-
If you are reporting a bug, please head over to our Technical Support section for Bannerlord.
Taleworlds needs to hold themselves accountable and admit that many key decisions regarding multiplayer have backfired.
- Thread starter EbdanianAdmiral
- Start date
Users who are viewing this thread
Zoonanay
Knight
Agreed I think Skirmish in some form could succeed, but there are alot of problems ahead. Multiple spawns means time-constraint objectives are hard to implement, as you might have to make a long walk twice due to spawns. Due to the many varying time differences to get to a objective you either have a system too lax and sometimes ignored, or too stringent and controlling flags becomes more important than being more skilled than your opponent. The perfect balance between these is what makes CSGO's bomb retakes so exciting or League's tower pushes so intense.
Perhaps a set of objectives each team has to complete in order to either win or set in motion an event that can lead to victory would encourage more focused gameplay. There should be something more focused than 3 flags between 6 people though, especially considering the size of some maps.
If by Generals mode you refer to a large scale AI battle each army controlled by a single player with their own composition of troops, agreed it might work as well if not better than Captain's in current form. Games only require 2 players which means long queues will be unlikely. It also maintains a lot of individual player agency that MP provides as well as the grandness of SP battles.
Oh wow, imagine a game where different passives weren't visually represented. I be that game would be really unsuccessful. Wait, you're telling me that literally every game has this? That there's complex item trees explicitly dedicated to this purpose in the most popular games in the world?
Wow that's surprising to me since I don't play online games.
Did you read my previous post? I said if you decide to use arguments you should at least stay true to them. I clearly said i didn't agree with it.
Yes, because it wouldn't give us the impression they put 0 thought behind the class system, and them being so stubborn about it.
If you do something stupid, at least make it credible. That's if i was TW.
But competitive doesnt want them either, it limits our freedom to create better strategies too much.
If TW are struggling to balance one system I don't want to see them attempt two at the same time
Honestly I think the best path forward is just to stick with the class system and make it work best they can. Even if that means just adding so many options to it that it might as well be Warband 2.0 anyway.
I wonder if each class has say 10 or 12 perks each (and lets say they were actually balanced) would people be able to accept the class system? Especially if some or most of those perks came with additional gold costs built in.
I dont think that would work either, we still wouldnt have as many options as in Warband, and again, why would a game created in 2020 have a weaker system than one created in 2010? Would you accept if the new iphone came out with less features than the ones before, but also costing twice as much?
Thats the problem, we dont know, because nothing is being communicated in a proper way. Everything is so vague that we have to assume everything. And with how the development has been going so far, we assume the worst.
AVRC's statement could mean anything. Theres tons of ways to understand that. Having to decide wether you use a spear or a javelin is a different way of playing the class. Picking an axe instead of sword is a different way. Again its so vague
A step in the right direction is like ok you're no longer coughing blood but yes your heart, lungs and kidneys are all shutting down, lets hope the patient survives long enough while we work on that broken toe.
Well that would kill competitive right there. It'd make it even more like rock paper scissors...
Not without making it clear the perks have been selected. If I do 99 damage to an enemy and I call a cav over to bump him, hes dead. I wont stick around I'll move to the next target and fight to avoid wasting time. If he has life regen he might not die, I wouldve played perfectly correct, but I'd be punished because he happened to have a perk I didnt know he had. Same with bashing, I've tanked shield bashes knowing he cant really punish me anyway, and he'd open up to attack which a teammate can take advantage of and get the kill. If thats randomly improved, it limits my potential play. Rock paper scissor in a skill based game sucks.
Gaining + damage or + head armour had its purpose to, it gave you something to progress towards. The class system isnt bad just because it limits freedom of picking equipment, it also limits any sense of progression. You start out with 1000 gold, and then if you survive, or you kill, you get rewarded by having more gold. You use this gold to upgrade yourself, from a common soldier to a beastly killing machine. Skill is rewarded, even in a team based game. Warband had a class system, a incredibly well crafted one. If you have a perfectly working system, why change it? If the vast majority of players dont like the new change, why keep it? Sounds like pure arrogance to me.
Maybe but that doesnt matter if we dont get to see them. They could have a perfectly working awesome game on their private servers and it means absolutely nothing until I get to play it. I certainly hope it doesnt take them 3 months to re-make vlandia cosmetics, if so the 8 year development might be accurate.
We're in 1.4.1 right? At this rate 1.5 would be after summer? I'll be gone by then, my loyalty to the franchise has its limits. I love the genre but theres other games to play and projects to put my focus on.
I don't mind passive perks, but they're hinting perks that have too much of a significant impact on the character like passive generation which is insanely OP.
But if i could choose between both of them, i would choose to not have passive perks. It doesn't fit the game.
Change it back i say 
Warbands system was far from perfect though; it was a functional system yes but it did have a LOT of flaws. So much so that NeoGK became the new normal - because it actually fixed some of the glaring issues (such as one of the factions being literally banned from every server).
I can't offer anything with that. TW are slow and it will probably take time. IF your limit is by the end of summer I would recommend you cut your losses now - or just come back in a few months time and see how it's going. Nothing is going to change that quickly.
You make it sound like this is something new. Perk based systems are very very very common in MP these days for both highly successful competitive games and for games in a similar genre to M&B. You can't honestly say that these don't work in competitive MP games if you have played literally any other MP game in the last half a decade?!
Depends how much it was; if it was say 1HP ever 3-4 seconds it would be completely valueless during a fight. Assuming I'm a class with 100 HP thats a full health bar back after 5 minutes or so? It would probably only be of value in extended battles where you have survived one fight and are now repositioning. I don't think that would break the game at all.
NeoGK became the norm on most TDM/Event servers because it allowed use of siege equipment, expanded the amount of weapons and armor there was available, and had a few other neat fun features. But that's all it was, it was fun but not balanced at all. On NA (can't speak for other regions) NeoGK was not used on battle servers because it contributed nothing towards an actual functioning balanced system it was simply more fun for the casual players that did not mind getting a bomb dropped on their head or wanting to walk around in full plate armor. Also Khergits were banned from the competitive community for balance a long time ago. The reason you would not see Khergs on public servers (on NA) is because most popular servers were run by competitive players. Servers that were not so competitive oriented still used Khergits such as GK servers.
Warband's system may not have been perfect but its fundamentals worked well enough that it went mostly unchanged for 10 years worth of competitive tournaments and various mods built off it rather than totally revamping it. Some minor improvements to it would have been appreciated far more than the current system.
I struggle to think of any competitive games that eschew the option to pick equipment and instead use perks. Some games have perks and equipment choice (Call of Duty, Mordhau), some games have very limited or no equipment choice but very different characters (R6, Overwatch), some games have no initial equipment choice and only cosmetic options, but have very in depth equipment and levelling options per match (MOBAS), some games have no perks but lots of equipment/economy options (CS, Valorant). What games do perks like Bannerlord does it? I genuinely can't think of any.
Classes are fine as long as they become significantly more customizable. For example don't force the spear infantry to take a spear if the players wants to go throwing weapons instead. Right now there are 3 possibilities for choosing specific perk equipment, but how about adding more options to increase customization abilities. I kind of like it that people don't spawn naked in skirmish because it annoyed me in Warband.
In any case, it is kind of pointless to argue about the class system because it was already mentioned that it will stay. I just hope that it will become significantly more customizable and everything shall be fine
In any case, it is kind of pointless to argue about the class system because it was already mentioned that it will stay. I just hope that it will become significantly more customizable and everything shall be fine
RCC_God
Knight
Also to add on to the neo gk point, banning khergs Was a huge discussion within the gk tdm community. I found them super annoying so I want them banned, and a lot of people agreed and disagreed with me. Neo gk was always more of a fun mod than a balance mod because no way it was balanced. It just added more variety and flavor at the cost of faction balance.
But GK admins added them back even though they knew it was unbalanced. They dominated easily on open map and were destroyed easily on close map, mostly because people joining khergits would actually play the faction's strength(HA and cav), unlike the tdm weak factions (nids and nords) where players would just go naked with throwing weps.
imagine thinking the neogk bit is true, were you a tdm-only pub player? it'd make sense why you seem so braindead
NeoGK also added a pistol that one hit kills at any distance and shoots through shields and still takes atleast 50% of your health bar, lets not pretend thats a good idea . Khergit was banned not because of the equipment, but because horse archery is broken and not fun to play against. It was lack of balance that killed Khergit, not their inventory. In fact any equipment that a faction was given is all balance issues, and has nothing to do with it being a choice.
You can say the warband system was difficult to understand (I think thats wildly incorrect and if this confuses people theres not much hope for them) or that it doesnt give them any real choice in equipment (which again I disagree with as I've mentioned before) but thats it. These things could easily have been looked into without throwing out one of the best systems I've played with.
If a 10 year veteran, whos lead one of the oldest clans in the game, made one of the biggest communties, contributed servers both public and to tournaments and commentated probably a hundred matches by now decides to leave not because I'm no longer enjoying the game but because the decisions being made are stupid, I hardly think I'm the only one to say goodbye. Right now everyone I talk to, both competitive and casual prefer warband over bannerlord. Everytime I glance over my friends list, this is usually what I see:
Taken at 23:20 ish, ofcourse this is just my friends list so take it with a grain of salt.
Perks are definitly not new, and where are the medieval games that use perks now? Hows war of the roses doing? If it was a better game I wouldve played that instead of continuing to play Warband. I actually said if Bannerlord had perks I wouldnt be playing it back in like 2014 or so as a joke because I didnt think they'd actually copy a system inferior to their own. Those were the days....
If the regen is that slow it'll only make overall gameplay more passive.
Early game archery duels will end up being oh I got shot for 30 damage guys wait up dont push I'll just heal this back up. Either that or it wont matter, making it useless and not worth taking. And considering how little info is given about the mechanics Im guessing the stats wouldnt have been shown on the regen, making it a potential noob trap. "Gives your character a passive life regeneration" is not information.
"Gives your character 5 health every 3 seconds" is information.
Ok but should Bannerlord focus the game on Competitive people or for more Casual Players who just want to have fun.
Focus on casual and you will have competitive people.
Similar threads
