Statement regarding Plans for Singleplayer and Engine III

Users who are viewing this thread

I think the elephant in the room is the fear that what is on the previous (...this topic lol) is all that's going to be done for the game. We want more and there's no nice way to say it. SO every month that goes by without any "and after that we're gonna add" is a problem. On top of that, there's all the vague "we will continue to work on X Y Z" that is concerning because it's never going to be enough to just tinker with the combat AI and damage formulas. It needs to be overhauled with a real vision and design for how combat and types of troops are expected to perform and playout!
 
Is there an ETA for the feature of being able to use mods while playing the game on a streaming/cloud gaming service like Nvidia GeForce Now? I haven't seen anything on this topic and that would be a needed add, also because the game is available on GeForce Now since launch.

(Also why on earth the option to continue as one of your troops after you die is not a vanilla option?)

Thank you
 
Is there an ETA for the feature of being able to use mods while playing the game on a streaming/cloud gaming service like Nvidia GeForce Now? I haven't seen anything on this topic and that would be a needed add, also because the game is available on GeForce Now since launch.
That is currently not part of our plans and even if we were to add it, we would likely prioritize general modding capabilities, custom servers & steam workshop over it (aka do those first).

(Also why on earth the option to continue as one of your troops after you die is not a vanilla option?)
Mount&Blade is more oriented towards a "human" player character. I think that experience would be reduced if you had body shifting in SP missions. That's my take, but, whatever the case - this is not (currently) desired for the base game.
 
I think the elephant in the room is the fear that what is on the previous (...this topic lol) is all that's going to be done for the game. We want more and there's no nice way to say it.
I agree, but with the proviso that "We want more of what we were led to believe would be in the game."

It sounds a bit unreasonable to just blanket ask for more because it implies we just want TW to be our personal genies. But it is very reasonable to ask for things which were either in the last game in the series, or things which were announced previously but have apparently been forgotten, things which enticed people to buy the game.

So I want to see a statement from TW about:
- nobles visiting the player's kingdom hall when they wish to strike a defection bargain (WB), or some equivalent feature that makes it easier to get in contact with nobles
- Feasts (WB)
- minor faction bases (advertised pre-EA)
- manhunters + deserters (WB)
- player-owned alley criminal enterprises (advertised pre and post-EA)
- skill books (WB) or an equivalent like skill trainers
- surprise attacks by bandits/drunks in town (WB)
- noble duels (WB)
- fighting your way out after failing to sneak into a town (WB)

Buyers who made the reasonable assumptions that (A) a sequel would carry over the features people liked, and (B) Taleworlds would do what they said, deserve to know about these.

If all of these were to be done in addition to the stuff in the future plans statement, and all existing features made to function properly, Bannerlord would be a feature-complete game and good sequel. Taleworlds would have fulfilled their obligations.
 
That is currently not part of our plans and even if we were to add it, we would likely prioritize general modding capabilities, custom servers & steam workshop over it (aka do those first).


Mount&Blade is more oriented towards a "human" player character. I think that experience would be reduced if you had body shifting in SP missions. That's my take, but, whatever the case - this is not (currently) desired for the base game.
Thank you.

Actually it seems that Steam workshop would enable Mods on cloud platforms like GeForce now. So this would do the job for you, right?
 
Last edited:
-no feasts or events.
-no claimants/usurpers
-no cutscenes
-randomly generated companions < jeremus
-no promised gang/brigand playstyle
-villages don't count as fiefs, only useless castles and town do.
-no upgradable villages
-no manhunters
-no naval combat
-RtR system from Warband discarded, a clown could become a faction leader overnight.
-no books or trainers.
-no hitmens targeting you/random encounters like the belligerent drunk.
-no lords consipiring on each others, no duels. 0 political intrigue.
-no political quests and denouncement quests.
-no deserters
-no deeper courtships, just gamble rng, no poems.
-no real reason to visit towns/castle/villages at all.
-no camping.
-lots of other content removed/discarded.
-meme ingame economy.
-meme ingame diplomacy.
-lots of exploit-early game is a chore/boring.
-meme mid-late game
 
-no feasts or events.
-no claimants/usurpers
-no cutscenes
-randomly generated companions < jeremus
-no promised gang/brigand playstyle
-villages don't count as fiefs, only useless castles and town do.
-no upgradable villages
-no manhunters
-no naval combat
-RtR system from Warband discarded, a clown could become a faction leader overnight.
-no books or trainers.
-no hitmens targeting you/random encounters like the belligerent drunk.
-no lords consipiring on each others, no duels. 0 political intrigue.
-no political quests and denouncement quests.
-no deserters
-no deeper courtships, just gamble rng, no poems.
-no real reason to visit towns/castle/villages at all.
-no camping.
-lots of other content removed/discarded.
-meme ingame economy.
-meme ingame diplomacy.
-lots of exploit-early game is a chore/boring.
-meme mid-late game

Dang - i knew something felt missing..
 
-no feasts or events.
While it would be nice from an RP'ing perspective, I don't think it should be a priority since the goal of feasts in Warband was to meet potential brides and improve relationship with lords, which is incredibly easy to do in Bannerlord.
-no claimants/usurpers
True, it would be nice to see them added.
-no cutscenes
Don't really see a point in cutscenes. Cutscenes for what exactly?
-randomly generated companions < jeremus
I actually really like the idea RNG companions, it just needs some tweaking to not make the companions all appear to be copy/paste. The game is in real time so really unique companions with their own individual lore aren't sustainable since they'll die eventually. A lot of people like me like to play long, slow campaigns because it's more realistic and fun to RP and companions like the ones in Warband will just eventually die.
-no promised gang/brigand playstyle
I agree with this, it's not sustainable to play as a bandit character, but let's be honest, it was like this in Warband as well. But with Bannerlord you can't even play as an evil character since executing enemy lords have really drastic relationship loss with a double digit number of clans.
-villages don't count as fiefs, only useless castles and town do.
Agreed. I think villages should be offered as fiefs. This would also add an opportunity to add more minor tier 2 clans who hold a single fief like a village.
-no upgradable villages
Ties into the last issue, there just really isn't anything you can do with villages. They just make some money and can be raided, that's it.
-no manhunters
I would like to see them added but I can imagine them being annoying in the early game when they're wiping out bandit parties that you wanted.
-no naval combat

On the topic of naval combat, it would be a very nice addition and was implemented very well in Viking Conquest. But there's a lot of stuff right now that should take priority before adding something major like that.
-RtR system from Warband discarded, a clown could become a faction leader overnight.
Yeah, a separate point system should be added in order to become a ruler of a faction.
-no books or trainers.
I agree with adding books.
-no hitmens targeting you/random encounters like the belligerent drunk.
A classic Warband feature, but really pointless. It would be more of a fanservice addition.
-no lords consipiring on each others, no duels. 0 political intrigue.
I agree. Lords should have beef with each other and be relevant. Like helping out a certain lord should decrease relationship slightly with another lord. There's no point in a lord's encyclopedia page having a list of friends and enemies if those relationships really don't do anything.
-no political quests and denouncement quests.
True, I guess it would add to more quest diversity.
-no deserters
Agreed. There should be deserter parties.
-no deeper courtships, just gamble rng, no poems.
The courtship/marriage feature really needs to be fleshed out and have more depth added. It would also add one more reason to actually visit cities in order to visit bards for poems.
-no real reason to visit towns/castle/villages at all.
Agreed.
-no camping.
This is actually something I've thought about and it really bothers me that TW completely cut out this feature. I really liked how camps in Viking Conquest were done and that you could upgrade them into little mobile forts and hire staff.
-lots of other content removed/discarded.
Yep
-meme ingame economy.
Agreed
-meme ingame diplomacy.
True
-lots of exploit-early game is a chore/boring.
Early game is indeed a chore, but really not that difficult, it's just grinding.
-meme mid-late game
The mid-game where you're a mercenary and have a decent army is actually the most fun in my opinion. Recent patches have made being a mercenary very sustainable and there's no incentive to become a lord right away once you're able to, since you'll lose your mercenary income.
 
While it would be nice from an RP'ing perspective, I don't think it should be a priority since the goal of feasts in Warband was to meet potential brides and improve relationship with lords, which is incredibly easy to do in Bannerlord.
RPing and improving relations were not the only benefits of feasts. They were also very useful by making lords/ladies stop in one place for a good amount of time so you could actually catch up to them and talk to them about starting/handing in quests, marriages, and (after the feast is over in a neutral kingdom) defections. It is very annoying and difficult to track people down in Bannerlord to talk to them, so feasts would make a big improvement even for that. They also gave the player another activity to add needed variety to the gameplay loop, and were important for immersion in the world by seeing lords engage in normal human activities once in a while instead of fighting all the time. From an alternative playstyle perspective, they are also a way of getting Influence for a non-combat skills playthrough (considering relations did most of the gameplay role of Influence in Warband).

Plus, most of the material for feasts already exists, so it would be easy to do. All they need to do is make an AI occasionally invite the clans they don't hate over to their hall during peacetime for a week. In the feast scene, re-use the tavern music players and dancers, re-use the feast dialogue from Warband, and add +1 relation when you speak to feast guests. If war starts, cancel feast. Straightforward.

For the player hosting feasts, a simple menu to choose which clans you invite, and a slider to choose how much money to spend - which increases relation gained with guests. Plus influence gain per guest who turns up.

Feasts had multiple benefits for gameplay and immersion and are something which many many players want to see return, so they should be a priority.
But with Bannerlord you can't even play as an evil character since executing enemy lords have really drastic relationship loss with a double digit number of clans.
Agreed, the problem is that nobles have too many friends outside their own faction. So that if I kill Unthery in Vlandia, for some reason that enormously pisses off Monchug on the literal other side of the continent, who never ever comes into contact with the guy.

Nobles need less friends outside their kingdom.
I would like to see them added but I can imagine them being annoying in the early game when they're wiping out bandit parties that you wanted.
Manhunters tended to just keep bandits in check in WB rather than wiping them all out.
But there's a lot of stuff right now that should take priority before adding something major like that (naval combat)
Yep, as it wasn't in the last mainline M&B title and TW never said it would be in Bannerlord either, there's no basis for expecting it in Bannerlord.

I would happily buy a DLC of naval travel/combat/Nord faction though.
A classic Warband feature, but really pointless. It would be more of a fanservice addition.
Not pointless. Being ambushed by belligerent drunks/bandit thugs/assassins adds needed variety to gameplay, ties back into the main gameplay loop with monetary and skill gains, makes civilian outfits more useful as a gameplay mechanic where right now they have barely any purpose, and increases the use of town scene interiors which currently the player hardly ever has any gameplay reason to go into.

The player's combat skills are also not important enough in gameplay right now, as after the early game you will be fighting in battles of 100-1000 combatants where your combat skills barely matter to the outcome. So fighting off the occasional assassin attempt on your life in the lategame will make your personal combat skills relevant, be exciting, and provide a nice variety from the usual lategame loop of endless sieges, field battles, and menus.
I agree. Lords should have beef with each other and be relevant. Like helping out a certain lord should decrease relationship slightly with another lord. There's no point in a lord's encyclopedia page having a list of friends and enemies if those relationships really don't do anything.
+1
The mid-game where you're a mercenary and have a decent army is actually the most fun in my opinion. Recent patches have made being a mercenary very sustainable and there's no incentive to become a lord right away once you're able to, since you'll lose your mercenary income.
Early game is quite good and midgame mercenary is fun, but midgame vassal and lategame kingdom are certainly an exercise in repetitive, horrible frustration.

An endless cycle of sieges, menus, field battles, sieges, menus, field battles, sieges, menus, field battles, sieges, menus, field battles, sieges, menus, field battles, with no different gameplay to break it up... While you also deal with flawed strategic AI, battles that are too imbalanced (thanks to dumb cavalry and weak armour) to have tactical depth, having to waste time personally tracking down mercenaries and defectors, and many other annoyances. But even if those annoyances were solved it would still be so repetitive.

This is why they need more variety in the form of things like political quests, duels, fighting off assassination attempts, and feasts, all of which provide the player with some sort of challenge and a reward for completing that challenge which gets them closer to their goal of conquering the map.
 
I actually really like the idea RNG companions, it just needs some tweaking to not make the companions all appear to be copy/paste. The game is in real time so really unique companions with their own individual lore aren't sustainable since they'll die eventually. A lot of people like me like to play long, slow campaigns because it's more realistic and fun to RP and companions like the ones in Warband will just eventually die.

This is not a difficult thing to overcome. General likes and dislikes based off Lore Data and anything recent could be plugged via very rudimentary variable plugging.
 
I've remember seeing one dev (I don't know which one and I don't like pointing fingers) at some point mentioning something along the lines of 'the intended criminal feature is already in the game'

BUT

I could be VERY wrong.... did a small search and couldn't find the post
So, there's that
 
I've remember seeing one dev (I don't know which one and I don't like pointing fingers) at some point mentioning something along the lines of 'the intended criminal feature is already in the game'

BUT

I could be VERY wrong.... did a small search and couldn't find the post
So, there's that
TaleWorlds Data Security officers have scrubbed the net of all previous promises, development plans and even the man himself
 
Armagan hasn't been seen on these forums since 2 years ago when he told someone he would personally look into South American server providers as soon as possible. He must have meant it literally - he's actually travelled to Brazil to open up every server box.
 
Armagan hasn't been seen on these forums since 2 years ago when he told someone he would personally look into South American server providers as soon as possible. He must have meant it literally - he's actually travelled to Brazil to open up every server box.
:grin: Finally, that case is cracked by our top detective.
 
Armagan hasn't been seen on these forums since 2 years ago when he told someone he would personally look into South American server providers as soon as possible. He must have meant it literally - he's actually travelled to Brazil to open up every server box.

D6v5d--WwAAz8ha.jpg
 
-no feasts or events.
-no claimants/usurpers
-no cutscenes
-randomly generated companions < jeremus
-no promised gang/brigand playstyle
-villages don't count as fiefs, only useless castles and town do.
-no upgradable villages
-no manhunters
-no naval combat
-RtR system from Warband discarded, a clown could become a faction leader overnight.
-no books or trainers.
-no hitmens targeting you/random encounters like the belligerent drunk.
-no lords consipiring on each others, no duels. 0 political intrigue.
-no political quests and denouncement quests.
-no deserters
-no deeper courtships, just gamble rng, no poems.
-no real reason to visit towns/castle/villages at all.
-no camping.
-lots of other content removed/discarded.
-meme ingame economy.
-meme ingame diplomacy.
-lots of exploit-early game is a chore/boring.
-meme mid-late game
Nice list, I agree all this is extremely desirable for the Singleplayer and sounds very inviting to receive high priority within a roadmap (where's an updated roadmap, though?). The only thing worth pointing out is that all the listed Warband features had been designed to fit organically into a feudal medieval setting which is no more a case for Bannerlord. However, I'd say that most of these features would still make sense or could be easily adjusted to present in Bannerlord setting (which is a very stretched and anacronistic attempt for the early medieval period anyway).
 
Back
Top Bottom