[parsehtml]<p><img class="frame" src="https://www.taleworlds.com/Images/News/blog_post_31_taleworldswebsite.jpg" alt="" width="575" height="290" /></p>
<p>For many people, Mount & Blade: Warband is a singleplayer experience which lets them rise from the rank of a commoner up to the ruler of an entire kingdom, developing their character and fighting in epic sieges along the way.
For others, it is an opportunity to run around naked with a two-handed sword and test their combat skills against players from all around the world. In this week’s blog, we talk with the person responsible for making these equally epic (and sometimes silly) experiences a reality in Bannerlord: Korneel Guns.</p></br> [/parsehtml]Read more at: http://www.taleworlds.com/en/Games/Bannerlord/Blog/51
Dev Blog 15/03/18
- Thread starter Callum
- Start date
Users who are viewing this thread
Look, the "good examples" you posted are both competitively oriented posts. My reasons were not as verbose because they are nuch simpler:Duh said:
I, like many people here, don't give a rat's ass about competitive play. And just like many others here, I happen to like Battle mode. Thus, removing Battle in the name of competitive play is simply daft, in the sense that there couldn't have been much thought put into the decision, as it appears that they didn't take that rather obvious thing into consideration.
Saying it's daft, dumb or moronic is a bit impolite, yes. It also is a perfectly functional way of expressing one's thoughts on the matter, especially when you explain why you think a it's dumb.
And for Internet standards, hell, for TW forums standards, this is all pretty damned mild anyway.
Let's not skip over the fact that "battle" can be implemented into any game mode. It's as simple as limiting player lives to one per round in the server settings. It's TBD if matchmaking will have a battle-specific game mode, but don't fool yourself into believing battle is a thing of the past.
Sheesh, some of these replies! If I were a dev that had a community trashing the game (unreleased, may I remind you) like this, I would feel very discouraged indeed. You haven't even played the bloody thing, and yet you are going on and on about how it'll be the worst thing in the world. Now I agree that having battle mode would be nice for those who enjoy that sort of thing, but TW is trying to do something else here, to entice newcomers to get into the MP scene, which I think is fine. Who knows, maybe they'll do player tests, see that not everyone is enjoying the Skirmish mode, and decide to include a battle or battle like mode in the game at launch.
Besides, Callum himself stated that:
So just chill the Flip out before going about accusing the devs of screwing over / ignoring the community. It's still too early to tell what sort of MP we'll be getting at launch.
Besides, Callum himself stated that:
and also mentioned:Callum_TaleWorlds said:
Callum_TaleWorlds said:
So just chill the Flip out before going about accusing the devs of screwing over / ignoring the community. It's still too early to tell what sort of MP we'll be getting at launch.
Duh
Duke
My own argument is for casual play and tries to provide some explanatation as to how and why Battle fills a void that other modes do not. It may not even be a good argument, but what matters is that it offers additional details, thoughts, explanations - effort. Something that Callum might be able to use. Something that may resonate with one of the developers. I also don't feel like Orion's points are exclusively competitive.Scarf Ace said:
I am not saying you can't call the decision daft or dumb (though, frankly, you are less likely to be heard/read, if you are overly hostile). I am saying you can't direct insults/flaming/trolling at other users or staff. Stuff likeScarf Ace said:
I want to take part in the big siege or the battle of the castle, all players, no NPCS, I can push the Siege hammer and other tools, the best network can maintain 500 people's war. This is a national war. I want to ride a horse with a lance Into the body and get people fly,Shake the lance and throw the man off the lance. just like The cavalry of Cossack in EA1. I also want to cut into other people body with a sword, watching him scream and scream until he dies，Then take the sword out of his body.,the corpse Don't disappear。AMD RYZEN2800X ，memory.RAM32G, video memory 8G， GPU1070， SSD 250G，GAME release, I buy this configuration. Our game optimization bone animation is CPU or GPU, I see an article, CPU is 500FPS, with GPU is 4000FPS, LINK HERE http://www.cnblogs.com/dbylk/p/4984530.html .If you find that the compiler you are using does not use the SSE command to perform float to int conversion, you can manually use inline assembly to optimize the program.I'm not a programmer, I don't understand, I just love MB2, I want to contribute my power, I don't know whether this article is useful for our game optimization.1.https://indienova.com/u/chenjd01/blogread/3917 （General-purpose computing on graphics processing units）2.https://indienova.com/u/chenjd01/blogread/4211 （Endless grass）
It doesn't matter that I didn't provide details as what I said is perfectly adequate for pointing out the lapse in logic.Duh said:
Also it's utterly disingenuous for you to quote that "retard" post and leaving out who said it, as it implies that it was me.
As for the one that actually was me, consider that he willingly decided to misinterpret a bunch of posts to insult people by calling them entitled and morally grandstand about it. He was being daft, not to mention rather off-topic. I stand by my response. All things considered, it was rather measured.
MaHuD said:
See Callum's quote next page.
Revverie
If you check the Bannerlord thread you will find the most popular mode is battle, check it out.Duh said:
Now they are just laughing in our faces lolCallum_TaleWorlds said:KhergitLancer80 said:
Siege mode will still be there.
The purpose of a forum is for open discussion, Taleworlds has made their work open for criticism and it would be un-reasonable not to expect that from their fans.The Meddling Monk said:
Criticism is a hard pill to swallow, but TW forwards all their effort for the very people who are voicing their concerns.
If discarding Battle mode, one risks removing the familiar excitement experienced players expect and excluding that potential fun for new players. It's a shock for conservative players who's logic revolves around questioning change where there need not be any to begin with; there's truth to that - BUT
Old users will be attached to what they have grown accustomed to & that presents a bias which doesn't necessarily ring true for new players who may find the initial pace lackluster to begin with - a quality which experienced players are simply used to - and maybe the oldies don't want to give that up for the sake of a more fast paced game mode.
That's okay but holding onto a game mode for the sake of familiarity doesn't reflect its inherent negative qualities, which should be taken into account.
Scarf Ace said:
Item 1: It doesn't matter who the author was, nor does his post imply it was you. What it does do is inform other users what the Mod deems inappropriate. Don't take offense for something you didn't do, easy as that.
Item 2: You assume much, dude. I "willing decided to misinterpret"? More like, I misunderstood because I had difficult comprehending what your message was through the thickness of your petty anger. I agree I was inputting off-topic responses, however I felt they were necessary because I was rather astounded by the measure of anger many of the posters (yourself included) exhibited on this thread. I have only recently been attending posts here, but I have played TW games since early development Mount&Blade. That being said, I really did not expect to waltz into a thread filled with individuals such as yourself spouting the like in which you stand by. And the name calling! Oh, I know, this is the internet, but that is an excuse. Obviously your character is in need of some serious internal speculation if you are going to get this upset about a game mode for a game that hasn't even been released.
With all of that being said, I apologize to the Mods for continuing this useless discourse and will try my best to provide more insightful posts related to the topic at hand.
Duh
Duke
I have explained at length how you can and how you can't make a meaningful impact on development. It is your choice what you do with it.Scarf Ace said:
Don't be silly. I provided you with an exampe for what is not okay after you continued arguing for a statement that is okay. Nothing more and nothing less. I will also note that no behavior of one user legitimizes the breaking of rules for another. If you feel that another user is behaving unduly towards you, simply hit the report button. If you cannot abide by the rules of this place, it will result in moderation action.Scarf Ace said:
Anywho, I believe everything relevant has been said in this regard. If you do wish to provide further input, you are welcome to send me a PM, post in the Realm or use our dedicated forum email.
I will go with the survey and investigation that TW has done. IIRC several hundred people participated in that one.
Revverie
Thanks for being the good voice here for us, Battle is just something we players enjoy and want, and I don't see how this mode can hurt the others, so what's the big deal about including it? They changed trees because a guy said so, we, at least a half percent of the MP community, want battle, yes we are not paying them currently, but we are the objectiveScarf Ace said:
I'm sorry... "Skirmish" cannot and will not at all replace the joy of Battlemode.
Almost NONE of the veteran players in Warband agree with removing battle; NOT because they are closed minded,but because we enjoy battlemode as it was- period!
We dont need to test skirmish to see if it is better than battle;
It cannot be better, because it is something completely different. That simple.
Multiple lives, Controlling multiple flags simultaneously, withdrawing to regroup, fixed classes, no gold, reward for loosing team etc. Nope. This far away from what we're searching for as a clan.
Maybe it is fun and yeah, we will for sure try it, but it makes no sense at all to remove battle in its place.
I presume that you think that this new system might give a new fresh take on warband when people test it, and I am sure it will, but I still
think you should listen and respect your dedicated fans that has brought hundreds and if not thousands of people into warband for over 5 years and kept warband active for a long time!
Instead of removing battle, why not adjust and balance it?
It's just a matter of adjusting prices and what to reward.
In example: We did a few adjustments on our "skirmish" server:
a) Reduced starting money allowing worse starting equipment, and thus made players more careful in their engagements.
b) Reduce gold reward for kills - to avoid focus on ramboic behavior
c) Increased gold rewards for winning rounds - to increase team effort.
We had quite a lot of players on our server for a long time almost always working as a team and no problem with snowballing.
To snowball you'd had to win at least 2 rounds consequently to be able to buy any significantly better armor or weapons.
In vanilla, you could get chainmail after winning a single round.
Giving rewards to the loosing team seems awkward to me... and does not belong in competitive play.
We love a game that is hard and punishing.
It gives us the incentive to worker harder both individually and well as a team so to NOT loose.
I hope this makes sense.
Almost NONE of the veteran players in Warband agree with removing battle; NOT because they are closed minded,but because we enjoy battlemode as it was- period!
We dont need to test skirmish to see if it is better than battle;
It cannot be better, because it is something completely different. That simple.
Multiple lives, Controlling multiple flags simultaneously, withdrawing to regroup, fixed classes, no gold, reward for loosing team etc. Nope. This far away from what we're searching for as a clan.
Maybe it is fun and yeah, we will for sure try it, but it makes no sense at all to remove battle in its place.
I presume that you think that this new system might give a new fresh take on warband when people test it, and I am sure it will, but I still
think you should listen and respect your dedicated fans that has brought hundreds and if not thousands of people into warband for over 5 years and kept warband active for a long time!
Instead of removing battle, why not adjust and balance it?
It's just a matter of adjusting prices and what to reward.
In example: We did a few adjustments on our "skirmish" server:
a) Reduced starting money allowing worse starting equipment, and thus made players more careful in their engagements.
b) Reduce gold reward for kills - to avoid focus on ramboic behavior
c) Increased gold rewards for winning rounds - to increase team effort.
We had quite a lot of players on our server for a long time almost always working as a team and no problem with snowballing.
To snowball you'd had to win at least 2 rounds consequently to be able to buy any significantly better armor or weapons.
In vanilla, you could get chainmail after winning a single round.
Giving rewards to the loosing team seems awkward to me... and does not belong in competitive play.
We love a game that is hard and punishing.
It gives us the incentive to worker harder both individually and well as a team so to NOT loose.
I hope this makes sense.
That is true, however, some users have resorted to insults and / or name calling which I would hardly call criticism. Their posts are either saying something that is irrelevant or that they don't like the new mode(s) because they don't like the new mode(s); they are not giving any particular reason as to why nor any feedback for how it could be changed. Which I would argue is not beneficial to the discussion.DoHope said:
Tequnique said:
As I have said before, I don't play MP much, or really at all. However, I am an advocate for choice. I don't see a reason to remove the option for Skirmish mode, Battle mode, Captain mode, etc. I agree with what you are saying, though, that there is no real reason to remove a game option, or replace it. Heck, I don't even think they need to fix it if they're adding Skirmish mode as a more balanced game option.
Options are always great, that is the message!
Callum already said several pages ago that he's going to present information to the team on Monday. Give TW their weekend, guys.
One thing to remember is that the developer side of things isn't always so cut and dry as "a lot of people say they want this." Players aren't always right, they just sometimes know what they think is wrong. I'm not saying this about any of you personally. But Taleworlds has metrics that you don't have.
Riot Games once released a blog talking about how one of their rotating game modes was extremely popular. They also mentioned that whenever it was brought out, the playerbase surged, but then dropped below where it was before. The takeaway here is that there are hidden impacts to game design decisions. They could put it back in and you would be happy, and then you wouldn't know if any of this stuff was going on behind the scenes. They could have a diminishing player count and you wouldn't know. I'm not saying this is the case (we can say that Warband multiplayer has dwindled, but that'd be age and anticipation for Bannerlord), just that there could be something like this that you don't know about.
Nothing about this screams "dumb decision" to me. Might removing it be the wrong decision, or it might not. But this is clearly a measured decision, and I cannot imagine they simply said "battle is broken, let's shrink it down and fit in point control and call it a day." You know why? Because that's not a logical progression, and this is from a team of talented people. What that tells me was that coming to this conclusion was a process, and that they almost certainly made a bunch of hard decisions to get here. And NO, they don't need to tell you how they got there, every step of the way. This is where we are now, and you can try to talk them back. But repeatedly I see "removing battle is a dumb decision because a lot of us want battle." Not everything in game design is that easy.
One thing to remember is that the developer side of things isn't always so cut and dry as "a lot of people say they want this." Players aren't always right, they just sometimes know what they think is wrong. I'm not saying this about any of you personally. But Taleworlds has metrics that you don't have.
Riot Games once released a blog talking about how one of their rotating game modes was extremely popular. They also mentioned that whenever it was brought out, the playerbase surged, but then dropped below where it was before. The takeaway here is that there are hidden impacts to game design decisions. They could put it back in and you would be happy, and then you wouldn't know if any of this stuff was going on behind the scenes. They could have a diminishing player count and you wouldn't know. I'm not saying this is the case (we can say that Warband multiplayer has dwindled, but that'd be age and anticipation for Bannerlord), just that there could be something like this that you don't know about.
Nothing about this screams "dumb decision" to me. Might removing it be the wrong decision, or it might not. But this is clearly a measured decision, and I cannot imagine they simply said "battle is broken, let's shrink it down and fit in point control and call it a day." You know why? Because that's not a logical progression, and this is from a team of talented people. What that tells me was that coming to this conclusion was a process, and that they almost certainly made a bunch of hard decisions to get here. And NO, they don't need to tell you how they got there, every step of the way. This is where we are now, and you can try to talk them back. But repeatedly I see "removing battle is a dumb decision because a lot of us want battle." Not everything in game design is that easy.
Revverie
I understand what you say yet Warband is known for having an active and loyal community, despite being a game that came out 7 years ago with an even older graphic look, yes mods play a big part, a really big one, but you can ignore that multiplayer does it job too, and one of the most played by clans or just random people who want to have fun is battle, this talks a lot of what makes this game good, if they think they can give us something better then I am on it, but there is no need to take this away from us.mgb519 said:
