Bannerlord map too mountainous?

Too many mountains?

  • Yes.

    选票: 46 56.1%
  • No, I like it.

    选票: 14 17.1%
  • I don't mind it.

    选票: 22 26.8%

  • 全部投票
    82

正在查看此主题的用户

Enigmaaa

Regular
Was just wondering about your guys' opinion on the Bannerlord map being incredibly mountainous?

I get that they're trying to create chokepoints and whatnot to make for strategical gameplay, but i think it is a bit too much. I'd like there to be mountains, dont get me wrong, but I'd prefer it to be kept at a realistic level and have it so that certain regions are incredibly mountainous whereas others have large wide-open plains, kinda like in Warband.

I know that Callum mentioned that they've been working on a new map. I hope it is not purely aesthethic upgrades but also that they've reworked the extreme amount of mountains that you can see in the pictures below.

https://i.imgur.com/4iLJzGi.jpg

https://i.imgur.com/vXMpBnP.jpg
 
It is to keep balance between factions and make it so some faction will not start sweeping the whole map.
 
Ki-Ok Khan 说:
It is to keep balance between factions and make it so some faction will not start sweeping the whole map.

Can't that be done through limiting the AI in some way?

I mean, it is not nescessarily a bad thing either, it is a common occurence in history that one "faction" has "sweeped" large areas, conquering everything in their path. And it is no fun if it remains a stalemate throughout the whole game, with no factions having conquered any considerable amount of land.
 
Enigmaaa 说:
Ki-Ok Khan 说:
It is to keep balance between factions and make it so some faction will not start sweeping the whole map.

Can't that be done through limiting the AI in some way?

I mean, it is not nescessarily a bad thing either, it is a common occurence in history that one "faction" has "sweeped" large areas, conquering everything in their path. And it is no fun if it remains a stalemate throughout the whole game, with no factions having conquered any considerable amount of land.
I guess , I somehow implied that it is gonna be a stalemate.  It actually is bound to the AI. The new AI is supposedly smarter and will make use of the chokepoints and will make preparations before going to a combat through those choke points. who ever harasses enemies economy better will have bigger advantage and therefore capture villages , cities.

I do not know how it is a bad thing for factions to be balanced??? When it comes to conquering lands , it will depend on the AI , what kinds of alliances or peace deals will they make, will they be able to sustain their economy etc. They are not gonna just sit ducks. Balance does not mean that.
 
Ki-Ok Khan 说:
Enigmaaa 说:
Ki-Ok Khan 说:
It is to keep balance between factions and make it so some faction will not start sweeping the whole map.

Can't that be done through limiting the AI in some way?

I mean, it is not nescessarily a bad thing either, it is a common occurence in history that one "faction" has "sweeped" large areas, conquering everything in their path. And it is no fun if it remains a stalemate throughout the whole game, with no factions having conquered any considerable amount of land.
I guess , I somehow implied that it is gonna be a stalemate.  It actually is bound to the AI. The new AI is supposedly smarter and will make use of the chokepoints and will make preparations before going to a combat through those choke points. who ever harasses enemies economy better will have bigger advantage and therefore capture villages , cities.

I do not know how it is a bad thing for factions to be balanced??? When it comes to conquering lands , it will depend on the AI , what kinds of alliances or peace deals will they make, will they be able to sustain their economy etc. They are not gonna just sit ducks. Balance does not mean that.

Yes, of course factions should be balanced. They should all be good at their respective things based on what the landscape they inhabit is like, just like in Warband.
My problem is that the map seems to be littered with mountains, which is neither realistic nor good-looking.
It also removes some of the charm of each region having a different landscape and the factions reflecting that based on their troops and culture.
 
that is what it looks like from the top. It is not as more mountainous as you see , It just looks crowded from all those big sized city names.Most of the mountains on the map were already there in warband. Seems like they added smaller mountains to the sides. Also keep in mind , the old warband map is just the top left part of the new bannerlord map.
https://cdn.wikimg.net/en/strategywiki/images/7/78/Mount%26Blade_Warband_world_map.jpg
https://vignette.wikia.nocookie.net/mountandblade/images/a/ae/Bannerlord_Map.png/revision/latest?cb=20171024193032

Might be worth checking out this blog on why it had to be somewhat more mountainous : https://www.taleworlds.com/en/Games/Bannerlord/Blog/14

I find it reasonable. Would not mind a change however.

 
First of all we really don't know if they are still using the maps we saw in 2016-2017. They might have changed them completely or removed or added even more mountains.

My problems with the mountains in the map was that they looked the same and kind of ugly. But they might have changed it completely so I don't really know.
 
If you look at an in-game picture it looks incredibly crowded.

https://i.imgur.com/vXMpBnP.jpg

I do not have a problem with the mountain-ranges in Warband, because they have alot of open space in between them. It seems as though the Bannerlord map just has a bunch of small mountains strewn around as opposed to terrain that makes any sense.
 
Not only too mountainous, but also those mountains look much smaller than in Warband. I would a fewer but bigger mountains.
 
Enigmaaa 说:
If you look at an in-game picture it looks incredibly crowded.

https://i.imgur.com/vXMpBnP.jpg
From a specific point and a specific angle . Sure. Whatever floats your boat. You are entitled to your opinion. I shall leave you alone in your thread.
 
I think Ki-Ok Khan meant that when you put Warband sized Calradia map on Bannerlord sized Calradia map, It just covers top left corner.
 
Al_Mansur 说:
Warband map with Bannerlord graphics would be perfect.

If they don't change the terrain pattern for a more believable and natural look, I think that'd be the first thing I'll look for in the modding board. The actual Bannerlord map is simply claustrophobic, and literally creates disconfort just by looking at it.
 
The Bowman 说:
If they don't change the terrain pattern for a more believable and natural look, I think that'd be the first thing I'll look for in the modding board. The actual Bannerlord map is simply claustrophobic, and literally creates disconfort just by looking at it.

Absolutely. While the Warband map gave a feeling of greatness and freedom.
 
I think/hope that the mountains are traversable to some extent. Like in the middle of the mountains you can just go across the peak. So people who control that peak have a speed advantage compared to people who dont. or you can extort caravans and stuff who want to use the path to save time. If they are complete roadblocks then yeah way too many imo.
 
Al_Mansur 说:
The Bowman 说:
If they don't change the terrain pattern for a more believable and natural look, I think that'd be the first thing I'll look for in the modding board. The actual Bannerlord map is simply claustrophobic, and literally creates disconfort just by looking at it.

Absolutely. While the Warband map gave a feeling of greatness and freedom.
That screenshot is really cherry-picked. It's in the midst of a very mountainous area.

Warband's map doesn't so much give a feeling of greatness as it gives a feeling of emptiness imo.
 
Honestly surprised how that this is a gripe with people. I never felt the BL map was too mountainous.

I thought they explained their intention to force much more choke points on the map, thus leading to more contests over strategically important points and routes. I think this is a welcome addition, as the WB map is simply just too open. Seriously. In WB opposing armies run amok around the map  without necessarily even coming to conflict. Aside from Rhodoks and the mountains around the khergit plains, the map is basically just a vast plain.

The only possible strategic considerations in WB are related to castle proximity to the nearest friendly and/or enemy settlement and the location of the free roaming army. Mountain passes are one way to force armies into more focused conflicts and a great way to add strategic layers. Of course i hope we`ll also see startegic bridges and roads. I would also love other kinds of "difficult" terrain added: swamps, for example, or "broken terrain" or "punishing desert" which would slow down party movement drastically and lead to losses in morale and men.

Making a tight map also helps with the issue of the AI, which, lets face it, will always be liable to do dumb or irrational things. In Total War Shogun 2 the map was also unusually tight, which limited the amount of stupidness the AI could do: in practice, the game became more engaging.

Besides, I think we`re overreacting a bit here. As shown in full screenshots of the map, there is still plenty of open fields and valleys that should have room to maneuver. From what I`ve seen, TW seems to have divided some of the plains into smaller sections with mountain ranges. I think this is, game-wise, a good change, as it limits crazy gallops across the continent to pillage one village.

Also many of the pics are from the Battania/Vlandia part of the map, which, based on WB, is going to be one of the most mountainous parts of the map. Just cause there is a mountain range there doesn`t mean there won`t be open spaces as well.

One thing I really hope they do is pay attention to the mountainous battle scenes: the ones in WB are incredibly frustrating. What they should do is make battle scenes in mountain passes, along mountain roads, and get rid of the ridiculous walking-up-this-cliff thing that frequently happens in WB. Mountains have rivers too, and fields and hamlets and forests.
 
后退
顶部 底部