Patch Notes v1.2.9

Users who are viewing this thread

Look, I understand the need to keep planned features that are not 100% confirmed under wraps, I do, even if I don't agree with such an extreme level of secrecy. But could you at least tell us what existing mechanics has TaleWorlds been working on fixing/revamping/updating? Because the problem with the game isn't a lack of features (except for more diplomacy features like alliances, non-aggression pacts & trade deals, as well as a lack of dialogues with characters), but the fact that a few tweaks in a lot of existing gameplay elements would improve the overall gameplay experience, such as: a customisable death chance slider, faster time & shorter years/day & night cycles, lowered blocking chance for tiers 1-2-3 troops, halved durability for shields, faster level up for trade & tactics skills, as well as at least 3x more profitable trade, better war & peace calculations, better voting & influence mechanics, and tweaked crime & alley mechanics numbers, etc.

We need to know if you're at least working on bettering the core mechanics that already exist within the game. So please, at least let us know what existing mechanics you've been working on, so that we can provide constructive criticism and/or suggestions to help you improve the gameplay experience for a wider audience.
It's simple, because they're not working on anything. Neither over the normal plot, nor over advanced diplomacy, nor over the crisis of the middle and late game, nor over the improvement of graphics and animation. They even forgot about the elephants and sent them to the trash.
 
I did forward his suggestions, along with others`.

I understand the curiosity and anticipation, but when the time comes to reveal more, rest assured you guys will be among the first to know.
The last time there was a huge pause in updates, we received the battle terrain system and weather. I'm sure more scenes are being worked on along with deserters, quests, claimants, etc.

Would really like to see a feature of granting rank/titles to heroes. I have a subordinate that is constantly just fighting rebels and not fighting existing kingdoms. I would really like to grant him the title: "General Who Pacifies the Land."
Additional Purpose: grants gold, fief, renown, changes armors/weapons, etc.
 
Look, I understand the need to keep planned features that are not 100% confirmed under wraps, I do, even if I don't agree with such an extreme level of secrecy. But could you at least tell us what existing mechanics has TaleWorlds been working on fixing/revamping/updating? Because the problem with the game isn't a lack of features (except for more diplomacy features like alliances, non-aggression pacts & trade deals, as well as a lack of dialogues with characters), but the fact that a few tweaks in a lot of existing gameplay elements would improve the overall gameplay experience, such as: a customisable death chance slider, faster time & shorter years/day & night cycles, lowered blocking chance for tiers 1-2-3 troops, halved durability for shields, faster level up for trade & tactics skills, as well as at least 3x more profitable trade, better war & peace calculations, better voting & influence mechanics, and tweaked crime & alley mechanics numbers, etc.

We need to know if you're at least working on bettering the core mechanics that already exist within the game. So please, at least let us know what existing mechanics you've been working on, so that we can provide constructive criticism and/or suggestions to help you improve the gameplay experience for a wider audience.
They're being completely flippant, that attitude is 'fine' if they have the competency to pull it off. But based on the whole EA and post-release 'quality of content' to even get the game to not crash, they don't.

They're just stringing those few still along that think there's something big. There isn't. But they still want to bank on that to hide behind how little work has actively been implemented or developed this past year (as if the other years prior were a shining example too...).

TW needs to just finish this damn patch as they said it's coming. Don't know when, don't know what's in it, don't care. Just get it through - end the development, end the series; modders can have finally have a complete copy to bring this sorry game to an acceptable level and we all move on after a couple more hours of that gameplay.
 
They're being completely flippant, that attitude is 'fine' if they have the competency to pull it off. But based on the whole EA and post-release 'quality of content' to even get the game to not crash, they don't.

They're just stringing those few still along that think there's something big. There isn't. But they still want to bank on that to hide behind how little work has actively been implemented or developed this past year (as if the other years prior were a shining example too...).

TW needs to just finish this damn patch as they said it's coming. Don't know when, don't know what's in it, don't care. Just get it through - end the development, end the series; modders can have finally have a complete copy to bring this sorry game to an acceptable level and we all move on after a couple more hours of that gameplay.
Honestly, at this point, I would be pretty content if the only things they did were giving us all the promised stuff: claimants, 70 or so battle maps & replay editor (Idgaf about this one, but I'm sure some people do care, and TW promised this one), as well and some minor changes like a slider that enables us to select the death chance, another slider for the length of days and/or years, another slider or a drop down menu that enables us to choose how much loot we get (as a difficulty option), halving the average shield durability, removing loyalty & security from castles altogether, 1,5x exp gain for companions in all skills, 1,5x increased exp gain for Trade & Tactics for the player, as well as 2-3x profitability for trading (or just decreasing the overall trading penalty), workshops making on average 200-250 per day (more if you monopolized a resource by manipulating the global trade, less if you chose a crappy workshop product at a crappy town) & kingdoms not coting to declare another war on another if the enemy(s) they are already at war with have 66% or higher the combat strength of their own kingdom.

I do want them to add meaningful diplomacy options like alliances, better dialogues, more companion variety and interaction, landline messengers to castles & towns, etc., but TW just tweaking some stuff and giving the players the ability to tweak some others like the death % would go an incredibly long way.
 
Last edited:
Honestly, at this point, I would be pretty content if the only things they did were giving us all the promised stuff: claimants, 70 or so battle maps & replay editor (Idgaf about this one, but I'm sure some people do care, and TW promised this one), as well and some minor changes like a slider that enables us to select the death chance, another slider for the length of days and/or years, another slider or a drop down menu that enables us to choose how much loot we get (as a difficulty option), halving the average shield durability, removing loyalty & security from castles altogether, 1,5x exp gain for companions in all skills, 1,5x increased exp gain for Trade & Tactics for the player, as well as 2-3x profitability for trading (or just decreasing the overall trading penalty), workshops making on average 200-250 per day (more if you monopolized a resource by manipulating the global trade, less if you chose a crappy workshop product at a crappy town) & kingdoms not coting to declare another war on another if the enemy(s) they are already at war with have 66% or higher the combat strength of their own kingdom.

I do want them to add meaningful diplomacy options like alliances, better dialogues, more companion variety and interaction, landline messengers to castles & towns, etc., but TW just tweaking some stuff and giving the players the ability to tweak some others like the death % would go an incredibly long way.

We have mods for all that though so it would a lot of effort for naught to a huge proportion, if not most of the remaining player base if that is all they worked on as were not going to download 1.3 and possibly break said mods seeing as the modders have left the scene.

I would hope that after all this time (and according to them they're reading feedback here from the shadows) they have been thinking outside of the box and are coming uo with something completely left field and interesting.
 
We have mods for all that though so it would a lot of effort for naught to a huge proportion, if not most of the remaining player base if that is all they worked on as were not going to download 1.3 and possibly break said mods seeing as the modders have left the scene.

I would hope that after all this time (and according to them they're reading feedback here from the shadows) they have been thinking outside of the box and are coming uo with something completely left field and interesting.
Nah, not only a lot of people play without mods, or even without access to them (such as console players), implementing the base features of such mods into the base game would remove the need for the mod owners to update their mods for every new patch (remember, even if 1.3 is the last major patch, it will probably have at least 5-10 minor patches containing fixes). A new patch will cause a lot of mods to break anyways.

Nevertheless, not adding the lacking fundamental features to the game due to existing mods would honestly be a terrible approach imo, and it would limit possible development to practically nothing since the game already has may mods that do tons of things from fixing bugs to adding diplomacy, crime, etc. mechanics to even sex mods.
 
Nah, not only a lot of people play without mods, or even without access to them (such as console players), implementing the base features of such mods into the base game would remove the need for the mod owners to update their mods for every new patch (remember, even if 1.3 is the last major patch, it will probably have at least 5-10 minor patches containing fixes). A new patch will cause a lot of mods to break anyways.

Nevertheless, not adding the lacking fundamental features to the game due to existing mods would honestly be a terrible approach imo, and it would limit possible development to practically nothing since the game already has may mods that do tons of things from fixing bugs to adding diplomacy, crime, etc. mechanics to even sex mods.

Not sure about that one. A player who dropped the game a few years ago isn't going to pick the game back up cause they made more tweaks to this and that. All they've done in the last few years is tweak the game to try make it a perfect balance

Saying that TW now finally added diplomacy to the game won't hold any merit because remember when TW finally added the Crime Empire we were all waiting for? And it was just punching 5 dudes in an alley? I'm sure people picked the game back up for a total of 5 minutes before dropping it again.

It'll be the same if they added Feasts, it'll be good for a few hours and then dropped again, which is not worth the exorbitant amount of time they've been working behind the scenes with zero communication.

It needs to be something big to bring both consoles and CPU players back and keep them back and again, fleshing out the game further won't do that, people have forgotten about Bannerlord as more and more high quality games come out.
 
Not sure about that one. A player who dropped the game a few years ago isn't going to pick the game back up cause they made more tweaks to this and that. All they've done in the last few years is tweak the game to try make it a perfect balance

Saying that TW now finally added diplomacy to the game won't hold any merit because remember when TW finally added the Crime Empire we were all waiting for? And it was just punching 5 dudes in an alley? I'm sure people picked the game back up for a total of 5 minutes before dropping it again.

It'll be the same if they added Feasts, it'll be good for a few hours and then dropped again, which is not worth the exorbitant amount of time they've been working behind the scenes with zero communication.

It needs to be something big to bring both consoles and CPU players back and keep them back and again, fleshing out the game further won't do that, people have forgotten about Bannerlord as more and more high quality games come out.

TW never did promise you to be able to run a crime empire though. There is a clear line between what we want, and what TW do deliver. Players hype themselves and read into things more than what they actually is, is a player problem, not a dev problem. And it applies to more games than just Bannerlord. Look at one of the more recent like Manor Lords. Some expected it to be a lot more than what it is and giving the dev a lot of flak for it. Eventhough dev went out before release stating clearly what it was and wasn't.
 
TW never did promise you to be able to run a crime empire though.

From their own steam page circa 2021, post release:

"Mount & Blade II: Bannerlord is the eagerly awaited sequel to the acclaimed medieval combat simulator and role-playing game Mount & Blade: Warband. Set 200 years before, it expands both the detailed fighting system and the world of Calradia. Bombard mountain fastnesses with siege engines, establish secret criminal empires in the back alleys of cities, or charge into the thick of chaotic battles in your quest for power.'

If you're going to simp for a corp and gaslight on their behalf, at least do 5 seconds of googling.

Its pretty obvious, but you should notice how before the Criminal Empire was patched in, they advertised as such. After it was patched in, they deleted said advertising.

Why? Well it's pretty flipping obvious no?

The difference between Manorlords and bannerlords was people were able to make informed decisions about purchasing the game because the developer is communicating with his audience, even though he doesn't have several community managers. Taleworlds advertises features on their steam page and then deletes them after they're released so to save face.

@JunKeteer makes the same point in another thread the other day and Fivebucks even made a whole thread about missing features never mentioned again.

The main issue is you can't develop a game for over a decade, release multiple videos and press releases about features being worked in development, cut said features from the game, remove said mention of features or implement them in a bare bones fashion, ignore the community following it, and then come back out and say "oh it's cooking" like we're a bunch a ****ing goldfish.
 
Last edited:
The reason TW doesn't provide details on what they're working in is because they have neither good direction for the game nor good planning and accountability. It's that simple. It's hilarious that they're acting like it's a principled stance and great things are in the works. Whenever 1.3.0 comes out, it will be a long list but, in the end, it will be mostly crash fixes, new crashes to balance the fixes, a few scenes and assets, and maybe a couple of shallow, poorly thought out features.

I'm just speculating based upon past performance. I'd love to be proven wrong and pull this game out of retirement.
 
The reason TW doesn't provide details on what they're working in is because they have neither good direction for the game nor good planning and accountability. It's that simple.

Honestly I think the project has suffered from a lack of direction and woolly-headed management. I don't understand that a game that draws inspiration from Sid Meier's Pirates! could somehow not have as many features in terms of things to do and places to visit, whilst at the same time utilising resources on features like crime empires and blacksmithing that could easily have been added in a fleshed out form in DLCs. The game is a huge canvas but they just don't seem to want to paint on it.

The missed opportunity annoys me no end.
 
Last edited:
From their own steam page circa 2021, post release:

"Mount & Blade II: Bannerlord is the eagerly awaited sequel to the acclaimed medieval combat simulator and role-playing game Mount & Blade: Warband. Set 200 years before, it expands both the detailed fighting system and the world of Calradia. Bombard mountain fastnesses with siege engines, establish secret criminal empires in the back alleys of cities, or charge into the thick of chaotic battles in your quest for power.'

If you're going to simp for a corp and gaslight on their behalf, at least do 5 seconds of googling.

Its pretty obvious, but you should notice how before the Criminal Empire was patched in, they advertised as such. After it was patched in, they deleted said advertising.

Why? Well it's pretty flipping obvious no?

The difference between Manorlords and bannerlords was people were able to make informed decisions about purchasing the game because the developer is communicating with his audience, even though he doesn't have several community managers. Taleworlds advertises features on their steam page and then deletes them after they're released so to save face.

@JunKeteer makes the same point in another thread the other day and Fivebucks even made a whole thread about missing features never mentioned again.

The main issue is you can't develop a game for over a decade, release multiple videos and press releases about features being worked in development, cut said features from the game, remove said mention of features or implement them in a bare bones fashion, ignore the community following it, and then come back out and say "oh it's cooking" like we're a bunch a ****ing goldfish.

Is that the only reference you have about criminal empires? No dev blogs, videos, etc where they promised you to run a criminal empire. whatever? I remember when BG3 was released and people took one sentence from the steam page where it said the game would come to conclusion in the upper city and then turned that into "Larian did cut out the entire upper city from the game"... You can take over the back alleys and pretend be whatever crime lord you want. Idk what type of criminal empire you think you where promised with what features/mechanics, please do tell/describe.
 
Is that the only reference you have about criminal empires? No dev blogs, videos, etc where they promised you to run a criminal empire. whatever? I remember when BG3 was released and people took one sentence from the steam page where it said the game would come to conclusion in the upper city and then turned that into "Larian did cut out the entire upper city from the game"... You can take over the back alleys and pretend be whatever crime lord you want. Idk what type of criminal empire you think you where promised with what features/mechanics, please do tell/describe.
Bro I'm not your mammy. I'm not going to do your homework for you. Look up the devlogs and posts yourself. They're are even some on this very forum ffs.

You said "TW never did promise you to be able to run a crime empire though." I sent you a direct quote from them on their store page saying otherwise. How many developers/games are you going to try bring up to fit your narrative? Manorlords, Larian, who's next? Were talking about Bannerlord here mate so there's literally no point in engaging in a conversation with you when your flailing about like this.

There's no medal for bootlicking a million dollar company.
 
Last edited:
Yeah, currently the criminal gameplay is incredibly barebones outside of owning alleys for RP purposes and measly amounts of money, raiding villages and forming a bandit only/majority army.

The thing is, it could be improved so much just by changing a few numbers (I had a post a while back on how specifically it could be improved, I'm too lazy to find it and post the link), as well as letting the player sneak into a town guaranteed if they own an alley in that town, giving the player the ability to store up to 50 units in player owned alleys with a discount in wages for "garrisoned", own all alleys in 1 town (which would decrease security in the town by 1 for each alley owned by the player if they are part of a different kingdom, increase it by 1 if part of the same kingdom), and the ability to incite rebellion so that the players could take rebel towns without repercussions and form their own kingdoms as a criminal.
 
In terms of 'fulfilling' their checklist features - sure, TW 'achieved' it; not like any of them was ever anything specific game-wise besides a vague sentence where it can be checked off with barely an effort/detail (as they did it). No different from getting a crystal-ball reading from a psychic.

In the end, game is a medieval battle simulator, all else is to be fluff to enhance that. But the way that 'fluff' was developed, makes the core experience worse overall.

WB had far less fluff features, but they didn't really interfere with the core game; in BL it interferes too much with it. You're almost required to interact with all those fluff features, or they roadblock you. The fact they are then done so poorly/shallow is what makes BL feel worse in that gameplay experience.

They were better off never having many of the features because most have been underdeveloped or lacked any gameplay details to them.
 
Bro I'm not your mammy. I'm not going to do your homework for you. Look up the devlogs and posts yourself. They're are even some on this very forum ffs.

You said "TW never did promise you to be able to run a crime empire though." I sent you a direct quote from them on their store page saying otherwise. How many developers/games are you going to try bring up to fit your narrative? Manorlords, Larian, who's next? Were talking about Bannerlord here mate so there's literally no point in engaging in a conversation with you when your flailing about like this.

There's no medal for bootlicking a million dollar company.

I asked you if you had any other source other than a summary on the steam page, of promised criminal empire mechancis, features and the like. It seems you don't. I made the comparison with Larian and BG3, because you took a sentence and turned it into something major. So I want to know what this major feature/mechanics that was promised to us they haven't done? You seem to know, so please share?
 
I asked you if you had any other source other than a summary on the steam page, of promised criminal empire mechancis, features and the like. It seems you don't. I made the comparison with Larian and BG3, because you took a sentence and turned it into something major. So I want to know what this major feature/mechanics that was promised to us they haven't done? You seem to know, so please share?

Do you need you hand held when you cross the street by any chance?

I told you to look it up yourself because I'm not your mammy and even told you FiveBucks posted a thread about features missing. There's a really handy search bar up the top of the screen which you can use to type in words and search for them. It's been around for a while. Put on your helmet and skedaddle.
 
Do you need you hand held when you cross the street by any chance?

I told you to look it up yourself because I'm not your mammy and even told you FiveBucks posted a thread about features missing. There's a really handy search bar up the top of the screen which you can use to type in words and search for them. It's been around for a while. Put on your helmet and skedaddle.

I take it as you don't have any acutal reference to show for then, and all you run with is that one sentence from the steam page.
 
I take it as you don't have any acutal reference to show for then, and all you run with is that one sentence from the steam page.
So steam pages don't count as advertisement? Mentioning an upcoming list of features there doesn't actually mean anything? Removing said sentence from their steam page after people already bought the game on the expectation that this would be included is fine? Why are you dismissing that as though its worth less than anything else Taleworlds put out. If anything its worth more, its removal is proof that they knew they promised something they couldn't deliver. And instead of owning up to it, they chose to try and sweep it under the rug and pretend it was never there.

You're excusing the todd howard school of lying. 'See that mountain, you can climb it' when talking about the world and exploration. And then when people find out that you can't explore all the mountains falling back on 'no I only said you could climb that singular one, its not my fault you thought the game had more in it' its ****ty and manipulative. And you continously defend that kind of misdirection, as though the company somehow has no idea how its words are going to be received. Its horribly incompetent and a refusal to admit to mistakes at best, and outright malicious deception at worst.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom