Thank you for the feedback

Users who are viewing this thread

Alene said:
I am not sure I like how banners act as weapons, they're really fast for their size. Were they commonly used as weapons in the era?
Meh Banners for me, even though they are 2H, are mostly for Roleplaying during a naval battle.
 
Sobakozoid said:
Yeyo said:
In the Antiquity and High Middle ages, before the 13th century, the regular warrior fought with shield; actually, sometimes the combatants were divided in categories in accordance with their type of shield. The spearmen that eventually didn't carry a shield normally fought in a second line. Two handed weapons were quite uncommon and there are just few examples, like the rhomphaia or the Dane axe.
Player is not a common warrior. So, in this case, why not allow such an extraordinary person to use such uncommon weapons?
Plus we have a skill "2 handed weapons". Why this skill was left in game?

I'm sure at least one guy somewhere back then used whatever weapon he felt like.
 
After playing MP for a while today, I am much happier about the game I have bought. There is this sense of it being so brutal, gritty, shield up against shield, which I just love.


Iron out the few issues and you have a great game.
 
i'm sorry for getting out of topic of the previous posts.

i'm enjoying very much the game. but there is something that
could give a thrust. i'm spending quite some time doing quests for
villages, but they (villages) give quests very rarely (i don't know if it is meant to be so).
so the few times i get a quest, they are all like the native (help against bandits, get some
grain, get some cattles).

it would really be nice having some quest variations.
 
To the guys of Brytenwalda - Adorno, Lenny, Yeyo (and anyone else I've missed) :

Firstly, thank YOU for giving us this DLC. Although it has unfortunately been released flawed and buggy - something you were unable to avoid despite all your best efforts - I am enjoying what we have and can see the potential of the game once it has been fixed and polished. So keep up the work and thank you again.

Secondly: I do not wish to sound like a scratched record, nor annoy anyone; I know you have tried to get this as "historically correct" as you can, but I do think you are making a mistake regarding two handed axes. Sure, the Dane Axe had not become popular yet, but to broadly say "no two handed axes were used" is just... a little short sighted.

The Romans had been using two handed axes for two thousand years. Their fasces, the symbol of Roman justice were two handed axes bound in a bundle of rods, mostly ceremonial but sometimes actually used in anger. In addition, during sacrifices, two handed axes were employed to help despatch the slaughtered animal. The Byzantines for their part continued to use axes, including a double headed version. Such an axehead has been found in Albania and dated to the 6th or 7th century. Corippus, writing in the 6th century, tells us the elite unit of Exubitores used such as double headed axe. The Exubitores were alive and well in AD 867.

Now if the Romans used such axes, then that means Roman Britain did too. So what do you think the Anglo Saxons would have found when they started arriving and settling on British shores? That's right, double handed axes. And what do you think the Vikings would have found when they in turn visited Britain and the Byzantines? Right again, double handed axes.  And are you seriously saying that when cutting wood to size or felling a tree, no Saxon or Viking felt that a longer handle and two handed grip was of any use? And there were of course always animals that needed slaughtering.

Come on. There may not be hard and fast evidence for it, but simple common sense should tell us that double handed axes WERE around in some form.

One more thing. You hold to the notion that it was the rise in prominence of armour that brought about the rise of the dane axe. That may be so. But the two handed axe would possibly have had a use in combat long before that, being useful for destroying shieldwalls, either by chopping down shields or else clipping the edge of a shield and dragging it down to expose it's wielder. Since Shieldwalls dominated combat for centuries, the two handed axe may well have been around in combat far longer than you would grant as well. (there is, I think, at least one archeological example dated 8th - 10th century(?)).  The Dane Axe could have been the ultimate END of the development of the weapon, NOT the beginning.

I respect your attention to detail and accuracy, but all things considered I do feel that you may need to revise your stance on two handed axes.

I will make that the last time I talk about this I think, and will rest my case gracefully before you decide to give me a blood eagle.  :wink: Which ever way you ultimately go with this,  you have my respects and admiration for your work.  :grin:
 
The new DLC may be somewhat raw, yes... But you know what, it gave me a certain itch. While VC servers became not available after downloading the last beta-patch, I realised an urge I couldn't ignore. So I jumped in a Native deathmatch after roughly half a year I haven't played it... And I just couldn't play Native anymore. But still, the itch wouldn't pass.

I didn't really like VC at first, but now I realise that I want it. I've got sucked in and hooked up, and all the hot-fixing is only teasing me.

What I want to say is that we may not like the new DLC at first, but Warband experience will never be the same. I've been playing the game for 8 years but now I feel extremely refreshed. I'm back to forum, I'm back to mods, I'm back to Mount & Blade yet again. Perhaps it's even somewhat better to have this DLC live and respond to the commuity than to receive it as a static, polished and finalized product. I can foretell you that despite any mods that will eventually be made for Bannerlords people will mod VC and even the Old Brytenwalda for years to come.

P.S.

And the multiplayer is by no means a weak part of VC - the new modes are just nuts.
 
The singleplayer storyline campaign is epic and I actually enjoy the grinding for pennings & troops. Raising an army to overtake a fortress is difficult at first.  :eek:
 
Monroe said:
- Made the AI worse
- Made the combat worse
- Bad dialogue
- Horrible lag, ruining the smoothe experience that is Mount and Blade
- Uninspired arsenal of weapons and armor, ruining the game experience because of socalled historical accuracy
- Unfinished map. Visually there might be more than 300 cities, castles and villages, but with no real, unique content to them. This DLC becomes an excellent showcase of why quality beats quantity ever time.

This was just off the top of my head. I am sure there is much more to add.

What little good this DLC adds - I actually really like its attempt to be historically and geographically accurate, as well as it adding a single player campaign with a story - is overshadowed  by the fact that this is an unfinished game. The developers are either incompetent, or this is just a shameless attempt to cash in on an otherwise great franchise. Either way this addition to the series gives Mount and Blade a bad name.
I really, really like Mount and Blade. Usually I dont preorder or buy at all, but I prepurchased this DLC in good faith because I wanted to show my appreciation, and because I trusted the company behind it to deliver. It did not.

I guess I'll make my money back by not paying for Bannerlord, though. Paying you again would be to encourage the act of promising something that you cannot deliver. I hope other people think this way as well.

Man this is not Rome II. You didn't pay 50 (or more) bucks for it. Devs are at theyr first serious game release, they were modders, but it seems that they really have the will to polish this DLC and to please our requests. Pre-ordered? Your fault. It's like buyng a dress without knowing the size. Doesn't fit you? You must have expected it. I haven't played Brytenwalda but i'm happy of every single cent i gave to the dev team, until they keep updating it. They are neither incompetent or greedy, they are just lacking the experience of a professional team (hope they're making treasure of our hints and suggestions). I understand your being upset, but imo this is not the way to obtain a better product. Give them a chance.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

About the 2h axes, here is some source from Osprey (a definitely thrustworthy source). Pg. 51

https://books.google.it/books?id=aEyQe18JWvUC&lpg=PA51&ots=xMLinLscU8&dq=breidox%20axe&hl=it&pg=PA51#v=onepage&q=breidox%20axe&f=false

B2 refers to an illustration of a guy with two-handed axe. As stated there, they started to be in use at the end of the 10th century. Then the devs must make a choice between gameplay and accuracy. I personally don't feel the urgent need of 2handed weapons, but if most of the players do...
 
thebogus said:
Man this is not Rome II. You didn't pay 50 (or more) bucks for it. Devs are at theyr first serious game release, they were modders, but it seems that they really have the will to polish this DLC and to please our requests.
I'd say that Brytenwalda was about the same level as VC  and that the devs are kind of experienced. So the "amateur at work" does not work.I would definitely call them the close to professional.
Also, no double posts. There for the "modify" button exists
 
General von Hiller said:
thebogus said:
Man this is not Rome II. You didn't pay 50 (or more) bucks for it. Devs are at theyr first serious game release, they were modders, but it seems that they really have the will to polish this DLC and to please our requests.
I'd say that Brytenwalda was about the same level as VC  and that the devs are kind of experienced. So the "amateur at work" does not work.I would definitely call them the close to professional.
Also, no double posts. There for the "modify" button exists

I didn't play Brytenwalda so i can't compare the two games, but i think that there is a big difference between working for yourself, with your own timetable, on an un-traded product, and working in (or for) a buisness company that has financiary needs and a business plan.

For the double post thing, i posted another reply because it was a different topic so i tought it would be good. I will edit asap
 
thebogus said:
I didn't play Brytenwalda so i can't compare the two games, but i think that there is a big difference between working for yourself, with your own timetable, on an un-traded product, and working in (or for) a buisness company that has financiary needs and a business plan.
In regard of the work that needs to be done, I guess they would be on a same level. And for people who did a mod of thta scope allready, a timetable should not be that disastrous for their work, because the community can be a very serious source of stress too. And by the way, from what I have read so far, the team was pretty free in their work, apart from the timetable.
 
Anyway, i think that even now it's a good dlc with a lot of potential. If they keep working on it then it can only get better  :mrgreen:
 
Despite a (very) bumpy road that's levelling out a little now, we're convinced we've made a really enjoyable game,
that not just adds a good story and many things to gameplay, but also marks a refreshing approach to historical gaming and early medieval warfare.
Now we work hard to fix as many errors as possible so as many players as possible can actually see it  :smile:
 
Don't be joking with me, Adorno. You've made a game in which world came to my totally unprepared, lonely self, kicked its ass and left it sobbing.

Then my character manned up, eventually ended with two boats worth of hardened veterans and smeared own face with revenge. And blood. And a bit of feces, because, damn, those battlefields get messy.

What I'm trying to get at, is that's my best M&B experience ever, when it comes to smashing each others head inside with axes settings. The steep initial curve was changed into small cliff in VC and I've absolutely loved every single minute of being last link of food chain.

Time for some apex-eying now.
 
Speaking of graphics. Any chance of changes for female and children faces? First look worse than in Warband [opinions, but still], second look like little men. I know this is a viking game and even children are manly, but that's a bit too much.
 
Adorno said:
Despite a (very) bumpy road that's levelling out a little now, we're convinced we've made a really enjoyable game,
that not just adds a good story and many things to gameplay, but also marks a refreshing approach to historical gaming and early medieval warfare.
Now we work hard to fix as many errors as possible so as many players as possible can actually see it  :smile:
And you guys have all my support on that road  :razz:
 
Remorr said:
Speaking of graphics. Any chance of changes for female and children faces? First look worse than in Warband [opinions, but still], second look like little men. I know this is a viking game and even children are manly, but that's a bit too much.

update game and check again
 
To be honest, Taleworlds bear most of the responsibility for the horrible launch as you cant expect a bunch of modders to make a professional title their first time. Taleworlds seem to have just stood back done nothing and taken their share of the profits.
 
william2401 said:
To be honest, Taleworlds bear most of the responsibility for the horrible launch as you cant expect a bunch of modders to make a professional title their first time. Taleworlds seem to have just stood back done nothing and taken their share of the profits.

I agree with you and this was the exact thing I said about the game as soon as I tried to play it!

But in the meantime Brytenwalda' team have worked hard to amend themselves and I can't help but to praise them for their efforts. If you look at game industry as a whole you will see that far more "reputable" and rich companies such as Ubisoft would overheat and sell their nonsense games full of bugs and problems (AC:Unity) even if the game sells for 60 Euros... to this date, still not fixed by the way.

On the other hand, we do not know what are the arrangements between Taleworlds and Brytenwalda, but a little help from the parent devs probably wouldn't hurt...

I want to report a strange bug, which I don't know if fixed by the new patch (because I haven't got any spare time to play recently):
In the start-up screen where you choose to play either sandbox or story mode and adjust the realism settings, I noticed that if the player turns on armor penalties and stamina on, the Continue and Back buttons break (can not be pressed) and the player is stuck on this screen with the only option of Alt+F4.
 
Back
Top Bottom