Feedback Regarding Armor/Weapon Realism

Users who are viewing this thread

I just wish medium-high tier armors would protect you a bit better in general (because right now they are too weak and not worth the investment) and blunt wouldn't be so broken, by TW own formula blunt just simply ignores 100% of your armor, being hit by a blunt weapon is like as if you are naked and this is just bad gameplay design, i would be fine if blunt ignored maybe half or even 2/3 or armor but 100%?

+1. That's it my man.
 
Jesus Christ people, where do y'all get so much time to shoot the sh*t with a no brainer thing. Amor needs a buff, period. Once you are in the game 99.99999% will get pissed by the amount of damage you get from small arms. This is about gameplay, that's it.

If y'all got some extra time on your hand, ill buy some.
While you may have put no brains into your analysis, that's just your own opinion that it needs a buff.

There is armour available than skyrocket you well ahead. If you're only using armour with a 20-30 rating, instead of the ones around 50 or higher, then why not go get the better armour?
 
While you may have put no brains into your analysis, that's just your own opinion that it needs a buff.

There is armour available than skyrocket you well ahead. If you're only using armour with a 20-30 rating, instead of the ones around 50 or higher, then why not go get the better armour?
What? Bro, KISS. Armour needs a buff, period.
 
As much as "historical weapon/armor realism" threads seem useless (except as a proof that there's a video to support any claim), there are worse kinds of threads, like "no women warriors, i'm geh" and "i want dual-wielding/finishing move/Hollywood fighting" threads. So, this is not so bad.
Jesus Christ people, where do y'all get so much time to shoot the sh*t with a no brainer thing. Amor needs a buff, period. Once you are in the game 99.99999% will get pissed by the amount of damage you get from small arms. This is about gameplay, that's it.
Breaking news: Weapon wankery threads deleted everywhere! Medieval "experts" confess they have small penises!
 
There is armour available than skyrocket you well ahead. If you're only using armour with a 20-30 rating, instead of the ones around 50 or higher, then why not go get the better armour?
Those are endgame armors (aka expensive and harder to get unless you steal from your wife) and they still don't protect you enough, is it right that a two-hander can 1-2 shot you with the best armor available in-game? or that just a few arrows will take you out when clad in padding, maille, scale, and plates at the same time? or that blunt just simply ignores 100% of your armor so no amount of armor will protect you from a mace or rock?
 
video of questionable quality. made by bow lovers most likely

countered with this much better made video made by reputable people:

If you watch your video closely, you'll note that they are attempting to accurately represent the year 1415. That is important given that Bannerlord's world is already history by the time of Warband, and I believe 1415 would have been late even for Warband.

Where the shooter describes how he decided to go for a lesser weight bow, 160 instead of 200 pounds, that is a significant difference. He talks about how he started shooting in his mid to late teens, and he shoots two or three times a week, so he feels he is comparable to the archers in that battle -- even though those archers likely started well before he did, and we have records showing people were much more physical stronger in this age. In Scandinavian cultures there was a practice by which a man's strength would be determined where he would carry a massive stone around something like a sheep-pen. If he could carry roughly 360 pounds, he was full-strength, 180 pounds and he was half-strength and half the value. I can basically guarantee you he would not rank elite at his level of practice.

Okay, so I stopped shortly after they talked about their justifications for using ballistic gel as a shock-absorber.

First, and most importantly, we are talking drastically different time periods. The breastplate being used for the demonstration displays curvature that is much at the heart of later plate-armour evolution, and specifically to deflect arrows. This level of technology would have been absolute state of the art in Warband's time, if present at all. I would contend that it would not be present, because armour like this came at a time when cannons were part of siege warfare, and in Warband I don't recall seeing any cannons, and instead catapults and trebuchet take their place. Bannerlord is supposed to take place roughly two centuries prior to Warband.

Between that and the use of ballistic gel for cushioning, this video really isn't very relevant. I went back and watched the slow-motion footage, and it's laughable how the breastplate is moving to disperse the energy. This is not even accurate to the time period.
 
We do note the type of armour we're being shown in the game, right? I think Taleworlds has done a great job with their graphical descriptions of these armour sets. I don't believe I recall any sets of plate like this to speak of.
 
Those are endgame armors (aka expensive and harder to get unless you steal from your wife) and they still don't protect you enough, is it right that a two-hander can 1-2 shot you with the best armor available in-game? or that just a few arrows will take you out when clad in padding, maille, scale, and plates at the same time? or that blunt just simply ignores 100% of your armor so no amount of armor will protect you from a mace or rock?
How many hits do you think you should be able to take by a two-handed axe from someone who is actively trying to kill you?
 
I think also it needs to be considered that if we're buffing armours so an armour rating around 20-30 can take multiple arrows and two-handed axe hits, how invincible will the player be with the late-game armour?
 
How many hits do you think you should be able to take by a two-handed axe from someone who is actively trying to kill you?
Maybe 3 or 4 so we would see some amount of progression in the equipment system? If you die with 1-2 hits from a two-hander when naked and when clad with state of art armor this is just bad gameplay design.

The game can't represent the full nuances of realism (gaps, weak spots, lucky hits etc) so it needs to have certain degree of balance for the sake of gameplay and RPG itemization.
 
Maybe 3 or 4 so we would see some amount of progression in the equipment system? If you die with 1-2 hits from a two-hander when naked and when clad with state of art armor this is just bad gameplay design.
So a lot of two-handed weapons deal a hundred or more damage per hit, without speed bonuses or anything like that factoring in.

How do you propose you take multiple hits from these weapons when naked?

Why don't you just put it on very easy settings? The game doesn't need to change to accommodate you because it already has.
 
I think also it needs to be considered that if we're buffing armours so an armour rating around 20-30 can take multiple arrows and two-handed axe hits, how invincible will the player be with the late-game armour?
I think Imperial lamellar should really make you almost like a tank. That should be the standard, then everything below.
 
I think Imperial lamellar should really make you almost like a tank. That should be the standard, then everything below.
I really think you should turn the difficulty level down to play at your desired difficulty level. I play both ways, depending how casually I want to play. You would take the option away from me, and for silly reasoning.
 
We're not talking small stones, but if you look at the size of the projectile in hand, these are full on rocks. If you threw one of these at an unarmoured head, you could very well one-shot that person. Wearing plate armour, this projectile would likely trash your plate -- let alone only damaging you. Any bend in the plate could prevent the suit from moving properly, and a hit in the head would cause the helmet to bend in against your skull and on top of your concussion you would be dealing with a metal plate grinding against your head.
this guy uses lead bullets with sling against a car hood 1mm thick at close range and it bends it to an unsubstantial effect.



plate thickness starts at 1.5mm up to 2.5mm
 
How do you propose you take multiple hits from these weapons when naked?

Why don't you just put it on very easy settings? The game doesn't need to change to accommodate you because it already has.
What? i said you die when naked and when clad with the best armors in the game just the same from a two-hander, armor has too little effect in protecting you, i'm not saying you should survive this when naked but when fully clad you should have better survivability than now.

And i'm not talking about the settings aswell, i'm talking about gameplay balance and giving my feedback that right now armor in general are too weak and blunt damage completely broken (it ignores 100% of your armor) and this affects negatively both the player and mid-high tier troops who should be able to take a few more hits than they do now atleast.
 
If you watch your video closely, you'll note that they are attempting to accurately represent the year 1415. That is important given that Bannerlord's world is already history by the time of Warband, and I believe 1415 would have been late even for Warband.

Where the shooter describes how he decided to go for a lesser weight bow, 160 instead of 200 pounds, that is a significant difference. He talks about how he started shooting in his mid to late teens, and he shoots two or three times a week, so he feels he is comparable to the archers in that battle -- even though those archers likely started well before he did, and we have records showing people were much more physical stronger in this age. In Scandinavian cultures there was a practice by which a man's strength would be determined where he would carry a massive stone around something like a sheep-pen. If he could carry roughly 360 pounds, he was full-strength, 180 pounds and he was half-strength and half the value. I can basically guarantee you he would not rank elite at his level of practice.

Okay, so I stopped shortly after they talked about their justifications for using ballistic gel as a shock-absorber.

First, and most importantly, we are talking drastically different time periods. The breastplate being used for the demonstration displays curvature that is much at the heart of later plate-armour evolution, and specifically to deflect arrows. This level of technology would have been absolute state of the art in Warband's time, if present at all. I would contend that it would not be present, because armour like this came at a time when cannons were part of siege warfare, and in Warband I don't recall seeing any cannons, and instead catapults and trebuchet take their place. Bannerlord is supposed to take place roughly two centuries prior to Warband.

Between that and the use of ballistic gel for cushioning, this video really isn't very relevant. I went back and watched the slow-motion footage, and it's laughable how the breastplate is moving to disperse the energy. This is not even accurate to the time period.
the thing is this video represents contemporary arms and armours.

the bow is a replica of the one in the mary rose.

they weren't a bunch of herculeses (herculei?) back in the day. 360lbs is 3.5 plate. deadlifting this number is easy in a couple of years of training.
and like they said, you need to keep some strength to join the melee.

if during warband days armour wasn't as good, neither would arms be better.
 
What? i said you die when naked and when clad with the best armors in the game just the same from a two-hander, armor has too little effect in protecting you, i'm not saying you should survive this when naked but when fully clad you should have better survivability than now.

And i'm not talking about the settings aswell, i'm talking about gameplay balance and giving my feedback that right now armor in general are too weak and blunt damage completely broken (it ignores 100% of your armor) and this affects negatively both the player and mid-high tier troops who should be able to take a few more hits than they do now atleast.
I just don't get why, if you want to survive multiple hits from weapons that deal well over 100 damage before your armour is factored in, you don't just turn down difficulty settings?

Which armour do you expect to leave you fine and ready to continue fighting after taking multiple hits to the chest from a two-handed axe designed for war, and designed specifically to negate your armour?

Two-handed weapons also carry the disadvantage of no option for a shield. This when one-handed swords can approach similar lengths.
 
Rocks were not real weapon of war after stone age ended. (professional slinger used sling bullets)

They were used yes, because sling was good tool for hunting so people trained with and could use them. But fact is that they didn't decide battles. Slings were very cheap weapon to produce and stones cost nothing. If slingers would have been even somewhat effective in war there would have been lot more slingers than there was and they would have been used in medieval times too.
They don't decide battles in bannerlord either. The complaint really is that you might lose a high tier troop to a lucky shot - but still slaughter the rest - or a large party of looters might beat a weakened caravan.

It's a complaint that's been exaggerated as though looters were going round defeating entire healthy armies. They don't.
 
Back
Top Bottom