Dev Blog 11/10/18

Users who are viewing this thread

[parsehtml]<p><img class="frame" src="https://www.taleworlds.com/Images/News/blog_post_61_taleworldswebsite.jpg" alt="" width="575" height="290" /></p> <p>Game development can be a tricky business. Sometimes an existing technology or tool just doesn’t do quite what you want it to do or it isn’t as efficient as you would hope. This leaves you with a difficult choice to make: change your design or create your own bespoke solution.</p></br> [/parsehtml]Read more at: http://www.taleworlds.com/en/Games/Bannerlord/Blog/81
 
I didn't really watch the whole video, I have already viewed many similar videos and more often then not the rules and regulation stop realism or true recreation. For good reason, they are techniques designed to maim and kill. It's kind of like why they don't use real sword fighting in movies: you actually would injure people, well that and it doesn't look as flashy.

About Roman legions, they did still use spears but the sword and shield combination was still more prevalent.

About piercing maille, apart from the fact that you don't actually need to penetrate maille to do damage and that there would be something underneath it, the amount of energy needed to actually break the rings may not be necessary. If you had a sword with a severe enough taper (or pointiness) then you effectively don't need as much energy. The same applies to spears, and a spear is basically a pointed stick which was primarily a thrusting weapon. Now considering that an 11th century sword generally wasn't as tapered as swords in later centuries whereas a spear is a simply a pointy stick then a spear, even a one-handed one, would have a much easier time piercing maille than a sword. Arm both of them in chain and the swordsman is at a disadvantage.

TL;DR:Chain is good at stopping slashes and cuts and the best way to beat it is with something pointy, like a spear.

Besides, I doubt that Bannerlord will simulate armour in a realistic manner anyway, otherwise the game will become much, much harder.
 
In addition to the above comment, just because your maille stops the blade from actually cutting/stabbing you doesn't mean that an 8' wooden shaft with a metal point jabbed as hard as possible into your abdomen is going to just disappear. Rather, that force is still transferred through the maille (and gambeson or whatever padding is under) to your body, probably knocking air out or at least forcing a double-over, which leaves you vulnerable. Also, much of the point of using spear+shield was the idea that, when you have a bunch of people all armed with spears standing in a line at least two deep, they can help cover each other/take advantage of openings created by others. Imagine you've got 200 men all armed w/ shields & spears and you get them in a double line. Each man on the front row can cover the area in front of him, as well as in front of the people on his left/right, while the back row can stab past the front row as well, meaning that attacking this formation potentially puts you in position to be attacked from 4/5 directions at once, and even if all of those end up being 'superficial' wounds, that many holes put in just about anyone will at least slow them down, if not take them out of the fight once and for all.
 
Lord Engineer said:
I didn't really watch the whole video, I have already viewed many similar videos and more often then not the rules and regulation stop realism or true recreation. For good reason, they are techniques designed to maim and kill. It's kind of like why they don't use real sword fighting in movies: you actually would injure people, well that and it doesn't look as flashy.

Of course. I do not question that for a moment. Just tryind to remind, that reanacment has it's flaws. It's not final argument in anything.

About Roman legions, they did still use spears but the sword and shield combination was still more prevalent.

After Marius reforms Pila were mainly throwing weapons. AFAIK they used mainly auxillaries for classical close combat spears.

About piercing maille, apart from the fact that you don't actually need to penetrate maille to do damage and that there would be something underneath it, the amount of energy needed to actually break the rings may not be necessary. If you had a sword with a severe enough taper (or pointiness) then you effectively don't need as much energy. The same applies to spears, and a spear is basically a pointed stick which was primarily a thrusting weapon. Now considering that an 11th century sword generally wasn't as tapered as swords in later centuries whereas a spear is a simply a pointy stick then a spear, even a one-handed one, would have a much easier time piercing maille than a sword. Arm both of them in chain and the swordsman is at a disadvantage.

TL;DR:Chain is good at stopping slashes and cuts and the best way to beat it is with something pointy, like a spear.[/quote]

Apart from blunt damage part (which is 100% correct), no, this test was done with wide range of swords, most of them with narrow, sharp end (mailpiercers). And no, still no one handed ring penetration. Even bodkin (FFS) needed 120 J to penetrate avarage mail, Lances needed staggering 140J, halebards 170J! So no, spears were most likely not mail destroyers. If they were, noone would invent more expensive, harder to learn weapons.

Besides, I doubt that Bannerlord will simulate armour in a realistic manner anyway, otherwise the game will become much, much harder.

I agree it won't. Would it become harder though? Or easier?

[quote author=Roccoflipside]
In addition to the above comment, just because your maille stops the blade from actually cutting/stabbing you doesn't mean that an 8' wooden shaft with a metal point jabbed as hard as possible into your abdomen is going to just disappear. Rather, that force is still transferred through the maille (and gambeson or whatever padding is under) to your body, probably knocking air out or at least forcing a double-over, which leaves you vulnerable. [/quote]

Well yes and no.
Of course it hurts. But I do not think lenght of the spear adds here anything to force. In fact, I believe it does otherwise. You decrease acceleration with unwieldy weapons.

Unless you get direct hit in the liver, blunt force trauma to the abdomen is painfull, but nothing a grown man can't handle. Boxers often use a tactic of hitting "body" of an opponent. In course of 12 rounds of bout it adds up. But unless it's delivered straight to the liver (Gasijev's style), body shots are there mainly to make opponent uncomfortable, not knock him down.

Also, much of the point of using spear+shield was the idea that, when you have a bunch of people all armed with spears standing in a line at least two deep, they can help cover each other/take advantage of openings created by others. Imagine you've got 200 men all armed w/ shields & spears and you get them in a double line. Each man on the front row can cover the area in front of him, as well as in front of the people on his left/right, while the back row can stab past the front row as well, meaning that attacking this formation potentially puts you in position to be attacked from 4/5 directions at once, and even if all of those end up being 'superficial' wounds, that many holes put in just about anyone will at least slow them down, if not take them out of the fight once and for all.

This is 100% true, and one of main reasons why shield+spear was dominant combination for many centuries in many places of the world.
Having said that, more agressive force could always try to come closer. Be it with a boar tusk's tactics or something like modern reaanacment "the bomb" :wink:
It can be observed for example here:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YOx4dSiVdqs&t=767s
at 8:40 center of shield wall breaks through.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JDEvx4pn6dM
same battle from drone perspective. 1:40 you can see a breakthrough. DESPITE pointy spears, and DESPITE the fact it's just reanacment (so one tap = you're dead).

I believe spears were mainly used for keeping the line, defensive purposes where lower quality troops could hold their ground for extended periods of time. But facing elite warriors in mail they were overrun.

I believe every shield wall battle would start with spear match, but sooner or later one side would try to close in. Not in whole line, mostly in part where best, most valiant warriors were.
 
My point of a body shot kind of rolls into my point about having up to 5 guys attack one person at once. If the first guy manages to get a good hit on the body that winds an attacker, then the other guys in line have an easier time landing a hit on an unprotected/less armored area, or just keep poking as hard as you can until something happens lol. I definitely agree that spears were common battlefield weapons for several reasons:
1: They're much less expensive to make, as someone pointed out above they don't even need to have a metal point, could just be a sharpened stick.
2: Relatively easy to train peasants/non-fighters on.  "Hold this end, stand here, and keep poking."
3: Range increase & ability to hit from farther away.

Therefore, the tactic for defeating a spearwall, which you basically described, is to target one point of the line w/ your best trained & equipped troops to break through. Once broken, the advantages of the spearwall become disadvantages, especially when you now have elite troops cutting through & into the rear of much less trained & experienced troops.

One of the first examples of these tactics would be when Thebes challenged Spartan authority, and surprisingly won the battle of Leuctra. Rather than deploying in one long, even line like usual, the Thebans stacked their Sacred Band (elite hoplite troops) on the left flank with twice the usual amt. of men, across from Sparta's allied troops, (i.e. not the bad-ass Spartans), while their allies swept back from the Sacred Band's flank in a sort of arc, so the troops that were across from the bona-fide Spartans were the farthest back on the battlefield. When the two lines met, the weight of the double Sacred Band line pushed right through their enemy, and were able to turn and hit the rest of the enemy from behind even before the Spartans really got to get going against their side of the line. Basically, spears are only as effective as the unit's ability to keep the line/formation together, and the enemy 6-10' away.

Another good example for anyone looking for more would be the battle of Cynoscephalae (Dog's head) between Macedonia and Rome. Not going to describe that one here, but another good example of how spear walls, while useful, can be disastrous when that's your only tactic.
 
Duh said:
:lol: @ Video

Imanis said:
Bannerlord_When? said:
haha when can i try this out in the game?

Careful! You are going to be watched for asking for something that is reasonable and certainly should have already been delivered.

We don't stand for common sense and attention paid to the consumer around here! We want to continue our government-funded boondoggle so that we can get paid for a couple of more years!

Now git!
Figured this bit of misinformation and/or trolling should be addressed rather than just trigger a warning (in case there is a lack of knowledge at play). The forum is run by volunteer moderators from the community and we are under no obligation to silence anyone or anything - outside of enforcing the rules...that have been put forth by past generations of volunteer moderators. The only "directive" that comes anywhere close to what you are implying is that TW does not permit any comments on the appearance of developers that partake in the Q&As.

So no, posts that are in line with the rules do not trigger warnings/mutes/bans/etc regardless of how critical of TW they may be. However, some folks do not bother to read the rules they agree to upon their use of the forums and are subsequently upset if they are punished for double or crossposting or insult-laden criticism. Similarly, people should understand that we classify the constant repetion of the same low-effort post as spam, because we have no desire to let this place devolve into what is sometimes seen in the steam-comment section with endless "Bannerlord when" posts. That is not to say that no one can ever pose this question, but that we will take action if that is all a particular user or set of users do. At that point it is simply venting frustration in a way that inhibits proper discussion and hurts our community.

Much the same goes for the spreading of misinformation, of course, so I will ask you to refrain from unsubstantiated claims such as the one quoted above - especially in areas that have nothing to do with forum moderation. If you do wish to complain about forum policy, you may instead use the realm to engage in public discussion or send a moderator a private message (pick an active one) or send us an email at [email protected]

I understand how the farcical nature of my comment could be easily muddled to the reader. The point remains that less and less people are visiting the forums.

On a separate note: you can attempt to separate yourself from the main corps of TW by clarifying your (and other mod's) volunteer relationship with TW; but that does not absolve you of the inevitable association to the development of the game, nor does it divorce you from the direct channel that you have with TW as moderators of their official forum.

I will put it in plain language: TW's method of marketing outreach is flawed. More and more people continue to be disenchanted with TW's approach to its consumer base. It is strange and highly ineffective.

Not my paycheck in the end, so I do not care too much. What you call trolling or misinformation, I simply identify as a half joke, half ironic observation. Because you see it in a negative light, your assertion is to cast it in a negative connotation. TW should have put out a release date by now and have not (which is their choice...a poor choice, but their prerogative nonetheless).

As to your accusation of unsubstantiated claims, they have been thoroughly substantiated inside and outside of these forums, in a manner too lengthy to post here (as it would just get "mod"-ified anyways).

I understand where you are coming from but, living in a country where basic civil liberties are despised and suppressed, I will respectfully, but resolutely, disagree.
 
Roccoflipside said:
One of the first examples of these tactics would be when Thebes challenged Spartan authority, and surprisingly won the battle of Leuctra. Rather than deploying in one long, even line like usual, the Thebans stacked their Sacred Band (elite hoplite troops) on the left flank with twice the usual amt. of men, across from Sparta's allied troops, (i.e. not the bad-ass Spartans), while their allies swept back from the Sacred Band's flank in a sort of arc, so the troops that were across from the bona-fide Spartans were the farthest back on the battlefield. When the two lines met, the weight of the double Sacred Band line pushed right through their enemy, and were able to turn and hit the rest of the enemy from behind even before the Spartans really got to get going against their side of the line. Basically, spears are only as effective as the unit's ability to keep the line/formation together, and the enemy 6-10' away.

To illustrate better:
 
Imanis said:
As to your accusation of unsubstantiated claims, they have been thoroughly substantiated inside and outside of these forums, in a manner too lengthy to post here
You have too much proof to provide any? That is... a strange argument.

At this point I am not sure whether you are conflating your concerns regarding TW marketing with the censorship joke insinuations or are just pulling my leg... but the warning I issued only concerns the latter matter.

Imanis said:
(as it would just get "mod"-ified anyways).
Is this what this is about? You disliking your posts being merged (rather than altered) after you triple-posted? That is standard procedure of rule enforcement.

In any case, further claims of moderation abuse without evidence and in areas unrelated to forum policy will simply see you warned/muted/etc. (Do also note that we are not running any platforms beyond this one, though you are welcome to highlight issues with them in the realm as well.)

As for the rest of your post - we do communicate the concerns of the community (yours, those of others and our own) to TW. Aside from that, however, our focus is on keeping this place constructive and enjoyable for as many members as possible. To us this platform and community go beyond the commercial side of things. (Why else would we volunteer?)

Edith: Just to reiterate further discussion of these matters should go in the realm, private message or email.
 
Great conclusions. I agree with everything except maybe that:

Roccoflipside said:
My point of a body shot kind of rolls into my point about having up to 5 guys attack one person at once. If the first guy manages to get a good hit on the body that winds an attacker, then the other guys in line have an easier time landing a hit on an unprotected/less armored area, or just keep poking as hard as you can until something happens lol.

Well, in case of round shield held in one place, like Roland's Warzecha you do not even have to land the hit. It's enough to just hit side of the shield to flip it for others. On the other hand, not every spearman used "viking's style" round shield.

Regardless, I think you greatly overestimate blunt power of spear thrust to belly. It's painfull I guess, but not something grown man could not handle without winding. Also, you sort of overestimate battlefield awerness of spearman. It's technically possible to attack one dude with 5 spears, sure. However not very likely. You have opponents around you. They also have sharp, long objects (or shorter axes/swords/maces) and look at you intently. Every time you focus attention elsewhere it creates an oppening.

That's why flanking and longer shield wall is so powerfull.

This lead me to what I said earlier. Spear is mainly defensive weapon, aimed to keep enemy at bay. For most warriors spear contest would be carefully observing guy(s) ahead, blocking his thrust and trying to score one for yourself. More hardened, better equipped warriors could maybe learn some more advanced techniqes like "i hit high, you hit low" or lowering shield with dane axe and thrust with a spear, but all in all I can't really see 5 guys constantly stabbing one fellow in battlefield conditions.


Another good example for anyone looking for more would be the battle of Cynoscephalae (Dog's head) between Macedonia and Rome. Not going to describe that one here, but another good example of how spear walls, while useful, can be disastrous when that's your only tactic.

Macedonian phalanx were more like pikeman than spear and shield. They used long, two handed sarrisas. Funny how they were defeated by short gladius.

To sum up:

Spear does not destroy sword in any way. It's more versitile, cheaper, easier to learn and have some advantages in battlefield conditions. It would start a shieldwall battle, but most likely breaktrhough would be made with axes/swords.
 
Mithril♡Souls said:
KhergitLancer99 said:

Spear+Shield destroys sword+shield.

We know that TW buffed spear a lot but I wonder if they buffed it enough.

Why did you even post this in the devblog discussion forum?...

It would have been bad if I posted it in a new topic in citadel.
 
Oh man, had to write a whole UI library. You guys are animals. Did you use any existing layout managers as a models as a template for the widgets and how they fit together? There's a lot of verbose attribute names, do you guys have at least have a keyword file or something for your text editor to help type the thing out? All in all really cool, looks very flexible, and I like the spots where you can just say slap in the character tableu as a widget and position it and bam, you have a working paperdoll on any screen.  I like all the different event handling in there for onClick's and hovers and the like pointing to a function to handle it too.  While it's probably made your guy's life way easier, I imagine how freeform it's going to be fore modders that want to go crazy in the game.  Honestly at this point I feel like bannerlord's just going to be the ultimate medieval sandbox and the best part of the game's the engine more so than however the game ends up!
 
Back
Top Bottom