We need a real serious revamp of how Player's Units/Parties are treated by the game. Why is it do hard to just leave them ALONE!

Users who are viewing this thread

Duh_TaleWorlds

Developer
I’ve seen this line come up a few times in the last couple of days, its very true, but is it something that is/was adressed within the team? Is it spoken of and would the devs engage or want to engage more if we werent as hostile? Not relevant, just curious, if you dont want to answer that is ofcourse fine since its way off topic.
Personally, I do take time off the forums if I am drained of energy and I find such interactions draining.
 

Phantom425

Sergeant
I’ve seen this line come up a few times in the last couple of days, its very true, but is it something that is/was adressed within the team? Is it spoken of and would the devs engage or want to engage more if we werent as hostile? Not relevant, just curious, if you dont want to answer that is ofcourse fine since its way off topic.
The fact that this question needs to be asked genuinely distresses me.
 
Personally, I do take time off the forums if I am drained of energy and I find such interactions draining.

I’m sorry about that, I can imagine how that must be. We often forget through the anonimity of the interweb that there actual people on the otherside of that username. Thank you for staying engaged!
 
His point is accurate and relates to what is being discussed - unlike the points of others. (At least I certainly didn't discuss "too complex". Indeed, the topic is discussing additional options for players - on top of the additional options that were introduced already (wage slider, etc.).

It would also be great if you could refrain from flame-baiting users. At best you are discouraging developers from engaging.
Is his point accurate though? Maybe it's accurate to the design decisions but I would guess that the majority of players do not feel that the game needs less/the same level of control, they would argue for more options of control over the things they own. Seems to be a pretty common grievance with the game. And nobody asked for complete control over all individual soldiers in battle or parties on the map, I have no idea why he would bring that up.

Everyone always takes light jives so seriously, I guess I should indeed keep it down, then.
 

Duh_TaleWorlds

Developer
And nobody asked for complete control over all individual soldiers in battle or parties on the map, I have no idea why he would bring that up.
Likely to exemplify the general approach in this regard. Still, it's not black and white. The topic is exploring more control for the player, not less, after all.
 

black_bulldog

Knight at Arms
WBWF&SVC
At best you are discouraging developers from engaging.
Duh I don't personally know you, but I have a lot respect for the work you've done and how well you communicate here on these forums. But I'm having a hard time believing that you and your fellow employees can't disagree with people here without getting your feelings hurt.

Your company is one of the worst at communicating with fans I've ever seen, whether this is a cultural thing, a language thing or a company attitude I don't know. I'm not saying that to be an ass it's my honest opinion.

Sorry for derailing this thread. I don't need nor expect a response Duh just giving an opinion.
 

Dabos37

Sergeant Knight at Arms
Personally, I do take time off the forums if I am drained of energy and I find such interactions draining.

Sorry for that and for the times I have been toxic too. It is for sure something which could burn out everyone after having to read every day tons of complains, insults, etc.

Hopefully people start understanding how counterproductive this behavior is.
 
I'm so fed up with the way this game just tosses troops out for no reason at all. I've made other reports and post about the garrison related garbage, food garbage, I seen plenty of people complain about clan parties just losing troops for reason, well I'm paying close attention in 1.6.1 and it just vanishes a elite troops form my clan party, in an army with me for no reason at all. We have plenty of food, money and they weren't even at party cap (not that it should matter). I'm checking it constantly as I replace their party with the troops I want so I notice it just suddenly drops 1 for no reason. I have to load an old save from 30 mins ago now, because nothing is more valuable then 1 good troops. I takes days of campaign time to go replace it. I wish to I could just tell my clam member to make the troops I want instead of having to swap troops with them but of course that's too much right?
I agree, we need to add the ability to prohibit clan members from transferring units to garrisons.
 

Duh_TaleWorlds

Developer
But I'm having a hard time believing that you and your fellow employees can't disagree with people here without getting your feelings hurt.
You can imagine it like working in any service industry. Civil disagreements and complaints are par for the course and part of the job. Abusive conduct (to staff or other customers) can be too (though my family kicks them out) but are certainly more exhausting than the civil ones.

Interactions on the forums (or elsewhere) are not part of the job for most developers.

Yet professional, respectful interaction is a baseline for us and so is careful communication (f.e. not making promises about things that are uncertain). If that interaction leads to the intentional distortion of arguments or personal attacks that go beyond good hearted banter, it is draining (for myself) to continue it. Not to mention that it is much less productive.
 

Ananda_The_Destroyer

Master Knight
Man I was just gonna let it be because I felt this thread wrapped up nicely but if we're going to keep it up.
The entire point of the game is that you don't have control
I do and I want more. I can disband that party, I can strip that npc to the skin and kick em out of my clan. This troop misplacement issues are oversights and it's not at all part the grand bannerlord vision that "sometimes troops just get deleted or given away for no good reason."
In battles you don't control each soldier like an RTS
I try my best to and desiring basic troops targeting group at group is a highly requested feature. Although I do agree with what @Callum said in a similar discussion that it's better improve the units AI so that specific targeting isn't needed but I think both would be better. It would make sense for archer to know on their own to focus down the enemy ranged that firing on them and ignore the slow moving harmless infantry BUT it's also fine for the player to be able to chose "FF enemy (highlight group like RTS command mod) to have peace of mind that they have ranged thier ranged to take out the enemy ranged first. The troop combat in bannerlord is absolutely RTS, the player is encouraged and expected to position and order troops, the lack of targeting a group at a group is just 1 small missing peace.
But what you're asking for is exactly the ability to micromanage the game - you want 100% control over what your clan parties do.
It's kinda the opposite though, me having to check the parties' troops constantly and avoid going into a allied town so they don't donate my special troops is way more hassle then just a option to prohibit such actions. Of course I would like to manage more aspects of the Clan because that adds GAMEPLAY and depth, but that's another subject.

Maybe it's accurate to the design decisions but I would guess that the majority of players do not feel that the game needs less/the same level of control, they would argue for more options of control over the things they own. Seems to be a pretty common grievance with the game.
It's very common for sure. Most players are appalled and confused that they can't make a Clan party just patrol thier fief or do issues or fallow them and it's very often asked "Well what is it for then?". Likewise that lack of command for a ruler is similarly criticized and questions "What are all these vassals for if they just do as they please?".

And I know some people get grumpy when they read "Most Players"... "But I'm a player and I don't think that !" All year I have read many many comments and questions about this lack of control over parties and I have not ever once read anyone comment "wow I love that I can make a clan party and it just wander's around and I can't make it do anything and it wastes tunz of my money." or "It's really cool how my vassals just waddle around in armies back and forth and don't defend thier fiefs and can't be told to siege a town and so cool they vote to end and start wars in a manner to prevent me from snowballing the map while they do nothing."
 

KingEroc1st

Veteran
personally i think the more options a player has to change, the more he can play the game the way he wants. which is the point of having fun.
I have found the lack of options makes achieving a desired result more difficult, kinda like creating a small wood carving with a jackhammer.
 

black_bulldog

Knight at Arms
WBWF&SVC
You can imagine it like working in any service industry. Civil disagreements and complaints are par for the course and part of the job. Abusive conduct (to staff or other customers) can be too (though my family kicks them out) but are certainly more exhausting than the civil ones.

Interactions on the forums (or elsewhere) are not part of the job for most developers.

Yet professional, respectful interaction is a baseline for us and so is careful communication (f.e. not making promises about things that are uncertain). If that interaction leads to the intentional distortion of arguments or personal attacks that go beyond good hearted banter, it is draining (for myself) to continue it. Not to mention that it is much less productive.
I appreciate your candor. I certainly understand where your coming from. But regardless of how badly some people act, I feel there's real value in being able to communicate with devs and hear your thoughts and insights. I just wish other TW devs could understand that.
 

Askorti

Sergeant Knight at Arms
WB
personally i think the more options a player has to change, the more he can play the game the way he wants. which is the point of having fun.
I have found the lack of options makes achieving a desired result more difficult, kinda like creating a small wood carving with a jackhammer.
I wholeheartedly agree. You know that something is wrong with a system, when an element of your progression that is supposed to be a big milestone in your rise in power (getting vassals/clan parties) is sometimes more detrimental to you as a player than beneficial. And the way parties treat troops that you give them is often just that, a detriment.
 

Madeloc

Recruit
I do see the conflict here - we want our parties to have some autonomy - to recruit/upgrade new troops within their budget etc... but to not throw away those that we give to them - so we can safely give them high level troops that they have the budget to keep...

A functioning toggle for keeping them - the same as we have for inventory items and troops/prisoners in our own party would work wonders...and solve Ananda's issue I think.

If there were parties over budget, they should drop unchecked troops first...
We need more control on our parties.
For exemple, my heroe who « commands » my knights, once gave - after a successfull siege - 90 out of almost 200 banner knights to garison the castle ! Provided how the IA will let that castle back to the ennemy, it’s a pure waste.
And with limited budget they are still recruiting and dropping high tiers once the budget is over !
I think it would be easier for the player to have full control on his parties :
- types of troops
- what to do or not
- taking prisoners Lords when in an army
- At the moment I do not trust at all the AI to be able to do something correct with the troops i’d give
 

Lazregamesh

Sergeant
WB
I'm so fed up with the way this game just tosses troops out for no reason at all. I've made other reports and post about the garrison related garbage, food garbage, I seen plenty of people complain about clan parties just losing troops for reason, well I'm paying close attention in 1.6.1 and it just vanishes a elite troops form my clan party, in an army with me for no reason at all. We have plenty of food, money and they weren't even at party cap (not that it should matter). I'm checking it constantly as I replace their party with the troops I want so I notice it just suddenly drops 1 for no reason. I have to load an old save from 30 mins ago now, because nothing is more valuable then 1 good troops. I takes days of campaign time to go replace it. I wish to I could just tell my clam member to make the troops I want instead of having to swap troops with them but of course that's too much right?
Okay, I found semi workaround by just inspecting thier troops immediately after each battle to upgrade thier recruits for them, but still I want to trust them with my hunky guys!

@Duh_TaleWorlds @SadShogun @Dejan I don't know at all who deals with this mechanic but please, it needs to be locked down tight so that the troops the player raises up can't get thrown away for ANY reason what so ever. If I can't just use and keep the troops I want I don't understand what the point of playing this game is supposed to be? I should just keep making the party I want and it deletes it's self "oh you put it in a garrison.." "Oh the clan party...... number....?????..."

Troops should NEVER be thrown away or given away or ANYTHING else, no mechanic or reason is acceptable. I, the human player picked out and raised up those troops myself and I expect to use them until they die in battle.
I agree, we should also have the option to tell our parties to only sell prisoners and never recruit them. Sometimes i just want them to kill looters and not join armies so i keep the party small and fast, what they tend to do however since the budget is small, they toss expensive troops in order to make room for lower tier recruits to fill their numbers, an option to limit max number/party strength ration might help with letting them know you want a small elite force to run around and protect your assets until further notice.
We could have it as a dialogue option where you choose party size (Small/medium/max)
Train all the way, minimal training, balanced, never train.
Refill options, take troops from nearby garrison if garrison is such and such (If your town have small number then they won't for instance) Or Recruit with preferences, Cavalry, ranged focused, footman. (it would help them with choosing upgrade paths) This could be ideal if you want them to run around a grab as many ranged troop while you are fighting in the front lines.
Anyways, i hope these things aren't that complex otherwise, great job so far, i am having a blast :grin:
 

Ted Striker

Veteran
The entire point of the game is that you don't have control, though. In battles you don't control each soldier like an RTS. On the map, you don't control every party like Total War. You play as one character and the other characters make their own decisions independent of you, it's the entire premise of the franchise.

That doesn't mean the AI should be frustrating and constantly working against you but time and time again people get upset because AI parties make decisions. People want to micromanage stuff like the troops of clan parties and that's just not what the game is about.
So how about issuing basic orders, like "prioritize bandit parties" (regardless of it would ever work because of speed differences), "do not donate t4-t6 troops to garrisons, "do not join AI's armies"

Fairly simple orders to influence what the AI does but doesn't directly control them.
 
Top Bottom