Agreed with position 2/3. Of course, we literally cannot have a productive conversation about this until someone with first hand knowledge of why it was removed demystifies the situation.
I have no interest whatsoever in Multiplayer and even LESS interest in being FORCED to do things in a certain way to accomodate features of a game mode I will probably never actually use.What hasn't been considered in this thread yet is the enormous gap that autoblock created when singleplayer players tried to get into multiplayer.
Autoblock was not a thing on 95% of the Warband servers, and it drove singleplayer players away who were used to just having to just press RMB and block everything. Not having autoblock in singleplayer forces players to learn, and those that can't or don't want to can stick to shields, so I think not having autoblock is the right call from Taleworlds.
Plus, I'm sure there will be a mod that adds autoblock in no time. But it not being in the base game forces more players to adjust to manual blocking, which I think is a good thing.
"But I'm not interested in multiplayer!" Well, it's part of the game whether you like it or not. I'm not all that interested in singleplayer either, but I can still applaud the gameplay decisions that make it more attractive.
I doubt they're trying to shoehorn players into multiplayer.I have no interest whatsoever in Multiplayer and even LESS interest in being FORCED to do things in a certain way to accomodate features of a game mode I will probably never actually use.
If their mentality is to shoehorn players into multiplayer, they'll lose me as a player. It's as simple as that.
Shame the terrrible design of this game demands such a ridiculous learning curve and the game will struggle commercially in the long run as normal, healthy, sane, non-OCD people walk away from it, tank the multiplayer and the community dies.Shame none of you can learn the game and block properly.
I.Game speed is 2x slower than warband maybe more. The fact that the ai gives me more trouble than playing multiplayer is sad. People such as yourself do not push to be better but to be catered.
I agree, it can be balanced better and I expect further tweaks in future.But it's not balanced. Right now for a large swath of players 2h swords are now ridiculously underpowered because they're struggling to make the intricate and unintuitive blocking system actually work for them
When facing an enemy with a 1H sword, attacks come in very quickly and the timing to get the blocking right is very, VERY demanding. I tried for a couple hours and didn't even get close to actually figuring out all the telegraphy I'd need to anticipate and block attacks from various directions, and that was just with a 1H sword. Now add maces, spears, daggers, axes, and hybrid weapons, all with their own unique animations and telegraphy that you have to master just to block in a video game, and throw in the fact that you will occaisionally need to block more than 1 of them at once..
At what point is it more rewarding, not so much to master the blocking, as to not play the video game?
I could probably figure out blocking if I had nothing else to focus on but we're talking about battles here, "nothing else to focus on" literally NEVER happens.
So as a result of that whole classes of weapons are completely denied to me because a game feature I'm used to was deleted thanks to smug "get shield or get gud" pricks who judge me for not sinking my time to mastering an obscure and extremely opaque game mechanic well enough to not just succeed at that, but do so while managing troops and navigating a battlemap at the same time.
Quite frankly, that's pathetic.
Irrelevant. It isn't necessary to NOT have. This is not a dueling simulator. Singleplayer is not a tutorial for multiplayer.It isn’t necessary to have.