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

[Kipsta]

Its becoming more and more clear that this is a warband reboot/remaster rather than an actual sequel.

Well at least the engine is way better this time around and way more moddable which is still the most important change to me.

 

[ShakenSpeare]

Its becoming more and more clear that this is a warband reboot/remaster rather than an actual sequel.

I think that's actually a generous view, Bannerlord in many ways has gone backward from Warband and is hardly a remaster. If you count VC as an official M&B game, then it is a step back in almost every way except graphical quality.

 

[Callum]

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.

 

[Terco_Viejo]

Most of these issues would be fixed by having the AI in different formations that they almost never break off from. The idea of a charge command where people pick their own individual targets is ridiculous. Formations should only be commanded to attack other formations directly, not run around like lunatics with a thirst for death. It's so stupid when you see a guy running at you when he's completely surrounded and bound to die. Only looters should attack out of formation, and if your army is big enough they should just surrender the moment you touch their army.

I totally agree. Something halfway between what was achieved in VC and the formation boxes of the typical rts style game.


Why don't we have this behavior on Bannerlord as a natural evolution?

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.

"Too complex", "not fun for the player"... every time I read this kind of comment I think if you (Taleworlds) really know what your target/customer/fan wants.

 

[Sidhwen_Khorest]

@Callum are there any additions to commands that you think could be added? for example, something like "use spears!" for your infantry to make sure they can brace themselves for a cavalry charge? I feel like those would be simple enough to not be a burden but still effective.

 

[Piconi]

"Too complex", "not fun for the player"... every time I read this kind of comment I think if you (Taleworlds) really know what your target/customer/fan wants.

I really don`t know where are these hordes of "players" that find such many things too complex and not fun. Same for the monocolor banners. Same for some scrapped features i won`t mention because its too hurtful to me. Same for many other dumbed down features.
Where are those "players" ?
Old or new, all the players show very similar preferences when it comes to SP features, and it`s not the dumbed down versions we now have....

 

[froggyluv]

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.

You would be dead wrong on that. The old "lets keep the game accessible.." is an affront to every gamer everywhere wanting to see the advancement of AI and strategy. The player you speak of would always have access to the f3 and f6 keys.

 

[Julio-Claudian]

You would be dead wrong on that. The old "lets keep the game accessible.." is an affront to every gamer everywhere wanting to see the advancement of AI and strategy. The player you speak of would always have access to the f3 and f6 keys.

Yeah this is what has basically ruined Total War games.

 

[sniparsexe]

would be too complex to use as a player and draw the game out too much

I think everyone on this forum would want that, medieval games should have medieval features, even if it is complex or not. Bannerlord's battles are fun but a complete mess, I'm trying to use historical battle formations but it doesn't work the way it should work.

 

[Kentucky 『 ＨＥＩＧＵＩ 』 James]

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.

This is the same game where you spend hours in the early game fighting the same looter battle over and over, and where you spend the lategame fighting literally tens of thousands of enemies. The game would "drag" a lot less if the individual battles were more involved.

 

[Piconi]

The game would "drag" a lot less if the individual battles were more involved.

Agreed. Not to mention that there is already the "autoresolve battle" function for those that don't want to micromanage the battle, or they can simply f1 f3 every time, that option will always be there.

 

[gopat]

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.

This post is a little disheartening to read. Bannerlord would definitely benefit from the use of tactics being more effective for both player and AI commanders, even fairly small changes to current mechanics could improve this.

Currently AI acts more individually than as an army and it's very noticeable and impossible to manage at certain points in battle, for example if I tell a line of archers to face a certain direction they will still turn and engage flanking cavalry...even if it's only one or two enemies, when really they should be prioritising the mass of infantry or archers I've told them to face.

AI commanders will often place archers behind infantry so they're unable to fire, even when the enemy is far from engaging. Even worse is when AI commanders mix ranged and infantry units together in a blob...what is the point in having archers if they can't have space to fire? The same can be said for most skirmisher units which AI always mix with normal infantry.

Cavalry often always charges in first by themselves, even if they're completely out numbered...it would be far more effective if they charged after infantry lines were clashing, to harass archers or impede enemy cavalry.

Formations still struggle to stay together when on the move. As soon as the charge command is issued the AI homes in pretty much on the same target rather than keeping formation. I'm aware the advance command allows units to stay in formation better but currently any unit with a throwing weapon wont approach an enemy any closer than throwing distance which renders them useless.

I think one of the reasons using commands seems too in depth at the moment is because you have to micro manage each type of unit individually (ranged, infantry, skirmishers, cavalry, shock troops), it really becomes a chore if you want each unit type to be most effective. This becomes extremely difficult to deal with once your troops are clashing with the enemy. It would be a lot simpler to save a few custom formations that you know work for your army composition and be able to move your troops as a whole like in OP's vid.

 

[remorse]

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.

It shouldn't play like an RTS, but melee combat in formation should be supported better for the benefit of both the vanilla game and the people who want Total War: Bannerlord.
Shieldwalls, to start with.

I think it's clear at least some of the developers agree with this given how much emphasis was put on shieldwall combat in some devblogs, lore, a promo video i'm pretty sure existed but i can't find right now, etc, the existence of an entire faction (Sturgia) based around such combat, and a hotfix that attempted to improve the current situation a little (https://www.taleworlds.com/en/News/344).

But right now trying to fight in a shieldwall is still pretty futile. Troops can't hit the enemy since they block each other, most troops don't attack since they know that they're blocked, the front ranks hold their shields up permanently instead of attacking in openings, polearm users should be great from behind the shields but can't attack, recruits without shields wrongly stand in the front row, telling them to charge breaks the wall, etc.

Formations need some work.

 

[MostBlunted]

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.

Then we wouldn´t have loved Warband and played it for 1000 hours.

But at least this explains at lot of the decisions TW made. We didn´t want a dumbed down Warband, we wanted a better Warband (more complex) with improved graphics.

 

[StewVader]

Bannerlord battles look great on the surface level, until you get past the surface level and you realize how garbage everything is and how nothing works the way it should.

Ding ding ding! Nailed it.

 

[StewVader]

I totally agree. Something halfway between what was achieved in VC and the formation boxes of the typical rts style game.


Why don't we have this behavior on Bannerlord as a natural evolution?

"Too complex", "not fun for the player"... every time I read this kind of comment I think if you (Taleworlds) really know what your target/customer/fan wants.

What are you talking about? Who are you talking about? I'm pretty sure the players of this game want more complexity and more options and agency. Not simply "the fast-paced action and gameplay" which is actually boring and repetitive and without substance.

 

[MostBlunted]

No, we totally want a Call of Duty Warband

 

[Ikea Knight]

, 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.

Callum's statement made me really sad :/

I am just going to quote myself here.

The three commands you are actually using are:
Follow me!
Build a shieldwall!
And: Charge!

And depending on your unit: Hold your Fire.

Formations like the Square or the Circle are pointless with cav being so weak.

The Column and Skein don't have any benefits either because any form of tacticl advance get's lost after ordering charge.


I personally think that the AI should really be the core piece, the crown jewel of Mount and Blade.

There are other games, where you, yourself can fight as a knight like Chivalry, Mordhau or Kingdom Come.

There are other games, where you have armies pitched against each other in large scale battles like Total War.

But there is no game, where both of these things are combined.
Of course there are other things you can do, that are unique to Mount and Blade, but most people enjoy Mount and Blade because of the battles.

The battles in Warband were great because they were clunky, but unique. But now after hundreds of hours in those battles, we really need the upgrade. We need the new depth, because everybody has seen the same battles again and again in Warband.

I would be happy, if Bannerlord gets remembered for the Ai and awesome battles above everything else.

We get complex trading, we get complex character relations and we get complex character progression.
But making the battles, one of the things you spent most of your active time (so not just point, click and wait on the overworld) on, is okay to neglect?
Then we can also go back on the armies and commanding different units as a commander. And we can also go back to Warbands Sieges, because what we have now is too complex aswell. Hell we can even remove all the current formations as they are barely useful anyway.
Honestly I hope it was just Callum's personal opinion and that we get more strategy stuff.

 

[mikeboix]

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.

Sad, Callum, really sad. For once you posted something that didn't look like a changelog bot posting, and then you make your fanbase look like simpletons who are not able to handle some tactics in battle.
Really, really sad.

 

[WhiteEyedSh4rk]

I haven't played large scale battles in Bannerlords sp, only battles in mp. There its really all about tactics. Is it really that different in sp?

Its becoming more and more clear that this is a warband reboot/remaster rather than an actual sequel.

Everyone is allways complaining about the new things n Bannerlord, that aren't like in Warband and now suddenly people are complaining that its too much like Warband?!