I just don't get TW priorities.

[Dr-Shinobi]

Obviously, TW is NOT buying it since players are still complaining about weak armor

But they are since they have both cranked up the armor to an stupid level both for you and your horse. And dont talk about arrows you can tank now as well as the rags youre wearing from the start... I took an axe to the back of me while riding from an guy in full speed and did only like 20% in damage with simple clothing on. This race is getting to an ridiculous level right now if it continues... Ive been a patient man accepting it up to now. but now idk really.

Remember that time when i thought shields on the back did stop a little but i didnt knew really ? then i had like 5 guys telling me i was lying. After many ifs and such as i was saying that i was pretty sure it stopped a little i had to drag it out of the community that it did thru an code which says something right here about how people work

So telling me that im providing nothing and trying to brush out the thread with emptiness and trolling is just plain BS

 

[Varthak]

Four man with mace can kill a guy with heavy armor. Yes, its realistic. I you want realistic dificulty, sword are not really effective against heavy armor, but mace yes. Arrow wil do nothing on heavy armor. I dont find the realistic diffculty really realistic, but in this example, i see no problem. (And sorry, for my English, its really bad)

 

[Akka]

And yet AGAIN, instead of focusing on the main question ("asking TW to communicate more and better about their plans, visions and explaining the reasons of their changes and their priorities"), it's gone derailed on bickering around the ego of our resident spammer.

At least there is lessons to be had for the next time I make a thread... -_-

 

[Dr-Shinobi]

And yet AGAIN, instead of focusing on the main question ("asking TW to communicate more and better about their plans, visions and explaining the reasons of their changes and their priorities"), it's gone derailed on bickering around the ego of our resident spammer.

At least there is lessons to be had for the next time I make a thread... -_-

Yeah next time dont mention that armor was the thing they didnt communicated about xD Love how you try to constant demine someone trying to put out an valid discussion...But im pretty used to this by now. People only talking but not providing anything solid to the table. Well some do

 

[Terco_Viejo]

And yet AGAIN, instead of focusing on the main question ("asking TW to communicate more and better about their plans, visions and explaining the reasons of their changes and their priorities"), it's gone derailed on bickering around the ego of our resident spammer.

At least there is lessons to be had for the next time I make a thread... -_-

At this point in time no one from outside has been able to or will be able to change Taleworlds' communication policy; that is a fact. It is only they who will or will not take that step; we have already seen an attempt, but what you neglect they return to bad habits. And of course, all this is a vicious circle...
If it's any consolation to you, I opened What else remains to be explained? in its day and still today there are unresolved questions about some issues that have remained in the inkwell.

I feel that commenting in a civilized way about Ai, armour and other related issues is a way to make the thread visible and to look for a much more enriching vein of feedback than "looking for answers" in a sterile mine.

Having said that, and continuing with the theme of Ai. There are several threads that refer to how AI has been dumbed down. Some of you may remember this video, and how Taleworlds claimed to have a combat Ai divided into levels that were more challenging.



This is a test video I made for another topic ([MP/SP] Dynamic Blocking Debate ) in which you can see 1vs1 and 1vs3 100 level bots (using the Improved Combat AI mod) fighting. The difference is astonishing, ridiculing the current standard level of the Native.

Ai buff (tactics & skill) + armor buff + collider revision +...an absolutely separate balance for SP and MP (and also with different balances for CM, skirmish etc...)... is the quest for real fun.

 

[Dabos37]

Yeah next time dont mention that armor was the thing they didnt communicated about xD Love how you try to constant demine someone trying to put out an valid discussion...But im pretty used to this by now. People only talking but not providing anything solid to the table. Well some do

You call everyone lier and talk about the people agenda, but the truth is that you are clearly the only lier here and the firt one who actualy has an agenda. You called me lier for saying that the player is immortal against looters in Warband and most of the Looters attacks do 0 damage. I have reinstalled the Warband and got a good armor (not even the better one, I could get 0 from 90-100% of the attacks if I would get the best possible armor) and you can see the result in this video:



I think I could kill 200 looters in Warband with the best two weapon and armor without problems and you just have to compare this with Bannerlord to the see insane difference.

I want to clarify that I dislike the Warband armor system and I prefer how it works in Bannerlord, but armor getting some tweaks would not be a bad thing. This video is just to show that I was not lying and to show once more time how biased and blind you are about everything. You will probably will try to find an excuse as always, good luck with that.

 

[Dr-Shinobi]

You call everyone lier and talk about the people agenda, but the truth is that you are clearly the only lier here and the firt one who actualy has an agenda. You called me lier for saying that the player is immortal against looters in Warband and most of the Looters attacks do 0 damage. I have reinstalled the Warband and got a good armor (not even the better one, I could get 0 from 90-100% of the attacks if I would get the best possible armor) and you can see the result in this video:



I think I could kill 200 looters in Warband with the best two weapon and armor without problems and you just have to compare this with Bannerlord to the see insane difference.

I want to clarify that I dislike the Warband armor system and I prefer how it works in Bannerlord, but armor getting some tweaks would not be a bad thing. This video is just to show that I was not lying and to show once more time how biased and blind you are about everything. You will probably will try to find an excuse as always, good luck with that.

Strange this is not at all how i remember how it was when i wore that exact same armor against peasants even if i knew you could take more damage... but seems i did then acc to this.

Nah im good with trying to prove something...I will let TW run themselves to the ground if they choose to listen to cheesers and people who dont have the full picture of the game trying to balance it for their own convinence

 

[Highest of all Landers]

At this point in time no one from outside has been able to or will be able to change Taleworlds' communication policy; that is a fact. It is only they who will or will not take that step; we have already seen an attempt, but what you neglect they return to bad habits. And of course, all this is a vicious circle...
If it's any consolation to you, I opened What else remains to be explained? in its day and still today there are unresolved questions about some issues that have remained in the inkwell.

I feel that commenting in a civilized way about Ai, armour and other related issues is a way to make the thread visible and to look for a much more enriching vein of feedback than "looking for answers" in a sterile mine.

Agreed. Yes, they can make efforts to improve their communication, and they did, they update a "Plans for SP/MP" post from time to time, they started the devblogs, we see mexxico in his personal time interacting with us and providing information about his work, there might be other devs doing that, but mexxico seems omnipresent to me.

There is also a language/culture barrier, and this is about devs, not Callum, I've seen mexxico apologise sometimes about his English skills, which are absolutely fine by me, I can perfectly understand what he writes, but some of the other devs may feel uncomfortable, and since it is not part of their job, they would be doing this on their own time, I am ok with them not interacting much. Even if we started to ask TaleWorlds to have reserved worktime to interact in the forums, we can't force people to do it if they are uncomfortable with it.

Having said that, and continuing with the theme of Ai. There are several threads that refer to how AI has been dumbed down. Some of you may remember this video, and how Taleworlds claimed to have a combat Ai divided into levels that were more challenging.

This is a test video I made for another topic ([MP/SP] Dynamic Blocking Debate ) in which you can see 1vs1 and 1vs3 100 level bots (using the Improved Combat AI mod) fighting. The difference is astonishing, ridiculing the current standard level of the Native.

Ai buff (tactics & skill) + armor buff + collider revision +...an absolutely separate balance for SP and MP (and also with different balances for CM, skirmish etc...)... is the quest for real fun.

Those look great, I will definitely check this mod. To be honest, I am more interested in how they fight each other in groups versus groups rather than how well they can fight the player, because we can create advantages much easier by tricking them with movement, circling around, or like the person in the video, bypassing the infantrymen to go for the archer.

 

[Dabos37]

Strange this is not at all how i remember how it was when i wore that exact same armor against peasants even if i knew you could take more damage... but seems i did then acc to this.

Nah im good with trying to prove something...I will let TW run themselves to the ground if they choose to listen to cheesers and people who dont have the full picture of the game trying to balance it for their own convinence

You are the first cheeser here spamming Sharpshooters and saying that cavalry should not get improved, just to be able to continue enjoying your campaings playing as infantry without investing much effort. You do not fool anyone my friend.

 

[Dr-Shinobi]

You are the first cheeser here spamming Sharpshooters and saying that cavalry should not get improved, just to be able to continue enjoying your campaings playing as infantry without investing much effort. You do not fool anyone my friend.

Yeah can clearly see who you are now xD I mean i had my suspicions before but now you put the dot over the i.....Next....

 

[Maroon]

To get back to actual point of this thread: the difference in vision between the community and the developers. This is a very real point, and one that needs to be addressed. If not, the unmodded version of this game will just be left in the dust in the years to come.

 

[ZeroFighterR]

Mine is already gathering dust at this point

 

[Terco_Viejo]

Agreed. Yes, they can make efforts to improve their communication, and they did, they update a "Plans for SP/MP" post from time to time, they started the devblogs, we see mexxico in his personal time interacting with us and providing information about his work, there might be other devs doing that, but mexxico seems omnipresent to me.

There is also a language/culture barrier, and this is about devs, not Callum, I've seen mexxico apologise sometimes about his English skills, which are absolutely fine by me, I can perfectly understand what he writes, but some of the other devs may feel uncomfortable, and since it is not part of their job, they would be doing this on their own time, I am ok with them not interacting much. Even if we started to ask TaleWorlds to have reserved worktime to interact in the forums, we can't force people to do it if they are uncomfortable with it.

Those look great, I will definitely check this mod. To be honest, I am more interested in how they fight each other in groups versus groups rather than how well they can fight the player, because we can create advantages much easier by tricking them with movement, circling around, or like the person in the video bypassing the infantrymen to go for the archer.

I personally strongly appreciate that the devs take time to share information publicly about the game; they don't have to do by contract and instead they do. I was referring to official communications (the bulk of PR) and how officially they should address "taboo subjects" as often as required, answer difficult questions, no generic phrases; honesty and transparency facing. But well, everybody knows that... I don't have to proclaim anything about it.

As for the mod, it only unlocks the fighting skills of each agent; it does not improve their ability to deal with the group.
It seems that in the latest patches Ai's groups tend (according to Taleworlds - it doesn't seem to me) to surround you. I would like you to see this sequence from 2016... yours are the conclusions .

 

[Medivhtratos]

I personally strongly appreciate that the devs take time to share information publicly about the game; they don't have to do by contract and instead they do. I was referring to official communications (the bulk of PR) and how officially they should address "taboo subjects" as often as required, answer difficult questions, no generic phrases; honesty and transparency facing. But well, everybody knows that... I don't have to proclaim anything about it.

As for the mod, it only unlocks the fighting skills of each agent; it does not improve their ability to deal with the group.
It seems that in the latest patches Ai's groups tend (according to Taleworlds - it doesn't seem to me) to surround you. I would like you to see this sequence from 2016... yours are the conclusions .

I have seen it tough. When the opponent collide with you shield wall(only Infantry), they try to surround your shieldwall, going behind them. But on the other Hand, i never saw that from my own troops, since the opponent never hold a close formation. An exception is when i besiege a castle/town. After the second door falls, my infantry always surround the Enemy, and than, out of the air, they went to the walls for whatever reason.

 

[RectalRanger]

Better AI would be a dream come true. I really miss having to get sweaty during a tournament. Like Highest of all Landers I'm more interested in group vs group AI behaviors and what not then I am 1v1.

 

[Highest of all Landers]

I personally strongly appreciate that the devs take time to share information publicly about the game; they don't have to do by contract and instead they do. I was referring to official communications (the bulk of PR) and how officially they should address "taboo subjects" as often as required, answer difficult questions, no generic phrases; honesty and transparency facing. But well, everybody knows that... I don't have to proclaim anything about it.

Ah, I went straight for the devs because I feel like whatever they share with us has a lot more valuable information than some PR post, but then again, maybe this view is biased because we don't get much from official communications.

We could theories about why their official communication is lacking, but all this would do is keep us entertained a little longer. I will say this though, being a software developer myself (not game), the mantra when dealing with customers is "no news is worse than bad news". If they shared more regularly maybe we wouldn't have so many annoying threads and more civilized discussion threads.

As for the mod, it only unlocks the fighting skills of each agent; it does not improve their ability to deal with the group.
It seems that in the latest patches Ai's groups tend (according to Taleworlds - it doesn't seem to me) to surround you. I would like you to see this sequence from 2016... yours are the conclusions .

Well, to be fair the looters tried to surround the player, but a simple left to right movement made them group up in a blob again. Maybe they are only tracking the movement of their target and not the other entities around them.

Making the AI consider more variables would mean more calculations and more calculations would mean more CPU being used. In my ideal scenario, single entities would track in a range around them, like "knowing" they are in a formation and where in that formation and also picking a target it could attack without exposing itself too much, which is closer to how a human would act in such situation. I would also say that the AI complexity is constrained by resource usage in an attempt to make the game available to the highest amount of people possible, considering the minimum required to run the game is already defined.

 

[Dabos37]

The thing is that the idea behind a better AI for making the elite units better than the low tier ones sound good but, how are you actually thinking to do this? I mean, not sure about you but I cannot defeat 3 looters at the same time (except if I make some circles), so how are you planning that devs could improve the AI to achieve this? Even if the AI would be able to perform non-stop chambers, it will be hard to kill 3 looters spamming attacks pretty fast.

So devs just have two options as far I see it:

- Increase armor to Warband level and reduce the stun chance when the damage is pretty low.
- Increase drastically the gap between low and high tier units concerning attacking speed.

(I personally do not like the first option much and same for the second one)

Improving the AI to be able to do what not even the player is able, sounds a bit too optimistic.

 

[Highest of all Landers]

The thing is that the idea behind a better AI for making the elite units better than the low tier ones sound good but, how are you actually thinking to do this? I mean, not sure about you but I cannot defeat 3 looters at the same time (except if I make some circles), so how are you planning that devs could improve the AI to achieve this? Even if the AI would be able to perform non-stop chambers, it will be hard to kill 3 looters spamming attacks pretty fast.

So devs just have two options as far I see it:

- Increase armor to Warband level and reduce the stun chance when the damage is pretty low.
- Increase drastically the gap between low and high tier units concerning attacking speed.

(I personally do not like the first option much and same for the second one)

Improving the AI to be able to do what not even the player is able, sounds a bit too optimistic.

3 to 1 odds is a loss, there is no saving that for the AI, but 10 v 15, 25 v 35 should be possible if one group is more skilled than the other, but only if the smaller group is not suicidal and go in swinging like they were the blindfolded birthday kid trying to break the piñata. That is what I want to be improved.

Like I said previously, I don't think the entities are tracking what is around them when it comes to combat, they just pick a target and go for that target regardless of what is around them and occasionally change if another target becomes more attractive, usually by being closer (Score calculations). Sure formations will make their movement be constrained.

As an example, when we build a chat bot, the idea behind the choosing of answers is by establishing intent and subject, you could say something like "I want an icecream", the key words would be "want" and "icecream", and then a search is performed in a database and answers would be returned according to their score in relation to intent and subject with a cut off value as the minimum score required for the answer to be viable, like only return answers that are 70% compatible with the intent and subject.

Translating this to combat AI would be something like tracking multiple entities and groups of entities around and determining threat and opportunity and then deciding based on those, for example retreating closer to allies if the threat is above a certain threshold or going in the offensive if the amount of allies around is greater than the amount of enemies. Of course it would be more complex than this example because there is a sea of possible variables and combinations of variables to track.

Unit skill would be translated into a bias (fixed value to influence outcome) in the calculation to influence decision making.

 

[Mad Vader]

Since Mount and Blade is a battle simulator already, the individual troops could determine their best move by running a simulation of the near future and deciding on an action based on the outcome of this simulation for that particular troop. You know it makes sense!

 

[Dabos37]

3 to 1 odds is a loss, there is no saving that for the AI, but 10 v 15, 25 v 35 should be possible if one group is more skilled than the other, but only if the smaller group is not suicidal and go in swinging like they were the blindfolded birthday kid trying to break the piñata. That is what I want to be improved.

Like I said previously, I don't think the entities are tracking what is around them when it comes to combat, they just pick a target and go for that target regardless of what is around them and occasionally change if another target becomes more attractive, usually by being closer (Score calculations). Sure formations will make their movement be constrained.

As an example, when we build a chat bot, the idea behind the choosing of answers is by establishing intent and subject, you could say something like "I want an icecream", the key words would be "want" and "icecream", and then a search is performed in a database and answers would be returned according to their score in relation to intent and subject with a cut off value as the minimum score required for the answer to be viable, like only return answers that are 70% compatible with the intent and subject.

Translating this to combat AI would be something like tracking multiple entities and groups of entities around and determining threat and opportunity and then deciding based on those, for example retreating closer to allies if the threat is above a certain threshold or going in the offensive if the amount of allies around is greater than the amount of enemies. Of course it would be more complex than this example because there is a sea of possible variables and combinations of variables to track.

Unit skill would be translated into a bias (fixed value to influence outcome) in the calculation to influence decision making.

Higher tier units are already able to win (depends on numbers of course) when they are outnumbered by lower tier units. On the other hand, it has mostly to do with equipment and who hits harder (high weapon skill also means more damage).

Higher tier units being able to defend better also sounds good but I personally think that not in the way combat system works now. You have the shield wall example, it is actually worse in melee for infantry units and they underperform when playing more defensively.

The problem is that units in this game are not afraid to die at all, and they just attack, attack and attack. If all units would try to play more defensively, would be nice that Elite units would be able to block and attack much better than Low tier units in terms of timing.

So yes, I would also like to see a lower phase of battle where units would be afraid to die and elite units would be more skilled but this means a whole rebalancing for combat. I for sure support this if possible.