Core Features & Focused Improvement for Bannerlord (Poll & References)

[testertesting]

Core Features & Focused Improvement for M&B II (Bannerlord)
- maximizing the results gained from developer experience in M&B WB and sequels -
[~3 min read, please read the description of each aspect before voting]​

! All poll-aspects are summaries of what is generally asked for most, so even if you consider all of them extremely important still choose the first 2 which you feel are utmost important, as if only those would be implemented in Bannerlord an everything else left the same (more or less) !​

I. Reasons for topic opening:

• getting a clear weight of the general preference and expectations concerning aspects that ought to be improved on in the upcoming sequel of M&B
  
• summary of my observations regarding general view, demand and realistic expectations on Bannerlord - essentially what should be improved - based on ~9 months of forum documentation, questioning, debating on the topic of game experience so far
  
• drawing a conclusion based on said observations in form of a list consisting of areas of improvement ranked according to necessity (where the general feeling of improvement is strongest)
• short descriptions [with according (lengthy) references] of the degree of improvement (meaning how much, to what extent that area has to be improved on)
• to simulate what the management team of the game would come to conclude based on their experience with M&B so far and thus provide the public with realistic expectations on BL, also taking in account already released content

[size=13pt]II.Description of poll elements:

1. Technical
The technical aspect refers to improvements on what could be considered game performance. Examples: The player being able to fight in any setting and make use of all environmental aspects (climb houses etc.); AI ability to react smartly with real-life strategies to player's moves; allowing the game engine to support the whole army on the same field (reinforcement waves as in M&B are extremely unrealistic); allowing the environment to be highly alterable by players and events unfolding on the battlefield (destroyed structures, cutting trees, interacting with fauna, flora etc.); ability for NPCs to interact in towns and other emplacements; and of course: graphics and visual detail fidelity. Customization ability of characters also goes in here.

2. Diplomacy / Diplomatic choices
This aspect refers to the ability of the player being able to actually implement complex real-time strategies and interactions on the campaign map. Examples: ability to send messengers with a wide variety of messages to pretty much anyone, the ability to interact in as many imaginable ways with everyone (from kings to peasants) ranging from dueling, to flattering, to enslaving, to robbing, to trading etc.. Some of these - such as the last 2 - should not even be in text format but rather a direct ability of the player to perform such an action in-game, like slaughtering. Also hierarchic options included in here.

What M&B WB currently offers is nothing more than 3-4 lines such as attack, flee, automatic/ field battle and a few more options while in emplacement such as towns and while interacting with entities such as kings or lords.

3. Command / battle-related choices
This is to be distinguished from diplomatic choices because it refers only to battle-related aspects. Examples: Ability to divide the army into segments; to give specific orders to specific groups or individual soldiers; to assign attack/defending points of priority or paths; ambushes; hiding; stealthy missions; formation building; ability to distinguish between specific soldier groups (cavalry is effective against archers because these are most undefended, not so effective against spearmen, extremely ineffective in sieges etc.).etc.

4. Combat Diversification and Dynamics
This aspect refers to the combat itself, covering a wide range of topics. Breakdown:

• 5. Dynamics refers to the ability of the player to engage in more, well, dynamic actions while fighting (actually every time the player directly controls the character). Examples: Running, crouching, crawling, jumping, sprinting, sprint-jumping, dive-jumping (sprint, jump, crawl), dodging (could be just crouching), leaning - and most important: a specific combination of combat moves (the popular 4-direction attacks) and each of the dynamic actions I just mentioned. This would increase the diversity potential of combat enormously while still keeping needed player knowledge minimal (player's don't need specific keys for each actions).
  
• 6. Weapon interaction: self-explanatory: how weapons of one material, given a certain kinetic force interact with other weapons of the same or another material. Examples: how a sword slash interacts with plate armor, chain armor etc.; how an axe smash interacts with an already broken sword (it destroys it) etc.
  
• 7a. Momentum physics - also self-explanatory: it refers to a realistic impact given a certain speed and force to an object. Examples: a horse charge is still devastating to a spearmen even if the spear penetrates the whole body of the horse and it dies; a standing sword slash or thrust would be quick and short as opposed to a slash/thrust delivered after a sprint. etc. If one has lost their weapon on the battlefield but has a strong armor, they could try simply charging a less armored enemy and getting their weapon as a result of hurling them to the ground by the charge.
  
• 7b. Realistic, local injuries - also self-explanatory: it refers to a realistic impact given a certain body-part is hit. Examples: limping when the leg is hit, inability to walk if the leg is completely cut off, or inability to fight if arms are cut off; inability to fight after a fatal injury (limbs cut off or a hard blow); getting rid of the health-bar: injury is not a number of hits one can take, because for example anyone can take 1000 slaps but nobody can take even 1 direct, unprotected sword thrust or slash.
  
• 7c. Realistic movements - no 360° pirouettes on one leg while holding up a sword should be possible, as we see in the recent video blog. Also realistic touch physics, when soldiers walk by eachother: not blocking one's way, not showing one to the side either - something in-between, such as a realistic trial to get through, sometimes even push, to allow the player and characters to move as freely as possible - of course, ultra-crowded sieges would behave accordingly and in formations.
  

[size=10pt]
8. General atmosphere
This refers to immersion: how well should the medieval era be portrayed? Specific words, acts, clothing, behavior - with all its gruesomeness and intrinsic, poetic beauty. This aspect is thought to be part of a more free-roam side of the game, not necessary relating to combat but not excluding violent acts.

9. Multiplayer experience
This one would be a little tricky, because all above aspects would apply for multiplayer as well. However, this is to be chosen if one considers that the main focus of the game should be on the PVP aspect, regardless what. However, if one feels that certain specific improvement aspects mentioned above is highly important, regardless if singleplayer or multiplayer, ignore this option.

10. Other
Please provide detail as to what aspect should be considered as to be improved on the most, if you feel like it doesn't belong to any of the above mentioned.

! Posts explaining why you chose a certain aspect, suggesting references or consisting of constructive criticism are more than welcomed. Please keep discussions on topic. !​

III.Extended Description & Explicit References:
-- To Follow --

The 4 aspects I started with while having in mind to create such a poll/ extensive topic:

Spoiler

Of course, a game is still a game, one cannot expect it ever to be a real-life simulation. However, the current system seems to me like it could use a lot of improvement. Being the only and first large-scale game of this specific genre is what keeps this game at the top and is what made the fan community obviously grow a lot. Yes, a game is supposed to be fun, immersive which M&B is to a certain point. Yes, we cannot expect to be just as real life [which is not what the word realistic stands for] but we have come to a point, and for some time now, where the next step can and should be taken towards realism and 'fun'.

Of course, but there are quite a few things that account so much for realism that should be implemented. My list is: 1. Combat dynamics, 2. Battlefield-related and diplomacy-related choices (in the sense of strategy) 3. Interaction and protection of armor. Improve on these three to a certain extent and I for one will be contempt.  I'm going to add a 4th point concerning my hierarchically ordered features which ought to be implemented and/or improved on, which is going to be character interaction. This could be fit under point no. 2 - choices, but I chose to put it separately because it is of more immersive nature whereas the former points were realism-inclined.

Explanation of the subtitle "maximizing the results gained from developer experience in M&B WB and sequels":

Spoiler

As much as I agree with the fact that SP should still receive a lot of focus I would also mention that multiplayer could use a lot of enhancements. Also, none of the current games even come close to what WB offers, even in mutiplayer. [...] I have yet to see a single-player and multiplayer game of this genre where strategy (teamplay, formations, tactics) actually matter. However we will shorty start seeing rivalries with Meele: Battlegrounds and Kingdome Come, but as far as the leaked videos show concerning these games they'll be simple improvements of M&B, not offering much novelty. Here is where Bannerlord would come in having 5 years of experience in this field and essentially overshadowing all of the other medieval-genre combat games. Even if not the masterpiece we are expecting, I still have faith in Bannerlord to deliver at least a better experience than any other game out there.

Indeed, but considering the first game came out 5 years ago with multiple sequels you'd think someone would draw some experience concerning technicalities thus far. As you said, some have done it more or less. Even Skyrim has managed to implement horse riding quite realistically - and I personally can't stand Skyrim for its gameplay. [...] And even if all these more or less aesthetic things were not to be implemented, at least improve on the combat in the sense of what I talked about a post before: more options, more combinations, more dynamics which would make the game more enjoyable and add that pinch of complexity and possibility of choice and realism that I believe all of us are looking forward to.

IV.Conclusions (based on poll results and references):
-- Will be drawn once poll results reach a high enough number of votes --

 

[Askorti]

It's a difficult choice, because I feel like Warband is actually quite poor in all of those aspects and picking two that need an overhaul the most is almost like choosing which of your limbs you like the least.
In the end I've picked diplomacy and multiplayer.
The first because it simply cried to me that it should've been there, and without it the singleplayer mode felt barren.
The second one because in my opinion MP is what keeps Warband alive. I used to love playing warband in SP, but for the longest time I haven't touched it because it simply bored me to no end. It was terribly repetitive and I bet that Bannerlord will be no different. Good MP on the other hand can give the game a lot of mileage, just as it did for Warband.

Edit: By the way, I don't really know what is the point of this thread save for checking what people think. It's not like it's going to influence the development of BL in any way. It's way too late for that, they've probably already decided on which parts they intend to put the biggest emphasis, so this poll here seems like a bit of a waste of time to me.

 

[testertesting]

@KuroiNekouPL, thanks for the explanation. I guess it would be a good idea to also rank the aspects if you definitely feel like all of them have to be improved at least with marginal differences. Also, since MP was thought to be more of a general topic, nothing specific, maybe you could provide some insight as to what exactly would you like to have improved specifically on MP?

 

[Alene]

This board is for Warband, Bannerlord stuff should go to the one thread here dedicated to Bannerlord (it's stickied on this board), to dev blog threads or Privy council board.

 

[Mad Vader]

If you are not a developer, you can leave the poll out.

to simulate what the management team of the game would come to conclude based on their experience with M&B so far and thus provide the public with realistic expectations on BL, also taking in account already released content

Collective guessing what Taleworlds decided? That's as desperate as the BL thread.

maximizing the results gained from developer experience in M&B WB and sequels

Say what?

TL;DR just post your wall of text suggestions and really get it out of your system like everyone else.

 

[Hannibaru]

For me the AI in single player of each unit is terrible, the fighting looks sloppy because they cant block even as the most elite troop and they walk around the enemy weirdly.

The AI could be improved so that the units fight instead of randomly slashing.

 

[testertesting]

Response to @MadVader (spoiler because more or less off-topic):

Spoiler

TL;DR just post your wall of text suggestions and really get it out of your system like everyone else.

May I then ask why you went through the horrific strain of posting this in the first place? I kindly ask you to either contribute in a manner helpful to the post or - if expressing disinterest and futility towards it - simply overlook it.

Collective guessing what Taleworlds decided? That's as desperate as the BL thread.

maximizing the results gained from developer experience in M&B WB and sequels

Say what?

Firstly, collectively taking all reasons together one would come to the conclusion that it's not merely 'guessing' but also a comparison between what features would actually be incorporated and what expectations were. I am not trying to alter any behavior of development, but am rather analyzing weather nor not the output will actually be something worth investing in - personally. Furthermore, any lacking aspects would be alterable by mods/ patches thus giving my statistic a quite extensive longevity for choice.

Secondly, what I mean with the subtitle that you quoted is explained here:

As much as I agree with the fact that SP should still receive a lot of focus I would also mention that multiplayer could use a lot of enhancements. Also, none of the current games even come close to what WB offers, even in mutiplayer. [...] I have yet to see a single-player and multiplayer game of this genre where strategy (teamplay, formations, tactics) actually matter. However we will shorty start seeing rivalries with Meele: Battlegrounds and Kingdome Come, but as far as the leaked videos show concerning these games they'll be simple improvements of M&B, not offering much novelty. Here is where Bannerlord would come in having 5 years of experience in this field and essentially overshadowing all of the other medieval-genre combat games. Even if not the masterpiece we are expecting, I still have faith in Bannerlord to deliver at least a better experience than any other game out there.

Indeed, but considering the first game came out 5 years ago with multiple sequels you'd think someone would draw some experience concerning technicalities thus far. As you said, some have done it more or less. Even Skyrim has managed to implement horse riding quite realistically - and I personally can't stand Skyrim for its gameplay. [...] And even if all these more or less aesthetic things were not to be implemented, at least improve on the combat in the sense of what I talked about a post before: more options, more combinations, more dynamics which would make the game more enjoyable and add that pinch of complexity and possibility of choice and realism that I believe all of us are looking forward to.

 

[TrashMan]

Also realistic touch physics, when soldiers walk by eachother: not blocking one's way, not showing one to the side either - something in-between, such as a realistic trial to get through, sometimes even push, to allow the player and characters to move as freely as possible - of course, ultra-crowded sieges would behave accordingly and in formations.

You do realize that is NOTHING like a real battle?

In the battle of Agincourt, the biggest loses to the french were inflicted by the french, as they were trampling each other. A battlefield is chaos. Having numerical superiority is only an advantage if you can bring all those numbers to bear in a maningful way.