Search results for query: *

Did I get correct that the game is almost ready, we just have to wait until the end of the 16 years straightforward development of mid and later parts of the gameplay?

Ki-Ok Khan said:

Maybe this?

Click to expand...

You may find a lot of similar videos about other engines. Such things are important part of communication between developers and rest of the world, they attract but do not answer questions.

MadVader said:

Good questions, perhaps you need a custom engine to optimize it for a large number of actors, their animations, AI and pathfinding, and it's not merely a vanity project…

Click to expand...

Osvaldon said:

A custom engine, created for the needs of a specific game, can provide better performance…

Click to expand...

Usually if you do approximately the same as others it’s impossible to win the race if you started significantly later. Time is very material.
Having less time you may try to be better in some of aspects but only sacrificing a lot of others. But comparing with competitors we usually have to aggregate and these few aspects may become negligible in the whole picture.
Working better with some parts of the scene and being poor with all others may leave no chance to achieve good quality and fps for overall scene.

DanAngleland said:

… why on earth nobody else is making games with anything remotely near M&B's NPC and real player numbers if that is the case- and player/NPC count is just one facet of M&B.

Click to expand...

The question «why do not others do that» makes sense only under very specific conditions.
If they are not met the short and straightforward answer: they don’t want.
There are a variety of games that similar to different aspects of WB, some have horses, some have a lot NPC or players, some have melee fights, some are sandbox, and the fact that they are not copy of WB do not make them that unpopular.

DanAngleland said:

extensively modifying it before eventually running into brick walls.

Click to expand...

Osvaldon said:

But the most important part of having a custom engine is that there are no limits to what you can do with it when developing your game.

Click to expand...

Yes. That’s usually one of the main point of redevelopment — control over source code, no limit etc. Even opensource projects if they are huge do not give enough control and freedom. Understanding and changing the code that is not yours is a difficult problem. However developing from the scratch you also  may eventually run into a wall, because limits exist anyway. And if for a stable engine this wall is from shiny brick and well-documented, your personal wall will be from vague strained glass appeared suddenly from «nothing».

Harmi said:

Why didn't they do it then? They wanted to keep the rich modding culture going on.

Click to expand...

Some of games on mentioned UE have very rich modding culture too.

kalarhan said:

which is better? Again that would be a boring business discussion, not something for a reply on a blog discussion.

Click to expand...

Yup, that’s why I don't ask to compare new BL engine, UE and Unity from the point of whole business process. Reformulating my question I'm interesting how opinion of developers changed for 5(I'm not sure here) of developing. My question is not about business but about personal feelings.

It was the start of the way. And you took a hard decision. Now after a long way making final steps, what are the thoughts about the first steps? Are their now completely the same? 

> such as the new engine we built from scratch

Working in a company that also decided to develop from scratch what others had been developed already 20 years, I can not refrain from asking personal questions:
What were main reasons for that decision?
Are these reasons still valid since 5 years?
Are there any advantages of that new engine (assuming that it will be available) for an external developer over rivals?

RoboSenshi said:

warpowerfull said:

I'm a bit worried about being able to defend your territory as it becomes bigger and bigger. Since you can't be everywhere at the same time the AI controlled armies that are in your kingdom need to be able to be smart enough and capable enough to defend your territories. Like if there is a huge enemy army coming controlled by a marshal, your AI lords need to get together and face them as a big army and not just run away from them individually, which happens in Warband a lot. I hate not having the abilities to adequately control my borders and just getting harassed by the AI in games. Recent example being in Total Warhammer where AI just raids and runs away without you being able to catch up to them.

Click to expand...

I completely agree. I also hope the AI is coded to attack and fight at each other's borders rather than target settlements way too far away. It would be so annoying if the AI in BL go on and seige a town on the other side of the map and ignore the one on its border. I hated that so much in Warband.

Click to expand...

A lot of rulers in the history also hopped that invaders would stick at the border fortified settlements instead of going into deep of the country to raid undefended ones. 
The only thing that can prevent an invader from bypassing border fortresses is a risk that supply to its army can be cut off. But many armies were able to operate quite long without direct supply for their metropolis.

Also, there were a lot of historical situations, when defenders failed to gather together to face joint enemy army.

But I can not disagree that history is annoying.  And in the game I would prefer to see valor battles instead of that realistic cheating.

troycall said:

2. I'm getting an error at line 10, group ID error: 25, any idea on what might be causing this?

Code:

(agent_get_division, ":class", ":agent"), #Group ID error
(class_is_listening_order, ":player_agent", ":class"),

Click to expand...

Are you sure? I would assume that line 10 is
(class_is_listening_order, ":player_agent", ":class"),
class_is_listening_order  wants a team, not an agent.

meminimina said:

where do i actually do this.?
sorry im kinda new to these kinds of stuff sorry.

Click to expand...

In the code, which you are investigating.

Did you read this https://forums.taleworlds.com/index.php/topic,240255.0.html ?

In WB each regular trooper has "DNA", that is persistent. That defines (seeds random generator) its face and a choice of equipment.
The variety of equipment depends on rank and type, but the final choice depends on DNA and restrictions or overridings.

meminimina said:

can you explain to me how?

Click to expand...

In case of mystery, first, that is good to check is if the code even is called.
Adding
(display_log_message, "@my debug message"),
may help a lot, especially if it's not displayed.
Later, you may yield some critical vars, to check effects of the code.

(assign, reg24, ":value"),
(display_log_message, "@{reg24}"),

Khamukkamu said:

What's the best a good way to test triggers (simple or regular triggers)? Bind it to a key click then see if it triggers? Anyone have best practices?

Thanks

Click to expand...

To test I usually used shortened timings for simple triggers, keys for battle tirggers and global vars (that allow skipping conditions) and menu for regular ones.

«Suboptimal» is a nice word. Now I got to know how to use it properly.

Next time being too late at my work, I'll say that «my route was suboptimal».

The only how I may imagine MB coop is completely asynchronous battles and global map. Other to my mind does not worth efforts.

Stromming said:

Rongar said:

TheBarbarianGamer said:

Rongar said:

TheBarbarianGamer said:

you should not be able to turn your head 180 degrees and even more... 

Click to expand...

There is not ablity to turn a head 180 degrees in WB or even in MB. However unability to turn head 180 degrees it does not mean that it's not possible to look back.

Click to expand...

In the video the person did turn the head 180 degrees...

Click to expand...

No. The person turns all torso, not just head.

Click to expand...

Yeah it is still not possible. Silly people trying to defend silly things is just silly

Click to expand...

If it's not possible for you, it does mean that it's not possible for a normally physically developed person.

SenorZorros said:

Rongar said:

For M&B they definitely were reading suggestions. And I believe that they implemented those of them that were reasonable in sense effort-result.
But since that I don't think they need to read new suggestion because amount of suggestion that were made in time of M&B betas enough for 4-5 games. And frankly, I don't see really new suggestions.

Click to expand...

then why haven't they already implemented the option to switch out troops

Click to expand...

I could guess that because it requires efforts but it's doubtful feature for game play.

TheBarbarianGamer said:

Rongar said:

TheBarbarianGamer said:

you should not be able to turn your head 180 degrees and even more... 

Click to expand...

There is not ablity to turn a head 180 degrees in WB or even in MB. However unability to turn head 180 degrees it does not mean that it's not possible to look back.

Click to expand...

In the video the person did turn the head 180 degrees...

Click to expand...

No. The person turns all torso, not just head.

KuroiNekouPL said:

Quidfit said:

I just want to put out how I think a coop mode should work in bannerlord. I know it's unlikely to be considered but is there anywhere to submit suggestions?

Click to expand...

I don't think TaleWorlds even reads suggestions. They didn't seem to before Warband launched.

Click to expand...

For M&B they definitely were reading suggestions. And I believe that they implemented those of them that were reasonable in sense effort-result.
But since that I don't think they need to read new suggestion because amount of suggestion that were made in time of M&B betas enough for 4-5 games. And frankly, I don't see really new suggestions.

TheBarbarianGamer said:

you should not be able to turn your head 180 degrees and even more... 

Click to expand...

There is not ablity to turn a head 180 degrees in WB or even in MB. However unability to turn head 180 degrees it does not mean that it's not possible to look back.

Do not look here said:

As far as helmet vision goes, this one is, I think, best approach I've seen.

Click to expand...

If you could know how we made a decision to do that, you would never suggested it for BL.

Varrak said:

Add breath voice into that and perfect

Click to expand...

TheFlyingFishy said:

From my understanding the vast majority of Roman gladiatorial fights were explicitly not to the death.

Click to expand...

Gladiatorial fights originated from ritual sacrifice where "god chose who it wanted to be sacrificed".
So originally they were fights to the death. But later gladiatorial fights where transfered into show with somewhat 10% lethality.

builder of the gods said:

error code:

Click to expand...

I don't see an error in provided part of the code. I could suppose that it's either a disguised indentation error or it comes from the other part. 

Vulpes_Inculta said:

Got a question here and hope it's a right thread to ask.

How may I change a range at which "allied" enemies join each other battles against player on the world map?

For example - 2 bandit groups are chasing me cause their combined strength is supposed to be higher. One of them attacks but another doesn't join because it's still too far away. That's not right. How may I increase this "joining" distance? Thank you!

Click to expand...

it's in let_nearby_parties_join_current_battle (module_scripts).

SenorZorros said:

dual wielding:
I'd still like to see the ability and it's uselessness as well as this:

Click to expand...

Yep, that is quite nice point, that realistic game is not that game where rare/unlikely approaches are forbidden, but the game where you can explore weakness and strongness of different approaches. And if you are exceptional in kb skills you can be exceptional in virtual battlefield  too.