• If you are reporting a bug, please head over to our Technical Support section for Bannerlord.
  • Please note that the developer team will be on leave until 26th of July. All technical support tickets will be handled when we're back in action. Thank you for understanding.

Beta Patch Notes e1.6.0

Currently viewing this thread:

Inappropriate behavior
These version numbers make no sense. Here we have another completely incremental patch but the version bump is meant to imply a bigger set of features...

On one hand I like that there is some work being done around non-combat related content, particularly with the smithing changes.
On the other hand this is too incremental for me to care at all or make me install the game again.


Edit: As explained by @Noschkov, changes to MP and Modding are quite sizeable, so I'll retract what I said above.
very disappointing going from1.5.10 to 1.6 and there wasn't a lot of new things added, not sure why this isn't 1.5.11
Very minimal changes to validate going to 1.6.0 in my opinion.
This is not how versioning works guys. They could have called it "Susan" if they liked and that would still be legit. You are perhaps assuming that all versioning is semantic versioning but that is simply not true. Any developer can give any name to any version. There is only rule in versioning: Any version number should only reference a single unique state of the codebase. Speaking of which...
Okay the crash should be fixed and 160 should be available again.
So now you have a unique name, "1.6.0" referencing two different states of the codebase... Wow... It is now official - snipped flame-
 
Last edited by a moderator:

MRay

Developer
So now you have a unique name, "1.6.0" referencing two different states of the codebase... Wow... It is now official:- snipped flame-
But.... it is different. The prev was 1.6.0.272919, the fixed version is 1.6.0.273005. Open the launcher, it says that on the bottom left. What's your point exactly?
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Apocal

Master Knight
So you guessed it there are quest with triggers, like lord needs tutor for his son/daughter. for example their age must lay between 18 and 23. Is the son/daughter over 23, the quest will not appear again until the lord gets a newborn with a speed rise to adulthood.
Yeah, I have something like 50 lords/ladies with children between those ages and the quest still isn't popping.
 
Is it just me or was lord death chance also reduced this patch? It feels just about right at the moment, sometimes they die, but not very often. Very good
 
Inappropriate behavior
But.... it is different. The prev was 1.6.0.272919, the fixed version is 1.6.0.273005. Open the launcher, it says that on the bottom left. What's your point exactly?
Are you certain this is source code version but not a build number? It appears you don't even know the difference and use them interchangeably. BTW, this is how you put yourself in a worse spot while trying to defend your incompetence :wink:
 

MRay

Developer
Are you certain this is source code version but not a build number? It appears you don't even know the difference and use them interchangeably. BTW, this is how you put yourself in a worse spot while trying to defend your incompetence
The number players see, is the version. SemVer even says build numbers can be used additional to MAJOR.MINOR.PATCH structure.
Additional labels for pre-release and build metadata are available as extensions to the MAJOR.MINOR.PATCH format.
We just don't add the '+' before the build number.

Sure bud, I'm the one who sounds incompetent.

Clearly, the initial message sought to inform players about an urgent situation. It served its purpose and your personal attacks against such communication benefits no one.
 

Althix

Sergeant
Mentok the Mind-Taker do i need to report bugs that are resurfaced in 1.6.0? Like companions after defeat stay in "busy" state which prevents me from creating the party from the clan menu? i mean i had to collect them all like pokemons all the time.
An issue with "Show mercy" when recapturing a town or castle that previously belong to the kingdom, "show mercy" (the only option) result in losing relation with lord.
I'm pretty sure those and some others were fixed in 1.5.10.
 
The number players see, is the version. SemVer even says build numbers can be used additional to MAJOR.MINOR.PATCH structure.

We just don't add the '+' before the build number.

Sure bud, I'm the one who sounds incompetent.

Clearly, the initial message sought to inform players about an urgent situation. It served its purpose and your personal attacks against such communication benefits no one.
You continue to put yourself in worse spots with every message :smile:

Did you actually read the document you linked to?? The build number is added for build metadata, not source code version. I mean not knowing your stuff is one thing, but linking a document that clearly explains how you failed is a new low.

And the idea that build number can be used for source code version is as paradoxical as naming your child after your future grandchild, as builds follow source code and not the other way around. Besides, you often have multiple builds for a unique source code state for you would compile against multiple versions of multiple platforms.

So the picture is pretty clear; you do not know the distinction between source code versions and build numbers, how one refers to the source and the other to what you build from the source, two quite distinct concepts with the former completely agnostic of the latter... Furthermore, you refer to separate source code states with the same version and you believe you are using semantic versioning even though you aren't... Nice.
 
You continue to put yourself in worse spots with every message :smile:

Did you actually read the document you linked to?? The build number is added for build metadata, not source code version. I mean not knowing your stuff is one thing, but linking a document that clearly explains how you failed is a new low.

And the idea that build number can be used for source code version is as paradoxical as naming your child after your future grandchild, as builds follow source code and not the other way around. Besides, you often have multiple builds for a unique source code state for you would compile against multiple versions of multiple platforms.

So the picture is pretty clear; you do not know the distinction between source code versions and build numbers, how one refers to the source and the other to what you build from the source, two quite distinct concepts with the former completely agnostic of the latter... Furthermore, you refer to separate source code states with the same version and you believe you are using semantic versioning even though you aren't... Nice.
I don't know what you're talking about nor do I care, but you sound like an internet grammar nazi correcting people's insignificant mistakes just for the sake of correcting them, and with a disrespectful patronizing tone at that. What's your point?
 

Grank

Sergeant Knight
WBNWVC
Clearly, the initial message sought to inform players about an urgent situation. It served its purpose and your personal attacks against such communication benefits no one.
I don't know what you're talking about nor do I care, but you sound like an internet grammar nazi correcting people's insignificant mistakes just for the sake of correcting them, and with a disrespectful patronizing tone at that. What's your point?
Ignore him. He does this every time I see him in these forums. He jumps into threads insulting people like he owns the software industry just to boost his own ego.
 

MRay

Developer
The build number is added for build metadata, not source code version. I mean not knowing your stuff is one thing, but linking a document that clearly explains how you failed is a new low.
Build metadata can include the source code version. If you bothered to look at the examples in SemVer, it's not just the build type. It can be anything depending on the build metadata. And "Build Source" is definetly a part of "Build Metadata". So it can certainly be the code state. It can be incremental like +001, or timestamp +20130313144700 or even a hash or guid. It's changeset for us. So what you said here:
So now you have a unique name, "1.6.0" referencing two different states of the codebase
is just, simply, wrong. Or at least, purposefully (more like ignorantly), misinformed.

And the idea that build number can be used for source code version is as paradoxical as naming your child after your future grandchild, as builds follow source code and not the other way around. Besides, you often have multiple builds for a unique source code state for you would compile against multiple versions of multiple platforms.
Which is not what we do. You're inventing situations that doesn't exists to get "angry" over.

So the picture is pretty clear; you do not know the distinction between source code versions and build numbers, how one refers to the source and the other to what you build from the source
Sure.

Furthermore, you refer to separate source code states with the same version
Not true, as I explained here twice now.
 

MRay

Developer
Mentok the Mind-Taker
'Bweeeooop'
do i need to report bugs that are resurfaced in 1.6.0? Like companions after defeat stay in "busy" state which prevents me from creating the party from the clan menu?
An issue with "Show mercy" when recapturing a town or castle that previously belong to the kingdom, "show mercy" (the only option) result in losing relation with lord.
Saved games for these would be most helpful. I'll take a look or at least relay them to the appropriate team. Posting them in a thread in the Technical Support forum will also help us track those issues until they're resolved. So yes, definitely please report them!


Edit: in order not to triple post

Ignore him. He does this every time I see him in these forums. He jumps into threads insulting people like he owns the software industry just to boost his own ego.
Yeah. Last time I'll answer to him, no need to waste everybody else's time here.
 
Last edited:
Build metadata can include the source code version. If you bothered to look at the examples in SemVer, it's not just the build type. It can be anything depending on the build metadata. And "Build Source" is definetly a part of "Build Metadata". So it can certainly be the code state. It can be incremental like +001, or timestamp +20130313144700 or even a hash or guid. It's changeset for us. So what you said here:
I never discussed build metadata. I was always talking about the source code version and how it did not change upon a source code change. You introduced build numbers into the discussion as if they have anything to do with the topic and are still not getting it. I don't give a damn about how build metadata is named. But since you still believe source and build are the same thing, not getting the difference, you still say things like "source is part of build." Of course it is, as I mentioned earlier build follows source.

I have only one question and I promise it is only to understand the situation. Are you a Software Engineer? If so, are you a senior at TW?

BTW, here are some sources if you want to learn the difference between source code versions and build numbers...
1. The same SemVer document that you sent me(!), but please read it this time.
2. A clear answer on Quora.
3. StackExchange topic for some discussion.
 
Last edited:
Ignore him. He does this every time I see him in these forums. He jumps into threads insulting people like he owns the software industry just to boost his own ego.
yeah I figured he wanted to feed his sense of superiority a little bit, that much was clear. And quite fitting, as his name, "Mehmet", translates to "praiseworthy", so you can imagine the kind of spoiling parents he must have had. I just wanted to see if he himself realizes that what he's doing serves no other purpose than a selfish one, but he hasn't answered the question both me and the developer proposed: "What's your point?". So since I don't know any better, my conclusion simply is, like MRay has stated, that it's just a personal attack, and all it really does is punish communication.

And he continues with a question that again serves no positive intent ("Are you a software engineer? are you a senior at TW?"). Probably just looking for more reasons to bring more insults to the table. "Are you this?" "If you are, how can you not know this? How incompetent". If he'll keep going then I'll just assume his intrapersonal intelligence, social intelligence, and empathy are lacking, and maybe he should work on those rather than criticize others, but yeah, dev shouldn't give him any more attention since in truth it's not a productive conversation at all.

Just a word of advice for him, if he really cares to educate people or create productive conversations: People are less likely to listen to you or take into account your view once you've insulted them. It makes people defensive and even if you are right or wrong in certain situations that really doesn't matter, people will reject your ideas and won't want to hear you if you aren't being respectful. It basically puts a barrier towards any kind of learning. That's a bit of psychological education, and it's also from my own experience because I was not a flawless human being and I made similar mistakes, which is why I feel like mentioning it. Flawed people and bad circumstances create flawed people that create more bad circumstances and more flawed people. That's why a growth mindset and an open mind is necessary, to stop that cycle. No matter how good or above others you might think you are that just might be the farthest from the truth thing in reality. Keep an open mind and seek to also learn from others, because you truly don't know it all. That's how you create a productive conversation, when you are willing to learn from someone just as much as you want them to learn from you, and you stay humble and curious.

Other than all of this, I just want to praise MRay for his work. MRay has been very good with communication, I always see him responding to players. Also great with taking into account player feedback, and the UI changes he made make a huge difference in the enjoyment of the game 👌 All the improvements in this patch have made me quite addicted to the game again, and I've spent 30-40 hours in the last 3 days, so great work devs. Now I'll have to force myself to take a break since I got other responsibilities I should be taking care of, so I'm looking forward to the next patch.

Keep up the good work!
 

MRay

Developer
@AndrewArt Yeah, no need to give him more attention, even the info he's sharing is proving that he's wrong so he's just probably confused.

Glad you like the changes!

We can still make the game better, UI wise or not, so please submit your suggestions to the suggestion sub-forums if you have any and we can discuss them. So more suggestions are always welcomed!
 
One problem i noted. (Not using mods) is that the smithed items fail to be nameable. It just comes out as crafted x weapon. No matter what I name it. And the template resets each time which is really obnoxious.

also you guys need to stop baiting and trolling the developers. We want them to all be like mexxico and communicate with us.
 
Top Bottom