Beta Patch Notes e1.4.2

Currently Viewing (Users: 0, Guests: 2)

Status
Not open for further replies.

Ishtarin

Regular
Best answers
0
You realize that this is not helping anyone right? Mexxico is not singlehandedly responsible for everything that is wrong with the game, and actually spends time talking to people in the forum and trying to figure things out together with the players.
Trying to figure things out together is not the same as reducing the effects of perks that were well received by players to 20% of their current effects. It's a case of fixing problems that don't need to be fixed and actively make the game worse while players wait for the bandaid that may or may not come. They ended up putting a 20 day truce back in anyways if you want to look at a precedent of how well this development policy works.
 

Bannerman Man

C# Sleuth
Knight
Best answers
0
Notice how you fought parties smaller than yours, where half of each party on their side was also recruits. That's perfectly fine, and I'm also attacking anyone I can catch up with or corner, but I'm mostly intercepting armies often twice my size that are trying to (re)conquer one of our towns/castles. Now due to my computer's (in)ability, I can only crank the max number of troops to 700 in the performance settings, and that means that, proportional to army size, I'm going to have around 250 troops at the start of battle to their 500. If many of my starting troops would happen to be recruits, it becomes difficult to fend off their waves without significant losses, and I need to have as few losses as possible, because right after this battle there's another one like it right around the corner and so on and so forth.
This all is mostly due to the frantic dynamic of wars and respawns.
Maybe if TW could achieve a more sane dynamic where, let's say, a 1000 vs 1000 battles would actually mean something and would happen like twice or trice a year at most, I wouldn't mind losing half my troops in such battles. The way it is now, since my AI fellow nobles are dumb as a doorbell, me and my army are a precious resource which should be treated as such and not wasted lightly.
I'm also playing on all max difficulties.
Anyway, I can only speak from my experience and voice my opinion. We all want this to transform into a great game so we could enjoy it more. How (and if) we get there, TW will have to decide.
Sure, but the original premise was that you must tediously smash your recruits up against looters in order to effectively train them. My entire point was that you can, in fact, train your recruits faster and more efficiently by fighting weaker lords and skipping the looter phase altogether. I was never suggesting that you take half a party of raw recruits and go assualting the biggest army you can find. You still have to work your way up to that. But, honestly, if you combined the final party from my test with whatever your companions can manage to scrounge together, you probably could defeat a 500+ man army.

I agree that large battles being more significant is a good thing, but as it stands, the game provides little incentive to ever engage armies that are stronger than your own. You can gain as much or more by fighting weaker lords individually than you can by fighting their combined forces.
 
Last edited:
Best answers
0
Trying to figure things out together is not the same as reducing the effects of perks that were well received by players to 20% of their current effects. It's a case of fixing problems that don't need to be fixed and actively make the game worse while players wait for the bandaid that may or may not come. They ended up putting a 20 day truce back in anyways if you want to look at a precedent of how well this development policy works.
That isn't even the part of the game he works on though :smile:. I am just saying, it's OK to be annoyed with how the overall development process is going, but you are barking at the wrong tree. He is not the one calling the shots. And it is not part of his job to be here and talk to us, he does it because he wants to, and I think it is beneficial to the community. Let's not sour that.
 

MostBlunted

Squire
Best answers
0
It´s still not nice to "attack" the only dev who is communicating with us. He really seems to care but of course he can´t decide everything on his own.

If we "lose" him, we won´t get any further updates of upcoming updates. I´m really thankful to him.

What TW should do now in my opinion:

Get a playable stable version with a playable mid/endgame out. Slow down on updates and test them internally to not screw up again. And of course, maybe...just maybe listen to the community? And for gods sake, start adding important features, we don´t need anymore new boring repetitive quests at the moment, at least in my opinion.

But I´ve lost my hope, I´ll guess there will be a minor update on thursday and it will break stuff again, as always.
 
Last edited:

Ishtarin

Regular
Best answers
0
That isn't even the part of the game he works on though :smile:. I am just saying, it's OK to be annoyed with how the overall development process is going, but you are barking at the wrong tree. He is not the one calling the shots. And it is not part of his job to be here and talk to us, he does it because he wants to, and I think it is beneficial to the community. Let's not sour that.
This isn't a matter of shooting the messenger, he's the one directly advocating for this to be nerfed.
I checked raise the meek and it is working right currently and giving xp to only 1-3 tiers but I think amount is too high. Its only a perk it should not upgrade even 25% of your troops, maybe 5-10% can be upgraded by this perk and still 90-95% should be upgraded after battles. It's effect should reduced by 50% at least with others.
It's absolutely ridiculous that he thinks 95% of your units should upgrade from fighting battles (more realistically, farming looters) and that hard nerfing XP perks is a good idea.
 

mexxico

Developer
Best answers
0
Trying to figure things out together is not the same as reducing the effects of perks that were well received by players to 20% of their current effects. It's a case of fixing problems that don't need to be fixed and actively make the game worse while players wait for the bandaid that may or may not come. They ended up putting a 20 day truce back in anyways if you want to look at a precedent of how well this development policy works.
I was aganist removal of 25 days truce from first days. I also informed players here you can make a search in forum about this issue and see what was happened. There are about 80 people working in company and I am not final decision maker of all decisions. Probably some of them are wrong decisions. Everybody can take a wrong decision. If something is wrong it will be corrected after a time. Especially perks are not in my responsible area but sometimes I examine their numbers and their effects to gameplay.

However yes I reduced the effect of perks and I do not think it is a wrong decision (maybe xp gains values can be 2x it can be better). Also even new values are less this is not a gamebreaking issue like removal of truce time. Previously that perk was giving 30 xp to every stack. In each stack you can have even 1 soldier or 30 soldiers. It was giving 30 xp in all situations even you have 1 soldier or 30 soldiers. It was giving 60 xp to second stack and 90 xp to third stack and 120 xps to fourth stack and so on, tier 1-2s are in first stacks and they get 30 or 60 xp. It was a bug (not intended) and it was making all AI parties full elites (because high tiers were getting 120-150-180-210 xp / days), I see that bug from forum reports, I am not coder of these parts and fixed it while fixing I reduced 30 to 2 because now we are giving xp per troop not per stack. Now this perk gives 2 xp per troop in stack (tier 1-2-3). So if you have 10 vlandian recruit this perk will give your vlandian recruits 20xp daily. Actually giving xp to only 1-2-3 tier troops is not so logical and create a difference from other perk option which gives xp to all troops. We have 5 tiers and xp gains of only 1-2-3-4 tiers make sense because 5th tier is not levelling up. So I will change this perk to giving 4 xp to only 1-2 tiers or you can select other perk which gives 2 xp to all troops per day (it is currently giving 1 will be increased to 2). This means if you have 30 tier-1 troops in your party this perk will give your tier 1-2 troops 120 xps a day. I think it is not a small number. By this every 2-3 days one of your tier-1 troops will level up even you do not enter any battle. If this is not enough for you, you can use mods or make cheats because having OP perks is something like cheat imo.
 
Last edited:

MostBlunted

Squire
Best answers
0
I was aganist removal of 25 days truce from first days. I also informed players here you can make a search in forum about this issue and see what was happened. There are about 80 people working in company and I am not final decision maker of all decisions. Probably some of them are wrong decisions. Especially perks are not my area. If something is wrong it will be corrected after a time.
We know, and we really appreciate your work and activity in this forum. Keep going on with the good work!
 

Ishtarin

Regular
Best answers
0
I was aganist removal of 25 days truce from first days. I also informed players here you can make a search in forum about this issue and see what was happened. There are about 80 people working in company and I am not final decision maker of all decisions. Probably some of them are wrong decisions. Especially perks are not my area. If something is wrong it will be corrected after a time.

However yes I reduced the effect of perks and I do not think it is a wrong decision. Previously that perk was giving 30 xp to every stack. In each stack you can have even 1 soldier or 30 soldiers. It was giving 30 xp in all situations even you have 1 soldier or 30 soldiers. It was giving 60 xp to second stack and 90 xp to third stack and 120 xps to fourth stack and so on, tier 1-2s are in first stacks and they get 30 or 60 xp. It was a bug (not intended) and it was making all AI parties full elites, I see that bug from forum reports, I am not coder of these parts and fixed while fixing I reduced 30 to 2 because now we are giving xp per troop not per stack. Now this perk gives 2 xp per troop in stack (tier 1-2-3). So if you have 10 vlandian recruit this perk will give your vlandian recruits 20xp daily. Actually giving xp to only 1-2-3 tier troops is not so logical. We have 5 tiers and xp gains of only 1-2-3-4 tiers make sense because 5th tier is not levelling up. So I will change this perk to giving 4 xp to only 1-2 tiers or you can select other perk 2 xp to all troops per day. This means if you have 30 tier-1 troops in your party this perk will give your troops 120 xps a day. I think it is not a small number. By this every 3 days one of your tier-1 troops will level up even you do not enter any battle. If this is not enough for you, you can use mods or make cheats because having OP perks is something like cheat imo.
Thank you for the response, but frankly grinding most of your T2s and T3s from fighting looters is ridiculous. We need a system that allows for active training of units without putting them in direct danger. Have it cost money, time, what ever else I don't care. A training camp system is desperately needed.
 

Mama Luke

Regular
Best answers
0
Trying to figure things out together is not the same as reducing the effects of perks that were well received by players to 20% of their current effects. It's a case of fixing problems that don't need to be fixed and actively make the game worse while players wait for the bandaid that may or may not come. They ended up putting a 20 day truce back in anyways if you want to look at a precedent of how well this development policy works.
It wasn't well received by me and I saw other people complaining about it too before the fix.
Devs already said they'll be adding new perks for passive xp gain which means as you level up your leadership skill you'll be upgrading your troops easier in upcoming patches with combined effect of different perks.
They didn't actually reduce the effects of the perk because devs made it clear it wasn't intended in the first place. They just fixed a miscalculation.

On the other hand, garrison training building, on max level, giving only 3xp per day is ridiculously low in my opinion.
 

Compco

Recruit
Best answers
0
I was aganist removal of 25 days truce from first days. I also informed players here you can make a search in forum about this issue and see what was happened. There are about 80 people working in company and I am not final decision maker of all decisions. Probably some of them are wrong decisions. Everybody can make a wrong decision. Especially perks are not my area. If something is wrong it will be corrected after a time.

However yes I reduced the effect of perks and I do not think it is a wrong decision. Also even new values are less this is not a gamebreaking issue like removal of truce time. Previously that perk was giving 30 xp to every stack. In each stack you can have even 1 soldier or 30 soldiers. It was giving 30 xp in all situations even you have 1 soldier or 30 soldiers. It was giving 60 xp to second stack and 90 xp to third stack and 120 xps to fourth stack and so on, tier 1-2s are in first stacks and they get 30 or 60 xp. It was a bug (not intended) and it was making all AI parties full elites (because high tiers were getting 120-150-180-210 xp / days), I see that bug from forum reports, I am not coder of these parts and fixed it while fixing I reduced 30 to 2 because now we are giving xp per troop not per stack. Now this perk gives 2 xp per troop in stack (tier 1-2-3). So if you have 10 vlandian recruit this perk will give your vlandian recruits 20xp daily. Actually giving xp to only 1-2-3 tier troops is not so logical and create a difference from other perk option which gives xp to all troops. We have 5 tiers and xp gains of only 1-2-3-4 tiers make sense because 5th tier is not levelling up. So I will change this perk to giving 4 xp to only 1-2 tiers or you can select other perk which gives 2 xp to all troops per day (it is currently giving 1 will be increased to 2). This means if you have 30 tier-1 troops in your party this perk will give your tier 1-2 troops 120 xps a day. I think it is not a small number. By this every 2-3 days one of your tier-1 troops will level up even you do not enter any battle. If this is not enough for you, you can use mods or make cheats because having OP perks is something like cheat imo.
You are not taking into account the historical precedent of training in Warband. While it took awhile to build the training skill, once you did, you could easily upgrade 2-3 troops per day waiting. If you surveyed most early access players, I am sure the vast majority would be in favor of a faster, passive way to train troops.
 

mexxico

Developer
Best answers
0
You are not taking into account the historical precedent of training in Warband. While it took awhile to build the training skill, once you did, you could easily upgrade 2-3 troops per day waiting. If you surveyed most early access players, I am sure the vast majority would be in favor of a faster, passive way to train troops.
I also adviced giving leadership skill passive xp bonus effect as you said (something like training at Warband). Something like each leadership skill to give +0.05 xp to each troop in your party (example : if you have 100 leadership skill each your troop in your party will get 5 xp daily). It is rejected for now. I think same with you about this issue. It can be good if a skill is used to give passive xp and effects of leadership skill (party morale bonus and garrison size bonus) are currently weak.
 

Lord Irontoe

Master Knight
Best answers
0
Im sorry but 3 days to level up a single recruit out of a stack of 30 is insignificant to the point that it might as well not exist at all. If you only have 1 recruit, it takes 90 days to train him? The effect is completely negligible.

A reasonable rate for a stack of 30 recruits would be 5 or 6 upgrading per day.
 

MostBlunted

Squire
Best answers
0
I also adviced giving leadership skill passive xp effect as you said (what was in training at Warband). It is rejected for now. I think same with you about this issue. It can be good if a skill is used to give passive xp and effects of leadership skill are currently weak.
This would be nice. Stupid question but do a lot of the other devs play the game? Or are they just "theorycrafting"? No offense, just curious.

I bet, if you make a poll, 90% would vote for passive XP gain related to the leadership skill.
 

Nakh

Sergeant
Best answers
0
I also adviced giving leadership skill passive xp bonus effect as you said (something like training at Warband). Something like each leadership skill to give +0.05 xp to each troop in your party (example : if you have 100 leadership skill each your troop in your party will get 5 xp daily). It is rejected for now. I think same with you about this issue. It can be good if a skill is used to give passive xp and effects of leadership skill (party morale bonus and garrison size bonus) are currently weak.
Passive training system in Warband was excellent. And it was complimented by active traning feature, what was fine mini-game. At Bannerlord we have system to level up one recruit from stack of 140 per day, or we have exiting alternative of chasing looters.
 

Sidrath

Sergeant
Best answers
0
I was aganist removal of 25 days truce from first days. I also informed players here you can make a search in forum about this issue and see what was happened. There are about 80 people working in company and I am not final decision maker of all decisions. Probably some of them are wrong decisions. Everybody can make a wrong decision. Especially perks are not my area. If something is wrong it will be corrected after a time.

However yes I reduced the effect of perks and I do not think it is a wrong decision. Also even new values are less this is not a gamebreaking issue like removal of truce time. Previously that perk was giving 30 xp to every stack. In each stack you can have even 1 soldier or 30 soldiers. It was giving 30 xp in all situations even you have 1 soldier or 30 soldiers. It was giving 60 xp to second stack and 90 xp to third stack and 120 xps to fourth stack and so on, tier 1-2s are in first stacks and they get 30 or 60 xp. It was a bug (not intended) and it was making all AI parties full elites (because high tiers were getting 120-150-180-210 xp / days), I see that bug from forum reports, I am not coder of these parts and fixed it while fixing I reduced 30 to 2 because now we are giving xp per troop not per stack. Now this perk gives 2 xp per troop in stack (tier 1-2-3). So if you have 10 vlandian recruit this perk will give your vlandian recruits 20xp daily. Actually giving xp to only 1-2-3 tier troops is not so logical and create a difference from other perk option which gives xp to all troops. We have 5 tiers and xp gains of only 1-2-3-4 tiers make sense because 5th tier is not levelling up. So I will change this perk to giving 4 xp to only 1-2 tiers or you can select other perk which gives 2 xp to all troops per day (it is currently giving 1 will be increased to 2). This means if you have 30 tier-1 troops in your party this perk will give your tier 1-2 troops 120 xps a day. I think it is not a small number. By this every 2-3 days one of your tier-1 troops will level up even you do not enter any battle. If this is not enough for you, you can use mods or make cheats because having OP perks is something like cheat imo.
Very much appreciate your communication with us on these forums, Mexxico. As part of the fix you suggest, would it be possible to also do something much stronger for the Training Fields of castles, so they give good exp to T1/T2 on a per-troop basis? I think what most players find objectionable is the notion that, in their lategame as an established clan, they'd still be 'babysitting' Recruits in Looter battles. Just being able to park 100 Recruits and 100 Levy Crossbowmen into a castle and know that after a while they'll naturally turn into usable T3's would be enough to quell some of the playerbase's concerns. Would also give castles a real purpose: static settlements should be better troop training facilties than a Lord's army on the trot, imo.
 
Best answers
0
I also adviced giving leadership skill passive xp bonus effect as you said (something like training at Warband). Something like each leadership skill to give +0.05 xp to each troop in your party (example : if you have 100 leadership skill each your troop in your party will get 5 xp daily). It is rejected for now. I think same with you about this issue. It can be good if a skill is used to give passive xp and effects of leadership skill (party morale bonus and garrison size bonus) are currently weak.
I wonder if they would they be open to making the perk effect dependent on Leadership level? I think that it makes a lot of sense for that to be in play. You should not be able to level troops from veterans from the get go, but you definitely should be able to do that at endgame if you have invested in the right skill.
 

mexxico

Developer
Best answers
0
Very much appreciate your communication with us on these forums, Mexxico. As part of the fix you suggest, would it be possible to also do something much stronger for the Training Fields of castles, so they give good exp to T1/T2 on a per-troop basis? I think what most players find objectionable is the notion that, in their lategame as an established clan, they'd still be 'babysitting' Recruits in Looter battles. Just being able to park 100 Recruits and 100 Levy Crossbowmen into a castle and know that after a while they'll naturally turn into usable T3's would be enough to quell some of the playerbase's concerns. Would also give castles a real purpose: static settlements should be better troop training facilties than a Lord's army on the trot, imo.
Ok. I will examine its effect also. Thanks for report.
 

remorse

Sergeant
Best answers
0
Is there any plan to add active training? Like let's say sitting in a castle and training your men, or having practice battles between them?
 

dukester

Recruit
Best answers
0
On the other hand, garrison training building, on max level, giving only 3xp per day is ridiculously low in my opinion.
Yeah, if I remember correctly, Tier1 to Tier2 needs around 180xp, so having to wait 60 days for basic troop upgrade (more for higher tiers) is not ridiculous, it's insulting. I'd rather they remove this building and effect than have it stay a joke like it is now On top of it all, they recently nerfed construction 'income' and increased construction cost, so if you conquer a basic castle, you'll have to wait for a looong time before you see your first garrison troop upgrade.
I'd have loved to be a fly on the wall in the office when they made a calculation and decision for these numbers.
- "So guys, what do you think of this progression pace?"
- "Let me see: from when you typically get your first castle to game end about 20 years, so having about 50-ish unit upgrades in your first garrison (less in the following ones) during the whole course of the game... Yea, sounds about right. Make it so."
I could be off in calculation, but I often wondered how they come up with these numbers and what made them think they're ok. Boggles my mind.
 

MostBlunted

Squire
Best answers
0
Is there any plan to add active training? Like let's say sitting in a castle and training your men, or having practice battles between them?
Sound goods, we totally need more options to level up T1 troops than just doing boring fights against looters. I start those fights and just go away or watch youtube/whatever because those fights are just boring and a waste of time, but needed right now.

I don´t want an easy way to train a T1 to T5 troop in a day but I need something at least.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.