-
If you are reporting a bug, please head over to our Technical Support section for Bannerlord.
Users who are viewing this thread
- Status
LonelyStep
Sergeant
MrMundy said:
Seriously. Can anyone show me a rational correlation between watching these steamdb pages and actually knowing anything about anything?
In my opinion the imperial factions are based on the Byzantine empire. Also all three imperial factions are the same, we haven't seen a confirmed northern empire, but the southern and western that we've seen in gameplays have the same troops with the same armour. I think this is good, as a recently split empire wouldnt suddenly have different troops on either side.
Some people, especially certain YouTubers, think that the empire factions should be based on the west and Roman Empire, thinking that they had different military equipment, but when they split the soldiers fighting on either side were equipped the same. The west Roman Empire stopped existing almost 1000 years befor the east Roman Empire did, and the Byzantine armour people are showing is medieval period, so it's silly to have 5th century roman gear coexisting with 13-14th century roman gear.
Some people, especially certain YouTubers, think that the empire factions should be based on the west and Roman Empire, thinking that they had different military equipment, but when they split the soldiers fighting on either side were equipped the same. The west Roman Empire stopped existing almost 1000 years befor the east Roman Empire did, and the Byzantine armour people are showing is medieval period, so it's silly to have 5th century roman gear coexisting with 13-14th century roman gear.
it's also silly to have celtic Battanians being a short march away from mongol-ish Khuzaits and high medieval Vlandians. I'd much rather have variety than accuracy in this instance.
+1Sir_Newton said:
Agree fully, wrote about this a couple of pages back. I mean come on, this is a game. And the variety and diversity is part of the TaleWorld's theme that makes their Mount & Blade series so great. It gives replayability. Perhaps we don't need full Segmentata legionaries, but troops and gear inspired by late roman equipment.
But this is probably too late now, what hasn't been made now, will probably not make it into the game at this point. I think they're polishing and finishing things for the release.
On a side note,
Does anyone know if the engine will support randomly generated worldmaps for increased replayability? Perhaps somewhat randomized factions and troops too? (Mostly thinking of modding possibilities here.)
[15th]Harvain
Veteran
Papabean said:
And it all go to heck in barely 24 hours. It shall be glorious.
Kellorkleft
Knight
Speaking of the community, I'm wondering if it would be unnecessary to set up some kind of "beginner" servers to gate off new players for a short period. You know, to let them get the hang of the multiplayer scene before throwing them into the lion's den. That, or something similar. It'd be something completely optional, of course, but the point is to let newbies discover the game with eachother.
We all know that M&B has been lovingly described as having a "learning cliff," and while some of us who no longer feel alienated by the daunting multiplayer environment might shrug off the idea, I have a couple friends who tried this game that simply could not get into the multiplayer because it felt dizzying and unwelcoming. I remember having a similar first impression before discovering I can compensate for my lack of skill by riding a horse 24/7. It's just a thought, anyway.
We all know that M&B has been lovingly described as having a "learning cliff," and while some of us who no longer feel alienated by the daunting multiplayer environment might shrug off the idea, I have a couple friends who tried this game that simply could not get into the multiplayer because it felt dizzying and unwelcoming. I remember having a similar first impression before discovering I can compensate for my lack of skill by riding a horse 24/7. It's just a thought, anyway.
vonpenguin
Recruit
Kellorkleft said:
That fear is one of the reasons I haven't even touched multiplayer in my 300+ hours of playing.
vonpenguin said:
This. I'll most definitely give the MP a shot in BL, but singleplayer will always be my primary focus. This isn't the only reason, of course (I just prefer having a big open world to explore by myself), but it's a major one.
When people run up to your face and start feinting, spinning and jumping all over the place it can be very difficult to get the hang of multiplayer combat.
Funny thing is, I do just fine in singleplayer with the AI on max and auto-block off.. Guess humans will always be smarter.
TheGreatGold
Sergeant at Arms
That doesn't mean anything.Zahari said:
https://steamdb.info/app/261550/subs/
This one does.
It was not updated for 4 days tough, maybe they're working on something big?
Didn't Warband randomly generate the battle scenes?Exitialis said:
Kellorkleft said:
When Bannerlord comes out, I'm pretty sure 90+% of the players will be "beginners", so I doubt this will be a problem. Warband multiplayer veterans are already a minority within Warband's community and they'll be even more of a minority when Bannerlord comes out. The noobs will be fighting noobs is what I'm saying.
TheGreatGold
Sergeant at Arms
And the other 10% of players will be ex-warband players, pros and melee gods.baca said:
That 10% will kill that 90% in multiplayer servers, so there should be a system where there are noob servers/pasturages, as i like to call them, where beginners can get some experience by fighting against other beginners, AND pro/veteran servers where people with a certain number of hours on warband (935+ would be perfect) play.
This makes it all more balanced.
Mamlaz
Sergeant Knight at Arms
lol, stop fearing multiplayer so much haha.
I was used to having 1:10 kill death ratios for the first month of my experience and it never bothered me.
What kind of a special snowflake cannot stand losing in mp?
Not to mention that in the chaos of the deathmatch mode or when there are tons of players on the server, it does not really matter that much.
I was used to having 1:10 kill death ratios for the first month of my experience and it never bothered me.
What kind of a special snowflake cannot stand losing in mp?
Not to mention that in the chaos of the deathmatch mode or when there are tons of players on the server, it does not really matter that much.
TheGreatGold
Sergeant at Arms
Oh i do not fear multiplayer, i love it.Mamlaz said:
I especially like being a killing machine with expensive foot armor, a courser and a lance/sword., because thats the thing in deathmatch.
Altough i played around 600 hours of singleplayer and 400 of multiplayer, i do not suck that badly and im mostly in the mid-high leaderboard.
Kellorkleft said:
If you go that route, then you might run into the same issue faced by the Chivalry community: loads of low-level/new players who emerge from the beginner servers having learned bad habits and who are wholly unprepared for the challenges posed by veteran players.
I say this as a beginner myself, one who dreads hopping into Duel servers. The idea of gated servers is not a bad one, but I think the best way for new players to surmount the initial learning curve, assuming they know the absolute basics, is to fight among and against experienced players or even the lot you find in a regular Siege server, for example.
A ranked mode for 8v8,5v5 Battle and 3v3,2v2 Shield&Board only would be the best imo, there is only one reason there is no mod in warband doing it.
Afaik it is not possible to assign a player to a server, therefore any kind of Matchmaking doesnt work. A ranking system is the best thing to learn a game because you have enemys of your level, slowly fighting your way up to the top works for all competitve games. In Warband you only have one battleserver where you get your head carved in even after you spent a lot of time training, there is just no middle ground any more server-wise. ( all modes with respawn don´t give a lot of adrenalin after some time imo). If devs dont put it into Bannerlord, mods will fastly find that big niche.
Afaik it is not possible to assign a player to a server, therefore any kind of Matchmaking doesnt work. A ranking system is the best thing to learn a game because you have enemys of your level, slowly fighting your way up to the top works for all competitve games. In Warband you only have one battleserver where you get your head carved in even after you spent a lot of time training, there is just no middle ground any more server-wise. ( all modes with respawn don´t give a lot of adrenalin after some time imo). If devs dont put it into Bannerlord, mods will fastly find that big niche.
Mamlaz said:
I don't learn anything by getting repeatedly killed by veterans. I do learn by fighting people around my skill level and failing (Or succeeding). That's just how it's always been with MP games for me. Games with matchmaking aren't a problem, but WB doesn't have matchmaking, and BL probably won't either. Having said that, I like server browsers better than matchmaking to begin with (It's why I prefer TF2 over Overwatch, etc.).
- Status
Similar threads
