Multiplayer Class System

[Roy1012]

Can we please get back on topic?

So I had the chance to talk to one of the devs (not sure if he was actually real, but many confirmed to me that he is genuine):
I asked him if the class system was for every game-mode and he answered, that it is only meant to skirmish and captain mode (the competitive game-modes).

I quickly lost contact to him due to rounds being rather short and dead-chat is also in bannerlord so I could not ask any further.
This probably means that they right now want to test that system so that compettive won't have much changes once early-access starts.
I also imagine they put it in the current team-deathmatch because it was easier than having everyone look and jerk around with different items and rather have everyone get a gist about the balance of the competitve classes so that they fit perfectly on release.

Also, keep in mind what I said in the first sentence!

Cheers,
DarthKiller
Beta Tester

That makes more sense tbh. Though take it with a grain of salt, as I doubt one of the devs would divulge such info instead of TW releasing it via dev blog.

Seeing how the developers introduced to us the new system really makes me think that their original idea was, and quite probably still is, for it to completely replace the old one. I hope I'm wrong on that one, though. Sooner or later a developer will address the situation and better explain what their actual plan is.

That's easy. The lead designer of multiplayer is a napoleonic wars community member. And somehow, they thought copying NW's system would work.

Obviously the difference is that Napoleonic Wars part of a historical respect, and especially it's not too disturbing on NW because there are many classes that differ, gunners, cavalry, sapper, infantry, grenadier...
While there unfortunately in Bannerlord it will probably be limited to just the infantry, cavalry and archery, and it will be boring

What other types of units do you suggest?

 

[Marko͘]

Well, not having horse archers would be a good start

 

[Maroon]

Laughs in dragoon

 

[Semke]

I have to disagree with people saying that Warband multiplayer was unbalanced, it was perfectly balanced as it had no strict meta compared to many other games both competitive and non competitive, there was simply nothing that was too underpowered or overpowered. Every player could achieve equal results on any class depending on their individual skill level, some people were better with awlpikes, some with great swords, some with cav, some with bows etc. etc. Hell, a person who is very skilled at the game can beat someone up with their fists and again it is based on every persons individual skill level, an archer who is good at melee combat can still beat any infantryman or cavalryman depending on their mechanics. This is exactly where the relatively low-key class system which was basically infantry/archer/cav came into play, as it did not limit any players playstyle according to their choice. If bannerlord is the same then I don't believe that being locked to a certain set of armour is a particularly bad thing either, however limiting a player's choice for what they want to wear themselves either it be naked or fully armoured takes away a lot from the aspect that made warband multiplayer what it was. I'm sure that even if you can't change the armour, mods will eventually circumvent that and implement a warband-like system but changing tiny core mechanics like this that worked and weren't broken or complained about in a game that was made 10 years ago and is still played to this day is not a wise decision.

 

[578]

I think the poll speaks by itself by now to be honest.

 

[Knüppel]

Where the hell does Taleworlds hire developers who bring in a mindset that appealing to gold fish minds will bring profit?

Just a reminder, dear developers, these kids with a short attention span won't be playing your game for 1000 hours regardless of how easy to grasp you make it, because they have short attention spans.
Bannerlord should be the wrong game for such people, not trying to fish bypassers from fortnite crowds, imho.

 

[TFK_Ted]

Where the hell does Taleworlds hire developers who bring in a mindset that appealing to gold fish minds will bring profit?

Just a reminder, dear developers, these kids with a short attention span won't be playing your game for 1000 hours regardless of how easy to grasp you make it, because they have short attention spans.
Bannerlord should be the wrong game for such people, not trying to fish bypassers from fortnite crowds, imho.

Problem might be that for a developer aiming at pure profit, there might be no difference whether ppl play the game for 1000hrs or 1. After all, both have paid the same amount money. Cash has been made either way. But I hope that this mindset ins actually not the defining one.

 

[Roy1012]

Where the hell does Taleworlds hire developers who bring in a mindset that appealing to gold fish minds will bring profit?

Just a reminder, dear developers, these kids with a short attention span won't be playing your game for 1000 hours regardless of how easy to grasp you make it, because they have short attention spans.
Bannerlord should be the wrong game for such people, not trying to fish bypassers from fortnite crowds, imho.

Problem might be that for a developer aiming at pure profit, there might be no difference whether ppl play the game for 1000hrs or 1. After all, both have paid the same amount money. Cash has been made either way. But I hope that this mindset ins actually not the defining one.

Not unless they want to sell DLC, though I doubt they'll move towards the Paradox model.

 

[Klausolus]

Where the hell does Taleworlds hire developers who bring in a mindset that appealing to gold fish minds will bring profit?

Just a reminder, dear developers, these kids with a short attention span won't be playing your game for 1000 hours regardless of how easy to grasp you make it, because they have short attention spans.
Bannerlord should be the wrong game for such people, not trying to fish bypassers from fortnite crowds, imho.

Problem might be that for a developer aiming at pure profit, there might be no difference whether ppl play the game for 1000hrs or 1. After all, both have paid the same amount money. Cash has been made either way. But I hope that this mindset ins actually not the defining one.

To be honest, and even though I dislike the direction they're forcefully pushing certain aspects of the game, Taleworlds doesn't strike me as a money grabbing company.

Updated the original post adding a spoiler with what I think would be the best outcome possible. It's nothing new, just wanted to make it easier to find.

 

[vicwiz007]

@TheBerserk- to say NW worked because it had more troop types doesnt sound right.  Many classes played basically the same regardless of their fancy names. For every class you could name for NW I could easily come up with one for Warband or Bannerlord, but I can guarantee there are more uniquely functioning class options you could make for a medieval setting compared to gunpowder.

For starters, melee infantry are completely gone aside from the memelords of sexy navy men and whatever the fur coat wearing ones were called

 

[Roy1012]

@TheBerserk- to say NW worked because it had more troop types doesnt sound right.  Many classes played basically the same regardless of their fancy names. For every class you could name for NW I could easily come up with one for Warband or Bannerlord, but I can guarantee there are more uniquely functioning class options you could make for a medieval setting compared to gunpowder.

For starters, melee infantry are completely gone aside from the memelords of sexy navy men and whatever the fur coat wearing ones were called

NW had what was necessary for the era. It just doesn't work for bannerlord's era.

 

[vicwiz007]

Ok sure so you're saying basically the opposite of what he did- that the class system worked because there werent many different possibilities of play styles to begin with. I can agree with that, however i think with the right amount of customization to classes Bannerlord can achieve enough playstyles. The question is at what point does that become so similar to warband’s system that classss were a waste? 

 

[Roy1012]

Ok sure so you're saying basically the opposite of what he did- that the class system worked because there werent many different possibilities of play styles to begin with. I can agree with that, however i think with the right amount of customization to classes Bannerlord can achieve enough playstyles. The question is at what point does that become so similar to warband’s system that classss were a waste? 

No, not necessarily. By the Napoleonic time, there was standardization of uniforms and armaments, whereas in medieval societies, there was no such organization. I think the class system in Bannerlord is just pointless, every change they make just makes it go back towards Warband, to the point where it was pointless and a waste in the first place.

 

[James_Lindsay]

@TheBerserk- to say NW worked because it had more troop types doesnt sound right.  Many classes played basically the same regardless of their fancy names. For every class you could name for NW I could easily come up with one for Warband or Bannerlord, but I can guarantee there are more uniquely functioning class options you could make for a medieval setting compared to gunpowder.

For starters, melee infantry are completely gone aside from the memelords of sexy navy men and whatever the fur coat wearing ones were called

You can never go wrong with customization in a game, let alone a medeival one. Thats why skins were so popular in other games. There are literally no negatives to sticking with warbands model, not counting balancing and devs effort.

 

[vicwiz007]

Ok sure so you're saying basically the opposite of what he did- that the class system worked because there werent many different possibilities of play styles to begin with. I can agree with that, however i think with the right amount of customization to classes Bannerlord can achieve enough playstyles. The question is at what point does that become so similar to warband’s system that classss were a waste? 

No, not necessarily. By the Napoleonic time, there was standardization of uniforms and armaments, whereas in medieval societies, there was no such organization.

Agree to disagree. You just changed the word “class/roles" to “uniform and armaments” ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ So the system worked for NW because the time period had less "uniform and armament" variation.

@TheBerserk- to say NW worked because it had more troop types doesnt sound right.  Many classes played basically the same regardless of their fancy names. For every class you could name for NW I could easily come up with one for Warband or Bannerlord, but I can guarantee there are more uniquely functioning class options you could make for a medieval setting compared to gunpowder.

For starters, melee infantry are completely gone aside from the memelords of sexy navy men and whatever the fur coat wearing ones were called

You can never go wrong with customization in a game, let alone a medeival one. Thats why skins were so popular in other games. There are literally no negatives to sticking with warbands model, not counting balancing and devs effort.

If I may interject, there certainly are times when you can go wrong with more customization. I mean have you seen the past few Call of Duty games? Being able to customize your guy to look like a clown with rainbow unicorn gun skins doing fortnite dances in a warzone did not go over well. You can never go wrong with customization to a believable extent for the setting, is what I would say.

 

[James_Lindsay]

If I may interject, there certainly are times when you can go wrong with more customization. I mean have you seen the past few Call of Duty games? Being able to customize your guy to look like a clown with rainbow unicorn gun skins doing fortnite dances in a warzone did not go over well. You can never go wrong with customization to a believable extent for the setting, is what I would say.

Limited customization is still customization and Warband had some indeed. So customization is always a benefit if done adequately. Regarding the titles you mentioned I completely agree it is a ****show.
If Banerlord follows in warbands footsteps and expands upon that, I cant see it going wrong.

 

[Roy1012]

Ok sure so you're saying basically the opposite of what he did- that the class system worked because there werent many different possibilities of play styles to begin with. I can agree with that, however i think with the right amount of customization to classes Bannerlord can achieve enough playstyles. The question is at what point does that become so similar to warband’s system that classss were a waste? 

No, not necessarily. By the Napoleonic time, there was standardization of uniforms and armaments, whereas in medieval societies, there was no such organization.

Agree to disagree. You just changed the word “class/roles" to “uniform and armaments” ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ So the system worked for NW because the time period had less "uniform and armament" variation.

We're talking about the same thing here. Uniform and armaments are words to describe the NW class/role system. What do you have in NW? Regulars included line and foot guards, and irregulars included light and skirmishers, but for the most part they have the same function, whereas in native there are much more types of units like pikes, short sword, two handers, throwing units, archers, crossbows, etc. The NW system worked because for that era, the warfare was much more uniform and organized, whereas with native this isn't the case. I don't see where the confusion is.

 

[vicwiz007]

There is no confusion, and I'm fairly sure we're on the same page. I was just pointinf out how it was odd for you to say my inference of your opinion was not true but the only real difference was a simple change of words that in this case are nearly synonymous.

The only disagreement is on semantics 

 

[Roy1012]

There is no confusion, and I'm fairly sure we're on the same page. I was just pointinf out how it was odd for you to say my inference of your opinion was not true but the only real difference was a simple change of words that in this case are nearly synonymous.

The only disagreement is on semantics 

Seems so. Sorry about that.

 

[vicwiz007]

No need for apology. That's just how it is when your only form of communication is written. I have trouble conveying my meaning and tone properly in that way.

If I may interject, there certainly are times when you can go wrong with more customization. I mean have you seen the past few Call of Duty games? Being able to customize your guy to look like a clown with rainbow unicorn gun skins doing fortnite dances in a warzone did not go over well. You can never go wrong with customization to a believable extent for the setting, is what I would say.

Limited customization is still customization and Warband had some indeed. So customization is always a benefit if done adequately. Regarding the titles you mentioned I completely agree it is a ****show.
If Banerlord follows in warbands footsteps and expands upon that, I cant see it going wrong.

Yes it would be fine. I'm torn because I want a competitive mode where we get matched against others our skill level but they insist classes are the only way to make it happen. This being said, I haven't played the damn thing yet so I'm holding my opinions for later.