Mount & Blade II: Bannerlord Old Discussion Thread

[nikosierra125]

this game better be ****in good

i said it in the other m&b2 thread and i'll say it here, this game better be ****in good

dont let me down taleworlds

 

[Dent]

I've wasted a lot of characters typing up things I want to see in M&B2, but the only one that truly matters is an obese King Harlaus. If he's still around, I hope to all the gods old and new that his gluttonous debauchery is canon.

 

[bertanx]

this game better be ****in good

That reminded me of my signature.

 

[Lommo]

well it better be ****in good thats all im saying

 

[Merlkir]

How is Taleworlds going to deal with the competition?
R: Ah, the competition…

Best interview ever!

 

[LordCorbin]

Need a release date so i can plan time off work
Any confirmation of single player? If so i hope they added evolving villages as you invest denars in them.

1 last thing, i hope they dont nerf it by tring to be somthing its not. Stick to realism its done 'em great, and maybe some added decaps heads/limbs and gore.

 

[Orion]

Need a release date so i can plan time off work
Any confirmation of single player? If so i hope they added evolving villages as you invest denars in them.

I would be hesitant to say they're in Alpha right now. The teaser might have coincided with their entry into an alpha phase, but I wouldn't get my hopes up. They haven't even mentioned a closed/open beta test yet, so expecting a release date seems rather far-fetched.

Also, M&B deviating from singleplayer is like Call of Duty deviating from multiplayer. Even with Warband, M&B is still singleplayer-oriented. Warband's multiplayer features lack sufficient depth to say M&B is multiplayer-focused. That isn't to say they're bad, but that they're not as thoroughly evolved as singleplayer features.

 

[LordCorbin]

Also, M&B deviating from singleplayer is like Call of Duty deviating from multiplayer. Even with Warband, M&B is still singleplayer-oriented. Warband's multiplayer features lack sufficient depth to say M&B is multiplayer-focused. That isn't to say they're bad, but that they're not as thoroughly evolved as singleplayer features.

Yeah I get that.
I just got worried after the release of Napoleonic Wars and then with War of the Roses hitting the Multiplayer market it looks like they may br trying to move in on the Taleworlds style/genre. It crossed my mind Taleworlds may try to push another Multiplayer sooner. As for release date i know its still far off, im just satisfied every day that they are working on this and we get closer to a release.

 

[Lumos]

Also, M&B deviating from singleplayer is like Call of Duty deviating from multiplayer. Even with Warband, M&B is still singleplayer-oriented. Warband's multiplayer features lack sufficient depth to say M&B is multiplayer-focused. That isn't to say they're bad, but that they're not as thoroughly evolved as singleplayer features.

And it's good that way. I have no feelings whatsoever to all them clans, regiments, divisions or whatever they call them. For me, M&B is SP 90%, MP 10%. I dislike the MP's feel, as discussed in the previous thread, but from time to time I get the urge to play a nice Native Siege, and it's quite awesome.
I would like some sort of a killcam though. BF3 style, getting to see who shot you from the bushes outside the castle walls, so you know where to shoot.
I do think that the singleplayer is the more important part of the game though. Yeah, slaying hundreds of thousands of bots. I like it, cause it's supposed to be that way, after all, you're the über hero, aren't you.
I wouldn't grieve much if M&B2 had no MP. Of course, I wouldn't like it as much as I would if it had a MP, which hopefully it WILL have, I just don't think that it's a very necessary feature.

Anyways, the interview sounds quite interesting. Expanding on Calradia lore, additions to the combat mechanics, no Module System, but otherwise improved modding... mmmm-hmmmm!

 

[dia151]

m&b still doesnt have any real competition, wotr is just silly, and chivalry looks the same as wotr

 

[Sound Chaser]

m&b still doesnt have any real competition, wotr is just silly, and chivalry looks the same as wotr

They're like the flashy, noisy and colourful toys that look nice at a first glance, but which are soon found gathering dust in a room corner, whereas m&b is like the Turtles figures or Legos to which a child will keep coming back to.

 

[tansvanio]

New programming language    interesting.

 

[nikosierra125]

well it better be ****in good thats all im saying

Did they not teach you more phrases?

 

[Tatari_okan]

New programming language    interesting.

C# maybe, I am not sure.

They're like the flashy, noisy and colourful toys that look nice at a first glance, but which are soon found gathering dust in a room corner, whereas m&b is like the Turtles figures or Legos to which a child will keep coming back to.

I have always liked k'nex but I got you mean. Chivalry doesn't look it has a chance to be rival of M&B but maybe WOTR has, as much as I don't even see a point to try it.

 

[tansvanio]

I would like it very much if it was built in C# eheh.

 

[Merlkir]

If it's not made in Java, I'm not buyin'.

 

[dia151]

i hope its made in pascal, ...hope its in pascal...
im so fu****ng good at that one 

 

[Argeus the Paladin]

Or maybe they decided to do a 180 degree and make the game in Ren'py. That would be epic trollage.

 

[Lommo]

a few things i expect from m&b ii:

- slower archers
- no half-assed models and textures (make an effort you ****s)
- the name 'TGD_Munby' shouldnt be allowed
- better be ****in good

 

[ThunderonCZ]

Also, M&B deviating from singleplayer is like Call of Duty deviating from multiplayer. Even with Warband, M&B is still singleplayer-oriented. Warband's multiplayer features lack sufficient depth to say M&B is multiplayer-focused. That isn't to say they're bad, but that they're not as thoroughly evolved as singleplayer features.

And it's good that way. I have no feelings whatsoever to all them clans, regiments, divisions or whatever they call them. For me, M&B is SP 90%, MP 10%. I dislike the MP's feel, as discussed in the previous thread, but from time to time I get the urge to play a nice Native Siege, and it's quite awesome.
I would like some sort of a killcam though. BF3 style, getting to see who shot you from the bushes outside the castle walls, so you know where to shoot.
I do think that the singleplayer is the more important part of the game though. Yeah, slaying hundreds of thousands of bots. I like it, cause it's supposed to be that way, after all, you're the über hero, aren't you.
I wouldn't grieve much if M&B2 had no MP. Of course, I wouldn't like it as much as I would if it had a MP, which hopefully it WILL have, I just don't think that it's a very necessary feature.

Anyways, the interview sounds quite interesting. Expanding on Calradia lore, additions to the combat mechanics, no Module System, but otherwise improved modding... mmmm-hmmmm!

There are two sides of M&B fans. One would not play the game without SP and second would not play the game without MP. I profess to second side. I think TW know it. There is no game which has MP like Warband (WotR has easiesment for little childrens). And definitely not any BF3 style like to getting to see who shot you from. If you play the game long enough and know the map you know from where arrows come. CS style da best!
btw. I dont dislike SP