How about they just get 1.2 update to live for all platforms first?!? The next ice age and ww3 are all gonna happen before it releases at this rate. Like I said, single player updates should be separate from multiplayer updates, at least on consoles, cuz it's dead and deçomposing on Xbox and we have to wait for mp stuff to be sorted.
-
If you are reporting a bug, please head over to our Technical Support section for Bannerlord.
Roadmap? Features in the future? Anything?
- Thread starter Gustafssonz
- Start date
Users who are viewing this thread
Ulfhedinn_
Sergeant at Arms
***Community Feedback ROADMAP - What Taleworlds still needs to fix!***
This is a collection of feedback from the community, to track Bannerlord's progress on meeting community expectations. Taleworlds said they want to "bring the game to the level the community expects". Here, those expectations can easily be seen. This list only contains things which Taleworlds...forums.taleworlds.com
Fixing, balancing, and completing non functional/partially functional/severely imbalanced features such as
* Voting
* Surrendering
* Minor factions
* Policies
* Lord relations
* Personality Traits
* Armour + weapon balance
* Morale
Missing Warband/Devblog features or some kind of equivalent that fulfills their gameplay role:
* Claimants and civil wars (announced, but no ETA)
* Replay system (announced, but no ETA)
* Nobles visiting your court, or something else like a messenger system that makes it easy to contact people when running a kingdom
* Minor faction bases, as seen in the 2016 demo
* Manhunters
* Feasts in peacetime!
* Duels against nobles, surprise combat scenarios in towns (eg: bandit ambushes or belligerent drunks)
* paying to gain levels in a skill more quickly (skill trainers or skill books)
* Fighting your way out after failing to sneak into a town
+1
One feature I like personally, Is individualism regarding colors and sigil display.
You could allow people like in single-player choose colors to represent the background and their sigil. Now this would be confusing for new players so you could have a setting in gameplay that simply says "Enable Generic Faction Colors". Like you guys do for avatars and names and unlike avatars and names this would be by default enabled so it wouldn't be confusing for new players while allowing more experienced players who recognize and can identify factions without needing the colors to display more personality. I if I explained that well or not but it would be pretty nice.
Oh look, no further reply in the thread from Dejan. Well, what a surprise. Five Bucks gave him the answer that TW doesn't want to know about.
Honestly, what's really amazing is that Taleworlds seem to think that their game is pretty much complete.
They are like : " What's the problem? it's a pretty good game right? "
What an absolute joke of a company they have become.
Honestly, what's really amazing is that Taleworlds seem to think that their game is pretty much complete.
They are like : " What's the problem? it's a pretty good game right? "
What an absolute joke of a company they have become.
Last edited:
No answer from Dejan here, I see. He asks and he disappears.***Community Feedback ROADMAP - What Taleworlds still needs to fix!***
This is a collection of feedback from the community, to track Bannerlord's progress on meeting community expectations. Taleworlds said they want to "bring the game to the level the community expects". Here, those expectations can easily be seen. This list only contains things which Taleworlds...
Fixing, balancing, and completing non functional/partially functional/severely imbalanced features such as
* Voting
* Surrendering
* Minor factions
* Policies
* Lord relations
* Personality Traits
* Armour + weapon balance
* Morale
Missing Warband/Devblog features or some kind of equivalent that fulfills their gameplay role:
* Claimants and civil wars (announced, but no ETA)
* Replay system (announced, but no ETA)
* Nobles visiting your court, or something else like a messenger system that makes it easy to contact people when running a kingdom
* Minor faction bases, as seen in the 2016 demo
* Manhunters
* Feasts in peacetime!
* Duels against nobles, surprise combat scenarios in towns (eg: bandit ambushes or belligerent drunks)
* paying to gain levels in a skill more quickly (skill trainers or skill books)
* Fighting your way out after failing to sneak into a town
Got a Cease and Desist/Dont Rouse the Rabble - order from above
Ulfhedinn_
Sergeant at Arms
I think the community manager must think he is talking to little kiddies instead of adults. You (Taleworlds) didn't hear to your community for the past 5+ years or what? Or maybe you're not aware of all the features that were promised that never made into the 'final' game?
This level of cynism is just... insulting.
+100
Hopefully, once 1.2 officially released, modders can "FIX DA FN GAME!" and add all the "adult" features this game needs.
.
For me the biggest issue is the lack of longtime motivation. I often lose interest in the game when i have "everything". That means when i have top armor and weapons, huge armies and a few towns and castles there is not much left to fight for. That is the point where money is no factor for me anymore. Cause i have everything i could buy already. So the at this point in the game its just all about joining armys and get even more castles, which is always the same.
The early game Mechanics like quests, collecting money to get a slightly better sword or improve your soldiers, this is not a factor anymore in the lategame.
What i think is important for longer motivation is:
-smithing armor. So you can customize your look even more.
- customize your castles and towns more. This would give you a reason again to collect money even in lategame. So i have a goal again what i am collecting money for.
- some sort of more lategame quests that are more usefull and give more rewards.
- There is literall no reason to "walk around the town". The towns are still so empty you just klick through the menus. I have no idea what could fix this. Maybe more unique npcs? That travel between towns? Where you have to discover them by really walking around? Fuller towns with more busy npcs? Idk
The early game Mechanics like quests, collecting money to get a slightly better sword or improve your soldiers, this is not a factor anymore in the lategame.
What i think is important for longer motivation is:
-smithing armor. So you can customize your look even more.
- customize your castles and towns more. This would give you a reason again to collect money even in lategame. So i have a goal again what i am collecting money for.
- some sort of more lategame quests that are more usefull and give more rewards.
- There is literall no reason to "walk around the town". The towns are still so empty you just klick through the menus. I have no idea what could fix this. Maybe more unique npcs? That travel between towns? Where you have to discover them by really walking around? Fuller towns with more busy npcs? Idk
I broadly agree with you, though since the game is sandbox, it is up to the players to decide on what the "end" is. But adding more end goals would keep the game fresher. Viking Conquest for example has several goals that the players could choose to complete, which would give some rewards upon completion (e.g. you get an increase to your 1h proficiency if you completed "Famous Warrior"). You can also select a new goal after completing one.
As for your suggestions:
- I like armor smithing in theory, but in practice it would be the same thing as buying armor (and probably would be an even bigger money printer than weapon smithing). Armor smithing just wouldn't have the depth or customization of weapon smithing, as armor only has the 2 values of Armor & Weight. You also wouldn't be able to visually customize it maybe except for its colour. So unless we get the ability to recolour our armor, I would pass on this one.
- This is a vague suggestion but I like it. I think there could be culture specific buildings for towns and/or castles to differentiate them, like
- I don't know what specific late game quests you have in mind, but we will be very likely getting claimants (& civil wars) in 1.3, which would count as one in my opinion. Another would be a late game invasion that can be enabled/disabled at character creation. I also had a suggestion for a game option to enable perma/long time destruction of towns by the player and AI with very negative traits, which spawn neutral refugee partie(s) (party of 100 units which include peasants & looters, also FFS Taleworlds, add peasant women as units to the game), the amount of parties scaling with the prosperity of the destroyed town, that move to nearby (intact) towns. If they reach these towns, they increase its prosperity by a flat amount (idk let's say 100) but also add a stacking malus to security and/or loyalty (idk, like -0.25). So in order to deal with possible future rebellions you have the choice of attacking these refugees to stop them (which would give negative trait points), or destroy towns in the heart of the enemy territory to cause chain rebellions down the line, crippling the enemy kingdom's future war potential.
- There's at least some incentive for going to the town scene in the form of alley ownership. But I still hold the opinion that we should be able to upgrade our equipments' modifiers by talking to weapon & armor vendors in towns and paying them a fee proportional to the price of the equipment like in Viking Conquest. This way, we would have another money sink while also having an excuse to actually go into towns.
SomeWeirdSins
Veteran
Do you have an ETA for improving the campaign level ai? Wars feel quite bad because the enemy ai army make the following errors:
Chase small armies that they can never catch. I posted an example where 2000 vlandian troops chased my one man army in circles in the desert while my faction captured several fiefs.
Walk past larger armies, get stuck in a siege, and get wiped
Overcommit: for example, two 1000 plus armies siege a castle with 40 defenders
Choose appropriate policies
These make it very easy to bait the ai armies, or to simply ignore them. It's hard to feel challenged or immersed, or to even access the content.
I tried a 'vassall role play' run where my party joins an ai army, and this results in 20 minutes of watching the army walk in circles before I get to fight.
Sadly all you said is true, along with other stuff such as not abandoning a siege with a significant garrison when there's a significant swarm of lords/smaller armies waiting for the sieging army's numbers to drop enough to be able to get the jump on them.
The way wars and peace are voted in favour or not...
The list could continue but these are the main issues to just try to fix what's there... as per missing features or improvements... so many of them in this game are incredibly barebones that I don't want to believe there's a need to name them... I'd start by adding what's in warband / viking conquest (making sure to keep some features as optional at the start of the game) and build from there...
The way wars and peace are voted in favour or not...
The list could continue but these are the main issues to just try to fix what's there... as per missing features or improvements... so many of them in this game are incredibly barebones that I don't want to believe there's a need to name them... I'd start by adding what's in warband / viking conquest (making sure to keep some features as optional at the start of the game) and build from there...
Finishing the dynasty/can system maybe? The easiest way to win the game is just to execute lords because these systems aren't finished and you can depopulate the world very easily.
A huge part of the pitch for Bannerlord was this idea that it is a generational game, heirs, clans, etc, the issue here is you can conquer the map inside a tenth of a single lifespan. The pace of mechanics is all wrong, voiding/making most new features, as barebones as they are, pointless.
the problem isn't consoles persay, it's doing everything concurrently at the same time.
should have made it good on pc first, then and only then tried to migrate it to consoles.
I'm amazed that Warband got an audience with much of a warm reception on console until I think I realized that they had indeed adopted some of the Quality of Life features from the mods. (perhaps not intending to so much as coming to the same conclusions that the modders did).
I would add that it frankly made the rest of the pacing kind of rushed-feeling.. would've preferred having a 12 month calendar like the original, idk; maybe with a x10 speed modifier if you really wanted to accelerate time. hard to find people who agree with me on that point though, think that the map in general is too small.
would've liked a game that had a better "mid-early game" of being a merchant or an industry/craftworks magnate, or mercenary or bounty-hunter for longer.
seems the game really wants to try and "accelerate" you into being a lord or dynastic clan but then has nothing to do other than fight. and that doesn't work for games where there's dynasties involved.. no intrigue or tornaments/feasts you have to attend or else you offend someone important, no weird long courtship rituals that inevitably lead to stabbing your future spouse's true love to death. Also set the year to 600 and remove lances
clans themselves make little sense, they don't replace the system of individual lords quite right, nor do they seem to really form the kind of factions or sub-factions one would think would be needed.. there doesn't seem to be enough inter-clan warfare, or clans switching sides or becoming "border-swing states"
Honestly, I feel like if TW looked at a game like Crusader Kings 2 or Crusader Kings 3, they'd have all the ideas they'd need for things to implement into Bannerlord. For example, all the intrigue and relationship systems and with the cutscene system..
I feel like a lot of the things that make CKII and CKIII as good and as in depth as they are could be brought over to Bannerlord. You'd always have different plots and schemes going into effect between kingdoms. New kingdoms rising and falling! Rebellions, Civil Wars, Claimants, and more!
Right now it does feel a bit... shallow in the mid to late game without any real intrigue and diplomacy is scuffed. No alliances? No non-aggression pacts? Trade treaties? Etc.
Hell I'd even enjoy if, I believe the mod is called Dynaculture, was made baseline. It's the mod where a culture of a town/castle shifts gradually over time. Maybe you have to build certain culture specific buildings and such to make the culture of the town/castle shift to that of the owner. That would also change the units you could recruit out of the town. Idk, I think it would be neat, because it does suck when you have to run across the map to recruit your own culture's units.
Even religious systems would be neat and having an extra layer of political intrigue between factions. Like imagine two lords from different kingdoms sharing the same religion, they'd have a chance of maybe splitting off and forming their own kingdom, or one defecting to the other. Maybe even have 'holy wars' using a religion system too... idk there are a lot of things that could be added to expand this relatively empty sandbox.
We have all this sand, and this big box... but no toys to play with!
I feel like a lot of the things that make CKII and CKIII as good and as in depth as they are could be brought over to Bannerlord. You'd always have different plots and schemes going into effect between kingdoms. New kingdoms rising and falling! Rebellions, Civil Wars, Claimants, and more!
Right now it does feel a bit... shallow in the mid to late game without any real intrigue and diplomacy is scuffed. No alliances? No non-aggression pacts? Trade treaties? Etc.
Hell I'd even enjoy if, I believe the mod is called Dynaculture, was made baseline. It's the mod where a culture of a town/castle shifts gradually over time. Maybe you have to build certain culture specific buildings and such to make the culture of the town/castle shift to that of the owner. That would also change the units you could recruit out of the town. Idk, I think it would be neat, because it does suck when you have to run across the map to recruit your own culture's units.
Even religious systems would be neat and having an extra layer of political intrigue between factions. Like imagine two lords from different kingdoms sharing the same religion, they'd have a chance of maybe splitting off and forming their own kingdom, or one defecting to the other. Maybe even have 'holy wars' using a religion system too... idk there are a lot of things that could be added to expand this relatively empty sandbox.
We have all this sand, and this big box... but no toys to play with!
