That's really disappointing to see that post from callum. Every single popular mp game has equipment customization just look at CS:GO and mobas like dota or fortnight or anything really. How is removing loadout selection going to encourage people to play multiplayer? At least compromise and allow us to select our loadout based on the class we select and you can curate and balance what each class is allowed to pick.
One other point I would like to make is: please don't exaggerate your statements. The vast majority (and I really do mean vast) of Mount & Blade players play singleplayer. Less than 10% of people playing the game right now are playing MP. Clearly, there is something that discourages a lot of people from playing MP, which is why we are trying to make that side of the game more accessible.
I feel like a lot of people in this thread are going to overlook this because it contradicts what many of you are saying. From Taleworlds' POV, Warband MP was a failure. I am not sure if Warband's loadout system was a contributing factor to MP not being played proportionally to SP, but this is the reason Taleworlds feels the need to change things with Bannerlord. Regarding the poll, I think it's important to consider there is likely a survivorship bias skewing the results. Most of us voting in this poll are veterans of Warband MP, people who saw no glaring issues and played it for years. The people who were turned off probably aren't here right now, likewise with the people new to the series that Taleworlds is likely targeting.
At the moment, I still prefer Warband's system to Bannerlord's, but I think I'd be more receptive to the new system if they expanded the perk selection and allowed us to cosmetically change our armor. They'd still need to find a way to have the system work convincingly with other gamemodes like Siege because right now all I can imagine is castles being assaulted and defended by hordes of Fianns and other high-tier troops. As Callum said, Siege was by far the most popular gamemode in Warband, so it should be important that it works optimally with whatever system they end up using.
One other point I would like to make is: please don't exaggerate your statements. The vast majority (and I really do mean vast) of Mount & Blade players play singleplayer. Less than 10% of people playing the game right now are playing MP. Clearly, there is something that discourages a lot of people from playing MP, which is why we are trying to make that side of the game more accessible.
I feel like a lot of people in this thread are going to overlook this because it contradicts what many of you are saying. From Taleworlds' POV, Warband MP was a failure. I am not sure if Warband's loadout system was a contributing factor to MP not being played proportionally to SP, but this is the reason Taleworlds feels the need to change things with Bannerlord. Regarding the poll, I think it's important to consider there is likely a survivorship bias skewing the results. Most of us voting in this poll are veterans of Warband MP, people who saw no glaring issues and played it for years. The people who were turned off probably aren't here right now, likewise with the people new to the series that Taleworlds is likely targeting.
At the moment, I still prefer Warband's system to Bannerlord's, but I think I'd be more receptive to the new system if they expanded the perk selection and allowed us to cosmetically change our armor. They'd still need to find a way to have the system work convincingly with other gamemodes like Siege because right now all I can imagine is castles being assaulted and defended by hordes of Fianns and other high-tier troops. As Callum said, Siege was by far the most popular gamemode in Warband, so it should be important that it works optimally with whatever system they end up using.
Just because their whole e sports thingy didn't push does not mean they need to force their system down our throat. The loadout system might have turned off a few players yes, but it has attracted so many players because of the replayability it had. Yes the poll might be much bias, but its because the people voting are usually people who have played this game for thousand of hours and probably a lot more then some devs.
Why would you not listen to the people who have played this game for thousands of hours and know what warband is instead of giving it to some devs who sometimes don't even play it no offense
That's really disappointing to see that post from callum. Every single popular mp game has equipment customization just look at CS:GO and mobas like dota or fortnight or anything really. How is removing loadout selection going to encourage people to player multiplayer? At least compromise and allow us to select our loadout based on the class we select and you can curate and balance what each class is allowed to pick.
Overwatch doesn't have equipment. And perks have better customization potential than warbands current system. Not in this state of beta tho, but they stated that they will add new perks.
That's really disappointing to see that post from callum. Every single popular mp game has equipment customization just look at CS:GO and mobas like dota or fortnight or anything really. How is removing loadout selection going to encourage people to player multiplayer? At least compromise and allow us to select our loadout based on the class we select and you can curate and balance what each class is allowed to pick.
Overwatch doesn't have equipment. And perks have better customization potential than warbands current system. Not in this state of beta tho, but they stated that they will add new perks.
One other point I would like to make is: please don't exaggerate your statements. The vast majority (and I really do mean vast) of Mount & Blade players play singleplayer. Less than 10% of people playing the game right now are playing MP. Clearly, there is something that discourages a lot of people from playing MP, which is why we are trying to make that side of the game more accessible.
I feel like a lot of people in this thread are going to overlook this because it contradicts what many of you are saying. From Taleworlds' POV, Warband MP was a failure. I am not sure if Warband's loadout system was a contributing factor to MP not being played proportionally to SP, but this is the reason Taleworlds feels the need to change things with Bannerlord. Regarding the poll, I think it's important to consider there is likely a survivorship bias skewing the results. Most of us voting in this poll are veterans of Warband MP, people who saw no glaring issues and played it for years. The people who were turned off probably aren't here right now, likewise with the people new to the series that Taleworlds is likely targeting.
At the moment, I still prefer Warband's system to Bannerlord's, but I think I'd be more receptive to the new system if they expanded the perk selection and allowed us to cosmetically change our armor. They'd still need to find a way to have the system work convincingly with other gamemodes like Siege because right now all I can imagine is castles being assaulted and defended by hordes of Fianns and other high-tier troops. As Callum said, Siege was by far the most popular gamemode in Warband, so it should be important that it works optimally with whatever system they end up using.
Data from today at 20:00 GMT+1, sources being Steam and Warband's server filter:
9995 players in M&B: Warband.
1601 of them playing multiplayer .
1185 of those players are not in native.
Data can't be 100% accurate but we can get an approximate idea.
It's an undeniable fact that M&B's biggest attraction lies in the singleplayer campaign, I don't think anyone here is saying otherwise.
I think it's clear by now that one of Taleworlds' main intentions with the changes was to attract more players to the multiplayer side of the game, but in order to do that correctly, they first should know what was keeping players away in the first place. Do they know? Have they done the proper surveying? Can they say that the class system was one of the main points to why many players were not interested in the multiplayer? Was it the naked people spamming feints? The steep learning curve? Archer/cavalry spam?
I don't know if they have an answer to these questions, but from my personal experience, I've seen new players complain about all of those things but the class system. Another thing I've observed over the years is that simply not everyone is interested in multiplayer, some just don't care about the game even having a multiplayer option.
As for the poll bias, there's only so much I can do about it, it is posted in a public forum visited daily by many players, varying in their interests and preferences, I also posted a link to the thread in the Bannerlord discussion board of Steam, and only messaged very few active members of the forum that I had never talked with before but knew had access to the beta and could provide some interesting points to discuss. I agree that a poll like this isn't and can never be 100% objective, but it shouldn't be discarded nor ignored.
Memoefe said:
Overwatch doesn't have equipment. And perks have better customization potential than warbands current system. Not in this state of beta tho, but they stated that they will add new perks.
Uh, unless the perk system changes drastically from what we've seen so far, there's no way it will have more customization potential than Warband's system.
John7 said:
It's ok guys, we will see who is right and who is wrong when multiplayer dies or thrives 3 months after Early Access
Strangely enough, I personally don't think that pushing for this new system would really kill Bannerlord's native multiplayer on release, but I for sure believe that it could be far more successful if they went with the classic system.
TW tries to make Skirmish a competitive mode mainly, and claim 'balance is easier' yet they have distinct factions. This alone is not balanced. The structure that the game is built upon is not balanced. People will need to switch classes and potentially play stuff they do not like to counter things. That is not fun in a game like MnB, you cant claim balance and have vastly different factions because people will only play the most OP ones and do not allow for creativity in the game. This smelled bad since the start and TW has been warned but apparently they know which system is superior somehow. Classes should work like this: Shielder/Shock/Archer/Cavalry/Hybrid, the current classes are not enough (NOTE: IN THE CURRENT BUILD
You want to make a balanced game? Be my guest, but having distinct factions with preset classes dictating how people should play is not fun and nor will be acceptable. Most people will prefer warband for the reason that they can counter others by simple adjustments like support weapon combined with their standard sword/axe/mace + shield. Making me play a different class to counter someone is NOT fun. What is so hard to understand? Regarding MOBAs, the items they have and the builds you can make are very deep, bannerlord will not even come close to the 1/10th of that probably.
Back in warband i didn't play much multiplayer because eventhough customization was so variant (nearly every class had 5 different armor, helmet, gloves, shoes, swords, shileds etc, you get the point) most of them was just pay more get better. It was so simple in a boring was imo.
I really like the idea of perk system but in bannerlord it seems soo dull(probably because of beta). I want to give them a chance to make the perk system fleshed out.
But if i had to make multiplayer customization system i would keep perk systrm but remove, 'get better sword, horse etc', instead of that i would add perk in the single player, like 'tow handed swords can block arrows' or 'using one handed sword without shield adds %x bonus damage' or 'two handed sword penalty on horse is reduced'. You get the point. Additionally i would add option to select sword shield but in a way like, do you want one handed or two handed or axe. Armor customization? Maybe, im not sure.
Back in warband i didn't play much multiplayer because eventhough customization was so variant (nearly every class had 5 different armor, helmet, gloves, shoes, swords, shileds etc, you get the point) most of them was just pay more get better. It was so simple in a boring was imo.
I really like the idea of perk system but in bannerlord it seems soo dull(probably because of beta). I want to give them a chance to make the perk system fleshed out.
But if i had to make multiplayer customization system i would keep perk systrm but remove, 'get better sword, horse etc', instead of that i would add perk in the single player, like 'tow handed swords can block arrows' or 'using one handed sword without shield adds %x bonus damage' or 'two handed sword penalty on horse is reduced'. You get the point. Additionally i would add option to select sword shield but in a way like, do you want one handed or two handed or axe. Armor customization? Maybe, im not sure.
Well of course the more you pay the better, what else would be the point? The perk combinations in bannerlord are so little compared to warband. 2 perks per class, and 7 classes. Which gives a total of 63 combinations per faction. Mind you that the "perks" never change more then one slot in your loadout. Its either a new horse, a new bow, additional arrows, or a better weapon.
Mind you singleplayer has customization. They have all the armor values in singleplayer and are all most probably balanced since players will use them.
Anyone defending the perk system did not play multiplayer engouh.
Back in warband i didn't play much multiplayer because eventhough customization was so variant (nearly every class had 5 different armor, helmet, gloves, shoes, swords, shileds etc, you get the point) most of them was just pay more get better. It was so simple in a boring was imo.
I really like the idea of perk system but in bannerlord it seems soo dull(probably because of beta). I want to give them a chance to make the perk system fleshed out.
But if i had to make multiplayer customization system i would keep perk systrm but remove, 'get better sword, horse etc', instead of that i would add perk in the single player, like 'tow handed swords can block arrows' or 'using one handed sword without shield adds %x bonus damage' or 'two handed sword penalty on horse is reduced'. You get the point. Additionally i would add option to select sword shield but in a way like, do you want one handed or two handed or axe. Armor customization? Maybe, im not sure.
Well of course the more you pay the better, what else would be the point? The perk combinations in bannerlord are so little compared to warband. 2 perks per class, and 7 classes. Which gives a total of 63 combinations per faction. Mind you that the "perks" never change more then one slot in your loadout. Its either a new horse, a new bow, additional arrows, or a better weapon.
Mind you singleplayer has customization. They have all the armor values in singleplayer and are all most probably balanced since players will use them.
Anyone defending the perk system did not play multiplayer engouh.
I don't think multiplayer of bannerlord is better than multiplayer warband at this point of beta. I only stated that it has potential to be greater than older versions.
'Choose what do want to be better at' more deep and dynamic than 'More you pay better you get'
And if you actually read what i said, i didn't defend perk giving you better sword horse etc.
Back in warband i didn't play much multiplayer because eventhough customization was so variant (nearly every class had 5 different armor, helmet, gloves, shoes, swords, shileds etc, you get the point) most of them was just pay more get better. It was so simple in a boring was imo.
I really like the idea of perk system but in bannerlord it seems soo dull(probably because of beta). I want to give them a chance to make the perk system fleshed out.
But if i had to make multiplayer customization system i would keep perk systrm but remove, 'get better sword, horse etc', instead of that i would add perk in the single player, like 'tow handed swords can block arrows' or 'using one handed sword without shield adds %x bonus damage' or 'two handed sword penalty on horse is reduced'. You get the point. Additionally i would add option to select sword shield but in a way like, do you want one handed or two handed or axe. Armor customization? Maybe, im not sure.
Well of course the more you pay the better, what else would be the point? The perk combinations in bannerlord are so little compared to warband. 2 perks per class, and 7 classes. Which gives a total of 63 combinations per faction. Mind you that the "perks" never change more then one slot in your loadout. Its either a new horse, a new bow, additional arrows, or a better weapon.
Mind you singleplayer has customization. They have all the armor values in singleplayer and are all most probably balanced since players will use them.
Anyone defending the perk system did not play multiplayer engouh.
I don't think multiplayer of bannerlord is better than multiplayer warband at this point of beta. I only stated that it has potential to be greater than older versions.
'Choose what do want to be better at' more deep and dynamic than 'More you pay better you get'
And if you actually read what i said, i didn't defend perk giving you better sword horse etc.
Except getting better equipment does not mean you will survive if you have no skill. And i said there are 63 combinations in one faction because that's what it would be if they decide to enable their 2 perk slots with each 3 perks. That will be how taleworlds sees it as fleshed out. 63 combinations per faction.
Taleworlds won't change their perk system they are already going in the defensive when you try and call them out for their current system in BL
That the developers do not come whining after because Bannerlord will not even be as competitive as Warband, the archers look even stronger, the cavalry do not even talk about it, and the infantry even weaker against the other classes especially with the shield blocking direction.
And they want to pretend that the system of predefined classes will give them the opportunity to make everything "balanced"..
One other point I would like to make is: please don't exaggerate your statements. The vast majority (and I really do mean vast) of Mount & Blade players play singleplayer. Less than 10% of people playing the game right now are playing MP. Clearly, there is something that discourages a lot of people from playing MP, which is why we are trying to make that side of the game more accessible.
I feel like a lot of people in this thread are going to overlook this because it contradicts what many of you are saying. From Taleworlds' POV, Warband MP was a failure. I am not sure if Warband's loadout system was a contributing factor to MP not being played proportionally to SP, but this is the reason Taleworlds feels the need to change things with Bannerlord. Regarding the poll, I think it's important to consider there is likely a survivorship bias skewing the results. Most of us voting in this poll are veterans of Warband MP, people who saw no glaring issues and played it for years. The people who were turned off probably aren't here right now, likewise with the people new to the series that Taleworlds is likely targeting.
At the moment, I still prefer Warband's system to Bannerlord's, but I think I'd be more receptive to the new system if they expanded the perk selection and allowed us to cosmetically change our armor. They'd still need to find a way to have the system work convincingly with other gamemodes like Siege because right now all I can imagine is castles being assaulted and defended by hordes of Fianns and other high-tier troops. As Callum said, Siege was by far the most popular gamemode in Warband, so it should be important that it works optimally with whatever system they end up using.
Data from today at 20:00 GMT+1, sources being Steam and Warband's server filter:
9995 players in M&B: Warband.
1601 of them playing multiplayer .
1185 of those players are in native.
Data can't be 100% accurate but we can get an approximate idea.
It's an undeniable fact that M&B's biggest attraction lies in the singleplayer campaign, I don't think anyone here is saying otherwise.
I think it's clear by now that one of Taleworlds' main intentions with the changes was to attract more players to the multiplayer side of the game, but in order to do that correctly, they first should know what was keeping players away in the first place. Do they know?
I think they do know. It's not a decision they would make without any thought and data, especially after how confident they have been that they aren't going to get rid of classes.
This comes from the perspective of someone who tried on several occasions to get into multiplayer. Everything Callum says about the average players' perception of game modes, the equipment and gold system, etc is true to my perception of them, and it's why I haven't written off classes as quickly as others. As a striking example, up until a week or two ago I didn't know you could even lose gold/equipment on death. You guys may remember this comment of mine in the other thread... A good example of how ambiguous the system is.
I get into a game, no idea who is winning or losing or what the objective is half the time. Try to compete with the good players; impossible. Switch to spamming thrown weapons. It's dumb fun for maybe an hour but nowhere near the fun that a competitive game like Overwatch can hook you on.
I'm going to assume most of you guys really enjoyed Warband mp since you're here, so just trying to give you the other sides perspective.
@theberserk if you're going to be disrespectful to them and not contribute please don't bother posting. I assure you that meme is more representative of the image we imagine you rather than TW after posting such things.
One other point I would like to make is: please don't exaggerate your statements. The vast majority (and I really do mean vast) of Mount & Blade players play singleplayer. Less than 10% of people playing the game right now are playing MP. Clearly, there is something that discourages a lot of people from playing MP, which is why we are trying to make that side of the game more accessible.
I feel like a lot of people in this thread are going to overlook this because it contradicts what many of you are saying. From Taleworlds' POV, Warband MP was a failure. I am not sure if Warband's loadout system was a contributing factor to MP not being played proportionally to SP, but this is the reason Taleworlds feels the need to change things with Bannerlord. Regarding the poll, I think it's important to consider there is likely a survivorship bias skewing the results. Most of us voting in this poll are veterans of Warband MP, people who saw no glaring issues and played it for years. The people who were turned off probably aren't here right now, likewise with the people new to the series that Taleworlds is likely targeting.
At the moment, I still prefer Warband's system to Bannerlord's, but I think I'd be more receptive to the new system if they expanded the perk selection and allowed us to cosmetically change our armor. They'd still need to find a way to have the system work convincingly with other gamemodes like Siege because right now all I can imagine is castles being assaulted and defended by hordes of Fianns and other high-tier troops. As Callum said, Siege was by far the most popular gamemode in Warband, so it should be important that it works optimally with whatever system they end up using.
Data from today at 20:00 GMT+1, sources being Steam and Warband's server filter:
9995 players in M&B: Warband.
1601 of them playing multiplayer .
1185 of those players are in native.
Data can't be 100% accurate but we can get an approximate idea.
It's an undeniable fact that M&B's biggest attraction lies in the singleplayer campaign, I don't think anyone here is saying otherwise.
I think it's clear by now that one of Taleworlds' main intentions with the changes was to attract more players to the multiplayer side of the game, but in order to do that correctly, they first should know what was keeping players away in the first place. Do they know?
I think they do know. It's not a decision they would make without any thought and data, especially after how confident they have been that they aren't going to get rid of classes.
This comes from the perspective of someone who tried on several occasions to get into multiplayer. Everything Callum says about the average players' perception of game modes, the equipment and gold system, etc is true to my perception of them, and it's why I haven't written off classes as quickly as others. As a striking example, up until a week or two ago I didn't know you could even lose gold/equipment on death. You guys may remember this comment of mine in the other thread... A good example of how ambiguous the system is.
I get into a game, no idea who is winning or losing or what the objective is half the time. Try to compete with the good players; impossible. Switch to spamming thrown weapons. It's dumb fun for maybe an hour but nowhere near the fun that a competitive game like Overwatch can hook you on.
I'm going to assume most of you guys really enjoyed Warband mp since you're here, so just trying to give you the other sides perspective.
@theberserk if you're going to be disrespectful to them and not contribute please don't bother posting. I assure you that meme is more representative of the image we imagine you rather than TW after posting such things.
I understand your point of view about it being hard but let's face it, warband has no proper tutorial for multiplayer. The little tutorial they have consist of showing you how the melee system works but that's about it. Almost all games, 99% of games have a tutorial on how to play the game and warband lacks it and to be honest bannerlord seems to be going in the same direction.
Now i personally when i started napoleonic wars i didn't know how to block for 2 years straight and i'm not joking and you can mock me for it. If you go on multiplayer for the first time and you get destroyed i mean how can this be the fault of the game?
Warband is a game where people spend thousands upon thousand of hours on, the gap between new players and veteran players is massive. But this is exactly why it is fun, you always have more things to learn and to do and will learn it the hard way . Competitive players are the most dedicated players and i personally don't know any competitive players who has not sunk in over 2000 hours into the game.
There are whole communities and clans with friendly players who are dedicated to help you learn and help you and most importantly teach you how to play.
Overall i think taleworlds seems to be punishing the people who only play multiplayer and trying to attract casual players which is fine but making such drastic changes to the core elements of what makes mount and blade so good is not okay. Again, bannerlord needs tutorials because it is so complex and this is one of the main things i dislike about warband it has a terrible tutorial. Rather then displease the community just help steer new players into it, and taleworlds ignoring the outcry is even more sad.
Am I the only one who immediately understood Warband MP system..?
As to Taleworlds stubborn and unwilling to change its new system, I'm not sure it won't change. When the new system was announced in a blog some months ago, a few people protested but most didn't care or didn't even notice it as it was just some written lines. Then when the beta was launched, a lot if not most of the participants complained. Since the Gamescom and the autorisation to speak about the beta or post footages of it, which made things more concrete, the problem has reached the bulk of the community which is seemingly very relucant about the new system (see the poll). So I assume that with the EA we'll get a massive protestation without precedent which will be tricky to handle for Taleworlds.
I can't help it but I cannot imagine that in the 2010-12 aera, thus after the immediate launch of Warband with MP support, singleplayer was the most played mode.
Callum's data most likely stems from post 2014 when a broad majority of "pubs" such as me stopped playing warband, the MP community had less active servers and thus became less attractive for new players in general.
Granted, even I contributed to these statistics, the last time I opened warband I just played a little sp. But saying in 2018 or 19 that "Warband's mp is not attractive" is quite correct, but only because the game is outdated by now and lacking the appeal it had in 2011, when there were plenty of active clans maintaining own servers for duel, dm, siege, roleplay or all of that combined.
Last but not least the mods- granted, we got amazing sp modificiations for warband too, but the real deal were mp mods. PW for instance might never have been competitive, but we rarely had troubles filling the 200 player slots from 2011 to 14. Not to speak of NW, which also did not directly start as sp mod.
But yeah that's just me preaching I guess
I think they do know. It's not a decision they would make without any thought and data, especially after how confident they have been that they aren't going to get rid of classes.
This comes from the perspective of someone who tried on several occasions to get into multiplayer. Everything Callum says about the average players' perception of game modes, the equipment and gold system, etc is true to my perception of them, and it's why I haven't written off classes as quickly as others. As a striking example, up until a week or two ago I didn't know you could even lose gold/equipment on death. You guys may remember this comment of mine in the other thread... A good example of how ambiguous the system is.
I get into a game, no idea who is winning or losing or what the objective is half the time. Try to compete with the good players; impossible. Switch to spamming thrown weapons. It's dumb fun for maybe an hour but nowhere near the fun that a competitive game like Overwatch can hook you on.
I'm going to assume most of you guys really enjoyed Warband mp since you're here, so just trying to give you the other sides perspective.
@theberserk if you're going to be disrespectful to them and not contribute please don't bother posting. I assure you that meme is more representative of the image we imagine you rather than TW after posting such things.
I don't think this is a reasonable argument. I had played League of Legends for 3 years straight. There are 100s of heros who have four skills and a passive along with hundreds of items which have their stats and usually 2 or even 3 passives. So there are tons of things you have to learn before being able to play it competitively but this fact doesn't stop millions of people playing it. The argument of old system being hard to get into beacuse of the gameplay of it is ridiculous in where you don't provide matchmaking system and proper tutorials for new players. Even singleplayer is like this. I first played MB in 2011, after couple of hours I uninstalled it which is something I regret now but this is hugely due to fact that both SP and MP being so hard to get into and this is not fault of gameplay the game offers but because the game is not helping new players with proper tutorials.
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
