Search results for query: *

  1. Kretti

    Combat legitimately looks horrible.

    ourgekj said:
    Yes made a mistake 2h not 1h and maybe to much.

    But the fact is,in this game, you can move a 2h flame-bladed sword as quick as a dagger, this is what I mean.

    Your point is honestly silly, swords, axes, warhammers, or medieval weaponry in general isn't hard to move around. If they were then they'd have been really bad weapons. You can check some modern HEMA competitions for reference.

    100% reactable, slow-paced combat turns gameplay into a staring contest when people are in 1-on-1 situations. Slower swings and more cumbersome movement makes group battles more skill-dependent, but duels suffer. Warband had a surprisingly well working combat system given its limited depth, if they decide to amp it up a bit it's only healthy for multiplayer. If you want more realistic (that is, faster, untelegraphed, and more streamlined) animations for single player, I'm sure somebody will fiddle a mod for it.
  2. Kretti

    View on progress from a disgruntled employee?

    Fake or not, I wouldn't be surprised or worried even if this is real. It doesn't really matter. It obviously hurts to see negative things written about you after an employee leaves, especially if they've seemed to be otherwise content while they've worked for you, but there's not much you can do about it. Some people become bitter when they happen to see someone else slacking off, or when they see internal hardships among management. It's normal. It's a fault in management for sure, but not a single company has resources for everything.
  3. Kretti

    Gamestop apparently sold a copy

    So, apparently Gamestop has already taken a pre-order of Bannerlord, saying that the game would be available approximately on 12th of May, +- a month or so. I don't know what to think about it yet, here's a reddit thread that made the claim...
  4. Kretti

    Winter warfare

    Your point about the immediate desertion. People die to all kinds of things, sure, and desertion's eventually a thing, but you're blowing it out of proportion, especially in a group as small as 120.

    Or are you talking about M&B numbers or real life numbers?
  5. Kretti

    Winter warfare

    Tuidjy said:
    You sound like someone who has skied for fun, always having a nice hot bath available if needed.  A medieval soldier would not be very happy about risking half a dozen new ways of death, in order to campaign in winter.

    I grew up in Northern Bulgaria, which is one Hell of a lot warmer than most of Russia and Scandinavia, and I can tell you that just having to sky to the outskirts of the village to check on my grandfather's sheep was a pain in the neck, and when I had to take tools and materials (to fix things) I preferred to walk.  Some winters, the Danube would freeze, and wolves from Romania would be threatening the herds and flocks.  I do not remember these winter nights fondly... camping on the move must be a lot worse than huddling in a shepherd's hut.

    I don't know your history or your physical condition, but your argument here is overemphasizing many things, and forgetting a lot of others. Your experience does not erase the fact that people have done what you describe and harder things on top of that for a good while before anyone had the luxury of an immediate hot bath. If winter lasts for 5-6 months a year then everyone has to know how to ski. Otherwise you can't get around, and you sure as hell aren't going to survive the winter without help, because summer is short and you need to hunt for food.

    We have records from the 1800s when this was still practiced in parts of Northern Fenno-Scandia and Siberia. Men would gather together during february or march, and assign who was to be chasing and spearing the deer, and who was to follow with a sled (pulled by either a man or a reindeer) to come up and skin and chop the carcass. The spearmen would try to surprise the deer and give chase until the deer collapsed in the snow, or the hunter caught up and killed it. They kept warm by staying on the move and drinking soup from a flask, and hunted from dawn to dusk (meaning around 8-10 hours depending on the time of year).

    After they stopped they dug a pit in the snow, made a large fire, cooked, and hanged their clothes to dry and continued in the morning until they had enough meat to last for a while. A spearman would continue to do this several times every winter until he wasn't fit for catching up to the deer, and was then assigned for just following the others and skinning and chopping the prey. Usually this would happen around the age 35-50, depending on health. All of this was done in deep snow, because otherwise the deer wouldn't tire fast enough.

    In addition to this, even softer modern people use skis for hunting, and every Nordic military has sking as part of the training. We carried around 50kg of gear while sking 30-40 km per day, and that's what you'd expect from just a regular scout, specialists have it harder. Staying isn't an issue if you can make a fire and/or have any spare clothes, you're not going to get cold if you don't just stand around and remember to drink.

    Honestly only wolves have a reputation for getting hunters killed by sweating and getting cold afterwards, because you had to chase it a lot longer than a deer, and were often too exhausted to set up camp by yourself.

    A good pair of ski would have been expensive to make, difficult to maintain, and a lot less durable than modern ones are. 

    This is simply false. People made backups and skis were thicker and longer than modern ones, sometimes the other one was padded with fur so you could kick more speed with it. Durability isn't an issue unless you're an incompetent skier.


    Also, different terrain would be quite treacherous to specific kinds of skis.  Are you going to be restricting yourself only to roads?  Are you going to have your army advance in a file or in a line?  Both have their issues.  You will be moving in unknown terrain, over unknown debris.

    Forget it.  There was a reason that there was very little raiding in winter, and practically no warfare.  Yes, I can think of three famous winter marches.  There is a reason that they are famous.  I can also think of quite a few winter disasters.

    I'm not aware of any pre-modern skis that couldn't have been used in deep snow. There wouldn't have been any point for modern sport-skis because all the roads were covered in snow. The ones we used in the army were wide and semi-long forest skis, historical skis were even longer so you wouldn't sink in the snow. Either way a regular forest ski is suitable for most environments.

    I do agree that melee battles on skis sound ridiculous, it's simply too clumsy and impractical. They are and were used for moving around but I don't think that's enough to justify putting skis into the game. I'm not arguing that medieval warfare would have happened during the winter, I'm simply stating that raiding wouldn't have been impossible at all.


    Lord Brutus said:
    No one is exempt from the ravages of winter.  That idea is ridiculous.  You begin a march with 120 troops and after two days you have 80 because the rest deserted.  Let's hope they stay close to reality in this case.  I am in favor of the player doing things besides large scale combat in winter.
    That is horse****.


  6. Kretti

    Winter warfare

    I'm also not really sure how well it would work, especially in a medieval setting as I only know about how it works in semi-modern settings.
    In Northern Europe you couldn't get around during the winter without skiing, so everyone knew how to do it. People have hunted for big game (moose, bears, deer) on skis with a spear so it's by no means an implausible way to move around and exert violence. It's only a matter of whether it could have an impact on gameplay or not, and whether or not it would be worth it to do separate animations and mechanics for it. In my mind they'd only be useful for either skirmishing, or harassing an enemy that's waist-deep in snow, possibly with a long spear so they can't get to you.

    You could obviously organize a raid on skis and dog/reindeer sleds and probably be somewhat succesful, but mobilizing an entire army for it sounds far fetched considering medieval supply-lines. Even in a modern setting skis are mostly used for quick ambushes (fire-and-retreat), or for getting to position where you either take off your skis or hold your position until you can retreat.
  7. Kretti

    Dev Blog 01/02/18

    The Easy nine said:

    I do agree with you about later medieval findings when we're considering hard plate that's meant to fit your body well (and thus doesn't even need as much padding as mail), but my original argument was referring to what the Vlandian knight was wearing, which is mail+padding+coat of arms. Even without Hollywood muscles the knight would look more puffed up simply because of the materials he's wearing.

    When worn under mail lesser padding was worn to prevent overheating.

    This here is kind of the problem, because as far as I know, we don't have any well preserved fabric/leather from the early medieval time period to see whether or not it was somewhat thick, very thick, or slim (which, I think, simply doesn't make sense if you're aiming to make it out alive and relatively intact). Once again, if you have sources for this, I'm interested to see them. Cavalry also has less reason to go in lightly armored. I'm not arguing that riding and fighting at the same time isn't exhausting by itself, but it's nothing like running around and trying to hold position as a footsoldier.

    Regarding switching positions with someone behind you, I'd like to point out that you're more than likely to know the person behind you because of unit divisions. As far as I know early medieval battles (during the Roman period anyway, since it's the most plentiful in written sources) would have consisted of push-->break through the ranks-->cause a rout. If the initial massive push failed, there'd be two first ranks facing each other, trying to hit someone and not get hit in the process, and trying to find an opening. There's plenty of opportunities in that time for some switching around. I can't see why a trained first rank soldier couldn't have the discipline and training to do it when needed.

    Ettenrocal said:
    High medevial age is the end of dark ages... you know. Kretti refers to youtube and this "sport" but you just have to google it to see padded armors or mails surcoats and that doesn't make you 5x times bigger.

    Don't put words in my mouth.
  8. Kretti

    Dev Blog 01/02/18

    The Easy nine said:
    Kortze26 said:
    https://youtu.be/ug3GkqjCqZE  Real armor makes you look fat regardless of the person underneath.

    I already debunked this. The people at battle of nations and similar events are not using historically accurate armor. It's too bulky and they wear too much padding.

    ---

    And lastly, the armor is possibly designed bulky intentionally, since that is what is seen as manly today. In history we see the opposite, armors were designed to be slim and show the curves of the body.

    "Nuh-uh" isn't the same as debunking. If you want to live you put on enough armor to survive, the fashion of the time affects only people who are not in the thick of fighting (high ranking officers, nobles, warlords, etc), while regular troops have either more practical or ****tier armour, depending on what kind of an army we're talking about. Another place where fashion affects the looks of armour is art, and the art from early->middle medieval periods makes a lot of leaps and assumptions, and isn't the most accurate thing out there.

    Aside from artistic interpretaions, I've yet to see any preserved remains of how thick the underlying layers of armour were, because fabric and leather from the early medieval period has so far had the tendency to rot away before we could find it. It just doesn't last for a 1000+ years.

    If you do have evidence that says otherwise, point me to it. If not, you're talking out of your ass, because when there's no evidence, we simply cannot know for certain, and being a nitpicking nerd becomes even more useless.

    In history battles could last waay longer, and so wearing that much padding would result in one fainting from the heat. Not to mention that too thick padding restricts movement more than you think. If you've ever worn a really think winter jacket you know what I mean

    It's not very far fetched to assume (as I don't have the source I'm thinking available to me atm) that people could take a few steps from the front to catch their breath in 3rd or 4th rank while someone else took their place in first rank - and this could only happen in situations where the fighting is constant, and that's just not the case in most historical battles.
  9. Kretti

    Dev Blog 01/02/18

    Ettenrocal said:
    Thanks i know that , but in the video all the soldiers look the same and they look big ! I don't want characters like in viking conquest with this ridiculous wrestler body. In pc weekender videos last year characters were looking better and more realistic than in this videos.

    In terms of realism the current look is more in line with how somebody would look with that amount of armor (padding, mail, clothing, etc), movies and especially fantasy games often have very slim, skintight armor that messes up people's expectations. The main factor for having snugly fitting armour in entertainment is to make certain characters look "good" even in battlefield conditions, and I'd be pretty disappointed if TW wanted to portray sexy warriors. It looks better this way in my opinion.
  10. Kretti

    Dev Blog 25/01/18

    Syndrella said:
    This is true but if that unofficial site or team give away items then they know some information about what time the game will be released. Nearly around that time plus minus few weeks. Also I know Callum is a community manager not a dev and nice that he and the team take the time to inform us with something that's why I said in my quote what I said.

    I don't know how many time it take them to give an interview but it is a sign of the release if they can do it more often these blogs. I am optimistic since I have other things to do so I can wait for my time here :smile:
    The people behind that group have a reputation of being scammers, so I wouldn't get my hopes up for it.
  11. Kretti

    Dev Blog 18/01/18

    Ki-Ok Khan said:
    Next time when I go to Kazakhstan again I shall ask my friend why his hawk was trying to protect him when I get close to him or his kid. Or my other friends' dog. Well I guess protective instincts are different . Also believe it or not people actually use animals to attack people. Be it hawks or dogs. Just saying.


    It was just my hopes. I am not saying they should. I would like to see it happen. Maybe not you. That's just my wish or you could call an opinion These kiddos don't need to go ape **** about it. "HEHEHE look cringey" I guess that's the Internet for you.

    Also here is why I was being defensive ; People said "omg look that scene is so cringey. Therefore I thing its bad."
    In reply I said that "scene being bad has nothing to do with what I am saying". It is the directors' fault. They could pull a more realistic scene.
    Then you jumped in to say "it does"

    Yes, protective/territorial behaviour is a bit different and occurs in situations like that, but a battlefield might be a bit too terrifying for a wild (as in, not domesticated, even if it's hand-raised) animal to do anything but flee, and it'd have to be trained specifically for battlefield conditions - meaning you'd have to organize a force every time you'd want to train the bird a bit further. Fight or flight is a bit of a different case (with stampeding war-elephants for example), but it can't be trained, and I won't derail the topic further by delving deeper into it. Training an animal to attack a person/animal is different because a single human, dog, or whatever is a more natural target for the bird. Some dog breeds might be able to pull it off to some effect, but birds would be much harder to get to do it consistently.

    The reason I said it does matter was because you originally said you thought "something like this" and linked the scene, so obviously I'm going to assume you mean it like it is in the scene. But whatever, doesn't really matter.
  12. Kretti

    Dev Blog 18/01/18

    You are a bird expert now, I see

    Not birds specifically, but animal behaviour is a huge part of my work in general. So not really a great time to be sarcastic.

    Anyway, I don't see why you're being so defensive about it, scene or no, it's just not a good suggestion because the idea of having flocks of birds (that are solitary hunters anyway) attacking a mass of troops isn't sensible at all. Hunting's different because the birds have natural behaviours that can be used to condition them for certain actions, and nature takes care of the rest. It'd be a crazy endeavor to pull off something of that scale even with modern knowledge of animal behaviour and learning.

    In short, animals don't work like that.
  13. Kretti

    Dev Blog 18/01/18

    Ki-Ok Khan said:
    White Lion said:
    That scene its pretty cringey to be honest and I don't thing they used eagles in battle. Hunting and sending messeges yes, but in battle I don't think so.
    Scene being bad has nothing to do with what I am saying.
    It does. You said you were thinking something like it, and even if we're only watching the part with the birds, how would you go about training hawks and eagles to do that in a manner that's even remotely practical? There's nothing in natural bird of prey behaviour that would compel them to attack a group of humans in force, and the amount of work required to train them to do that is so ludicrous that it's almost impossible. Almost, because I know it can be done in theory, but not in any way that would be practical for warfare. Or any other situation for that matter. If it was a fantasy world with magic, then it could be explained away, but semi-realistic Calradia, nah.
  14. Kretti

    Cultures within cultures, border cultures, shifts.

    Lord Brutus said:
    "didn't have much to do?"  :lol:  More than 80% of the time of common man was spent acquiring the means of survival, as in food, shelter, means of warmth.  No internet and no TV doesn't mean they had little to do.  :lol:

    It's one thing to be wrong, it's a whole other thing to be wrong and arrogant at the same time.

    The year was divided into different types of work. For peasants especially, winter wasn't a very physically active time, because people couldn't do the stuff they'd normally be busy with. Early and late summers were full of work in cultures that had developed/learned agriculture, mid-summer usually had some festivities and late autumn started the season where you'd be able to visit relatives and focus on making items, clothing and what-not, because there wasn't much else to do.

    If things went wrong and there wasn't enough means for survival for the winter, people tended to help each other out when possible. If the whole community was in trouble, people hunted more frequently (winter hunting's difficult and probably wasn't very common, autumn was the best time for that) and eventually, if things got bad enough, raiding started to occur. In the end people tended to have more good than bad winters though, otherwise we wouldn't have this problem of overpopulation we currently have.

    You'd almost be right if we were talking about pre-historic hunter-gatherer societies, but not entirely, because they knew how to store food and trade as well. And more than 80% of the time? Really? Even predatory animals don't work on a schedule like that, that's ridiculous.

    -----

    Back on topic, I'd really like to see more cultural influences and minor details as well, but I suspect TW's not going to be focusing on these elements that much. It hasn't been their strong point in previous titles and culture's been more of an added flavour to force some variety in troops and warfare, rather than policies and non-combat events.

    Doesn't mean somebody couldn't mod it in I suppose.



  15. Kretti

    Surprise

    I think a best-case scenario is a beta-release of some aspect of the game, so they can cover as many flaws and bugs as possible before the actual release. Multiplayer and custom battle if they're going the same route as with Warband.

    Or maybe a gameplay video of a multiplayer mode they've come up with.
  16. Kretti

    Shield On The Back

    Depends on what time-period and area we're discussing, but late medieval plate armor probably allowed sufficient protection from arrows. Shields didn't stop arrows either, but using one is a lot different from strapping one on your back.

    In the early medieval period (which Bannerlord is supposed to be inspired from) swords weren't that common to begin with when shield-usage was at its height. It's not so much about your equipment breaking (because anything's going to break eventually when we're talking about battlefield usage), shields were used because they were just better at protecting you, and wielding a 2-hander doesn't give enough of an advantage to make up for the disadvantages of not having a shield. Unless you're in the second or third rank with a spear or a long-axe, in which case you'd be relying on the shields of the first rank.

    Lindybeige makes some good points about how you'd use a shield to protect yourself from arrows and blows.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yNyvLz9w69s

  17. Kretti

    Dev Blog 21/12/17

    lolbash said:
    Will these minor factions that Taleworlds have shown us be playable in Multiplayer?

    Apparently yes, at least Battanians have wolfskins and berserkers in captain mode.
  18. Kretti

    Dev Blog 21/12/17

    Owen Wulfson said:
    But what faction do we get next week? I am betting the Asurai, so that the subsequent releases will focus on the three distinct Empire factions. That is, if they don't just want to put all news of these factions into one blog.
    No blogs next week apparently, Callum said somewhere that they'll post the next one after New Year's.
  19. Kretti

    Dev Blog 21/12/17

    4. realistic animation... they have a mocap studio...

    Do you want attacks that you can't possibly react to? Because that's what you'll get if you implement a completely realistic fighting system. Attacks are telegraphed and obvious in games for a reason. Having them be as good as actual longsword-techniques, for instance, would make for extremely frustrating gameplay, especially against AI that's utterly immune to any sorts of mindgames.

    Furthermore, in a practical sense, it's completely plausible to swing non-optimally in a battlefield situation when it's necessary or easy. You hit a person with a more or less sharp object in order to incapacitate them. Oomph. They are incapacitated, whether the strike was good swordsmanship or not. That's the point of combat.

    Anyway, gameplay trumps realism in this regard in any case. Having the attacks be fast and technical enough to be realistic makes them unreactable and frustrating to deal with, especially in a multiplayer setting with lag present.
  20. Kretti

    MP - Banner poll

    Blead said:
    Kretti said:
    Also, hi Blead, have you been active all this time? I just came back to the forums because for some reason I thought Bannerlord was going to come out.
    Hello!  :razz: A little bit, it has been on and off for about a year now, still waiting for bannerlord. How are you?
    Good enough I think. Waiting for Bannerlord as well, every other game seems to lose it's shine when this is the only game I'm currently wanting to play.
Back
Top Bottom