Search results for query: *

  • Users: JaroX
  • Order by date
  1. Patch Notes e1.7.2

    I have the same problem: I saved the game after I entered a town, there were 5 crafting orders, 2 of them non-accessible for me. Next day I loaded the game, no crafting orders, the ORDERS tab is inactive. Is this a "new feature" or a bug? If I stay in the town and let the time pass, I get new crafting orders for small cash, like 150 or 300 coins only. Discussing crafting... anyone knows, if I disassemble lets say two-hand maces, do I get two-hand mace crafting recepies, or just random ones? I would prefer unlocking new recepies for the stuff I work on (disassembling, smithing). From my experience, I get random recepies which is not cool at all. So many features of the game are hiddent from the players, we dont know whats intended, whats random, what the current rules are. There should be a screen in the game stating the current rules in regards to fief vote distribution, unlocking crafting recepies etc.

    Also... the pictures of nobles are with red eyes = like with blood instead of eyes. The 3D models are OK with normal eyes.

    And one more, older thing - I have noble prisoners with me in party. Some of them I defeated, some of them I took from prisons inside my towns and castles (I dont remember which one is from where). I get offer to release a noble for 14k coins and when I click YES, I get 4780 coins or for other prisoners with ransom over 10k nothing at all... It seams ransom till 7k works OK, only the higher values get bugged.

    And finally - I have read the patch notes e1.7.2. and as I understood, there were no changes made to SINGLE PLAYER, but I see changes in single player (dont play multiplayer at all). Also the game got more complicated and is running slower, with FPS drops.
    OK, so I rolled back the game version to e1.7.1 and tried to load my save-game from e1.7.2 but the game is crashing. Taleworlds... Bannerlord became playable after 2 years since selling (ladders during sieges and such were making the game unplayable for me), but with e1.7.2 you are making the game unplayable again. Why cant you test your updates before release? Now I read the redeye and no crafting orders bugs were identified in beta update and solved back in march, yet you release these bugs end of may? I just cant understand this, its like you were doing this on purpose.
  2. Patch Notes e1.7.2

    Is there a bug with the crafting system? If you exit the campaign and then return to the game again, all orders for crafting weapons disappear. They appear gradually, but with high demands. Is this a bug or an update to the crafting system?
    I have the same problem: I saved the game after I entered a town, there were 5 crafting orders, 2 of them non-accessible for me. Next day I loaded the game, no crafting orders, the ORDERS tab is inactive. Is this a "new feature" or a bug? If I stay in the town and let the time pass, I get new crafting orders for small cash, like 150 or 300 coins only. Discussing crafting... anyone knows, if I disassemble lets say two-hand maces, do I get two-hand mace crafting recepies, or just random ones? I would prefer unlocking new recepies for the stuff I work on (disassembling, smithing). From my experience, I get random recepies which is not cool at all. So many features of the game are hiddent from the players, we dont know whats intended, whats random, what the current rules are. There should be a screen in the game stating the current rules in regards to fief vote distribution, unlocking crafting recepies etc.

    Also... the pictures of nobles are with red eyes = like with blood instead of eyes. The 3D models are OK with normal eyes.

    And one more, older thing - I have noble prisoners with me in party. Some of them I defeated, some of them I took from prisons inside my towns and castles (I dont remember which one is from where). I get offer to release a noble for 14k coins and when I click YES, I get 4780 coins or for other prisoners with ransom over 10k nothing at all... It seams ransom till 7k works OK, only the higher values get bugged.

    And finally - I have read the patch notes e1.7.2. and as I understood, there were no changes made to SINGLE PLAYER, but I see changes in single player (dont play multiplayer at all). Also the game got more complicated and is running slower, with FPS drops.
  3. Why Is This Forum Section So Toxic?

    That being said, I also share the opinion that this forum has been overwhelmed with anger, rage and bitterness which is not helpful or constructive for the future of the game. Like how many threads do people need to post saying the same thing over and over again? We get it. And I think the devs got it too now, we are all disappointed.
    You midht be right, that there is way too much bitterness on these forums, but seeing the developers defending an irracional mechanics, or working on time consuming additions despite the game having so many very easily correctable flaws is just too frustrating to just sit and wait (how many more years to get at least the single-player working logically/realistically/not irracionally?).
  4. Resolved Fief elections are always the same lord

    I am curious, how high is your influence? Not sure if it has something to do with it. but it could. I am Khuzait by birth, but have attached myself to the Vlandians, namely Derthert... currently 910 influence, and I am on the ballots, especially those where I was instrumental in the capture.
    Like over 500 influence. I dont think there is any connection in what you suppose. There is another thred with a formula to calculate values for each clan and the highest 3 clans are nominated for the vote. In my case, it is because I already have many towns and castles, and my army inside those fiefs is not as strong as other clans have.
  5. Why Is This Forum Section So Toxic?

    I was referring to the "teenagers" bit. I can't fathom why he felt the need to add that.
    I think (speaking from experience), 5-15 year olds have stronger need to comment on things, to give reviews, to let the world know what they feel/think/experienced, while they decide to do so after spending only a short time with that activity. Older guys (like myself) tend to withheld feedback, they dont need to raise their voice so often and so loud, especially if the feedback would be negative. Once the older guy decides to give a written negative review, he usually takes much more time to think it through (compared to teenagers), the text is longer and structured, he highlights or repeats the most important ideas in the text, he usually reads it after himself and makes changes before giving it out.

    Why I wrote that: If I were an owner/manager of a company producing a game like Bannerlord, I would definitely look more for feedback from guys 25+ years old, than from teenagers. I would read the reviews that are long, ignore the reviews consisting of only one sentence (even so if not complete). Also, I would focus on negative reviews. Why? Because I would want to make my product better and not to look for ways to confort my ego.
  6. Why Is This Forum Section So Toxic?

    Well jokes on you because if you own the game that IS essentially what you did :iamamoron:

    Guess the massive 'this game is in early acces' warning was missed?
    Corsair831 said, Bannerlord is something like a DEMO and people should live with what they got, because the developers are working on it and once its ready, it will be reliesed as a final product. I said, I never paid for DEMO but I paid 45 Euro for Bannerlord. Go ask Taleworlds, if they consider their product to be a DEMO after 1 year since start of monetization... They will tell you "NO".

    Another thing is, that nowdays, almost all games come out half-finished and it takes 3-6 months to get them working correctly, after that the developers are adding new content and usually ask for more money. I dont like it, but I know I have to live with it. Bannerlord is a different story - it asked for 45 Euro a year ago and today the singleplayer is a mess (I have no idea why they "reliesed" MP already, or why they are about to bring in more crafting and escape from prison etc., when the basic things in singleplayer just dont work).
  7. Why Is This Forum Section So Toxic?

    "I bought a ticket to the movies, and they let me see the trailer early, and based off of the trailer the movie is absolutely terrible"

    Edit: You guys literally just proved my point here. Healthy criticism is fine, but some of you guys are just outright vitriolic. The game is clearly going to take ~~2-3 years to be in a fully playable state, we all know it. You're going to get to play it, it's just going to take some time. If you're not having fun, go play Mordhau/Warband, come check back in at official release.

    Healthy, polite criticism of the game is great. The devs seem to like interacting with their community more than most I have seen (which I am very surprised by given the attitude of you guys, I wouldn't want to have to talk to you guys). What is not great is constantly insulting and belittling the devs/game and alienating the community from the devs. Do you think they're just sat twiddling their thumbs? They're working on the game, every day they do more stuff, it's going to get finished. Just because you don't directly know what it is they're doing every day does not mean it's not getting done.

    Please guys for the love of god think of Early Access as a demo, not an official release.

    Thanks to those of you who agree with me, it appears not everyone here is going to act like a baby, just a vocal minority
    Oh my God. I cant believe Im seeing this. I have been playing PC games for more than 25 years and never paied for DEMO (and never will). What I traded my 45 Euros for was Bannerlord PC game on Steam (nobody cares if alfa, beta, gama, delta, EA or whatever). They had 1 year time to get singleplayer working, and today it is a mess. All the adults, hardcore players see the game is broken, it is illogical, the product is not working as it is supposed to work. Go to Steam and check the reviews there. The short reviews like "awesome!", "super great!" and alike are made by teenagers who have spent less then 100 hours in Bannerlord, most of the negative reviews are written by people who have spent over 200 hours and are able to formulate more complex thoughts...
  8. SP - General Lets make Bannerlord work

    You probably can't play Warband, it's too much of a graphical downgrade.

    You are also right about the expansion of Taleworlds being a problem from them. Warband was made by a small team, and key people in Taleworlds couldn't change their approach to management for the much enlarged Bannerlord team. It happens to many companies as you know too. The solution is to hire a management pro to whip the developent into shape, but then you have to give him power to do that and not overrule him. They had a managing director that was not an owner and was supposed to do this, but since the key owner (Armagan) had a major role in development, I would guess he interfered too much in the management. For whatever reason the MD quit or was fired two years ago. Their problems continue and can't be solved by us here.
    Oh... thats a pity. So they actually made a step to right direction, but something went wrong so they made two steps back. Thank you very much for the info, seems you are very well informed and have been following the company and products for longer period of time. Anyway, I believe that even after people make decisions, they still can be in doubt to a certain degree, can make a new, different decisions later. As long as I am concerned, doesnt matter who are the owners, management, develeping team, as long as the game is good. Not asking for money or work, not trying to be too clever here, just would like Bannerlord basic issues to be corrected asap. I dont think its that hard to correct the 10 points I mentionned, if the developers realize those 10 points are a problem. If they dont see them as a problem, then there is a much bigger problem within Taleworlds that cant be solved in few days time.
  9. SP - General Lets make Bannerlord work

    1. When the owners are also managers, you can't change the management. Mismanagement will continue until the owners sell or the company goes under.
    2. Taleworlds is not in any danger of closing shop for the foreseeable time. The EA money would last for a long time (to paraphrase their PR guy). They have no incentive to be "saved" from poor development.
    3. The only way to make Bannerlord work is to wait for the modders to do it with some assistance from Taleworlds. This will take time.
    I didnt check, so I dont know who is the management and who are the owners. In any case, they can hire one or two guys to help them with "out of the box thinking" and solve some problems for them. Bannerlord is my first game from the series, so I dont know "how it goes" with this developer and its products, but the potencial is huge and after 1 year on the market the trivial issues are still there. I checked some alternatives, but they are very far away from Bannerlord. Maybe I should try out Warband, but I assume it is not only graphically behind.
  10. SP - General Lets make Bannerlord work

    Sorry if I'll ignore the 90% of your post but the point 2 caught my attention particularly, because recently I'm also experiencing this FPS drop (sometime), but it doesn't happen only in the sieges and I don't understand why. Did you report it?
    No. I dont play everyday, only when I have free time. Since then I changed my graphics card and patches came out. Right now, I dont have that problem, but the point is not to focus resources on improving stuff that is working and nobody has issues with, when there are lots of fundamental issues to deal with.
  11. SP - General Lets make Bannerlord work

    Note: I have read the guidline after writing down this text, sorry for the text not being structured as asked in guidelines, but I believe this text is better together like this than as divided to many separate threads. Hello all, who love the Mount & Blade II Bannerlord PC game and want to...
  12. Resolved 20+20+20 influence gives 33% vote, same as 100 influence

    I think mexxico said they will increase the amount of influence you can spend on things, but I don't remember if it was confirmed or just an idea.
    But yeah I agree with everything you said. I don't join or create factions anymore because it's actually easier to just be a lone clan because you don't use the election/influence system at all. Just take what you want.
    Yes, it must be more easy and simple that way, but... I actually like the election/influence system, because it gives the game depth and complexity. Its like the political games in real-life. What I have problem with, is the absence of info on how the game works, based on what rules are nominees decided, 3*20i = 100i, merciful nobles raze villages to ground, kill villages and caravans, or when Sturgia won 1 town, 3 castles, imprisoned 1 Battanian king and 2 nobles, but should pay 600 coins/day to end war with Battania (that has no more fiefs nor coins to keep minor clans fighting for them) that is "winning" the war because it killed more civilians.

    Thank you MArdA for the info, I will open a thread there too.
  13. Resolved 20+20+20 influence gives 33% vote, same as 100 influence

    Hello JaroX, we give specific values to these influence points spent on the votings. Let me explain in few words. 20 influence worths 1 value number while 60 influence worths 2 and 100 influence worths as a 3 value number. So in your case, Crotor, Nicasor, and Fafen influence votes worth 3 value but both Raganvad and Isvan used 100 influence which also worths 3 value number and that's why the results were all %33.
    Hello TheHusky, thank you for the explanation, but I dont see this to be logical :smile: Why would you do such thing? It just confuses the players and it seems even MArdA wasnt aware of this in-game mechanic, while taking/defending towns/castles is probably the core of the game.
    Also, if the formula to calculate the 3 nominees for new fief vote
    Bannerman Man was presenting, is correct, why would you include attributes like clan tier, total clan strength, powerty bonus, value of captured fief, total value of all clans fiefs in the formula? It would be much more understandable to give fiefs to clans that fought for them, clans that dont have any fief yet, clans that already have fief next to the one that has been captured. What I see in the game now, is that the nominees for the fief (that I captured and cant get) dont want to spend their influence to get it. Like Crotor has over 60 influence, but is willing to give only 20i to get that fief. I have 300i and would pay 100i for this fief, but I am not even nominated. I assemble army and take 4 fiefs in row, but I am not nominated to get any of them (and the 3 nominees are same). You guys really should rework these formulas, make them more straightforward and visible to players. I think, right now I am in a situation, that I can not get any fief that I capture, because I cant get to be nominated (I have like 15 fiefs, ruler has 10, others 2-3-4). I only can spend 200i to take the fief away from someone else and start a new vote, hope to be nominated and spend another 100i to try to win the vote. So I conquer a fief, Crotor gets it for 20i and I have to pay 300i to steal it from him. Its ridiculous really and I think it is not working as intended, or is it? The game is really good, but its the things like this that just dont make any sense and cause players to lose interest.
  14. Converting captured clan leaders

    That manual ransom pay will sure be implemented in the future since the conversation with the ramsom broker indicates that. However, capturing lords has a huge benefit especially if they are good leaders. Their parties are considerably weaker with non warrior leaders. Also the war tribute goes to your favor and helps you to end a war. And donating them as prisoners to another lord of your faction also gives a good relationship bonus to that lord which also greatly lvls charm (~+120 relation if you donate an enemy ruler)

    Still the argument in this thread is a good one since the player has to spend alot of time chasing lords he wants to recruit into his kingdom. 95% of their campaign time they are either in an army or captured. So you can't talk to them. I find that frustrating. Right now I do it like this: If the lord is imprisoned in one of my settlements I take him out and ride to his settlement. Two days before I arrive there I release him and wait infront of his settlement. You have to check alot if he is already healed and ready to talk to over the wall.
    I agree, that the biggest benefit of having enemy lords locked up is to stop them from leading parties/armies, especially to stop them from raiding villages. But war tribute is wrong also. Battania started a war vs. Sturgia (where I am vassal) after losing the previous, not so distant war, and managed to raid 3 villages, while we took 1 town, 3 castles and imprisoned 3 of their lords. Battania (with no fiefs left at all, their king locked up in my town) killed more people (probably civilians from villages). To end the war terms were: Sturgia should pay 600 coins/day to Battania. Nonsense...

    Thnx for the tip how to get enemy lords that you want to join your kingdom to talk to you. Not easy at all atm. Anyone knows, if in such case, lords demand during barter (1.) more in war then during peace (2.) more if they still have fiefs which they lose anyway in case they decide to join your kingdom?
  15. Resolved Fief elections are always the same lord

    Well... this is happening to me as well, but playing for Sturgia. I think I was never included among fief vote nominees since 1.5.9. The only town I got was when I offered 200 influence to take the town from one clan and then I won the new owner vote. Everytime Sturgians conquer town/castle (my party/army or other parties/armies), the 3 vote nominees are same and I am not included.
  16. Resolved 20+20+20 influence gives 33% vote, same as 100 influence

    Summary: Me and my clansmen conquerred a town and the vote started. I was not among new owner nominees (probably have too many towns and castles compared to other clans in faction already, cant figure out other reasons...), so could not vote for myself, but noticed that the first potencial owner...
  17. Converting captured clan leaders

    I agree, there is very little benefit from keeping captured enemy lords in towns/castles or dragging them with you around the whole map. The ransom money for a king being 4500 coins is laughable. I would suggest - after defieting them - give them the chance to join you (they could not leave your kingdom for at least 1 year). In case they end up in prison, lords from their clan can not attack your clan´s fiefs. This would give sense and value to having enemy lords locked up in prisons too. Btw... anyone knows, if a noble from my clan gets imprisoned, can I pay the ransom (how)? Once my brother got defieted, imprisoned, but he escaped after a while by himself...
  18. Issues being granted a town

    Hello there. I just had to register to this forum because I wanted to share my opinion on the newly taken towns/castles and on rules of their distribution among various clans.

    This is the situation: I am with Sturgia (Raganvad being the greedy ruler), but I already have like 15 fiefs, where Raganvad has only 10 (I capture fiefs when I have influence and Raganvad does not have over 100i). I used 700 000 coints to get one clan to join Sturgia (300 000 coins I still have). I would like to become ruler of Sturgia, once Raganvad is dead. I created an army with 2 other parties of my clan and invited 2 parties from the new clan that I invited to Sturgia (and has no fiefs, because they had to let go the castle they had, when they came over to Sturgia). I decided to keep my strongest soldiers in my town garrison and use recruits and middle developed soldiers in my party and in parties of the other 2 parties of my clan. There is a war going on and I would like to take 2 castles and 2 towns (which I actually manage to do), I would like to keep 2 towns for my clan and give 2 castles to the new clan, that I invited to join Sturgia.

    The problem is - I take 2 castles and 2 towns, but I am not amongst the selected 3 clans from which the new owner will come. All these fiefs are adjacent to my towns and castles, I was leading the conquerring army, my loot was over 60%, I personally killed over 1/3 of all enemies on the battlefield, but the 3 clans for the vote for the fiefs new owner are the ruler Raganvad, the new clan with no fiefs and the third is one clan lvl5 that has no fiefs anywhere close and did not participate in conquerring the fief. Also I have to mention, that I have over 90 rating with all clans withing Sturgia, but only 4 rating with the new clan. Even if I vote with 100i for the new clan to get the first captured fief and my rating goes up to 44, the 3 potencial owners of the SECOND captured fief are same (I am not included again). Even if the clan has very little influence, even if the clan is not willing to sacrifice any of its influence in the vote (!!!), I still dont get to be voted for. This is ridiculous... Now I find, that the rules that decide who can get the chance to become new owner of the fief in the vote, include some clan tier bonus, total clan strength bonus, ruler bonus, player bonus, powerty bonus and then value of captured fief and value of all clans fiefs apply too.... This is even beyond ridiculous...

    Please, developers, just imagine, how this would be applied during middle ages... and use only capturer bonus and ruler bonus. Distance factor is OK too. Please do not include nonsence like total army strength, value of fief, value of all fiefs, powerty bonus, player bonus etc. Let human players develop their avatars, their parties, their clans and let them play the game. Do not allow restrictions that there are in the game now. I very much like the game you created, lets try to make it more logical, more fair, more fun to play.

    *** So I loaded an older save, took my best soldiers to 3 clan parties, created army with only 3 of my clan parties, conquerred the castle adjacent to my castle... and I still cant vote for myself to be the castle new owner (I am not one of the 3 nominees). What is the Total Clan Strength anyway, where can I look it up and compare to other clans???
Back
Top Bottom