Community Feedback-based EARLY ACCESS ROADMAP - ready for you, Taleworlds!

Does this roadmap represent your basic wants for Bannerlord?

  • Yes

    Votes: 286 86.9%
  • No

    Votes: 43 13.1%

  • Total voters
    329

Users who are viewing this thread

Apocal

Grandmaster Knight
Only thread on the forums where people are mad about the new terrain system
It isn't. It went from 100% approval on announcement to a bunch of people being mad because it hasn't been released yet and now has gone on to complete its journey as a terrible feature that no one asked for.

It's a game forum man. People are gonna be salty. 🤷‍♂️
 
If I'm in the loop, I understand this is to save space; however, I wouldn't be able to use those lacking a terrain for a mod?
I think you can use them but not change them. And, yes, sharing the scene data for the majority of scenes would significantly bloat the tool download. We are intending to add a couple more editable scenes though.

@Duh_TaleWorlds So do you mean there's no code involved in the battle terrain system at all and everything with the feature is done by the scene artists?
The battle terrain system is making progress. Most of the work is currently going towards scene creation.
But, not to be obtuse, what I was saying is that the BTS did not and does not block the addition of books. Not that that really was MVs sole argument, but that's already been gone over.

But I am using it as one of multiple examples of an ongoing trend where TW is incapable of even committing to features that people expected when they bought the game, but they come up with new features that almost nobody expected or asked for, and are able to commit to those.
Unwilling != incapable. I don't really know why you are returning to this discussion as it is just looping through the same points. To put it briefly
  • What you desire is not necessarily what decision makers or the majority of users desire
    • It isn't particularly meaningful to say "but everyone wants these things listed here" because, of course, most folks will be happy to express their desire for any addition in isolation (just like the battle terrain system). The difficulty arises when you have to make a choice between them.
      • Thus priorities should remain flexible to be adjusted based on what is learned about assumed costs and benefits as time passes.
  • This and many other topics attest that announcements / commitments should only be made if they are really solid
  • Given the previous point and that we are pursuing an agile rather than a waterfall approach to development and features/content, that means features/content shouldn't be confirmed / committed to early.
 

Phantom425

Sergeant
What you desire is not necessarily what decision makers or the majority of users desire
If you don’t mind me asking, how does TW, if you do, take community suggestions in terms of features coming to BL? I guess what I am asking is how does TW weigh different ideas/suggestions from the forums/reddit/steam pages against the internal design, and how likely is it that fan suggestions be added to the game?
 
Leaving aside the scene design work, the terrain battle system almost certainly required some code work. And that effort could have been used on implementing multiple lower effort features that people expected when they bought the game. Or a single feature of similar size, like the criminal workshops.
To be fair, the coding work for a BTS-like feature is fairly simple (choosing the right map and some kind of dynamic spawn points based on overland map positioning - there's more work in testing the maps here than coding). It still takes someone's time though to test the maps, and these are probably the poor QA guys again who could be testing million books instead. :smile:
I'm afraid we can't argue with Duh about the irrationality of choosing to do these maps in the middle of EA when there are so many other things that players wanted, because it's a done deal and Duh will always defend it as a loyal employee, no matter what he really thinks. (Be sure to buy his tell-all autobiography when he retires from Taleworlds, "Up Butter Creek Without a Paddle".)
 
If you don’t mind me asking, how does TW, if you do, take community suggestions in terms of features coming to BL? I guess what I am asking is how does TW weigh different ideas/suggestions from the forums/reddit/steam pages against the internal design, and how likely is it that fan suggestions be added to the game?
Regarding the part of the collection and processing, I recently shared an earlier post of mine

I feel that part of the frustration comes from a lack of understanding / certainty about community feedback. So I will try to shine some light on the processes. To begin with, we gain and process information from players in a variety of ways. The most straight forward ones are probably our dump-uploader and technical support section. Anything that comes in through these avenues has a very high probability to be investigated. Naturally, it isn't just blind activity either - we try to prioritize problems along the lines of prominence, so that anything that impacts many players is resolved as soon as possible. I think this is particularly evident during the first few months of the Early Access where many patches focused on stabilizing the game. I know there are posts that don't much care for bug fixes or performance improvements, but to me, it was and is the right call to make sure that as many people as possible are able to play the game that they purchased.

The next most apparent avenue is the beta branch, which allows for a closer collaboration between developers and the community - and has verifiably led to good feature adjustments (the most recent example that comes to mind for me is the pillaging feature). Patches in general are, of course, always an opportunity for constructive discussion and so are the releases of our priority statements (where I believe a fair few questions are answered when players post them). Less overt, but also important, are things like the closed (and open) tests that are conducted with members of the multiplayer community as well as our direct lines of discussion with community volunteers or, for instance, the closed testing and workshops we did with some of our modders ahead of the release of the modding tools.

Beyond that, both individual developers (of whom not everyone may feel comfortable posting) as well as the community staff read through and take notes from our various community platforms and other outlets. This is processed both in unstructured, individual discussions as well as regular, dedicated meetings where we go over suggestions. Similarly, what we observe in the community discussions informs our internal prioritization as well. Which brings us to

And that's not just an empty claim either. Just last week Dejan and Callum organized a small survey about the scene editor. Suggestion meetings still take place for singleplayer, multiplayer and modding. There are continuous, albeit closed combat tests with a range of MP community testers afaik. Developers engage with users on the forums and on discord.// copy pasta from another post

To add further to it, the various platforms also compile the hot topics being discussed (Dejan handles the collection for the forums).

testing million books instead.
For whatever reason this made me think of the infinite monkey theorem, which in turn reminded me of one of my favorite books - Fool on the hill. I must now read it again.
 

five bucks

Squire
Only thread on the forums where people are mad about the new terrain system
Definitely not mad. I like the concept of the feature, it's good, I just think that it's one symptom of an overall negative trend. If terrain battle systems was the only thing TW was doing that (basically) nobody asked for, I wouldn't have put it there on the list.

There are three reasons for the OP:
* list "community expectations" in one convenient place, while keeping them within the scope of what TW has actually said or implied, to be fair to TW.
* track what TW has done successfully, and has not done so far, to be fair to TW. I've spent some time defending what TW has actually accomplished.
* make it clear to TW that as they said they want to "make the game to community expectations", they should be prioritizing that. Not prioritizing what the "decision makers" desire. The "decision makers" actually recieved hundreds of millions of dollars to provide the game to the community and either indicated or promised it would be a certain way.
What you desire is not necessarily what decision makers or the majority of users desire. It isn't particularly meaningful to say "but everyone wants these things listed here" because, of course, most folks will be happy to express their desire for any addition in isolation (just like the battle terrain system). The difficulty arises when you have to make a choice between them.
If majorities are the question here, where was the big wellspring of people demanding that TW implement a battle terrain feature? I saw one (1) thread, from one guy, with one reply. I think most people assumed that TW would just add new maps to the existing, functional system whose main flaw was lacking enough scenes.
And I've seen no discussion anywhere requesting battle sally outs or unique AI party templates or barbershops or faction rewards.

Again, before this discussion gets railroaded too far down arguing about individual features, I want to stress that I like and appreciate these features, and don't want TW to stop work on them, and nobody else does either.

The only reason I started putting things under that heading (which AxiosXiphos questioned, starting this discussion we wouldn't be having otherwise) is because it seems like there's a growing trend of features getting committed to that nobody, or very few people, asked for, while ones which definitely are getting asked for by many more people (regardless of if they are a majority) will not be committed to.
 

AxiosXiphos

Sergeant Knight
M&BWBWF&SNWVC
Definitely not mad. I like the concept of the feature, it's good, I just think that it's one symptom of an overall negative trend. If terrain battle systems was the only thing TW was doing that (basically) nobody asked for, I wouldn't have put it there on the list.

There are three reasons for the OP:
* list "community expectations" in one convenient place, while keeping them within the scope of what TW has actually said or implied, to be fair to TW.
* track what TW has done successfully, and has not done so far, to be fair to TW. I've spent some time defending what TW has actually accomplished.
* make it clear to TW that as they said they want to "make the game to community expectations", they should be prioritizing that. Not prioritizing what the "decision makers" desire. The "decision makers" actually recieved hundreds of millions of dollars to provide the game to the community and either indicated or promised it would be a certain way.

If majorities are the question here, where was the big wellspring of people demanding that TW implement a battle terrain feature? I saw one (1) thread, from one guy, with one reply. I think most people assumed that TW would just add new maps to the existing, functional system whose main flaw was lacking enough scenes.
And I've seen no discussion anywhere requesting battle sally outs or unique AI party templates or barbershops or faction rewards.

Again, before this discussion gets railroaded too far down arguing about individual features, I want to stress that I like and appreciate these features, and don't want TW to stop work on them, and nobody else does either.

The only reason I started putting things under that heading (which AxiosXiphos questioned, starting this discussion we wouldn't be having otherwise) is because it seems like there's a growing trend of features getting committed to that nobody, or very few people, asked for, while ones which definitely are getting asked for by many more people (regardless of if they are a majority) will not be committed to.
I don't disagree with you per se - but I think this community (as a whole) over-values features from Warband and under-values new features.

I hate to keep using it... but it is the perfect example. The Books. That is barely a feature lets be honest. A non-interactive way of slowly gaining additional skill points. Most players probably never even used it or really knew about it. Certainly most mods just forgot about it. Yet it is valued so highly by this community because it is in Warband - and that seems to be the only reason. In an alternate universe somewhere that feature didn't exist in warband and no one ever missed its absence.

Another one - feasts. An interruptive event that damaged the game balance with about 2 lines of dialogue attached. TW could hopefully turn this into something more dynamic or interesting for Bannerlord... but again it is only valued because it is in Warband.

I love this thread - because I think it's the perfect way out outlining the expectations of the community. And I have always found you to be honest and fairly unbiased in what features you consider finished for bannerlord. However - and it's not just you but the community as a whole - we all seem very dismissive of much larger new features and much more demanding of much smaller old features.

For example I didn't see the respec feature mentioned anywhere? That seems like a really significant option I've personally wanted for ages.... yet as far as I can see its been ignored?

It would seem fairer to me to just have a list of all the features separated by category based on their type (Combat, Campaign etc). Giving them arbitrary rankings... just seems unfair.

Bannerlord in many ways is like the Hobbit trilogy. On it's own a perfectly competent and fun movie with great action sequences and special effects. However it is regarded poorly because it is the sequel (prequel) to the LOTR trilogy; perfection in movie form. I find bannerlord suffers from the same fate.
 
Last edited:

five bucks

Squire
I hate to keep using it... but it is the perfect example. The Books. That is barely a feature lets be honest. A non-interactive way of slowly gaining additional skill points. Most players probably never even used it or really knew about it. Certainly most mods just forgot about it. Yet it is valued so highly by this community because it is in Warband - and that seems to be the only reason. In an alternate universe somewhere that feature didn't exist in warband and no one ever missed its absence.
I think you're really over-focusing on a single example instead of the main point at hand, but anyway, skill books would be very little effort to implement relative to some other features, and would provide a way for players who didn't like the "learn by doing" aspect of Bannerlord's new skills system to pay to level up a skill without directly practicing it. One prime example would be Engineering; the player rarely gets opportunities to exercise the skill until later in the game. So it's not just "we want it because it was in Warband"- though that is definitely a factor. It's also because it fills a useful role.

There are quite a few people on the forums I've seen who have asked for a similar feature like skill trainers from Skyrim. So obviously even people new to the series, who don't know it was in Warband, feel the need for something like that in the game.

Duh_ has said in the past that they would want to improve levelling before introducing a factor like skill books that could confound feedback and that's fine by me.
Another one - feasts. An interruptive event that damaged the game balance with about 2 lines of dialogue attached... it is only valued because it is in Warband.
We've covered this, dude: https://forums.taleworlds.com/index...most-in-bannerlord.445379/page-5#post-9733287
I love this thread - because I think it's the perfect way out outlining the expectations of the community. And I have always found you to be honest and fairly unbiased in what features you consider finished for bannerlord. However - and it's not just you but the community as a whole - we all seem very dismissive of much larger new features and much more demanding of much smaller old features.
Well thank you. I'm not dismissive of their value and keep saying I appreciate it. I'm just worried that TW is going to keep coming up with random new features and leave behind the ones we were supposed to have.
For example I didn't see the respec feature mentioned anywhere? That seems like a really significant option I've personally wanted for ages.... yet as far as I can see its been ignored?
Have you realised that "really significant option" is actually a similar type of feature to skill books (allowing the player to alter their skills how they want), which you say is unimportant? But yeah I forgot. I will put it under 2.
It would seem fairer to me to just have a list of all the features separated by category based on their type (Combat, Campaign etc).
Again, part of the point of this post since it was made is asking TW to prioritise what the community is asking for, specifically what people who bought the game expecting it to be a proper sequel to Warband or expecting the advertised crime system wanted.
Giving them arbitrary rankings... just seems unfair.
It's not ""arbitrary"" at all, the reasons are clearly given at the top of each category. I'm being very fair to TW. I actively defend them when people say they haven't accomplished anything. But I am also realistic about what they have achieved.

Also I really appreciate the announcement of the Warband features which are returning, and even appreciate the stuff they have announced which is in category 4, and have said as much repeatedly, but I just don't want them to keep bringing random features in while stuff people are actually asking for gets ignored and may possibly never make it in.
 

AxiosXiphos

Sergeant Knight
M&BWBWF&SNWVC
I think you're really over-focusing on a single example instead of the main point at hand, but anyway, skill books would be very little effort to implement relative to some other features, and would provide a way for players who didn't like the "learn by doing" aspect of Bannerlord's new skills system to pay to level up a skill without directly practicing it. One prime example would be Engineering; the player rarely gets opportunities to exercise the skill until later in the game. So it's not just "we want it because it was in Warband"- though that is definitely a factor. It's also because it fills a useful role.

There are quite a few people on the forums I've seen who have asked for a similar feature like skill trainers from Skyrim. So obviously even people new to the series, who don't know it was in Warband, feel the need for something like that in the game.

Duh_ has said in the past that they would want to improve levelling before introducing a factor like skill books that could confound feedback and that's fine by me.

We've covered this, dude: https://forums.taleworlds.com/index...most-in-bannerlord.445379/page-5#post-9733287

Well thank you. I'm not dismissive of their value and keep saying I appreciate it. I'm just worried that TW is going to keep coming up with random new features and leave behind the ones we were supposed to have.

Have you realised that "really significant option" is actually a similar type of feature to skill books (allowing the player to alter their skills how they want), which you say is unimportant? But yeah I forgot. I will put it under 2.

Again, part of the point of this post since it was made is asking TW to prioritise what the community is asking for, specifically what people who bought the game expecting it to be a proper sequel to Warband or expecting the advertised crime system wanted.

It's not ""arbitrary"" at all, the reasons are clearly given at the top of each category. I'm being very fair to TW. I actively defend them when people say they haven't accomplished anything. But I am also realistic about what they have achieved.

Also I really appreciate the announcement of the Warband features which are returning, and even appreciate the stuff they have announced which is in category 4, and have said as much repeatedly, but I just don't want them to keep bringing random features in while stuff people are actually asking for gets ignored and may possibly never make it in.
Well at the end of the day it's your thread and your work. If I can't convince you (and it doesn't appear I will be able to) then there is no point arguing about it. There is of course nothing preventing me making my own list my own way - but also no need.

Still thank you for adding the respec issue and thank you for your work on this. That's a big one for me - I've been banging on about it for awhile.
 

five bucks

Squire
Well at the end of the day it's your thread and your work. If I can't convince you (and it doesn't appear I will be able to) then there is no point arguing about it. There is of course nothing preventing me making my own list my own way - but also no need.

Still thank you for adding the respec issue and thank you for your work on this. That's a big one for me - I've been banging on about it for awhile.
Hakuna Matata brother!
 

five bucks

Squire
Updated list to take into account the things in patch 1.6.2 which resolved issues or implemented features:

* Performance improvements.
* Numerous bug/crash fixes.
* New Khuzait crown.
* New Aserai/Battania armors.
* Spear Bracing for AI feature implementation for singleplayer and multiplayer!!
* Dialogue improvements.
* Seems to have resolved the weird creepy smiles for female NPCs issue- will need to get more info but going to list it as fixed from what I've seen.
* An item with inappropriate stats was switched.
* Numerous adjustments and implementations for modding/at the request of modders.

All up, small patch, but great patch!
 
Last edited:
Another one - feasts. An interruptive event that damaged the game balance with about 2 lines of dialogue attached. TW could hopefully turn this into something more dynamic or interesting for Bannerlord... but again it is only valued because it is in Warband.
I agree with you that I hope that Taleworlds could turn it in something more interesting than the feast system in warband and only in peacetime.
I do think it is a missing part of gameplay that has links to a lot of game systems .

One problem at the moment is the creating of armies in peace time. This prevents lords from fighting bandits or perform other tasks. The same army recruitment/influence spending mechanic could be used for something similar to feast + high level tournaments. It would be a great opportunity for relation building with specific nobles in the kingdom. But again it could use some more dialogue and intrigue options.

Benefits:
interesting tournament
extra way of increasing relations
gives the AI something to spend influence on
Marriage opportunities
Boost to the hosting city loyalty

but I agree with you that just reusing features because it was in warband is not a good argument.
I could personally not care less about books, but I hope that the suprise attacks by assassins make a return.
 
I honestly think the AI in general will need an overhaul. Anything the AI touches. So like Diplomacy, How they fight in battles and sieges, how they handle everything I guess. That is one thing I would really like to see. I see they touch them here and there but its just not enough to say the AI are moving in the right direction. Well I cant entirely say that but still more bad that outweighs the good. Hopefully with time that will all change.
 

five bucks

Squire
Update to this list based on what was changed in 1.6.3:

* Performance improvements.
* Multiple bug/crash fixes.
* The least expensive horses are now used first when upgrading troops.
* NPCs can now die in simulated battles.
* Fixed NPCs dying too often in real battles.
* Ornate battle crown added for Aserai lords.
* Companion focus point/attribute distribution maybe fixed? Will need to make sure.
* Workshops can now produce lowest/highest tier items.
* Emissaries getting less relation gain basically fixes the relation gain sound spam issue.
* Multiple improvements for modders.
 
Last edited:
Well done! We have to do our part as well. Voicing our opinions and voting is all we have and it is great to see constructive posts not just moaning and complaints. Keep up the good work and don't give up brother.
 
Top Bottom