Search results for query: *

  1. AlexTheCat

    My faction loses every single battle

    Arkyll said:
    This is problematic considering that early on the influence system relies on AI's choice of policies.
    Click to expand...
    As a new part of a faction, goal #1 should be gaining influence. As an established member their goal would be to keep you down.
  2. AlexTheCat

    Bannerlord Armor System as a bottleneck for tactical gameplay

    I don't understand. Maybe, someone can fill me in without hyperbole. I don't have a problem with troops getting killed by looters or recruits. Armor seems to make a difference with my MC. To be clear I usually use a shield wall with ranged on higher ground behind.
  3. AlexTheCat

    This is what was expected of Bannerlord AI to behave!!!

    Gadheras said:
    You have all kind of cultures in this game. How well did it go for the roman legions in the Teutonic forests vs Germanic tribes? oh yeah, they died with their superior tactics. That was a game changer for history as well.
    Click to expand...
    I don't want to be that guy. But if you're referring to the Teutoburg forest, that was an ambush with the Romans out of formation.
  4. AlexTheCat

    construction stuck

    That happened to me once. What's the city loyalty?
  5. AlexTheCat

    Recruiting lords to your kingdom.

    five bucks said:
    I think he was joking (at least I hope so). It's not an infinite quiver of arrows, the implication is that the player picks up arrows from the battlefield after the battle.
    Click to expand...
    Not joking. And, there is no implication. You're coming up with a needless and convoluted backstory to explain video game mechanics. It's a video game, it doesn't need fan fiction to explain why you never run out of arrows.
  6. AlexTheCat

    Recruiting lords to your kingdom.

    veronicaaltoids said:
    I don't understand why javelins cost so much, and why arrows cost thousands too
    why arrows should cost so much???

    this game is very inbalanced for weapon price
    Click to expand...
    well, consider that you're not buying 30 arrows. You're buying a magical never ending quiver of infinite arrows. For it to be "balanced" you'd have to go to a town and buy arrows after every battle.
  7. AlexTheCat

    Issues in Beta 1.5.8

    I noticed these. But, I started a new game today and it seems mostly fixed except for looters running away. Still, a lot less companions available than before.
  8. AlexTheCat

    Death in Battle hurts Lategame

    I think an advanced setup option menu at the start of a new game would work for everyone. Sort of like when you create a game in Civilization where you can micro-manage the game parameters. Say, add an option that allows deaths from other clans but not yours. Obviously if every body is having kids the game is going to be way too overpopulated without a (relatively) balanced birth to death ratio.
  9. AlexTheCat

    Death in Battle hurts Lategame

    nyarlathotep1975 said:
    well that´s good for you, but doesn´t really help the people who do have a problem. sure, you can work around it and if it would be an unavoidable problem that´s clearly the way to go. but it is avoidable and the only reason it isn´t fixed until now, is because some dev doesn´t feel like it. that´s not an accepable behaviour towards people who spend their time and money to support this company. saying that he doesn´t see it as a problem dispite the fact that so many people discribed their problems with it (clans die out, companions/family die on and on, snowballing...) is simply not ok.
    Click to expand...
    It is avoidable. Just check the the box that says disable death.
  10. AlexTheCat

    Death in Battle hurts Lategame

    Galvar said:
    This entire thread is about one such mechanic. They added death only in player battles and purposefully keep it overtuned. There was a post in this thread that quoted a developer confirming that they're aware of it, but consider it low priority.


    They added it to both branches. If it was added to beta, but main branch didn't have it, I imagine people would complain about it less, they'd just switch to the main branch.

    If they need help with balancing AI death, I'd gladly opt into branch that has it in some form and provide feedback on it. Instead we're sitting on this feature for months with no end in sight. For what purpose? Did they get anything out of it?
    Click to expand...
    I don't consider death in battle a bad mechanic. I like the feature. Sure, some tweaking here and there. Overall I like the way it's working. If you don't like it you could save scum or disable it. I think it's a %10 chance of someone dyeing when they go down. That sounds totally reasonable to me. Again, it's an option.
  11. AlexTheCat

    Death in Battle hurts Lategame

    nyarlathotep1975 said:
    still think it´s not needed, but respect your opinion. and i´ve seen the BG3 forum. I will play the game at 100%, but i´m not crazy enough to take part in that discussion. that seems almost on a religous level. nothing i´m into. but i love BG, can´t wait for release. hope it´s awesome
    Click to expand...
    I think we're on the same level. Thanks for a civil discussion.
  12. AlexTheCat

    Death in Battle hurts Lategame

    nyarlathotep1975 said:
    the beta is simply not necessary. why put in something in even worse shape? read the forum of any beta brench. people get very upset about it. that´s simply not needed. sure you could say nobody needs to play it, but people are curious and try it. why would they drive people into it if not to use them as test subjects? all it does is to create an unnessacery amount of angry players.
    and about their silence, i don´t expect them to go into detail but for almost one year all we knew was that they work on stability and and bugs. so many people didn´t knew what or if there is something more to expect. only lately, after almost a year they confirmed new content. and even when it´s more then obvious that they need more then a year to develop the game, they keep silent about it. at least some idea they must have, so why not share it. don´t expect a release date but a little bit of open communication can´t be that dangerous. they already missed their starting idea about when they could finish and nobody got angry about it.
    Click to expand...
    Well, the game needs to be tested one way or another. So, I wouldn't say beta is unnecessary. I agree with you in that I would like more communication from taleworlds. I wouldn't say they they drove people into it. There was a very devoted mount an blade community that waited for this for a long time. all they had to do was say "hey we made this new thing". You want to to see angry? go to the Baldurs Gate 3 forum. DnD folks get pissed when you mess with their stuff. But, again, I agree more communication would be the best the thing for everyone.
  13. AlexTheCat

    Death in Battle hurts Lategame

    nyarlathotep1975 said:
    That´s not exactly the point. It´s an EA product and bugs are to be expected. The problem I have is, how they treat their customers. EA should still be an enjoyable experience. but they purposefully introduce bad mechanics for testing and the whole beta brench thing also seems fishy to me. also the fact that they keep so silent about their plans for the game is concerning. their planing seems just wrong to me
    but that been said; impressive patients and positiv attitude, even afte 1k hours of gameplay.
    Click to expand...
    I don't understand why the beta would be fishy. Maybe you could explain. I think the silence is because if they say something and it doesn't work out people will be even more outraged than they are now. They can't respond to every post or everyone will expect a response and if they don't get one they'll be pissed. I don't think they purposefully add bad mechanics. If they do, they add it to the beta that you have to opt in to. EA is about trying new things. There are games that are complete that have aspects I hate. I feel like people get angrier at stuff they don't like in EA games than in "complete" games. I get the criticism, I disagree with most of it.
  14. AlexTheCat

    Death in Battle hurts Lategame

    Nodice83 said:
    Then i must say i admire your attitude and honesty. After 500 hr of my gameplay i figured out there is not much to be done there at the time. They started to implement some perks and things but it was never the hype i felt in those first 500 hrs (it is just 200 more now). I agree it was worth the money i paid for it, but i've had higher hopes for the game.
    Click to expand...
    I had higher hopes as well. But, to quote an ancient epic poem "you can't always get what you want". All said, in my opinion it's on the right track. I mean, I think bannerlord is a massive improvement on warband. And, when (eventually) the final release comes, everyone who doesn't like it will find a mod that makes them warm and fuzzy. I know this game isn't for everyone. I told my friends that I loved this game but if you're not a mount and blade person you probably won't like it.
  15. AlexTheCat

    Death in Battle hurts Lategame

    Nodice83 said:
    How long have you played it so far ?
    Click to expand...
    almost embarrassed to say 1000 hours. I bought it the first week.
  16. AlexTheCat

    Death in Battle hurts Lategame

    I'm going to go against the current here. I really enjoy this game. I knew it wouldn't be "complete" for a while. But, so far, It is so much better than warband native. Side note: when a 1257 mod comes out that'll be the only thing I play. I like the death in battle (well, I don't like it). It adds a risk aspect that doesn't generally exist in other games. It sucks when a companion I've grown fond of dies. But, hey, that's war. It's kind of like what makes gambling fun. you can turn off death if you'd like. I remember when this first came out a review said something like "basically a prettier version of warband... So, the best game ever". I don't feel cheated. I waited for this game. I bought it. I feel good about it. I'm not trying to start a fight.
  17. AlexTheCat

    Dragon Armor

    I don't want to sound rude. But, this isn't dark souls. I don't want to hit someone 20-30 times. And if you think people are pissed when a companion dies... Well, just wait 'till they lose their helmet. I like your ideas, but not in this game. Again, my opinion, I think it's fine the way it is. Maybe add an armorer where you can buy custom armor. But, aside from that, I don't want someone that takes 20 hits to take down.
  18. AlexTheCat

    Dragon Armor

    I like the armors as they are. I assume people getting one/two hit dyeing are playing on hard. maybe play on an easier setting. I'd be fine with the system they have in "with fire and sword". But, as it is, I don't have issues with me or my people being unreasonably chopped down.
  19. AlexTheCat

    why xD

    Yes. The latest hotfix put everyone in zombie makeup.
  20. AlexTheCat

    Spawning of hight tier Armor

    Midnitewolf said:
    Yeah but the realism becomes completely removed form the game when your a Lord or a King, in charge of 2 cites and 3 castles, with 10 million Denars in assets and you can't wear the same armor or use the same weapons that a unit you have 50 off in your army can wear. I would think that as a King, if nothing else, I could go to my Elite Imperial Cataphract and say, " Give me your arms and armor" and he would comply. Wearing worn chain and a battered helm in this situation makes no sense whatsoever and is absolutely not realistic.
    Click to expand...
    Point taken. I must agree.
Back
Top Bottom