Mount&Blade II: Bannerlord
- Thread starter vadermath
- Start date
Users who are viewing this thread
- Status
Rewjeo
Sergeant at Arms
Outlawed said:
I didn't mean the economy/trade stuff, I meant in battle. M&B uses individuals as units, TW does not. Their recruitment systems are completely different, TW does not have the player or companions who you customize throughout the game, M&B units upgrade while TW units don't, and then you have to balance both aspects in battle. I mean, in TW you don't get too much time to just watch the armies fight, usually you're issuing orders, so you wouldn't have much time to actually go into first person mode and fight, and TW armies tend to be HUGE compared to M&B armies, so you controlling one person won't make a huge difference. Beyond that, other aspects have issues, like M&B being based on an individual while TW is a full country. I'm not saying it's impossible, but it's not such an easy feat and there are a lot of places where TW and M&B don't blend. Depending on which game was used as a base, you would have to sacrifice some parts of the other game.
well i was thinking of a hybrid,.like a combination that fits with TW economies, maybe even cities and similiar campaign map but with real time movement and on the battle field,. the ability to control men as units instead of unit type.adding in customization
and still retaining the first person combat but with a seperate HUD for the minimap where u can actually control units from.Also it would make sense to keep the party system and all but with a kind of unit system instead and a trade economy system which changes when u become king (where its done automatically via trade rights and a seperate HUD for kingdom management but different from TW and more in line with mount and blade)
and still retaining the first person combat but with a seperate HUD for the minimap where u can actually control units from.Also it would make sense to keep the party system and all but with a kind of unit system instead and a trade economy system which changes when u become king (where its done automatically via trade rights and a seperate HUD for kingdom management but different from TW and more in line with mount and blade)
Nope.wakko2k said:
JankoMega
Grandmaster Knight
It'd be good if you could have a "vassal"in your Party,so he can lead a part of your army,for example:you have 50 knights,and you decide to give him 25 or whatever;i would personally add many strategic things which you could do... It'd add many things to MB2 though.
Tchan
Veteran
[quote author=Ringwraith] The fact that even after what, five years in development you can still walk up and down sheer cliff faces is just ridiculous.
[/quote]
To me, that is a feature.
Anyways im sure M&B2 will be using a new engine, engine's become specific and with optimisation, it would become hard to adapt the old engine to a new game. Im sure there all rubbing their hands with glee at the thought of coding a new engine
Did i say engine enough?
[/quote]
To me, that is a feature.
Anyways im sure M&B2 will be using a new engine, engine's become specific and with optimisation, it would become hard to adapt the old engine to a new game. Im sure there all rubbing their hands with glee at the thought of coding a new engine
Did i say engine enough?
Tchan said:
To me, that is a feature.
Anyways im sure M&B2 will be using a new engine, engine's become specific and with optimisation, it would become hard to adapt the old engine to a new game. Im sure there all rubbing their hands with glee at the thought of coding a new engine
Did i say engine enough?
[/quote]
Engines... I really hope it is pretty :3 And I hope... it is awesome
Funnily enough, I don't really care what it looks like. I'd be perfectly fine with it if it looked exactly like Warband does, and let's face it, that's not exactly the pinnacle of computer graphics, is it. IMO there are more important things that M&B2 needs to get right.
I don't expect TW to make any radical changes to the concept, but I do hope it all comes together in a more focused, seamless way. If you look at M&B's development, I think it's clear the devs didn't really go into it with a very clear idea of what they were doing. The early versions had the beginnings of a storyline and zombies, for crying out loud. I think this shift away from a classic RPG and towards a free-form sandbox kingdom management game shows in the very structure of the game. Like for example certain stats of your character aren't actually part of your character. Honor and renown, specifically. They're not on the character screen, you have to go to the reports screen, which makes no bloody sense whatsoever. These stats were later additions and rather than modify the existing stat system TW just tacked on another, separate stat system just for them. That's just one example, IMO this haphazard nature of the game's development, where they first developed a solid combat system and only then started thinking about how to actually build a game around it, shows in every aspect of the game. The good thing is that they don't have to do that for M&B2 anymore. The concept is done now and they don't have to tack things on and kludge them together to make them kinda-sorta work, they can build the game from the ground up with a clear idea of what it's supposed to be.
Some M&B issues I'd like to see fixed:
Braindead AI with non-existent pathfinding
Clunky UI
Unrealistic movement that often feels unduly sluggish
Better controls. I realize even uttering this is heresy, but while the directional attack/block controls were an interesting experiment, I think there are better ways to handle combat, especially when facing multiple opponents, as is often the case in M&B. I'll even go so far as to say that I'd like M&B2's controls to be optimized for a 360 controller. There, your hatred of me is now complete.
Better inventory. I've never been a fan of the four slot system that makes it possible to carry four pikes, one in your hands and the other three presumably tucked neatly up your ass.
Things I'd like to see added:
Dynamic physics-based animations. Shoving opponents to make them lose balance and fall down, collisions between horses causing one or both to fall down, knocking people off horses, knocking weapons out of people's hands, etc.
Dismemberment and mutilation. When a galloping horse takes a two-handed sword chop in the knees, it shouldn't just carry on prancing around like everything's peachy.
Special attacks. And I don't mean nonsense like power attacks. Look at Two Worlds 2, for example. If you have a torch in your off-hand, you can burn your opponent and possibly set them on fire. If you have a shield, you can bash with it. If you have your other hand free, you can grab some dust off the ground and throw it in their face. That sort of thing.
Dual-wielding. Yes, I know it's nonsense, but it's so damn cool! Even Kingdom of Heaven had a bit of it purely for that reason, and c'mon, that was a superb movie (well, the Director's Cut was anyway). And while yes, the guy did die horribly within seconds, he looked like a total badass even when he took that arrow in the neck.
Things I don't care for:
Graphics. They're fine as they are.
Voice acting. There are better things on which to spend your limited resources, TW.
Multiplayer. The only thing that might make me mildly interested in that would be a full campaign with a proper map in which I could scheme/ally/fight with/against other players.
I don't expect TW to make any radical changes to the concept, but I do hope it all comes together in a more focused, seamless way. If you look at M&B's development, I think it's clear the devs didn't really go into it with a very clear idea of what they were doing. The early versions had the beginnings of a storyline and zombies, for crying out loud. I think this shift away from a classic RPG and towards a free-form sandbox kingdom management game shows in the very structure of the game. Like for example certain stats of your character aren't actually part of your character. Honor and renown, specifically. They're not on the character screen, you have to go to the reports screen, which makes no bloody sense whatsoever. These stats were later additions and rather than modify the existing stat system TW just tacked on another, separate stat system just for them. That's just one example, IMO this haphazard nature of the game's development, where they first developed a solid combat system and only then started thinking about how to actually build a game around it, shows in every aspect of the game. The good thing is that they don't have to do that for M&B2 anymore. The concept is done now and they don't have to tack things on and kludge them together to make them kinda-sorta work, they can build the game from the ground up with a clear idea of what it's supposed to be.
Some M&B issues I'd like to see fixed:
Braindead AI with non-existent pathfinding
Clunky UI
Unrealistic movement that often feels unduly sluggish
Better controls. I realize even uttering this is heresy, but while the directional attack/block controls were an interesting experiment, I think there are better ways to handle combat, especially when facing multiple opponents, as is often the case in M&B. I'll even go so far as to say that I'd like M&B2's controls to be optimized for a 360 controller. There, your hatred of me is now complete.
Better inventory. I've never been a fan of the four slot system that makes it possible to carry four pikes, one in your hands and the other three presumably tucked neatly up your ass.
Things I'd like to see added:
Dynamic physics-based animations. Shoving opponents to make them lose balance and fall down, collisions between horses causing one or both to fall down, knocking people off horses, knocking weapons out of people's hands, etc.
Dismemberment and mutilation. When a galloping horse takes a two-handed sword chop in the knees, it shouldn't just carry on prancing around like everything's peachy.
Special attacks. And I don't mean nonsense like power attacks. Look at Two Worlds 2, for example. If you have a torch in your off-hand, you can burn your opponent and possibly set them on fire. If you have a shield, you can bash with it. If you have your other hand free, you can grab some dust off the ground and throw it in their face. That sort of thing.
Dual-wielding. Yes, I know it's nonsense, but it's so damn cool! Even Kingdom of Heaven had a bit of it purely for that reason, and c'mon, that was a superb movie (well, the Director's Cut was anyway). And while yes, the guy did die horribly within seconds, he looked like a total badass even when he took that arrow in the neck.
Things I don't care for:
Graphics. They're fine as they are.
Voice acting. There are better things on which to spend your limited resources, TW.
Multiplayer. The only thing that might make me mildly interested in that would be a full campaign with a proper map in which I could scheme/ally/fight with/against other players.
I was agreeing with most of your post until it came to that physics collision or whatever. Horses fall over when they collide? That'd be the most half assed feature; it would be annoying as hell that every time you brush another rider you face plant into the dirt. Duel wielding? Seriously? They'd add in magic before doing that. No one in their right mind duel wielded in medieval combat, and a medieval combat sim is what the devs are looking for.
I said "collide", not "brush". I admit that I have never seen a horse running at full speed smash right into the side of another, stationary horse, but I'm pretty sure the consequences of that would be a wee bit more severe than they are in M&B. Which is to say non-existent.Suspicious Pilgrim said:
Firstly, you're in no position to tell me what the developers want when it comes to a subject they have not discussed publicly. Not until you show me a credible scientific study that proves beyond the shadow of a doubt that you have telepathic powers. You can't see into their heads.
Secondly, simulating medieval combat on a computer is impossible, and indeed M&B does a pretty piss poor job of it if you regard it as a simulation. I see M&B as a hack&slash RPG that's been made needlessly clunky by misguided attempts at realism.
And maybe some dragons, and maybe some Shouts, and maybe then some enchanted armour, and an encha...wakko2k said:
WAIT A MINUTE, THIS SOUNDS FAMILIAR
*gasp*ColonicAcid said:
I've figured it out! I know where all the nord guards that took an arrow in the knee come from! They come from M&B, of course!
C'mon, admit it! You've shot hundreds of the poor buggers in the knees because they wouldn't lower their shields.
- Status
