Multiplayer-A reason to play

[Caps]

What made you think it's the case with Mount & Blade?

Insane you are quoting the title, what a legend. Try opening the game and play it.

If the game was designed for cav then the maps would be more open. There would be a bigger variety in cavalry classes . Skirmish wouldnt be capture a point but capture the flag. You need more reasons?

 

[ijumpispin]

The game is blunt because it ignores its core gameplay. Its like playin cs:go but you dont shoot. If you make a slasher and then make support weaponry far stronger (throwing, archery, cav) you dont need to wonder why the game is utterly trash. The melee in general is just clunky. If csgo had bad weapon handling and shooting no one would play it aswell. Or if they had insane shield which would block all the bullets.

You dont need original game ideas or something the core gameplay must feel good.
Just look at apex, it has very good in a game where you need to run alot. The shooting is good aswell, at least not off putting, thats what makes it a good game.
Mordhau just focused on the combat, the game modes werent anything special (just TDM with a different name) and what a surprise it worked out.
NW litterly just focused on attacking, blocking and teamwork (and no i dont mean just hitting someone in the back) and it worked. Teamwork is impossible in Bannerlord because ur weapon just gets ghost stuck on some random ass **** somewhere on its windup.

Im sorry but im sure what is your point is with this. Are you saying that Bannerlord core mechanics havent been fleshed out enough yet. Because even if it is clunky you cant compare the game in its current state to be CSGO without shooting. it may be rough , and i really dont like what single player is, thats the reason i preer if they work more on the multiplayer

 

[Caps]

Im sorry but im sure what is your point is with this. Are you saying that Bannerlord core mechanics havent been fleshed out enough yet. Because even if it is clunky you cant compare the game in its current state to be CSGO without shooting. it may be rough , and i really dont like what single player is, thats the reason i preer if they work more on the multiplayer

Fleshed out KEKW Its absolute garbage and a failed game design.

• blocking isnt good even if it works u still got shields; that negate all of the gameplay
• holding a stab got a huge delay, so it legit isnt about reacting
• if you feint you cant react to enemy spams because the block is so trash
• stuns are just randomly generated
• teamwork is non existant thanks to shield and weird stab hitboxes on startup
• Armor just generates another level of randomness on top of the ****ty system with all the **** ass glances
• Light and heavy units are no where close to being balanced (some light units do 2-10 dmg with their **** ass weapon looking at the Flyssa)
• You could say its fine the fight will just last longer, but then cav just runs in or archers got time to shoot. Infantry was **** in warband and only good because they could kill enemies fast enough. But here fights just get decided by whoever gets knocked over by cav or shot in the head.
• Playing without a shield is never an option
• This makes half the infantry units are absolute garbage, legit unplayable because they overbuffed support units (they are so easy to play, you could teach it to a monkey)
• Fighting against cav is absolute trash, horse rearing is ****, 1h to horse is trash and will just glance, lances have insane attack speed
• Chasing archers down is impossible because they implemented the ****ty ass weight system again. The only thing they actually managed to fix, that infantry is faster than archers and not the other way round. (and they broke it)
• some infantry classes are far worse than archers in melee (heavy - light disparity)
• dont get me started on throwing weapons, if i wanted to gamble i would play a mobile gatcha game
• cav mains cant even play their class KEKW brilliant design and changes
• Cav vs Cav or archer vs archer is just blunt and has no depth
• The matchmaking is so bad, it would be better to just have a server list. People complain in other games about unbalanced teams, but this is just a random af.
• The devs listen more to random plebs than to vets who are experts at the game (hello shieldbash)
• Dont need to mention server instability in siege right? (probably only thing they will fix)

those were just the few things that spontaneously came to my mind. But hey its early access only 10 more years soon (tm) Its probably best if they just give us server files, most people wouldnt even mind a web interface. Gab spoon feeds them the changes they need to make but they still cant make them.

 

[Tork789]

Insane you are quoting the title, what a legend. Try opening the game and play it.

If the game was designed for cav then the maps would be more open. There would be a bigger variety in cavalry classes . Skirmish wouldnt be capture a point but capture the flag. You need more reasons?

All of it is speculation, there's nothing that explicitly states that the game is inf-oriented and that cav is a mere support "weaponry".

 

[Caps]

All of it is speculation, there's nothing that explicitly states that the game is inf-oriented and that cav is a mere support "weaponry".

Count infantry units per nation and then cav units. I hope that you can count to 10

 

[Tork789]

Count infantry units per nation and then cav units. I hope that you can count to 10

Again, this is a speculation, it says nothing.

 

[Caps]

Again, this is a speculation, it says nothing.

Sure next time create a flying simulator with ground anti air units.Make the anti air units so strong that no one plays and plane class. Not my problem if you run out of arguments. Ask a dev if you want to check for sure that its true, but its common sense.

Btw the mount and blade title most likely refers to singleplayer. Thats not even a speculation, because mb didnt have a multiplayer.

 

[Tork789]

Sure next time create a flying simulator with ground anti air units.Make the anti air units so strong that no one plays and plane class. Not my problem if you run out of arguments. Ask a dev if you want to check for sure that its true, but its common sense.

Btw the mount and blade title most likely refers to singleplayer. Thats not even a speculation, because mb didnt have a multiplayer.

I'm curious: what role for cavalry and archers do you see in the game? What would it look like if you were in charge?

 

[Caps]

I'm curious: what role for cavalry and archers do you see in the game? What would it look like if you were in charge?

i would fix all the issues in the list step by step, most of them been pointed out in other threads.

 

[Midoss]

I mean there wasnt naked one hit mans in singleplayer so...

 

[Caps]

I mean there wasnt naked one hit mans in singleplayer so...

they balanced siege and skirmish off of cpt mode, obv this never will work out.

 

[Tork789]

i would fix all the issues in the list step by step, most of them been pointed out in other threads.

That doesn't answer my question though.

 

[Caps]

That doesn't answer my question though.

i made a thread a while ago on how i would create the class system.

edit: https://forums.taleworlds.com/index.php?threads/reworked-class-system.414254/
You could expand on that and add dragoons, less spear focused cav and gameplay. (similar to nw hussars) Some of it needs to be changed a bit more.

 

[Tork789]

i made a thread a while ago on how i would create the class system.

edit: https://forums.taleworlds.com/index.php?threads/reworked-class-system.414254/
You could expand on that and add dragoons, less spear focused cav and gameplay. (similar to nw hussars) Some of it needs to be changed a bit more.

Again it doesn't answer my question. But whatever, I doubt I'll get the answer from you. What I do find strange though is that how many people get a game called Mount & Blade and get disappointment when they aren't able to live out their infantry power fantasy there.

 

[Caps]

Again it doesn't answer my question. But whatever, I doubt I'll get the answer from you. What I do find strange though is that how many people get a game called Mount & Blade and get disappointment when they aren't able to live out their infantry power fantasy there.

Idk why you still go on about the title. Its not my problem if you cant read. You can live out the infantry fantasy on nw, guess why so many people played that, because it was straight out more fun.

Well just scroll through the forum and search for the "too much cavalry" posts.

 

[Alyss]

We need lootboxes

 

[Caps]

Again it doesn't answer my question. But whatever, I doubt I'll get the answer from you. What I do find strange though is that how many people get a game called Mount & Blade and get disappointment when they aren't able to live out their infantry power fantasy there.

• I would nerf heavy cav in the ground stat wise
• Buff light cav and give them decent equipment
• Give heavy archers 10-15 arrows (same with horse archers)
• I would remove spears from heavy infantry and light infantry and introduce a spear infantry class (for cpt mode and to encourage teamplay)
• I would remove glances and lower heavy armor values by around 10
• Light archers should only have around 20 arrows and get better bows
• lower the attack speed of lances to make cav more skillfull and to prevent melee lingering
• Introduce cav without spears or lances. Dragoons = infantry that can dismount, Heavy Melee Cav = Cav that is as tanky as heavy cav currently is but can fight in melee with a sword
• Buff light inf and peasant units (or make light inf playable instantly in TDM and siege)
• Lower shock infantry movement speed.
• Lower the amount of throwing weapons on regular infantry slightly (by around 1-3 for some units)
• Reduce the amount weight has on movement speed (fix the displayed movement speed)
• Buff 1h dmg against shields (around the double)

All these changes should support the core gameplay of the game. Attacking, Defending and Teamwork.

 

[Tork789]

• I would nerf heavy cav in the ground stat wise
• Buff light cav and give them decent equipment
• Give heavy archers 10-15 arrows (same with horse archers)
• I would remove spears from heavy infantry and light infantry and introduce a spear infantry class (for cpt mode and to encourage teamplay)
• I would remove glances and lower heavy armor values by around 10
• Light archers should only have around 20 arrows and get better bows
• lower the attack speed of lances to make cav more skillfull and to prevent melee lingering
• Introduce cav without spears or lances. Dragoons = infantry that can dismount, Heavy Melee Cav = Cav that is as tanky as heavy cav currently is but can fight in melee with a sword
• Buff light inf and peasant units (or make light inf playable instantly in TDM and siege)
• Lower shock infantry movement speed.
• Lower the amount of throwing weapons on regular infantry slightly (by around 1-3 for some units)
• Reduce the amount weight has on movement speed (fix the displayed movement speed)
• Buff 1h dmg against shields (around the double)

All these changes should support the core gameplay of the game. Attacking, Defending and Teamwork.

Ok but how do you see the heavy cavalry will be played with this changes? Backstab and run?

 

[Caps]

Ok but how do you see the heavy cavalry will be played with this changes? Backstab and run?

if you reduce the threads you can still play it like throwing weapons, they should play like light cav just with 1 spawn per match in all rounds (except you snowball and dont die) Since its better to play 2 light cav instead 1 heavy + peasant

Which we can already see now that cataphracts arent played and empire light cav is trash.

 

[Tork789]

if you reduce the threads you can still play it like throwing weapons, they should play like light cav just with 1 spawn per match in all rounds (except you snowball and dont die) Since its better to play 2 light cav instead 1 heavy + peasant

Which we can already see now that cataphracts arent played and empire light cav is trash.

I reread that two times and understood nothing. Can you please rephrase?