Reus' Rants & Critiques

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 3 (members: 0, guests: 3)
I think I agree with this list but tbh I didnt read it all that closely. 2 things: 1. I never had a problem with food....ever.(but my game did bug out and skills no longer increase) 2. I noticed the leader of the empires army got stuck up against a mountain with 600 troops and never moved. I wonder if this is how factions are painting the map super quick.
 
100% correct, best post in here today.

"the companion recruitment system is inferior to the one in the previous games"

It is, I have no idea what TW was thinking here, I really don't.
 
Gamelin said:
I completely agree with this statement.

I remember a while back a year ago, people where making jokes about the game getting so polished we would hurt our eyes looking at it. Now we are almost there, but fo the lack of polish.

I considered making my own thread, mostly about the boring, slow, repetitive early game. However this post summed up most of my experience.
Click to expand...

Yep, that post said it all. The early game is stressful and boring, if you don't find bandit parties to attack you just keep losing money. They better change this. Sorry, I just spammed this thread... :lol:
 
Good post OP; it's disappointing, bewildering and worrying that some of the inadequacies, more than the bugs, are present. I know they had to start over to a degree several years back, but you do wonder with things like the battle AI and whole map being overrun in a short time how this could have happened. Why is the steamrolling faction not running low on troops during this blitzkrieg? Why are other factions not teaming up on them? How are they fighting successfully on all fronts? Why aren't lords getting so many fiefs that some, depending on personality and relation to the king, trying to challenge for the throne or form a breakaway faction (not sure if the latter is possible, but you know). Why in the OP's playthrough are the N.Empire not suffering economically when bandit parties are running rampant (indeed, why are the lords not considering the bandit issue a priority). Very dispiriting, though not altogether surprising for most of us, perhaps.

That said, I've been enjoying it and staying up late to play it, and I am going to load it up again now :lol:

Archonsod said:
It's the inconsistency rather than the icons. I find most of them obvious - if the icon is a crossed out horses head then it's pretty intuitive it means you can't use the weapon from horseback. However if they're using that kind of iconography, it would make sense to then have the un-crossed horse head icon visible on every weapon you can use from horseback, which isn't the case.
Click to expand...

You can mouse over those icons to tell you what they mean.

I think the OP asked if you need a particular type of horse to upgrade infantry to cav; the answer is yes. Mules only improve your cargo capacity, any other horses in your inventory speeds up overland travel (the idea being infantry ride them), and I think you need a specific type of horse to suit the unit you want to upgrade to. For example, I could not upgrade my Khuzait nomads to cav in the party screen when I only had sumpter horses and mules in the inventory, but once I bought some steppe horses they could be upgraded.
 
Reus said:
The pace of the game is completely off. In my save, the Northern Empire started snowballing around 20 hours into the playthrough. I am now around 30 hours into the playthrough and they have wiped everything on the map except 5 towns in Vlandia. My character is only level 10 and the game is already about to end in a Speedrun Any% fashion. At first I was afraid that my character would die of old age before anything happened in the game, but now I'm afraid the game will end before he even turns 33.
Click to expand...

I personally completely agree with this. I myself am a 10 years player with around 3k hours in previous games and was quite shocked how fast it has happened to me and couple friends too. There are many features enhancing long game times like character death, clans, heirs etc. but in 10 game years, 80% of map is owned by a faction. To me it doesn't feel realistic, it doesn't improve gameplay and it doesn't make it more re-playable.

Also I am part of the server team so I am not working directly on Bannerlord but as a long time M&B fan, I have to thank you for this really good feedback!
 
it's genuinely sad. and this doesn't even get into all the poorly coordinated art design or technical flaws.

i hope they fix some of it but at this point i don't think i believe they can fix all of it. i'm sure they'll try though, and i'll be glad when it's a bit better.

to add:
the world feels empty, the early game is even slower and duller than warband's, the player party is too slow even with a lot of speed boosts, the way the smithing parts unlock is an infuriating time waster, etc. etc.
 
Nice post. The problem with feuds changing too many of faction's hands it's clearly due to the fact that the conquerors of a city or castle put just a few warriors inside as a garrison.
For sure the AI decissions work as expected, because if a faction finds out that a feud that they have just lost to the enemy has now only 30 men as garrisson to defend it, this will be the objective to attack next. Dumb af. It's so sad to see the current state of the game, specially of those feautres that were supposed to be so innovative and they just work like sh**
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

New Strategies for a more difficult game
Replies
10
Views
306
Count_Morfetico
Count_Morfetico
Expressing myself about the state of the game.
Replies
10
Views
439
JunKeteer
JunKeteer
Gustafssonz
Taleworlds transparency and roadmap?
Replies
1
Views
191
Cquarto91
Cquarto91
Back
Top Bottom