Search results for query: *

  1. To anyone who says "Buggy mess after 8 years"

    Dear OP. Are you trying to change someone's beliefs over the internet? Stop that. It's futile :wink:

    Your post is interesting, but to tell you the truth, no one really cares what are the cultural or buissness condidtions of game dev, just as hardly anyone cares about working condidtions of workers in some korean car factory when they run into petty problems with their newly purchased vehicle. You buy a product/service. If it doesn't do what you expected, you are going to be pissed.

    Having said that, I notice some people expected too much. I laugh my ass off every time I read something like "this game sucks, I paid 50 euros for it and only got 120 hours with it". That's great value for money, considering some other entertaiment avenues. People here have been demanding game in any shape or form ASAP for few years. I kinda knew that when devs do that, other groups will rise and complain about state of the product. Well, life I guess.

    People got sooooo emotional recently... We should all just chill. Warband was not masterpiece either, it had buggs and holes, but patches made it better. What I did was play Warband extensivly for two weeks, get bored and stopped for half a year and more. And when I got a feeling to ride on virtual stead and kill see riders again, I got back and always found fresh quest, new gameplay mechanic or something I did not do before. Also, rekindled sense of entertaiment.

    I plan to do exactly same thing with Bannerlord. :smile:
    Game is not perfect, but I will find enjoyment in it for quite some time. If others won't, tough titties. There is no point in changing their opinions.

  2. What do u think is missing for this game to have a soul?

    Revverie said:
    I dont think Taleworlds planned just to do the framework of this game, they made a whole lore, a story campaign, they made their own engine from scratch so they could make their own vision and put it in the game. The problem I think there is... is that their own vision doesnt reach that far in my opinion. I mean, look at warband, yes it survived by mods but man the native game needed way more work and way more expansion but they decided not to improve it anymore, this game isnt pushing it any further than Warband in some aspects and in others some times it even takes steps back *cough*encyclopedia*cough*, the same thing it's with Skyrim, I truly dont believe they just laid back and said **** it, let's just let the modders fix it and add new content, they were done with it and pushed the release button, and cmon guys, Todd Howard vision even in the Fallout 3 era was full of crap, I'm not saying TW suffers exactly the same problems as that ****ty company but it suffers from a lack of imagination in the aspects we as players think the game lacks of, and that's where modders come in, I mean look at the suggestions threads they're full of great ideas I have no doubt they will add when they can, Taleworlds cares about other aspects of the game and I don't think they will truly make a full fledged RPG, but I'm not hopeless though, we're still in EA and maybe just MAYBE TW still has some content they're waiting to release that we haven't seen yet, I mean, there is no scene for marriage? That HAS to be missing, it's impossible its NOT missing RIGHT??? (Please time dont prove me wrong)
    Also excuse my terrible grammar its 5 am and I'm using this forum to escape my work that is already due
    Click to expand...


    Oh, they started with something more ambitious, that's for sure. But AFAIK, during game development things get dropped. Sometimes they are too difficult to implement (reward not worth it's time), other times they do not work as good as predicted or just feel wrong to beta testers so on... Some changes might be loved by part of the audience, but hated by the rest.

    Take VC for example. I loved it's shieldwall on shieldwall battle mechanics, stronger push for realism, camps and so on. But there are people that feel quite the opposite. When TW told us that spears will not be magically held on the back, but rather dropped to the ground while switching to secondary weaponary I was thrilled. But some users of this forum (3 guys AFAIR) always contested any remark about increasing realism.

    So somewhere along the line TW abandoned some of game features. But to say Bannerlord has less features than Warband is simply not fair. You have clans, kingdom politics, influence system, mercenary groups, crafting (dunno how it works really), kids, better leveling system, hell, even semblence of main quest... Sure, some of those things are still in early form, but to say game has no new features comparing to it's predacessor is simply a lie.

    And btw, you are right. Bannerlord will never be fully fledged RPG. Unless some modders will make it so.

  3. What do u think is missing for this game to have a soul?

    Pythagoras said:
    Most people here see a desperate need of something like a soul=depth (just look at those 9 pages of answers), so i don't think i am generalizing too much. The series formula is sandbox, not a superficial arcade framework. We are discussing Bannerlord here, not some mods that come after the game has reached a decent state.
    Click to expand...

    Remember, that forums are always a fraction of general playerbase.
    I believe that feeling of dissatisfaction mainly comes from unmet expectations. They were sky high during development phase, people here analayzed every pixel on every new screen, discussed and played their ideal Bannerlord in their heads for years. Some expected new and better VC, others wanted elements from Crusader Kings or Total War. But M&B in it's root is generally about riding around on your horse and cutting bandits or enemy lords. In general formula everything else is kinda fluff. It was so in original M&B, it was so in Warband and it will be in Bannerlord.

    As long as combat part seems nice, game stays true to it's predacessors. But if you bought it thinking it's something deeper than that, I understand your lack of satisfaction.

  4. What do u think is missing for this game to have a soul?

    Pythagoras said:
    This would be a totally understandable opinion, but most people don't want to pay 50 f*** euros for a mere framework! We can't just accept everything that gets thrown to us, hoping that "the modders will fix it" - at least as long as they don't see a single cent of that money. Mods are a thing that comes on top, but they don't have a place in an argument about what would make it worth its money. And certainly the "framework" won't bring the game a soul, which is what this thread is about.
    Click to expand...

    I believe you kinda miss the point. Bannerlord has no "soul" (in your definition of the word) because it needs to be bland in order to maintain serie's formula. VC has a lot more punch because it creates entire new experience from it. It has tone, it has flavour, it even had fairly gripping storyline, which distinguished it from other m&b mods. Without Warband however, there would be no VC.

    Please, refrain from generalizing what most people want or don't want. As a huge VC fan, I am happy with state of the game. It's a matter of expetations

  5. What do u think is missing for this game to have a soul?

    Pythagoras said:
    Doesn't matter where VC came from. We can expect TW to include the quality and features of a DLC to an "M&B 2", especially after 8 years and with that price - for which we can expect much more than just a framework, btw.
    Click to expand...

    You could, if that was their intent. However, I do not believe that's the case. I would advise curbing expectations a bit. :smile:

  6. What do u think is missing for this game to have a soul?

    SirLoin said:
    Bannerlord is my first M&B game and I really enjoyed it... thinking OH BOY, everyone is right M&B is so good and drank the Kool aid. Just out of curiosity and because Bannerlord is still in EA, I bought Viking Conquest and oh boy, I've been playing it for 2 months straight... IMO, while VC is pretty janky but it has PLENTY more of whatever makes it so much more fun than Bannerlord. Even with the ****ty sieges, VC tops Bannerlord. In VC, it just feels once you establish yourself in the world, even for a little bit, you feel like you matter and people know you. If you take someone's army it feels like you've made a dent on someone's kingdom and when you upgrade units you actually feel their durability and effectivity rise. It was surprising that you could spread rumors about a kingdom to weaken em. It also surprised me how much of a difference armor made. I come back to BL every "major" patch to see if it is any closer to VC but it isn't, I'm sure down the line it hopefully will be but for now, I'll be trading with the tax money I stole from the Irish Lords and raiding monasteries with my peasant women and sail back to Denmark and have a party in my camp. VC got some soul.
    Click to expand...

    Bad news is : Bannerlord will never be like VC.
    VC started as a mod, that was called Brytenwalda. It eventually got upgraded to fully fledged DLC, but you still gotta treat it as a mod. Bannerlord in its design is more like original M&B or Warband. It's supposed to be a framework. So yeah, if you want another experience simillar to VC, give it couple of years and wait for something like Brytenwalda 2.

  7. What do you want Bannerlord to be?

    At minimum I wanted Bannerlord to be warband with better graphics and some streamlined UI. During develpoment phase my hopes got up a notch, with some nice info from blogs I began to imagine it something more to my tastes, like more visual appealing, less buggy Viking Conquest. But somewhere along the line videos from cons were published, and I abandoned hope for this extra bit.

    At the moment, Bannerlord is shaping to be exactly what I expected: Warband with better graphics and some general gameplay improvements. And I accept it. Fighting seems enjoyable, rudamentary tactics sorta work. I am confident mods will make this game as replayable as predacessor. Bryttenwalda 2 FTW :smile:

  8. Do you need to cool down after playing Bannerlord

    Have you tried weight lifting, mate? I can't imagine anyone having sleep problems after heavy squat session during the day. Regardless of their pre bedtime routine. :smile:

  9. Spears are weak.

    GG Cannon said:
    There were some disadvantages to holding the spear 1H with a shield on the other hand as mentioned in the second video shared by @hsngrms, those were fixed by the formation mixing a shield wall with a lancer line also known as a Phalanx, when done in a square formation, and the Phalanx was even more special in this, in which it was the beginning of the use of "Sarissa"s and an arm strapped shield so that freakishly long spear could be held with both hands, fixing the hole 1H spear weakness.

    211_hoplite_vs_sarissa.jpg
    sarissa1.jpg
    An-artists-rendition-of-a-Hellenistic-phalanx.-Copyright-Johnny-Shumate-NOT-OSPREY..jpg


    Yet 1H shield formations with shorter spears were also employed by the Macedonians because they also had their merit on handling.
    Click to expand...

    You do however take into consideration, that spear wall is not an invention of Macedonians? It was used before and afterwards, mainly in the "age of mail" after fall of Western Roman Empire, which is closest to what game depicts. And untill rise of pikeman in late medieval period, predominant use of spear was 1H + some 2H within shieldwall.

    I do believe swingable polewarms are worthy of mentioning here as indeed, they are awfully strong and broken without the proximity penalty as they are giving full damage on pole hits, and this disparity between how strong swingable polearms are to how weakned piercing polearms are makes even more evident that the spears need some love from the devs.
    Click to expand...

    Fully agreed

  10. Are spears and pikes ever going to be fixed?

    You gotta take into consideration "rule of cool".

    I believe devs do know how deadly spear can be, they even implemented it's deadliness in earlier testing. They however nerfed spears later on. Why? I think because they want to appeal to general public, and general public is not so keen on spear walls exchanging thrusts, but more about sword on sword heroics, great cavalary charges and so on.

    That's why tier 1 infantary have sword, expensive and hard to master weapon instead of spear and shield which were cheaper, easier to use and more deadly on the medieval battlefield. And I think that's why combat consist of huge overhand or horizontal swings, that would be telegraphed and easy to parry IRL.

    If you guys want realism, wait for mods :smile:

  11. Spears are weak.

    From my experience, from other people's reserch and from youtube scene I can surmise that IRL spear held in one hand (ie: in a shieldwall) and two handed spears are two different beasts all togheter. Twohanded spears are proven to penetrate not only riveted mail, but also on occasion, some types of plate armor. However, in order to do that, they require some space and weight put behind the hit.

    There is one dude who promotes his own original one handed spear thrust that can penetrate mail, as presented at the end of the video:



    However, this method also requires some acute timing and preparation. Might be difficult to execute in shieldwall vs shieldwall scenario.

    Having said that, I also believe spears are too week in Bannerlord. As they were in Warband. This comes down to poor formation applicaton by the AI. I am waiting for Bryttenwalda 2 :smile:

  12. Dev Blog 15/10/19

    As with siege AIs, the description sounds cool and all, but I am yet to see a battle video, that shows reasonable morale or AI in Bannerlord. Granted, I've not watched plenty of them (I get tired easily watching someone else play), so if anyone has anything showing the content of today's blog in practice, please feel free to share.

  13. Dev Blog 26/09/19

    JustinTime49 said:
    Well people have said enough about your comment. But as for horses, they're making a game. People can't use history only when it conveniences them. In this case, the horses act TOO MUCH like actual war horses
    Click to expand...

    Do not listen to him.
    Historical sources clearly say that full head on charge did not work against a shieldwall. Funny eneough, there were some formation that head charged later on against pike squares (with huge succes). But generally speaking, no. Full frontal assault is not a purpose of cavalary.

    Also, early medieval horses were much smaller than today's horses. Which is not to say that Calradian horses were. They can be wahtever world creators wish.

    It was repeated here many times over, but apparently some people do not acknowledge that, because "hav u evr seen a horsie, dude?"

  14. Dev Blog 18/07/19

    Man, that's a tough job.

    You post a blog - they complain no blog is better than this ****e...
    You do not post a blog - they complain you do not blog.

    There is no winning with those guys :wink:

  15. Dev Blog 13/06/19

    Terco_Viejo said:
    It's not clear to me. Battle orders = Sergeant mode? An undercover freelancer?
    I would have to see it in action...I want to like it; however it is not well explained...or I have not understood it well...
    Click to expand...

    Was it not similar with warband? When you joined battles with multiple lords you pressed 0 (all of you, listen) and than 3 (charge) and only some of troops listened (unless you had greater renown or sth). Now you officialy get to command specific branch of realm's forces. Seems legit. Hope it's fun as well.

  16. Dev Blog 07/06/19

    cherac said:
    Great blog, now I can get rid of that Pesky lord who keeps raiding my villages for no reason
    Click to expand...

    It would be awesome if AI could really learn from your behavior. For example:

    lord A rides your village. Not long after you capture him and execute cheeky bastard.
    lord B rides your village. Soon he finds himself beheded.
    lord C rides your village. You sent his bodyparts to his clanmates.
    lord D comes to your village at the time of war...Stops...Naw, lads. Let's leave this one out.

  17. Dev Blog 07/06/19

    Executions mechanics seems allright. However I am curious wheter you can try to kill lord in battle, before the capture in order to avoid reputation penelties. That would allow for some trade offs in bouts. In warband chasing after one agent on the battlefield is usually of less value to the outcome than slaying hordes of infantry mooks.

  18. Dev Blog 14/03/19

    I laughed at forum references in this week's blog. Nicely written again.

    Terco_Viejo said:
    2. For the topic of reins; I provide feedback from a professional rider who explains different medieval equestrian techniques. Unless the PC is eventually handling a two-handed spear, a crossbow or bow, the reins should not be released. If the PC has a shield in the left hand, this hand also holds the reins...the right hand is free for the weapon.
    Click to expand...

    That was my first thought as well, horseman used shields on two straps( even vikings when their infantary used one grip/umbs shield) for the sole purpose of holding reins.

    However, you gotta take into account simplifiacation of computer game comparing to reality. In reality, horseman would rarely move shield at all. He would steer the horse in such a way, that he would be protected from shield side and be able to use his reach and speed to kill enemy with a spear/sword with dominant arm. Transfering shield to the other side of the horse is certainly possible, might be even quite fast, but will always be clumsy affair. Same goes to attacking enemy on wrong side of the horse with spear/sword. Although possible, not advisable.

    In warband (and I assume in Bannerlord too) the movement of the shield/weapon is much more abstract. In worst case scenario, you will only see some clipping. Rider can transfer his shield anywhere mouse points, his torso much more fluid and because of that, reins would look silly. Therefore I think an idea to drop reins is quite good compromise. We know it is doable to steer a horse with just legs, current physics of horse fighting won't allow us to depict it more realisticly (unless we agree to drop a lot of dynamic style of warband out of it), so current decision seems to be correct.

  19. Dev Blog 31/01/19

    CaptainLee said:
    Got it? Now you have your answer. Heaven forbid a fantasy race like the battanians should have some distinctive stylized leather lamellar armour.
    Click to expand...

    I do not think anyone would have anything against stylized leather lamellar armour. Even more in dry climates, but what the hell man, if it looks cool on Battanians and distinguish their culture from the rest of the world, why the hell no?

    I think the main point of contention is : it is not leather lamellar armour. It looks kinda like leather scale armor which kina makes no sense. Not in it's-historically-accurate sense, rather it's-not-viable sense. Besides, I do not think it looks more cooler than this one :
    http://www.medieval-fightclub.com.au/images/watermarked/4/detailed/5/leather_lamellar_02__15648.jpg?t=1455691595
    or this one:
    https://www.google.pl/search?q=lamellar+leather&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwiqgoq3mp_gAhXOmIsKHfXvD5AQ_AUIDigB&biw=1680&bih=936#imgrc=QLeTsx_DxTYI8M:

    So why not make this texture right, if it's still possible?

  20. Dev Blog 17/01/19

    DtheHun said:
    Edit: Fire arrows are hollywood B.S. The most hot thing in a general siege before gunpowder was the tar over the body of the poured off besiegers.
    Click to expand...

    No they aren't.
    At least Thietmar describes it's widespread use. And that was in the most powerfull European army at that time, one that also employed many siege engienes. One siege he described against fortress of prince Boleslav I the Brave (of Poland) failed because it started to rain and palisade fires were extinguished.

    They used exactly same tar, you mentioned to keep the flame going on the arrows.
Back
Top Bottom