E3 2016: The thread

正在查看此主题的用户

Frankly, I don't know what to tell you. This siege to me looks nothing like Warband, aside of the fact that you have plenty of soldiers, a castle and plenty of soldiers that are inside the castle. The arrows bouncing off the walls are, imo, related to the physics engine that allows you to throw stuff down the murder hole - and notice how the items being thrown don't just vanish, killing a soldier holding a pot makes it tumble down the hole along him, hurting men assaulting the gate anyway. Improved AI is also visible, notice how enemy infantry stays in gate keep and only archers man the walls until they're breached, same goes for your men staying out of obvious deathtrap by the gate. And I don't really consider the Bannerlord siege engines only cosmetic upgrade over what mods had in Warband, cause... what mods had those? Actually working catapults, battering rams and whatnot that AI could handle from both, attacking and defending side? I don't recall any, but then again, I haven't played many mods lately or multiplayer at all, so maybe I'm wrong.
 
jacobhinds 说:
It's a gamified oversimplification and globalisation of a system that already exists in warband in a much more nuanced form. You can already "influence" people with good relations and a few other things like honour and renown. The difference is that these things aren't depletable resources and they aren't global variables.

I don't know of any real world scenario where "influence" as a depletable resource makes any sense at all, and no reason why any of the benefits of such a system couldn't be just applied to the current relation/honour/renown system. It's just needless gamification.

I started a big autistic argument about it on the bannerlord thread where I go into more detail, starting from about here: https://forums.taleworlds.com/index.php/topic,249537.msg8334101.html#msg8334101

Okay I guess my impression of it was sort of like an updated version of renown that's easier to lose based on fluctuating circumstances, not a literal currency. I didn't watch the weekender video. You've got some valid points then.
 
Austupaio 说:
Do not look here 说:
Besides, imo, 'it looks like Warband' is kind of compliment, no? All after all, it's Mount&Blade II :razz:
Well... no, I barely bought Warband because I was interested in the multi-player. Bannerlord looks like Warband which looks like Mount & Blade. After this many years I expect a bit more than shinier graphics. Multi-player was an example but unless the AI in this is getting a major overhaul, which it seems may happen, I'm not seeing anything desirable. I played M&B years ago and played the hell out of it, why would I want to play it again?

Also, unless the arrows do damage, which would strike me as annoying and unrealistic, how is it anything but cosmetic?

If you only 'barely' enjoyed Warband/M&B, then I'd strongly advise sliding on by Bonerlord. This is another game with the same formula. Same as Battlefield 1 is the exact same formula as all the rest of the Battlefield games.

It so happens that I deeply enjoy the M&B formula, and have done so for the past 11 years. So seeing these further refinements to one of my favorite games of all time makes me all kinds of happy.

And that's what they are. Refinements. Improvements. But it's the same bones underneath.
 
That's because you're an illiterate troglodyte. I, on the other hand, could say it much better, and with much more eloquence.

Not that the previous post wasn't spot on. It just lacked pretentious wording that I could easily have provided.
 
Age of Empires II: The Densetsu 说:
But you're American!
And the bottom of the barrel at that.  :razz:

Austupaio hit the nail on the head above about the need for a better AI.  Warband's AI lacks any kind of strategic planning.  Factions at war with three other factions will declare war on another faction just out of the blue.
 
Yeah, if the AI is improved that'd be a nice meaningful change. I'm not saying I hate M&B here, just that there's only so many hours I can put into one game before it loses its luster.
 
So they're not improving the campaign and/or battle AI in Bannerlord? Although I haven't seen any evidence that they are, I was hoping otherwise... The game series could be so much more if the AI had some semblance of intelligence, CK2 and even Total War are more challenging in that regard. Some sort of diplomacy system with alliances (between AI, I couldn't care less about players being able to) would be nice, or at least factions focusing on taking out weaker neighbouring factions (and not Nords declaring on Sarranids).

M&B's challenge is usually the grind, if anything, and by 'challenge' I mean time consuming process that keeps you occupied until you conquer you first city or two. After that I've found that it turns into a steamroll (and I usually stopped playing before I finished the job).
 
To be fair, the battle AI in CK2 and TW involves units rolling weighted dice at each other so it's much simpler to implement than what happens in M&B.
 
Ljas 说:
To be fair, the battle AI in CK2 and TW involves units rolling weighted dice at each other so it's much simpler to implement than what happens in M&B.

Yeah, there is that. All three games, on the world map, use the same sort of auto-resolve system, though TW and Warband do have actual combat ingame. But obviously Warband is quite a bit more complicated, as each individual troop is simulated rather than twenty squads of 300 men. Guess that is a limitation that isn't easily overcome.

But personally I was more thinking about how the AI interacts with other AI nations/empires. It all feels far too random, like some sort of event-based system with a MTTH forces War and Peace events to fire off. Number of times I've watched the nords, who are struggling against the Vaegirs and Swadians, declare war on the Sarranids on the other side of the world.
 
后退
顶部 底部