Sooooo is it worth comming back trying out the singelplayer out again

Users who are viewing this thread

sooooooo I havent played the singelplayer for about 4 montsh id say and has there been any major improvments or should i just keep waiting a bit cause i want to have a good campaign not just stuff being broken ?
no. absolutly not worth
 
I think people here probably played too much and got bored, that's why they are all saying no.

I am someone who didn't play since the initial release, and tried a full campaign in 1.5.7. The game is quite a lot better, I definitely had a more enjoyable experience now in 1.5.7. I would say it's worth a campaign if you have time to kill, just don't expect stuff to be perfect.
The problem is not having played with it much.
The game suffering from a problem, which is the same as many other games.
TOO MANY PARAMETERS.
The style that best suits a game like bannerlord is not to be a parametric RPG like any MMORPG where the result of a fight is decided by the attack and defense parameters and where a perk between 20 perk of a skill between 18 skill varies by 1-2% something that probably could also vary by selecting another perk among the 20 of another apparently unrelated skill and put there just because "eh but it's an RPG"... because this structure is NOT an RPG, but a PARAMETRIC RPG, where the parameters are not related to the ACTION component of the game.
Bannerlord should be an ACTION-RPG with some sprinkling of parametry, NOT THE VICE VERSA.
Parametry should be there in combat physics.
For example, the armor system should be revised.
Currently the system is of the type:
the character's hurtboxes are about 6 (head, neck, shoulders, torso, arms and legs) and the armor, inserted in the armor slot, tends to protect the reference hurboxes by assigning a reduction coefficient of the damage received.
The problem arises when it comes to arrows and armor.
The simple damage reduction does not reflect the superiority of the armor, because if you get 30 arrows that deal 100 base damage and you are in heavy armor (plate we assume) with a 90% reduction in damage, if you hit 10 arrows, you are dead.
And it is irrelevant WHERE they hit you, net of the damage reduction that can vary from hurtbox to hurtbox, because if they are not 10 arrows they will be 11 or 9.
But a warrior in full plate armor usually only dies if the arrow manages to enter the crevice of the helmet or some other momentarily uncovered point.
If a warrior's face-to-face area with full plate armor is 1-5%, this means that out of 100 arrows coming in and HIT ALL, only 1 or 5 should go through the armor and hit the face-up area of the warrior.

HOW IT SHOULD BE:
A solution for this would be to increase the number of hurtboxes (even triple them in number) and make sure that some of them, those relating to the joints, being difficult to cover, are considered "uncovered points".
-In this way in a hand-to-hand combat you will tend to hit those points to do a consistent damage.
-At a great distance, being hit will become a probabilistic matter
-At small distances a matter of aim and skill of the archer to shoot these uncovered points.
Obviously the parametry can help to establish the coefficients to be attributed to the various types of armor, but there would be FEW COEFFICIENTS and there would be no large variations in the armor value of the same type but rather a different number of hurtboxes covered by different types of armor.
Thus where the hurtboxes are covered with plates, you will receive almost zero damage from many types of damage (slash, piercing and blunt).
From chainmails you would have a great widespread protection from cut damage.
The gamberson would protect against impacts
And the overall protection would depend on what type of protection you wear, maybe even on multiple layers, and how many hurtboxes are covered by one protection or the other.
And instead I have to put up with the fact that in the engineering skill there is a perk that increases the armor by 10 .... and that a catafrac armor costs 529,000 money just because the armor value is very high.
And so there are paper armor (complaints that I read on the forum) and armor that protect TOO MUCH, because with a very high general protection and without "uncovered points" you do not knock the enemy down because he doesn't have weak points.

Clearly, in the case of the plates that would be too protective, some new mechanics related to the impact damage should be added: for example if you are hit in the head the helmet could fly (recoverable but exposing yourself to risks), or your vision will fade and it is a dizziness for a few moments.
In short, damage that is not necessarily a numerical parameter, but a game mechanic that makes blunt damage "otherwise useful" .
I hope I have made myself clear.
 
The problem is not having played with it much.
The game suffering from a problem, which is the same as many other games.
TOO MANY PARAMETERS.
The style that best suits a game like bannerlord is not to be a parametric RPG like any MMORPG where the result of a fight is decided by the attack and defense parameters and where a perk between 20 perk of a skill between 18 skill varies by 1-2% something that probably could also vary by selecting another perk among the 20 of another apparently unrelated skill and put there just because "eh but it's an RPG"... because this structure is NOT an RPG, but a PARAMETRIC RPG, where the parameters are not related to the ACTION component of the game.
Bannerlord should be an ACTION-RPG with some sprinkling of parametry, NOT THE VICE VERSA.
Parametry should be there in combat physics.
For example, the armor system should be revised.
Currently the system is of the type:
the character's hurtboxes are about 6 (head, neck, shoulders, torso, arms and legs) and the armor, inserted in the armor slot, tends to protect the reference hurboxes by assigning a reduction coefficient of the damage received.
The problem arises when it comes to arrows and armor.
The simple damage reduction does not reflect the superiority of the armor, because if you get 30 arrows that deal 100 base damage and you are in heavy armor (plate we assume) with a 90% reduction in damage, if you hit 10 arrows, you are dead.
And it is irrelevant WHERE they hit you, net of the damage reduction that can vary from hurtbox to hurtbox, because if they are not 10 arrows they will be 11 or 9.
But a warrior in full plate armor usually only dies if the arrow manages to enter the crevice of the helmet or some other momentarily uncovered point.
If a warrior's face-to-face area with full plate armor is 1-5%, this means that out of 100 arrows coming in and HIT ALL, only 1 or 5 should go through the armor and hit the face-up area of the warrior.

HOW IT SHOULD BE:
A solution for this would be to increase the number of hurtboxes (even triple them in number) and make sure that some of them, those relating to the joints, being difficult to cover, are considered "uncovered points".
-In this way in a hand-to-hand combat you will tend to hit those points to do a consistent damage.
-At a great distance, being hit will become a probabilistic matter
-At small distances a matter of aim and skill of the archer to shoot these uncovered points.
Obviously the parametry can help to establish the coefficients to be attributed to the various types of armor, but there would be FEW COEFFICIENTS and there would be no large variations in the armor value of the same type but rather a different number of hurtboxes covered by different types of armor.
Thus where the hurtboxes are covered with plates, you will receive almost zero damage from many types of damage (slash, piercing and blunt).
From chainmails you would have a great widespread protection from cut damage.
The gamberson would protect against impacts
And the overall protection would depend on what type of protection you wear, maybe even on multiple layers, and how many hurtboxes are covered by one protection or the other.
And instead I have to put up with the fact that in the engineering skill there is a perk that increases the armor by 10 .... and that a catafrac armor costs 529,000 money just because the armor value is very high.
And so there are paper armor (complaints that I read on the forum) and armor that protect TOO MUCH, because with a very high general protection and without "uncovered points" you do not knock the enemy down because he doesn't have weak points.

Clearly, in the case of the plates that would be too protective, some new mechanics related to the impact damage should be added: for example if you are hit in the head the helmet could fly (recoverable but exposing yourself to risks), or your vision will fade and it is a dizziness for a few moments.
In short, damage that is not necessarily a numerical parameter, but a game mechanic that makes blunt damage "otherwise useful" .
I hope I have made myself clear.
It just needs a bit more balancing.

I for one don't want another Mordhau where you just point and swing at most vulnerable body part.

There's plenty of medieval multiplayer action games incoming, this shouldn't be one.

Also - auto resolve and AI battles. They need numbers to calculate outcome.

About blunt damage I can agree, tho.
 
Last edited:
It just needs a bit more balancing.

I for one don't want another Mordhau where you just point and swing.

There's plenty of medieval multiplayer action games incoming, this shouldn't be one.

Also - auto resolve and AI battles. They need numbers to calculate outcome.

About blunt damage I can agree, tho.

did you read the text?
And if you've read it, didn't you understand that my suggestion is AGAINST SPAM ATTACKS?
mordhau is as PARAMETRIC as bannerlord, because the armor system is similar.
Few hurtboxes and moderately protected, so that if you hit any hurtbox at random you still do significant damage.
Obviously you can spam attacks with a similar system, since wherever you hit and with any weapon, you will knock out your opponent in a number of hits that is less than 10.
What I wrote above has a very different meaning:
if you have a sword and you continuously use attacks against a warrior in plate armor and you continuously attack him ONLY on the torso, which is covered by the plate, not even after 50 hits you knock him to the ground.
Conversely, if your enemy has the joint between the torso and the arm (usually the shoulder or armpit) uncovered and you lunge there, then you could kill them in 2-3 hits.
DO YOU UNDERSTAND WHY YOU CANNOT SPAM with the system I propose?
simply because you would end up hitting only covered and well defended hurtboxes.
Do you understand that mordhau or how to spell it has nothing to do with what I said?
 
Personally, I would say no. It's kind of a dumpster fire at the moment. They seem to be having a lot of trouble getting a fix out for some severe issues that one would think would be relatively easy to diagnose.

I'm not so pumped about the new terrain stuff that was announced; I'd rather see depth added to the incomplete and/or missing features.
 
Personally, I would say no. It's kind of a dumpster fire at the moment. They seem to be having a lot of trouble getting a fix out for some severe issues that one would think would be relatively easy to diagnose.

I'm not so pumped about the new terrain stuff that was announced; I'd rather see depth added to the incomplete and/or missing features.
Yeah 1.5.8 is unplayable. 1.5.7 is playable, but not yet a great game.
 
It just needs a bit more balancing.

I for one don't want another Mordhau where you just point and swing.

There's plenty of medieval multiplayer action games incoming, this shouldn't be one.

Also - auto resolve and AI battles. They need numbers to calculate outcome.

About blunt damage I can agree, tho.

Pretty sure he was advocating for the opposite of point and swing not sure how you read that into his request.

Overall id say a sound "No" to is the game interesting and worthwhile coming back to. Some people are so caught in the weeds helping the Devs (a good thing to a point) that they get excited at the Lack of Snowballing -the lack of snowballing is now an applauded feature.... Thats pretty sad. Personally i dont care if a faction is snowballing or not - its the why and how the faction is doing it that matters. If its simply because they are cav and cav gets all kinds of Auto bonuses -then thats just bad game design recalibration -not a feature.

Someone said the game lacks soul and I find that to be true. The little points of immersion that make games interesting can all be argued away point by point as not necessary but it is the collective tied with vision that gives a game "soul" -and i just aint feeling it here sadly.
 
did you read the text?
And if you've read it, didn't you understand that my suggestion is AGAINST SPAM ATTACKS?
mordhau is as PARAMETRIC as bannerlord, because the armor system is similar.
Few hurtboxes and moderately protected, so that if you hit any hurtbox at random you still do significant damage.
Obviously you can spam attacks with a similar system, since wherever you hit and with any weapon, you will knock out your opponent in a number of hits that is less than 10.
What I wrote above has a very different meaning:
if you have a sword and you continuously use attacks against a warrior in plate armor and you continuously attack him ONLY on the torso, which is covered by the plate, not even after 50 hits you knock him to the ground.
Conversely, if your enemy has the joint between the torso and the arm (usually the shoulder or armpit) uncovered and you lunge there, then you could kill them in 2-3 hits.
DO YOU UNDERSTAND WHY YOU CANNOT SPAM with the system I propose?
simply because you would end up hitting only covered and well defended hurtboxes.
Do you understand that mordhau or how to spell it has nothing to do with what I said?

I understand what you are writing, that's why I brought up an action game example.

I get it that you want a game where one with the most sKiLL wins (For honor, Mordhau, Chivalry II) I am saying that this shouldn't be the case.

For "hardcore" players that want to demonstrate their skill and patience in killing enemies are mods like realistic fighting.

Chivalry II sounds like a game for you.
 
I understand what you are writing, that's why I brought up an action game example.

I get it that you want a game where one with the most sKiLL wins (For honor, Mordhau, Chivalry II) I am saying that this shouldn't be the case.

For "hardcore" players that want to demonstrate their skill and patience in killing enemies are mods like realistic fighting.

Chivalry II sounds like a game for you.

Thats dumb. Skyrim sounds like the game for you if you dont like skilled fighting.


See how that felt? Probably pretty dismissive as if you are the authority on the issue and the traffic cop of what game someone should play based off of their preference for difficulty and combat realism
 
The simple damage reduction does not reflect the superiority of the armor, because if you get 30 arrows that deal 100 base damage and you are in heavy armor (plate we assume) with a 90% reduction in damage, if you hit 10 arrows, you are dead.
Man I ****ing wish it took 10 arrows to kill me in the heaviest possible armor! That would be amazing! Only at max distance against militia archers can I take 10 ranged shots :sad: Any real fight and 1 shot is likely to knock off 40-70% HP.

Anyways, IMO Bannerlord is currently neither an action RPG or a parametric RPG as neither stats/perks or the AI of units in battle are deciding factors. Live battle is won by exploiting the stupidity of the AI parties and auto-calc depends on a very crude system that doesn't actually consider most things about units. I can park my party on the edge of the map and go solo the entire enemy HA and Cav formations, not because of some great action skills on my part, but because the AI's combat is completely incompetent, especially versus a single target. The I can move my ranged into position and without distraction they will wear down the remaining enemies as they slowly approach, not because of the great stats of my archers, but because the AI just wasn't made to move fast enough AND keep it's shield up and the AI just doesn't have any better ideas programed in other then just charging strait at me or remaining in place where the map tells them too "this is the defense spot".

I think your ideas are very good and I'm not trying to argue against them. I doubt TW will ever do anything like that though.
 
I think people here probably played too much and got bored, that's why they are all saying no.

I am someone who didn't play since the initial release, and tried a full campaign in 1.5.7. The game is quite a lot better, I definitely had a more enjoyable experience now in 1.5.7. I would say it's worth a campaign if you have time to kill, just don't expect stuff to be perfect.
Nope not the case. I am quit literally itching to play right now but I literally can't stand to play either my Vassal or King playthrough because of the constant non-stop wars going on against multiple factions.

I know combat is a lot the fun in the game but all that I am doing in my vassal playthrough is playing wack-a-mole trying to keep my villages from getting raided as enemy lords scurry around like cockroaches raiding the village I just left as I try to go run the raiders off at yet another one of my villages, all the while my Faction is off on the other side of the map fighting yet another faction despite half their territories burning and they won't even consider peace at good terms.

Then for my King playthrough, my lords want to fight the entire world. The keep voting to declare war over and over every 2-3 minutes with 100% support for war even though we are already struggling with the war(s) we currently are in.

It is just nonstop war for hours and hours and hours over and over and over without break and all I can do is watch all my villages burn and my cities starve while the AI for my faction continues to make illogical self-destructive decisions. It is also frustrating that even as a King, I don't have the power to keep my faction from declaring 3 wars at a time.

Also all the mods that might have fixed this have been abandoned so you can't even rely on a mob to make the game fun and playable.

So this is why I would recommend waiting for a while. There seems to be some good changes coming either in 1.5.9 or 1.5.10 that will have some very positive impacts on gameplay so I have quit until then myself. That is not to say I didn't get a good 30+ hours of enjoyable gameplay prior to all this ridiculousness happening.
 
Nope not the case. I am quit literally itching to play right now but I literally can't stand to play either my Vassal or King playthrough because of the constant non-stop wars going on against multiple factions.

I know combat is a lot the fun in the game but all that I am doing in my vassal playthrough is playing wack-a-mole trying to keep my villages from getting raided as enemy lords scurry around like cockroaches raiding the village I just left as I try to go run the raiders off at yet another one of my villages, all the while my Faction is off on the other side of the map fighting yet another faction despite half their territories burning and they won't even consider peace at good terms.

Then for my King playthrough, my lords want to fight the entire world. The keep voting to declare war over and over every 2-3 minutes with 100% support for war even though we are already struggling with the war(s) we currently are in.

It is just nonstop war for hours and hours and hours over and over and over without break and all I can do is watch all my villages burn and my cities starve while the AI for my faction continues to make illogical self-destructive decisions. It is also frustrating that even as a King, I don't have the power to keep my faction from declaring 3 wars at a time.

Also all the mods that might have fixed this have been abandoned so you can't even rely on a mob to make the game fun and playable.

So this is why I would recommend waiting for a while. There seems to be some good changes coming either in 1.5.9 or 1.5.10 that will have some very positive impacts on gameplay so I have quit until then myself. That is not to say I didn't get a good 30+ hours of enjoyable gameplay prior to all this ridiculousness happening.
There is little to do in late game anyway. I'm curious, what do you do when you already have money and strong army, except wars? In my opinion, permanent wars give us something to do. There is almost nothing to do at peace.
 
Back
Top Bottom