*Eight simple ways to improve Banner lord multiplayer and a poll to see the priority.

Which of these issues do you agree should be fixed.

  • 1. Cavalry bumping specifically lances at point blank range.

    Votes: 13 19.4%
  • 2. Allow crouching during combat

    Votes: 16 23.9%
  • 3. Extending shields invisibly to offset where they can't be moved to block.

    Votes: 7 10.4%
  • 4. Removing left and right blocks from round shields, or moving them closer to the center

    Votes: 7 10.4%
  • 5. Slow down crushed through classes so regular infantry is faster or remove this mechanic

    Votes: 7 10.4%
  • 6. Two handed hammers do a weirdly high amount of damage to horses and should be fixed

    Votes: 9 13.4%
  • 7. Remove the stun from over 10 damage so that 2v1's are actually possible again

    Votes: 12 17.9%
  • 8. The crashing servers (I believe this is the most important)

    Votes: 56 83.6%
  • none of the above

    Votes: 2 3.0%
  • 9. Chambering

    Votes: 2 3.0%

  • Total voters
    67

Users who are viewing this thread

BruXseleS

Recruit
Brux you mad because i don't agree with you but you haven't said anything of value to agree with. Everything you've said in these threads is to detract what other people have said. You've given no useful input at any point and you're blowing up my thread with pointless comments. If you hate my ideas so much why are you giving them so much attention and interest by constantly replying. I can't delete my old thread but there were some really good examples of useful comments that actually made a difference or made me change my thread in some way because they had merit and I'd love to give credit where it's due and shine a spotlight on useful dialogue and what good it can do to improve the state of the game.




Also like I said rumor was the server crashes were already going to be fixed or had been fixed by the community. I changed that and the entire focus of this post once the guy who runs the custom NA servers mentioned it. I know that's a higher priority, but does that mean we can't get anything else done for the game at all?
If mean my first messages were about not agreeinng and asking for Non of the above and also giving few point for new players, after that I laught at your "3k hours validation" where you simingly got mad and made it personal. Then i also anwsered with something more aggressiv, I also seems like you are saying i feel somehow but truely its how you do. You say im mad beacuse you dont agree with me ? Why would o care if you agree with me im only gave me critics over your ideas. The attention is pointless its not Youtube or some other social Media it wont give you any benifits. Ye there were "usefull" comments or in other words "usefull beacuse they agree with you at some Level" but there were also comments telling you to "get gud" or people that didnt care to state their opinion. I mean you were even passiv aggressiv to tell me that im waisting my breath to disagee with your point. So i guess you can only type if you preise atleast one of your ideas ?

(Also non of the above is very pointless at this point as the crushing Server idea is obviuslly important, making even me, that disagress with all the rest, not vote for it :smile:) also i only asked it to be added at the very begining of the post, but you kept pressing on it like i was constantly asking you to add it

Further Discussion is pointless, in summary "You say im here to provocate, without any usefull comments and i say i gave critic on All points being pointless beacuse there are more important ones (I think crtic can be seen as either a usefull thing or something like "Haters gona hate" we both know how you took it) So lets just agree to disagree :mrgreen:
 
Last edited:

Fyren338

Regular
So lets just agree to disagree :mrgreen:
um. no? You haven't said anything to disagree with. HAHAHA. Agree to disagree on what? All those valid points you brought up about my thread?
Where is the voting option " None of the above" ? Tbh none of these problems is really a problem, every single one of them can be avoided by knowing the game, and as some people said "Getting better".
Wait a second, you don't have any points. Your point is, all my points are invalid without any clarification as to why. No better suggestions, just, I'm wrong. I'm not agreeing with this nonsense plotline. I don't mind debating the inner philosophy of online social interactions but nothing you've said about my personality actually applies to the point of this thread right. Like my goal here is to try and make suggestions that would improve the game. Your goal here? I suspect is just to make me angry. I will literally chase my tail like a dog for no reason I'm never going to give up replying on you buddy. I know maybe everyone that you love may have already done that but me, this stranger on the internet you've entangled yourself with. I'll never stop telling you to shut up.
 

Farticle

Sergeant
1478018252-napoleon-dynamite-fight.gif
 

Terco_Viejo

Spanish Gifquisition
Grandmaster Knight
[...]

Let's go me and the historian agree today this has got to be a good omen, usually Terco in the past has not agreed with me ever and now here we are preaching the same medicine today. That's how crouching should work. I also think that pike movement is wonky and silly too. Pikes had to be set up typically they would be dug into the ground behind the infantry holding them historically, not inching up ahead to meet the cavalry that is preposterous.
Looks like we had debated on top of a mountain for ages like Gandalf vs Balrog... but we only did it once about the pilum. I mean... it's not all black and white, there will always be common ground... if we eventually interact again. :iamamoron::lol:

Joking aside, crouching is what it is (there are many more people who feel the same way we do) and Taleworlds knows it... in fact, in Napoleonic Wars you can attack while crouching and also shoot... why not in Bannerlord? only decision makers know it. Providing the player with this possibility, apart of expand the playable experience posibilities is a matter of no extra work for the dev (plausible - just code line, no new animation sets needed), it's just the willingness to do it, no more, no less.


Edit: By the way... it's been a while since I've logged into MP and grabbed a pike for brace; apparently at some point the devs penalised this action by making it static with the impossibility to hold the brace action while moving (as shown in the gif in my previous comment). I'm glad to see this finally... I hope see the same with being able to attack/fire while crouching in future.
 
Last edited:

Krisee

Sergeant
1. Bumping is fine.
2. Rather have them try and fix chambers than this.
3. skill issue
4. this isnt a problem
5. just remove crushthrough
6. its fine
7. remove stun when you get hit? no. Chambers will fix it if they ever work. Also you can win 2v1 it is just very hard. (against good players)
8. yes
 
Last edited:

Sundeki

Master Knight
M&BWB
Was the stun when you got hit in Warband? It just feels ridiculous in Bannerlord
Yeah, there was a stun, enough that if someone hit you, and they decided to swing again, you had no choice but to block. Near as I can tell (based on instinct, but the data may not exactly align) the stun in both games is more or less the same. Bannerlord just has all these extra slowdowns (combat speed slowdown, attack animation delay, the delay on block effect vs block animation, weapon textures being out of sync with the weapon hitbox, etc.) that make that same stun effect so much worse. Remove all of this extra garbage and I don't see a reason as to why stun should change at all.
 

Fyren338

Regular
1. Bumping is fine.
It isn't and I'll go in depth as to why you are wrong. Currently there is an issue with the interaction of a 1v1 battle of cavalry versus infantry without a spear that's paying attention to the cavalry. The issue is that there is no way to defend yourself and if this battle starts against a skilled cavalry you will lose in seconds regardless of anything you do or how skilled you are at the game. This is because as the cavalry is moving towards the infantry they can see while they are moving at them whether that infantry is going to be blocking, or swinging. Then the cavalry can choose to either stab in front of them outranging the infantry while they are swinging, or charge into the infantry and drop their block and forcing a hit. Every single time they move at the infantry they can make this decision in the moment and there's no counter play no way to respond in any fashion even dodging wont work because they just adjust to where you go. All of the cards are in cavalries hands there's no amount of skill or ability or tactically decision making that can save you as an infantry in this scenario all you can do is pray the cav guy messes up. That's problematic and unnecessary let me give you an alternative.

Just make it so they can't use a lance to hit you from point blank, it's physically impossible. Then if they want to forcefully end the fight they are forced to engage in a battle where people can possibly react. So to stop a cavalry from overpowering you with bump attacking, you can actually hit them first to stop their swing because they no longer have a ten foot pole that stabs from point blank. You might notice they can hit the horse first because it sticks out further. That's how you have to trade off if you want to force an infantry to die without being able to respond. 1: skillfully outrange them with your longer ranged lance and repetition hoping to catch them making a mistake. 2: Pull out your sidearm and charge your cavalry into them to force their block down, risk getting hit first and losing the chance to attack. Also opening your horse up to take free damage as it ploughs through infantry head on in order to give you the opportunity to hit people for free without them being able to block. Balanced because it stops the currently broken interaction between the outranging people with the lance or bumping down their shield combination. It also increases the range of tactics available to cavalry by having them actually use the sidearms on horseback every now and then. Because they no longer can force you to hold up your shield when they are engaging with a longer range weapon while retaining the threat of bumping down your block anyways if you try to do that. If cavalry used their sidearms to be able to bump into people to force down blocks for free damage they risk getting stricken first and losing their attack and they also assuredly risk damage to their horse that is in front of them. The infantry has to decide if they want to gamble swinging against a longer ranged sidearm or stab into the horse charging them. This is no longer taken away because cavalry is holding a lance that outranges you way further. For anyone saying this would nerf cavalry you're wrong actually. This is a very specific scenario that won't effect 90% of how cavalry engages in it's ideal way. Typically, cavalry, rides around at full speed and wants to stab anyone who isn't paying attention in the back. This is for those rare situations when cavalry doesn't do that. When they want to kill one specific person that is paying attention to them. Because in -this- fight. The game is BROKEN.

2. Rather have them try and fix chambers than this.
They don't need to fix crouching bro, it is already in the game. It's probably a toggle. Like they could just click a button that has this on or off. I don't even disagree that fixing chambers would be better. The list is simple ways though like, seems chambers don't work very well with the game state as it is and that could be insanely hard to fix. I'll add it to the list though I agree it should be fixed.

3. skill issue
"where they can't be moved to block." My exact quote on the effing vote. What the actual oh my god I can't even engage with how non sensical your reply is .... learn to read? This reply makes me not want to validate your other replies at all because it's so bad. I'll move on, whatever.
4. this isnt a problem
I guess you don't use round shields much probably. This is really annoying and happens to me alot, I'm confident this happens to other people. You're in a fight 2v1 or something and you block quickly because you have a shield and it just dives off away from body leaving you completely exposed. It's a frustrating way to die bro you're capping if you say this never happened to you.
5. just remove crushthrough
Bet. Ya. Let's do that.
6. its fine
Are you sure? I don't think so. It's weird that a giant wooden mallet does double the damage against horses that spears do. It does an INSANE amount of damage compared to anything else in the game. I'm actually convinced it's a bug. Have you tested it? This is weird. And silly. What do you mean? Why do big wooden hammers do so much more damage explain how that's fine?!
7. remove stun when you get hit? no. Chambers will fix it if they ever work. Also you can win 2v1 it is just very hard. (against good players)
Chambers would help yes, I think that shouldn't be the -only- way. I'm not saying like I take a hit but my swing still goes through. I'm saying I take a hit and then I'm not locked for just enough time to take another hit from something else giving the original swinger just enough time to hit you again before you can block. The problem is, with the correct tempo and footwork, two moderately skilled players completely shut down any single player in the game. Also if I see two swings coming at nearly the same time and block one, it's really weird that the millisecond the other one hits me, my blocking of the second swing is phased out of existence. How about you tell me the benefit of keeping it instead. Why are these interactions not problematic? How does keeping the stun and not solving these issues I've raised make the game better?
 
Last edited:

Fyren338

Regular
Love that one :grin:

and to the mad lad, lets see how many of your great ideas will be added to the game :oops:
Honestly, I think you are major contributing factor to why they won't. I think you intentionally derailed everything to undermine me to make yourself feel better and succeeded. I also think that everything I've said here would make the game better and I think you think that too. Your issue was a matter of prioritization right? I think in an effort to make yourself feel validated you've destroyed a good opportunity to implement some good ideas that would improve the game. I've made concessions I shouldn't have under pressure and you get to stand there feeling vindicated patting yourself on the back because of it. Congrats on actively making Bannerlord a worse game? You must feel smug. 👍
Yeah, there was a stun, enough that if someone hit you, and they decided to swing again, you had no choice but to block. Near as I can tell (based on instinct, but the data may not exactly align) the stun in both games is more or less the same. Bannerlord just has all these extra slowdowns (combat speed slowdown, attack animation delay, the delay on block effect vs block animation, weapon textures being out of sync with the weapon hitbox, etc.) that make that same stun effect so much worse. Remove all of this extra garbage and I don't see a reason as to why stun should change at all.
I actually totally concede to that. Ya, fix all of those problems and we should keep the stun to some degree.

I think the problem is that the stun lasts long enough that if you take another hit near the end of the stun, you are actually locked long enough for the first person to swing again. Right like this is what I'm trying to explain that people may not be understanding. Once you take the first hit, it's easy to get stun locked just repeatedly take damage until you die without being able to do anything. This can be utilized with as few as two players if they are halfway coordinated.
 

flashn00b

Sergeant at Arms
Regarding game balance, i wonder if people would be opposed to the idea of a "Mounted Infantry" perk for some cavalry units. If i were to use the Vlandian Knight as an example, I could see him having his Cavalry Sword and Cavalry shield upgraded to the Vlandian Axe and Kite Shield (shield shared with Voulgier), but his mount suffers a -3 horse armor penalty (Stacks with Flanker's -5) and the lance is downgraded to a Long Spear
 

Krisee

Sergeant
It isn't and I'll go in depth as to why you are wrong. Currently there is an issue with the interaction of a 1v1 battle of cavalry versus infantry without a spear that's paying attention to the cavalry. The issue is that there is no way to defend yourself and if this battle starts against a skilled cavalry you will lose in seconds regardless of anything you do or how skilled you are at the game. This is because as the cavalry is moving towards the infantry they can see while they are moving at them whether that infantry is going to be blocking, or swinging. Then the cavalry can choose to either stab in front of them outranging the infantry while they are swinging, or charge into the infantry and drop their block and forcing a hit. Every single time they move at the infantry they can make this decision in the moment and there's no counter play no way to respond in any fashion even dodging wont work because they just adjust to where you go. All of the cards are in cavalries hands there's no amount of skill or ability or tactically decision making that can save you as an infantry in this scenario all you can do is pray the cav guy messes up. That's problematic and unnecessary let me give you an alternative.
You can just dodge the bumping and hit the horse when he rides past you will eventually dismount him, there are only a few, maybe not even 5 cavalry players that are hard to dodge.
Just make it so they can't use a lance to hit you from point blank, it's physically impossible.
Is it point blank range though? Afaik to hit 'point blank range' cavalry has to move their lance first to the side or up to hit else you will just glance. But that depends on what we both mean with point blank range. If we take a real life example and lets say you move a spear from someone's face 10cm back and then proceed to hit them you will do damage to them.
Then if they want to forcefully end the fight they are forced to engage in a battle where people can possibly react. So to stop a cavalry from overpowering you with bump attacking, you can actually hit them first to stop their swing because they no longer have a ten foot pole that stabs from point blank. You might notice they can hit the horse first because it sticks out further. That's how you have to trade off if you want to force an infantry to die without being able to respond.
You can already react if you just have proper awareness, you can dodge horses or force them to try and hit you with a fake attack and then block their hit before bump. Bump stabs aren't very easy especially versus people that know what they are doing on infantry, you can move into the horse to mess up their bumpstab timing, dodge the bump, or you can even go for rider if they attempt a bump stab. Which they can counter by outranging your hit, but that means if you see they will you just cancel your attack and block.
1: skillfully outrange them with your longer ranged lance and repetition hoping to catch them making a mistake.
Doesn't work versus infantry that know what they are doing. They will just block every outrange 1v1.
2: Pull out your sidearm and charge your cavalry into them to force their block down, risk getting hit first and losing the chance to attack. Also opening your horse up to take free damage as it ploughs through infantry head on in order to give you the opportunity to hit people for free without them being able to block.
Sidearms on cav are garbage.
You already can hit cavalry as he goes through an infantry crowd, if you have the awareness for it. And I don't mean go for the rider, i mean both rider and horse. You attack them from the sides not the front of course.
Balanced because it stops the currently broken interaction between the outranging people with the lance or bumping down their shield combination.
A cavalry outranging a 1 handed infantry without a spear is fine. I already went over bumping
It also increases the range of tactics available to cavalry by having them actually use the sidearms on horseback every now and then.
No it doesn't as sidearms are garbage. This just means that cavalry will have less options.
Because they no longer can force you to hold up your shield when they are engaging with a longer range weapon while retaining the threat of bumping down your block anyways if you try to do that.
You aren't forced into doing that, just take my previous suggestions you have a lot of options.
If cavalry used their sidearms to be able to bump into people to force down blocks for free damage they risk getting stricken first and losing their attack and they also assuredly risk damage to their horse that is in front of them. The infantry has to decide if they want to gamble swinging against a longer ranged sidearm or stab into the horse charging them. This is no longer taken away because cavalry is holding a lance that outranges you way further.
Trying to outrange infantry as a cav using a sidearm, won't happen. It is so easy to play versus cav that is using sidearm, I can just get freehits on their horse. While they cannot do anything to me.
For anyone saying this would nerf cavalry you're wrong actually. This is a very specific scenario that won't effect 90% of how cavalry engages in it's ideal way. Typically, cavalry, rides around at full speed and wants to stab anyone who isn't paying attention in the back. This is for those rare situations when cavalry doesn't do that. When they want to kill one specific person that is paying attention to them. Because in -this- fight. The game is BROKEN.
Yes that's right it is for rare situations, but I disagree it isn't broken. There are situations where cav is vs inf in a 1 on 1. Usually in skirmish the infantry will be able to make it to the flag, and the cavalry is forced to dismount.
They don't need to fix crouching bro, it is already in the game. It's probably a toggle. Like they could just click a button that has this on or off. I don't even disagree that fixing chambers would be better. The list is simple ways though like, seems chambers don't work very well with the game state as it is and that could be insanely hard to fix. I'll add it to the list though I agree it should be fixed.
Chambers don't work well due to the fact that the hitboxes need to touch rather than just a good timing, The hitboxes don't touch due to 2 reasons mainly, 1: Disconnected hitboxes/hurtboxes. 2: you need to have roughly the same y-axis (height)as the incoming attack, which means that if someone attacks your head you need to jump to chamber. (is my understanding, as ive seen sarranid show me this)
"where they can't be moved to block." My exact quote on the effing vote. What the actual oh my god I can't even engage with how non sensical your reply is .... learn to read? This reply makes me not want to validate your other replies at all because it's so bad. I'll move on, whatever.
"where they can't be moved to block" such as? Versus Archers: Just move properly in a way that makes footshotting/headshotting hard, only on the worst shields you cannot block a footshot by doing downblock. So just move a bit better and it is hard for archer to footshot. This is why I called it a 'skill issue' as you can just move in a way that makes it much harder for archer to do this kind of thing.
If you meant infantry I really don't understand...
I guess you don't use round shields much probably. This is really annoying and happens to me alot, I'm confident this happens to other people. You're in a fight 2v1 or something and you block quickly because you have a shield and it just dives off away from body leaving you completely exposed. It's a frustrating way to die bro you're capping if you say this never happened to you.
When I play sturgia I use varyag, I never have issues blocking. Probably because I use downblock 90% of the time, and only use a sideblock when needed, this is just about experience nothing else. If you fumble your shield direction block it is your own issue.
Are you sure? I don't think so. It's weird that a giant wooden mallet does double the damage against horses that spears do. It does an INSANE amount of damage compared to anything else in the game. I'm actually convinced it's a bug. Have you tested it? This is weird. And silly. What do you mean? Why do big wooden hammers do so much more damage explain how that's fine?!
Yea it is definitely fine, here is why: A cavalry can deal insane amount of damage to me as well, even without couch as a heavy infantry unit I can get ~80 damage from a full speed cavalry, they should be punished for making a mistake same way I am as infantry.
Chambers would help yes, I think that shouldn't be the -only- way. I'm not saying like I take a hit but my swing still goes through. I'm saying I take a hit and then I'm not locked for just enough time to take another hit from something else giving the original swinger just enough time to hit you again before you can block. The problem is, with the correct tempo and footwork, two moderately skilled players completely shut down any single player in the game. Also if I see two swings coming at nearly the same time and block one, it's really weird that the millisecond the other one hits me, my blocking of the second swing is phased out of existence. How about you tell me the benefit of keeping it instead. Why are these interactions not problematic? How does keeping the stun and not solving these issues I've raised make the game better?
Actually that is a fair point, being double hit annoys the living **** out of me as well, id kind of want to see how it would look if there was less of stun only for blocking after being damaged >5 (as its the damage where u get stun) You should have to redo your block though after being hit I think.
Your attack should remain stunned though if you are damaged
 

[UNC]V

Regular
5: People are tired of chasing naked people with two handed hammers all day. They out range you so you run up take a free hit and run up and take a free hit and run up and take a free hit. This is annoying, easy to fix.
but now heavy inf runs fastest in combat (84 movement speed),2 hand inf is only 81...I would rather tw nerf heavy inf's movement speed
 

Greedalicious

Grandmaster Knight
WB
but now heavy inf runs fastest in combat (84 movement speed),2 hand inf is only 81...I would rather tw nerf heavy inf's movement speed
2 handers could potentially still run faster, because of the weight of equipment. 2 handers only have 1 weapon dragging them down, while heavy infantry has a shield that slows you down alot. Sadly we cant see how much it matters.
I also had a peek at the armory and didnt see any infantry with higher movement speed than 80, while lighter classes have 81+
 

Einarcf

Master Knight
M&BWBWF&SNWVC
When you mention it, could be interesting to explore less polearm-focused cav playstyles. Some perks for sidearms at the cost of the lance/spear
 

merrrica

Recruit
These freaking nerds arguing over game balance, half in bad faith, but TW can't even fix the server crashes. I'm losing wrinkles in my brain just reading this crap
 
Top Bottom