Tactical decisions on the battlefield should play a bigger role in deciding the tide of battle

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 2 (members: 0, guests: 2)
eddiemccandless said:
That wasn't really about the banners though. It was about how the uniforms look in battle. It's related, but not the same thing.
Click to expand...

Oh yeah, I'm guilty of using banner color and uniform color synonymously, because some units only barely have colored elements at all (Khuzait Heavy Lancers and Horsemen, Imperial Cataphracts, Asersai Vanguards).

mAtAtA said:
Also, we didn't have to play it back then to see the singleplayer videos that announced the awful banner design, so that does not excuse you from not using the search function properly, when claiming it was "the only" thread you have found.
Not only that, but as mentioned above, the thread you "found" is not about banners, but uniforms, and there was a much more important thread than that too
The Great Poll About Textile Color
You can have your opinion and it is your right, but how can anyone take you seriously after such false claims and lazy search, i really don't know, just made yourself discussion unworthy...
Just another example of miserably failed straw man . . .
Click to expand...

I never said I searched for anything and I didn't, but you can tell I saw the thread before because I'm in it.
 
Because its early access. Why everybody expects everything to be worked on / fixed at the same time.

ALso note, there are not that many people here on forums. Whilst the proposed changes and tactical depth are great and im +1, not eeverybody is. People maybe want arcade slamming rekt destruction. Its their choice.
So maybe be little extra considerate in pushing your opinion on everybody.

Aside all that, can we have better battles, optional AI maybe? Plox.
 
Callum said:
The game leans more on the action RPG side, with just elements of strategy sprinkled in here and there. The video in the OP is great, and I think that it is awesome that people are making these types of mods and that the game supports them, even at this early stage, but I think that something along those lines would be too complex to use as a player and draw the game out too much, ultimately detracting from the fast-paced action and gameplay.
Click to expand...
"yeah bro, our game is designed for idiot."
good job exposing yourself.
 
CzeReptile said:
ALso note, there are not that many people here on forums. Whilst the proposed changes and tactical depth are great and im +1, not eeverybody is. People maybe want arcade slamming rekt destruction. Its their choice.
So maybe be little extra considerate in pushing your opinion on everybody.
Click to expand...
You said it yourself, this is early access, we are playing it and giving feedback in order to make this game better in the full release, forum users are trying to give feedback, they should listen to us, not them. Also Bannerlord's combat system is soo flexible, they can just F1+F3 and charge I want some tactics and historical formations.
 
1115141208114 said:
Currently, Bannerlord suffers from the same thing that Warband did. Despite being given commands, I hardly find myself doing any tactical maneuvering on the battlefield besides ordering my troops to charge. This essentially leads to two blobs simply slamming into each other. It possesses no tactical depth and to be honest I'm surprised that Taleworlds hasn't fixed this with Bannerlord. One possible way to fix this is formations.
Take this mod as an example of how formations should actually be:


Essentially, the current decisions and formations you do in battle don't matter. All that matters is numbers.
Another thing that irks me about the battles is flanking maneuvers. Flanking maneuvers should be devastating not only to troops but to their morale. More often than not, it was a flanking maneuver that decided the tide of battle, which is why cavalry was such a critical unit.

In other words, its really disappointing that battles haven't changed since the days of Warband, and they should really be overhauled.
Click to expand...

+/-
 
Callum said:
The game leans more on the action RPG side, with just elements of strategy sprinkled in here and there. The video in the OP is great, and I think that it is awesome that people are making these types of mods and that the game supports them, even at this early stage, but I think that something along those lines would be too complex to use as a player and draw the game out too much, ultimately detracting from the fast-paced action and gameplay.
Click to expand...
what the **** man
 
well it would be nice to set up troops before the battle and to put them in parties .. this would stop some maps were your horse troops start on a cliff and fall of and are killed before the battle starts..and for those that want Pikes in one party H Inf in another and so on.
 
eddiemccandless said:
I really don't get it. Just how dumb do they think their playerbase is?
Click to expand...

Very. Kinda accurate too, considering how many were falling over their own feet to shout down and belittle anyone the least bit unhappy about this borderline scam of a release. You can still see this particular brand of simpleton parroting "it's EA!" even in this very thread.

So yeah, in conclusion: the playerbase is dumb. Me included, I bought the damn game, based on TW's previous releases/reputation. Won't repeat that mistake though.
 
For the sake of good vibes, proactivity, feedback and constructive criticism @azakhi @MArdA TaleWorlds @Duh_TaleWorlds

The OP's shared mod may be too complex for a more arcade-oriented audience, as it requires many key combinations to be used correctly. However, there is another mod that is a little friendlier and that has the function of follow me with relative positioning (Save Battle Formation aka Troops Follow In Formation). This other one, by pressing a toggle on/off key (K) allows to "anchor" the different formation to the player's relative position. This works great if you're going straight ahead; however if you're trying to spin in a block it doesn't work as well.

I am not an expert in programming, but I can see a very promising system in Bannerlord if you use the existing relative positioning of Viking Conquest (and those mods).

NGX9k.png

Imagining this concept on Bannerlord:

The examples are with zenithal view for better understanding, however its application would be at ground level as normally the orders are given in the game.

In example #1 we can see that I have arranged 5 divisions (D) of infantry troops manually around my avatar (center). To each one of them I have placed them, first selecting them by pressing key 1-2-..etc (D1/D2/...etc) + F1 giving it a shape to it's single formation. As in the mod, there would also be a key here that would do the same function; let's keep pressing K. After pressing K, the troops are already anchored to my relative position. If I advance, the troops will advance with me, if I stop; they will return to the initial relative position.

Here we have an interesting mechanic, let's go with another one.

Even in example #1 and keeping that "anchor" function still working, I am interested in having all my divisions rotate in a single block considering my relative position. Well, then I select them all by pressing the 6 key and I get ready to turn. Pressing F1 will show me the flags with which I could position the block in formation if I didn't have the anchor function (k key) in effect; but this time I only want to rotate. Then, F1 + hold RMB (plausible for practicality) would allow us to turn in block all the units to a direction marked by the user and subordinated to the relative position of this one. Similar to the face direction function but with a whole group of divisions.

Another interesting mechanic to add up, let's go with another one.

In example #2 I want to use the current game' s face enemy or face direction function but with the relative position concept activated. Then with anchor mode activated (k) I want only the troops I want to rotate from my block in formation (D2-D3-D4-D5) keeping D1 at the front unchanged. I'll give the orders, press key 2 (select D2) + F1+F2 and follow the same procedure for the rest. The divisions have turned in the direction I consider appropriate.

Another interesting mechanism to add up.

#1#2
78MVX.jpg
fzOJh.jpg

If this (or something similar) could be done, there would be a requirement for AI; no bot will leave the formation, never. As in VC, the bot will remain orderly in its position within the formation in a disciplined way. This mechanic could become a basic command panel at ground level and would be enhanced by the PBOD system which is expected to offer the "One step ahead" perk (Allow you to place your troops before all battles) with an aerial view.

I think that under the simplicity that Bannerlord offers nowadays hides a complex system that if it is reached can be turned into gold. ?
 
Lychee Nut said:
I seem to recall most posts on forums about 6 years ago wishing that Bannerlord was just an upgraded Warband, and that people didn't want a completely different game, many posts say things like "I just hope for a Warband with extra mechanics". I took that to mean people didn't want to see a change like from Fallout 1 and 2 being a Tactical time-based game to a real-time shooter, and it really doesn't elaborate on what people wanted. So when people complain about it not being more than what they had hoped for, its just like: where were you?

Taleworlds already stated that the beginning of the EA release will be about bug-fixing and stuff, that the new mechanics would be coming in later. Unfortunately we have no idea exactly when or even what they might just be considering. They have definitely started giving us more information but their post on future plans and focuses currently just covers a handful of things of which about half have been addressed in patches, such as perks, adding the ability to vote for war and peace, creating your own kingdom, General AI enhancements etc.
Click to expand...

I understand this argument a lot, and more or less is why I invested hundreds of hours into this game. The thing is, comparing BL to other games doesn't really work due to how unique. I think the majority of criticizers like myself are disappointed in the clear lack of fulfilling that potential, as opposed to being ripped off.

We were teased with content and a release date back in 2016, and I'm sure you can understand how when that was put off, people's expectations began building on top of just the regular "WB but prettier and modern". That being said, come 2020, and you can easily argue that in its current state, many mods and even VK outclass BL not due to lack of content by itself, but poor game design. Some might even say current BL is more lackluster than earlier builds shown(siege defense).
 
Callum said:
The game leans more on the action RPG side, with just elements of strategy sprinkled in here and there. The video in the OP is great, and I think that it is awesome that people are making these types of mods and that the game supports them, even at this early stage, but I think that something along those lines would be too complex to use as a player and draw the game out too much, ultimately detracting from the fast-paced action and gameplay.
Click to expand...
That's exactly how I thought of Bannerlord when I see the videos along with Warband, a fast paced action RPG game with some strategy, diplomacy, and NPC interaction thrown in, anything that's not part of the base vanilla are just mods, it's just that simple, there's nothing deep and complex about it. The problem is that most of the people in this forum think Bannerlord is somehow this deep, complex, realistic, immersive, and epic medieval the sims/crusader kingdoms/total war hybrid game on steroids 'everyone' in the universe craved for forged from the fires of the interwebs by an obscure, god-like 100-man indie company from the near east that can finish projects within the span of a week, the kind of work large scale AAA+ companies would normally take a year or two to finish.
 
meowwoofneigh said:
That's exactly how I thought of Bannerlord when I see the videos along with Warband, a fast paced action RPG game with some strategy, diplomacy, and NPC interaction thrown in, anything that's not part of the base vanilla are just mods, it's just that simple, there's nothing deep and complex about it. The problem is that most of the people in this forum think Bannerlord is somehow this deep, complex, realistic, immersive, and epic medieval the sims/crusader kingdoms/total war hybrid game on steroids 'everyone' in the universe craved for forged from the fires of the interwebs by an obscure, god-like 100-man indie company from the near east that can finish projects within the span of a week, the kind of work large scale AAA+ companies would normally take a year or two to finish.
Click to expand...

3 minutes battles and 5 minute sieges? :iamamoron:
 
The problem isn't that the game is too complex or too simple, but that it doesn't know what it wants to be. If they went full power fantasy and made this more like dynasty warriors but with directional combat, it would be loads of fun and would give Koei a run for its money. Similarly if they basically made "small scale total war but with a 3rd person avatar", it would be an amazing game. But it sits in this weird limbo with some features suggesting its the former and others the latter.

For example I wouldn't be so annoyed with the instantly respawning enemies if the game was just about racking up a billion kills with an overpowered multi-killing lance on horseback, but that isn't the case. I also wouldn't be annoyed with the early game grind if you literally started as a peasant in a proper feudal structure which was a real challenge to climb up. But neither of these things are true, and right now you have this strange hybrid between a very understated dynasty warriors and a very very very very stripped down total war.
 
I was just expecting a M&B game with at least the complexity and depth level of Total War, specifically the campaign. Total War is hardly the most complicated Strategy game out there. With battles, no one I think expected battles in Bannerlord to be exactly like Total War, but I think people expected it to go somewhat towards that direction. Bannerlord is supposed to be better, improved, more complex, more in-depth, more challenging. Not a dumbed-down experience from what we've had before.

If killing looters fight after fight was incredibly fun, then maybe this "action" focus could be warranted. The problem is that it's not fun. It's painfully repetitive. The fun of battles in the previous titles was when you had sticky and harrowing battles where you have to use strategy in order to win it. Hell, in the past, people including myself have literally explained M&B by simply saying: "It's like Total War, but you play as the general in third person and you're a combatant too, and you get to command your army."

Right now, every time a proper battle happens, it gets somewhat strategic, then everything falls apart and nothing is working properly, the bots don't operate like humans in a formation, your AI Commander's army is outnumbered, the recruits get messed the hell up by arrows, the Commander then says "Our plan is to overwhelm them", lose more men, back them up against the edge of the map, they get reinforcements, and then they outnumber you and destroy your army. This sums up a good chunk of battles when the AI is commanding. When you're in command, it's usually a case of "destroy their recruits with archers and let your elite infantry clean up the remaining recruits, while you go around and get in a wild goose chase with their small force of cavalry with your cavalry." That's 90% of battles.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

New Strategies for a more difficult game
Replies
7
Views
249
Ananda_The_Destroyer
Ananda_The_Destroyer
Is it possible to invite the clans from fiefless kingdom in future patch?
Replies
2
Views
371
viperswhip
Consul_Kaiser
Revert back to the Warband System for Formations/Unit Assignments
2
Replies
25
Views
1K
archaicwarrior
archaicwarrior
Back
Top Bottom