On that much, we can agree. I do respect your opinion on this, for what it's worth, I just find it a bit more respectful to realism than you do. Definitely, though, replicating HEMA would be a mess.
-
If you are reporting a bug, please head over to our Technical Support section for Bannerlord.
horses crashing into soldiers like tanks
- Thread starter Shatti
- Start date
Users who are viewing this thread
Talewords beg to disagree:
Mount&Blade is an immersive medieval action/tactics game taking place in a fictitious land named Calradia. Enriched with RPG elements, Mount&Blade offers a captivating environment, beautifully detailed with hundreds of castles, towns, and villages to explore.
Mount&Blade - TaleWorlds Entertainment
www.taleworlds.com
You may have missed this one.
Not your fault though.
Here, I have marked parts that you have missed:
...for Bannerlord, we draw our inspiration for each faction from a number of historical cultures and peoples. Using real-world cultures in this way gives us a great starting point when it comes to creating visual assets for the game. It allows us to create weapons, clothing, armours, buildings and practically everything else in the game in a way which looks and feels authentic to players. However, the low fantasy setting of the game gives us room to inject our own flair and flavour into each item we create, which is something our artists certainly make the most of.
manuelcipo
Recruit
Well, i think they should be able to barge 2-3 line deep slowing down after each slodier knocked down but surely not go through 5-6 men it is in fact one of the thing i was worried about when seeing some singleplayer gameplay, they just seem to swarm through and even if we forget about realism or immersion the thing i'm most worried about it's that doing so ruin strategy behind the positioning of troop, why put my archer behind some footman if the cavalry will pass trough my soldier like they are not even there, why wait and try to find an opening through the ranks for a charge or a flank manuver with my cav if i can just pass trough them all,or why put my soldier uphill to slow the cav down if that won't help stop them by slowing them down, where is the meaning of adding shieldwall formation and everything else if the base strategy won't be in the game.
For this reason i think cav should work based on mass and speed of itself and the object(soldier) it impact slowing based on it until a stop, heavy horse have more mass, heavy infantry too,a charge uphill would be slower so less momentum, so let's say i place a 1 rank deep line heavy infantry, if charged by a heavy cav should go down, but if the cav is slowed should stop it, maybe throwing the soldier down but still stopping it, this way having the big map that we will have we could make use of the terrain maybe having swamp zone, or snow in some area that slow down too, and not only cav, but infantry too, so placing archer behind someting like that could give it time to throw in some more shot before entering meele.
Said that, seeing in captain mode it doesn't seem bad how cav works.
Sorry for my english.
For this reason i think cav should work based on mass and speed of itself and the object(soldier) it impact slowing based on it until a stop, heavy horse have more mass, heavy infantry too,a charge uphill would be slower so less momentum, so let's say i place a 1 rank deep line heavy infantry, if charged by a heavy cav should go down, but if the cav is slowed should stop it, maybe throwing the soldier down but still stopping it, this way having the big map that we will have we could make use of the terrain maybe having swamp zone, or snow in some area that slow down too, and not only cav, but infantry too, so placing archer behind someting like that could give it time to throw in some more shot before entering meele.
Said that, seeing in captain mode it doesn't seem bad how cav works.
Sorry for my english.
I don't know. I found the 'stopping on a dim' when ever you hit one of your units or a tiny bush in warband to be worse.
Yes LOW fantasy, not fantasy. And you know what makes for most of the content in the game that is low on fantasy? That's right -realism. Historical realism in this case. So all that talk about how historical realism discussion here are useless is childish. Because there is far more realistic content in the game then fantasy one.
And before you start to argue again, no, nobody expects MB to be 100% realistic. That's not the point of this discussion or any numerous others on this forum.
I dunno that I'd call it this though. Fantasy and fiction aren't the same thing; fantasy is a genre. Game of Thrones, for example, classifies as "low fantasy". It has dragons, zombies, face changers, and people coming back from the dead. Low fantasy is a genre with fantastical elements, but which otherwise conforms to vaguely believable rules. The Witcher, for example, as opposed to say Warcraft, which is high fantasy. Wikipedia and its two footnoted sources define low fantasy as follows:
Far as I'm aware, no magical elements exist in the Mount and Blade setting. To be honest, I'm not sure whether this franchise has a proper genre designation, now that I think of it... It's basically just straight up fiction, set in a medieval setting. I think Callum's wrong here.
Last edited:
I can understand the grievance about horses being able to easily charge through ranks of men, ignoring any argument other whether they can or would, I think it’s more important to determine if they should.
How does it affect gameplay? Is it balanced? How does this impact the players experience?
All of these are things the developers need to consider and in its current state I think that horses trample through units a bit too easily. They don’t really seem to lose momentum as fast as one would expect so I believe this could do with some fine tweaking.
You can have fantasy books without magic nor monsters but admittedly they are rare (probably because the alternative is much more interesting). If you don’t mind philosophy I would recommend reading The Library of Babel, a short story agreed to be fantasy despite not containing magic and the like.
I would also argue that the game depict events unlikely to happen, I doubt a single person in a medieval type setting could accomplish as much as the player can for example.
How does it affect gameplay? Is it balanced? How does this impact the players experience?
All of these are things the developers need to consider and in its current state I think that horses trample through units a bit too easily. They don’t really seem to lose momentum as fast as one would expect so I believe this could do with some fine tweaking.
Even though it is commonly used as such magic is not a defining element for the fantasy genre. The setting for Mount & Blade though influenced by real life history is a fictional setting and not based off of reality and therefore falls into the realm of imaginative fiction, and since you would be hard pressed to classify it as either horror or science fiction or any of the other it would be classified as fantasy. Since it lacks the usual distinguishing traits of typically fantasy settings, like magic and otherworldly creatures, it’s called Low Fantasy.
You can have fantasy books without magic nor monsters but admittedly they are rare (probably because the alternative is much more interesting). If you don’t mind philosophy I would recommend reading The Library of Babel, a short story agreed to be fantasy despite not containing magic and the like.
I would also argue that the game depict events unlikely to happen, I doubt a single person in a medieval type setting could accomplish as much as the player can for example.
You may wish to review your logic standards.
?
You may wish to learn to use arguments in the discussion. Weak ad hominem attacks works only on people under certain low age barrier.
No, I didn't said that. Splitting enemy ranks sounds good to me. But I submit to your ruthless logic.
I have not read everything in this thread, but I am an average Joe and I love horse charges and horses crashing into infantry. As a representative of the average Joe's this is our stance.
Well, except the time traveling flintlock pistol in Warband, the initial zombies and the undead with their undead king Harlaus, with all the monster killing quests, in the first versions of the original Mount&Blade
.I do love the current absence of the full fantasy in M&B, since i do love and enjoy history, but i must admit that the fictional world of Calradia is refreshingly freeing us of the shackles of past real world conflicts, and the toxic burden they could potentially pass on to the players.
Now there is no space for nationalism or any kind of dogma in this game, there can be one and only butterism !
Last edited:
Well, for the record, for all the debate I've done about the prevalence of frontal charge and the physics of trampling enemies from horseback, my actual take on this is that horses shouldn't run all too deep into braced enemy lines. If you have enemies ten ranks deep in a tight formation, I feel like a horse should only go three or four ranks deep at most before it simply refuses to go any further. I also think frontal charges should have a great deal of risk involved in them, and should run a high risk of failure.
Ah, then I misread and I apologize. I wasn't certain, which is why I asked, but I'd thought you meant that Roman infantry used the wedge for change of direction purposes the way cavalry often did.
Sometimes I don't know if you are joking but nevermind. A clarification. I never said cavalry can't smash into infantry lilnes and make a mess. But I think riders would think twice before doing it, even more so if there are polearms pointed at them. They'd rather aim for already engaged troops or those scattered around the flanks which had crossbows or shorter weapons. Even if they have long lances charging head on is scary.
Yeah, the on that front, we agree. French knights tended to do it more boldly, but... Well, French knights also failed spectacularly in many cases. Much of the time, if a charge didn't appear to be backing the enemy out of tight ranks, a prudent commander would swerve his charge away before making contact. The rear or flank charge was definitely the preferable option.
Similar threads
