I know it's subjective but IMO that's too important/impactful an idea to be just "discarded" without a disclosed reason? At least tell us why it has been rejected so we can discuss it? @Dejan
-
If you are reporting a bug, please head over to our Technical Support section for Bannerlord.
SP - Battles & Sieges The tactical way: beyond the melee cluster
- Thread starter Terco_Viejo
- Start date
Users who are viewing this thread
Truly a shame, I remember making a thread about it in beta. Captain mode has zero value for me as long as I cannot do something as basic as choosing which unit to attack.
Don't forget that Dejan is just the messenger, we shouldn't put more pressure on him than he has. If he has information he can share (for good or bad) he always does not bring it willingly. If he doesn't answer you, it's because he can't speak out again, because the authorities haven't moved from where they were.
@Silen ..absolutely ?
Absolutely. I'm sorry if I sounded like I believe otherwise. I'm certain Dejan is not the one responsible for the decision nor for not disclosing the reason behind it (or else I assume he'd have disclosed it). I'm also certain whoever discarded the idea acted in defense of the game's best interests. However I believe diclosing the reason could allow healthy discussions to continue and maybe either TaleWorlds would end up deciding to implement it or we, the players, would understand why and agree that it's best not to endeavor towards implementing it.
Absolutely, this targeting issue shows problematic with all unit types. Archers shooting at a shield wall while an exposed infantry unit (recruit, shock) is right next to it. Horse archers running into clusters of units while circling around another. Cavalry charging into a units with spears rather than any other exposed unit. This list goes on and on. I've never really jumped into multiplayer since the beta has ended, but I don't think it has improved by alot. But this problem does persists in singleplayer as well.
It's good this thread is re-ignited; Bannerlord's not what it ought to be.
GrandiousBrain
Regular
TRUTH HAS BEEN TOLD.The battle is as usual Warband style a huge clusterf**k of brainless AI where we can see heads,half of the npcs boddy,hands going throu npcs heads,body,shields,soldiers morfing/combining with one another DBZ style/siamesse twin style all due to the clustering stuff.A good number of M&B fans love the tactical potential offered by the game and even more since the additions that Motomataru introduced (Formations+AI). However in Bannerlord, this tactical illusion of deploying formations in different shapes is totally dynamited when the "charge" command is given; a direct conflict is created with Ai, apparently due to its hardcoded section.
With the addition of formations in Bannerlord (SP + MP [Captain Mode Beta]) we all looked with bright eyes at the same possibility of deploying bots in battle through formations such as Shield Wall, Column, Wedge, etc ...
All that stuff so beautiful, is now pure cosmetics; pure artifice that is useless because once again we find the same problem. When we command "charge" those formations are shredded by the same IA that governs it, because it is coded that way (plausible). The fact that the AI in formation does not keep the closed order when it is commanded "to charge", is absurd for those of us who play in this way. It simplifies the fight situation to a "mosh pit cluster hell" in which there is anything but mayhem.
In the Captain Mode I have tried the following scenario (My infantry unit against another enemy):
In an attempt to "hack" the breaking point of the formation itself, I thought the following:
What if by F1 I place the flag just behind the last member of the enemy unit?
My unit should therefore keep the formation; and it does keep it, but badly. The "aggressiveness" it has is much lower than when we give the "charge" order. So if I try that "hacking" my unit faces the situation passively and is annihilated because the AI "thinks" defensively.
Therefore, I don't know what philosophy you have for closed-order combat because the current proposal to capture "the picture" will look awesome in eventual publications; however, at the very end of the day... it doesn't work at all. And for those of us who pretend to play in a more tactical way, our experience is ruined (mine personally) when what I tell you happens.
If you are a Dev and you are still reading, know that all this if not complemented with this other, the tactical path will be limping:
[Suggestion] combine face direction with formation location (Osiris)
Suggestion for Troop Commands (John.M)
Battle Command: Switch Weapon (myself)
Fallback order does not work properly (myself)
It's okay to look at the product as, wow massive battles; but of headless chickens charging?
As individual combat is being polished (movement, blocking, etc.), please give the nut one more twist in this regard.
They also on top of thinks that you mentioned/wrote should deffinetly also create some line mechanics where AI/NPC form lines and then instead of all of the lines attacking instead we get the 1st contact line then 2nd and maybe if needed 3rd lines being engaged in the fight while the remaning lines stay put/alert/redy to engage BUT they not engage and just wait for a comrade from front to fall to fill its spot.
That way in battle the computer/sytstem wont need to consatntly calculate NPCs/AIs animation/movements who arent even engaged at all in combat BUT instead would save system/relive system from calculating all of that mess and focus on first 2-3 lines of combat (depending on the space of contact closed in door fighting or filed fight).That way it will free alot of memory space bcs the non engaged NPCs/AI will stay in one combat motion and would wait without activating any animation or moving until its needed to fill the gap in lines that lost a soldier.
I think i mentioned somewhere this type of aproach alongisde for them to make AI/NPC pathing inside gates better by SIMPLY after the first gate is breached by ram then all it need is that soldiers mounted/operate on ram MOVE the ram atelast/minimum 10 steps back from the breached gate or after the breaching of the gate move the ram to the side and that way they would clear the path for the soldiers to easly without ram obstruction clearly go to breach the second gate without morfing/merging with each other and causing pathfinding problems just bcs ram is messing with the pathfinding.
If i remmember correctly sugested somewhere both of the things from army AI aproacing battles/tight corner battles to the atleast temporary fix moving the ram away post breaching the first gate BUT my sugetions were comleatly ignored so i stopped making suggestions all together.
Last edited:
Forgive me if I don't reply directly to the quotes, but we are all going round in circles about the same matter. We as a notorious all seem to be absolutely aware of what problems there are and what else needs to be considered.
A bit of home-grown drama ? ?
As I have said before, this thread is not a manual from a strategy guru; it is a work of honest fan feedback and also nourished by the comments that forumites have contributed here. I started this thread near the end of September 2019 after a beta tester period from the end of June until then. Since September 2019 I've been adding my thoughts about the game and providing suggestions as I understand the shortcomings of the game and thus passing them on to the devs.
I'm already tired
Maybe it's unfair to say this, but much more could have been done in the alpha beta period (June 2019 - March 2020) + the 10 months of EA. If it has not been done, it is either because it could not be done or because its implementation clashes with the design rails of what Taleworlds considers Bannerlord as such. Or maybe they consider them to be bad ideas to implement, it could also be...
There are inconsistencies everywhere in the game in my eyes, quite a few I've been posting in this thread. I can no longer add more than I have added, I can no longer test more than I have tested; the feedback is there for Taleworlds, mine and that of many players who have altruistically thrown themselves into the game.
I'm going to sit here and see where this ship called Bannerlord drifts in the end.
A bit of home-grown drama ? ?
As I have said before, this thread is not a manual from a strategy guru; it is a work of honest fan feedback and also nourished by the comments that forumites have contributed here. I started this thread near the end of September 2019 after a beta tester period from the end of June until then. Since September 2019 I've been adding my thoughts about the game and providing suggestions as I understand the shortcomings of the game and thus passing them on to the devs.
I'm already tired
Maybe it's unfair to say this, but much more could have been done in the alpha beta period (June 2019 - March 2020) + the 10 months of EA. If it has not been done, it is either because it could not be done or because its implementation clashes with the design rails of what Taleworlds considers Bannerlord as such. Or maybe they consider them to be bad ideas to implement, it could also be...
There are inconsistencies everywhere in the game in my eyes, quite a few I've been posting in this thread. I can no longer add more than I have added, I can no longer test more than I have tested; the feedback is there for Taleworlds, mine and that of many players who have altruistically thrown themselves into the game.
I'm going to sit here and see where this ship called Bannerlord drifts in the end.
I cannot complete with the stunning selection you shared recently, so let’s take the cello in a different direction.
Who knows, maybe this ship will head into a different direction as well.
Last edited:
You know that the only instrument capable of conveying a sense of success or achievement is this particular one
:Let's hope that at the end of the EA we hear that melody and not something like this
.
Philozoraptor
Sergeant
I did not read the whole thread so if it was mentioned I apologize. Total war like formation behaviour is codable (aka first row is fighting, guys behind are waiting). However there are 2 problems with it - it looks and feels really weird in 1st / 3rd person and it tanks performance significantly / freezes the game.
Lusitani 5th Empire
Don't get your hopes too high.
Very little progress was made since.
I don't see devs having enough time to get battles to go "beyond the melee cluster" if they decide to have the premature release in Q2 2021.
It's might look funny to call it premature since it was delayed I don't know how many times but the reality is that the game will not be ready by then, I believe.
Battles and combat is what makes the game so fun, but a decade later from warband and there was little progress to make it solid and enjoyable, it's actually worse regarding siege gameplay experience.
I know full well people working at TW can do better and make it better.
It's quite easy too, it doesn't take much to make a bunch of slight improvements which make all the difference when combined.
We are not asking to make it perfect, just make it better at least.
Oh I'm of the opinion Taleworlds will get to this... Eventually. It's just cause this guy kind of bumped my thread but he went on about formations an AI and I was like "Uh, dude... I just want the front rank to crouch when in shield/ square circle formation... I wasn't really talking about the shortcomings of Bannerlord AI" lol.
Philozoraptor
Sergeant
Actually in a mean time we managed to do formation fighting without tanking the performance. Enjoy.
I have tested it and here's my congratulations to you and the team. This is the way, very good work mate.
Realistic Battle mod is the candle in the dark, don't let it fade away.
Ulfhedinn_
Sergeant at Arms
+1
