• If you are reporting a bug, please head over to our Technical Support section for Bannerlord.
  • Please note that we've updated the Mount & Blade II: Bannerlord save file system which requires you to take certain steps in order for your save files to be compatible with e1.7.1 and any later updates. You can find the instructions here.

Beta Patch Notes e1.6.1

Users who are viewing this thread

LDominating

Regular
625.jpg
It's harvesting season,finally!
 

Blood Gryphon

Master Knight
WBVC
Does this patch include NPC leaders killing NPC leaders or is that still something being worked out?
I don't see anything in the patch notes (I can't test, away on vacation).

@Duh_TaleWorlds its been since mid june since we heard anything about this, what's the status? last thing we heard you guys were still balancing the death rates
 
Last edited:
The task is in the backlog and will be worked on once more urgent issues have been resolved. If you are looking for a guesstimate I would mark it for 1.6.3.
I find it baffling that something so essential to the balance, simulation & health of campaigns has been deemed this unimportant. We've been dealing with death in player battles only for so long now, to the complete detriment of every medium-long campaign.
 

MArdA TaleWorlds

Community Support & Localization
Community Support
M&BWBWF&SNWVC

Terco_Viejo

Spanish Gifquisition
Grandmaster Knight
As an outside observer, I have stated several times that I do not see the challenges at TW as primarily a dev team problem; it looks mainly like a leadership and planning problem. If I had a criticism of the dev team, it might be that sometimes bugs get in that would not pass a quick desk check if it underwent some ad hoc testing before being pushed.

This is a massively complex system you guys are trying to create and a quite large team is working on it. This requires detailed, well-organized planning and a disciplined execution to a vision. Again, from the outside, it has a number of hallmarks that look like poor, undisciplined, obstinate leadership:

- Recurring bugs.
- "You didn't ask for it, so here it is" features.
- Shoddy implementation of features.
- Obvious severe bugs languishing for extended periods.
- Painfully slow development process.
- No detailed roadmap released.
- Core features missing or broken, including quite a number of features that were implied to be present leading up to EA.
- Weird priorities.

I mostly do not see these as criticisms of the development team so much as top-down problems. It is clear that the dev team has a lot of talent and passion behind it. But you can't just throw a large, talented, and passionate dev team at the problem and expect things to go well.

[...]
+1
giphy.gif


By way of metaphor, right now Taleworlds is asking a dry, sun-burnt soil to generate fresh clumps of grass through the call of "constructive being". Generally speaking, the Community has already filled the quota of "being constructive" by attempting to build irrigation systems and the construction of aqueducts via player-dev to foster a rich soil as an orchard which will sustain the Community.

However, if it doesn't rain, the soil is not nourished; Taleworlds needs to materialise ACTS... even more so at this stage of the development process.

#makeitraintaleworlds
 

Lornloth00

Knight
M&BWBWF&SNWVC
I have noticed in sieges troops wait to charge a breach instead they either wait for the gate to be broken by the battering ram then ignore the breaches or they wait for the ram to break the gate and some troops go through the breaches and others go through the broken gate simultaneously. Is this intended? When I have taken command and transferred all units to one division with a breached castle its best to rush the breaches and ignore using the battering ram. Most of the time I do this I defeat the enemy. Wouldn't it make more sense for attackers to prioritize a castle wall's breaches rather than using the ram at all? Pushing the ram seems to lead to more casualties rather than rushing after the weakened least guarded breach. IIRC the same has happened with other siege machines on the attacker side the AI prioritizes the use of equipment rather the vunerabilities of the defenders.
 

Spinozart1

Knight
I have noticed in sieges troops wait to charge a breach instead they either wait for the gate to be broken by the battering ram then ignore the breaches or they wait for the ram to break the gate and some troops go through the breaches and others go through the broken gate simultaneously. Is this intended? When I have taken command and transferred all units to one division with a breached castle its best to rush the breaches and ignore using the battering ram. Most of the time I do this I defeat the enemy. Wouldn't it make more sense for attackers to prioritize a castle wall's breaches rather than using the ram at all? Pushing the ram seems to lead to more casualties rather than rushing after the weakened least guarded breach. IIRC the same has happened with other siege machines on the attacker side the AI prioritizes the use of equipment rather the vunerabilities of the defenders.
I have noticed the same thing.
When joining an army and assaulting a settlement with a breach, AI will still prioritize the ram.
Maybe you could update AI behaviour so the breach in the wall is considered before the use of the ram, or something like that.
 
Project management at this scale is a completely different animal from a few people creating their first indie game.

Well, it sure is different, but TW still qualifies as a small business. LinkedIn shows a total staff of 124 employees, including interns. If anything, project management would become easier, providing you put the right management in and have a competent director steering the ship. The scope in which you have to function narrows the bigger you become.
 

Gandamula

Sergeant at Arms
Anyone still get frame drops/lags when open menus/inventory/troops etc? Never happened on earlier versions and now its so frustrating with 5-10 second load times when ever opening any in game menu.
It happens to me since 1.5.9, I tried the 1.6.0 and happened the same, that's why I'm rolled back for 1.5.8, for me is something related with the HD use, maybe the early versions loaded the inventory from ram, but now it loads from the HD. Some people with ssds don't have this problem. I don't understand nothing about programming, but they may want less ram occupied due people with low ram computers.
 

AndrewArt

Squire
I wish for more perks for the next patches, we are still waiting for some fairly game-changing ones. Don't forget about the Roguery tree-defining perk that allows us to recruit big armies of bandits!

Another cool feature would be if you could tell your companion what kind of troops they should prioritize to recruit. (same culture/different culture/ or bandits, // or just regular troops/ or bandits). That way we could tell a companion with high roguery to go around recruiting bandits which would be really cool, and it allows the companions to up their roguery skill (we also need recruitable thugs on the streets of towns so that both we/and the companions can start our recruitment there early-on and gain roguery skill. Please make it a thing!

And we still need traits to somehow affect what a companion/lord prefers doing. A companion with high roguery and "evil" traits should prefer to raid villages/chase down caravans/villager parties and heavily pillage towns more than a good-natured leader which would ignore those kind of things most of the time.
 
Last edited:
Top Bottom