NoRegretz00
Recruit
Yeah but they said they'll be pushing it to live this month and they haven't even released the last beta
-
If you are reporting a bug, please head over to our Technical Support section for Bannerlord.
Beta Patch Notes v1.2.0-v1.2.6
- Thread starter Dejan
- Start date
Users who are viewing this thread
Recruit
I can't process how you can praise C about flexibility while complaining that C# is too complex.
Like, WTF.
Rather than using a special ability, shouldn't each weapon simply have a maximum amount of damage it's able to block (with a skill multiplier so the better you are at using them, the more you can block), with the remainder going through ?
So that daggers can't block heavy hit from polearms, and you can block better with a sword than with an axe ?
Last edited:
Hechicera
Recruit
I will try and field this question since I was in computing in the same era. Power and flexibility can be defined by how many layers above the actual hardware you are. Before C (and Pascal and Fortran and COBOL, all old friends) there was only assembly language. Very obscure to use, but almost obscenely powerful. You can do anything as you are right at the machine pushing its buttons so to speak. C is one layer above the machine so you can usually see how you map to what the machine is actually doing. Us dinosaurs (my first professional job was indeed in assembly) can do most of what we could in assembly in C with some sussing about. The other early languages did a better job of not allowing that, but it was to protect novice programmers from themselves. The flexibility to do anything can be a trap.
Then came abstraction, first of the code layer and object oriented programming. This was handy in that better programmers, theoretically, could write the tricky stuff, and then other programmers could quickly reuse it. Then came virtual machines and abstraction of the hardware layer. Now for writing code once and then having it run on multiple platforms, this is quite handy. They are time saving, but they do take you away from communicating directly with the machine. And you are playing "telephone". What you type tells the software layer what you want to do, abstractly, which tells the software layer under that what to do. Then that tells the virtual machine compiler what you want it to do. Then the virtual machine code tells the actual hardware what to do. Tracking a tricky bug through that IS complex. And the code is not more powerful, just more labor saving to make.
So the statement makes sense. But no one wants to go back to the days where making a game like Bannerlord was coded in assembly on PCs (and every GPU known to man) and each console! Plain C is as close to to that as you can get today.
TL;DR abstraction
Meme TL;DR puny abstraction, I have wielded the true power to do anything that is assembly language
They have 19 business days left - not a lot if you're chronically mismanaged.
I remember Assembly (MASM), I wrote some graphic functionality in it, I still remember the starting address for a CGA graphics card - B800:0000 Hex. Almost finished graphics functionality when everyone went EGA cards .. ouch! (BA00:0000 from memory?) But this code impressed on my Resume, and I got the job ... so. The other languages that was available back then was GW-Basic and "C" . I remember programming in Basic on CPM machine (8 bit), games like Haunted House, Goldex, etc ,you had to reprogram ASCII characters and only had 80 X 40 screen graphics
All the time I was programming in Assembly, I was imagining roman legions marching across the screen .. then burst into tears, knowing I was DECADES away from this.
Macewindu16
Recruit
When in November is this releasing?
No the statement doesn't make sense. Reread the quote : "I can't process how you can praise C about flexibility while complaining that C# is too complex."
Praising a language being more powerful due to being "closer to the metal" is one thing I can understand. But by essence, being that close means being much more complex and touchy to use. So complaining at the same time about the complexity of C# makes no sense. C# is MUCH SIMPLER, because, precisely, abstraction means you don't have to micromanage that much and worry about all the problem of working so close to the hardware.
TurkishEconomy
Regular
Yes, the Bannerlord project has been completely mismanaged from the top down. The lack of polish and years-long bugs really highlights that the current/final(?) game is not a quality product. I am actually shocked they're able to retain employees, because as a developer, I would not want to have this on my resume.
Gadheras
Squire
So what are you developing?
Ok, it's not too complex for Mr Wonderful but novice gamers will have trouble. C# is based on C++, a complex language, which is based on OOP, a complex concept. "C" on the other hand is a procedural language, one step after another, simple. SQL is a simple procedural DB script language. (you don't need to know any programming language).
1) Obviously, non-developpers will have a problem with modding that requires developper knowledge. Who would have guessed.
2) The entire point is precisely that C# is simpler than C, while you promote C over C# on the grounds of complexity.
So your whole sarcasm is some sort of shooting yourself in the foot and you seem to have trouble not just with C# but with basic reading comprehension and logical thinking.
Saying procedural is simpler than OOP is pretty simplistic to begin with. Like many things in software development, it might be a bit more complex to start, but it ends up making work vastly simpler. I don't even want to imagine how coding Bannerlord in procedural C would be.
Not to add that C# doesn't have to bother with memory management, pointers and other complex safety concerns that C had.
Yeah, because novice gamers won't have trouble with setting up a SQL server and dealing with SQL queries. That's just common novice gamer knowledge.
Mate, just be honest. You learned things in the past for which you got expertise and as such are simple for you, you can't be bothered to learn new things now and as such they are complex for you. That's fine. No problem here. I wouldn't be able nor willing to code anything in Assembly either.
But don't throw BS like "C# is too complex compared to C" or "XML is too complex compared to SQL" (like seriously ?) or implying that "novice gamers" would be able to deal with either modding in SQL or C. All that is just idiotically wrong.
Bannerlords has many faults, but the modding is not one of them, it's absolutely magnificent, and for the very reasons you complain about. Your preferences would make it ten times worse, no more accessible and vastly more limited.
In Bannerlord I can whip up Visual Studio, rewrite the code of any exposed method, make it a mod and change how the game is working.
In 20 mn I can change the damage formula to make armor count. In one hour, I can decide to give my Leadership skill the ability to give XP to my men each day.
Good luck doing this with SQL in a simpler manner.
Last edited:
Hechicera
Recruit
You guys are saying the same thing: C# is easier to use because it is more complex.
C# does a lot for you, which ofc makes using it very efficient. And when everything goes right and all the layers work well (and were written by those "theoretically" better programmers) work is done quickly as good code is reused and all goes well. Until it doesn't. Most of us have heard of Cities: Skylines 2? yes? This blog post:
A great first look at when multiple layers didn't go well, and why. That post isn't relevant to Bannerlord as my understanding is they wrote their own engine. As a retired tools programmer I salute them. Despite a lot of the carping on this forum I suspect Bannerlord has a fairly good code base. Unlike the current state of Unity ...
One of my last professional jobs was working on tools for semiconductor manufacturing. Modern semiconductors are insanely complex. Even after working on the tools to make them, I still feel some of how they work is as close to magic as I can get in real life. Using them however makes anything more efficient. No one says abacus FTW!
C# does a lot for you, which ofc makes using it very efficient. And when everything goes right and all the layers work well (and were written by those "theoretically" better programmers) work is done quickly as good code is reused and all goes well. Until it doesn't. Most of us have heard of Cities: Skylines 2? yes? This blog post:
Why Cities: Skylines 2 performs poorly
blog.paavo.me
A great first look at when multiple layers didn't go well, and why. That post isn't relevant to Bannerlord as my understanding is they wrote their own engine. As a retired tools programmer I salute them. Despite a lot of the carping on this forum I suspect Bannerlord has a fairly good code base. Unlike the current state of Unity ...
One of my last professional jobs was working on tools for semiconductor manufacturing. Modern semiconductors are insanely complex. Even after working on the tools to make them, I still feel some of how they work is as close to magic as I can get in real life. Using them however makes anything more efficient. No one says abacus FTW!
Last edited:
When it's ready.
Beta v1.2.5 is undergoing fixes we identified during the tests - we'll be pushing it out once they have been resolved.
Having a maximum amount of damage a weapon can block would bring some issues, like the player not being able to determine if they can block the incoming attack or not, thus turning it into a gamble, which is undesirable.
However, not being able to block with a dagger as much or as well as with other, let`s say more conventional weapons, makes sense, we`ll bring this up.
Ulfhedinn_
Sergeant at Arms
@Dejan or @Piconi , can we have a final say on the minor factions?
We don't expect any changes anytime soon, but could you at least tell us if there is any intention to improve this feature in the game?
Minor factions should represent alternative gameplay options, each type with its own unique characteristics and objectives...
For example, I would love to join the Wolfskins and lead an insurgent force in Battania!
If you could tell me that, at least that, I could stop holding onto that hope and give up on the vanilla game completely. Thanks.
We don't expect any changes anytime soon, but could you at least tell us if there is any intention to improve this feature in the game?
Minor factions should represent alternative gameplay options, each type with its own unique characteristics and objectives...
For example, I would love to join the Wolfskins and lead an insurgent force in Battania!
If you could tell me that, at least that, I could stop holding onto that hope and give up on the vanilla game completely. Thanks.
