Dev Blog 05/04/18

[parsehtml]<p><img class="frame" src="https://www.taleworlds.com/Images/News/blog_post_34_taleworldswebsite.jpg" alt="" width="575" height="290" /></p> <p>Castles are perhaps one of the most iconic images that come to mind when people think of the medieval era. These large and seemingly impregnable structures dominated the landscape in which they stood and projected an image of power and authority that aimed to impress both a lord’s subjects and peers. In last week’s blog we looked at some of the tools of warfare that were used to overcome the defences of these magnificent medieval behemoths and talked about the different ways that players can approach sieges in Bannerlord. In this week’s blog we would like to discuss the thought process that goes into designing castles for the game, from the historical influences we use through to the gameplay related decisions we make, and show you how this all comes together to make a castle for the game.</p></br> [/parsehtml]Read more at: http://www.taleworlds.com/en/Games/Bannerlord/Blog/54

 

[Rabies]

I think it's necessary to speak of this in broad terms because we have so little information of what the final product will be like. All of my posts should be read with a "in principle" caveat in mind as we can't really assume much from the little information we have been shown.

But I think the worry persists even if there is tiered system for castles as long as castles can be upgraded along these trees. If each village can have a castle, the player can reach a stage where every settlement has a castle of enormous proportions. We have no idea if the sizes of tier 3 castles are similar across the board, and we also don't know what the in-game timeframe for the upgrading of castles is. There's no word on razing of castles or other mechanics to naturally limit castle growth that I'm aware of, so it seems prudent not to assume them.

In principle, I agree with that in broad terms.

But precisely because we have so little information about what limiting factors there will be in the game for the player (or the AI) to build a large number of very big castles, I don't think it's something that we should be complaining about it as "unrealistic" just yet.

What we have been shown is not unrealistic in itself. It may be historically inauthentic if the same is replicated across the entire gameworld, but that's something for the developers to balance. I'd rather trust them on that score, at least until we know a bit more about how it's all going to work.

On a more general point: time and cost were certainly one factor that limited castle size historically - and this is easily and likely to be simulated in Bannerlord. But it doesn't follow that other limiting factors that existed historically would necessarily exist in Calradia. For example, historically it was also the feudal system itself that limited castles' sizes: Lords weren't allowed to build enormous castles unless they had the King's permission, and not everyone was given it. Bannerlord's/Calradia's "feudal" system is likely to be different in that regard (Talewords have already stated that their system of allegiance is a much more simplified two-tier, King-Lord relationship), and so that limitation to castle expansion could well not exist - which could give more plausibility within the lore to a greater proportion of large-scale castles, perhaps.

There are any number of ways that the designers of the game's lore and scenario can explain their way around differences between Calradia's universe and historical reality. And those differences shouldn't be seen as a flaws in the game.

 

[SenorZorros]

According to the gif the footprint stayed the same. And that's the disappointing part. castles grew horizontally. not vertically. You can't build atop of a building, or at least it's not easy and if you want a higher tower or more spacious chambers you can always build a new tower and re-purpose the old one. after all maybe your retainers would like their own barracks instead of having to sleep in the main hall...
I mean, that castle in the blog would quite a nice for a level 10 castle with all buildings unlocked.
Which brings us to the second point. 3 levels are just too little for a good model of castle construction. you can't grasp a castle's full life in it. most castles had many more extensions.
I do get why there would only three levels. as a king you don't want to mess with the detail and it's only just a part of a village but I still find it disappointing. after all, most of the time you will deal with villages will probably be when you are a lord. And for a lord his castle is his home. It would be nice to see more customisation of your castle. to make it something more... personal. The ability to place buildings would be great but clearly out of scope but some options would be nice. Maybe you could choose what workshops you place. decide if your peasants may build their hovels inside or outside of the walls. make choices of extensions you commision and how much you can pay. Of course always make sure you don't run out of coin and never go stand upon an unfinished tower... Do you go for comfort or defensibly? built lavish decorations to impress your peers and subjects or simple but sturdy construction which will stand it's ground. Or you could make the castle actually look worse-of than it is to goad your rivals and opponents on attacking you only to discover you're more than ready for them.

 

[dr4gunov]

+dr4gunov

I get your point about

At the same time, vast majority of the community would not mind lower walls, better looking vegetaion or flashy swordsmanship, as long as the game STAYED FUN TO PLAY. It is just as I wrote with cutting through mail thread: you would not notice the difference.

but dont forget, such a change would lengthen the developement time for years since TW would have to do every scene again
and I am 100% positive noone including you would want that.

You may save it for M&B 3 though 

And that's a very good point. There is nothing wrong however with providing feedback regarding artwork or game mechanics. Some of these changes could be easily fixed (say, making walls lower but do not quote me on that, I do not care about this particular issue), others would take too much time or money to implement. If that's the case, I do not believe anyone giving those opinions would mind. There are mods after all.

I am just protesting against bashing idea just because it is from realism-guys. And also using word realism for historical accuracy.

 

[Innocent Flower]

Speaking as someone who's made mods for many different games of different engines;Resizing models is very easy, It's only a pain when you've got some things perfectly sized and other things odd-sized in the same model.

You might then need to regenerate navigation, but that does itself. It'd be less than a single day's work for a single person. You'll need to do some playtesting, but you're not going to get a great variety of technical issues through a simple rework. 

 

[killer-blead]

I for one, like this blog post and the castles featured in the Gif.

Thank you for the blog! I can't wait for the next one.

 

[AmateurHetman]

Ya'll got that next blog? it's almost 17:30.

 

[lolbash]

Dev blog or im calling police

 

[The Meddling Monk]

*Dev blog or or riot

FTFY


Edit: The blog's up on Steam now

 

[Crowcorrector]

Fellas it takes alot of time to gather 2 screenshots and trawl through info that's 2 years old to find stuff to transcribe for these blogs. Give them a break.

 

[kalarhan]

Edit: The blog's up on Steam now

it is funny how the blog already comes with replies to expected off-topic comments 

 

[Syndrella]

The gifs are lovely and now I imagine how deeply we can customize or freely build our own forts. I fall in love into this  

 

[kalarhan]

I imagine how deeply we can customize or freely build our own forts.

just remember that "freely build" means going outside the game to use modding tools. It is not like [Fallout 4] or [Stronghold Crusader] or any other building simulator.

(unless they add this feature in the future)

 

[El Gato Supreme]

Love the ideas but a bit worried about the historical direction of the game here... The blog mentions about how the Battanian faction architecture was difficult as it is based on British tribes whose architecture transformed as Britain was subject to 'waves of invaders'.

I thought the game was based circa AD 11th-12th century?  Britain was indeed subject to 'waves of invaders' (think Romans: AD 43-400, Anglo-Saxons: circa AD 450, Vikings: AD 793 and Normans: 1066), however the majority of architectural advances taking place during the early middle ages had settled by the time the game is based.

Taleworlds have then instead based Battanian castles on Iron age hillforts?  British iron age hillforts (some built more than 2000 years before the game's setting), despite their name, were not castles.  Their ramparts were likely not manned and many interpretations of hillforts suggest their use may well have been as livestock enclosures.  They did not have the ranged technology to 'command a landscape' like a medieval castle might (sling technology being a revolutionary introduction during the middle IA), and we have scant archaeological evidence for large-scale warfare during this period.  Many hillforts were simply unsuited to defensive warfare; many didn't even have water supply for example and, consider the 21ha Welsh hillfort of pen-y-cloddiau, simply did not have the men to even consider adequately manning the ramparts (if you consider medieval siege manuals as a guide).

What really confuses me then is that: we have a game set during the medieval period which, whilst citing the plethora of influences in play in the preceding 'dark ages',  disregards the even-earlier Roman period and instead settles on using the even-even-earlier iron age???

I'm not moaning - I am rattling with excitement for this game - just concerned about some of the reasons behind design choices... But I am an ass.

 

[kalarhan]

I thought the game was based circa AD 11th-12th century?

nope. Go back to each of the faction blogs and read them again, you will notice each faction has its own timeframe that all together is more like 6-12th century (with some stuff from other periods like historical base characters for inspiration)

 

[El Gato Supreme]

An thanks for the direct, I'd just seen the castles blog not the factions.  Still the bit about hillforts still applies.

 

[kalarhan]

Still the bit about hillforts still applies.

castles are 10th century and up (depends on the reference source), a specific name for the fortifications of the time. Wikipedia says this

Perhaps because the castle has become the most familiar type of fortification, many sites of fortifications earlier than the 10th century have become known as castles. Most of these are Iron Age hill forts

A European innovation, castles originated in the 9th and 10th centuries,

Also remember that

most early castles were motte-and-bailey castles of earthwork and timber, which could be constructed quickly. Some were later rebuilt in stone

 

[El Gato Supreme]

I'm citing from range of sources, none of which are wikipedia but I'm not sure what you mean? I completely understand that iron age hillforts are not castles nor even a form of earlier motte and Bailey fortificatiion. 

What I was trying to say is that, hillforts are not fortifications in the early medieval-medieval sense of the word, so how can they be used as the model for battanian castles? 

 

[kalarhan]

so how can they be used as the model for battanian castles?

Some hillforts were reused in the Early Middle Ages, and in some rarer cases, into the Later Medieval period as wel

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hillforts_in_Britain#Early_Medieval_hillforts

Early medieval ~6th to ~10th century.

 

[El Gato Supreme]

Some hillforts were indeed reused in later periods, however in dramatically altered formats entirely alien from their iron age predecessors; whose inspiration it was that taleworlds  cited.

Early medieval Britain is circa AD 450-1070.

I'm happy to post a bibliography but for a snapshot of the effect which Iron age hillforts have had on the British landscape:

https://hillforts.arch.ox.ac.uk/

It's been created by Gary Lock and a team from Oxford university - by no means a resource to access in isolation but nonetheless a good start point.

 

[kalarhan]

Some hillforts were indeed reused in later periods, however in dramatically altered formats entirely alien from their iron age predecessors; whose inspiration it was that frameworks cited.

the problem here is that you are taking the word "hillfort" meaning too seriously. Check the faction blog and screenshots. They are using hillfort style fortifications (which existed in the timeframe) as inspiration. That is all. For diversity sake they are trying to give factions a distinction on architecture style, how towns and forts are build, troops and their weapons, etc.

Now if you want to revisit the meaning behind the blog description or the faction itself I would suggest that you post on the faction blog thread itself.

If you, however, would like to see a gif/screenshots of a Battania castle on all stages (level 1, 2 and 3) - or any other faction -, then you are not the only one  . Ask for one, it is unlikely they will post more, but who knows hehe