Search results for query: *

I'm surprised that matchmaking works at all, considering it was effectively gone for like a year.
But yes, inspired by this post I had my first try in months and guess what: Geme was cancelled for someone leaving.

I don't know whether I'd prefer this to be a technical difficulty or a design decision, though both ways it's really not understandable.

I think you could be in ghost mode for like 3 seconds after spawn as some shooters have it.
But yes, not spawning surrounded by enemies would be preferrable

I think they should balance teams so that the average rank is roughly equal on both sides, should work even with small player bases. Premates should be able to opt into being split for team balance, or have longer waiting times if no players with a similar skill can be found and the tolerance increases only over time.

As for players leaving: How about adding surrender polls so players can leave as a group when they are once again matched against an obviusly superior opponent?

AngryEsox said:

I found a Fix It was my IPv6 on Windows was preventing me from connecting once I turned it off it started right up, Here is a link for any future problem havers.. Good Luck! https://support.nordvpn.com/hc/en-us/articles/19919186892305-How-to-disable-IPv6-on-Windows

Click to expand...

Tested it with IPv6 off, doesn't seem to work.

Edit: Managed to log in just now. Don't know what the problem was but I hope it is fixed.

+1

Having multiple characters is one thing I'm sorely missing compared to Warband. I wouldn't have come up with the look i'm playing now and even replicated in other games had i not been able to try something new without loosing the look i had already put a lot of effort into creating.

Having your skin automatically adjust to the culture you're playing would then be an actual step up when compared to Warband

I really miss the option to use character names like we had in Warband. I find it more immersive to display a name that ist specifically selected to fit the setting rather than my steam name that fits equally mediocer to any of the various game worlds i play in.

Seleucid said:

Right now defenders are at a huge disadvantage in siege. With some maps like Ayzar strong hold almost never seeing a defender win because of it. It's clearly not intended design as it makes siege incredibly frustrating as defenders.
I recorded the winners of 28 sieges of the official siege server in EU.
Below are results by map using A and D for short hand
Fen Altai - 4A 1D
Ayzar Stronghold - 8A
Baravenos Encirclement - 6A 1D
Domogtul Castle - 4A 2D
Skala Landing 1A 1D

I should say most of the defender wins were clumped together: during those matches it seemed very clear that the defender players were far better and attackers seemed to ignore flags. I do not know why Skala had so few results it just seems less popular.

The maps where it's easiest to back cap like Ayzar stronghold or Baravenos(if you count F) rarely have a defender win. It's only Domogtul(Skala has too little data but I think it might be a little better) that defenders even have a chance on however this is largely because of A being very hard to take. If attackers take D they can easily win from that point.
Another factor might be that Vlandia(seemingly the strongest faction) will usually be attacker. Another fix to this problem might be making it so that the voted for factions are randomly assigned sides not that the most voted for is always the attacker. Or that the winner of the last round cannot be voted for the next.

Click to expand...

As for Azyar Stronghold my experience is that Defenders can win and do quite regularly. The problem is that the Attackers will always and only win if they backcap E and F before the forward flags because the spawnpoints when EFG are still on are much better for defenders than attackers. This creates an ugly dynamic where the players who know about this only concentrate on the back flags while knowing that the players who try to capture/defend the intuitive way are actually hurting their team in the early stages of the game. I think in this case the map really needs to be tweaked.

Another thing that is annoying about back capping in Bannerlord is that a single sneaker can force a whole team into panic. In Warband the capture speed depended on th enumber of players capturing, causing a difference between a single sneaker and a big breakthrough. Also havin just a single flag made the game flow more naturally around defensive map features while the many flags of Bannerlord ofthen stand in positions where it makes no sense for any side to wait for a prolonged time.

I think that Harrisons idea of enabling certain map features only when certain flags have been captured is quite appealing and it would make sense that for example ladders in the inside of the castle only appear when the attackers have already advanced so far.

One thing that doesn't adress back capping per se but rather map balance in general would be to have the game keep a statistic for each map on how long it took to capture it, or if not captured then how many flags the attackers managed to take. The winner would then be the side that beats the medium performance on that map. Would require a bit of work but should keep the winrate as close as possible to 50% no matter how imbalanced a map is.

Same problem here. Interesting to know that it happens regularly.

I thinkt the only thing that holds community servers back compared to official ones is the lack of loot.
Otherwise they perform just as good and better and even in Warband times there were alot more fan made maps than official ones.

FF active again? Nice!
Though from my experience in Warband it is better to have pure self damage or pure team damage. The former takes away the trolls ability to damage others, the latter preserves the ability to deal with trolls especially those who in warband often would block ladders or gate mechanisms as kick polls were incredibly ineffective.
The way Bannerlord sieges work I would clearly prefer self damage only.

I mean, I wouldn't complain if loot was instead tied to in game performance, even though it might be difficult to balance across the game modes. Whenever I have a really good round I reflexively hope to be rewarded with extra loot, even though I know it doesn't work like this in this game, and then I am disappointed that the game doesn't even register it.
The current state where afk farming is the best way to get loot is not satisfying.

Thx

1+
As it stands now loot is being rewarded just for being on the server, no need to play so it doesn't even necessarily increase player count.

Sure it's cool to have something to show off with, but the way it's implemented right now customizables don't fill that niche. I think badges were meant to be a thing to show off with, but as matchmaking doesn't work since far too long that's out of the window too.

Do you think TW have any incentive to keep players on their own servers? Data collection or something? Or is the way that server time is measured exploitable so that custom servers could just grant arbitrary loot values? Maybe give loot just for being logged into Multiplayer.

At least TW haven't tried something like an in game shop or seasonals. MP might be sorely neglected, but at least TW are not trying to milk their players like other companies.

Piconi said:

We do have shouts on the MP radial menu (Q by default on PC). Did you mean to suggest expanding those to include formation and/or movement orders that can be heard when ordering AI troops?

Click to expand...

Exactly, enable players to shout the commands that they would usually give to the AI. I think some of these could be quite nice situationally and I don't see any decrement to it.

Maybe it wouldn't be such a problem if bash was better. Most times I try to shield bash to get out of a feint spam or held attack I just get hit during the readying time of the bash.

I think that attacking while the shield is held would not synergize with the M&B combat as right klicking is also meant to abort an atack which is important for feinting and preventing friendly fire. Maybe gibe shield a small time after releasing right klick so you don't open up when you change shield direction.

I agree that M&B style combat could profit from a well executed stamina system though maybe better for another game series (I think that War of the Vikings had stamina when it was still around and it worked well there.)
For M&B I think it's part of the feel that you can feint spam until your mental stamina runs out. I remember in Warbnd duels often both players feint spammed each other until one felt an opening. It also seemed easier to block in the last moment which enabled counter spamming. In BL combat I don't see that as much anymore though maybe it's just that my reflexes have gone worse since my teenage years (Though I think functioning chambers would help).

Yeah, good change with throwing weapons.

Also considered slowing down crossbow readying time? Trying to stagger them often results in getting kickshot because they ready and shoot so damn fast.
Maybe consider removing stagger all together but speed up shield bash so it becomes more viable against held attacks/shots and fully steps into the gap that chambers have left.

Zeimer said:

Actually kicking is not a thing in HEMA or real world. Remove it all together.

Click to expand...

I think kicking is necessary from a game machanical standpoint to deal with shield turteling. The problem is that in contrast to warband it takes some exercise to hit in time after a kick making it feel more cheesy when it happens to you.

Welcome_To_Hell said:

- Allow kicks to be executed while blocking. +1 (No clue why this got removed from Warband)

Click to expand...

Because block+kick=bash

Caps said:

edit: theres a short window after landing your kick that will speed up your attack, you need a decently fast weapon aswell.

Click to expand...

Why easy if you could make it comlpicated? I think kick was fine and balanced in Warband, no need to change it, at least not if you want to stay true to the "easy to learn, hard to master" approach.

KSHMR said:

people keep talking about how they want everything to be like in Warband..

Bruh.. This is not warband. If you want to play warband, then go play warband.

Click to expand...

We don't want everything to be like in Warband, just the things that were better in Warband. I think it's ok to expect a sequel to be a straight improvement mechanically. Given, we might disagree on which changes are improvements or disimprovements.

Mabons said:

1. Fix the spawning. Numerous times I have been fighthing 1 on 1 in an isolated area and suddenly 4 guys are behind me, no my situational awareness isn't that bad they just spawned quite literally on top of me and my enemy. Then I die, and then I respawn right where I died.
2. Just disable the gold system and allow people to select the classes they want to play. It's a totally casual game mode and you can feel the server die everytime it gets to a new game and people have to work their gold reserves up again to play the good classes. Also makes it less painful if I choose an expensive class and the game decides I have to ****ing die by spawning me into 5 enemies.
3. Reflective friendly fire, or even mirrored, would fix a lot of the other annoying issues, specifically 1: The deathball and 2: Archery spam. Deathball is when one team has just got that little bit luckier with their spawns or timings and have a group roaming the map just mopping up the small pockets of enemies who respawn in their way. If you're unlucky you will actively spawn in front of them 4 or 5 times and then probably quit for the night because what's the ****ing point. At least with some friendly fire I can use the moronic ****ters against each other and stand a chance.

EDIT:
4. Enable the ****ing autobalancer and stop disabling it.

Click to expand...

1. Yes
2. I Think that could make many classes unplayable and thus make the game more boring. I remember a Warband Siege server giving all players max gold with the promise "play what you want" but everyone only played Heavy+2hander. I also think that cav spam would be bad but on the other hand it could be balanced by everyone having access to a good inf spear.
I think it's a problem that classes are balanced for skirmish where you start with free class choice and the peasant classes are kind of designed als classes for leftover money, almost penal classes. Maybe a good compromise would be to increase the default money in TDM, giving players the option to pick the mid tier classes all of the time, or pick the peasant tier classes sometimes to get gold more quickly.
3. Yes! (Though I don't think that TW have that under control as of now)
4. Yes

Olaf The Cruel said:

TW, look at your telemetry. Vlandia is being voted ALL THE TIME!!! It's getting super boring... At this point, delete the Voting system in TDM, or delete all other factions, because they are not being picked anyway.. Face it, players are don't care about the over all "fun", the cheating and exploiting, and now this... And, nothing happens from your side...

Click to expand...

I feel like the faction pick diversity has gotten better since the last period I played but I can't put my finger on why. Any balance update that I missed?