An open letter from the Kingdoms of Arda team, and the total-conversion mod community

Currently viewing this thread:

Eärendil Ardamírë

Subforum Moderator
WBWF&SM&B
You just dont want them to report about this, people do care if people with influence complain about somethign. It can destroy bannerlords reviews or get attention by some bigger media outlets.
I don't care about if someone reports it or not. You overestimate the influence a youtuber has at this situation. But go on, live your dream and find some youtuber who will talk about it. We can discuss afterwards what a huge effect his video has had :lol:
 
Resonant making a video is like Jesus feeding the 5000. He takes practically nothing and extends it forever.
🤣🤣🤣

I think youtubers are in fact making a lot of money with Bannerlord development hell, i have myself passed more time to watch videos about Bannerlord than playing or modding it. I will not wait some complains on TW about Youtubers they don't want to "start a feud" with them i think or you can say bye bye to the nice presents 😁

 
Last edited:

DariusPlayer

Recruit
I will tell Khamzat Chimaev about this he will just fly to turkey and deal with Taleworlds himself. Hell he even flew alone to ireland just to beat up Conor McGregor with no english or place to stay.
 

HugoTheFrenchMan

Master Knight
Hi guys,

We want to thank you for the time and effort you have put into coordinating with each other to communicate your concerns with us. Modding has always been a massive part of Mount & Blade, and Bannerlord is no exception to that! We of course want to do what we can to support you in your efforts wherever possible.

It will require some time to address all your concerns, but we held a meeting today regarding your letter and reviewed our feedback and bug reporting processes, along with the specific points you raised. We decided to set aside some time next week to discuss possible solutions and ways in which we can support you more, such as with more extensive documentation. In the meantime, we will be reaching out to gather some more modding-related feedback and suggestions.
Do we have any sort of ETA on when a few more mod features or just fixing what we have already since I swear just one more broken thing I find I will smash my head
 

Dejan

Community Manager
WBNWVCM&B
Hello creators! First of all, thank you for writing this open letter and bringing it to our attention.

Last week, we went ahead with a meeting to discuss the concerns raised in the open letter, along with a collection of other pressing modding-related issues that we gathered via feedback.

As you might imagine, some of these topics are pretty big and in many cases, it is going to take some time to implement solutions, but we have already started taking steps towards resolving the issues and wanted to share this with you.

To start, we have decided to hold regular modding meetings to discuss feedback and other modding-related topics from the forums and Discord to ensure that issues like these aren’t allowed to fester.

In addition to this, we think that providing clearer warnings and assertions for the tools should help to point you in the right direction when trying to diagnose an issue, or at the very least, provide you with useful information to include when requesting support from us. We’ll be adding them within the next few patches.

So, with the more general things out of the way, let’s move on to the core topics we discussed at the meeting:
  • Custom Campaign Maps
We have identified a number of bugs with modifying and creating new campaign maps and will be looking into fixing them. We have also discussed a couple of potential solutions that we will be exploring to enable modifying of the MapWidth and MapHeight for the walkable area and camera. Ultimately, the message we want to convey here is that this certainly isn’t intended and that you will be able to add custom campaign maps when we have decided which path to take and implemented that solution.
  • Custom Skeletons & Body Meshes
We’ll be adding a system in the future to allow you to change faces, hand meshes, and body meshes, as well as, a system to add new skeletons to the game. Please bear in mind that you will likely have certain limitations when adding new skeletons for agents capable of combat in order for the native combat system to work properly.
  • Code-related documentation
We hope to start providing a reference for the API. In addition to this, we will be reaching out to collect specific requests for documentation to be brought to our developers for review and extend our efforts to make more documentation, similar to this explanation regarding Sealed Class Extension. We encourage you to request specific documentation in our updated forum section for Official Tools & Modding Feedback.
  • Hard-coded behaviour
In this case, we feel that the best approach would be for us to know specifically what you are trying to achieve so that we can find an appropriate solution. Please let us know which specific problems you’re facing here. With that being said, we will be doing a review of our code to see if there are places where we might have used “internal”, or any other modifiers, unnecessarily.

In addition to the topics from the open letter, we identified the following points that we will be going over in the dedicated modding meetings to find solutions.
  • Total conversion mod load order
  • Enable Cloth Physics on CraftedItems
  • Allow attributes on Items to determine weapon damage
  • Extrude function for AI meshing
  • Subdivide function for AI meshing (into quads not tris)
  • Allow single axis scaling of assets before placement
  • Ability to name a new paint layer upon creation
  • Mesh keyframes documentation
  • Documentation for skeletons for reins/horse harness and their implementation
  • Documentation on implementation of custom quivers
  • Add a duplicate mesh option
  • Add attribute to hide head (xml)
  • Ability to disable the usage of generated widget code
As we have said previously and will say again, modding is a huge part of Mount & Blade and we will do what we can to work alongside modders to help you fulfill your modding ambitions. However, we do want to be clear now that there will be some instances where we will be in disagreement about how a problem can, or should, be resolved. Moving forward, we ask that modders include more details about what they are trying to achieve when making suggestions, requesting support, or leaving feedback, rather than just suggesting a solution to their issue on its own. This will help us a great deal when exploring potential solutions, some of which may already be present. It would also be helpful if everyone could share future feedback and suggestions in the Official Tools & Modding Feedback section of the forum to ensure that your comments are processed correctly.
 

Bloc

Duke
WB
similar to this explanation regarding Sealed Class Extension.
Overall thanks for taking the time and discussing but this particular example is a bad example. Why?
Because TW's code usually not as simple as this example.
I think many people are aware of the fact that there is an "Extension method" feature in C# (assuming that they know C#) but if you behavior have random private and internal keywords in it, then it won't work.
To visualize this, let me edit the example;
C#:
public class HeroManaExtensionCampaignBehavior : CampaignBehaviorBase
    {
        private float  _currentMana;

        public float CurrentMana
        {
          get
          {
             return this._currentMana;
           }
          private set
          {
             _currentMana = value;
           }
        }

        private void SetManaInternal(Hero hero, float newValue)
        {
            CurrentMana = newValue;
        }
                          /* Other stuff we don't care */
    }

    public static class HeroManaExtensions
    {        
        public static float GetMana(this Hero hero)
        {
            var behavior = Campaign.Current.GetCampaignBehavior<HeroManaExtensionCampaignBehavior >();
            return behavior.CurrentMana; // Will work
        }

        public static void SetMana(this Hero hero, float newMana)
        {
            var behavior = Campaign.Current.GetCampaignBehavior<HeroManaExtensionCampaignBehavior >();
            behavior.CurrentMana = newMana; // WONT WORK
            behavior.SetManaInternal(newMana); // WONT WORK
        }
    }
Others can confirm but the code above is 90% more similar to TW's code than what is presented in the example.

That documentation example is also really a bad example in terms of defining the extension methods because it's using the same method name - as if it's overriding it - but that's not the case. An extension method never takes priority over an instance method and never become part of polymorphism of that object.

Why am I explaining this? Because whoever is creating this Coding document should be aware of their codebase and create the document accordingly. This might sound like an unimportant thing to mention but it is really important - especially for those who don't have much knowledge about modding ( but knowledgeable about C# ) that sees TW's code and feels like

300px-Confused_Nick_Young_%28wide%29.jpg
 

Dejan

Community Manager
WBNWVCM&B
Why am I explaining this? Because whoever is creating this Coding document should be aware of their codebase and create the document accordingly. This might sound like an unimportant thing to mention but it is really important - especially for those who don't have much knowledge about modding ( but knowledgeable about C# ) that sees TW's code and feels like
I am happy to relay feedback about that particular page onwards, can't really argue the points. We put this example forward because it was created based on a request from a community member. They came to us with an issue and we covered it in our documentation. It's the kind of interaction between you, the modders, and us the developers, that we would like to encourage via the aforementioned forum section.
 

Bloc

Duke
WB
t's the kind of interaction between you, the modders, and us the developers, that we would like to encourage via the aforementioned forum section.
Agreed - however, do you think creating a thread is efficient for every single bits-and-pieces that we found in the code? I think it makes your life harder as well. Or I think you can do the following:
- A sticky but non-locked thread "Suggestions from Modders" etc
- Where modders write down stuff about things they see and complain.
- If you feel like it's unique/not mentioned before etc, you can edit the first post and link it to there.
- If it's done, you can color it to green, if rejected or replied, you can make it red/yellow or whatever.

So when modder John Doe comes with an idea/improvement, he can check there first and if it's not mentioned before he can simply post it under the same thread.
 

La Grandmaster

Sergeant Knight at Arms
If nothing else, I think this at least signals tw still think of modding as an important part of bannerlord. The fact they've already met about this letter is a good sign. I think Ill still personally be holding off modding until the game is out of ea but it seems promising going forward
 

HugoTheFrenchMan

Master Knight
Hello creators! First of all, thank you for writing this open letter and bringing it to our attention.

Last week, we went ahead with a meeting to discuss the concerns raised in the open letter, along with a collection of other pressing modding-related issues that we gathered via feedback.

As you might imagine, some of these topics are pretty big and in many cases, it is going to take some time to implement solutions, but we have already started taking steps towards resolving the issues and wanted to share this with you.

To start, we have decided to hold regular modding meetings to discuss feedback and other modding-related topics from the forums and Discord to ensure that issues like these aren’t allowed to fester.

In addition to this, we think that providing clearer warnings and assertions for the tools should help to point you in the right direction when trying to diagnose an issue, or at the very least, provide you with useful information to include when requesting support from us. We’ll be adding them within the next few patches.

So, with the more general things out of the way, let’s move on to the core topics we discussed at the meeting:
  • Custom Campaign Maps
We have identified a number of bugs with modifying and creating new campaign maps and will be looking into fixing them. We have also discussed a couple of potential solutions that we will be exploring to enable modifying of the MapWidth and MapHeight for the walkable area and camera. Ultimately, the message we want to convey here is that this certainly isn’t intended and that you will be able to add custom campaign maps when we have decided which path to take and implemented that solution.
  • Custom Skeletons & Body Meshes
We’ll be adding a system in the future to allow you to change faces, hand meshes, and body meshes, as well as, a system to add new skeletons to the game. Please bear in mind that you will likely have certain limitations when adding new skeletons for agents capable of combat in order for the native combat system to work properly.
  • Code-related documentation
We hope to start providing a reference for the API. In addition to this, we will be reaching out to collect specific requests for documentation to be brought to our developers for review and extend our efforts to make more documentation, similar to this explanation regarding Sealed Class Extension. We encourage you to request specific documentation in our updated forum section for Official Tools & Modding Feedback.
  • Hard-coded behaviour
In this case, we feel that the best approach would be for us to know specifically what you are trying to achieve so that we can find an appropriate solution. Please let us know which specific problems you’re facing here. With that being said, we will be doing a review of our code to see if there are places where we might have used “internal”, or any other modifiers, unnecessarily.

In addition to the topics from the open letter, we identified the following points that we will be going over in the dedicated modding meetings to find solutions.
  • Total conversion mod load order
  • Enable Cloth Physics on CraftedItems
  • Allow attributes on Items to determine weapon damage
  • Extrude function for AI meshing
  • Subdivide function for AI meshing (into quads not tris)
  • Allow single axis scaling of assets before placement
  • Ability to name a new paint layer upon creation
  • Mesh keyframes documentation
  • Documentation for skeletons for reins/horse harness and their implementation
  • Documentation on implementation of custom quivers
  • Add a duplicate mesh option
  • Add attribute to hide head (xml)
  • Ability to disable the usage of generated widget code
As we have said previously and will say again, modding is a huge part of Mount & Blade and we will do what we can to work alongside modders to help you fulfill your modding ambitions. However, we do want to be clear now that there will be some instances where we will be in disagreement about how a problem can, or should, be resolved. Moving forward, we ask that modders include more details about what they are trying to achieve when making suggestions, requesting support, or leaving feedback, rather than just suggesting a solution to their issue on its own. This will help us a great deal when exploring potential solutions, some of which may already be present. It would also be helpful if everyone could share future feedback and suggestions in the Official Tools & Modding Feedback section of the forum to ensure that your comments are processed correctly.
Finally
 

Roy1012

Marquis
If nothing else, I think this at least signals tw still think of modding as an important part of bannerlord. The fact they've already met about this letter is a good sign. I think Ill still personally be holding off modding until the game is out of ea but it seems promising going forward
This.
 

OliverWu

Recruit
Hello creators! First of all, thank you for writing this open letter and bringing it to our attention.

Last week, we went ahead with a meeting to discuss the concerns raised in the open letter, along with a collection of other pressing modding-related issues that we gathered via feedback.

As you might imagine, some of these topics are pretty big and in many cases, it is going to take some time to implement solutions, but we have already started taking steps towards resolving the issues and wanted to share this with you.

To start, we have decided to hold regular modding meetings to discuss feedback and other modding-related topics from the forums and Discord to ensure that issues like these aren’t allowed to fester.

In addition to this, we think that providing clearer warnings and assertions for the tools should help to point you in the right direction when trying to diagnose an issue, or at the very least, provide you with useful information to include when requesting support from us. We’ll be adding them within the next few patches.

So, with the more general things out of the way, let’s move on to the core topics we discussed at the meeting:
  • Custom Campaign Maps
We have identified a number of bugs with modifying and creating new campaign maps and will be looking into fixing them. We have also discussed a couple of potential solutions that we will be exploring to enable modifying of the MapWidth and MapHeight for the walkable area and camera. Ultimately, the message we want to convey here is that this certainly isn’t intended and that you will be able to add custom campaign maps when we have decided which path to take and implemented that solution.
  • Custom Skeletons & Body Meshes
We’ll be adding a system in the future to allow you to change faces, hand meshes, and body meshes, as well as, a system to add new skeletons to the game. Please bear in mind that you will likely have certain limitations when adding new skeletons for agents capable of combat in order for the native combat system to work properly.
  • Code-related documentation
We hope to start providing a reference for the API. In addition to this, we will be reaching out to collect specific requests for documentation to be brought to our developers for review and extend our efforts to make more documentation, similar to this explanation regarding Sealed Class Extension. We encourage you to request specific documentation in our updated forum section for Official Tools & Modding Feedback.
  • Hard-coded behaviour
In this case, we feel that the best approach would be for us to know specifically what you are trying to achieve so that we can find an appropriate solution. Please let us know which specific problems you’re facing here. With that being said, we will be doing a review of our code to see if there are places where we might have used “internal”, or any other modifiers, unnecessarily.

In addition to the topics from the open letter, we identified the following points that we will be going over in the dedicated modding meetings to find solutions.
  • Total conversion mod load order
  • Enable Cloth Physics on CraftedItems
  • Allow attributes on Items to determine weapon damage
  • Extrude function for AI meshing
  • Subdivide function for AI meshing (into quads not tris)
  • Allow single axis scaling of assets before placement
  • Ability to name a new paint layer upon creation
  • Mesh keyframes documentation
  • Documentation for skeletons for reins/horse harness and their implementation
  • Documentation on implementation of custom quivers
  • Add a duplicate mesh option
  • Add attribute to hide head (xml)
  • Ability to disable the usage of generated widget code
As we have said previously and will say again, modding is a huge part of Mount & Blade and we will do what we can to work alongside modders to help you fulfill your modding ambitions. However, we do want to be clear now that there will be some instances where we will be in disagreement about how a problem can, or should, be resolved. Moving forward, we ask that modders include more details about what they are trying to achieve when making suggestions, requesting support, or leaving feedback, rather than just suggesting a solution to their issue on its own. This will help us a great deal when exploring potential solutions, some of which may already be present. It would also be helpful if everyone could share future feedback and suggestions in the Official Tools & Modding Feedback section of the forum to ensure that your comments are processed correctly.
Thank you for your feedback.

I have one question that will you release tools for edit data in xml files?
It is better to use an official tool to edit data with GUI.

Thank you!
 

Bakura

Recruit
Hello creators! First of all, thank you for writing this open letter and bringing it to our attention.

Last week, we went ahead with a meeting to discuss the concerns raised in the open letter, along with a collection of other pressing modding-related issues that we gathered via feedback.

As you might imagine, some of these topics are pretty big and in many cases, it is going to take some time to implement solutions, but we have already started taking steps towards resolving the issues and wanted to share this with you.

To start, we have decided to hold regular modding meetings to discuss feedback and other modding-related topics from the forums and Discord to ensure that issues like these aren’t allowed to fester.

In addition to this, we think that providing clearer warnings and assertions for the tools should help to point you in the right direction when trying to diagnose an issue, or at the very least, provide you with useful information to include when requesting support from us. We’ll be adding them within the next few patches.

So, with the more general things out of the way, let’s move on to the core topics we discussed at the meeting:
  • Custom Campaign Maps
We have identified a number of bugs with modifying and creating new campaign maps and will be looking into fixing them. We have also discussed a couple of potential solutions that we will be exploring to enable modifying of the MapWidth and MapHeight for the walkable area and camera. Ultimately, the message we want to convey here is that this certainly isn’t intended and that you will be able to add custom campaign maps when we have decided which path to take and implemented that solution.
  • Custom Skeletons & Body Meshes
We’ll be adding a system in the future to allow you to change faces, hand meshes, and body meshes, as well as, a system to add new skeletons to the game. Please bear in mind that you will likely have certain limitations when adding new skeletons for agents capable of combat in order for the native combat system to work properly.
  • Code-related documentation
We hope to start providing a reference for the API. In addition to this, we will be reaching out to collect specific requests for documentation to be brought to our developers for review and extend our efforts to make more documentation, similar to this explanation regarding Sealed Class Extension. We encourage you to request specific documentation in our updated forum section for Official Tools & Modding Feedback.
  • Hard-coded behaviour
In this case, we feel that the best approach would be for us to know specifically what you are trying to achieve so that we can find an appropriate solution. Please let us know which specific problems you’re facing here. With that being said, we will be doing a review of our code to see if there are places where we might have used “internal”, or any other modifiers, unnecessarily.

In addition to the topics from the open letter, we identified the following points that we will be going over in the dedicated modding meetings to find solutions.
  • Total conversion mod load order
  • Enable Cloth Physics on CraftedItems
  • Allow attributes on Items to determine weapon damage
  • Extrude function for AI meshing
  • Subdivide function for AI meshing (into quads not tris)
  • Allow single axis scaling of assets before placement
  • Ability to name a new paint layer upon creation
  • Mesh keyframes documentation
  • Documentation for skeletons for reins/horse harness and their implementation
  • Documentation on implementation of custom quivers
  • Add a duplicate mesh option
  • Add attribute to hide head (xml)
  • Ability to disable the usage of generated widget code
As we have said previously and will say again, modding is a huge part of Mount & Blade and we will do what we can to work alongside modders to help you fulfill your modding ambitions. However, we do want to be clear now that there will be some instances where we will be in disagreement about how a problem can, or should, be resolved. Moving forward, we ask that modders include more details about what they are trying to achieve when making suggestions, requesting support, or leaving feedback, rather than just suggesting a solution to their issue on its own. This will help us a great deal when exploring potential solutions, some of which may already be present. It would also be helpful if everyone could share future feedback and suggestions in the Official Tools & Modding Feedback section of the forum to ensure that your comments are processed correctly.
Hi Dejan & TaleWorlds, thanks for the meeting and the detailed plan.
In the meantime, is the [melee(forgeable) weapon import tool] on the modding tool's plan list?
We are asking this because it could take a lot of time to manually adjust the relative position of each weapon piece throguh related XML files, especially when we are handling hundreds of forgeable weapons.😁
 
Top Bottom