Search results for query: *

Mad Vader said:

I'll be leaving the forum (=deleting bookmarks really, I'm not here anyway).
I waited a while if they were going to fix the game's flaws, but very little came out of it, which was not a surprise given the dev attitudes.
I wish you all good luck in your lives and as much happiness and love you can find.

Click to expand...

Today I logged on again from a long time ago... and I see this [...]I waited a while if they were going to fix the game's flaws, but very little came out of it, which was not a surprise given the dev attitudes.[...]. Just like my thoughts.

I wish you all the best from the bottom of my heart.
Hasta siempre compañero

Surprise!

+1

Taleworlds turn a deaf ear to this issue and many others... projectile damage... armour protection in relation to weapon damage...etc....Although Dejan (and now Piconi) I'm sure has brought it to the devs debate table..."the committee of the nay"... basically doesn't care.

We provided feedback to fill a football stadium and yet; NOTHING in +4 years. There are things that are too basic to not be implemented in the base game and have to be brought in through modding.

#thehamsterwheel

I fully agree.

As I already pointed out in the past; it's an addition that many of us are looking forward to... however when you test it as a player in the first 5 minutes you realise the shortcomings of this mechanic (Fracas shows)... it need work and fine tuning. But if this fine tunig is limited for the corseted limitations of console... well we knot how this ends...

Akka said:

Console port dumbed down the game [...]

Click to expand...

This, no matter who it hurts, is an irrefutable fact.

bbaydogdu said:

Once again a talented modder fixed the TW's mess. Kudos to bestmods168, he released his new Realistic Couched Lance mod to save us from disgusting native animation. It only works with the strapped shields. Here's the link

Click to expand...

Yes, I totally agree. In fact, many users, including myself, highlighted this a long time ago, bringing it to the eyes of the devs.

Funny enough, that "rEaLiStIc CoUcH"animation is Native; surprise! we also provided feedback in the past... but it fell on deaf ears... like hundreds of other contributions that could enrich the experience of the base game.

Goyyyio said:

The return of the king!

It is absolutely nonsensical, it serves no purpose and gets men killed. Why would they even change it from Warband?

Click to expand...

Nah... I'm still the bastard mother****ing gollum... what I'm hiding behind the bushes now... lurking.

Joking aside, Piconi has brought the issue to the attention of the devs... maybe we will have an answer soon.

One step forward, two steps back™

Totalgarbage said:

Yes, that's true with cavalry. I wonder why cavalry essentially converges into one or more points when attacking rather than acting more like a lawn mower. Maybe it's because cavalry lines tend to be wider due to cavalry both occupying more space than a foot soldier and also having larger gaps with the soldier next to them compared to foot soldiers, therefore resulting in them "converging" on a point maybe?

Click to expand...

Cry with me brother

Piconi said:

We've forwarded feedback on this and the team is having some ongoing discussions around it - but there is nothing definitive I could share at this point.

Click to expand...

Cross your fingers for me, I already have arthrosis... ib 84 years...

Changed the static colors of cloth located on 61 armor pieces to heraldic colors (the used color now depends on the faction color).

Click to expand...

You have made a crime with certain modifications.... more teletuby effect...

I think it's fine that you applied a team colour layer to the sturgian winingas or to the catafract's googled helmet plumes... but in others it wasn't necessary at all... that red cape with battanian tartan, why? ... the leather trimming of the brass lamellar torso, why? the braid of the sturgian helmet, why?...
Anyway, I won't go on...

Sorry for the necro,

I bring a suggestion regarding the position of the banners on the bearer's hand, because I see that after all this time you haven't changed anything.

Don't you find it unrealistic that the position of the flagpole is so displaced upwards? I've tinkered with this Z position and I don't see any inconsistencies in the inventory panel... and in mission both foot and horseback carriers feel more realistic inmho. The suggested Z position works with all banners.



Any chance with this? @Piconi @Dejan

Totalgarbage said:

Yeah regular infantry with the fallback command definitely needs work, I agree, but skirmish infantry acted pretty similar to how it is in RBM with the fallback command in that they move back while facing the enemy and throwing their throwables. Unless you mean that the units under the fallback command should continue falling back as much as they can regardless of the location you indicate, then I both agree and disagree at the same time but mostly agree.

[...]

Click to expand...

A bareback clip without any mod using your wildings...



I don't know about you but I'm laughing at it. I don't want to argue for the sake of arguing... but ffs...
I'm going to create a thread and a poll... I'm idle today...

Totalgarbage said:

Fallback when used by skirmish infantry and archers work pretty much as you want it to be. Try it with wildlings in a custom battle. It's not completely smooth, but I would say that it's more than satisfactory. I agree that other infantry units should behave in a similar manner.

Click to expand...

I have tested both now with 1.2.0 as you indicated as well as in previous versions and the result is the same for me... the agents keep facing back and that is not acceptable because it breaks with the concept that this order represents... or so I think.

Look at this video (right side with archers),


the difference is abysmal and the tactical use is totally different if we compare with native. If RBM's ai module can perform it, what less than Taleworlds can improve it or equal it. Do I need to create a thread and a poll?

Totalgarbage said:

Cavalry AI vs foot troops is really bad, but thankfully Duh replied that there's a hotfix on the way (hopefully soon).

Click to expand...

I was already suspecting a bug issue... because what they say in the videoblog is far from the practical reality...thanks for the info.

Totalgarbage said:

Archers are actually stupidly OP and annoying in the hands of the AI now and Infantry has no chance of beating archers by themselves. They basically kite the attacking infantry all through the map until they run out of ammo or they manage to kill all of them, and are generally as fast if not faster than the chasing infantry units. Of course you can still beat archers with tactics and dividing your infantry into multiple formations to flank of course, but archers have become such a cheap no-brain unit without proper cavalry AI to actually chase and decimate the kiting ranged units. It kind of feels like you're playing against a SC2 pro controlling stimmed marines with only zealots that don't have the charge upgrade lmao.

Click to expand...

The behavioural approach for archers on foot or mounted archers/skirmishers is not all bad... the problem is once again the damage calculation of the projectiles issue. If these were tuned down together with the armour increase as we discussed ad nauseam, the result would not be so annoying.
What I would change about mounted archers/skirmishers is the behavioural guideline that tells them If you have no ammo switch to melee mode...and no. I think this type of unit should attack as a group and not individually as a foot archer unit operates... wait until the last agent runs out of ammunition and then attack in melee as a sole formation.

Totalgarbage said:

I completely agree with all your other points regarding damage/armor.

Click to expand...

NEW BATTLE TERRAINS-NEW HIDEOUT SCENES​

Very nice job overall with this new addition. On the other hand I must point out that there are still scenes without baking (plausible) or where the shadow has an unsightly shading, unreal and visually disturbing. Modding: I wish you would at least release the open field battle maps for editing... you will make the work easier for the sceners.

NEW ARMOR PIECES [v1.1.0]​

Sorry, they are ugly as hell...I had to say it. If they are Ali's concepts, which are unknown to me, the 3d application will not rank high in terms of beauty.

CAMPAIGN MAP WEATHER & WEATHER EFFECTS [v1.2.0]​

While it is true that I applaud the visual application of meteorology in the campaign map, in mission scenes... well... I think that Realisitc Weather by OrderWoPower overtook you from the right, certainly a proposal to be valued.

NEW VOICEOVERS - SIEGE ENGINE SOUNDS​

Although I have not tested it, but if the improvements are real; I applaud it.

FOG OF WAR [v1.1.0]-FOG OF WAR IMPROVEMENTS [v1.2.0]​

That is emphatically not fog of war; this is:


And I am of the opinion that its application should be a difficulty option in the new game creation settings.

SALLY OUT AMBUSH [v1.1.0]​

From that video in 2016 to the release of 1.1.0, time flies, doesn't it?

PUSHABLE SIEGE LADDERS [v1.2.0]​

Nice addition, finally we see it working

MELEE COMBAT AI [v1.2.0]​

I commented in another thread. A step forward, but edges need to be rounded.

RANGED COMBAT AI [v1.2.0]​

A step forward, good work.

TARGETING SYSTEM [v1.2.0]​

The best in terms of combat mechanics. Thank you for finally considering this request which was demanded practically since the closed alpha-beta period of 2019.

CAVALRY COMBAT AI [v1.2.0]​

Bad, a step backwards. Some bug has slipped through... everything you talk about, in practice it does not resemble the reality.

FORMATION TARGETING [v1.2.0]​

I repeat, thank you for considering this request. You have expanded the tactical possibilities and improved the gameplay experience. Wonderful that you are going to implement it in the MP, @Ling* will be euphoric wherever he is.

AUTO BATTLE CALCULATIONS [v1.2.0]​

Untested, no comments

KINGDOM DESTRUCTION [v1.2.0]​

Step forward, this was requested. Just look at Warband.

WAREHOUSES [v1.2.0]​

Warband maybe?

ALLEYS [v1.1.0]​

I guess a step forward... but I guess a far cry from the more complex approach that Foruberie offers.

MULTIPLAYER​

TAUNTS [v1.2.0]​

It is not that I am totally against it, in fact I commented about this at the time. But dang... that you put these animations before swing arcs//2 revision, which is a current problem of combat fundamentals... I don't know, debatable to say the least .

SCENE DOWNLOADER [v1.2.0]​

Good!

MODDING CHANGES​

Good! Among other things, we now have a tag for crouching. Lucon is a happy man now.

Today I downloaded the beta,

The 1vs1 has improved a lot compared to previous versions. The only thing that makes me squeak is "that preventive block"... I don't know why but practically all the bots have that behavior at the time of the individual combat. If by design a "more defensive" attitude is intended, wouldn't it be better to define patterns of behavior for footwork... I mean... make the bot keep the distance and move forward-backward/left-right according to the use of the weapon it carries...

Then, what to say... a bot that kicks and bash with shield/weapon will be one day possible in Native?--- rethoric.

In formation,

Although it is undeniable that a step forward has been taken in certain aspects; we are still far from the proposal of RBM and its AI module inmho.
We keep on seeing formations that pile up and lose their shape. Although it is true that in 1.2.0 the agents tend to " surround"... they wrap by sectors or clusters, not as a single unit in formation, I miss that type of sensation which is offered to us accurately in the RBM ai module.

I still don't agree that the intended native proposal for the fallback command is a solid design decision; the agents must retreat in an orderly manner facing the nearest enemy, not turning their backs to be slaughtered. Retreat and fallback are different concepts and currently the two orders operate in the same way unfortunately.


Cavalry,
While it is true that in 1vs1 melee combat with other cavalry the improvement of 1.2.0 compared to previous versions is close to satisfactory, fighting against agents on foot (as many others have commented) I perceive some worsening in the final performance. Basically, they still don't manage to land the right attacks.

The formation charges-attacks should not be concentrated in a single point but the whole unit should attack as if it were a roller, in the full extent of the form of the unit (extensible to infantry).

As for the archers/horse archers-skirmishers,
The implementation of the much demanded focus fire/targeting command (it was about time) has expanded the tactical possibilities and the playable experience for these units and others available. A real achievement and the positive point for me of this patch as far as combat mechanics are concerned .

Finally, old problems... same complaint,
We are expressly told in the devblog, I quote: [...]We reworked the melee AI to make agents fight less recklessly and increase the duration of combat[...] ; in terms of combat duration I have to disagree. While it is true that the bot is "not so wild" and that [...]decrease of attack frequency[...] there is still the problem of the damage/protection ratio.

I'm no longer saying that you should improve it... just level it up to the experience we had in Warband-Ving Conquest :
Weapon damage reformulated by tier, bonuses and acceleration variables adjustment. We all know about the benefits of a glaive (sarcasm)... take a horse and enjoy the acceleration buff; terrible. On the other hand the performance of the spears on foot are far below their real/plausible effectiveness.

Armor protection reformulated by tier; basically a warband approach.
Projectile damage... the current performance of these elements is still taken for granted by devs. A reformulation of these elements is desperately needed... absolutely lower the damage inflicted... once again... the answer is in Warband and not elsewhere.

If all of the above were reformulated and adequate, then the HP of the shields could be revised.... under these premises, a nerf on durability would not go amiss.

@Piconi , you won't mind if I bother you, will you... maybe an inception ..... Big hug.

Best regards to all of you.

Congrats guys!, especially to my dear Nenad. All the best.
Best plot twist EVA!

Lol, even MRay has left the building...

@Ulfhedinn How far away are the moments of active feedback when many of us still harboured some spark of hope™...

Akka said:

Damn, you mean the only way to adjust camera is a mod ?
Well, thanks for the link at least, I could meddle with the numbers and center like I wanted. Nothing for the non-inverted camera in campaign mode though, this one might be a bug.

Click to expand...

Well, NCT is a bit closer to a more old-school warband-ish experience. You may also want to try Xorberas' option which is much more customizable. @Artem1s , released this video recently (thanks for the promo mate, big hugs). Check it out Akka, give it a shot, and see what you think.