What else remains to be explained?

[Odradek]

I think I might be stretching this but are we able to control two or more parties at once.

I think I noticed a hint for a feature that - as far as I noticed - was never mentioned before: It seems you will be able to control several parties in Bannerlord.

Background theory:
- Observation: The clan screen clearly states that you can add parties to your clan
- Observation: If you zoom out on the map screen you see a portrait of the player character as a replacement for his map model
- Assumption: If you zoom out on the map screen while having several parties in your clan you will see portraits of the leaders of these parties
- Assumption: If you click on a leader of your clan you will start to control this leader character and his party
Edit:
- Evidence: They added the resemblance between map-character-model and scene-character-model to enable the player to differentiate between the parties he can control
- Evidence: They added companions to all party-leaders because the player also wants to have companions when he is switching to another leader of his clan

 

[RoboSenshi]

Yes we know for sure that multiple parties in a clan is a thing. The only thing we don't know is how they'll be controlled. Hopefully the awesome way that we want or the crap way through dialogue like WB.

 

[NPC99]

It seems unlikely that TW would code two different systems to control multiple parties. Accordingly, I expect multiple clan parties to be controlled like armies, allowing the clan leader to summon and task clan parties or have them accompany him/her. Hopefully, there will be little or no influence cost to ordering members of your own clan that should only kick in when you manipulate non-clan members of your faction.

 

[John_M]

I don't expect you to be able to hop around and control different characters. Mount and Blade has been about following a single character, now lineage of characters, not a clan or faction. This feature, while welcome imo, doesn't seem like something TW would add. I would guess, as others have said, that you can simply control other parties through the commands from your own character.

 

[Bjorn The Dead]

I don't expect you to be able to hop around and control different characters.

This is what I expect also. Besides it wouldn't feel like a rpg game if you are able to hop around the parties which are in your clan.

 

[Hernanxd16]

I also hope in game the other parties can't be controlled directly but by giving them orders. If the player can "change character" wouldn't fit the game.

 

[RoboSenshi]

Giving orders directly would be so incredibly tedious if you are trying to issue complex orders to your clan parties. Having them just accompany you will put you at a disadvantage cause other clans will have multiple parties doing their own thing. I don't see anything wrong with having your main besiege a castle and then have your other clan party raid some villages or engage enemy lords. It just adds more depth to the current system.

With a direct order system, you would have to break the siege, find and ride to your other party (which we know sucks from our experiences in Warband) then give them the new order. By that time the entire situation could have changed.

And when I say switch parties I mean for movement purposes only. Of course you should only be able to fight on the battle map with your main. Other party engagements can he auto resolved.

 

[Roccoflipside]

I would think a simple solution would be to give orders through a messenger of sorts. That way you aren't jumping from place to place, character to character, but you also don't have to leave what you're doing to seek out where the other party is to give them orders. I do think, however, that being able to see where your parties are by zooming out on the map, or perhaps through an option in the camp or something.

 

[RoboSenshi]

What if the messenger is killed en route? Or your other party gets distracted on their way by a bunch of bandit parties. You know how the AI can be. Plus situations can change at the drop of a hat. Sending a messenger would he very inefficient in conveying complex orders to your other party.

Since you want to be able to control them anyway and the other party would have auto resolved battles, why not just have the parties switchable? You lose nothing and you get a much easier and convenient system.

Sending Messengers in general is too much realism for me. I feel it will add tedium and take away from the game.

 

[Terco_Viejo]

I share the view of NPC99 that clan parties will operate in the same way as faction armies. But of course...we don't really know how the latter work...
I would be happy if we could deploy a VC style political map but "more current (2017-18-19 graphics)" where we can establish strategic objectives/points by positioning "tactical tacks" (I don't know how to explain it better) with such orders: wait here, patrol here, defend here, attack this, defend this, I'm being besieged-help me, send me x soldiers, escort me as an advance guard, etc...I think it's understandable.

 

[Roccoflipside]

What if the messenger is killed en route? Or your other party gets distracted on their way by a bunch of bandit parties. You know how the AI can be. Plus situations can change at the drop of a hat. Sending a messenger would he very inefficient in conveying complex orders to your other party.

Since you want to be able to control them anyway and the other party would have auto resolved battles, why not just have the parties switchable? You lose nothing and you get a much easier and convenient system.

Sending Messengers in general is too much realism for me. I feel it will add tedium and take away from the game.

I suppose, as M&B isn't turn based but real time on the campaign map, I'm worried about what happens to my "main" party while I'm off controlling a secondary party. What if you're controlling that second party and a huge enemy army attacks your main character, but you don't have the chance to escape because you're too busy controlling your second cousin's party? Plus, as others have said, M&B is more about following the story of one character, or in this case family, rather than about controlling an entire kingdom/empire like a TW game.

Also when I say sending a messenger, I don't mean for there to actually be a messenger party on the map that then has to intercept my other party to give them the message. I was implying, from the camp screen or something similar, there'd be an option to "send a message to another party", and then, depending on how far away the other party was, a certain amt. of time later those orders would be followed automatically. No chance of orders not being received, although that could make for an interesting mod. Additionally, parties following orders wouldn't attack random parties unless following a "patrol" order, rather they would go straight to the target. However, this is all just an idea, so don't anyone look to far into it.

 

[RoboSenshi]

You have a very good point about being distracted when controlling both parties. The best solution I guess would he to have both avenues available and optional. Cause I like tour suggestions as well. I don't mind micro managing so I would use the switch feature a lot and try and keep track of both parties. It would be a challenge but that's a good thing in my opinion.

However, knowing TW they will probably have multiple parties available only to follow you when you form an army or re hash the old WB way. Of course one hopes they do something new and exciting but "hope" as we know is problematic.

 

[Terco_Viejo]

Obviously the action would not be in real time, nor would be necessary to send messengers. A UI tab like the existing ones where time is stopped, you do the action, close the tab and get the result of the option in a time lapse. Adapt the warband marshall window to a friendly user interface, making it connect to the world map in dashboard mode.

Anything like that?

In Bannerlord we will have quick conversation access to any character clicking on it. A political map with the option to activate and deactivate different captions (borders, cities, etc.) with drop down action options for the captain of your different parties...oh mama...it would be very interesting. 
I would use the beautiful map that they have nowadays, taking only the orography and all the remaining information through 2D icons and overlaying graphic information.

 

[FBohler]

TW should hire Terco Viejo, this guy is a legend!

 

[RoboSenshi]

Obviously the action would not be in real time, nor would be necessary to send messengers. A UI tab like the existing ones where time is stopped, you do the action, close the tab and get the result of the option in a time lapse. Adapt the warband marshall window to a friendly user interface, making it connect to the world map in dashboard mode.

Anything like that?

In Bannerlord we will have quick conversation access to any character clicking on it. A political map with the option to activate and deactivate different captions (borders, cities, etc.) with drop down action options for the captain of your different parties...oh mama...it would be very interesting. 
I would use the beautiful map that they have nowadays, taking only the orography and all the remaining information through 2D icons and overlaying graphic information.

This. I like this.

 

[Terco_Viejo]

Obviously the action would not be in real time, nor would be necessary to send messengers. A UI tab like the existing ones where time is stopped, you do the action, close the tab and get the result of the option in a time lapse. Adapt the warband marshall window to a friendly user interface, making it connect to the world map in dashboard mode.

Anything like that?

Spoiler

In Bannerlord we will have quick conversation access to any character clicking on it. A political map with the option to activate and deactivate different captions (borders, cities, etc.) with drop down action options for the captain of your different parties...oh mama...it would be very interesting. 
I would use the beautiful map that they have nowadays, taking only the orography and all the remaining information through 2D icons and overlaying graphic information.

This. I like this.

I have version 2.0 that I commented here 

Spoiler: Tercosketch v.2

Map of natural resources and processed goods: wood, cotton, furs, horses, iron, clay, olives, grain, cattle, oil, beer, meat, linen, flour, ceramics, weapons, fabrics, etc ....
Map of prosperity in settlements: Demographic growth, rates, wealth, public order, developed projects/level walls...
Faction property map: Border borders and settlements belonging to each faction.
Clan property map: settlements belonging to each clan.
Map Hostilities- Attitude faction and minor factions: At war, allied, neutral.
Military force map: Garrison settlements, moral armies,...
Commercial routes map: visualization by factions of commercial routes/caravans.

 

[SwedeBalls]

Obviously the action would not be in real time, nor would be necessary to send messengers. A UI tab like the existing ones where time is stopped, you do the action, close the tab and get the result of the option in a time lapse. Adapt the warband marshall window to a friendly user interface, making it connect to the world map in dashboard mode.

Anything like that?

In Bannerlord we will have quick conversation access to any character clicking on it. A political map with the option to activate and deactivate different captions (borders, cities, etc.) with drop down action options for the captain of your different parties...oh mama...it would be very interesting. 
I would use the beautiful map that they have nowadays, taking only the orography and all the remaining information through 2D icons and overlaying graphic information.

That’s along the lines of what I was thinking. Go to the clan tab, select a party that would fit your needs for the mission and order them through the tab. For instance if you want to besiege a certain castle you would order your most mobile party to go raid the enemy lands to lure out their lords thereby making the siege much easier with the enemy commander off trying to catch the raiders.

Which brings me to something I’ve been wondering for a while: when sieging a settlement do you think the presence of a lord will have an effect on the way the ai performs and the way the defenders set up? So if there’s a lord there would be a more logical defense staged with them using choke points, tactical retreats and logical artillery choices, whereas without a lord the ai makes stands in less defensible areas and chooses to use less logical artillery?

 

[Roccoflipside]

I'm not sure how much the lord's personality affects this, but we do know that both the attacker and defender in a siege can choose one of (iirc) 3 tactics to follow, which can be changed at any time. Now, I'm not sure if this will affect actual battle ai or just the number of casualties during the campaign map section of the siege, but it at least promises to make sieges less of a one-dimensional rush the ladder/siege tower and hope you've got enough troops to kill everything on the other side.

 

[xdj1nn]

I have opened this thread only with the intention of turning it into an informative tool and space for debate without entering into heated discussions about the Bannerlord development process and its launch date. Don't get me wrong, I don't want the question to sound like "have we arrived yet?"

Throughout the 17 Legacy Devlbogs (Era Lust) and the 74 current Devblogs (Era Callum) we have been discovering new features and accepting with resignation the elimination of others due to technical impossibilities or rethinking as part of the complex development that a game like Bannerlord supposes. Who more who less (more who have been following the development during all these years - others have succumbed to the inexorable passage of time) is well informed in broad strokes about the different mechanics, dynamics and different features that exist in the game.

Assuming that illustrious users, walking libraries and reliable sources of information to drink from (your skull) are co-existing in this forum, I launch this question to the Community:

What else remains to be explained?
You have in mind a feature that has not yet been discussed? if so, share it with all of us.

Community General Concerns

Dynasties
Character Traits
System event (backstory of grudges and feuds)
Seasons system -Climatic effects on battlefield
Ambushes Link of official confirmation of its non-existence as a feature
Formations and combat AI (link)
Character creation
Permadeath system
Sergeant System
Gang system and ✔ criminal operations (link)
Siege Tactics system
Settlement issues
Custom banner editor
✔ Settlement management (link)
Special NPC services
Dynamic Quests
Caravans and market stimulation policies
Caravans and Peasant revolts attacking settlements



​

release date should be in the list
or a date for release date announcement
or a date for a date for a date for release date announcement

 

[Terco_Viejo]

Regarding the control of parties I rescue the following Callum comment:

With the way our army system works in Bannerlord, you could leave part of the army besieging a castle and split off the rest of it to go around raiding villages, patrol, etc. (link)