Dev Blog 18/04/19

[parsehtml]<p><img class="frame" src="https://www.taleworlds.com/Images/News/blog_post_86_taleworldswebsite.jpg" alt="" width="575" height="290" /></p> <p>Mount & Blade II: Bannerlord’s deep and immersive sandbox doesn’t just facilitate an emergent narrative, it actively encourages it. And while the game includes quests and tasks to help guide you on your travels, ultimately, you are free to chart your own course and plot your rise to power using the many different game features at your disposal. In this week’s blog, we talk with, Rabia Adigüzel, one of our campaign team programmers who is responsible for ensuring that these different features and systems work together, and provide you with an engaging and fulfilling experience during your adventures in Calradia!</p></br> [/parsehtml]Read more at: http://www.taleworlds.com/en/Games/Bannerlord/Blog/106

 

[Mad Vader]

Player death in battle is optional; I've seen no indication of old age being optional.

That. The optional part is your character dying randomly in battle. It looks like from the start you're ageing and will eventually die.

I'd like to see this confirmed by devs or Callum (or sources). It's an important distinction.
Can you turn off dying of old age for the player and, if so, how does it affect inheritance? Are there any special gameplay rules for such immortal players?

 

[Millix]

Yes!

I was waiting for more info on this feature. I had a feeling that they would make it similar to Crusader Kings, but I didn't know to what extent. Kinda breathes more life into the world, instead of you feeling like an immortal god by endgame.

To the few who are upset : this will establish an extra challenge to a game that we're already too familiar with when you feel yourself being too overpowered in the late game. Think of it as a way to realign your stats as the game goes on, but you're a different character. Like the sons took over after the death of Ragnar in the Vikings series. Conflicts between multiple heirs could also add that extra bit of challenge to a stale play through. Possibly even more replay value than Warband, without mods.

More informative blogs in the future like this one please .

Keep up the wonderful work.

P. S.: Please don't end up doing something weird like only releasing the game in Europe Thank you!

 

[zebbe2002]

Will there ever be that you can invite a steam friend for exampel into your singleplayer world and play together?

 

[Echtel]

Yes!

I was waiting for more info on this feature. I had a feeling that they would make it similar to Crusader Kings, but I didn't know to what extent. Kinda breathes more life into the world, instead of you feeling like an immortal god by endgame.

To the few who are upset : this will establish an extra challenge to a game that we're already too familiar with when you feel yourself being too overpowered in the late game. Think of it as a way to realign your stats as the game goes on, but you're a different character. Like the sons took over after the death of Ragnar in the Vikings series. Conflicts between multiple heirs could also add that extra bit of challenge to a stale play through. Possibly even more replay value than Warband, without mods.

More informative blogs in the future like this one please .

Keep up the wonderful work.

P. S.: Please don't end up doing something weird like only releasing the game in Europe Thank you!

Until you download Prophecy of Pendor and you ragequit when you die because you are back at square 1 getting owned by mid-tier troops who have twice your proficiencies... LOL

 

[Terco_Viejo]

隐藏

Yes! In Bannerlord, the player can die because of old age.

Relatively confirmed, waiting for a clarifying and forceful blog. It's a really exciting feature for me, but it' s still to be specified that little point that connects "death" with other features.  I hope that the statement Lust uttered in 2016 "you can kill a lord, steal his unique weapon and kill all his family with it" will be a reality and the "tactical elimination" of family members will be a feasible reality among your presumably legendary Advanced Diplomacy.

隐藏

That's just the sort of nasty thing Frank Khan would do.

But the interesting thing is that you could be immortal and all other death-and-heritage features can stay in place and apply to everyone except you. I hope they took the Highlander route and made you a sterile immortal.
This somewhat balances things. You want to be immortal? No kids for you. No marriage alliances and free vassals that look like you. No terrifying genetic experiments for you assholes.
The key to convincing people mortality is a good thing, is to make kids valuable.

I can't discern the irony if there was in your comment. 
Yet I believe that the implementation of the yea or nay death implementation that you do is brilliant.
The game is thought beyond the character, elevating the clan above the individual; then death and succession are perfectly understood. Want to play your sanbox with your immortal character? Turn her/him into a sterile mule...

One problem about succession, in mb with one character you can conquer all Calradia anyway. In Ck2 for example, there are always challanges and growth is relatively small.

But it is that reached the case of having conquered all Calradia by means of the prolongation and survival throughout the time of your lineage; who tells you that the game ends? Tensions between members could be created again and thus lead to territorial instability leading to civil wars...
And all this without considering the traits of each individual... And what if my PC makes his son heir by legitimate right and the bastard of his cousin murders him, thus usurping the throne?
Could a faction rise from its ashes once eliminated? Could two powers unite through alliances and become a new faction? Could simple peasants promote a revolutionary movement like the one led by Spartaco?
There would be so many possibilities if a true Advanced Diplomacy is implemented going hand in hand with permanent death and aging....

Such an approach in my view would be a challenge when it comes to moving our tokens; we would have to think a lot about our decisions. Therefore, yes to permanent death and ageing.

 

[Memoefe]

If your old character died in battle (or was murdered, if that's a feature) you now have to take vengeance. You also get a handy chance to change your play style if you want to.

I would also love it if succession crises were a thing. If the PC dies in battle without choosing an heir or the potential heirs have a very bad relationship, or even if the chosen heir has a very poor reputation or honor, others could contest the succession. This could range from an attempted palace coup to one pretender fleeing to a foreign court and asking for help to a full scale civil war where every clan member has to pick a side. I wouldn't want it to happen automatically, but in rare instances, under the right circumstances.

Or if you pick a heir does your other children turn against you and you heir to get the heritage, even things like does your the choosen child tries to kill you to get it early

 

[Howlett]

How will the traits and stats work with heirs?

They system as a whole sounds amazing but I can imagine going back to a base level character in the later stages of the game would be more than an inconvenience, but having heirs retain all stats from the previous character wouldn't make sense either.
Is there going to be a partial transition of stats or can we train our heirs to be?

A seconary question from this is with multiple heirs how long can the games last?

I feel like it might work as in Warband, when you choose your character's parents and upbringing. In Bannerlord, I hope it's like that, but you get to train your heirs yourself.

 

[FBohler]

The player death feature is optional. I don't know whether it is optional for AI though they might just eventually die of old age.

If death is optional, why would anyone choose it? There's got to be some bonus over an immortal play-through.

I will choose to play with perma death to both NPCs and my character. Being immortal feels like cheating.

 

[John the Roleplayer]

I think the dynasty aspect might solve one issue with warband that I always had, which was that I would get bored of the character and begin to long for the early game excitement. In CKII the succession was always a moment of realignment and reflection. Your skills, priorities and relationships change abruptly. If your old character died in battle (or was murdered, if that's a feature) you now have to take vengeance. You also get a handy chance to change your play style if you want to.

Dying of old age should be fleshed out with some RPG elements, such as having emotional final words with your relatives and old friends or taking a look back and pondering on your achievements. Playing as the heir I would like it if organizing a funeral and a coronation were to be my first tasks. Medieval political life was full of ritual and I feel like it would enhance the RPG side of things. Then the new ruler could decide what to do with the old ruler's widow and other retainers. Will they be provided for or chased out of the court?

I would also love it if succession crises were a thing. If the PC dies in battle without choosing an heir or the potential heirs have a very bad relationship, or even if the chosen heir has a very poor reputation or honor, others could contest the succession. This could range from an attempted palace coup to one pretender fleeing to a foreign court and asking for help to a full scale civil war where every clan member has to pick a side. I wouldn't want it to happen automatically, but in rare instances, under the right circumstances.

Very good suggestions.

One problem about succession, in mb with one character you can conquer all Calradia anyway. In Ck2 for example, there are always challanges and growth is relatively small.

I thought about this too. I'm guessing they're hoping that speeding up the time and having the major factions divide into clans (which I read as increased decentralization and potential infighting) the player juggernaut will slow down. So much hanging on the new influence mechanic could also make a difference: it's harder to get ahead until your reputation and influence grows.

I think the clan mechanics include a lot of potential for shifting loyalties and resulting infighting in factions. So progress for the player's kingdom will be less linear than in Warband, hopefully.

 

[monoolho]

Absolutely great blog! Very informative, fun to read, and plus: q-tip eye.

Note that it says "In Bannerlord, the player can die because of old age."

Not the character.

FFS I ain't playing this no more, I still have some years left in me, I don't wanna die just because my damn character couldnt mount a horse fast enough.

Will it be possible for us to use a saved game as a basis for a new game? For example if in a campaign we managed to conquer the empire of Calradia, we could create a new character in that world and try to ally or confront our old character/clan

Option to Inherit World? Play in a world your previous character already played in will we have option to create new character and kill your old character?

I suggested this back in 2016. An export world feature. Great to see more people interested in it. I very much wanted this, and it seems doable, I would love an official word on this, but I would not get my hopes up for a launch-day feature, maybe DLC, maybe mods, maybe a future [free] update... Any of those, I would gladly accept.

I really hope there are roads especially for the campaign map, maybe not for all factions but the Empires should have them for sure. Some of the old Roman roads are still around and they would make the campaign map look much more alive like they do in Total war games. 

隐藏

Really hoping for this as well. Functional roads would be ideal, of course, but merely graphic ones would be appreciated, so the world doesn't feel as empty. And oddly enough, it would be easy to do with the traffic feature they've added: just finish the whole map, let the simulation run for about 1 hour (or 1 ingame year, something like that), and paint roads on the most heavily travelled places, make the AI draw it for you, it would look way more natural than a hand-placed road in a beautiful patch of land that no one ever uses.

If death is optional, why would anyone choose it? There's got to be some bonus over an immortal play-through.

Because it could be fun. For the last 10 years I've been playing immortal M&B, and i've been seduced by the evil that lurks within Crusader Kings 2, now I want the same evil to lurk within Bannerlord: Dynasties!

Save & Load system

Many of you have overlooked it, however this is really important and praiseworthy that you are conscientiously designing it to avoid possible problems and game malfunction with eventual updates.

YES, THIS IS BRILLIANT, no need to worry about savegame compatibility is a MUST. Comparing to Paradox's Crusader Kings, which in every update you have to choose between giving up on those 4gb of mods, >20h of familial coital and murderous relations, or starting afresh, with that game-breaking bug fixed, or that new "I NEED THIS" feature included. Just updating and loading a game is the simplest, hardest and most necessary feature any RPG and RTS player needs, even if they don't know it.

The player death feature is optional. I don't know whether it is optional for AI though they might just eventually die of old age.

If death is optional, why would anyone choose it? There's got to be some bonus over an immortal play-through.

I will choose to play with perma death to both NPCs and my character. Being immortal feels like cheating.

I wouldn't consider it cheating, but it most definitely loses its magic after some hours. It's precisely the fun to be had with Dark Souls games, where your character dying is of no consequence to it, but the fear of losing all those souls/coins... That's heavy on the mind.
Fighting a battle to the last man has only one consequence in Warband: either you're captured and lose some coins and a minute or two waiting, or you miraculously survive or escape, which can be fun. But if you fear for your life, when you know you want to wait for your heir to grow up, maybe you'll be more keen on running away than fighting "for death and glory". Having that anxiety of "sacrifice oneself to hold that pass, or run back home to wait out a few more months/years so your child can grow up, instead of that godawful old uncle you've got for an heir" is an odd feeling, but a welcome one.

I think the dynasty aspect might solve one issue with warband that I always had, which was that I would get bored of the character and begin to long for the early game excitement. In CKII the succession was always a moment of realignment and reflection. Your skills, priorities and relationships change abruptly. If your old character died in battle (or was murdered, if that's a feature) you now have to take vengeance. You also get a handy chance to change your play style if you want to.

Dying of old age should be fleshed out with some RPG elements, such as having emotional final words with your relatives and old friends or taking a look back and pondering on your achievements. Playing as the heir I would like it if organizing a funeral and a coronation were to be my first tasks. Medieval political life was full of ritual and I feel like it would enhance the RPG side of things. Then the new ruler could decide what to do with the old ruler's widow and other retainers. Will they be provided for or chased out of the court?

I would also love it if succession crises were a thing. If the PC dies in battle without choosing an heir or the potential heirs have a very bad relationship, or even if the chosen heir has a very poor reputation or honor, others could contest the succession. This could range from an attempted palace coup to one pretender fleeing to a foreign court and asking for help to a full scale civil war where every clan member has to pick a side. I wouldn't want it to happen automatically, but in rare instances, under the right circumstances.

Very good suggestions.

Absolutely agree with this.

One problem about succession, in mb with one character you can conquer all Calradia anyway. In Ck2 for example, there are always challanges and growth is relatively small.

I thought about this too. I'm guessing they're hoping that speeding up the time and having the major factions divide into clans (which I read as increased decentralization and potential infighting) the player juggernaut will slow down. So much hanging on the new influence mechanic could also make a difference: it's harder to get ahead until your reputation and influence grows.

I think the clan mechanics include a lot of potential for shifting loyalties and resulting infighting in factions. So progress for the player's kingdom will be less linear than in Warband, hopefully.

Hopefully. It would be sad, and eventually tedious, if you just changed characters after death, but the clan and kingdom remained the same. The intrigue is what makes dinasties and families work in CK2. Most consequential of all: the inheritance of land. If you die and lands are distributed among clan heirs, instead of going all to one single heir, you provide enough of a challenge. If that were the case it would also give a certain feeling of hopelessness, because how can you ever conquer the whole world? Only with very slow time passage, a huge enough army and a LOT of money to pull an "Alexander The Great" on Calradia. Which would be a goal in and of itself for many players: Raising the money so your great-great-great-grandson can conquer the world! I wouldn't mind this not being a feature when it's released, so long as we can mod it later, or the devs have future plans for internal dynastic affairs. I honestly wouldn't mind paying for that as a DLC, TW gotta make some moneys too, right?

Perhaps it will come to pass.
Perhaps.

Did I overdo it with the quoting? It feels like such a long time since I've really written anything in the forums...

 

[NPC99]

If your old character died in battle (or was murdered, if that's a feature) you now have to take vengeance. You also get a handy chance to change your play style if you want to.

I would also love it if succession crises were a thing. If the PC dies in battle without choosing an heir or the potential heirs have a very bad relationship, or even if the chosen heir has a very poor reputation or honor, others could contest the succession. This could range from an attempted palace coup to one pretender fleeing to a foreign court and asking for help to a full scale civil war where every clan member has to pick a side. I wouldn't want it to happen automatically, but in rare instances, under the right circumstances.

Or if you pick a heir does your other children turn against you and you heir to get the heritage, even things like does your the choosen child tries to kill you to get it early

It will depend if there is a pretender or rebellion mechanic in Bannerlord. The player can choose his successor without any dispute. However, offended clan members could form a rebel faction around an alternative heir and conduct a civil war if that mechanic exists. If it doesn’t, the most offended clan members could do is defect to another or enemy clan/faction, weakening the player’s powerbase.

 

[Memoefe]

It will depend if there is a pretender or rebellion mechanic in Bannerlord. The player can choose his successor without any dispute. However, offended clan members could form a rebel faction around an alternative heir and conduct a civil war if that mechanic exists. If it doesn’t, the most offended clan members could do is defect to another or enemy clan/faction, weakening the player’s powerbase.

My bet is on mods. Mods might get crazy over these kind of mechanics.

 

[NPC99]

It will depend if there is a pretender or rebellion mechanic in Bannerlord. The player can choose his successor without any dispute. However, offended clan members could form a rebel faction around an alternative heir and conduct a civil war if that mechanic exists. If it doesn’t, the most offended clan members could do is defect to another or enemy clan/faction, weakening the player’s powerbase.

My bet is on mods. Mods might get crazy over these kind of mechanics.

True, but Warband had pretenders.

 

[Baltic Marauder]

Whether this feature ends up working or not I'm glad they're trying something new. The biggest betrayal after this long would be the game just being a graphics and battle scale upgrade. Without any major changes my warband fatigue would just transfer over to bannerlord. I need something new.

 

[killer-blead]

Will this game have crossover characters? Will we be able to meet doomguy or samurais?

 

[xdj1nn]

This devblog Q&A has passed the Terco_Viejo informative quality control. Congratulations.

What about me, am I Terco_Viejo approved? 

 

[Mad Vader]

Will this game have crossover characters? Will we be able to meet doomguy or samurais?

Yes, but they will be disguised as unassuming Calradian townsfolk and peasants. And the moment we look away they'll make faces at us and indulge in obscene gestures.

 

[RockinPotato]

you guys should do a blog about the weather system, that would be sweet.

 

[JuanNieve]

隐藏

I think the guards should carry the spears in this way, maybe even the infantry when they aren't in combat mode

I totally agree, those spears on the backs are really ugly unfortunately I don't think they will change them 

There are some screenshots that say otherwise. It may not be fully implemented.

隐藏: properly applied

The fact that a castle guard or a soldier walking through the city has his spear properly held and not glued to the back is a point in favor of immersion. Where my faith is null is on the battlefield; I hope I am wrong but surely the " spear stuck " to the back is not intended to fix it.

隐藏: ugly as ****

What do you think should be the solution to the problem of spears in the back? I believe that weapons that doesn't have scabbards, like two-handed axes, when you change weapons should be hidden. Maybe it's not realistic, but I prefer it to the magnetically glued spears that there are currently.

 

[Rabies]

What do you think should be the solution to the problem of spears in the back? I believe that weapons that doesn't have scabbards, like two-handed axes, when you change weapons should be hidden. Maybe it's not realistic, but I prefer it to the magnetically glued spears that there are currently.

I'm sure I readsomewhere that longer weapons like pikes and lances have to dropped on the floor when you switch to another weapon.