-
If you are reporting a bug, please head over to our Technical Support section for Bannerlord.
Users who are viewing this thread
"Player X has voted for a gamepause, press f1 for yes, f3 for no."
Or each team gets 2 pauses shared between them per game.
Or each team gets 2 pauses shared between them per game.
Voting system. Such as if 3 or more players voted "yes" in 6 players in server gives each team 1 minute timeout and each team has 1 timeout right. What do you think? Is it bad idea?
Think like CS:GO's timeout mechanics.
This isn’t even a feature in games like League where matches go on for up to an hour and missing 5 minutes at the start means your opposing laner gets ahead and snowballs the game. It’s not necessary except in super competitive environments and I dont think Bannerlord fits it. I don’t want some twats pausing the game right in the middle of a fight for example.
LoL doesnt have it? oO Dota does, and its definitly handy incase someone disconnects and wants to reconnect. For competitive its a must really.
Smite fixed the pausing mid fight thing by making sure if there was a fight, you couldn't initialize a pause vote. Also obviously this shouldnt be an option for TDM etc.
Last I checked no, but then LoL isn't a perfect model of how to make a game anyways. I don't really see the need to pause a game, but I won't object to it if they can't pause at important moments.
Having had tons of disconnects in matches its cost us countless rounds and just general impossible to predict events happening. I had a match once where the fire alarm for a player triggered and it kept beeping transmitting it over TS. GL fighting properly with a fire alarm noise blasting in your ears ?
I mean I can imagine how many people would like to have such a system because playing 6v3 is not fun at all. Let it be clear that such a system would be great for Skirmish. For other game types, not so much.
Playing with unbalanced team (yesterday we had to play 6v2 in the first round) is not fun for any of the teams. Not for the 6 guys, and most definitely not for the 2. In most cases, such scenarios usually result in one team offering the other team duels.
@MArdA TaleWorlds
This is honestly a great suggestion that I haven't seen on the forums yet. I would say this is definitely something that could be tested in the so called Beta branch we heard about yesterday.
Playing with unbalanced team (yesterday we had to play 6v2 in the first round) is not fun for any of the teams. Not for the 6 guys, and most definitely not for the 2. In most cases, such scenarios usually result in one team offering the other team duels.
@MArdA TaleWorlds
This is honestly a great suggestion that I haven't seen on the forums yet. I would say this is definitely something that could be tested in the so called Beta branch we heard about yesterday.
But winning that 2v6 is fun as hell.
I reccommended this in beta ?
Not middle of a fight. Just for between 2 of rounds. Yes games not so long but I don't want to stay afk.
Would make sense to limit it to the 20 seconds at the start of the round yep
This really doesent make sense. Why should my game get stopped, because someone is incapeable of calling a person back like 4min later?! And noone would vote for someone they don't know to get a pause. Only clans could make use of it and they probably would exploit it, No thanks.
Because its a team game and team games rely on your teammates. If your teammates arnt there, you're not playing at full force. I watched a decent amount of Smite etc and if someone disconnects theres almost always a pause, unless they're assholes. Everyone would benefit from it not just competitive.
How would it be exploited in competitive? To discuss tactics? Honestly that makes it even cooler if the tournaments add restrictions on it, like 1 pause per set, so if you use it for tactics mid game, and you get a disconnect, you've spent your pause.
You know as good as I do, that this will never work with random Bannerlord players. And benefit in which way? The only use from it, that I can see, is in clan matches to discuss tactics. But Bannerlord mp matches are really short and fast paced. Its simply annoying to pause a 10min game (for how long?) just to wait for someone else. I want to play, thats why I start a game! You normally discuss the tactics before the game starts and if anything happens, which you did not discuss prior, you need to improvise quickliy. Its part of the difficulty and part of the fun. And I allmost never dissconnect from the game (if so, usually its the whole server goes down anyways).
I actually agree with Greedalicious.
Furthermore, I believe a system like this could work very well along with a really solid ranked matchmaking system. For random games I wouldn't say it is as useful, but for hardcore competetive games its definitely nice. I suppose most players will accept a poll because similar system work effectively in games like CSGO, so why wouldn't they work here?
Also, I don't think it would make much sense to implement such a system for skirmish random games because the mindset of players would be arguably different from those that play the game competetively. Casuals just want to play, like you said, and don't really care about such things. In that case there is no need for a system like this. For competetive it would be really nice because it actually enhances the accuracy of matchmaking ranking precision because I would assume less games would be lost due to being 1 or 2 (or even more...) people behind.
Furthermore, I believe a system like this could work very well along with a really solid ranked matchmaking system. For random games I wouldn't say it is as useful, but for hardcore competetive games its definitely nice. I suppose most players will accept a poll because similar system work effectively in games like CSGO, so why wouldn't they work here?
Also, I don't think it would make much sense to implement such a system for skirmish random games because the mindset of players would be arguably different from those that play the game competetively. Casuals just want to play, like you said, and don't really care about such things. In that case there is no need for a system like this. For competetive it would be really nice because it actually enhances the accuracy of matchmaking ranking precision because I would assume less games would be lost due to being 1 or 2 (or even more...) people behind.
Yes, maybe not necessary for now. But in the future? They're planning bring new game modes like in Warband. TaleWorlds's games are developing with his community's ideas. And going to perfect with baby steps. Yes not necessary for now. Technical problems are more important than little suggestions. But little details are makes perfect a game.
