All the information I brought back from Gamescom (Banners, bug fixes, futur of the game, UI changes, new crafting parts in forge, consoles, etc)

Users who are viewing this thread

Spinozart1

Knight
I don't see why it wouldn't be possible. For one, you would need to think about how players can understand what kind of buff they provide (if it's meant to be specific to the banner you are picking up). For two, the difficulty of introducing "destruction" depends on what you have in mind exactly (f.e. you could just block other troops from picking it up or remove it from the mission when it drops).
Interesting...
For one, yes ideally it would be nice to show the current effect of the banner and apply it once the player grab it.
For two I was more thinking about having the possibility to somehow interact with the banner and "destroy" it, then apply the effect.
Anyway, that's just some ideas I got while watching the video, I can't wait to test them in their "native" form (y)
 

MostBlunted

Sergeant Knight at Arms
tumblr_lmputme3co1qa6q7k_large.jpg

:iamamoron:

Does someone from the community has a signature from Callum or Dejan? I´ll pay a lot!
 

five bucks

Knight at Arms
Why do people even act like this is a bad thing lol.
Because Taleworlds advertised this game as being a sequel to Warband which had a bunch of new features. And they took money for that. So they should actually do that and make the features work.
I'd love to know how often you guys played the vanilla warband versus modded warband.
Did about three/four playthroughs of vanilla.
A game being extremely moddable is a great thing and Mount and Blade has also been one of the best modded games out there.
Nobody's complaining about the game being moddable. They're complaining about the game being incomplete, and the potential that unpaid modders will be left to pick up the work Taleworlds was paid to do.

Whether or not that scenario occurs is, of course, yet to be seen. TW claims they will keep updating the game post-launch. I will personally be happy if the game gets the missing Warband features, the advertised criminal enterprises feature, and all features currently in-game are made reasonably balanced and functional.
Siege retreat
  • Siege defense: No more possible to retreat, only surrender.
  • Siege attack: All the siege machines will be lost after retreating.
Good move, but players will still be able to retreat and reload their ranged ammo...
Agreed.

Also: I am glad that Taleworlds is nerfing exploits that make the game too easy to cheese, but every time they do that, they should also be rebalancing things that make the game too grindy or repetitive. Because the exploits currently fill the role of helping to skip the grind.

For example: Clan tier 4 requires 900 Renown. 900 Renown is way too much grinding. Should be 700 Renown. That's an easy change that would instantly cut down a lot of the pointless grind that it takes to finish a singular playthrough.
 

Spinozart1

Knight
great video
havent finished watching it

banners are cool looking but underwhelming, its such a tiny buff; they should make it into like a minigame during battle, where the ENEMY can steal your banner and it gives you a big debuff; conversely, stealing the ENEMIES banner gives you a big buff (i.e., double the normal buff or something; i couldnt tell how they calculate the buff from the video)

i hope the dragon banner gives a huge buff to make it worthwhile to pursue. should be super hard to obtain, but then literal cities/castles can sometimes join you when sieging (or some crazy buff)
Clearly the bonus is still WIP, let's see first the final implementation.
And for the buff/debuff I was thinking about something similar. A great idea for a mod.
 

kreamy

Sergeant
Clearly the bonus is still WIP, let's see first the final implementation.
And for the buff/debuff I was thinking about something similar. A great idea for a mod.
or a game mode of course, capture the flag!!!! (or hold the flag, the longer you have it, the more points you have, but you have to hold the flag within a certain zone (not just be in the zone of the flag, but actively holding the flag within a small zone so you cant just gallop around the map with it)
 

Spinozart1

Knight
or a game mode of course, capture the flag!!!! (or hold the flag, the longer you have it, the more points you have, but you have to hold the flag within a certain zone (not just be in the zone of the flag, but actively holding the flag within a small zone so you cant just gallop around the map with it)
"Steal the banners" would be better as there is already a capture the flag :wink:
 
What the **** are these banner bonuses? 😭
You mean the values? Likely percentages, 0.08 would be 8%, and 0.1 would be 10%. Since it seems to be a work in progress, maybe they haven't got to the part of doing the UI presentation of the values.

It is common in programming to use percentages as values between 0 and 1 to simplify math operations.
 

Apocal

Grandmaster Knight
You mean the values? Likely percentages, 0.08 would be 8%, and 0.1 would be 10%. Since it seems to be a work in progress, maybe they haven't got to the part of doing the UI presentation of the values.

It is common in programming to use percentages as values between 0 and 1 to simplify math operations.

I mean their actual effect. Who the hell is going to notice a difference of only 8%? Decreasing ranged damage by a tenth?
 

Totalgarbage

Sergeant
WBWF&SVC
I mean their actual effect. Who the hell is going to notice a difference of only 8%? Decreasing ranged damage by a tenth?
I agree. I think the lowest tier should be 10% at least, with the tier 3 banners giving buffs/damage reduction at 20-25%. These banner bonuses are 1 per formation with a captain (that has a banner equipped) after all so I think a 25% ranged damage reduction wouldn't be as OP as say, the current medicine level 275 perk.
 
I mean their actual effect. Who the hell is going to notice a difference of only 8%? Decreasing ranged damage by a tenth?

Will 10% make a difference if the ranged troop is a Fian? No way.
Will 10% make a difference if the ranged troop is an Empire Archer? It is likely that top tier infantry will be able to take an extra arrow before being killed, but anything short of that will still die just as easily.
Do AI armies have enough top tier infantry or top tier ranged for this to even be noticeable? No.

Combat in Bannerlord ends so quickly and the damage values are so high that I don't really think the banner effects are going to be noticeable either way. For bonuses to be noticeable they would also have to be OP.
 

Apocal

Grandmaster Knight
Will 10% make a difference if the ranged troop is a Fian? No way.
Will 10% make a difference if the ranged troop is an Empire Archer? It is likely that top tier infantry will be able to take an extra arrow before being killed, but anything short of that will still die just as easily.
Do AI armies have enough top tier infantry or top tier ranged for this to even be noticeable? No.

Combat in Bannerlord ends so quickly and the damage values are so high that I don't really think the banner effects are going to be noticeable either way. For bonuses to be noticeable they would also have to be OP.
It is frustrating because this could be an interesting mechanic that would inject some much-needed dynamism into the battles and TW are just like, "Eh... what if it's overpowered... we don't want tactics to be up-ended... the balance..." There are a lot of other medieval games but banners are either abstracted or meaningless and Bannerlord might be the first were the banners actually have a role beyond looking pretty.
 

five bucks

Knight at Arms
Will 10% make a difference if the ranged troop is a Fian? No way.
Will 10% make a difference if the ranged troop is an Empire Archer? It is likely that top tier infantry will be able to take an extra arrow before being killed, but anything short of that will still die just as easily.
Do AI armies have enough top tier infantry or top tier ranged for this to even be noticeable? No.

Combat in Bannerlord ends so quickly and the damage values are so high that I don't really think the banner effects are going to be noticeable either way. For bonuses to be noticeable they would also have to be OP.
Alternatively, TW could buff armour protection against arrows, and then we would see banners having a noticeable impact without being too OP.

Both sides in a battle should be using banners anyway so I don't think, say, a localised 10-25% boost that both armies have access to would be too gamebreaking
 

Bluko88

Veteran
Taleworlds told me that there would be only one beta patch before release. I'm assuming that it will be 1.9.0 ☝️
Hmm there's not much time between now and release, if they're going to push it out as a beta.

Probably be good to get as many people playing the would-be live version, cause I'm sure it will introduce it's own bugs/glitches. I can only hope TW is working around the clock here to get everything "polished" for release.
 
It is frustrating because this could be an interesting mechanic that would inject some much-needed dynamism into the battles and TW are just like, "Eh... what if it's overpowered... we don't want tactics to be up-ended... the balance..." There are a lot of other medieval games but banners are either abstracted or meaningless and Bannerlord might be the first were the banners actually have a role beyond looking pretty.

I think the "x% damage reduction" or "x% to morale" wouldn't be such an interesting mechanic anyways, and there would be types that would never be picked and ones that would be pretty much be the only viable choice. I see the ranged damage reduction as a must, even if they keep it as 10% I can hardly think of anything else that would be better, except for maybe survival rates.

I would rather have banners change the behavior of the group. For example, a banner that would add a bias so the AI would choose blocking attacks more often that attacking, or a bias for the troops to prioritize using polearms, a banner that would increase the aggressiveness, a banner that would prioritize a certain type of enemy when picking targets and so on.

Something like this would not only be noticeable, it would also give the player more control over the AI without forcing us to babysit too much and would expand tactical options in battle.

Alternatively, TW could buff armour protection against arrows, and then we would see banners having a noticeable impact without being too OP.

Both sides in a battle should be using banners anyway so I don't think, say, a localised 10-25% boost that both armies have access to would be too gamebreaking

It was you that posted a comparison between hits one troop could take before dying in Bannerlord and Warband, wasn't it? With the current 4-5 arrows, the percentage for an extra arrow would be around 20%, but even if tw rebalanced that to around 7-8 it would still require around 15% for the extra arrow.

I agree that tw should rebalance armors and I think your (?) suggestion of 7-8 is good, but my main problem with the way tw is going with banner bonuses is that ranged damage reduction or even any damage reduction would be a sure pick over anything else.
 

froggyluv

Grandmaster Knight
NW
Defifintely pro a more noticeable buff whether it be from Lords personality's, War Experience or the Banners themselves -this game is literally starved for that kinda dynamism . If its miniscule then it just feels hokey -they need to matter
 

five bucks

Knight at Arms
I think the "x% damage reduction" or "x% to morale" wouldn't be such an interesting mechanic anyways,
What's interesting is the tactical dimension it adds to the battle:

You have to protect your own banners, to preserve your army's morale or effectiveness.

You try and target enemy banner bearers to make whole groups of troops less effective, and maybe even precipitate a rout by taking down their banner (if TW ever fixes the broken Loyalty and Honor perk so that routs are possible!)

Plus, banners having an AoE effect on the strength of many troops makes the player's individual combat skill more effective. In battles where 1000 troops are on the field, me killing 10 or so guys doesn't matter much to the outcome. But if I can kill the enemy banner bearer who is carrying a level 3 banner, and reduce the whole enemy army's ranged accuracy by 25%, and keep killing enemies before they can get the banner back, then I can have a huge impact.

Bannerlord is pretty sorely lacking in interesting tactics at the moment, so this would be a welcome addition.
and there would be types that would never be picked and ones that would be pretty much be the only viable choice.
Unfortunately this is pretty likely given the current state of troop balance in Bannerlord, but it's not out of the realm of possibility that Taleworlds could eventually balance the banner bonuses well.
It was you that posted a comparison between hits one troop could take before dying in Bannerlord and Warband, wasn't it? With the current 4-5 arrows, the percentage for an extra arrow would be around 20%, but even if tw rebalanced that to around 7-8 it would still require around 15% for the extra arrow.

I agree that tw should rebalance armors and I think your (?) suggestion of 7-8 is good, but my main problem with the way tw is going with banner bonuses is that ranged damage reduction or even any damage reduction would be a sure pick over anything else.
Yeah, I support 7-8 hits for arrows.

Damage reduction will certainly be the best pick in the current state of the game because everything dies when an arrow breathes on it.
 

Spinozart1

Knight
What's interesting is the tactical dimension it adds to the battle:

You have to protect your own banners, to preserve your army's morale or effectiveness.

You try and target enemy banner bearers to make whole groups of troops less effective, and maybe even precipitate a rout by taking down their banner (if TW ever fixes the broken Loyalty and Honor perk so that routs are possible!)

Plus, banners having an AoE effect on the strength of many troops makes the player's individual combat skill more effective. In battles where 1000 troops are on the field, me killing 10 or so guys doesn't matter much to the outcome. But if I can kill the enemy banner bearer who is carrying a level 3 banner, and reduce the whole enemy army's ranged accuracy by 25%, and keep killing enemies before they can get the banner back, then I can have a huge impact.

Bannerlord is pretty sorely lacking in interesting tactics at the moment, so this would be a welcome addition.

Unfortunately this is pretty likely given the current state of troop balance in Bannerlord, but it's not out of the realm of possibility that Taleworlds could eventually balance the banner bonuses well.

Yeah, I support 7-8 hits for arrows.

Damage reduction will certainly be the best pick in the current state of the game because everything dies when an arrow breathes on it.
I'm also really looking forward to the tactical aspect of the banners.
It feels like there is plenty of potential (both native and modded).
I'm just worrying about how the AI will be good at managing it:
Let's say an enemy infantry formation spawns with half the number + banner. They all die and the banner drops. What will happen on every reinforcement tick? Will the AI send a soldier alone to try to grab the banner? Or decide to gather more troops before trying to reach the fallen banner? Will it be able to evaluate and decide if the banner is worth the effort to be taken back?
Or maybe it will be just a simple distance check (if a soldier of that formation is close enough, then he will go for the banner).
 
Top Bottom