This is what was expected of Bannerlord AI to behave!!!

Users who are viewing this thread

Mad Vader

Duhpressed
Duke
M&BWB
Hype. That and indie devs can cultivate an almost parasocial relationship with fans.
Well he is preparing the game for EA and that means he wants to avoid player backlash when the game goes public. The best way to do this is to listen to players.
It doesn't mean he will be as responsive when the EA gets underway and probably doesn't need to be as long as his vision of the final state of the game is solid and achievable.
Some players will be inevitably disappointed when the game is in their hands as they have projected and assumed too much, but hopefully he won't resort to misleading hype (like some people!) as there's a price to pay down the line.
 

Fate

Veteran
That's cool, but TBF TW showed off some great demos and dev blogs and got us hyped for years with features we really wanted, but the actual delivery of castles and gangs n such turned out to be left behind.
Thankfully not everyone operates with the integrity TW has
 

Stromming

Sergeant at Arms
WBWF&SNWVC
wow thanks for sharing ,but this shield wall tactic in this movie is stupid

where's the archers?? why no archers in the back firing??
why no cavalry flanking enemy on the back?

they don't have any other type of weapon? like catapult or and those big arrows?

the best tatic I seen is from Gladiator, the initial battle scenes

I hope you are joking? While it is a very cool looking scene, it is not at all realistic.
The shieldwall of Last Kingdom is much more accurate, with the exception of Uhtred being an absolute madlad and jumping over the shields and breaking everything by himself without getting skewered in the process lol.
 

Gadheras

Sergeant
I don't want to be that guy. But if you're referring to the Teutoburg forest, that was an ambush with the Romans out of formation.

Still doesn't change the fact their "superior" tactics, (whatever), doesn't work unless they can decide the battle field conditions.
 
The shieldwall of Last Kingdom is much more accurate
?
hozCvsu.jpg
 

Mad Vader

Duhpressed
Duke
M&BWB
Nothing really works if you are ambushed. If you stab Chuck Norris in the back, he'll die.

By the way, the Gladiator clip shows a non-environmentally friendly way to start a battle and should be edited out of the movie. We need battles that support sustainable warfare.
 
I hope you are joking? While it is a very cool looking scene, it is not at all realistic.
The shieldwall of Last Kingdom is much more accurate, with the exception of Uhtred being an absolute madlad and jumping over the shields and breaking everything by himself without getting skewered in the process lol.
I think that's pretty accurate realistic scene
Rome army is famous for using all kinds of tools weapon and battle tatics

the best way to break a shield wall is to out frank it
 
While the game looks cool and I will definitely keep and eye on it, it's combat mechanics are not applicable to Mount&Blade. Like Total War, the animations you see are paired and they reflect calculations that were made between the two entities, so it is already established if the attacker landed a hit or not.

It is also worth mentioning that entities have their combat calculations on a 1 to 1 basis, and even if an entity is surrounded the calculations will not happen all at once, they will take turns running attack/defense attempts. This is clearly not the case in Mount&Blade, the agents don't care if you are engaged or not, nor will they wait their turn to do something. Making the agents more aware of what is happening around them means more calculations would be required per agent, which in turn means more resources are required. It is already known that the game has to be optimized for consoles so there is a ceiling for resource usage (mainly CPU) and this ceiling is why I don't see TW making big improvements on mission AI (siege, field battles and so on).
 

Apocal

Grandmaster Knight
Well he is preparing the game for EA and that means he wants to avoid player backlash when the game goes public. The best way to do this is to listen to players.
I'm not saying it is bad, just an advantage in getting people to talk about your game when they don't think of you as an employee creating a product that they might buy, but a friend instead.
 

froggyluv

Grandmaster Knight
NW
While the game looks cool and I will definitely keep and eye on it, it's combat mechanics are not applicable to Mount&Blade. Like Total War, the animations you see are paired and they reflect calculations that were made between the two entities, so it is already established if the attacker landed a hit or not.

It is also worth mentioning that entities have their combat calculations on a 1 to 1 basis, and even if an entity is surrounded the calculations will not happen all at once, they will take turns running attack/defense attempts. This is clearly not the case in Mount&Blade, the agents don't care if you are engaged or not, nor will they wait their turn to do something. Making the agents more aware of what is happening around them means more calculations would be required per agent, which in turn means more resources are required. It is already known that the game has to be optimized for consoles so there is a ceiling for resource usage (mainly CPU) and this ceiling is why I don't see TW making big improvements on mission AI (siege, field battles and so on).
I’m always kinda shocked how many fans here who should know better still fail to understand the difference between a total war mass blob animation combat and mount and blade combat - literally leagues apart.
 

Mad Vader

Duhpressed
Duke
M&BWB
I'm not saying it is bad, just an advantage in getting people to talk about your game when they don't think of you as an employee creating a product that they might buy, but a friend instead.
Yeah, they feel like cool kids hanging with the band. This is why indie devs get laid a lot.
 

hruza

Knight at Arms
Others already said it but I'll repeat it. This is unfair comparison of two very different games. MB is FPS, what you have shown is RTS. If you would put that kind of AI in to MB, it would be complete failure. What you have shown is formation based AI. It's based on formations of soldiers interacting with other formations of soldiers. MB requires individual AI that can interact on soldier to soldier basis so that for example AI soldiers would not stand in the back of the formation doing nothing as player runs around and starts stabbing them.

In game like MB it's much harder to achieve the level of formation behavior that you can see in RTS games.

While I am all for better formation AI in MB, Bannerlord already have better AI then Warband had (and better AI in general - for one horse archers actually work and heavy cavalry is not overpowered). I think devs deserve some respect for that and our expectations should be bit more reasonable. AI is one of the most difficult aspect of games and also at the same time one that doesn't pay the most in terms of sales. Most players unfortunately buy games based on nice visuals rather then good AI. So it's in part our own fault.
 

Gadheras

Sergeant
Others already said it but I'll repeat it. This is unfair comparison of two very different games. MB is FPS, what you have shown is RTS. If you would put that kind of AI in to MB, it would be complete failure. What you have shown is formation based AI. It's based on formations of soldiers interacting with other formations of soldiers. MB requires individual AI that can interact on soldier to soldier basis so that for example AI soldiers would not stand in the back of the formation doing nothing as player runs around and starts stabbing them.

In game like MB it's much harder to achieve the level of formation behavior that you can see in RTS games.

While I am all for better formation AI in MB, Bannerlord already have better AI then Warband had (and better AI in general - for one horse archers actually work and heavy cavalry is not overpowered). I think devs deserve some respect for that and our expectations should be bit more reasonable. AI is one of the most difficult aspect of games and also at the same time one that doesn't pay the most in terms of sales. Most players unfortunately buy games based on nice visuals rather then good AI. So it's in part our own fault.

If we can get "target unit group" I would be happy. Like tell my cav to focus on archers, and my archers to focus on infantry etc. Then hopefully my cav wouldn't scatter like headless chickens and run in all different directions :p
 

hruza

Knight at Arms
If we can get "target unit group" I would be happy. Like tell my cav to focus on archers, and my archers to focus on infantry etc. Then hopefully my cav wouldn't scatter like headless chickens and run in all different directions :p
That's actually in the game already and AI is using it. There is just no interface for the player to control it as well.
 

WNxSpectre

Recruit
Bannerlord needs a "maintain formation" option. that way players can make their own formation and when it the troops "advance" they maintain their shape
Agree with this. Such a command would be nice. I would also like my mounted companions not to rush on ahead of the unit they are commanding when I give the advance order. Currently they rush ahead on their horse leaving their unmounted troops far behind and move into a ton of enemy soldiers like twits to get slaughtered.
 
Top Bottom