DEATH

[Dial-Up]

I don't know if it's possible, but I've never died after losing a battle. This seems a little silly, especially when fighting dark hunters, and such. I think that if death were an option, you'd be more likely think twice about taking big risks, like fighting that big war party that out-numbers you 3 to 1. It would also mean that defeating said war party would give a greater sense of accomplishment, and make other suggestions, like the writing history and becoming famous stuff more viable.

It would also make ordering your troop to go at it without you more useful. Sure, you may suffer more casualties, but you wouldn't have to include yourself.

 

[Berny]

what do you mean like start the game over?

 

[sheek]

Not unless you get more save slots. No way.

 

[GonZ]

Yes I suppose it makes sense. The option to surrender first would be good, then we'd have a mini game of escaping from the salt mine or from gladiator duties in the arena.

--
Perhaps we could see the grim reaper riding over the battlefield towards us riding a nightmare?

 

[Berny]

yea that would be fun or you could take the chance to try and fight

 

[sheek]

Think though. You're riding along and just fought a battle. You've lost your horse, got 10% health and half your men are unconscious... you save the game. Suddenly you see a party of dark knights galloping towards you.

You're dead.

 

[DaLagga]

This game is far to random to have such a penalty for dying. No matter how good you are, how high level your character is, what equipment you have, you will die. It would be one thing if i lost my hardcore character because i made a dumb tactical decision, or i just plain suck...but lose my hero because an enemy archer 50 yards off got a lucky headshot on me? Or Borcha with his sniper crossbow was up to his old tricks? no thanks.

 

[Berny]

hmm yea thats true... it is very random

 

[JohnathanStrange]

One of the advantages of having a working search capability (and 5 seconds free) : http://taleworlds.com/v-web/bulletin/bb/viewtopic.php?t=1163&start=0&postdays=0&postorder=asc&highlight=

Although I suspect we will, in a couple of weeks, read a new post "Death: I want to die" with the same feeling of deja vu.

 

[Kamamura]

I personally prefer the current system to constant reloading.

As it is, you are penalised for being struck down, but the losses are recoverable. Reloading disrupts the flow of the game.

 

[Ilex]

An optional death *might* bring something to the game. No more: "Oh... how boring I am at 45lvl and I can bring down everything. My doctor skills provide minimal losses on defeat (which happens only if I get multiple headshots from xbows), time to make a new char and make up a new technique...", but "Darn I was at 45lvl and died, well I might just make a new char and trie not to challenge those dark hunters so 'early'."

... and to the topic: Death is a great band.

 

[Ancientwanker]

Ive posted this suggestion before but Id like to see a serious wound system.

So if you lose and are knocked out there is a chance that you (and all heroes with you) might gain a serious wound flag.

Like:

Broken ribs (reduced weapon speed)
Concussion (all skills reduced by 1)
Leg sprain (riding and athletics reduced)

The states would last until healed by time and this could be accelerated by the usual healing skills. So heroes who survived a bad beating would act more like they had just been through something without totally disadvantaging them or killing them.

 

[CNukemR]

Yeah, that does bug me too, no named people die (i have 2 named npcs in my party).

Now granted, they should be HARD to kill, but, eithe way we get knocked unconcious, I play dead every time (auto) and sneak away. One of these days (if i dont get killed) i should at least be taken prisoner, made into a slave, or forced to join w/e side defeated me.

 

[Maolvar]

Possibility of dying would be nice, but it looks like most m&b players are abunch of wussies who just want to collecr the best items in the game and complain how the game is too easy.

I delete my character every time he gets knocked out in a battle. It really makes game more challenging because even river pirates can be very dangerous if you don't use ranged weapons.

Today I made new character who used one handed blunt weapons. I think I was level 8 or 9 when I got attacked by group of forest bandits. I managed to kill them but all of my soldiers were knocked out or dead. Soon after that a group of sea riders attacked me. I managed to escape but then I encountered a horde of dark hunters who killed me.

Most players might not like playing like this, but I feel m&b is much more enjoyable with this "ironman"-style.

 

[kroc]

DEATH: I WANT TO DIE!

jjajajaj,. yes i really do!
gimme some hardcore!!!

 

[MMad]

A "hardcore" or "ironman" mode would be fun, and should be pretty easy to code in. Some real challenge for the M&B veterans..

 

[Custodis]

Indeed, a Hardcore mode would be very awesome.

Think like Diablo II.

 

[Kissaki]

If anyone here is familiar with that great if unknown classic, Sid Meier's Sword of the Samurai, they might recall the difficulty settings there. You basically had four difficulties, and these were (from easiest to toughest): Tanto, Wakizashi, Katana and No-Daichi.

At the Tanto setting you would never die from a melée encounter; only rendered unconscious. At Wakizashi setting, there was some chance you might die. At Katana setting, there was only some chance you would survive. And at the No-Daichi setting, you would always perish.

Perhaps something similar could be possible for M&B, e.g. a slider at the options screen, allowing you to adjust the % of survival/death for each encounter lost.

 

[Conrad Poohs]

Perhaps something similar could be possible for M&B, e.g. a slider at the options screen, allowing you to adjust the % of survival/death for each encounter lost.

I like this. I like it alot.

 

[Ancientwanker]

Thats a nice idea.

It would go hand in hand with an endgame screen with various stats including "days survived".