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.
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.
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?).
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.
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.
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".
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...
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.
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.
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.
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.
Hello TheHusky, thank you for the explanation, but I dont see this to be logical 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.
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...