Single player gets better each patch, Multiplayer gets worse each patch.
-
If you are reporting a bug, please head over to our Technical Support section for Bannerlord.
Curious, what's the current state of the game?
- 主题发起人 xdj1nn
- 开始时间
正在查看此主题的用户
I don't get the people claiming that there's not enough to do or that the game lacks features, etc. Are we forgetting what Native Warband was like before all the big mods? BL has a lot more depth than WB, even in its current raw state. Is it unfinished? Yes. Flawed? Of course. But even in this state it's hella fun and perfectly playable.
Marajah
Regular
Do you mean native mount&blade? Because Bannerlord got less features than Warband. They scrapped some half-baked mechanics, like feasts, but didn't add new stuff to make it up. I don't think the comparison threshold should be native mount&blade, because they said they were gonna up their game and raised the price accordingly.
The features' goal should be at least the same as in the last games. I agree the game is playable, but at this state I wouldn't recommend it to anyone unless it's on a 60%+ sale
More depth? you have more control over kingdom targets being a vassall in WB than being a king in BL, at least you can suggest the where to attack or where to defend to your friends. As king/marshal you have the control of the single army of the kingdom...
Nothing slighly similar is even planned for BL.
Boring compared to Warband? Genuine question.
Well if it wasn't for the fact that Warband engine is extremely dated at this point, I would actually say that Prophesy of Pendor is WAAAAYYYY better.
Just like how Fallout New Vegas is better than Fallout 4 and GTA San Andreas is better than GTA V.
Old engines kills games eventually, doesn't mean that new games are better.
Antaeus
Squire
As per literally the two posts above yours... the latest beta is specifically to test for bugs. The main branch is EA specifically to test while they develop. Everything is WIP.
No, I mean Warband under the final patch. Just off the top of my head, Bannerlord has things like the clan system with companion parties and caravans, character aging, death and having kids, the barter system, smithing, deeper fief management with governors, loyalty, security, militia, rebellions, etc. You've got kingdom laws, influence, forming armies, executing lords, and so on. These are all entirely new mechanics that did not exist in Warband.
Let's go through these mechanics shall we?
Clan system - Pretty good implementation so far, could be better, but it is satisfactory
Companion parties - Pretty good implementation so far, could be better, but it is satisfactory
Caravans - Unbalanced, if not broken
Character aging/Death/Having kids - Completely broken in current implementation and balance
Barter system - Pretty good implementation so far, could be better, but it is satisfactory
Smithing - Completely broken
Deeper fief management - This is not deeper. You could build buildings in cities in Warband too. Only the effects are different, but sure, it's nice.
Governors - Pretty broken mechanic so far. I don't find governors so useful since you can't make their partners stay in the same city so they can make babies.
Loyalty - Pretty good implementation so far, could be better, but it is satisfactory
Security - Pretty good implementation so far, could be better, but it is satisfactory
Militia - Pretty good implementation so far, could be better, but it is satisfactory
Rebellions - Pretty good implementation so far, could be better, but it is satisfactory
Kingdom laws - It's good.
Influence - It's good.
Forming armies - Broken. Being unable to create armies without belonging to a faction is completely garbage. AI sucks at managing armies.
Executing lords - I like it, but I think for most people that want a normal playthrough it's not going to be used often. Nice to have the choice though.
Now how about we go through old features?
Companions - Broken and boring. You don't feel a connection to them anymore. Skills are all over the place.
Sieges - Broken to hell. Sieges are now over in 60 seconds if you know how to attack. I literally just took over a castle with over 400 soldiers defending and only took 102 losses (34 deaths). Granted my army was 1400, but it shouldn't be so easy.
Battles - AI is completely broken and worse than in Warband. I didn't like the fact that AI always charged in Warband when you got knocked out. Now I wish that they did nothing but charge, as that is actually better than what the AI does in this game.
Item prices - Completely broken and unrealistic. Needs serious fine-tuning
War/Peace - Completely broken. Casus bellis are thrown out the window and now simple strength calculation is everything. You can be in 4 wars and your clans are unwilling to make peace because how simplistic the strength calculation is. It doesn't even take into consideration that the enemies have more armies and is thus able to siege more settlements than we can defend, meaning that we can lose wars even though the game thinks we are stronger.
I could go on, but honestly what is the point?
TW has made it clear that we are gonna get a dumbed down version of the game simply so they can launch it on consoles without having to make a separate console version.
Marajah
Regular
Sure, but at least half those mechanics are half baked or have negligible impact on the game. Not to mention they are mostly different approaches to the same system we had in warband
Companion parties - they work as extra parties IF you are a vassal or king. They are useless money sinks in any other situations. Also we can't direct them to do anything, like recruiting soldiers and coming back, attack X, defend Y, etc...
Caravans - Pen and paper extra income. Got some roleplaying value. Still, limited use if you are a vassal, since we can't really tell caravans to avoid routes where they might get attacked
Character aging, death, marriage and kids - the game pacing doesn't really favor these mechanics, since the only thing we can do to pass time is fighting and it gets boring before kids grown up or the player character ages significantly
Barter system - might have some, but never really found any use for it. I suppose I might bribe lords/bandits into letting us go eventually, but I value party speed too much to avoid that situation
Governors - the perk system is all over the place, training companions is horrible, so finding good governors are more a question of luck than anything else
Kingdom laws - half baked. Most are nearly useless and it's a missed opportunity to apply a defining character to different kingdoms. Get the best bonuses with the least side effects
Influence - basic game currency for some things. Quite unbalanced most of the campaigns.
Executing lords - half baked. No decent law system or cultural approaches to it. It's just a way to murder your reputation with most clans, while wiping out contenders to the throne.
Forming armies - good and needed mechanic, but at the cost of losing the former marshal benefits of directing parties to do specific tasks. Why not implement both?
Loyalty, security, militia and rebellions - didn't try that out yet. Could be interesting since last patches...
Philozoraptor
Sergeant
They are fixing problems that require delicate touch with hammer instead. Are horse archers OP? Make them bump into infantry and fight in melee half the time. Are people exploiting archer AI? Disable the archer AI. Are soldiers falling from wall in sieges? Put wooden fences everywhere (on those wall lol, they could have used low invisible wall that player can jump over and dead soldier can fall off instead). Are soldiers attacking enemy soldiers inside stone towers that are behind stone wall with melee weapons? Just put so many rock arround towers that soldiers cannot reach them. Its actually silly, I would expect this from inexperienced modder that just want to make a quick fix until davs fix it properly.
redmark
Squire
Money sinks usually yes, but not useless. If you're planning an independent kingdom, they're running round recruiting and training up the troops that you're going to use to replenish your losses and fill your first garrison with. Just inspect their troops occasionally and kick out any looters and too many recruits/peasants. Along with being easily the quickest way of levelling up your younger siblings (and a spouse, if they weren't a high level NPC to begin with).
For those players who would appreciate a slower pace and generational play, renown is acquired too quickly compared to most other game mechanics. You can be a king in 3 or 4 years, and max out your clan in 10-15 quite easily, which feeds the idea that you should 'win' the game with your starting character. But TW seem to be in an awkward position on that issue, because a lot of threads indicate many players don't want a slower pace. At some point, renown/world pacing will need to be an option (or modded).
最后编辑:
Boring compared to vanilla WB no, compared to modded WB yeah pretty much, compared to conversions absolutely. Even if TW was just going to iterate on what they had done they should've looked to expand more of the rgp elements of the game. But there really isn't anything to do but fight and even that lacks any real depth. It's wide as a lake but has the depth of a puddle.
1.5.7 is fine
1.5.8 (beta) has more issues
Main issues with 1.5.7 are balance related, smithing is currently like cheating due to the way things are calculated. Some skills level too fast others way too slow. Some troops are too strong others too weak, some factions are underwhelming, there are some equipment imbalances.
Entirely playable, at least on my system, if you can ignore or play around the issues. I certainly am not going back to Warband or anything, as someone who only does the single player.
I am highly enjoying it, but I don't take it all too seriously and play while listening to audiobooks and lectures. As a grindy game with great combat mechanics it delivers, just like Warband but with nicer graphics and some enjoyable new features. Once it all gets fleshed out I'm sure it will be a game I keep playing for years.
1.5.8 (beta) has more issues
Main issues with 1.5.7 are balance related, smithing is currently like cheating due to the way things are calculated. Some skills level too fast others way too slow. Some troops are too strong others too weak, some factions are underwhelming, there are some equipment imbalances.
Entirely playable, at least on my system, if you can ignore or play around the issues. I certainly am not going back to Warband or anything, as someone who only does the single player.
I am highly enjoying it, but I don't take it all too seriously and play while listening to audiobooks and lectures. As a grindy game with great combat mechanics it delivers, just like Warband but with nicer graphics and some enjoyable new features. Once it all gets fleshed out I'm sure it will be a game I keep playing for years.
redmark
Squire
Decline of powerful village notables = disappearance of noble troop lines is probably the biggest long term issue for an enjoyable game at the moment.
In my opinion it is all relative. I just came back myself and honestly the vanilla experience hasn't changed much from when I stopped playing back in May but there are some really cool mods out that change things up enough that it has been a lot of fun coming back. You have things like Ronin which adds a new playable Samurai faction or Eagle Rising that changes the Empire troops to make it a full on Roman Army simulation. As always there are a ton of little mods that fix or change the various things you don't like about gameplay such as leveling rate or maybe production levels. Basically with a little modding work, I am looking at probably another couple hundred hours worth of gameplay before I get bored again.
