Is bannerlord losing their idendity?

Is bannerlord losing their idendity?

  • Yes

    Votes: 18 13.7%
  • No

    Votes: 113 86.3%

  • Total voters
    131

Nymeris

Squire
Best answers
0
reapo said:
Sgt._Pepper said:
Bannerlord is not even released yet, how can it lose its identity? Do you mean "Is Bannerlord not the same as Warband"?
man the different between a games forums and steams forum is night and day. on here, there is logical conversation about the topic at hand. on steam its a post about how this certain nobody won't give their money to the company anymore or telling everyone that they, specifically, will not be picking this game up

kudos to you gents.
??? This is for real? Do they even say why??
I stopped getting into steam because it's a pile of crap full of uncivilized incels, most of the subhumans there get into the page right after losing CS:GO rankeds to throw their rage into game developers.

Regarding this post... uh what is even the point of this post, OP doesn't even has an opinion of what Bannerlord's identity is and why its losing it, why did people even voted for yes hahaha, I just can't make my head around it
 

Benjamin Bones

Sergeant
Best answers
0
JustinTime49 said:
With that, I'm going to hit off saying they aren't, as let's be honest, most issues(yes issues) will be fixed or adjusted by mods as was with Native Warband.
With a certainty! Vanilla Warband was enjoyable for sure (I personally sunk many hours into the base game), but compared to the mods that came out after... Vanilla WB felt far inferior to a number of subsequent modifications. Judging by what I've seen so far, Bannerlord may be a similar situation.

JustinTime49 said:
My personal worry for bannerlord however, which is still prevalent is its encyclopedia. This is going to be a massive game, however, having the ability to google search information on basically anything is ridiculous, especially considering the setting. Want to know where a lord is? Just search the encyclopedia. Want to know how many troops in the garrison of any castle(friend or for)? Encyclopedia. WANT TO KNOW THE TOTAL AMOUNT OF FIELDED TROOPS OF YOUR RIVAL FACTION?? Dw encyclopedias got you covered. Yes, it is a streamlined system, but it builds on top of the issue I'm sure many veterans have faced in SP, and that's the power of winning most engagements because they are(for the most part) the initiator which in turn, is what makes late-game Warband awfully bland.

TL; DR: If the encyclopedia stays the way it was shown back in Gamescom and September vid, it will have lost its identity of being a challenging game strategically and logistically.

Especially early game, it won't feel like you are an adventurer in this world, rather a literal scholar using that given info to raise yourself.
The new and "improved" encyclopedia does seem to be just a bit too revealing I grant you that, but I cannot agree that this one element alters the game such that "[...] it will have lost its identity of being a challenging game strategically and logistically."

Concerning the new encyclopedia: I like the fact that there is a search bar (really wanted this in WB). However, always being able to know where any lord in the world is at any time just by looking at the encyclopedia is rather ridiculous (especially a lord from an enemy faction). Knowing exactly how many troops the enemy has at their disposal just by consulting the encyclopedia is also not ideal.

I think that some of the changes made to the encyclopedia (and other changes made in different areas of the game) were done to make the game more accessible to a wider audience.
 

JustinTime49

Regular
Best answers
0
Benjamin Bones said:
JustinTime49 said:
My personal worry for bannerlord however, which is still prevalent is its encyclopedia. This is going to be a massive game, however, having the ability to google search information on basically anything is ridiculous, especially considering the setting. Want to know where a lord is? Just search the encyclopedia. Want to know how many troops in the garrison of any castle(friend or for)? Encyclopedia. WANT TO KNOW THE TOTAL AMOUNT OF FIELDED TROOPS OF YOUR RIVAL FACTION?? Dw encyclopedias got you covered. Yes, it is a streamlined system, but it builds on top of the issue I'm sure many veterans have faced in SP, and that's the power of winning most engagements because they are(for the most part) the initiator which in turn, is what makes late-game Warband awfully bland.

TL; DR: If the encyclopedia stays the way it was shown back in Gamescom and September vid, it will have lost its identity of being a challenging game strategically and logistically.

Especially early game, it won't feel like you are an adventurer in this world, rather a literal scholar using that given info to raise yourself.
The new and "improved" encyclopedia does seem to be just a bit too revealing I grant you that, but I cannot agree that this one element alters the game such that "[...] it will have lost its identity of being a challenging game strategically and logistically."

Concerning the new encyclopedia: I like the fact that there is a search bar (really wanted this in WB). However, always being able to know where any lord in the world is at any time just by looking at the encyclopedia is rather ridiculous (especially a lord from an enemy faction). Knowing exactly how many troops the enemy has at their disposal just by consulting the encyclopedia is also not ideal.

I think that some of the changes made to the encyclopedia (and other changes made in different areas of the game) were done to make the game more accessible to a wider audience.
Forgive me, I should have clarified. When referring to strategically and logistically, I was moreover classifying that with the ability to 'exploit' army numbers and whatnot. I think it is overall a VERY fine addition, large step up from Warband, just needs some tweaking(imo ofc) so that it acts as a form of streamline for players, as opposed to giving actual advantages. Then again, like literally everyone has said, only when the release comes will we know for sure.

tellcools said:
JustinTime49 said:
Benjamin Bones said:
I'm not sure that such a question could adequately be ascertained at this moment in time. I mean... The game has yet to be released. How could that really, truly be answered?

The combat in multiplayer has, at least in the beginning of the closed beta, caused participants (especially several M&B veterans) to complain. The UI design has been criticized for looking like one of those micro-transaction based online mini-games... And don't get me started on the current Bannerlord banner situation.

Even though it is not released, and though many things will be subject to change, I don't see an issue in talking about last known facts of gameplay.

With that, I'm going to hit off saying they aren't, as let's be honest, most issues(yes issues) will be fixed or adjusted by mods as was with Native Warband.

That being said, there are a number of design features that don't stick well with me, one being the character portraits. They look really really bad imo.

My personal worry for bannerlord however, which is still prevalent is its encyclopedia. This is going to be a massive game, however, having the ability to google search information on basically anything is ridiculous, especially considering the setting. Want to know where a lord is? Just search the encyclopedia. Want to know how many troops in the garrison of any castle(friend or for)? Encyclopedia. WANT TO KNOW THE TOTAL AMOUNT OF FIELDED TROOPS OF YOUR RIVAL FACTION?? Dw encyclopedias got you covered. Yes, it is a streamlined system, but it builds on top of the issue I'm sure many veterans have faced in SP, and that's the power of winning most engagements because they are(for the most part) the initiator which in turn, is what makes late-game Warband awfully bland.

TL; DR: If the encyclopedia stays the way it was shown back in Gamescom and September vid, it will have lost its identity of being a challenging game strategically and logistically.

Especially early game, it won't feel like you are an adventurer in this world, rather a literal scholar using that given info to raise yourself.

Most players just google search their problems or questions so I think this is a good think, doesn;t force me to open my phone and waste time googling about stuff.
What? You can't google search stuff that is specific to your playthrough.
 

Vermillion_Hawk

Grandmaster Knight
WF&SWBVC
Best answers
0
It's definitely a step back in single as well as multiplayer so far. I'm not a fan in the least of what they've done to the campaign with influence, the time scale, and the clan system. It definitely seems like they've lost sight of some of the more holistic elements of Warband which made it enjoyable for me.
 

Benjamin Bones

Sergeant
Best answers
0
Vermillion_Hawk said:
It's definitely a step back in single as well as multiplayer so far. I'm not a fan in the least of what they've done to the campaign with influence, the time scale, and the clan system. It definitely seems like they've lost sight of some of the more holistic elements of Warband which made it enjoyable for me.
You forgot banners.  :facepalm:
 

malvado

Recruit
Best answers
0
my god y'all act like the beta is some massive failure. I almost wish everyone would shut the **** up, let Taleworlds make Bannerlord how they/Armagan feels is best, and either play or don't play the damn game when it releases.

there were no forums criticizing every ****ing move when Armagan made the game we all love in M&B, but thats not perfect either and has plenty of flaws and poor design choices.

the game won't be perfect, it won't be spot on to what you want it to be, but it's still- at it's core- a Mount and Blade game. No. Bannerlord is not "losing their identity" you dumb****s.

Mod the **** out of the game like we all did with Warband if you don't like it when it comes out.
 

Benjamin Bones

Sergeant
Best answers
0
malvado said:
my god y'all act like the beta is some massive failure. I almost wish everyone would shut the **** up, let Taleworlds make Bannerlord how they/Armagan feels is best, and either play or don't play the damn game when it releases.
You do know that one of the purposes of these forums is so that the community can discuss things they like and don't like about the upcoming game? It's also a TW resource to get some feedback from potential and future buyers so TW and Armagan can produce a game that appeals to as many new customers as possible while not alienating their core fan base. 

malvado said:
there were no forums criticizing every **** move when Armagan made the game we all love in M&B, but thats not perfect either and has plenty of flaws and poor design choices.
No, I seriously doubt there were... I mean, who knew about the development of Mount & Blade when it was being developed?

malvado said:
the game won't be perfect, it won't be spot on to what you want it to be, but it's still- at it's core- a Mount and Blade game. No. Bannerlord is not "losing their identity" you dumb[*****].

Mod the **** out of the game like we all did with Warband if you don't like it when it comes out.
I wonder why you're using such aggressive and vulgar language. If you don't like what you see on the forums then there is no reason for you to be here. Regardless of how you feel, there's no reason for you to be so aggressive and insulting to people you don't know.
 

malvado

Recruit
Best answers
0
[quote author=Benjamin Bones

I wonder why you're using such aggressive and vulgar language. If you don't like what you see on the forums then there is no reason for you to be here. Regardless of how you feel, there's no reason for you to be so aggressive and insulting to people you don't know.
[/quote]

Because every damn game with a combat system goes through this annoying cycle of making devs tweak it and then you end up with a domino effect. One tweak after another rather than letting the devs focus on updates with real content and not just catering to whatever the next community complaint is.

Mod the game. None of us had any say in Mount and Blade or any idea it was even being made and then boom, we ended up with a gem of a game. “Is bannerlord losing its identity”??? Half of Warbands identity was modded. At its core, bannerlord still has the same mechanics we love from Warband.

Peoples feedback on these forums sound like they’ve completely ruined the franchise.
 

Benjamin Bones

Sergeant
Best answers
0
malvado said:
Because every damn game with a combat system goes through this annoying cycle of making devs tweak it and then you end up with a domino effect. One tweak after another rather than letting the devs focus on updates with real content and not just catering to whatever the next community complaint is.
Indeed, there is a barrage of criticism and complaints, but that is born out of a passion and a love for game and concept, and usually comes from a good place; a desire to see the best game possible.

malvado said:
Mod the game. None of us had any say in Mount and Blade or any idea it was even being made and then boom, we ended up with a gem of a game. “Is bannerlord losing its identity”??? Half of Warbands identity was modded. At its core, bannerlord still has the same mechanics we love from Warband.
You're quite right, a significant part of Warband's identity is its moddability... But modding tools for Bannerlord will not be released until full release (that's at least a year after early access). And then the community will have to wait for those mods to be developed. This actually is the place for constructive criticism for the upcoming game. It is not a place for insults and mudslinging directed at TaleWorlds... or members of the community.

malvado said:
Peoples feedback on these forums sound like they’ve completely ruined the franchise.
You're right. Some are more alarmist than others, and I agree with you that the very question posited in the OP seems, at least to me, a bit ridiculous... but I don't see how people who want to see this game be the best it can be warrant insults... No matter how annoying or ridiculous they may seem to you.

 

Vermillion_Hawk

Grandmaster Knight
WF&SWBVC
Best answers
0
malvado said:
Mod the game. None of us had any say in Mount and Blade or any idea it was even being made and then boom, we ended up with a gem of a game. “Is bannerlord losing its identity”??? Half of Warbands identity was modded. At its core, bannerlord still has the same mechanics we love from Warband.

Peoples feedback on these forums sound like they’ve completely ruined the franchise.
Except that I don't play with mods. I liked the base game perfectly the way it was with Warband (while acknowledging bugs and features that could be improved), but Bannerlord is clearly taking things in a somewhat different direction.
 

vicwiz007

Knight
WBNWVCM&BWF&S
Best answers
0
Vermillion_Hawk said:
It's definitely a step back in single as well as multiplayer so far. I'm not a fan in the least of what they've done to the campaign with influence, the time scale, and the clan system. It definitely seems like they've lost sight of some of the more holistic elements of Warband which made it enjoyable for me.
Vermillion_Hawk said:
Except that I don't play with mods. I liked the base game perfectly the way it was with Warband (while acknowledging bugs and features that could be improved), but Bannerlord is clearly taking things in a somewhat different direction.
It sounds like you just want Warband 2.0 rather than a fresh new fully fledged sequel. Embrace the change boomer.

You are a very rare species if you prefer vanilla over any of the mods anyway.
 

Vermillion_Hawk

Grandmaster Knight
WF&SWBVC
Best answers
0
Warband 2.0 would have been perfectly fine by me. I'm also adamant that a game must be able to stand on its own merits without mods. My impression of Bannerlord's campaign systems right now are that they're trying to hard to be accessible - systems like clans and influence and even the previously-mentioned banner colour simplifications make the game a lot easier to read for someone picking it up, but they trample on things that made Warband interesting. The Crusader Kings II-style succession mechanics are probably the biggest disruption and my most hated new feature, which ties in to a lot of my issues with clans and influence.

Call it resistance to change if you want, the fact of the matter is I'm not looking forward to Bannerlord anymore, since it's clear that Taleworlds is not interested in keeping the things I loved about Warband.
 

vota dc

Knight at Arms
M&BWB
Best answers
0
Vermillion_Hawk said:
Warband 2.0 would have been perfectly fine by me. I'm also adamant that a game must be able to stand on its own merits without mods. My impression of Bannerlord's campaign systems right now are that they're trying to hard to be accessible - systems like clans and influence and even the previously-mentioned banner colour simplifications make the game a lot easier to read for someone picking it up, but they trample on things that made Warband interesting. The Crusader Kings II-style succession mechanics are probably the biggest disruption and my most hated new feature, which ties in to a lot of my issues with clans and influence.

Call it resistance to change if you want, the fact of the matter is I'm not looking forward to Bannerlord anymore, since it's clear that Taleworlds is not interested in keeping the things I loved about Warband.
When they shifted from a fantasy RPG to a "career" game the influence from Pirates was obvious. In that game you are forced to retire after some time. With clan you can keep playing. The problem isn't much your clan (you can customize your character and kick out people you don't like) but could be OTHER clans. For example what if Caladog Is a funny and interesting King with unique interactions and quests while the heir Is a boring generated guy? Native warband anyway has the problem of people swapping faction all time and that was really silly and immersion breaking.
 

Vermillion_Hawk

Grandmaster Knight
WF&SWBVC
Best answers
0
Kodlak Jorrvas said:
Vermillion_Hawk said:
since it's clear that Taleworlds is not interested in keeping the things I loved about Warband.
Could you elaborate on that
I just did but to maybe add a bit more detail, but it appears they're stripping down the RPG aspects to accomodate the new succession mechanic, which itself ruins most of the campaign for me. From a design perspective it means two things - first, that the player and his companions can (and apparently, in the base design for the campaign, will) be replaced, secondly that Lords can be replaced.

This change affects pretty much all the campaign systems as a result. The influence system of magical political power points is a result of needing a way to preserve the player's political influence where personal relationships would no longer work, due to either the player or the Lords in question being able to die. The accelerated time scale accomodates the death and succession mechanics, and breaks from a perfectly good system from Warband which I saw no reason to change. The system of clans also therefore becomes necessary as a sort of workaround to preserve the same kinds of political relationships, but this time with an impersonal vague entity with a rotating cast of faces.

I admit I don't know too much about the skill and stat system beyond what was shown in early blogs but I imagine that it's changed significantly to accomodate for the succession mechanic as well. My impression of it is that either the skills and stats will be massively watered down so that succession isn't so terrible, or skills and traits will simply migrate between characters and their successors, at which point I would ask why even bother having succession at all?

And that's only scratching the surface. Warband had good combat but it also had something very special going on outside of it, and a lot of that was the interesting stories that would emerge as you played and interacted with the Lords in the game. The fact that it was the same set of Lords every time honestly made the campaign map what it was - this particular design decision has killed a lot of that already.

vota dc said:
When they shifted from a fantasy RPG to a "career" game the influence from Pirates was obvious. In that game you are forced to retire after some time. With clan you can keep playing. The problem isn't much your clan (you can customize your character and kick out people you don't like) but could be OTHER clans. For example what if Caladog Is a funny and interesting King with unique interactions and quests while the heir Is a boring generated guy? Native warband anyway has the problem of people swapping faction all time and that was really silly and immersion breaking.
And that's exactly my point. Harlaus wouldn't have nearly the same reputation if he up and died halfway through your campaign and was replaced by Autogenerated Swadian Lord Variant #56783.
 

JustinTime49

Regular
Best answers
0
Vermillion_Hawk said:
Kodlak Jorrvas said:
Vermillion_Hawk said:
since it's clear that Taleworlds is not interested in keeping the things I loved about Warband.
Could you elaborate on that
I just did but to maybe add a bit more detail, but it appears they're stripping down the RPG aspects to accomodate the new succession mechanic, which itself ruins most of the campaign for me. From a design perspective it means two things - first, that the player and his companions can (and apparently, in the base design for the campaign, will) be replaced, secondly that Lords can be replaced.

This change affects pretty much all the campaign systems as a result. The influence system of magical political power points is a result of needing a way to preserve the player's political influence where personal relationships would no longer work, due to either the player or the Lords in question being able to die. The accelerated time scale accomodates the death and succession mechanics, and breaks from a perfectly good system from Warband which I saw no reason to change. The system of clans also therefore becomes necessary as a sort of workaround to preserve the same kinds of political relationships, but this time with an impersonal vague entity with a rotating cast of faces.

I admit I don't know too much about the skill and stat system beyond what was shown in early blogs but I imagine that it's changed significantly to accomodate for the succession mechanic as well. My impression of it is that either the skills and stats will be massively watered down so that succession isn't so terrible, or skills and traits will simply migrate between characters and their successors, at which point I would ask why even bother having succession at all?

And that's only scratching the surface. Warband had good combat but it also had something very special going on outside of it, and a lot of that was the interesting stories that would emerge as you played and interacted with the Lords in the game. The fact that it was the same set of Lords every time honestly made the campaign map what it was - this particular design decision has killed a lot of that already.

vota dc said:
When they shifted from a fantasy RPG to a "career" game the influence from Pirates was obvious. In that game you are forced to retire after some time. With clan you can keep playing. The problem isn't much your clan (you can customize your character and kick out people you don't like) but could be OTHER clans. For example what if Caladog Is a funny and interesting King with unique interactions and quests while the heir Is a boring generated guy? Native warband anyway has the problem of people swapping faction all time and that was really silly and immersion breaking.
And that's exactly my point. Harlaus wouldn't have nearly the same reputation if he up and died halfway through your campaign and was replaced by Autogenerated Swadian Lord Variant #56783.

I think we are jumping the gun here.

From my point of view, the addition of a succession mechanic makes the game more dynamic and actually INCREASES RPG elements. Think of this way. On start, you can take the playstyle as a looter. Robbing caravans becoming a criminal(new system) for multiple factions. Using light armour, a bow and a short sword. Eventually, you meet your match either due to old age, or getting defeated by the lord and him executing you.
Instead of having to start a new game, or playing this style until two major factions remain, you take control of another family member, or your children who you(I assume) level up to be in your vision unless told otherwise. Level up to redeem your father by proving yourself to the faction who your father disrupted the most. Become a heavy knight leading warriors in battle from horseback. That is only one scenario, remember, M&B is a sandbox.

I like the fact that different generations will interact with each other, and with possibilities like making feasts more than just a tool for relation, tourneys and lord gatherings. Request that your best friend lord(relation) to allow your son to court his/her daughter.

This is prime RPG stuff, and while I think it's a step away from warband, it most certainly is not a step BACK from warband.

Then again, this part of the project will completely change the identity of M&B, and if done very poorly or blandly(ie: Keeping old systems like bland feasts to merge with new systems as opposed to creating new systems(hunts, dynamic conversations) that would complement new systems) could fracture the fanbase like seen with Star Wars :ohdear:.
 

vicwiz007

Knight
WBNWVCM&BWF&S
Best answers
0
It's funny, our opinions are basically polar opposites  :lol: That is not to say I don't respect yours and anyone else's.

Vermillion_Hawk said:
And that's only scratching the surface. Warband had good combat but it also had something very special going on outside of it, and a lot of that was the interesting stories that would emerge as you played and interacted with the Lords in the game.
I find it strange you can say this without acknowledging the possibilities succession opens up for this topic. It seems like many of your grievances stem from succession (i.e lords changing after the first set). I really don't get it because the lords in Warband were so bland anyway. Aside from the kings, there are very few lords worth a mention. Even so, the kings had no personality either! Let's take the most memorable one- Harlaus. What is he known for? Butter, feasting, and losing his kingdom first. Butter is a meme from a glitch, feasting is the fault of poor AI decision making, and Swadia falls first for several reasons including feasting. Not a single one of those have to do with his character. The community projected this personality on him, and he's really the only one with a "personality" because of it.

If I were to think of one example of a story from Warband, lets say have beef with a lord who keeps raiding your villages. The same exact thing can happen in Bannerlord except now you can end the beef by executing him, and possibly have it continue on by making an enemy of his family. The point I'm making is that for every story you could make in Warband, there's that plus more for Bannerlord. Unlike Warband, you don't have to put up with someone's bull**** for eternity.

Clans being introduced just introduces another layer of story/politics. You can have quarrels within and between them. I know you don't play mods, but for a second just imagine this used in a GoT mod. Half the story of GoT is between families (clans) and succession. Anyone who has seen the show/read the books must be hard just thinking about its potential in BL.

As for influence, I understand the logical flaws of the system but I think its practicality trumps those aspects. It gives players something to work toward, and a reason to fight even the smallest of battles against bandits. It allows systems like voting on topics, creating armies, and more advanced politics.

@Justintime49 posted as I was writing this so I feel like beating a dead horse now, but yeah I agree with what he said.
 

Younes123

Knight at Arms
WBNWVCWF&SWBWBWB
Best answers
0
Bannerlord identity will be as following be sure to follow word by word:

mods

that's it, thanks for reading
 

Nymeris

Squire
Best answers
0
vicwiz007 said:
It's funny, our opinions are basically polar opposites  :lol: That is not to say I don't respect yours and anyone else's.

Vermillion_Hawk said:
And that's only scratching the surface. Warband had good combat but it also had something very special going on outside of it, and a lot of that was the interesting stories that would emerge as you played and interacted with the Lords in the game.
I find it strange you can say this without acknowledging the possibilities succession opens up for this topic. It seems like many of your grievances stem from succession (i.e lords changing after the first set). I really don't get it because the lords in Warband were so bland anyway. Aside from the kings, there are very few lords worth a mention. Even so, the kings had no personality either! Let's take the most memorable one- Harlaus. What is he known for? Butter, feasting, and losing his kingdom first. Butter is a meme from a glitch, feasting is the fault of poor AI decision making, and Swadia falls first for several reasons including feasting. Not a single one of those have to do with his character. The community projected this personality on him, and he's really the only one with a "personality" because of it.

If I were to think of one example of a story from Warband, lets say have beef with a lord who keeps raiding your villages. The same exact thing can happen in Bannerlord except now you can end the beef by executing him, and possibly have it continue on by making an enemy of his family. The point I'm making is that for every story you could make in Warband, there's that plus more for Bannerlord. Unlike Warband, you don't have to put up with someone's bull**** for eternity.

Clans being introduced just introduces another layer of story/politics. You can have quarrels within and between them. I know you don't play mods, but for a second just imagine this used in a GoT mod. Half the story of GoT is between families (clans) and succession. Anyone who has seen the show/read the books must be hard just thinking about its potential in BL.

As for influence, I understand the logical flaws of the system but I think its practicality trumps those aspects. It gives players something to work toward, and a reason to fight even the smallest of battles against bandits. It allows systems like voting on topics, creating armies, and more advanced politics.

@Justintime49 posted as I was writing this so I feel like beating a dead horse now, but yeah I agree with what he said.

+1 none of the lords had identity at all, other than the one you make in your head, of course there was always a lord that was more sided to start wars and he would give you that quest to start conflict but that was it. You're romanticizing Warband imo, it wasn't that deep, it barely covered a surface of deep. Of course I remember Emir Lakhem, but I only befriended him because I wanted to marry his sweet sister Safiya, but it wouldn't been different if it was Emir Tilisman or Emir whatever, because they all act the same and I mostly build relations by helping him in battle and doing the same quests anyone could have given me. And Safiya? I only cared for her because she had the prettiest model in the Sarranian desert, not because I liked her. They didn't have traits that made them special and raised a challenge to connect with their attributes, so, yeah, my hopes is that Bannerlord actually gives traits just like in CK2, I dont mind at all they're aiming for it I'm happy for it