Mount and Blade 2 - Suggestions

Users who are viewing this thread

I'd agree with a lot of FlashOverlord's suggestions above, but would definitely add:

- More economic and other "management" options.  I don't need "Civ XVII", but would like a few more choices as to what you can build (to either increase crop growth, herd growth, or cottage industry, rather than a generic "mill" in a village, etc.) and more quest possibilities (not just "get cattle", "get wheat", and "train villagers"), for both villages and towns.

- The option to play a left-handed character.  Yes, it's pointless for 85% of the players, but the other 10-15% have to do everything "wrong, and essentially "unlearn" everything they already knew.  It feels counter-intuitive and confusing to have to block on my "sword arm" side and swing from my "shield" side, especially on horseback.  I can't tell you how many times I've attempted to shoot and had the arrow go way wide because my horse was facing the "proper" direction instead of the way I'm forced to play it.

- Unit "formations", where infantry units will tend to draw themselves together into either a "block" or "line" if told to "bunch up", but lower-tier troops may be prone to being tugged out of position by individual threats and targets of opportunity.

Thanks to the awkward "backwards" (at least for a "lefty") combat, I'm forced to play more of a command or sniper role and sit back where I can control the pace of combat better (with time to think, since all of my reactions are dead wrong).  In such a role, I would like to see more "strategic options" and non-combat choices to the game, rather than (or better yet, in addition to) "more immersive combat".

I don't know whether the AI was improved in WB since the basic game, but I've grown to dread the faction leader or marshall's inevitable "Follow me and just sit here for 6 days until your morale plummets and supplies start looking questionable".  Then you get called to "bring cattle" while they take off to beseige some castle or raid a village only vaguely in the same region, and you have to (A) scrounge up 6-9 cattle (prices are either 22 Denars, 400-ish Denars, or around 1700 Denars, seemingly at random), (B) find them again, without losing the cattle.  At that point, you're stuck following again until they send you on a Scouting run, only to have it cancelled only about a day or so later just as you're about to reach them with the info.  I've had that same sequence happen at least 10-12 times out of roughly 12-15 campaigns.  A little more variety or sense would be welcome.
 
Honved said:
I don't know whether the AI was improved in WB since the basic game, but I've grown to dread the faction leader or marshall's inevitable "Follow me and just sit here for 6 days until your morale plummets and supplies start looking questionable".  Then you get called to "bring cattle" while they take off to beseige some castle or raid a village only vaguely in the same region, and you have to (A) scrounge up 6-9 cattle (prices are either 22 Denars, 400-ish Denars, or around 1700 Denars, seemingly at random), (B) find them again, without losing the cattle.  At that point, you're stuck following again until they send you on a Scouting run, only to have it cancelled only about a day or so later just as you're about to reach them with the info.  I've had that same sequence happen at least 10-12 times out of roughly 12-15 campaigns.  A little more variety or sense would be welcome.

To add to this, I would like that the lords would not break sieges just to run for some peasants. And marshalls that are not appointed every single day.
 
To summerize what I would like to be added into the game. Thank you to those who already put the idea;s I have mentioned in.

What I came up with before reading the topic:
-controllable siege equipment (trebuchets, catapults, battering-rams, etc.)
-More village economy upgrades
-multi-player campaign
-Diplomacy
-when you take over a village for a lord, the nation's units can be recruited there.
That I agree with:
From: SikukuXIII
-More interactions with girls/women that you are courting to(Dance in events;Saving her from villains).
-The option to duel wield.
From Rudovich
-Make it so Ai can't see through building's and such.
From Sir Lewzalot:
-Expandable villages and cities including small garrisons (20 or so) in villages. Player owned merchants , product dependent on merchant type and mats invested
-Complete revamp of siege warfare including siege engines that are purchased like any other piece of gear.
From Iorya Dragon:
- Make every upgrade you build appear in the settlement or even further place it yourself.
-Complete revamp of siege warfare including siege engines that are purchased like any other piece of gear.
- Make every upgrade you build appear in the settlement or even further place it yourself.
- You could make gimmicks like help peasents in a city, by training them there, no instance, or helping with goods, blacksmith, stuff like that basically make a nice economy and cities more dynamic and imersive.
From ScholarOfTea:
- Camps should be places where you can walk at, freely venture around and come back to, with ability to build fortifications, and if after enough requirements are fufilled, should be able to build a small fort, and then upgrade to large fort, or keep, or city..... and it all can start with open field travel.it enables true questing, you travel the world map, and you get notified that something (like a valley, or a large cave, or an abandonned keep/castle) has crossed your path, and you have the option to embark with your troops into the territory, with random spontaneous possibilities in terms of what will happen or what you'll find at certain locations in the area. You could also get the option to make a hideout somewhere, where it will be a good place where players in early game can garrison troops.also, it is an RpG. You should be able to adventure, make money comfortably, and interact with the world- without it always being the same simple you vs. these guys every time
From Luken:
1. I would really like to see everything or most things from Diplomacy Mod in native m&b 2 .
2. More sophisticated vertical hierarchy of nobles. I would really like to see not only king vassals and others, but like kings, princes, barons and others :smile: (structure like in the game Crusader Kings) That would be a great improve in "m&b'ish" style. You could be a vassal of the vassal of the vassal :smile: that would open much more options and relations between them. The same hierarchy could be applied to groups of bandits (if you would destroy a big leader group of bandits it would lower a bandits activity in the region).
From FurryBlade:
-Singleplayer Co-op
Be able to play a singleplayer game (LAN)
thinking about 2-3 players conquering Calradia. That would be awesome.

And many more that I'lll not post due to my laziness and that this is already too long.

Kaiser Deadly Tree6
 
Something i would really like is a sort of chain of command in battles. To avoid the all top tier units aspect, only allow so many units to tier proportionally to the players total unit count. From there be able to assign units into different formations. (not in the sense of square, triangle, etc but in the form of squad, platoon, battalion, company, unit, regiment, etc)

This way we can have say 3 platoons, 2 melee and 1 ranged, with a well distributed number of properly tiered units within each one. As a continuation of this, if we could then only control the leader of each group in a general sense that would be nice so we could say "platoon 1 move *somewhere on the battlefield* then he would move there, bringing his men with him but the leader could say attack these people on the way. For more of a realistic battle stand-point. Also if we could have a pre-battle deployment phase in which we could put each group at a certain location, that would be cool.

Now i'm not sure if that made sense or is even possible but it sounded cool to me when i came up with it.
 
I would definitely back up the idea of a multiplayer campaign. I'm no scripter or modder, but maybe they could be held on certain servers that held external info (like DayZ)? Not sure how realistic that may be. You could put passwords on these servers to be able to play with your friends, as well.
 
Hello
I think you could give more "life" to the towns and villages, I mean, walking on the streets and roads is too boring, you see few NPCs going to nowhere, and you only need to go there for talking to the village elder, the guild master or the prison...
So the idea is let the player play with the town/village, like a real lord, for example:

-When the player  goes along the streets of his/her town with his/her bodyguard, the people aproach to the player, and depending on the reputation with the place, they acclaim you, or they repudiate you, or  he could have options like say something to the peasants, or drop money, or simple give the order to the bodyguard to push away the people.

-Give the possibility to repair buildings, or upgrade parts of the town/village, and see the results by your own.

-Criers on the streets, slave's markets, etc

-Let the player put some guards at the villages, and burn the buildings in the raids

In conclusion, make from the towns and villages something useful in the campaign, and at the same time, let player have more fun, more roleplaying options, etc



Also, you could add to the multiplayer the mods -Persistent world- and -CRPG-
Why?
Because you can kill in battles and sieges, but with CRPG, you have an objetive, upgrade your character as you like, leveling and making money in the battles, so it will be nicer than -oh my god, i start all the battles with a ****ty armor, when I make money, I choose good gear and i get killed, I lose all-,
Persistent world, its one of the best mods in all warband, it let the player play in a roleplay enviroment without tons of effort, roleplay with players is much better than with NPCs

if few modders did those mods with time and donations, why don't you?
 
Arterus said:
Hello
I think you could give more "life" to the towns and villages, I mean, walking on the streets and roads is too boring, you see few NPCs going to nowhere, and you only need to go there for talking to the village elder, the guild master or the prison...
So the idea is let the player play with the town/village, like a real lord, for example:

-When the player  goes along the streets of his/her town with his/her bodyguard, the people aproach to the player, and depending on the reputation with the place, they acclaim you, or they repudiate you, or  he could have options like say something to the peasants, or drop money, or simple give the order to the bodyguard to push away the people.

-Give the possibility to repair buildings, or upgrade parts of the town/village, and see the results by your own.

-Criers on the streets, slave's markets, etc

-Let the player put some guards at the villages, and burn the buildings in the raids

In conclusion, make from the towns and villages something useful in the campaign, and at the same time, let player have more fun, more roleplaying options, etc



Also, you could add to the multiplayer the mods -Persistent world- and -CRPG-
Why?
Because you can kill in battles and sieges, but with CRPG, you have an objetive, upgrade your character as you like, leveling and making money in the battles, so it will be nicer than -oh my god, i start all the battles with a ****ty armor, when I make money, I choose good gear and i get killed, I lose all-,
Persistent world, its one of the best mods in all warband, it let the player play in a roleplay enviroment without tons of effort, roleplay with players is much better than with NPCs

if few modders did those mods with time and donations, why don't you?

How about adding children to the game. You can have the children of commoners running around in the streets of the towns and villages, while you can see children of lesser noblemen serving as pages in the lord halls of castle and towns
 
Sreaction said:
Please, please don't make available ONLY on Steam.
Agreed, totally.  I was a fan of the TES series, particularly Morrowind, but haven't bought Skyrim, because I can't and won't, mainly because it's a Steam-only game.  Played and enjoyed the original Fallout, and played Fallout 3, but won't play FO:NV because of Steam.  I also played X3:Terran Coflict, but the sequel was Steam-only, and I have not bought that either, since there's no non-Steam alternative.  I can't and won't buy the new X-Com remake, for the same reason, which I would otherwise jump at.

For me, Steam means "no buy".  Please don't add this game to my "forget it" list.
 
More voiced dialog. The few examples in M&B Warband: "I'd slit your throat for a trinket" or "That's a nice head you have on your shoulders" are funny and add character to the game. However, there are too few of them.
 
Playing some Warband today I realised some stuff that I thought would be neat (very briefly skimming this thread, I see a lot of similar ideas have been had. So count any repeats as added support behind an idea, or another way to go about it).

1. Naval Operations.
This is my biggest and most favorite request. It would be really awesome to  be able to a buy (or build) a boat then go out on the high seas. Raid merchant ships, battle pirates, engage in an invasion by sea; storming the enemy's port or just bombarding the city.

It seems like there could be some really fun stuff having boats be added to the game.

2. Destruction! When starting a siege, there's always a bit of crumbled wall or something. I want to do that! Expand on that idea as you will.

3. Spying/Sabotaging/Being generally sneaky. The prison escape action from Fire and Steel was okay, but I want to be able to sneak around in the enemy's castle intentionally, instead of against my will. Adding the ability to perhaps sneak into the city and then fight your way into the gatehouse to open up so your armies can storm in.

4. More voice acting. The few little blips found in Warband are fun and add to the game. I'm not sure how I'd feel if the game was entirely voiced out though... Might just end up being annoying instead. I don't know.

5. More weapons. You've got the mace, how about a flail? How would that even work? I don't know, you figure it out. I want to swing a ball of death around my head as I ride into battle. To go along with this, I would limit certain weapons to certain areas as sort of specialties, instead of being able to find them in every city.

6. Building new towns/castles/villages. I'm not sure exactly how this would work with limiting where you could build them and such, but it'd be cool to be able to actually have YOUR castle that YOU built. Maybe with some degree of customizeability too.

7. Fighting in wheat fields. If you engage in battle anywhere near a town or village, odds are you'd probably be fighting in the vast wheatfields needed to feed the world. It'd be neat to have battle area types.

8. Different 'command' systems. I never liked the interface that popped up when I hit backspace. Not enough options, maybe try to get an actual sort of map to render in the map box too.

EDIT: Almost forgot one of the important ones: MAP! The map from M&B was fun and varied enough. Warbands was okay too. Fire and Steel's map was just awful. Really. Super duper flat and extremely uninteresting.... And yet, despite its flatness, every battleground was surrounded by a field of mountains to close you in. I prefer the invisible 'retreat' wall method to the unrealistic giant mountains of doom casing you in method. As I recall, you often couldn't even reach those mountains anyway so they were just there to block your view or something... I'll have to try replaying FS to regain my thoughts on why exactly I hated the terrain.



Comments on other ideas:
Co-Op campaign: What does player 2 do while player 1 is in a battle...? Seems like it could either get really boring, or really broken. I just really can not see any way that it could possibly work, unless battles happened real time, in which case travelling on the map would go SUPER slow. It just doesn't seem plausible to me, getting servers to host it aside.
Anti-Steamers: Why...? I suppose it would be better if it were for steam and not for steam too but why can't you just get it on steam?
 
I am not against Steam, I am against Steam having anything to do with my computer.

Oh, and crowds at the tournaments, real crowds, and lords get to carry their own colors on their shields (a pretty easy fix actually).
 
After playing some F&S, I have another thing I want to voice again:

Go back to the old recruitment and upgrade system for armies.
I liked capturing bandits and raising them up into honorable knights, and going around to villages to recruit peasants to train into an army.
F&S felt like you just basically had to throw money at it to get your army into shape. That's not as fun. (Training upgrades mostly consisted of turning a basic unit into a veteran unit... Woo hoo...)
 
One drastically important point: limit the amount of "vertical" in the terrain.  I HATE having horses charging up and down slopes that would make a mountain goat skittish.  On top of that, the constant up and down movement starts giving me nausea after a couple of battles.  On one occasion, I had about 6 fights in a row against a wave of small armies, all in the same basic mountain pass, and I had to break it up over half a dozen sessions to keep from getting sick.

On top of that, the terrain looks improbably convoluted for anything other than a "fantasy" game, and even a lot of the "flat" land on the big map is really hilly.  I could easily see reducing the visible amount of vertical deviation by a factor of 4 or even more, but keeping the penalties for movement as they are now.
 
- More realistic physics for projectiles, specially throwing.
- Ships and sea battles
- Voices on dialogues and the characters opening their voices when they talk.
- Usable catapults and stuff for sieges
Hmmm, can't think of more right now...
 
Hey! I would love to see improvements in those sections, mainly mechanical suggestions as follows:

Animations:

-Proper weapon movement (now every weapon is same stick) - what i mean are different techniques of handling it.
-Running and jumping - as funny as it was, walking however was very good.

Combat system:

-Less deadly hits on armors - love your work on fighting without them
-Dodging, crouching, tumbling- (movement - hold wasd and double click?) to counter heavy armors
-Spears - tougher blocking thrusts with one handed
-Slower two handed weapons except hammers - winning 1vs1 would be actually easier with shield and 1h, could add counter of a disarm perk if smashed against 1h wep. etc.
-Less shield destruction, more disarms - bit more work guys on blocking missiles with it as it they have been dodgy. I suppose with adding more advanced shield movement system could improve challenge between two players, who are using different tactic.
-Stamina - attacking, running, tumbling, parrying, blocking should consume our inner condition, so less space for spammers fainters. Even keeping weapon on hold and crouching should consume a tiny amount of strength disabling bugs.
-Throwing - from 3 steps or running should provide different outcome - steps more important than aim itself
-Close up system - coming to close should be somehow adapted like in Fight Night 4? Fighting on a less than and arm to arm range would involve headbutts, knees, overthrows, ground pounding. Maybe more like MMA, little space for ninjas without weapons. Special keys, or some magic? Trick me ;]


Teamwork and "wallwork":

- Close up system - coming close to another player should also involve stance change - shield should go on another allowing players to create formation or just simply protect one each other. To counter - archers should benefit by covering themselves using objects or teamed players. Just look on Gears of War, than Army of Two, little script copy and you got it :wink:.

-------

Wishlist:
-Flying arms, legs so i can capture them in slow motion to rise my ego  :twisted:

That's my vision. So far i heard about blood! Can't wait for combat news. Keep the machine runnin'!
 
I'd personally like to see a Lasso that could be used on horse back or on foot.

also more hand to hand forms of martial fighting.
 
Armatus said:
I'd personally like to see a Lasso that could be used on horse back or on foot.

also more hand to hand forms of martial fighting.
Going a Connecticut Yankee in King Arthur's Court with the lasso?
 
Back
Top Bottom