.

Currently viewing this thread:

Shatti

Squire
WBWF&SNWVC
1- Restrictions:
-i can't play and specialized in a weapon i like
-and i can't wear what i like
2- Bad weapons mechanics & design:
-spears doesn't swing and they work like lances
-the weapons damage and speed is weird and not balanced
3- lack of game mods:
- battle mod is missing
4- crashing and unbalanced teams

these things drove me out of banner-lord
the rest of things like: gameplay, class system, server issues are well explained 1000000 times before
 

OurGloriousLeader

Grandmaster Knight
A small but contributing factor that hinders longer play sessions is that it is a chore to rejoin servers after every game. Breaks you out of the action and lets you think about if you want to continue playing at all, rather than the game just loading the next map and telling you to pick a side/class. A small thing, but one I've noticed nonetheless.

Yeah you would notice this in other games, if server crashes or if admins changed maps so that people needed to download, each time it happened you'd lose a certain % of players. After enough times you reach too low of a population and that causes more people to leave, ending up dead or permanently low pop.
 

Ikea Knight

Master Knight
M&BWBWF&SNWVC
Well I think it's different issues for every game mode.
First of all though: The menus.
While Warband's menus loon dated by today's standard, I think there were two advantages:

The multiplayer button was in the same menu as the campaign button. In Warband after hours of singleplayer at some point this button was making me curious. I don't think that happens mich in Bannerlord.
On that note- what's the purpose of the friendslist in the Multiplayer. I can see that my friends are in Singleplayer but I have no way of contacting or even inviting them to my game. Actually in Singleplayer I can't even see my friends that are in MP. So why is that a thing in the first place? It feels like a missed opportunity.

The other issue is the multiplayer menu.
In Warband you were greeted with the server list. You could see where the most action was or look for the game mode most suitable. In Bannerlord that's hidden.
Sure it's only one click away but that might be already to many.

The game modes. So I'll start with best to worst:

Skirmish: Skirmish is imho the most balanced and most thought out game mode we have. I think classes worl well there and nowadays every class is getting used reguarly.
It's problems are that it's not beginner or solo queue friendly.
That can only be solved when the playerbase for that game mode grows. Which doesn't happen as it's not beginner friendly :grin:

Team-Deathmatch:
I think TDM is okay - even with the class system. But that comes my personal view. When I join TDM I expect an chaotic, mindless slaugther filled with 2-hander spammers and cav. If that's what you expect from the game TDM works.

If you want a strategic game mode that you play with your friends or clan- it's not TDM.
The factions aren't well balanced and nothing and everything you do feels meaningless.
Contrary to most other people I don't think the class system is a big problem for the game mode. -Well, again, if you look for a mindless slaugther. If players don't gain everything from playing defensivly they obviously go for the loadout with most damage output - so cav or two handers.

I think TDM is probably the worst first step into the multiplayer. I think it encourages bad habits and is a rather frustrating experience.


Duel:
Duel isn't a real game mode yet but I want to mention it here.
Duel works, barely but it works.
The gameplay is quick and fun but people are expected to know the server rules. The class system is again no issue since most players use the same classes anyway.

Duel is probably the best place to improve your melee skills but at the same time it's not a good entry point.
But thanks to it's exlusivity you don't see many new players here.


Siege:
Siege could and should be the go to game mode for beginners. It's atmospheric, it's about teamplay and it favors players survivabilty.

Which is super frustrating because imho it's ruined by the class system. In Siege players should have a reason to try to get better armor and shields. But heavy infantry costs too much gold. So most people that aren't archers go for light infantry (which is garbage) or shock infantry. And once everybody uses shock infantry, the few heavy inf players just get overwhelmed.
Here the class system makes players pick an offensive class that is not actually synergizing with the game mode.
In Warband that was less of an issue.
Players were able to get relativly bulky from the very beginning which made it harder for offensive builts from the get go.
Additionaly, playing together with friends and clans is not as easy as it should be. Players from my group don't get highlighted and players still can't pick their spawnpoints.
So the game mode that is all about staying alive, cooperation and teamplay doesn't let you have any of these things.
Additionaly the factions aren't well balanced either.
In my eyes Siege is hardly better than TDM for new / solo players.
By the way I wonder how TW wants to use voicechat in those massive servers.

Lastly Captain:
On first glance the ideal bringe between singleplayer and multiplayer.
But for a gamemode that's all about strategy and making use of the correct units for the correct situation the balance is really horrible.
Additionaly in a game mode that's all about strategy most units are useless.
Captain is from a gameplay perspective in a very bad spot.
That, together with the importance of teamplay and communication, makes it another bad entry for beginners and solo players.

To sum it up: There is not a single Mode that is beginnerfriendly. Either you're matched against way better players or you are thrown into a frustrating chaotic experience.

The best way to lern multiplayer (and I am serious here) is the training camp at the beginning of the SP campaign.

But even training there can't really prepare you.
 

WMorton

Sergeant
WBWF&SNW
Well I think it's different issues for every game mode.
First of all though: The menus.
While Warband's menus loon dated by today's standard, I think there were two advantages:

The multiplayer button was in the same menu as the campaign button. In Warband after hours of singleplayer at some point this button was making me curious. I don't think that happens mich in Bannerlord.
On that note- what's the purpose of the friendslist in the Multiplayer. I can see that my friends are in Singleplayer but I have no way of contacting or even inviting them to my game. Actually in Singleplayer I can't even see my friends that are in MP. So why is that a thing in the first place? It feels like a missed opportunity.

The other issue is the multiplayer menu.
In Warband you were greeted with the server list. You could see where the most action was or look for the game mode most suitable. In Bannerlord that's hidden.
Sure it's only one click away but that might be already to many.

The game modes. So I'll start with best to worst:

Skirmish: Skirmish is imho the most balanced and most thought out game mode we have. I think classes worl well there and nowadays every class is getting used reguarly.
It's problems are that it's not beginner or solo queue friendly.
That can only be solved when the playerbase for that game mode grows. Which doesn't happen as it's not beginner friendly :grin:

Team-Deathmatch:
I think TDM is okay - even with the class system. But that comes my personal view. When I join TDM I expect an chaotic, mindless slaugther filled with 2-hander spammers and cav. If that's what you expect from the game TDM works.

If you want a strategic game mode that you play with your friends or clan- it's not TDM.
The factions aren't well balanced and nothing and everything you do feels meaningless.
Contrary to most other people I don't think the class system is a big problem for the game mode. -Well, again, if you look for a mindless slaugther. If players don't gain everything from playing defensivly they obviously go for the loadout with most damage output - so cav or two handers.

I think TDM is probably the worst first step into the multiplayer. I think it encourages bad habits and is a rather frustrating experience.


Duel:
Duel isn't a real game mode yet but I want to mention it here.
Duel works, barely but it works.
The gameplay is quick and fun but people are expected to know the server rules. The class system is again no issue since most players use the same classes anyway.

Duel is probably the best place to improve your melee skills but at the same time it's not a good entry point.
But thanks to it's exlusivity you don't see many new players here.


Siege:
Siege could and should be the go to game mode for beginners. It's atmospheric, it's about teamplay and it favors players survivabilty.

Which is super frustrating because imho it's ruined by the class system. In Siege players should have a reason to try to get better armor and shields. But heavy infantry costs too much gold. So most people that aren't archers go for light infantry (which is garbage) or shock infantry. And once everybody uses shock infantry, the few heavy inf players just get overwhelmed.
Here the class system makes players pick an offensive class that is not actually synergizing with the game mode.
In Warband that was less of an issue.
Players were able to get relativly bulky from the very beginning which made it harder for offensive builts from the get go.
Additionaly, playing together with friends and clans is not as easy as it should be. Players from my group don't get highlighted and players still can't pick their spawnpoints.
So the game mode that is all about staying alive, cooperation and teamplay doesn't let you have any of these things.
Additionaly the factions aren't well balanced either.
In my eyes Siege is hardly better than TDM for new / solo players.
By the way I wonder how TW wants to use voicechat in those massive servers.

Lastly Captain:
On first glance the ideal bringe between singleplayer and multiplayer.
But for a gamemode that's all about strategy and making use of the correct units for the correct situation the balance is really horrible.
Additionaly in a game mode that's all about strategy most units are useless.
Captain is from a gameplay perspective in a very bad spot.
That, together with the importance of teamplay and communication, makes it another bad entry for beginners and solo players.

To sum it up: There is not a single Mode that is beginnerfriendly. Either you're matched against way better players or you are thrown into a frustrating chaotic experience.

The best way to lern multiplayer (and I am serious here) is the training camp at the beginning of the SP campaign.

But even training there can't really prepare you.
Honestly I think Taleworlds needs to shut down multiplayer for however long they need and completely redesign it. It is a ****show right now but I think thats the only way to save it. No matter how you look at it, Bannerlord will never reach the potential Warband showed with how it is currently structured and performing, Hundreds of Thousands of Copies sold, yet there is never more than 20 people queing for skirmish at a time, interesting
 

Baronsworth

Recruit
Captain mode got it's final deathblow dealt with 1.5. Faction balance is completely skewed still, instead of 2 superior factions and 1 completely useless one, we now have 3 superior factions, 2 useless ones and one that's barely usable.

With shock buffed the only real comps are either 1 shield 5 shock, or 6 shock. Archers used to be a pretty hard counter to shock units, but now that's gone with the archer AI not being able to use bows due to new combat parameters. Cavalry AI was always bad, but with 1.5 they don't even use their lances anymore. Menavlions are not used by menavs units if they have a sword in hand, which means palatine guards are almost useless, and taking a sword on menav units (even if completely stupid) is now a death sentence to the whole unit.

Throwing weapons are also useless because of the same combat parameters that ruined archers, which leads to how skirmishers were always a useless class in captain, just as well as peasant units (discounting Warriors with improved armor and 2h axe, which is more powerful than Berserkers as a choice, and peasant before the billhook got nerfed). The only factions that could make use of the peasant units AS peasant units were Battania, and Khuzait, (battania being the worst lost useless faction out of the 6) and even those only when you could draw the right team comp out of the opposing team, and pulling them in a spot where they could be easily overwhelmed.

Captain has been in shambles for a long time, but the recent changes have made it near unplayable. The community has nesrly died in the span of the last 4 or so weeks that we have been playing this latest patch.

Basically this.
 
Honestly I think Taleworlds needs to shut down multiplayer for however long they need and completely redesign it. It is a ****show right now but I think thats the only way to save it. No matter how you look at it, Bannerlord will never reach the potential Warband showed with how it is currently structured and performing, Hundreds of Thousands of Copies sold, yet there is never more than 20 people queing for skirmish at a time, interesting
I agree. Pretty much nobody is playing the mp anyways so this wont be much of a problem for it to be closed a few months.

Also, they sold a few million copies now a few hundered thousand.
 

Ling*

Knight at Arms
I agree. Pretty much nobody is playing the mp anyways so this wont be much of a problem for it to be closed a few months.

Also, they sold a few million copies now a few hundered thousand.

We definitely want to play MP but we just can't right now, I'm sure everyone's noticed by now the 6 shock troop vs 6 shock troop Captain Mode meta. This doesn't allow for any variety and each match literally just results in one large melee brawl, which is #1 Not good for a competitive atmosphere and #2 Not a fun experience for any players at all. I've been wanting to run events for Captain's League and I simply can't right now it's really depressing to see such an active and passionate community of players not being able to enjoy the mode they have played for hundreds and thousands of games.

We really do need to separate the class and perk balances between the gamemodes, or else I fear the cycle of Skirmish and Captain imbalance will continue until it spirals out of control (which has already happened for captain mode).
 

Askey

Veteran
It's clear by now that multiplayer died pretty damn fast, and even with new patches the playerbase doesn't really grow.

What are your thoughts on why Multiplayer doesn't click with people? What confirmed feature do you think will help with this, or what do you think they should add or change that they haven't already talked about adding or changing. Do you think Native multiplayer is just doomed to stay dead until custom servers bring players in?

No private servers, I have to rejoin to join a server, classes are boring (I want to choose my weapons/armour etc), little content, clans are currently useless (I used to play large scale battles in my old clan in Warband).

I expected private servers to come out with early access, the clans and large battles/sieges (MountandSiege anyone) kept the community alive.
They have recently done one thing right though, the mod tools - gives people something to play with in the meantime.
In fact, I expected Taleworlds to fully release either MP or SP and then do the other after during the early access. All seems abit odd to me.
 

Mabons

Sergeant Knight
M&BWBWF&SNWVC
Ask yourself why a game from 2018 is the most popular game right now.

Cause it's just fun to play with some friends. Even that got old in Bannerlord fast.

I haven't played in weeks at this point and I don't feel anything drawing me back to it, if I get the urge to hit people over the head with **** I play Warband.
 

Mushbeast

Knight
Well I initially bought the game hoping there'd be massive, tactical battles with communication and a reason to value your life. All the components are there to make it happen, it just needs a game mode that properly accommodates it. With VoIP coming that should help with that too, but I can't help but feel like we're lacking some form of mode where that sort of thing is encouraged.
 
Yes. I have thought about this non stop for the last few days, and I can summarize that what we're missing in competitive (or even casual) MP is the old good Battle mode.
Skirmish is fun when the teams are equal, but when the teams are equal most of the time people enjoy fighting each other in organized groups, rather than cheesing in for a point cap and bleeding enemy team, thus bypassing the Skirmish game mode goal alltogether. In a way, there is mutual unspoken respect where no party caps any points, or caps just the one and continues to fight just to see who's better which essentialy equals Battle mode.
So dear TW, can we have a 4th competitive mode? Something like 10vs10 best out of 5 rounds, no respawns? Denars would be accumulated and spent similarly to current skirmish mode, but lower, obviously to avoid rolling in expensive units regardless of how bad you did.

As for the current matchmaking, the further I play, the less new people I see there, and it makes me want to say... one game mode free to play to get an influx of players to finally split the hardcore players from casual ones? some sort of a demo version?
 

Pacemaker

Knight at Arms
When asking this question, I don't think the combat or the class system matter a whole lot, at least not as much as people believe. I won't deny that they may be a dealbreaker to some people, but I think the ones who quit permanently just because of that are the absolute minority.

I've said bits of this before in previous posts, but MP (as it is) is almost by design fated to be dropped by 99% of the players trying it out. The lack of custom servers, a proper matchmaking model and a progression system makes this game's multiplayer very unattractive, not to mention that the things you can play are of very low quality looking at their availability and general user experience.

The average joe who knows M&B for its singleplayer and decides to try out Bannerlord multiplayer won't care about which aspects of combat are unbalanced or how the classes pale in comparison to the ability to select ones own equipment. He will, however, find a game that he not only cannot get into, as matchmaking will put him into games with tryhards who have been playing since day 1 and destroy him relentlessly, and also one he has no reason to stay for, as there is nothing to unlock, no rank to attain, no achievements to be claimed.

What does that leave us with? The people who just really love the game so much that they could look past all this and keep playing regardless, and those who have managed to find a spot in the community early on and can take part in clanwars and tournaments. Everyone else quits.
 

Greedalicious

Grandmaster Knight
WB
When asking this question, I don't think the combat or the class system matter a whole lot, at least not as much as people believe. I won't deny that they may be a dealbreaker to some people, but I think the ones who quit permanently just because of that are the absolute minority.

I've said bits of this before in previous posts, but MP (as it is) is almost by design fated to be dropped by 99% of the players trying it out. The lack of custom servers, a proper matchmaking model and a progression system makes this game's multiplayer very unattractive, not to mention that the things you can play are of very low quality looking at their availability and general user experience.

The average joe who knows M&B for its singleplayer and decides to try out Bannerlord multiplayer won't care about which aspects of combat are unbalanced or how the classes pale in comparison to the ability to select ones own equipment. He will, however, find a game that he not only cannot get into, as matchmaking will put him into games with tryhards who have been playing since day 1 and destroy him relentlessly, and also one he has no reason to stay for, as there is nothing to unlock, no rank to attain, no achievements to be claimed.

What does that leave us with? The people who just really love the game so much that they could look past all this and keep playing regardless, and those who have managed to find a spot in the community early on and can take part in clanwars and tournaments. Everyone else quits.
I somewhat agree, I dont think its just one thing making people stop the game, but all of them combined. The classes lack alot, and I still dont like them.
The combat feels clunky still, fighting 2 handers is just not fun. Horse archers are frustrating, clipping and hitboxes sorta suck, getting up from bumps is insanely slow, hidden game mechanics, no private servers, kicking people out after each game on casual modes, crashes, terrible matchmaking and incredibly few players. If I queue at 9 in the afternoon i shouldnt have to wait 2 minutes to get put into a 3v3 game.

Skillbased matchmaking should have been ready on day 1 of early access, right now it simply doesnt work because theres not enough players.
MbrRGV4.png

I think 2-3 of those losses were against 6 man stacks when I solo queued, but none of these matches were close. Faction in balance ofcourse matters, but thats why we swapped sides in Warband to counter that.
 
Personally my ping is always too big and people teleport behind me too much! My internet also disconnects a lot so waiting for captain is kinda a low chance of getting in and getting a match, even though the ping is less of an issue in captain.

As far as disliking it, I think it's just okay, but doesn't really offer anything that great or special as a MP game. It's capture the flag.
 

Revverie


This video shows a literal parallel on what Taleworlds is doing right now, and why they're failing, this has happened before in another game, please guys watch this video and tell me what you think about this, I'll leave some interesting (non exact) quotes with timestamps:

Around 5:30

We dumbed the games mechanics in order to retain new players but we failed at it, and at the same time we angered the existing playerbase

Around 6:50

Our biggest regret is that maybe if we went back we would listen more to the dedicated players and less to the short term players and focus about what the dedicated players like so much about the game and exposing more of that and building on that


This is literally a videogame developer that learnt about their mistakes but after their game almost died, what else does it need to be said here? Really
 

Gibby Jr

Marquis

This video shows a literal parallel on what Taleworlds is doing right now, and why they're failing, this has happened before in another game, please guys watch this video and tell me what you think about this, I'll leave some interesting (non exact) quotes with timestamps:

Around 5:30



Around 6:50



This is literally a videogame developer that learnt about their mistakes but after their game almost died, what else does it need to be said here? Really

Fascinating video and what the guy is saying applies directly to Bannerlord. The general attitude from TW staff during the alpha/beta always appeared to be that Warband's MP was a failure and that it wasn't accessible enough and wasn't easy enough, particularly for SP-only players, to cross over and play. In chasing what Mark calls in that video "the mythical [player] retention stats", in trying to get all these new people not only to try the MP but to stick around, TW neglected the most beloved parts of Warband's MP. As OGL pointed out in his reply, there are a ton of reasons why new players are not sticking with Bannerlord's MP and why Warband players aren't either, but fundamentally I think it can be broken down to two key reasons:
1) A disjointed and uncoordinated development process in which the aims of various decisions appear to contradict each other
2) A lack of positive-focus and an insistence on viewing Warband's MP as a failure, rather than as the great success that it was, and a lack of focus on the aspects which made it so great.

Rubbing posted some GK_TDM stats which blew my mind a couple nights ago, which is that since mid-2016, on that one server alone, over 180,000 unique IDs were logged. It's a well known fact that NA has a smaller MP pop than EU and, considering many argued that NA Native MP was "dead" from 2018 onwards, it's quite incredible that the number is so high over that period. I can only imagine what the figures are for a server like TG_Arena in EU but, given that EU is more populous than NA and that everybody plays a bit of TG now and then, it's probably several times the GK_TDM figure.

My point in bringing those stats up is that Warband's MP was not a failure. Hundreds of thousands of people (if not more) tried it and many thousands played, and still do play, it daily. For all of the game's flaws, graphically and in its design, which were and are numerous, it's a remarkable achievement that a 2010 game was achieving those numbers in the 2016-current period.

In my opinion there should have been a much greater focus on what the dedicated Warband players liked and a much more positive process, as opposed to chasing SP-only players and an undefinable and unknown "wider playerbase". By "dedicated Warband players", I don't mean competitive veterans or so-called "pros", I mean the players Mark defines in the video and the players that OGL outlines in this post. Dedicated players, in the case of Warband, did not just mean tryhard sweaty duellists or competitive players, it meant regular event-goers and organisers, it meant guys that liked to mess around on TDM or siege with their friends for a few hours and it meant guys that switched between all of these things on different days. What is quite remarkable about Bannerlord's MP is that is caters to NONE of those people. There are no private servers, there is no customisation, servers crash regularly and you have to rejoin after they're done and the combat is divisive and generally disliked by Warband players. Competitive Warband players overwhelmingly dislike the combat and gameplay, there is no ability to host events or participate in them and there is no way to jump in and mess around with random gear with friends.

Bannerlord's MP was an enormous wasted opportunity. The window in which the "new playerbase" and SP-only players gave MP a try has already passed. I don't know how many hundreds of thousands tried Bannerlord's MP, but the fact only a couple hundred of those players (under 0.1% retention) stuck around should be alarming to TW and should be prompting massive design changes. Maybe internally it is, we can hope so, but I doubt this very much. I think TW have a vision for their MP and unfortunately it just doesn't match what the majority of players want.
 

This video shows a literal parallel on what Taleworlds is doing right now, and why they're failing, this has happened before in another game.

Man this brings back memories. I used to play this game a lot back in 2013.

I don't think this is just a mistake of a few misguided developers. Practically all developers of multiplayer (and often even singleplayer) games think this way nowadays. Developers have access to a truly megalithic amount of data about how people use their games, and there is a huge pressure to use that data to make their games more profitable for longer. The problem is that most of them aren't data analysts and often remove stuff they think isn't being used at all, instead of improving it so that more people use it, and so on.

A really extreme case of this is Total War, since after NTW released they suddenly had all this data about gameplay that they were collecting under people's noses, and ever since then they've been stripping their games bare and removing stuff that nobody is using, with the culmination being these strange, rigid robotic games like Total War Troy which hardly feel like they were made by humans.
I think with the sheer amount of easy data corporations have access to these days it's difficult for them to avoid just relying on analytics to tell them what the users "want". It's easy to focus on Taleworlds but it's a capitalism-wide problem that even affects Microsoft and Apple. Taleworlds just isn't very good at it.
 

Revverie

Fascinating video and what the guy is saying applies directly to Bannerlord. The general attitude from TW staff during the alpha/beta always appeared to be that Warband's MP was a failure and that it wasn't accessible enough and wasn't easy enough, particularly for SP-only players, to cross over and play. In chasing what Mark calls in that video "the mythical [player] retention stats", in trying to get all these new people not only to try the MP but to stick around, TW neglected the most beloved parts of Warband's MP. As OGL pointed out in his reply, there are a ton of reasons why new players are not sticking with Bannerlord's MP and why Warband players aren't either, but fundamentally I think it can be broken down to two key reasons:
1) A disjointed and uncoordinated development process in which the aims of various decisions appear to contradict each other
2) A lack of positive-focus and an insistence on viewing Warband's MP as a failure, rather than as the great success that it was, and a lack of focus on the aspects which made it so great.

Rubbing posted some GK_TDM stats which blew my mind a couple nights ago, which is that since mid-2016, on that one server alone, over 180,000 unique IDs were logged. It's a well known fact that NA has a smaller MP pop than EU and, considering many argued that NA Native MP was "dead" from 2018 onwards, it's quite incredible that the number is so high over that period. I can only imagine what the figures are for a server like TG_Arena in EU but, given that EU is more populous than NA and that everybody plays a bit of TG now and then, it's probably several times the GK_TDM figure.

My point in bringing those stats up is that Warband's MP was not a failure. Hundreds of thousands of people (if not more) tried it and many thousands played, and still do play, it daily. For all of the game's flaws, graphically and in its design, which were and are numerous, it's a remarkable achievement that a 2010 game was achieving those numbers in the 2016-current period.

In my opinion there should have been a much greater focus on what the dedicated Warband players liked and a much more positive process, as opposed to chasing SP-only players and an undefinable and unknown "wider playerbase". By "dedicated Warband players", I don't mean competitive veterans or so-called "pros", I mean the players Mark defines in the video and the players that OGL outlines in this post. Dedicated players, in the case of Warband, did not just mean tryhard sweaty duellists or competitive players, it meant regular event-goers and organisers, it meant guys that liked to mess around on TDM or siege with their friends for a few hours and it meant guys that switched between all of these things on different days. What is quite remarkable about Bannerlord's MP is that is caters to NONE of those people. There are no private servers, there is no customisation, servers crash regularly and you have to rejoin after they're done and the combat is divisive and generally disliked by Warband players. Competitive Warband players overwhelmingly dislike the combat and gameplay, there is no ability to host events or participate in them and there is no way to jump in and mess around with random gear with friends.

Bannerlord's MP was an enormous wasted opportunity. The window in which the "new playerbase" and SP-only players gave MP a try has already passed. I don't know how many hundreds of thousands tried Bannerlord's MP, but the fact only a couple hundred of those players (under 0.1% retention) stuck around should be alarming to TW and should be prompting massive design changes. Maybe internally it is, we can hope so, but I doubt this very much. I think TW have a vision for their MP and unfortunately it just doesn't match what the majority of players want.
I knew you were going to answer Gibby because you knew this problems all along, and you're so right about Warband having casual people messing around. You were in the SA community messing around a little bit, well, I was a founder of the Jorrvas clan, and you know, we sucked, we were really bad hahaha, but it was so much fun, in fact, before our clan turned 100% competitive most of the players were just my friends and some other dudes that werent all about wining every competition and stuff, and some of those players we had were plain bad, or didnt cared to be good, and that is fine, but you know what is surprising, that most of them sticked in the game for like 3 years? more I think? But because they were having fun, because we joined battle and messed around, listened to music, played together in massive encounters, joined events, played PW when it was opened, all of those moments were so good and so special, and I barely care about not winning anything because it was a nice group, but in Bannerlord I doubt any of them would have the fun we had in Warband, and mostly, because Battle doesnt exist, because we dont have a private server we cant make (they refused to give SA even a lame TDM server). Warband was so succesful, and so good, and it was fun. The devs neglected their game and thats were it failed, what a shame.
 
Top Bottom