Taleworlds, this is false advertising and you know it

Users who are viewing this thread

I do believe it's the exact same on Nexus, Singleplayer mods much more popular than Multiplayer. Can't see a way to sort them on Moddb.

Not saying I believe these mods are better either, just that Singleplayer mods are much more popular.

I saw the same on ModDB. I would dare say that NW was super super popular though, but of course when I went to go find the steamcharts page on it I found that it just DOESN'T EXIST, which really sucks. I would argue that SP mods being more popular makes sense, simply because of the differences in community. People who play MP religiously do it for the skill and challenge, or for RP... which means you usually stick with one or a handful of mods, or simply stick to native. MP servers are hugely populated. I really don't think one community is larger than the other at any meaningful level.

You're right but the arrows deal less damage

Hence "Arguably", haha
 
This shouldn't be an argument between the singleplayer and multiplayer communities lol. Improving the combat is a win win for everyone. Any opinion against improving the state of combat is moronic. People need to stop fanboying out, and be able to admit when their are very obvious issues with the game. With that said though, singleplayer guys should probably take a backseat in conversations dealing with the intricacies of m&b combat. I'm sorry, but fighting bots is not going to allow you to have a full understanding, or informed opinion about the issues a lot of us have with certain game mechanics.
Kicks don't work properly still. Chambers don't work properly still. The latter two are basic mechanics that were present in Warband, and they are SUPPOSED to be present here, but they are non-functional or not functioning as they ideally should.
As a long time competitive wb player, I couldn't agree more with this. This has been my main issue with bl combat for a while now. I never expected bl's combat to be an exact copy/paste of wb's, but to not have these basic mechanics working properly at this point is unsettling. However, they have made huge improvements since early beta, so I still have hope that these issues will get ironed out in the future.
 
A world of ice and fire, A clash of Kings, The last days of the third age, Persino, Gekokujo, Warsword conquest, Anno Domini, Diplomacy, L'aigle, Star wars conquest, Prophesy of Pendor.

They're undoubtedly more popular than any Multiplayer mods. All you need to do is look at the most popular mods on steam of all time and you'd see the first multiplayer mod is 25th in the list I do believe.
nw? has 10x the playerbase of any of those mods
 
nw? has 10x the playerbase of any of those mods
e02e5ffb5f980cd8262cf7f0ae00a4a9_press-x-to-doubt-memes-memesuper-la-noire-doubt-meme_419-238.jpg
 
This game is known for its singleplayer. M&B didnt get popular because of its multiplayer events, it got popular because of the mods like GoT, LoTR etc..

The Game has gotten huge amount of exposure due to both Singelplayer and Multiplayer. Recently videos such as 1000strat man has exposed the game to many new people, simularly with The Reformist's GoT singelplayer campaigns.

Though saying that it didn't get popular due to Multiplayer and Multiplayer events is awfully incorrect as you should know. Warband enjoyed enormous ammounts of exposure from Mount & Musket and Napoleonic Wars.

M&B didn't get popular for its multiplayer as it had none, Warband oh so definitively did.
 
It's not a fallacy. People who are skilled at something give better more useful feedback than people who aren't as skilled. A game designed by casual players would play terribly and not be fun for anyone. And I say this as someone who isn't great at multiplayer.
It may feel like unfair elitism, but the fact is that people who are skilled at something have much more valuable insight than people who aren't. It's a kind of nice but false anti-intellectual myth that somehow skilled people are too set in their ways and need a newcomer to make the game fun for other newcomers.
I get your point, but I have a different view.

I'm going to use a metaphor here, just to get my thoughts to a more neutral field.

Let's say Mount & Blade is a car.

Warband was a very fast car, no air conditioning, no board computer, no automatic shift. But it's, like a dragster, very fast on straight tracks.

TaleWorlds stated that Bannerlord, their next car, is targeted to a wider audience.

People that want smoother curves, more comfort, etc.

The Warband guys liked Warband for what it was really. Fast on straight tracks. They have deep knowledge of straight tracks, on how to accelerate ridiculously fast without breaking the car apart. Their opinion is valid, but may not represent what the new car is meant to be.

In the end there are some old school Warband fans that feel Bannerlord wasn't what they expected, so they use their experience to tell us we need a car that's fast while going straight forward rather than a slower, more mainstream friendly one.
 
SP mods are definitely more popular, but that's because SP and MP are essentially different games. Playing SP feels more like dynasty warriors with some light RTS and RPG mechanics, while MP is more like Street Fighter. PC players (for a number of complex reasons) have never been the primary market for fighting games, so it makes sense that the more or less casual experience of singleplayer is what gets more attention.

What's more, MP mods tend to fail because MP relies on high population servers. People will always return to native in larger numbers because that's where most of the players are. Meanwhile I can play whatever SP mod I want regardless of how niche it is.

TaleWorlds stated that Bannerlord, their next car, is targeted to a wider audience.

Explain to me how bannerlord's gameplay changes appeals to a wider audience.
 
Well yeah except for these particular "first person swordfighting" games, especially when Warband was one of the early successes in the genre.


Unfortunately the data doesn't exist so we can neither prove or disprove what he said. I can tell you that NW had a lot of hugely popular youtube videos, and even inspired a few games, like War of Rights.
 
I get your point, but I have a different view.

I'm going to use a metaphor here, just to get my thoughts to a more neutral field.

Let's say Mount & Blade is a car.

Warband was a very fast car, no air conditioning, no board computer, no automatic shift. But it's, like a dragster, very fast on straight tracks.

TaleWorlds stated that Bannerlord, their next car, is targeted to a wider audience.

People that want smoother curves, more comfort, etc.

The Warband guys liked Warband for what it was really. Fast on straight tracks. They have deep knowledge of straight tracks, on how to accelerate ridiculously fast without breaking the car apart. Their opinion is valid, but may not represent what the new car is meant to be.

In the end there are some old school Warband fans that feel Bannerlord wasn't what they expected, so they use their experience to tell us we need a car that's fast while going straight forward rather than a slower, more mainstream friendly one.

No, what you are doing is totally mischaractarising everything. If you read Noudelle's criticism, you would notice that the steering is loose, the 5th gear isn't working right, and the "improved" traction control is messed up and downright dangerous. However, fanboys don't want to notice that because it's fine below 80km/h and the new bodywork looks fab. They also, for some reason, are happy about the fact that the new one can't powerslide at all.
 
No, what you are doing is totally mischaractarising everything. If you read Noudelle's criticism, you would notice that the steering is loose, the 5th gear isn't working right, and the "improved" traction control is messed up and downright dangerous. However, fanboys don't want to notice that because it's fine below 80km/h and the new bodywork looks fab.
I'm in love with this analogy
 
No, what you are doing is totally mischaractarising everything. If you read Noudelle's criticism, you would notice that the steering is loose, the 5th gear isn't working right, and the "improved" traction control is messed up and downright dangerous. However, fanboys don't want to notice that because it's fine below 80km/h and the new bodywork looks fab.

Also he's implying that Bannerlord needs to be changed to be more "Mainstream" and that lots of the things that have been changed are for that purpose.

They aren't.

Stances? Added complexity. Physical blocking? Added complexity. Strike delays? Doesn't make the game easier, harder if anything.

I could go on and on and on about all the changes/issues that folks like Noudelle are complaining about and how they have nothing to do with "making the game have mainstream appeal"

Please give an example of a change that was made, or something that in Noudelle's long list of issues, that was done for the purpose of making the game easier to get into as far as the combat system goes.
 
It's nothing to do with wanting the game to be a copy of Warband. Bannerlord on its own is just a slow sluggish game with a low skill cap. If you're primarily an SP player or just want to play massive battles you probably won't notice it, and likely will like the new pretty stuff and "weighty" attacks, which is fine, I'm a casual in 99% of the games I play.
 
No, what you are doing is totally mischaractarising everything. If you read Noudelle's criticism, you would notice that the steering is loose, the 5th gear isn't working right, and the "improved" traction control is messed up and downright dangerous. However, fanboys don't want to notice that because it's fine below 80km/h and the new bodywork looks fab. They also, for some reason, are happy about the fact that the new one can't powerslide at all.
Gold
 
That guy has posted more constructive feedback on this board than the rest of the people combined. You're at recruit rank, so stop ****posting.

I came to this thread to see what's going on and the first thing my eyes find is rank shaming. This is why I hate forums. Always have, always will. You implement a system so people can see at a glance how active someone is in a community, and people immediately turn it into a popularity contest and use it to ostracize newcomers who may very well have better thoughts than the moderators themselves. Shameful. I'll probably get a reprimand for saying so, but whatever. As soon as this game is out, I'm gone anyway. I just want everyone to know that it's not you, it's what the forum mindset does to a very select few of you. Even those of you it "changes" are probably fine people IRL. There's just something about forums.


By the way, the combat is fine. Anything could be better with polish, but it's not the disaster Noudelle is making it out to be by a long shot. I know, I deep dove into analysis of a lot of his complaints a month back. Most of what he says is born of sensationalism, ignorance, misunderstanding, or misappropriation. He does make a couple good points, mind. But only just, and when he has a laundry list of them, that's not a very high batting average.


Issues that definitely, without a doubt, need fixing:
Hitting downed players
Horse audio is too quiet
Blocking thrusts with side blocks
Imprecise shield hitboxes
Poor body parts hitboxes

Issues that could very well be a matter of multiplayer latency:
Delay on release of attacks
Variable attack delay
Accelerated attacks

Issues that could be a matter of attempted multiplayer fairness balance that requires tweaks:
Defender stun & initiative
Very fast stun recovery
Shields durability is too high
Character height and hitbox size (but definitely needs fixing if not)
Switching weapons before and while getting hit

Issues that I've heard are being looked into:
Chamber blocking is non-functional
Cavalry movement and crushthrough

Issues that I take issue with:
Everything wrong with kicking: The complaint is twofold: One, that the foot doesn't come down faster when hitting an opponent. I'm not certain this is even the intended effect. Perhaps it is. My big issue is with the second complaint, however: The stun being too short to attack with short weapons. I feel this is the way it should be. The advantage of short weapons is their attack speed. If you can kick and attack with a short weapon, the enemy has pretty much no defense against you except offense. If they try to go toe-to-toe with you, your faster weapon will beat theirs the majority of the time. I feel that being unable to follow up on kicks with short weapon attacks is perfectly reasonable.

Stance affecting combo speed: The slight speed increases look natural to my eye when paired with the respective animations. Maybe it's not supposed to be this way, but it looks right to my eye.

Movement speed depending on stance: Likewise, this looks right to me. If you're swinging with your movement, you have no reason to slow down. If you're swinging across your body, however you need to twist your body, which means you'd consciously slow your lateral movement. It's the same as a quarterback throwing cross-body as opposed to throwing in the direction of their scramble when running. You don't need to slow overmuch if you're throwing in the direction you're running but you practically need to stop if you want to twist the other way and throw to the opposite side of the field.

Shields durability is too high: In addition to perhaps merely being a multiplayer balance facet that we won't see in singleplayer, I personally prefer it if shields are a little tougher. Realistically, a sword is not going to destroy a shield in 10-15 hits. Axes do much better work, and as it should be, it seems they make fairly quick work of shields ingame at the moment. Just take a look at how this simple shield made out of friggin' plywood holds up to various weapons, standing stationary to be hit.

Height variable: As a multiplayer concern, I can completely understand this being a problem. Solution: Take the height slider out of multiplayer. As a general mechanic, however, height should absolutely have a tangible effect on combat, as it would in real life.

Imprecise cavalry swings: This one's tough. On the one hand, I see what's being said, but on the other, if many of those one-handed windups were placed where the video suggests they should be placed, they'd look incredibly unnatural. Joint tolerances have to be accounted for, but at the same time, surely you don't expect a cavalryman to swing his sword directly into his own leg.

Knocking players down as cavalry is too easy: Really, though? Stand in front of a horse running at the speeds shown in this video. Even horses without armor adding to their mass. See if you can keep standing as they run square into you. There are a couple of instances in here where I wouldn't mind seeing a stagger instead, but the horse keeps moving, and you're not going to stop it. Unless you sidestep, you're going down.

Attacking over your mount's head: That's on the player posting the issue. When you release an attack a split-second after shifting a loaded animation from the left to the right of your mount, no, I don't want your character doing a back-wrenching 45 degree twist in 0.25 seconds and releasing a perfectly aimed thrust. Be careful where you're pointing your spear, same as an actual lancer would have to be.

Downed horsemen, blocking and pivoting: To answer the poster's question, it's different because of momentum. If your horse suddenly gives way to the side, inertia doesn't give you an opportunity to raise a shield in a meaningful defense. If, on the other hand, your body weight is forward and your horse goes down in full stride, you being flung forward has no negative effect on your ability to raise your shield in front of you.

Camera position shift on knockdown: It gives knockdowns some added weight. Like your character, your view of the world has suddenly shifted in a somewhat disorienting way, and you need to quickly reacquire whatever you were looking at when you get up. I see no problem with this mechanic.

Partially drawn bow not incurring a speed penalty: Would raising a bow quarter-drawn negatively affect an archer's speed in real life? I don't see how it would. Therefore, it shouldn't have one in Bannerlord. The poster says "there's no reason to not use this mechanic", and that's how it should be. A mobile archer of reasonable skill should always be ready to fire another arrow. It does, however, have the slight downside of taking a split second longer to switch to a melee weapon, should one feel the need. Seems fitting to me.

Switching weapons before and while getting hit: Short of dropping the weapon you were holding and now having no weapon in hand, I don't see how else to handle this. It doesn't seem you should be rewarded for deciding to switch weapons at an inopportune moment in the heat of combat. If you tried to do what the video demonstrates in real life, you'd probably have your arm broken, which would at the very least mean you wouldn't be drawing that sword and shield.

Height does not affect reach: I don't have a huge problem with this simply because, at the differences shown, it's perfectly reasonable for two individuals to have the same reach. Height isn't a uniform calculation. Many people have an arm length beyond the norm, or vice versa. It's not at all impossible to find someone with four extra inches of leg length with no extra arm length. But height should, realistically, have an affect as this is the norm. Good news, though!

QlmFXfg.jpg


Tapping W on horseback: Heavens, our man Noudelle gets infuriated easily. (I appreciate his obsessive bugtesting work, though, doing it like a beta tester should!) Personally, I don't find this a problem. One shouldn't be able to walk his horse in close combat. Horses are living creatures with a sense of self-preservation, and they're highly unlikely to walk slowly this way or that when the noise of battle floods their ears and shiny sharp objects are swinging in their vicinity.

Automatic attack direction switching: I get his point, but I don't mind this one bit. I think it should be a toggle, though.

Insufficient evidence for judgment:
Leg hitboxes when mounted
Lack of animation for aiming up and down
 
No, what you are doing is totally mischaractarising everything. If you read Noudelle's criticism, you would notice that the steering is loose, the 5th gear isn't working right, and the "improved" traction control is messed up and downright dangerous. However, fanboys don't want to notice that because it's fine below 80km/h and the new bodywork looks fab. They also, for some reason, are happy about the fact that the new one can't powerslide at all.
good sum up
 
Back
Top Bottom