Companions to nobles

[Noudelle]

Why not just go ahead and simulate every single NPC and billager and peasant if we are going to go this deep into the mechanics and think that this is a good idea?

There's a good chance they are.

No, because that's just a dumb thing to do.

 

[TehRalph]

Why not just go ahead and simulate every single NPC and billager and peasant if we are going to go this deep into the mechanics and think that this is a good idea?

There's a good chance they are.

No, because that's just a dumb thing to do.

Why is it a dumb thing to do?

 

[Noudelle]

Why not just go ahead and simulate every single NPC and billager and peasant if we are going to go this deep into the mechanics and think that this is a good idea?

There's a good chance they are.

No, because that's just a dumb thing to do.

Why is it a dumb thing to do?

Massive developpement cost, massive CPU demand for constantly simulating every action of every character in the world which will number in the thousands if they truly want to simulate every character.

 

[Lord Engineer (Castor)]

Why not just go ahead and simulate every single NPC and billager and peasant if we are going to go this deep into the mechanics and think that this is a good idea?

There's a good chance they are.

No, because that's just a dumb thing to do.

Why is it a dumb thing to do?

Massive developpement cost, massive CPU demand for constantly simulating every action of every character in the world which will number in the thousands if they truly want to simulate every character.

While I'm not sure about the cost I do agree that to try and simulate everything would a monumental task and require a lot from the CPU.
If they were to include something like this they could simulate groups as collectives instead of individuals. Why wouldn't they when trying to simulate every part of everything is such an impossibility. So you would simulate [Merchant + Followers] as a whole instead of [Merchant] + [Follower 1] + [Follower 2] ... [Follower n], at least that's how I reckon it should work.
Should help save on processing power, or at least it should. I don't know I am not a programmer.

Also, to the former multicoloured runner, I don't reckon this is going massively deep into the mechanics, at least not to the level of simulating every action of every entity as you said.

 

[lolbash]

I don't reckon this is going massively deep into the mechanics, at least not to the level of simulating every action of every entity as you said.

Yes it is. Training employees and insignificant people for skills and immersion is one step further into simulating the entire world. Developememt time has to go to make sure this is simulated correctly and balanced for fun. And all of this effort just so you can see more named npcs for some insiginificant sword cleaner or a watermelon handler?

Theres a reason they created copy paste NPCs for shopkeepers and villagers. To make developememt time much easier and it really does not sacrifice much immersion at all. I seriously do not need a complex tree of follower and companion code and balanced skillset to understand and get understand that the person cleaning the floor is the janitor.

 

[Lord Engineer (Castor)]

I don't reckon this is going massively deep into the mechanics, at least not to the level of simulating every action of every entity as you said.

Yes it is. Training employees and insignificant people for skills and immersion is one step further into simulating the entire world. Developememt time has to go to make sure this is simulated correctly and balanced for fun. And all of this effort just so you can see more named npcs for some insiginificant sword cleaner or a watermelon handler?

Theres a reason they created copy paste NPCs for shopkeepers and villagers. To make developememt time much easier and it really does not sacrifice much immersion at all. I seriously do not need a complex tree of follower and companion code and balanced skillset to understand and get understand that the person cleaning the floor is the janitor.

I don't want to see more uniquely named NPCs instead I want to see simple, non-combative units that can be upgraded like normal ones that assist companions with their roles in the party. I believe I pointed this out in my post originally suggesting this idea, citing followers as being troops (and thus unnamed generic NPCs).

I do not want to name every shopkeeper or villager or otherwise inconsequential NPC in the game. I don't believe I ever stated as such.

As for merchants and shopkeepers, they are simply people required to run your businesses. The more skilled they are, the more money they'll bring in. You need a certain amount of them to run a business and that's it.

 

[lolbash]

I don't want to see more uniquely named NPCs instead I want to simple, non-combative units that can be upgraded like normal ones that assit companions with their roles in the party.

As for merchants and shopkeepers, they are simply people required to run your businesses. The more skilled they are, the more money they'll bring in. You need a certain amount of them to run a business and that's it.

This role can be easily filled with a simple copy paste unit that have an upgrade path with a click of one button. Similar to what we have for troops right now, but instead of skills being set for combat they have skills or perks set for trading or whatever you want in a shopkeeper.

Companions already can lead their own segment of an army in Bannerlord, there is no need to code companions for your companions. I inagine this can be easily modded too, as simple as change the stats of a unit and check the box that says "non combative = true".

 

[Rabies]

Why not just go ahead and simulate every single NPC and billager and peasant if we are going to go this deep into the mechanics and think that this is a good idea?

It's a good idea. A great idea, in fact. Whether or not it's practical or necessary for Bannerlord is another matter, though.

There was a game that came out (I think) in the early 2000s called "Republic". It was supposed to be a politics sim set in a former soviet republic, where you had to try to gain influence and work your way up from an anonymous citizen to become president, using whatever methods you wanted - political canvassing, economic influence, violence and mob activity, etc. If I remember rightly, the character background creation wasn't that far off what M&B has in Warband. Anyway, the pre-release claims of the developers included that every citizen in the game world was simulated individually and could be influenced, recruited, attacked or otherwise interacted with by the player - and that they would number around 1 million individual NPCs. They did fulfill the first part of that, but the total number ended up being far less - but it was certainly in the thousands, I think. The game itself turned out to be pretty boring to play, as many of the advertised features were watered down or dropped. But the point is that simulating every individual NPC in a game world should be possible, even on a large scale like Bannerlord's, if the developers choose to go down that route from the beginning. Whether it's worth doing in a Mount & Blade game that is up for debate, though.

To me, it'd be amazing if they could pull it off. Warband's Calradia feels a bit static - as if the world and its inhabitants are just hanging around waiting for the player to do something. Bannerlord promises to improve on that (dynamic economy that tracks goods and resources as they are produced, traded and processed around the map), but obviously not as far as simulating peasants, townsmen and soldiers as individuals. I think Taleworlds should be trying to achieve a "living world" feel, at least to a similar level to the Grand Theft Auto games. To do that, I think more of the NPCs need to be observable actually doing things, going about their lives - and at a lower level of 'society' that just the lords and kings. Crucially, the players needs to be able to interfere with, disrupt or assist their activities, and that to have a real and noticeable effect on the state of that part of the gameworld.

 

[lolbash]

It's a good idea. A great idea, in fact.

Yes it is

if they could pull it off.

They won't. Not in the next couple decades or so. You are asking too much from Taleworlds. The ability to program an entire world is not an easy task at all. And since Bannerlord is not a simulator, rather a bideo game, it should stay that way and focus on what makes the game fun.

If you want to deepest world simulator currently on market, ypu should consider looking into Dwarf Fortress. And even after about 12 years of constant developement the game is still considered halfway done by the Developers. Its simply too much of a massive feat to even consider for a 60 dollar video game.

 

[NPC99]

Warband's companions had individual as opposed to generic dialogues. Even though there were only sixteen of them and the depth of their conversations appears limited, it is a modding chore to change them all and a challenge to give them a unique and interesting twist. Bannerlord has already increased its cast of unique companions, I can't see TW going any further.

Everything I've seen suggests dialogue is still either generic or prescripted, apart from some random village gossip. I'd be surprised if TW has developed a system of procedurally generated dialogue that takes into account dialogue parties, world & local circumstances, relationships and companion character. Without that what's the point of more generic companions with cardboard dialogue? How long did it take you to stop asking villagers how hard life was in Warband due to the standard answers?

 

[TehRalph]

My concern is that we're going to run into continuity immersion breakers. So we know permadeath is in the game and this comes with the ability to have children and siblings and continue to play as them when we die. After 80 or so years and you're playing as your grandson, is that notable you get recruits from in the village going to be the same one? Will they have been replaced by another randomly generated notable after a period of time? Will they ever fatally meet their end during a raid? Do they also have families, and children who will follow in their footsteps?

In no way do I advocate "simulating every action of every villager". I just wonder if implementing a surface layer of simulation for NPCs the player will be interacting with. We've been told lords will have families and operate enterprises, thus being simulated to a degree, but how far and how deep does this go?

This is a good thing to consider when it comes to enterprises. It would add a whole nother level of depth to managing your business. I would hate for it to be a system of you just purchasing a building, throwing money at it for it to become a business, and just passively waiting for it to produce. That takes all of the fun out of it.

 

[Lord Engineer (Castor)]

I would think that notables would get replaced over time, I would also think they would age and die just like the rest.
I hope this also applies to companions. Would be funny if you had your companion 'Kela the Young' with you for fifty years though.

It would also be kind of cool if you had like a combat valet cross generations, who wouldn't want Jeeves with sword?

 

[NPC99]

My concern is that we're going to run into continuity immersion breakers. So we know permadeath is in the game and this comes with the ability to have children and siblings and continue to play as them when we die. After 80 or so years and you're playing as your grandson, is that notable you get recruits from in the village going to be the same one? Will they have been replaced by another randomly generated notable after a period of time? Will they ever fatally meet their end during a raid? Do they also have families, and children who will follow in their footsteps?

In no way do I advocate "simulating every action of every villager". I just wonder if implementing a surface layer of simulation for NPCs the player will be interacting with. We've been told lords will have families and operate enterprises, thus being simulated to a degree, but how far and how deep does this go?

This is a good thing to consider when it comes to enterprises. It would add a whole nother level of depth to managing your business. I would hate for it to be a system of you just purchasing a building, throwing money at it for it to become a business, and just passively waiting for it to produce. That takes all of the fun out of it.

I’d be surprised if TW catered for this given the average players time in game, but notables could have their faces replaced every so often and their names changed while all their dialogue etc remained unchanged. Akadan the Miller could become Akadanson the Miller who inherits all his father’s contacts and relationships.

Thinking about the passage of time makes me wonder about visual ageing. In Warband, the character creator has a slider for ageing your character, but once in game that choice becomes static. Bannerlord will also have an age slider. However, I doubt it would be possible to update facecodes with ageing once a year.

 

[wormydowg]

My concern is that we're going to run into continuity immersion breakers. So we know permadeath is in the game and this comes with the ability to have children and siblings and continue to play as them when we die. After 80 or so years and you're playing as your grandson, is that notable you get recruits from in the village going to be the same one? Will they have been replaced by another randomly generated notable after a period of time? Will they ever fatally meet their end during a raid? Do they also have families, and children who will follow in their footsteps?

In no way do I advocate "simulating every action of every villager". I just wonder if implementing a surface layer of simulation for NPCs the player will be interacting with. We've been told lords will have families and operate enterprises, thus being simulated to a degree, but how far and how deep does this go?

This is a good thing to consider when it comes to enterprises. It would add a whole nother level of depth to managing your business. I would hate for it to be a system of you just purchasing a building, throwing money at it for it to become a business, and just passively waiting for it to produce. That takes all of the fun out of it.

I’d be surprised if TW catered for this given the average players time in game, but notables could have their faces replaced every so often and their names changed while all their dialogue etc remained unchanged. Akadan the Miller could become Akadanson the Miller who inherits all his father’s contacts and relationships.

Thinking about the passage of time makes me wonder about visual ageing. In Warband, the character creator has a slider for ageing your character, but once in game that choice becomes static. Bannerlord will also have an age slider. However, I doubt it would be possible to update facecodes with ageing once a year.

The older you are, the more attribute points you should get...