Search results for query: *

Passive perks, especially those that modify global swing speeds, are a waste of the developer's time. Armor exists for protection, everyone can see it. Weapons look bigger or more imposing than others, everyone can see it. But no one can see a hidden percentage modifier that throws every encounter, every duel into a guessing game.

Taleworlds poisons their own formula by throwing in their gameplay the rotten ingredients from other games.

The genius of Taleworlds is that they create great underlying charcoal that is pressed into diamonds by a community of people with clearer vision. Who in the community is stepping up with custom servers? The GK did it beautifully during Warband; who has taken their place? Are custom server tools released to the public yet?

As soon as server tools are in the hands of the community, these issues will cease to be issues. So I implore Taleworlds to not waste more time and money in copying poor ideas from other games and that they instead hone their unique gameplay and make the AI smarter so players can fight more immersive battles against them.

New video with a new (but familiar!) face:

Is this going down tonight?

FearSpear said:

If you were trying your best you would try to make authentic content instead of relying on a sort of prostitute-like friend for hire system. True memes occur naturally. Feel free to write some more paragraphs defending yourself.

Click to expand...

My content is authentic. What's fake about it to you?

CANTON said:

[MEDI=imgur]a/rilJpuO[/MEDIA]
[MEDI=imgur]a/BguNNdB[/MEDIA]

Click to expand...

An audience of even ten committed viewers is big to me. But that's fine--I'm taking down the application here. Let me try a more natural approach:

There will be a Siege event tonight and I'd like to film content to turn into funny videos. If you've an interest in playing and don't mind your voice being recorded, send me a Steam message at Ehombre. Please be over 23-years-old (US EAST Time Zone), simply because I'm old and connect well with older folk.

FearSpear said:

Imagine having to fill out an application to be somebody's gaming buddy lmao

Click to expand...

I'm a lifelong nerd and find it hard to make friends.

This is an opportunity. I am beholden to a large Mount & Blade audience and aim to give them only the funniest, goodnatured souls.The application is short and the benefits are that you get to have fun adventures that are turned into short films at no expense to you, besides the two minutes it takes to fill out the form.

You remind me of the people who heckle me when I tell jokes at the comedy clubs. I'm here to entertain you; why hate on a man trying his best? This negativity reflects not the man who receives it, but the soul of the man who conjures it up.

Hey guys,

I've reconnected with Jeremy. We both see that the beta or whatever public release is in a couple days. We've been talking about reliving some glory days and I wanna make new content (Gotta convince Jeremy tho). Don't want to promise too much, but boys...

It's almost harvesting season.

Lolbash said:

This is a fault of the AI, but Warband's multiplayer places intelligent minds behind those masses of bodies. Smart players who flank the castle walls, who breach the parapets and whose fights spill over into courtyards and throne rooms to claim the castle. Multiplayer Siege plays like the single-player fantasy.

Click to expand...

You are also conviently forgetting the other half of the players in the same servers who consist of

-Racists/alt right wingers  trying to start fights on the text chat

-Mic squeaks and the guy vaping playing his music in his mic, while a vacuum cleaner is roaring in the background.

-Trolls who will try and throw the game, intentionally hitting teammates, directing siege weapons to aim at teammates, running over teammates with horses, interrupting archers wih kicks

-People who just simply don't care about winning the game, playing joke loadouts, running to get themselves killed, or hanging out with their friends at spawn point to do a funny visual glitch.

-Hackers and scammers

Click to expand...

This is inherent to all online interactions in all video games because people behave ****ty. I cannot change human nature, but I vainly hope my posts here can help shape the future of the online component to this game.

My perspective is unique in that I started playing Warband exclusively because of the online multiplayer mode, Siege. I then gave the single-player a shot and became fond of it, too, but my passion for Mount&Blade is for the chaos of great battles over fictional castles.
——
Please do not bypass the words filter.

Lolbash said:

But where else can I have epic, medieval fights around the moats and into the parapets of stone castles?

Click to expand...

The singleplayer

Click to expand...

I believe the best multiplayer games are ones that can seamlessly extend single-player gameplay into a multiplayer setting, because though AI is fun, people are social creatures who want to share and play with each other.

Castle sieges were, and to this day still are, the lamest and most disappointing part of playing Warband. It's the goal you spend the whole game working towards; amassing your troops, setting camp outside castle walls and spending weeks of in-game time creating ladders and siege engines in anticipation of the assault. Then the dawn of the siege finally arrives, and how does it play out?

Thousands of mindless ghouls climb up ladders in single-file through a meatgrinder chokepoint. When enough bodies pile up around those ladders, the castle is declared yours. These giant maps, these epic armies, wasted on any map more complicated than fields and hills.

This is a fault of the AI, but Warband's multiplayer places intelligent minds behind those masses of bodies. Smart players who flank the castle walls, who breach the parapets and whose fights spill over into courtyards and throne rooms to claim the castle. Multiplayer Siege plays like the single-player fantasy. Great credit goes to mapmakers like GK who created brilliant Siege maps that facilitated staged fighting, so not everyone dies at the foot of a few rickety ladders.

With the advent of Siege weapons, destructible walls, and all the other amazing features behind these blogposts for Bannerlord, Taleworld chooses to focus on small, 6v6 melees. Where is the scope of their vision? Why is it limited to single-player? Do they not realize the potential playerbase such a unique multiplayer experience can attract?

[quote author=Dead account]
-
[/quote]

Though your comments are harsh, I share your disdain. Mount & Blade is a uniquely large scale experience, so why focus multiplayer development into small-scale bouts? It panders to the multiplayer audience of Chivalry instead of using the strengths of this new, large-scale engine to create a unique multiplayer experience that attracts players to this series.

I can 6v6 in CS and Rainbow Six: Siege, or do small scale medieval fights in failed titles like War of the Roses/Vikings or Chivalry. But where else can I have epic, medieval fights around the moats and into the parapets of stone castles?

A larger scale makes use of Mount&Blade class systems--archers, horses, two-handed weapons, siege weaponry, frontline sword and boarders. 6v6 cannot capture those elements. I understand there has always been a diehard competitive scene to Warband that favors these small-scale battles and limited respawns, and I am glad their competitive spirit thrives, but there is reason their scene is so small. Those small-scale battles focus on Warband's fighting and tactical gameplay, while gamemodes like Siege capture Mount&Blade's gameplay as a whole. I believe there is a broader market for large-scale, castle-sieging, respawnable and objective gameplay.

Taleworlds has a different vision than mine, but these are the reasons why I enjoyed Warband multiplayer so much that I created the Mount & Multiplayer series. It's my hope that this new multiplayer embodies that spirit and boldly distinguishes its multiplayer instead of chasing the multiplayer trends of today.

Multiplayer is of great interest to me. 6v6 is a good start, but I believe the heart of Warband is Seige mode and its grand assaults against castles. Such epic skirmishes capture the feel of single-player, and good multiplayer games are ones that extend the core mechanics of single-player into a multiplayer setting.

Whenever this beta launches, I'd like to sign up and make videos about Mount&Blade multiplayer again.

Get hyped for Warband tournament excitement. 

GillsFan91 said:

I'm all for it. I would recommend the image of a fist being inserted into a mans anus, you know to symbolise the way the devs fisted the people who bought the game.

Click to expand...

Oh, you! 

kalarhan said:

cjackson92 said:

The club takes 25 strength to wield.

We all know it is an easter egg

Click to expand...

So what you are saying is that either the weapon should be nerfed or not available for players (non lootable). Ok. There is nothing wrong with a big wooden club per si.

Let me put in another perspective. Lets say devs add a 2H axe that only does 1 damage. What would you complain about? The new weapon or its damage?

So lets stop using the TROLL CLUB as a example that should justify other stuff, shall we?

Click to expand...

I believe the reason the troll club is brought up at all is because it is obvious the developers strayed from their strict adherence to "historical accuracy" by adding it into the game. If they've made such an exception, it follows that they can just as easily make another exception for people to play with one of their favorite weapon types: 2-handed weapons.

Honestly, the term "historical accuracy" is a red herring excuse for lazy development. I want historical accuracy in my documentaries, in my scholarly texts--this is a friggin' video game about charging giant armies into other giant armies. As evidenced by the complaints over this subject, players want tools and gameplay choices above all else.

If the dev team's "vision" for their Warband expansion excluded these items (When all Warband DLCs prior to this included this style of gameplay), then the decision was shortsighted and speaks for the quality of the product. And just look at what we have to play today.

mikedh08 said:

There should be no discussion here. Players want two handed axes, add two handed axes. End of story. Not one single person alive today knows for 100% fact the commonality of two handed axes during the period, and it doesn't even matter because this is a video game.

Add two handed axes.

Click to expand...

Concise and directly to the point. You have said all that needs to be said.

Yeyo said:

Do not look here said:

That being said, I think that discussion right now is futile. From what I've seen so far in devs' post, once the bugs are squashed the items will be revised/added/discussed/whatever - two handed axes among them.

Click to expand...

Yes. First bugfix and later the team will talk about this kind of improvements. I am just explaining our criteria in the selecting of weapons. Frankly, I'm surprised by this reaction about the absence of two handed axes. It’s something that we had not expected, but as it has been said it’s quite simple to get a ‘historical’ solution for this demand. We have a list of suggestions that we’ll consider also.

Click to expand...

Are you one of the Viking Conquest developers? I'm glad to hear that at some nebulous point in the future two-handed weapons will be re-introduced to the game.

I'm nonetheless shocked that you guys are surprised players want 2-handers. Native Warband, the game most people here love, has four weapon types: Polearms, 1-handers, 2-handers, and ranged weapons. You removed an entire facet of combat that Warband players are used to, so of course players want it back.

Historical accuracy be damned: this is a video game, not a history text. As a player I want tools to play with, not restrictions based on loose criteria like "historical accuracy". Be faithful to history if you want to be, but not to a fault where you remove pre-existing gameplay to conform to it, as was done here.

Even if the design team is fanatical about "historical accuracy", why must this apply at all to multiplayer? What must be historically accurate in instanced, ahistorical multiplayer bloodbaths? Give me tools, give me weapons to create variety in combat, or strip it all away and let me just go back to Native and wonder at what could have been.

You wrote a thorough and detailed post about Viking Conquest's many problems. Kudos to you for taking the effort to lay these problems out so clearly, and I hope the VQ team look into these issues.

You da man.

Hey there fellow kuge,

I have started a new playthrough for this awesome mod. You can check it out here. I am a noob to this mod but a veteran of samurais. Just wanted to share this with those who want to watch a man try to rise up from haggard ronin to the shogun of Japan. 

BlackTide said:

Love me some Jeremy

Click to expand...

He's making a special guest appearance tonight on the stream with me, going on now:

Reviving this thread to let people know I am returning to Warband and to Livestreaming. Gonna be playing some Siege this evening (11PM EST) and invite you guys to join me:

http://twitch.tv/CoolGamingBros


Also, look forward to new Mount & Multiplayer vids with Jeremy soon.