My first experience with Order of Battle

[Emax]

My current playthrough left off with a castle siege (defending) and went to give the new system a whirl.

As I fumbled through the new UI I was experimenting with the different groups and sliders. Noticed that group II was positioned in the towers above the main gate.

So I thought "Oh Ill put a bunch of archers up there" and moved the slider to max.....

The kill feed lights up, as a hundred or so archers were force spawned into the same spot and spilled out onto the ground outside the gate.

lol... reload. Just skipped the whole order system and played the old fashioned way.

After the battle was over I roamed a bit and got into a fight with a looter party.

Jerked around with more sliders and trying to get specific troops and companions to go where I wanted them to, to no avail. Realized what a horrible break in the game flow this new system is, when even a "quick" looter fight is encumbered by this extra step before you are allowed to get into battle.

Im not entirely sure I'm keen on it overall.

 

[MRay]

Jerked around with more sliders and trying to get specific troops and companions to go where I wanted them to, to no avail. Realized what a horrible break in the game flow this new system is, when even a "quick" looter fight is encumbered by this extra step before you are allowed to get into battle.

You can use Auto Deploy in these instances.

Edit: My mistake I'm remembering one of the previous iterations where the reset deployment button was "Auto Deploy", it's now applied automatically you can just press Ready.

 

[Spinozart1]

My current playthrough left off with a castle siege (defending) and went to give the new system a whirl.

As I fumbled through the new UI I was experimenting with the different groups and sliders. Noticed that group II was positioned in the towers above the main gate.

So I thought "Oh Ill put a bunch of archers up there" and moved the slider to max.....

The kill feed lights up, as a hundred or so archers were force spawned into the same spot and spilled out onto the ground outside the gate.

lol... reload. Just skipped the whole order system and played the old fashioned way.

After the battle was over I roamed a bit and got into a fight with a looter party.

Jerked around with more sliders and trying to get specific troops and companions to go where I wanted them to, to no avail. Realized what a horrible break in the game flow this new system is, when even a "quick" looter fight is encumbered by this extra step before you are allowed to get into battle.

Im not entirely sure I'm keen on it overall.

A new system = need to adapt and maybe learn a little bit about...
At first I didn't really understand how the sliders were working but the more I'm using it, the more I realize how cool this stuff is.
Once you have set the sliders, click where you want to place your formation, hold the button and slide your mouse to decide its shape (square, line, etc...).
In your case, you have set too many archers on that tower, next time just reduce the number of troops.
For the looters, just hit ready. The battle will start instantly.
We know they will keep improving this new system over the time.
For me it's already a great addition.

 

[MRay]

We know they will keep improving this new system over the time.

Exactly, if you(or anyone else) have suggestions on improvements, feel free to share them in the UI suggestions sub-forum.

 

[Spinozart1]

Exactly, if you(or anyone else) have suggestions on improvements, feel free to share them in the UI suggestions sub-forum.

I will!

 

[TengriBless]

@MRay Since the game's target audience is clear, of what use is a system that from a first impression is impalpable and easier to simply ignore?
How about making the tutorial not utterly ineffectual at teaching anything but the combat on a surface level (and i won't mockingly hint at why you would want to do that again) but maybe unconnected to every campaign start put the player in a believable scenario where all this order of battle could actually come to matter and be grasped, at all?

 

[MRay]

@MRay Since the game's target audience is clear, of what use is a system that from a first impression is impalpable and easier to simply ignore?
How about making the tutorial not utterly ineffectual at teaching anything but the combat on a surface level (and i won't mockingly hint at why you would want to do that again) but maybe unconnected to every campaign start put the player in a believable scenario where all this order of battle could actually come to matter and be grasped, at all?

Our target audience is anyone who wants to play Bannerlord.

Ignoring the feature is up to the player and "Impalpable" is debatable. If you have suggestions on making it better, I left the UI suggestion subforum up there. I'm pretty active in those suggestions and would love to hear from you.

You can skip the battle as a whole too(simulation), by that logic we shouldn't waste time in battle/combat improvements either. Since what use for us to improve it if I can simply ignore it. I don't agree with this pov.

Tutorial improvements are planned, and this includes OoB. We wanted to focus on implementing these features over adding tutorials for existing and new features in the game. You can expect them before BL leaves EA.

 

[TengriBless]

Our target audience is anyone who wants to play Bannerlord.

I'll do my best and pretend to view that as genuine.

You can skip the battle as a whole too(simulation), by that logic we shouldn't waste time in battle/combat improvements either. Since what use for us to improve it if I can simply ignore it. I don't agree with this pov.

It's not the same analogism, it doesn't even make sense. How does skipping a battle benefit the player when the player's involvement can have decisive impact on the battle (moreso than any actual planning or tactics, which I would argue is another problem)? And in the few cases when it doesn't, say a 300-man army vs. 20 looters, people do skip them.
It's not about having the option to ignore something, it's whether or not doing so would be advantageous, not even factoring in the time spent on what arguably isn't advantageous, or only barely.

Tutorial improvements are planned, and this includes OoB. We wanted to focus on implementing these features over adding tutorials for existing and new features in the game.

Fantastic.

You can expect them before BL leaves EA.

I'll make sure to have that noted in my last will.

 

[MRay]

I'll do my best and pretend to view that as genuine.

That's your prerogative ?‍

It's not about having the option to ignore something, it's whether or not doing so would be advantageous

If you can't leverage the deployment to your advantage, that's up to you I guess but we should talk more about how to make the current system better. That should be the focus.

I'll make sure to have that noted in my last will.

Again, your prerogative.

 

[Antaeus]

I'm finding the order of battle system to be possibly the biggest quality of life improvement we've experienced.

I'm not sure about the slow-mo order system yet. It kind of takes me out of the moment so I'll have to get used to it. But when you have an army in the thousands, the ability to set up like this really helps with the leadership experience.

It took about 20 seconds to get my head around, and there's the empty group bug from that other thread. But it allows me to actually deploy correctly.

 

[MostBlunted]

I'm not sure about the slow-mo order system yet. It kind of takes me out of the moment so I'll have to get used to it. But when you have an army in the thousands, the ability to set up like this really helps with the leadership experience.

I like it, I´ve used a mod before 1.7.0 to have the same option. You can also just disable it in the gameplay options.

Overall 1.7.0 is a huge step forward, feels like Bannerlord 2.0 compared to 1.6.5.

 

[Askorti]

I find the slow-mo to be somewhat hit or miss. Sometimes I just want to give a very quick correction order, or to change formation, which really does not necessitate the slow-mo, and then it slightly takes me out of it.

 

[AngryPanCake]

I'm finding the order of battle system to be possibly the biggest quality of life improvement we've experienced.

Totally agree with you, even though I have not mastered it yet!

I'm not sure about the slow-mo order system yet. It kind of takes me out of the moment so I'll have to get used to it. But when you have an army in the thousands, the ability to set up like this really helps with the leadership experience.

The good thing about it, is it is optional. So, people with slower hand-eye coordination like me can use it and others can deactivate it. It does take some getting used to it though, you are right.

Our target audience is anyone who wants to play Bannerlord.

In my opinion inclusive is always better than exclusive...so I applaud that statement.

 

[TengriBless]

In my opinion inclusive is always better than exclusive...so I applaud that statement.

"Our target audience is literally just an audience"

 

[Aurex]

@MRay Since the game's target audience is clear, of what use is a system that from a first impression is impalpable and easier to simply ignore?
How about making the tutorial not utterly ineffectual at teaching anything but the combat on a surface level (and i won't mockingly hint at why you would want to do that again) but maybe unconnected to every campaign start put the player in a believable scenario where all this order of battle could actually come to matter and be grasped, at all?

I suppose I'm another audience, then. I absolutely love the system and have been asking for something like it for a while.
Since the maps are not enormous, doing f1f2f3f4f5f1f2f4 like a crazy hamster while 200 horsemen are rushing your out of position troops is... really uncomfortable and suboptimal. Both this and the slow-down system are absolutely needed in my opinion.

 

[TengriBless]

I suppose I'm another audience, then. I absolutely love the system and have been asking for something like it for a while.
Since the maps are not enormous, doing f1f2f3f4f5f1f2f4 like a crazy hamster while 200 horsemen are rushing your out of position troops is... really uncomfortable and suboptimal. Both this and the slow-down system are absolutely needed in my opinion.

Absolutely needed? It's a neat feature, would be anyway, if formations and tactics (beyond sending horsemen behind enemy force that just about any battle game has) mattered. The fast pace of battles, small scale in armies and scenes hardly allows for meaningful or clever strategies. Formations don't even fight in formation half the time so what's the point, really. Units can't be hidden, if they weren't already charged in the first minutes by enemy cav, choosing terrain and position are severely limited, with all remaining viable options being essentially brainless.

 

[bm01]

While I agree the tactical aspect of battles is a bit limited (also reinforcements ruin everything but it's a difficult problem to solve), I don't think it's a good enough reason not to have this feature. Because, well, it's fun. I've been using the RTS camera mod for most of my playthrough for the same reason.

Also there may simply not be a specific target audience. Bannerlord is advertised in a very traditional way, it's also a fairly unique game without much competitors. I believe there are many players from Asia but the game doesn't really do anything to cater to them. Also how is that relevant?

 

[AngryPanCake]

In order for formations and tactics to matter, we may need to figure out ways to defeat the enemy other than just sending cavalry behind enemy lines (which is actually what field commanders often try in battle). It would be great if we had the ability to hide units in order to ambush a flank or an unsupecting enemy unit heading straight to the player's main line.
The fast pace and small scale of current battles might need some improvement, maybe bigger maps and with it bigger armies?

 

[TengriBless]

While I agree the tactical aspect of battles is a bit limited (also reinforcements ruin everything but it's a difficult problem to solve), I don't think it's a good enough reason not to have this feature. Because, well, it's fun. I've been using the RTS camera mod for most of my playthrough for the same reason.

That's fine (no, really), though I don't think reinforcements are that complicated of an issue, but that's another subject entirely. I mean they've already done the work, so I'm not about to advocate for its removal. But that doesn't change the fact that it doesn't address any / much of the underlying issues that the pre-OoB Bannerlord faced, and which the game will continue to face if it doesn't make the necessary changes.

Also there may simply not be a specific target audience.

That's an absurd suggestion, even for TW (well especially for TW). Are you telling me they (whoever "they" may be) based their aims solely on their ambitions, independent of financial concerns like market demand and standards? Has all that ambition and passion gotten us a mediocre-at-best sequel, which by pure chance was good enough to sell and be received positively by a certain archetype of players and not by others? No, they knew what sold, and who bought.

I believe there are many players from Asia but the game doesn't really do anything to cater to them.

...What could they do, that more importantly wouldn't alienate those who provide them their largest percentage of sales (Non-Asians)? I shouldn't need to underline this but just so we're all on the same page: they're here to make money

Also how is that relevant?

You can @ people for answers, but since you've not done so, I'll take a wild guess and assume that question was directed at me.
It's not too hard to figure out mate, they're motivated to mold the game in a shape that'll please the most amount of potential income- I mean players. What most of those players look for in this game can differ radically from what a numerical minority such as the forumites here may want.
In this particular case, whom could the fast-paced, combat-oriented and thoughtless gameplay be meant to appeal to, @bm01?

It would be great if we had the ability to hide units in order to ambush a flank or an unsupecting enemy unit heading straight to the player's main line.

It would.

The fast pace and small scale of current battles might need some improvement, maybe bigger maps and with it bigger armies?

There are trade-offs, hence the bigger scale in strategy games aren't what sells as much nowadays. CA realized this with Total War Warhammer's, TW realized it with M&B Bannerlord. Both as dear to my heart as video games can be and it's infuriating to see their blatant degeneration be applauded by the.. casuals (Dammit, I said the word).

 

[Gandamula]

My current playthrough left off with a castle siege (defending) and went to give the new system a whirl.

As I fumbled through the new UI I was experimenting with the different groups and sliders. Noticed that group II was positioned in the towers above the main gate.

So I thought "Oh Ill put a bunch of archers up there" and moved the slider to max.....

The kill feed lights up, as a hundred or so archers were force spawned into the same spot and spilled out onto the ground outside the gate.

lol... reload. Just skipped the whole order system and played the old fashioned way.

After the battle was over I roamed a bit and got into a fight with a looter party.

Jerked around with more sliders and trying to get specific troops and companions to go where I wanted them to, to no avail. Realized what a horrible break in the game flow this new system is, when even a "quick" looter fight is encumbered by this extra step before you are allowed to get into battle.

Im not entirely sure I'm keen on it overall.

At least they don't remove the "old fashioned way", I like the game as it is.