good point. The original took years to get into a really good state. And it wasn't until Viking conquest that I think it really got to be an amazing game rather than just an amazing concept (I know some people don't like VC, but I can't play Warband now without all it's features).

Probably similar to a lot of people here, I'm playing a lot at the moment due to the lockdown. In a normal workweek, I'd have maybe 4-6 hours to play, so the issues with the game wouldn't be a problem. But Steam is telling me I've played 32 hours since launch, and I don't think the Early access is designed for that kind of hardcore play. I'm purposely saving my favourite faction (Batanians) for a playthrough further down the line when the game is in a better state. I'll probably not play for a while as well. Otherwise, I can see me getting burned out on this game real fast, due to all of the issues it has at the moment.