What do you guys think of the new features being removed?

[TehRalph]

Maybe this lord and companion thing will be blended. How about a system where lords can have companions, companions can get fiefs, so companions can become lords and lords can become companions if they lose their land?

I think that's exactly what the clan system is. The clan leader is awarded fiefs by the faction leader and can divide up smaller parts of that land to their clan members if they so wish. In a gamescom video there was the overhead description of a village saying that the surrounding land was MOSTLY owned by so-and-so of X clan.

 

[CaptainLee]

Isn't lords having companions already confirmed feature?

It's mentioned here- https://www.gamersnexus.net/gg/2743-mount-and-blade-bannerlord-what-we-know-so-far

NPC lords can now also recruit companions of their own.

Presumably it's still in though I do wonder if they have them from the start of the game and are drawn from a separate pool to the player or whether they are more permanent retainers than recruitables.

 

[ArnulfFloyd]

Nothing interesting

I remember as community was happy during Gamescom but devblog make some people lost interest in game because... release date and removal of some unimportant features

 

[The Meddling Monk]

Ability to build a stockade around the village with a not so durable gate, impregnable without siege equipment, giving effects like slowing raids, little advantage to the defending archers in scene and giving a chance to shelter some stocks and villagers (farther the castle, lesser the chance, success would grant a faster renewal after raid) would be more credible. It would also leave a big part of the village scenes and AI maps reusable.

I think this would be a good compromise.

 

[R4MPZY]

If you mean this sentence: "The solution was changing the status of villages so that they would no longer be considered independent fiefs but were always attached to a castle or town. "
It is the same as Warband. If you conquer a castle or town you conquer the attached villages. But you could own a village in Warband without owning the castle that village was attached to.

Not really, If you capture a castle or town in warband you get the town/castle and every village thats associated with it yes,And then the faction leader decides who gets the castle AND for every village but in Bannerlord a castle and village are 1 fief, meaning if you get the castle awarded to you, you also get the village, the village management screen has been replaced by 1 management screen for both the castle/town and the village with it

This removed the necessity to have a management screen for villages and simplified and streamlined the system. The aesthetics of our new villages is also much more pleasing.

You manage your village when your in your castle management screen. You cannot get only villages anymore.

Certainly it would be weird to manage your village from a castle you don't own so probably you are right.
But if that is the case I am worried about the number of fiefs.
https://forums.taleworlds.com/index.php/topic,378752.msg9022179.html#msg9022179
There you can see that at the moment we will have 65 castles, 265 villages and 52 cities. (Asuming that numbers are correct, I only checked the number of cities)
In Warband we have 48 castles, 22 towns and 111 villages. And as possible owners we have 120 lords and 6 kings. So 126 owners for 181 fiefs.
In Bannerlord if we have 1 king and 20 lords for each faction as it is in Warband we would have 168 possible owners for 117 fiefs.
Considering that numbers I am not sure about villages being unable to be owned separately.

Someone else once counted around 120 Towns & Castles, but like you said we can't be sure yet.

And where do you count 20 lords for each faction? I only count 10 clans max for each faction. And i'm assuming that not everone in a clan has a castle or town, it wouldn't surprise me if only the leader of a clan had any fiefs, his subordinates could guard or even govern them sure, but not own them since they answer to the leader.

 

[Oxtocoatl]

It`s a shame about the minor factions, though surely easily modded. I was hoping the minor factions would enable a larger variety of playstyles that aren`t tied to land ownership.

Regarding the castles, it`s probably far easier to balance the way it is now, particularly for the end game. I do wish there were ways to upgrade defenses in one`s villages, kinda like in Novas Aetas where you could build walls as an improvement.

 

[monoolho]

Not being able to upgrade a village to a castle, while personally I would have liked to be to, it always would of had problems. To put it simply it would have added a lot of complexity and bloat the game. So while disappointed I can accept this. Honestly I would have been fine with building a castle (as a separate settlement) right next to the castle.

That being said I was actually much more interested in joining a minor faction, joining a non-major faction (and potentially making it rise to power) was a very exciting concept for me. I really do hope that they are able to implement it in the future and I do see this feature as being more likely than the other because I believe there are less problems associated with it.

I actually like the way they are going with this, i hate how in warband you get a random village as your first fief, and by the time you get a castle/town they are on the opposite sides of the map, and you're never in time to save your village in time.
Now your village is right next/near your castle since they count as 1 fief, and even if you have several your family or clan could guard them.

These.

It's not such a big deal, even the minor factions, as I never knew we could join them. And I'm sure it will be modded in eventually. Also, we can still create our own faction, I think, so the concept of starting from a small place is still there, but more customizeable. I know I'm putting my faith in modders too much, but it is still possible. Given all the problems they've had over the last 6 years, I accept them cutting stuff now, so they can release it soon, and later on releasing it as (free) DLC.

 

[R4MPZY]

隐藏

Not being able to upgrade a village to a castle, while personally I would have liked to be to, it always would of had problems. To put it simply it would have added a lot of complexity and bloat the game. So while disappointed I can accept this. Honestly I would have been fine with building a castle (as a separate settlement) right next to the castle.

That being said I was actually much more interested in joining a minor faction, joining a non-major faction (and potentially making it rise to power) was a very exciting concept for me. I really do hope that they are able to implement it in the future and I do see this feature as being more likely than the other because I believe there are less problems associated with it.

I actually like the way they are going with this, i hate how in warband you get a random village as your first fief, and by the time you get a castle/town they are on the opposite sides of the map, and you're never in time to save your village in time.
Now your village is right next/near your castle since they count as 1 fief, and even if you have several your family or clan could guard them.

These.

It's not such a big deal, even the minor factions, as I never knew we could join them. And I'm sure it will be modded in eventually. Also, we can still create our own faction, I think, so the concept of starting from a small place is still there, but more customizeable. I know I'm putting my faith in modders too much, but it is still possible. Given all the problems they've had over the last 6 years, I accept them cutting stuff now, so they can release it soon, and later on releasing it as (free) DLC.

Modders have done amazing jobs on Warband so far, and hopefully with the improved and easier to access modding tools for bannerlord aswell, i wouldn't say you're putting to much faith in modders.

 

[Bladerider]

If you mean this sentence: "The solution was changing the status of villages so that they would no longer be considered independent fiefs but were always attached to a castle or town. "
It is the same as Warband. If you conquer a castle or town you conquer the attached villages. But you could own a village in Warband without owning the castle that village was attached to.

Not really, If you capture a castle or town in warband you get the town/castle and every village thats associated with it yes,And then the faction leader decides who gets the castle AND for every village but in Bannerlord a castle and village are 1 fief, meaning if you get the castle awarded to you, you also get the village, the village management screen has been replaced by 1 management screen for both the castle/town and the village with it

This removed the necessity to have a management screen for villages and simplified and streamlined the system. The aesthetics of our new villages is also much more pleasing.

You manage your village when your in your castle management screen. You cannot get only villages anymore.

Certainly it would be weird to manage your village from a castle you don't own so probably you are right.
But if that is the case I am worried about the number of fiefs.
https://forums.taleworlds.com/index.php/topic,378752.msg9022179.html#msg9022179
There you can see that at the moment we will have 65 castles, 265 villages and 52 cities. (Asuming that numbers are correct, I only checked the number of cities)
In Warband we have 48 castles, 22 towns and 111 villages. And as possible owners we have 120 lords and 6 kings. So 126 owners for 181 fiefs.
In Bannerlord if we have 1 king and 20 lords for each faction as it is in Warband we would have 168 possible owners for 117 fiefs.
Considering that numbers I am not sure about villages being unable to be owned separately.

Someone else once counted around 120 Towns & Castles, but like you said we can't be sure yet.

And where do you count 20 lords for each faction? I only count 10 clans max for each faction. And i'm assuming that not everone in a clan has a castle or town, it wouldn't surprise me if only the leader of a clan had any fiefs, his subordinates could guard or even govern them sure, but not own them since they answer to the leader.

"if we have 1 king and 20 lords for each faction as it is in Warband"
The 20 lords for each faction is in Warband. I used it to estimate a possible number of lords in Bannerlord.

 

[R4MPZY]

"if we have 1 king and 20 lords for each faction as it is in Warband"
The 20 lords for each faction is in Warband. I used it to estimate a possible number of lords in Bannerlord.

Oh yeah like that, Well when looking at the footage and screenshots of leaders and the clans serving them i count max 1 leader and 10 clans assuming each leader of a clan is a lord, serving directly under the Leader ( one of the biggest being Western Empire ) so i dont think there will be 20, we will have to wait and see

 

[xdj1nn]

Nothing interesting

I remember as community was happy during Gamescom but devblog make some people lost interest in game because... release date and removal of some unimportant features

I'd attribute that much more towards excessive development time with the plus of any sort of removal from previously teased content. But that's not me tbh.

What killed it to me is the fact that Armagan insistently teases with pseudo-hints of release and TW never announces any date, that translates in total lack of any sort of deadline.
Since 2015 I've been saying that this lack of compromise with any sort of deadline would only end up with rehashes of the game (which indeed happened a lot), and such rehashes are bound to result in tons of cut content due to the fact that they are occupied re-inventing the wheel instead of implementing new things, translating into even more excessive delays, and can turn the development into an never-ending vicious cycle (which also happened) or they'll cut anything that they don't consider "core" which results in cuts like those mentioned before.

Until they announce any sort of date it means there are no deadlines, and no deadlines means it'll never be finished. My current guess is the following: the game will get released suddenly without being finished at some point, from there on-wards everything will be about patches which could mean years of fixes until the game is truly enjoyable.
That doesn't mean it'll be bad, that means it won't be as good as "advertised", which is enough to turn heads all over the place. My biff is mostly with this abysmal operative model, it's not with the development of the game itself, it's with how things are being run, which consequently killed my faith concerning the results. Imho I think BL won't be anything but mediocre judging it by the high-standards they've striven for, that doesn't mean it'll be bad, that means it'll be average, that combined on how the business was run makes me not want to spend money endorsing such, just like I do with many other games / companies since a decade ago. I never buy games from EA no matter how good (well marketed) they are, I've adhered to a total boycott on Bethesda too, on any DLC Gatling-gun based models (like most of the games published by Paradox), so on so forth. If BL doesn't achieve extremely high-standards quality I won't purchase it for the same reasons: I refuse to support business models that I hate. Funny enough if people were more strict, like I am, many of these bizarre business models would never grow, but instead people keep feeding them like zombies, and we see EA doing the atrocities it does due to that. Bethesda's following the same path as EA, and many others are on their tail. And I don't even think it's worth mentioning the reason behind all the trauma regard Early Access, which's also a result of bad behavior from costumers, who complain but keep buying 

 

[ArnulfFloyd]

I lose my interest in waiting Bannerlord already because seems a lost hope

 

[Gurkhal]

If it makes the game released sooner than I'm all for it. Now granted I had really looked forward to ride with the Cossacks of Calradia, but I'd rather have a game without Cossacks than no game with Cossacks.

 

[xdj1nn]

I lose my interest in waiting Bannerlord already because seems a lost hope

It's not that, it's just that I have vision, too much for my own taste, over paths. I am good at predicting patterns which lead to certain results. Sure BL can be a miracle, but if it indeed follows this path, TW will be tainted and their next games are gonna be problematic.
All companies start on the bad path with a single title which doesn't exactly become bad itself, but it draws the path for new games and those become the real trash.
Bioware started down this path with ME2 (which people praise, and indeed it's a good game, but it's what started their downfall), after that we've got DA2 (total trash), DAI (total trash), ME3 (total trash), ME Andromeda (their suicide). Same goes for Bethesda who due to a miracle has managed to make 2 decent games before definitively destroying their model: Started with Oblivion, then Skyrim came which is arguably bad, but many people loved it, then Fallout 4 (which is total trash). Not for the whole Zenimax cashing in for ESO (MMO), I could easily see Bethesda being sold to some satan-spawn like EA, but regardless, until they get rid of Todd Howard and replace him with someone who doesn't bow to every suit whim, they'll follow the same path as Bioware, but independently without EA ever touching them (which's a miracle, generally EA is the culprit of destroying most game companies).

People can doubt my predictions, they always do, but I'm very rarely wrong, and when I am wrong it's due to information hidden from me.

BTW I can differentiate personal tastes from these predictions of mine, Rockstar makes GTA, I hate GTA 5, but it's good, it's AAA, it's not dumbed down, wasn't developed in a bad way. So they'll keep being good. I really preferred the titles before the lore reset, my favorite being San Andreas, but then again, none of their games after that were bad. I also have a biff with the fact that Red Dead Redemption never got released on PC, but then again, it's a personal biff rather than a intellectual one (I hate consoles)

PS: The reason why I am so vocal and annoying here is because I do care for M&B in general, I loved their game for years even though I can't stand it now-a-days, and I'd be happy to see them thrive with BL and make something better than M&B, better than anything anyone could do... So I had high-hope for BL when it was first teased, but after 5 years of such tease and countless fake-announcements I've grown weary and started to notice a bad pattern, so here I am, 7-8 years later trying to fight something which I can't control.

 

[ArnulfFloyd]

I am interested by Bannerlord but I accept reality - nothing after 7 years sounds weird for me

 

[vota dc]

You are confusing games with Matrix trilogy.
DAI was a little better than DA2. ME2 wasn't inferior than ME3, both are inferior than ME1.

All GTA titles are very good but still GTA4 is a dumbed down version of GTA3 with less features, expecially if you compare it to San Andreas.

 

[ArnulfFloyd]

Same thing goes for Age of Empires series - first good, second best and third bad in all aspects. All series suffers same fate

 

[John the Roleplayer]

[...]

BTW I can differentiate personal tastes from these predictions of mine, [...]

Then you are of course aware that calling a game trash is an entirely subjective opinion. It appears that your predictions are based on these opinions. They can thus be no more than predictions of your personal sentiment towards future games, and at no point contain objective facts.
Counter-example: I feel that Skyrim is better than Oblivion, and I also like Fallout 4. I am therefore very much looking forward to future Bethesda titles and expect to like them too. I don't think the company is declining in any way.

 

[ArnulfFloyd]

I found Total War Attila better than overrated Rome Total War and Medieval II Total War or CK2 beats EU4, also newer games were more complex than old games, this is my opinion.

 

[CaptainLee]

It's easy to predict correctly how things will turn out if you already have a preconceived subjective opinion about it.