bestmods168
Sergeant at Arms
For sure, not before tomorrow. How do you plan to implement it?
-
If you are reporting a bug, please head over to our Technical Support section for Bannerlord.
Anyone know when we will get spear brace for SP? (Devs?)(video)
- 主题发起人 bestmods168
- 开始时间
正在查看此主题的用户
Sergeant at Arms
While I want this implemented ASAP, there really is no need. Cavalry is straight up garbage right now.
Also, I doubt the AI would be able to handle these formations since there isn't a separate group for spear/pikemen infantry and normal sword/axe infantry.
This is something we really should have, because it allows for more advanced tactics. Like there is a line of of troops in the middle in a shield wall with swords and other anti-infantry weapons, and on the flanks where cavalry usually attacks, we cav have spear infantry with bracing.
Would also be good if we could split a formation into 2
Also, I doubt the AI would be able to handle these formations since there isn't a separate group for spear/pikemen infantry and normal sword/axe infantry.
This is something we really should have, because it allows for more advanced tactics. Like there is a line of of troops in the middle in a shield wall with swords and other anti-infantry weapons, and on the flanks where cavalry usually attacks, we cav have spear infantry with bracing.
Would also be good if we could split a formation into 2
bestmods168
Sergeant at Arms
Agreed. They have to start implementing a heavy infantry or pikemen class. The num keypads are not used. They should really add about 8 more slots or so.
TheWitchIzalith
Regular
Or they could add another layer of Command controls.
Infantry (Melee) > Groups 1-9 > Orders.
Infantry (Ranged) > Groups 1-9 > Orders.
Infantry > Melee > Group 1-9 > Order
or Infantry > Ranged > Group 1-9 > Order
I imagine that would be a simple code addition, to just create the difference between two, like the present system of Selection of unit1-9 and then orders. Just an extra menu to toggle in the UI at that point.
(Not A Coder at all so probably more complex than this, but code is binary logic, so can't be too far off)
You could split infantry this way by then assigning, the only thing I can't solve would be splitting the same exact unit, IE T3 Trained Legion from other T3 Trained legions, as in game that has no way just yet, but could split your T5, T4 and various other melee units for flanking a bit easier with Spears, 2H etc.
Infantry > Group 1 > Orders
Infantry > Group 2 >Orders
As for Spear bracing, teaching the AI when to use it is probably the reason it hasn't been added in yet. They would have to either train the AI to intelligently use it, or create a Formation command the player can use. The player command being "Okay" but not exactly gameplay friendly in that it would become very micro intensive to consistently reset these parameters for them in heated combat, unless you play a "Lead from the back" type character.
Are the hooked spears that dismount cav they talked about even in SP yet?
on topic, I agree with most of what was said here. I don’t think an extra layer of commands would be problematic for people
on topic, I agree with most of what was said here. I don’t think an extra layer of commands would be problematic for people
TheWitchIzalith
Regular
I have yet to see it, and contrary some people are already complaining the commands are too bloated, but that was the easiest way to address it, in my limited knowledge (and Im not bothered by the deep ish command section,)
I honestly just used a Sticky note the way code would work till I remembered the ones I needed that sat top left of my screen.
Ex Shieldwall - Group > F3 > F2
NLCRich
Squire
Yea, there are a couple that could do with a split. Spearmen is one you might want to break off. Skirmishers could be another. Both of these and one handed are all considered common infantry. However, many have multiple weapons. I might not want the split to be automatic but command based somehow. It would do wonders for the tactics in battle. When in the appropriate division, the soldiers should always choose to use the associated weapon type.
So instead of it being, oh they use the one handed if I say "charge" and the spear if I say "Advance" (which honestly is not explained and makes little sense),the multiple weapon types make the soldier unit diverse in that you could put them in a one handed division, or in a spear division.
Then in your spear division you can have the option for a spear brace formation, and all the units are guaranteed to have the spear.
bestmods168
Sergeant at Arms
Very nice input. For even intermediate coders, its not that complicated. It should be child's play for them. That's why people find it difficult to believe that people from Taleworlds are unable to do simple stuff.
As for spear bracing, since you feel that TW isn't able to teach ai yet, I will still stand by my opinion: That TW took my mod and turned it into theirs. (Note that they have quietly implemented people's mods in their updates.) Spear bracing was never on their radar or even intermediate radar. That's why they didn't know how to implement it in its most basic form, let alone allowing ai to implement it. My two mods on the topic already allows ai to implement spear bracing effectively. I already understand the concept on how they can best implement it very effectively. It doesn't stop there. I already understand how they will be able to implement: ships, chariots, cannons, flying objects(dragons, planes, etc.). But as we all should know, there's a few select group of people who can easily sway the devs to adjust the game to their abilities. Its not likely the devs will ask for help.
TheWitchIzalith
Regular
You were so busy asking if you could, that you didn't think if you should.
I forget which Pokemon Dev said it, but when asked one time why they don't listen to fan suggestions, he stated in the typical blunt Japanese fashion. "Because our games would be garbage if we implemented every suggestion players wanted".
Sure there are great suggestions, but they don't always mesh well with the game over all, or interfere with other actions. Or like you stated they simple didn't think of the idea themselves, as even with group brainstorming, different groups will surely find other solutions, or experiments.
Understanding and execution are entirely different things. I understand most binary code. I think mostly logic based, but I wouldn't begin to know how to write it to have proper effect. Outside of some very loose attempts at custom games on the original WC3 Engine a decade ago.
I don't mind them integrating the mods, honestly. It shows they are open to suggestions on a technical level, even if they aren't vocal about it. Plenty of games have actually done this, especially Indie Devs (I know TW isn't quite Indie, but they aren't quite large either). It boils down to time management really, and quotas.
The difference between Blizzard of yore, and blizzard now. They used to be far less corporate, and have far better games, now its all about deadlines, and such. For all the complaints we may have the devs do need to feed their families.
My guess is that, compared to warband, which was relatively well received as a Sandboxy RPG at the time, it's players have grown up with Paradox, Civilization, and Total war style games over the years and we now demand a higher complexity control systems. Which if I had to guess, was outside the realm of TW's initial scope of the game.
Time will tell what we get, I am optimistic, that if the game itself is not as fleshed out as some people demand, we will still have a very stable, and broad foundation for which many spectacular mod overhauls will be born.
bestmods168
Sergeant at Arms
This thread wasn't simply about asking if I could or I should. This thread had other intentions. lol. You seriously thought that my thread question was genuine? lol. And it's exactly as you said about suggestions. Unfortunately, in this case TW took the garbage suggestions. They're like in a relationship being pulled back and forth between all the garbage suggestions. "Cavs are too OP, nerf them." Next week, they're nerfed. "Cavs are too weak, buff them." The next week, they're buffed. This stupid cycle has been going on for quite some time. No need to make the excuse of "testing" things out. The testing department should already have a general idea of balance.
TheWitchIzalith
Regular
I wouldn't call it an excuse, and rather a poignant point from my perspective. In that I have zero knowledge of the inner workings of TW, and such am not really educated enough to judge their Developing process. Just how much I enjoy it, and I enjoy it enough to sit on its forums, so theres that.
If I had a man on the inside, sure, but I don't. So everything is safe speculation.
Like I said, we will see in time, I won't hold my breath, but I won't be pessimistic either.
For all we know, you could be a better coder than anyone on their entire team, which could drastically change peoples opinions if we actually had a tangible measurement of it. I think a lot of people have expectations much higher than what's realistic.
Which also isn't the fault of TW if their team is not as skilled as the ever ravenous consumer demands. I'll cast a harsher judgement on release day, and I know it's tried, and old, but this is an EA. People need to reign in their own expectations, when we have zero knowledge on how experienced the TW team is. The last game was a decade ago, after all.
musashii89
Banned
Wrong
