A sandbox game like Mount and Blade may not have a prescribed set of "victory" conditions commonly found in traditional RTS & Grand Strategy games, but an expansive sandbox game would support as wide a variety of PLAY STYLES.
I'm interested in hearing what play styles you guys would like to see in Mount and Blade (or a hypothetically similar game) and how you would see them implemented.
What to respond with:
When you respond:
1. Which PLAY STYLES do you feel are currently supported?
2. Which PLAY STYLES would you like to see supported?
3. Elaborate
**A quick note on how on how I view these play styles:
Finally, let me preempt any misunderstanding that creating meaningful choices in character progression and supporting multiple play styles will somehow limit player choice or make this game less sandbox. This will open up this game to be much more sandbox than it is currently.
Today I feel all choices and all play styles lead to the same conclusion. Become a ruler and paint the map through conquest play style.
I look forward to everyone's ideas. I don't mean to suggest that TaleWorlds could implement any of these ideas in Bannerlord. I don't know what is practical or possible at this stage of the game's development.
I view this as a purely hypothetical exercise in tinfoil hat development. So please feel free to go as big or as broad as you want with your ideas. If you want to keep you ideas grounded in reality of this game title and what may be practical feel free to do that as well. However, I've placed this thread in the general comment section and not not the suggested feedback thread for a reason.
Cheers.
I'm interested in hearing what play styles you guys would like to see in Mount and Blade (or a hypothetically similar game) and how you would see them implemented.
What to respond with:
- Which PLAY STYLES do you feel are currently supported?
- Which PLAY STYLES would you like to see supported?
- Elaborate.
When you respond:
- Please try to follow the progression format I use below. I chose this simply because I think it succinctly communicates how the player would approach the game differently for each play style and how they would progress. If we all follow a similar format it will make reading this thread easier. If this doesn't work for you then use whatever format you want.
- PLEASE feel free to elaborate on how you would like to see these play styles supported (i.e. through which game systems and mechanics). I am going to elaborate very little on my list so this post isn't 20 pages long, but I will give some small details. I separated this section so for those (like me) that want to write pages and pages so we can keep that info. separate from our bulleted lists.
1. Which PLAY STYLES do you feel are currently supported?
- Mercenary >> Vassal >> Ruler >> Kingdom Conquest "Victory"
2. Which PLAY STYLES would you like to see supported?
- Mercenary >> Mercenary Company >> Mercenary Empire >> Warlord "Victory"
- Trader >> Trading Company >> Trading Empire >> Mercantile "Victory"
- Arena Pleb >> Gladiator >> Arena Champion >> Renown "Victory"
- Rogue >> Spy >> Spy Master >> Puppeteer "Victory"
- Craftsman >> Weapons Guild >> Guild Master >> Arms Dealer "Victory"
3. Elaborate
- Mercenary
- Warlord "Victory": The mercenary can work towards a warlord victory where the land is in a perpetual state of war. This means the mercenary has to preserve kingdoms from being to keep as many different wars options open. The mercenary can eventually acquire all minor factions into their mercenary empire.
- New systems / mechanics: A Mercenary Company tab equivalent to Clan tab. A Mercenary Empire tab equivalent to Kingdom tab. Mercenary camps, outposts, headquarters.
- Suited Skills: Multiple combat skills, roguery, leadership, mobility
- Suited Traits: Cruel, Valor
- General Description: The mercenary is an independent contractor. He/she never bends the knee and pledges fealty. The mercenary company is a band of minor clans that the player can form that sell their swords to Kingdom as a unit. The mercenary company can evolve to a mercenary empire where the player has banded together 80% to 100% of minor factions and possibly even disenfranchised clans whose Kingdom is gone. The mercenary empire can make or break kingdoms. The player negotiates with rulers as a peer or in some cases superior. The mercenary empire is much more democratic and less feudal than the kingdoms. Voting occurs for policies and company actions but the primary currency is in denars not influence. The mercenary does not get to own fiefs but can have camps (player can place these on the map), outposts which are an up-scaled and fortified version of camps that the player can also place on the map. Outposts are open for some trading and can hold some prisoners. Lastly the mercenary can set-up headquarters in existing settlements provided they complete a series of epic quests, meet some predefined criteria, and have the resources to open and maintain the headquarters. The headquarters gives access to a bunch of new and existing settlement options.
- Trader
- Mercantile "Victory": The trader can work towards a mercantile victory where profit is the priority not conquest or ruling. While wars can be good for temporary profit, war is not sustainable. The ultimate goal of the mercantile victory is to create a lasting peace throughout the land.
- New systems / mechanics: A trading company tab and trading empire tab equivalent to the clans and kingdom tabs today.
- Suited Skills: Trade, charm, stewardship
- Suited Traits: Honest, Closefisted
- General Description: Ruling is expensive and the trader is concerned with pure profit. Therefore, the trader will have to forgo ruling a Kingdom if they want to progress to a trading empire. The trader will be able to form an obscene amount of caravans and workshops. The trader will be able to form coalitions of merchants and artisans across Kingdom boundaries. The ultimate goal of the trader will be to create a lasting peace throughout Calradia bringing prosperity to every corner of the land. Competing interests will be looters, bandits, and most importantly petty nobles and rulers. The shortsighted rulers will always be looking to make war so the trader will need extreme amounts of wealth and economic leverage to make all the various Kingdoms "play nice".
- Arena
- Renown "Victory": I'm not going to elaborate here as I feel I have gone on long enough. Perhaps others can share their ideas for what this would look like.
- Rogue
- Puppeteer "Victory": I'm not going to elaborate here as I feel I have gone on long enough. Perhaps others can share their ideas for what this would look like.
- Craftsman
- Arms Dealer "Victory" I'm not going to elaborate here as I feel I have gone on long enough. Perhaps others can share their ideas for what this would look like.
**A quick note on how on how I view these play styles:
In my opinion, the player should be able to participate in multiple play styles at Tier 1 (i.e. mercenary, trader, rogue) but as they progress to Tier 2 (i.e. mercenary company, trading company, spy) some play styles become incompatible with others. Once a player gets to Tier 3 (i.e. mercenary empire, trading empire, spy master), most play styles are mutually exclusive. And to achieve the "victory" condition the player will have to commit to one or the other. This will force the player to make meaningful choices in how they spend their skill points, which perks they apply, which quests they perform, and what character traits they cultivate. I also think specific skill points, perks, epic quests, and character traits should be geared to to support these play styles and force the player into those meaningful choices.
Brief examples of meaningful choices (again I'm trying to let this become 20 pages).
- Skill progression: A player trying to achieve the Warlord Victory would need to load up on 2 of 3 vigor kills; 2 of 3 control skills; riding or athletics; leadership; and roguery. A player trying to achieve Conquest Victory would need to leadership, steward, charm, and 1 of 3 vigor or control skills and either riding or athletics would be useful but not critical. You can see where there is some overlap (leadership and perhaps combat) but there is a lot of differentiation. With a limited number of skills that you can progress this will force meaningful choices.
- Perks: Within the leadership tree (a skill shared by Warlords and Rulers) the perk choices at level 150+ start to become binary and support either a Warlord victory or a Kingdom Conquest victory. For example, at 275 Ultimate Leader choices could be a) you gain a ridiculous amount of influence or b) you can force minor clans into your mercenary empire.
- Character Traits: Each character trait should benefit some play styles, hurt other play styles, and some would be neutral. For example, rogues working towards a Puppeteer victory would want devious but traders and craftsmen want honest. Mercenaries would benefit greatly from cruel and never merciful and rulers would benefit from merciful or cruel. Traders and Craftsmen would want to be viewed as closefisted but rulers would benefit from being generous. An arena champion or mercenary would benefit greatly from having valor but a spy master would be hurt by this trait (rework valor to include "notoriety" and the opposite becomes "inconspicuous").
Finally, let me preempt any misunderstanding that creating meaningful choices in character progression and supporting multiple play styles will somehow limit player choice or make this game less sandbox. This will open up this game to be much more sandbox than it is currently.
Today I feel all choices and all play styles lead to the same conclusion. Become a ruler and paint the map through conquest play style.
- Want to be a mercenary? That is a great stepping stone to becoming a vassal and joining a Kingdom. There are options for you to play out the game as a mercenary and progress beyond 20 hours of gameplay. You can't call armies. You can't progress some skills. You can't impact the world in a meaningful way. Give me a way to collect all the minor factions and form an company of mercenaries. That is sandbox.
- Want to be a trader? That is a great way to make some bank and save up for when jumping straight into your own kingdom. There are no options for you to create an obscene amount of caravans and coordinate the efforts or those caravans to control supply and demand on a global scale. There are no ways for you to create a coalition of artisans and traders across settlements that would transcend these petty kingdom boundaries. Do you think governments rule the world? No it's banks and corporations.
- Want to be an arena champion? Maybe you don't want to form a warband become a vassal and rule a Kingdom. Maybe you aren't interested in a dynasty? Maybe you want to spend 1 character lifetime building up such a name for yourself that you are renown across all of Calradia as the greatest arena champion. Everyone knows your name. Maybe you can't influence the map the way you can with other play styles, but maybe Kingdoms will halt wars for a time to see you compete. Or maybe you will have so much renown that you can form your initial Kingdom directly from your name recognition....and forgoe ever being a mercenary or vassal or trader or craftsman? These options don't exist today.
- Want to be a rogue? How about ruling from behind the scenes? What if you could become the power behind the king not just for one Kingdom but for multiple kingdoms? Imagine if you could direct when the Khuzait AND Battanians AND Aseri went to war? All from the comfort of your armchair with the assistance of a spy network and a lot of carrier pigeons. That is not a play style that is supported today.
I look forward to everyone's ideas. I don't mean to suggest that TaleWorlds could implement any of these ideas in Bannerlord. I don't know what is practical or possible at this stage of the game's development.
I view this as a purely hypothetical exercise in tinfoil hat development. So please feel free to go as big or as broad as you want with your ideas. If you want to keep you ideas grounded in reality of this game title and what may be practical feel free to do that as well. However, I've placed this thread in the general comment section and not not the suggested feedback thread for a reason.
Cheers.