Dev Blog 09/08/19

Users who are viewing this thread

[parsehtml]<p><img class="frame" src="https://www.taleworlds.com/Images/News/blog_post_101_taleworldswebsite.jpg" alt="" width="575" height="290" /></p> <p>As development on Mount & Blade II: Bannerlord steadily proceeds, we are constantly looking at how best to allow players to interact with the game’s many features. One big change in this regard is the way that we are handling sieges. Sieges are key events in Mount & Blade games, and we are making great efforts to improve this aspect of the game in Bannerlord.</p></br> [/parsehtml]Read more at: http://www.taleworlds.com/en/Games/Bannerlord/Blog/121
 
Vairly said:
Terco_Viejo said:
A quick Tercosketch™ removing those ugly green **** bars. A simple hover that shows the information using graphical elements of your interface.

nyHRC.jpg


These green bars break the cleanliness that you have been applying to your interface since the map enhancement. Please rethink.
Cool, but I like the original better.

Indeed, i saw no problem with the health bars and actually like them, it's a game and it does well the job to display the health of the engines and wall so you can play the sieging mini-game well informed about what's happening.
 
NPC99 said:
Interesting blog. Are siege artillery slots limited to four per side in every siege to fit all the action on the campaign map?

Previous videos showed animated sieges on the campaign map, with siege artillery moving and firing. If siege artillery is animated and every town/castle icon is unique, then catapults etc. will never fit perfectly on top of defending towers. I’d much rather have animation than static models that align to their towers.

This UI will help players assess the status of a siege while travelling on the campaign map, letting us choose the right time to intervene. Keep up the good work.  :grin:
This. They could scale the models down a bit, but that's about it. I don't need perfect fit models everywhere, and as long as they do their job (showing what is firing what, where and at whom), I'm happy.

vonbalt said:
Vairly said:
Terco_Viejo said:
A quick Tercosketch™ removing those ugly green **** bars. A simple hover that shows the information using graphical elements of your interface.

nyHRC.jpg


These green bars break the cleanliness that you have been applying to your interface since the map enhancement. Please rethink.
Cool, but I like the original better.

Indeed, i saw no problem with the health bars and actually like them, it's a game and it does well the job to display the health of the engines and wall so you can play the sieging mini-game well informed about what's happening.
The bars are ugly and unfitting, but still are a better UI option than the hover menu, which seems confusing. If you have 4 catapults, how can you know at a glance which is more damaged? It's too confusing, you'd have to do some mental math to find out which is which. Not good, we need easy access to the info, not some convoluted series of bigger and smaller bars. I would prefer a visual damaged model - a burnt and scarred texture for damaged engines, and squeaky-clean for new and healthy engines, with no health bars, or very, very discreet ones - a slim single-colour line (dark beige maybe), with no black background. So if it's almost derstroyed, there's almost no bar left.
If it's not doable, a slimmer, more discreet and more transluscent health bar may better fit the UI. Something like the Player health bar. The green to red colours are nice, but too much on the eye. Maybe a fixed gradient from Light brown/beige to dark grey - whereas the light colour indicates good health, and darker colour indicates low health... Sorry I can't think of anything better, my designer days were over a decade ago, unfortunately.

NPC99 said:
Interesting blog. Are siege artillery slots limited to four per side in every siege to fit all the action on the campaign map?

Previous videos showed animated sieges on the campaign map, with siege artillery moving and firing. If siege artillery is animated and every town/castle icon is unique, then catapults etc. will never fit perfectly on top of defending towers. I’d much rather have animation than static models that align to their towers.

This UI will help players assess the status of a siege while travelling on the campaign map, letting us choose the right time to intervene. Keep up the good work.  :grin:
This. They could scale the models down a bit, but that's about it. I don't need perfect fit models everywhere, and as long as they do their job (showing what is firing what, where and at whom), I'm happy.

KhergitLancer99 said:
Vairly said:
Catapults on the walls look strange. Models do not fit on towers.
Everything else is cool
Another nice thing I noticed in the ss is that AI focuses on trebutchets since they are the ones damaged, nice !!!

This means AI can understand which siege engine is the most dangeous.
I'm not sure that's what happened here. What I got from the blog is that they fire at whichever is closest first. My guess is that the attacker deployed the trebuchets first, and they got damaged, and at this point in time in the screenshot, the catapults were just deployed. So the trebuchets are more damaged, but not because they're dangerous, but rather they were there first.


Quite a good blog, but it does raise more questions than answers. Maybe some of them will be answered in Gamescom. Maybe not. Most likely not.

 
No power enough for engageing catapults and such into battle phase :ohdear:
But the player got to be imersed into siege machines controlling somehow :shifty:
Put a right people into storm of creation and U got briliant solution :grin:
Bravo TW!!!!
 
Building siege machines involves the use of resources such as wood, iron and stone.
Therefore the distance from the source of these resources and their rarity in the besieged area must imply an extension of the construction and use times of the same.

Clearly having an engineer with skills speeds up the construction processes, but an engineer cannot make the material appear out of thin air.
Therefore, given the same engineering competence, two areas with different availability of resources imply a different amount of time in building the same siege machines.
This without taking into account the material that can be brought in the party's inventory.
So:
1) is the material to build the siege machines taken from the surrounding area or must it be transported into the army inventory, or is this mechanic not really taken into account with its obvious consequences?

if the answer is yes:
2) Is the time taken to build siege machines proportional to the rarity of resources in the area?

if the answer is no:
3) Is there the possibility of implementing this mechanism based on a number of variables (wood / stone / water) relative to each point on the map?
so that if the siege takes place in a certain area, the influence range of the besieging army will cover a certain number of points which will therefore offer a given number of resources, which apply a multiplier to the speed of construction.

think about it, a castle, not exactly in the best conditions, is difficult to take by the enemy because the besieger had not taken into consideration the lack of resources in the territory and had not brought the necessary material and therefore cannot build siege machines in time before the allies of the besieged arrive.
 
Going back to the previous devblog, I believe many community members noticed the lack of both cloth and horse mane physics, did Callum explain this? Is it off the closed beta for any reason?
 
darksoulshin said:
Building siege machines involves the use of resources such as wood, iron and stone.
Therefore the distance from the source of these resources and their rarity in the besieged area must imply an extension of the construction and use times of the same.

Clearly having an engineer with skills speeds up the construction processes, but an engineer cannot make the material appear out of thin air.
Therefore, given the same engineering competence, two areas with different availability of resources imply a different amount of time in building the same siege machines.
This without taking into account the material that can be brought in the party's inventory.
So:
1) is the material to build the siege machines taken from the surrounding area or must it be transported into the army inventory, or is this mechanic not really taken into account with its obvious consequences?

if the answer is yes:
2) Is the time taken to build siege machines proportional to the rarity of resources in the area?

if the answer is no:
3) Is there the possibility of implementing this mechanism based on a number of variables (wood / stone / water) relative to each point on the map?
so that if the siege takes place in a certain area, the influence range of the besieging army will cover a certain number of points which will therefore offer a given number of resources, which apply a multiplier to the speed of construction.

think about it, a castle, not exactly in the best conditions, is difficult to take by the enemy because the besieger had not taken into consideration the lack of resources in the territory and had not brought the necessary material and therefore cannot build siege machines in time before the allies of the besieged arrive.
No thank you to all that.
 
Noudelle said:
darksoulshin said:
Building siege machines involves the use of resources such as wood, iron and stone.
Therefore the distance from the source of these resources and their rarity in the besieged area must imply an extension of the construction and use times of the same.

Clearly having an engineer with skills speeds up the construction processes, but an engineer cannot make the material appear out of thin air.
Therefore, given the same engineering competence, two areas with different availability of resources imply a different amount of time in building the same siege machines.
This without taking into account the material that can be brought in the party's inventory.
So:
1) is the material to build the siege machines taken from the surrounding area or must it be transported into the army inventory, or is this mechanic not really taken into account with its obvious consequences?

if the answer is yes:
2) Is the time taken to build siege machines proportional to the rarity of resources in the area?

if the answer is no:
3) Is there the possibility of implementing this mechanism based on a number of variables (wood / stone / water) relative to each point on the map?
so that if the siege takes place in a certain area, the influence range of the besieging army will cover a certain number of points which will therefore offer a given number of resources, which apply a multiplier to the speed of construction.

think about it, a castle, not exactly in the best conditions, is difficult to take by the enemy because the besieger had not taken into consideration the lack of resources in the territory and had not brought the necessary material and therefore cannot build siege machines in time before the allies of the besieged arrive.
No thank you to all that.

Sounds like too much micromanagement for me.
 
FBohler said:
Noudelle said:
darksoulshin said:
Building siege machines involves the use of resources such as wood, iron and stone.
Therefore the distance from the source of these resources and their rarity in the besieged area must imply an extension of the construction and use times of the same.

Clearly having an engineer with skills speeds up the construction processes, but an engineer cannot make the material appear out of thin air.
Therefore, given the same engineering competence, two areas with different availability of resources imply a different amount of time in building the same siege machines.
This without taking into account the material that can be brought in the party's inventory.
So:
1) is the material to build the siege machines taken from the surrounding area or must it be transported into the army inventory, or is this mechanic not really taken into account with its obvious consequences?

if the answer is yes:
2) Is the time taken to build siege machines proportional to the rarity of resources in the area?

if the answer is no:
3) Is there the possibility of implementing this mechanism based on a number of variables (wood / stone / water) relative to each point on the map?
so that if the siege takes place in a certain area, the influence range of the besieging army will cover a certain number of points which will therefore offer a given number of resources, which apply a multiplier to the speed of construction.

think about it, a castle, not exactly in the best conditions, is difficult to take by the enemy because the besieger had not taken into consideration the lack of resources in the territory and had not brought the necessary material and therefore cannot build siege machines in time before the allies of the besieged arrive.
No thank you to all that.

Sounds like too much micromanagement for me.

but the only thing you need to do is look at the enemy territory and see if there are forests, wood and stone
If yes, go quiet, otherwise fill the inventory with resources too.
Assaulting a castle should require efforts to have time and resource management skills.
If they implemented the construction of shelters, as in viking's conquest, the choice of the place in which to place it would also fall on how much that place offers resources to us but also to a possible besieger.
It would be enough to move the mouse on the map and have a small window with the territorial resources.


 
darksoulshin said:
FBohler said:
Noudelle said:
darksoulshin said:
Building siege machines involves the use of resources such as wood, iron and stone.
Therefore the distance from the source of these resources and their rarity in the besieged area must imply an extension of the construction and use times of the same.

Clearly having an engineer with skills speeds up the construction processes, but an engineer cannot make the material appear out of thin air.
Therefore, given the same engineering competence, two areas with different availability of resources imply a different amount of time in building the same siege machines.
This without taking into account the material that can be brought in the party's inventory.
So:
1) is the material to build the siege machines taken from the surrounding area or must it be transported into the army inventory, or is this mechanic not really taken into account with its obvious consequences?

if the answer is yes:
2) Is the time taken to build siege machines proportional to the rarity of resources in the area?

if the answer is no:
3) Is there the possibility of implementing this mechanism based on a number of variables (wood / stone / water) relative to each point on the map?
so that if the siege takes place in a certain area, the influence range of the besieging army will cover a certain number of points which will therefore offer a given number of resources, which apply a multiplier to the speed of construction.

think about it, a castle, not exactly in the best conditions, is difficult to take by the enemy because the besieger had not taken into consideration the lack of resources in the territory and had not brought the necessary material and therefore cannot build siege machines in time before the allies of the besieged arrive.
No thank you to all that.

Sounds like too much micromanagement for me.

but the only thing you need to do is look at the enemy territory and see if there are forests, wood and stone
If yes, go quiet, otherwise fill the inventory with resources too.
Assaulting a castle should require efforts to have time and resource management skills.
If they implemented the construction of shelters, as in viking's conquest, the choice of the place in which to place it would also fall on how much that place offers resources to us but also to a possible besieger.
It would be enough to move the mouse on the map and have a small window with the territorial resources.
"The only thing you need to do is tediously gather resources before you can get to the fun part"
Look I'm not saying this doesn't have its appeal, I'm sure a lot of people would like this mechanic, but for people like me who play M&B for the combat first and foremost, I don't want a mechanic like this to come anywhere close to this game.
 
darksoulshin said:
Building siege machines involves the use of resources such as wood, iron and stone.
Therefore the distance from the source of these resources and their rarity in the besieged area must imply an extension of the construction and use times of the same.

Clearly having an engineer with skills speeds up the construction processes, but an engineer cannot make the material appear out of thin air.
Therefore, given the same engineering competence, two areas with different availability of resources imply a different amount of time in building the same siege machines.
This without taking into account the material that can be brought in the party's inventory.
So:
1) is the material to build the siege machines taken from the surrounding area or must it be transported into the army inventory, or is this mechanic not really taken into account with its obvious consequences?

if the answer is yes:
2) Is the time taken to build siege machines proportional to the rarity of resources in the area?

if the answer is no:
3) Is there the possibility of implementing this mechanism based on a number of variables (wood / stone / water) relative to each point on the map?
so that if the siege takes place in a certain area, the influence range of the besieging army will cover a certain number of points which will therefore offer a given number of resources, which apply a multiplier to the speed of construction.

think about it, a castle, not exactly in the best conditions, is difficult to take by the enemy because the besieger had not taken into consideration the lack of resources in the territory and had not brought the necessary material and therefore cannot build siege machines in time before the allies of the besieged arrive.
IMAO
Such mechanics are not needed M&B.
Too much needs to be realized for this. Change locations of castles, change AI, сreate a resource availability map.

In the game has a lot of content and features. Do not overload.
 
blog_post_95_taleworldswebsite_02.jpg
https://www.taleworlds.com/en/Games/Bannerlord/Blog/115

From this devblog, we know some villages produces wood for living. So after raid or as a lord of that villages, what to do with all of that wood? We are just meant to sell them? I don't consider to supply a campaign with relevant materials to besiege a castle as a micromanagement. This is exactly like the idea of producing or buying horses to have mounted units. So TW didn't think that as a micromanagement, why would they think this idea as a micromanagement?
 
Bjorn The Hound said:
blog_post_95_taleworldswebsite_02.jpg
https://www.taleworlds.com/en/Games/Bannerlord/Blog/115

From this devblog, we know some villages produces wood for living. So after raid or as a lord of that villages, what to do with all of that wood? We are just meant to sell them? I don't consider to supply a campaign with relevant materials to besiege a castle as a micromanagement.
Nobody said anything about micro-management. I wouldn't consider this micro-management either, but it still is management that I think is unnecessary.
Bjorn The Hound said:
This is exactly like the idea of producing or buying horses to have mounted units. So TW didn't think that as a micromanagement, why would they think this idea as a micromanagement?
Which I'm not a fan of. But this is still more straightforward than gathering resources for a siege depending on where the city or castle in question is located.
 
Back
Top Bottom