Mount & Blade II: Bannerlord Developer Blog 12 - The Passage Of Time

Users who are viewing this thread

Hello Bannerlord blog regulars and newcomers. In this entry, we are once again responding to your demands to hear more about single player gameplay - specifically, looking at the overworld map and some of the improvements made there. We revealed the map at Gamescom and mentioned some new features in the last blog. Here, we'll take what we've revealed and go into some more detail.

Read more at: http://www.taleworlds.com/en/Games/Bannerlord/Blog/14
 
I think there must've been a mob outside Taleworlds' office, and they panicked.
The topography of the map is not entirely consistent with Warband, in fact Bannerlord's map is somewhat more mountainous. The effect of this is an increase in the number of choke points.
Very interested how the choke points will be used, continuity of the map aside. Would this provide possibilities for ambushes or last stands, etc? Very eager to see how that will grow.

But no release date tho...  :cry:
 
I'm not a big fan of memes but...
party-hard_o_335187.gif
 
the yearly cycle has been shortened to twelve weeks, which adds more importance to the changing seasons and ageing of characters.
So does that mean that heirs are confirmed?

Also
Pink – Northern Empire, Orange – Western Empire
So does that mean certain noble families will take over different parts of the empire,  or will it start divided?
 
Blogs for the blog god!

I hope the world ends up being as dynamic and detailed as it sounds like.
 
Now, as I thought a little bit, I can suggest you the following:

So, you want to create chokepoints which are supposed to be crucial for controlling regions and trade. While that is a very good idea, I consider that you should not neglect roads. My idea is that roads should be added between all the settlements, which would grant all the parties a speed bonus. Generally, both the player and the AI would prioritize road movement while traveling on the campaign map, and the caravans/farmers, specifically, would always use them. The main advantage of a road system is that you can precisely know the caravan routes, thus, it would be easier to defend or attack them. On the other hand, if you want to take the enemy by surprise, you could walk through the rough terrain, but that would generally make you a bit slower and the seasonal effects would also have a bigger impact on you.

Edit: Ambush attempts may also be more successful on roads.
 
"we are once again responding to your demands to hear more about single player gameplay - specifically, looking at the overworld map and some of the improvements made there." Is multiplayer on the overworld map a thing? I could have sworn I read it somewhere.
 
Do Villages grow with different look in the world map?
For example: First 3 houses, then 5 houses, then 8 houses and a little wall.
So you can see from the world map how strong and good a village ist. that would be awesome.
 
The Bowman said:
Now, as I thought a little bit, I can suggest you the following:

So, you want to create chokepoints which are supposed to be crucial for controlling regions and trade. While that is a very good idea, I consider that you should not neglect roads. My idea is that roads should be added between all the settlements, which would grant all the parties a speed bonus. Generally, both the player and the AI would prioritize road movement while traveling on the campaign map, and the caravans/farmers, specifically, would always use them. The main advantage of a road system is that you can precisely know the caravan routes, thus, it would be easier to defend or attack them. On the other hand, if you want to take the enemy by surprise, you could walk through the rough terrain, but that would generally make you a bit slower and the seasonal effects would also have a bigger impact on you.

Roads sound like a great idea.
 
So
Much
Hype

BTW

Guys I noticed something when watching the "seasons" video

Untitled_zpslkoiem8j.png


Now assuming the number of "?" represents the number of digits of party members (this is reasonable since small peasant parties are single digits, while larger caravan parties are in 2- 3 digits)
I think to answer all of your "will Bannerlord have larger battles" it would be partially YES.
4 Digit parties means in the thousands, with a possible max size of 9999

Notice how the party model for the 4-digit ? is a military horseman/rider?
Likely army-parties are going to number in the thousands now and Bannerlord will support much larger and epic battles

Which is good
For my beastily computer I wouldnt mind engagements in the tens of thousands
 
jeehwanlee99 said:
For my beastily computer I wouldnt mind engagements in the tens of thousands

You would. I'm not saying that huge battles are a bad thing, I'd love that and hope they're in, but tens of thousands? That's impossible. Unlike Total War, units in Warband (and thus Bannerlord) are handled indepently, that is, they're not handled on grups/regiments of X units (For example 160), but each unit has its "process", which simply makes it much more computer demanding.
 
Twezie said:
You could get the parties that large in warband too, but you couldnt fight with them. Just saying

thats true. There is theoretically no size limit to how big parties can be

But individual party sizes in Warband were only as large as the battles could support. I never saw more than 250+ simultaneous persons in a battlefield, and likewise I never recall seeing a normal warband with 250+ members in ONE party (not a group). If that trend is to continue.......
 
I would rather say that the amount of '?' in that party maybe accounts for the number of lords/warbands joined as a single map entity. Just my guess.
 
Roads sound like a good idea; but I'm more interested in hearing about character aging and the possibility of character death and dynastic succession.
 
Back
Top Bottom