I guess because I have never played out the story to see what happens. Generally, the only thing I like about it is that the only useful companion is the brother.
-
If you are reporting a bug, please head over to our Technical Support section for Bannerlord.
Beta Patch Notes e1.7.1
- Thread starter Callum
- Start date
Users who are viewing this thread
I guess because I have never played out the story to see what happens. Generally, the only thing I like about it is that the only useful companion is the brother.
TengriBless
Banned
I've played it through a couple of times and even I couldn't ****in tell ya. It's that unmemorable. Except for the bit where the old gran jumpscares you so hard when she starts audibly speaking mid-dialogue that it made me tab out to see if I'd forgotten to close my browser because it is that uncharacteristic of this game series. Oh and I guess you follow some nasty set narrative and acquire a banner to save a world or empire you have neither an investment in nor even a single bleedin clue about. Then you do that and LE EPIC TITLE DROP ???YOU ARE NOW LORD ?OF THE BANNER - LITERALLY ??? A BANNERLORD?
So in summary it's a crock of unadulterated ****.
Is the story even complete? All I remember is how awful it was and begging for sandbox mode which is more in line with the original M&B. This happened to with Viking Conquest: they had to add a story mode to it.
five bucks
Knight at Arms
Not much has changed. The campaign story starts off reasonably strong with the sensible motivation of finding your captured family, then the weird segue into the dragon banner section of the quest, then you meet Arzagos and Istiana in person and they have quite good dialogue and justification for their respective viewpoints, which is great for immersion.
After that, the quality drops off sharply, and the rest of the campaign is grindan quests, delivered through textboxes, with no character interaction and questionable logic behind them (why can't I just go kill Arzagos in Marunath when he's organising a conspiracy against me and I literally know where he lives?) followed by the experience of the last three kingdoms declaring on you simeltaneously and the resulting slow slow grind to take enough of their fiefs to force surrender, capped off by an extremely anticlimactic ending which is just a textbox saying "you win".
And doing the entire campaign in the first place is of dubious value too, because giving the Dragon Banner to a faction leader doesn't benefit you whatsoever, you make three kingdoms auto-declare on you at once, and you waste a lot of time doing the conspiracy quests.
The two good things about the campaign from a gameplay perspective is that it removes a little bit of grind from painting the whole map by making enemy kingdoms surrender when you take half their territory, and you get free family members as a reward for doing the Radagos quest.
Making the later stages of the campaign better - more benefit to the player for doing it, more drama and storytelling with characters, a more satisfying climax - would be great, but honestly while the current one is in a barely serviceable state and we have Sandbox, I'd prefer TW improves the sandbox first and tackles the main quest last.
Last edited:
They do not surrender, when the campaign forces them to surrender, it is peace for 2 days with luck a bit more, but then they declare war again.
(Campaign peace has no truce period for AI factions)
The campaign wars should lock factions in perma peace and not to be able to declare war against the player faction, after that or they should rework the quest, to destroy the 3 factions, after completion.
five bucks
Knight at Arms
I would even say they could rework it so that once you're getting close to winning, the three factions form a Grand Alliance mega-huge-army you have to defeat, and if you do the rest of their fiefs all surrender, you get a satisfying end cutscene, and you win without having to go through the slow process of painting the whole map once you've already beaten all the difficult enemies.
xGreedo
Regular
oooh that is good.
Sounds good, so it won´t happen
не знаю как написать разработчикам, надеюсь, они читают этот форум. когда предлагаешь лидеру клана скрепить союз женитьбой , он предлагает зачастую неподходящую кандидатуру, например, моему сыну 18, а ему предлагают 40-летнюю невесту вместо ее 18-летней дочери, поэтому было бы неплохо добавить опцию выбора подходящего партнера
It's a bit different. For the imperial side, a defeat should mean a defeat - with the remaining forces and holdings joining one of the remaining imperial pretender factions which goes somewhat in the direction of
except that it seeks to limit the scripted behavior and utilize the general sandbox mechanics - which is probably also the reason why you (sometimes) can see a new declaration of war after "defeating" an anti-imperial kingdom. It ends the scripted, enforced war but returns the factions to the general sandbox mechanics. (IIRC, though, if you are king of your "supported" imperial faction, you can reject the peace offer of the barbarian faction and end them for good... to avoid any such "backstabbing".)
I found this to be incredibly weak as well. Viking Conquest had you start on a boat at sea with your mother -thats adding a new mechanic (boat travel/warfare) right off the bat for the "WOW!" factor, you experience the attack on your boat and your Mother gets killed. Thats a strong case for revenge right there.
In Bannerlord there is no new mechanic introduced at the Start, feels like more of the same from old games (attack a bandit hideout/train with weapons guy) and even the story of kids being kidnapped is just told to you -its utterly devoid of anything interesting or not cliche whatsoever. Plot felt like something conjured up on a morning coffee conference Zoom meeting. They need some real motivated writers in there.
we got any idea when we will get a hotfix, the reinforcements joining the wrong formations in battles and not being able to increase cohesion really sucks
five bucks
Knight at Arms
I appreciate that TW is trying to do a good thing by avoiding excessive scripting, but is a little scripting actually bad for campaign mode? Wasn't the point of having a campaign to create a more structured path through the game?
You have a problem in Bannerlord right now where a lot of people are saying the endgame drags on, for two main reasons. Once you get to 40% of territory taken, everyone constantly declares war on you without any pacing, without any breathing room, for a long, repetitive slog of battle after battle after battle after battle after battle after battle after battle after battle. Battles lose their sense of uniqueness because they lack tactical depth or balance and faction troop trees feel too samey, but even if TW fixes those issues there are just too many battles needed to complete the game, and most battles only have minor impact on the enemy's ability to war.
Then eventually, once you get to about 60% of territory conquered, there are no more credible threats. The game loses all challenge, but the enemy still doesn't realise they're beaten. So in order to get your endorphin hit for painting the whole map you have to sit through a prolonged anticlimax. (This problem applied to Warband as well).
Wouldn't it be more satisfying and fun to condense a lot of the lategame battles into one big challenging battle which wins you the game, and skips that boring last part when you win it?
A climactic moment where you break the enemy, like the Battle of Mankizert, the Battle of Tours, the Battle of Marathon... Even Bannerlord's backstory has a huge climactic battle, the Battle of Pendraic.
Considering Sandbox mode has completely unscripted gameplay, I think it wouldn't hurt to add a bit more scripting to the Campaign mode to make it a more satisfying experience.
With all this said obviously getting the sandbox working right is the much higher priority.
Last edited:
Wait. We're a couple of months away from the release date aren't we? Assuming it hasn't changed.
I am seeing LOTS of crashes when interacting with the Smithing UI. For example, in Free Build, clicking on a category. The really weird thing is that when I relaunch, the resolution setting has changed.
EDIT - I have a saved game where this happens every time. Click free build then one hand. If any devs are interested, shoot me a message and I can send you the save.
EDIT - I have a saved game where this happens every time. Click free build then one hand. If any devs are interested, shoot me a message and I can send you the save.
The best way to process these would be to open a topic in the support section (these are then associated with our internal tickets and updated based on them). Similarly, if you are prompted with the dump uploader absolutely DO upload the dump. It helps immensely.
If you haven't and won't do either of those and the savegame is vanilla, I can forward it as well.
Curious if they have any real Quality Assurance testers -i mean actually paid people outside of each Dept's cubicle that play the game -trying to break it and more importantly give feedback on Midgame and LateGame pleasurability. I really wanna know what they find satisfying with the game at that stage -what is exciting what are they hoping to achieve and what is the payoff?
All of that is possible with the confines of a Sandbox experience if done right.
All of that is possible with the confines of a Sandbox experience if done right.
When will patch 1.7.2 be released? Today or tomorrow?
