[parsehtml][IMG]https://www.taleworlds.com/Images/News/blog_post_29_taleworldswebsite.jpg[/IMG]
Hump day is behind us and the weekend is in sight; Thursday is upon us and it is time for another of our weekly updates! Grab a cup of [i]camel-mile[/i] tea, sit back and let us introduce you to a new addition to the [b]Mount[/b] & Blade series.
[/parsehtml]Read more at: https://www.taleworlds.com/en/Games/Bannerlord/Blog/49
Dev Blog 01/03/2018
- 主题发起人 Callum
- 开始时间
正在查看此主题的用户
White Lion 说:
@kalarhan
What I know is this: If the game had a mechanism or a feature, they would talk about it. If they don't talk about it, the game doesn't have it.
Also, what I described about camels - horses is not particularly important to me. I am just pointing out that if you are implementing something, you must do it right. TW is just delivering a BASE game full of BASIC stuff, and hope that the modders will make it great (eg: in warband they had sea and ship models ready, but never implemented naval battles, instead they waited for modders to do it).
Adding the disgust factor of horses could be depicted by making cavalry slower or weaker in stats when vs camels, or having a small random factor of the horse going wild and not being able to control it for a few seconds, you name it. But adding a camel and saying: "It has more hp, but lower speed than horses", yeah nice to meet you. Not adding mechanisms for your assets = mediocre game.
@ Iberian wolf
Yes, I don't argue against their logistical primary use, I agree. But, camels were also used vs cavalry. I would refer you to read about the Battle of Thymbra between Cyrus of Persia and Croesus of Lydia. Cyrus made a BRILLIANT tactical and strategic choice there, and that is exactly what is missing from Mount and Blade. The ability to think outside the box, of using smart mechanics to achieve victory instead of relying on stats and hit points.
@ White Lion
Yes I know, but I was too bored to post the whole info. Their smell & the fact that they were unknown beasts drove the horses wild.
About the spears, the use of pikes around the 14th - 15th century made cavalry a secondary force. From that point cavalry was mostly used to pursue enemies or make tactical maneuvers. Exceptions occurred of course, but they stopped dominating the battlefields when the pikes came out.
About the fire arrows I was just trying to make a point, but after googling I found that fire arrows, spears, javelins etc were pretty common in many civilizations and battles. Search "Early thermal weapons".
Point is: Games need mechanisms and gameplay features, not just sheer numbers and stats and whoever has the biggest stats result will win the battle. In AoE 2 if you had 150 paladins and the enemy had 100 camels, you would lose because of the mechanism that gave a bonus to the camels. In bannerlord from what we see, whoever has more units or better trained units wins. No logistics, no unfavorable terrain, no weather conditions, no bonus for flanking, no nothing.
What I know is this: If the game had a mechanism or a feature, they would talk about it. If they don't talk about it, the game doesn't have it.
Also, what I described about camels - horses is not particularly important to me. I am just pointing out that if you are implementing something, you must do it right. TW is just delivering a BASE game full of BASIC stuff, and hope that the modders will make it great (eg: in warband they had sea and ship models ready, but never implemented naval battles, instead they waited for modders to do it).
Adding the disgust factor of horses could be depicted by making cavalry slower or weaker in stats when vs camels, or having a small random factor of the horse going wild and not being able to control it for a few seconds, you name it. But adding a camel and saying: "It has more hp, but lower speed than horses", yeah nice to meet you. Not adding mechanisms for your assets = mediocre game.
@ Iberian wolf
Yes, I don't argue against their logistical primary use, I agree. But, camels were also used vs cavalry. I would refer you to read about the Battle of Thymbra between Cyrus of Persia and Croesus of Lydia. Cyrus made a BRILLIANT tactical and strategic choice there, and that is exactly what is missing from Mount and Blade. The ability to think outside the box, of using smart mechanics to achieve victory instead of relying on stats and hit points.
@ White Lion
Yes I know, but I was too bored to post the whole info. Their smell & the fact that they were unknown beasts drove the horses wild.
About the spears, the use of pikes around the 14th - 15th century made cavalry a secondary force. From that point cavalry was mostly used to pursue enemies or make tactical maneuvers. Exceptions occurred of course, but they stopped dominating the battlefields when the pikes came out.
About the fire arrows I was just trying to make a point, but after googling I found that fire arrows, spears, javelins etc were pretty common in many civilizations and battles. Search "Early thermal weapons".
Point is: Games need mechanisms and gameplay features, not just sheer numbers and stats and whoever has the biggest stats result will win the battle. In AoE 2 if you had 150 paladins and the enemy had 100 camels, you would lose because of the mechanism that gave a bonus to the camels. In bannerlord from what we see, whoever has more units or better trained units wins. No logistics, no unfavorable terrain, no weather conditions, no bonus for flanking, no nothing.
Lamias 说:@kalarhan
What I know is this: If the game had a mechanism or a feature, they would talk about it. If they don't talk about it, the game doesn't have it.
Also, what I described about camels - horses is not particularly important to me. I am just pointing out that if you are implementing something, you must do it right. TW is just delivering a BASE game full of BASIC stuff, and hope that the modders will make it great (eg: in warband they had sea and ship models ready, but never implemented naval battles, instead they waited for modders to do it).
Adding the disgust factor of horses could be depicted by making cavalry slower or weaker in stats when vs camels, or having a small random factor of the horse going wild and not being able to control it for a few seconds, you name it. But adding a camel and saying: "It has more hp, but lower speed than horses", yeah nice to meet you. Not adding mechanisms for your assets = mediocre game.
@ Iberian wolf
Yes, I don't argue against their logistical primary use, I agree. But, camels were also used vs cavalry. I would refer you to read about the Battle of Thymbra between Cyrus of Persia and Croesus of Lydia. Cyrus made a BRILLIANT tactical and strategic choice there, and that is exactly what is missing from Mount and Blade. The ability to think outside the box, of using smart mechanics to achieve victory instead of relying on stats and hit points.
@ White Lion
Yes I know, but I was too bored to post the whole info. Their smell & the fact that they were unknown beasts drove the horses wild.
About the spears, the use of pikes around the 14th - 15th century made cavalry a secondary force. From that point cavalry was mostly used to pursue enemies or make tactical maneuvers. Exceptions occurred of course, but they stopped dominating the battlefields when the pikes came out.
About the fire arrows I was just trying to make a point, but after googling I found that fire arrows, spears, javelins etc were pretty common in many civilizations and battles. Search "Early thermal weapons".
Point is: Games need mechanisms and gameplay features, not just sheer numbers and stats and whoever has the biggest stats result will win the battle. In AoE 2 if you had 150 paladins and the enemy had 100 camels, you would lose because of the mechanism that gave a bonus to the camels. In bannerlord from what we see, whoever has more units or better trained units wins. No logistics, no unfavorable terrain, no weather conditions, no bonus for flanking, no nothing.
At the battle of Thymbra, the Lydian horses had never come into contact with camels. This tactic of using camels to scare horses would quickly become useless once the horses are trained to tolerate camels. Let's assume that horses are used to camels in Calradia, what other mechanics exist to separate camels from horses? They have mentioned that camels are more durable, probably faster on sand, they have a height advantage which will be useful for archers and already gives the camel an advantage to the camel rider as they have the higher elevation vs cavalry and should triumph in most cases.
@AmateurHetman
Partly, I agree. How about that then: For the sake of cool gameplay, let's NOT assume that the horses in Calradia are trained to withstand camels. Or if you don't want that, then let's assume that many horses die and new horses are constantly bred. Those new horses need to be trained too. Why make that automated?
Instead, let's have a possible upgrade to the stables of our fief that does that very thing: by spending money, we train our new horses to withstand camels and negate the negative modifiers. So the northern kingdoms that don't come in contact with camels could choose not to spend money on horse training and spend it elsewhere, whereas the southern kingdoms can't afford not to train them, or risk being at a disadvantage. See what happened there? A simple mechanism gave us a choice to make. Not just faster, higher, lower, more durable. No choice in these matters.
@kalarhan
I say it to every blog. Check the feature list of some amazing mods for Warband: Diplomacy, VC, 1257 AD, Brytenwalda and Pendor. TONS of amazing features. I am pretty sure that if modders can create such features, the Devs can create even better. But Bannerlord will have none of those features. If they had them, they would tell us.
Partly, I agree. How about that then: For the sake of cool gameplay, let's NOT assume that the horses in Calradia are trained to withstand camels. Or if you don't want that, then let's assume that many horses die and new horses are constantly bred. Those new horses need to be trained too. Why make that automated?
Instead, let's have a possible upgrade to the stables of our fief that does that very thing: by spending money, we train our new horses to withstand camels and negate the negative modifiers. So the northern kingdoms that don't come in contact with camels could choose not to spend money on horse training and spend it elsewhere, whereas the southern kingdoms can't afford not to train them, or risk being at a disadvantage. See what happened there? A simple mechanism gave us a choice to make. Not just faster, higher, lower, more durable. No choice in these matters.
@kalarhan
I say it to every blog. Check the feature list of some amazing mods for Warband: Diplomacy, VC, 1257 AD, Brytenwalda and Pendor. TONS of amazing features. I am pretty sure that if modders can create such features, the Devs can create even better. But Bannerlord will have none of those features. If they had them, they would tell us.
kalarhan 说:Lamias 说:
so your proof that the game is shallow, incomplete, hoping that modders will save it, is ... that they havent talked about all game features in the game. Right. Gotcha ya
They wouldn’t tell us as they want to surprise us. I can’t help but feel Lamias is very pessimistic about what the game will offer.
Lamias 说:
Bannerlord may also have unimplemented ship and pistol models - not necessarily for modders - Armagan has already talked about bringing sea travel/battles in a DLC after BL. I'm sure their code library and resources will include things they've tested for a future beyond Bannerlord - I just hope they leave them in the version that's published for us to play with.
You are right, I am pessimistic. They've had 5 years to tell us what the game will offer. Not 6 months, not 1 year, but 5 whole years. People are losing heart and stop following the game because they don't hear any big features coming up.
If I was TW, I would stop posting lame blogs about camels and characters smiling or frowning, and I would let the fans know the huge improvements and features of the campaign map. Don't we deserve it after waiting and supporting M&B for the past 10 years?
If I was TW, I would stop posting lame blogs about camels and characters smiling or frowning, and I would let the fans know the huge improvements and features of the campaign map. Don't we deserve it after waiting and supporting M&B for the past 10 years?
Lamias 说:
The reason we all want BL is because of the huge improvements demonstrated in the videos TW have posted. It takes a hell of a lot longer to build, test, debug and balance a feature than to talk about it. Even subtle and seemingly inconsequential changes may have a greater significance in game - we'll only know for sure when we get our hands on it. Waiting's hard but it's the only option, unless you find a better game to turn to.
Lamias 说:
I think all the juicy features will be presented by TW after the release date. Because at that time they will be %100 sure which features will be in the game or not. Let's think about it, If they had been talking about features which they are not sure those features will be in the game or not, that would be like ****storm of 2016 If those feeatures is not in the final game. The presented features of Bannerlord already satisfied me but this is just me.
The development team should be at a stage in their project where big, notable features aren't being scrapped but rather refined. I doubt TW would make drastic decisions this late into the project. Speaking of which, its also disappointing that they're still working on unfinished aspects of the game which are so basic, and judging from that, I think we're looking at another 2 years of delays.bjorntheconquerer 说:
DoHope 说:The development team should be at a stage in their project where big, notable features aren't being scrapped but rather refined. I doubt TW would make drastic decisions this late into the project. Speaking of which, its also disappointing that they're still working on unfinished aspects of the game which are so basic, and judging from that, I think we're looking at another 2 years of delays.bjorntheconquerer 说:
Which basic aspects are they still working on? I would say that the stuff they are working on like camels are an optional add on, not a basic essential for the game.
AmateurHetman 说:
Lol, I read this as "the extra 30cm or so of height will allow camel archers rain down hell upon the lowly horse archers, for whom it will be very much an uphill battle". I guess you probably meant more for melee combat, but not sure.
I think camels are more unstable as archery platforms than horses are, with a fair amount of vertical motion for the rider when the camel is moving, which may be a more significant factor for that matchup.
No not essential, but its an insignificant update nonetheless which doesn't serve any purpose, really. Some bannerlord channel made a video debating on what this update could be and I remember the comment section was so hyped with anticipation. Oh, how TW loves to crush hearts, and I bet they will continue to crush hearts for many years to come.AmateurHetman 说:DoHope 说:The development team should be at a stage in their project where big, notable features aren't being scrapped but rather refined. I doubt TW would make drastic decisions this late into the project. Speaking of which, its also disappointing that they're still working on unfinished aspects of the game which are so basic, and judging from that, I think we're looking at another 2 years of delays.bjorntheconquerer 说:
Which basic aspects are they still working on? I would say that the stuff they are working on like camels are an optional add on, not a basic essential for the game.
