What we have in Bannerlord pre-release dev diaries but not in game by now

Currently viewing this thread:

five bucks

Sergeant
They should either acknowledge the dropped features, accept the fault caused by misinformation, and provide some compensation by pointing at substitude features, or provide information about whether they will ever be implemented.
Absolutely. I know that when they gave the explanation for why they had to drop the advertised feature of building new castles, I was okay with it, because it did sound a bit ambitious and the explanation was somewhat reasonable.

Sure, there will always be some people who won't accept your explanation, but even more people get angry when a company silently dumps a bunch of advertised features that they used to drive hype to make sales for their game, and can't even bother to explain themselves.

Taleworlds made huge money on Bannerlord, they have obligations to fulfill. This isn't a tiny husband and wife indie company anymore.
 
Anyone remember one of the dev diaries talking about wandering NPC parties that act like your own? With their own objectives etc. I think this was going to be different than minor parties.
I don't quite understand the feature you described. Are you talking about NPC parties of player's clan or another independent clan with no fiefs?

That would be really cool but, as I understand it, because of the way they design scenes they'd have to completely rebuild the whole city scene to add a building, and rebuild it again for each level of that building, and again for every combination of building and their respective levels, and again for each city wall level, then make pathfinding etc. work for all of those variations... I don't really understand why it's done that way, perhaps I'm totally wrong, I hope I am.
TBH, I just don't fking understand why TW are going to manually implement pathfinding for each scene seperately, that's a huge waste of resources. The only proper reason I can found is reducing computation complexity. An ideal implementation could be divide into sub-areas, each as a verticle of a un-diected(or maybe directed?) linked graph with changeable edges(e.g. succesfully deplolyment of siege weapons can create new edge between 2 originally-disconnected sub-areas), then we need an algorithm to distribute weights for each sub-area and place destination for NPCs, then those commonly-used pathfinding algorithm can come to help compute route automatically. But obviously, letting the NPCs follow built-in commands like first go A then do B then go C then do D should cost much less computation steps than letting the NPCs do real-time computation based on weight of strategical point and pathfinding algorithm. Though complexity pressure induced by this kind of approaches can be somewhat reduced by grouping NPCs into squads then calculate route at squad level rather than individual level, since we even don't have a proper group formation system for commanding troops, this alternative does not look feasible.

About scenes changes issue, I don't really know how it works for M&B. But if what you desribed is true, I guess the reason might be rooted at data structure. And reason for that can be reducing runtime complexity or minimizing savefile/game folder size. If we have different scenes for each building completion, or even letting player DIY how the building will be placed, I can think of several ways of implementation, first, using coordiante system and built-in module of object models to represent a scenes, then construct the scenes using the above as input each time the scene is going to be loaded, but obviously the loading speed will be lowered; second,use coordinate system and module to consturct scene as the first approach, but let the computer construct and load the varied scenes into temporary memory when you load the save, but this will significantly increase save-loading time; third, just store varied scenes in save files, but this will significantly increase savefile size;fourth, we may have different scenes as built-in file in game folders, then the computer dont need to compute how the scene is supposed to be when the scenes is loaded, but this may significantly increase storage space occupation of the game folder as well as human resources requried to construct scenes. Personally speaking I felt the first approach is completely fine, though people compaining about loading speed when chatting with load in early patches, times of city scenes loading is much less compared to chatting of lord; not sure how others think about that.

Oh and as you mentioned, pathfinding problem, if we keeps having this pathfinding staff require manual adjustment of developer sure we cant have varied scenes for settlement.
 
Last edited:
I don't quite understand the feature you described. Are you talking about NPC parties of player's clan or another independent clan with no fiefs?
Independent clan with no fiefs. I guess this ended up being the minor factions (legion of the betrayed etc.) IIRC, they were supposed to have their own goals and agendas. Turns out they are just mercenary parties - at least atm.
 
Independent clan with no fiefs. I guess this ended up being the minor factions (legion of the betrayed etc.) IIRC, they were supposed to have their own goals and agendas. Turns out they are just mercenary parties - at least atm.
oh I see, so something like those nobles want to take back throne in Warband? That might be a good starting point if TW is going to implement this feature
 

AnandaShanti

Master Knight
Anyone remember one of the dev diaries talking about wandering NPC parties that act like your own? With their own objectives etc. I think this was going to be different than minor parties.
No and dammit now i wish you'd never told me !!
Yeah really! This one of those things I wanted, like rivals that started like you in the game and progressed...... that's sad if it was actually on the table at some point and got cut.
 
Wow... I've done my own research on particular missing features, but this hits hard. So many of these features are both vital to the M&B series or would've been an absolute game changer.

Then again, I guess that is the reason why so many of us are disgruntled in the first place.
 

Rbtparker13

Regular
A vassal of a vassal is my vassal
I don't know if anyone talked about this yet. But gosh darn it would be cool if there was minor nobles or something for your villages. It would also work really well with the rebellion system. With the minor nobles raising up against their duke.

Yet this is probably way too complex, probably. Don't know coding that much to know how complex that would be.
 
Last edited:
I don't know if anyone talked about this yet. But gosh darn it would be cool if there was minor nobles or something for your villages. It would also work really well with the rebellion system. With the minor nobles raising up against their duke.

Yet this is probably way too complex, probably. Don't know coding that much to know how complex that would be.
It's not too complex, it's just bug-prone. Most modders could do it in a week.
The most complex parts of the code are things like battle AI or the kingdom AI. You could work on these for months and they may still suck unless you are very competent.
 

Rbtparker13

Regular
it's just bug-prone
I'm curious, do you have any ideas what type of bugs that could be a problem with the lords and village idea?

And I figured battle ai would be a different beast altogether. Pathing, enemies, dangers, weapons, and more. I do not envy the people who code that part.
 
I'm curious, do you have any ideas what type of bugs that could be a problem with the lords and village idea?
We are talking about implementing a hierarchy of nobles with fiefs etc., right? The bug prone part is what happens when a noble dies or defects or is otherwise removed. The code needs to handle all the possibilities.
Also what are the possible interactions between liege and vassal: AI-AI, AI-player and player-AI? This could complicate things and add more time/effort for coding.
 

Rbtparker13

Regular
We are talking about implementing a hierarchy of nobles with fiefs etc., right? The bug prone part is what happens when a noble dies or defects or is otherwise removed. The code needs to handle all the possibilities.
Also what are the possible interactions between liege and vassal: AI-AI, AI-player and player-AI? This could complicate things and add more time/effort for coding.
Yeah a hierarchy is the best way of explaining it. Thanks for the info MadVader, just one last thing. For interactions with player and the minor subjects. (Petty lords? Minor lords? Village lords? Idk) I figure they would act as if they were part of your clan. But to the kingdom overall, they would probably be treated as permeant mercenary? And if they do receive a fief of their own, they forfeit the village. With another noble taking their place. Hell, maybe you can promote your companions into these roles?
 
We are talking about implementing a hierarchy of nobles with fiefs etc., right? The bug prone part is what happens when a noble dies or defects or is otherwise removed. The code needs to handle all the possibilities.
Also what are the possible interactions between liege and vassal: AI-AI, AI-player and player-AI? This could complicate things and add more time/effort for coding.

Won't you approach it by first listing out all the possible interactions then provide code that handles each case?

What would be the best way to solve this type of problem? I'd very much love to see a mod like this with working relations. Do you guys actually study the whole code before you begin coding?

Is it possible for someone who has never coded to learn how to mod?
 
Won't you approach it by first listing out all the possible interactions then provide code that handles each case?

What would be the best way to solve this type of problem? I'd very much love to see a mod like this with working relations. Do you guys actually study the whole code before you begin coding?

Is it possible for someone who has never coded to learn how to mod?
Of course, first of all you have to design it - it has to work in your head (or on a piece of paper). You don't need to study the whole code, just the relevant parts (once you find out which are the relevant parts :smile:), but it helps immensely to have an overview of the whole thing - this way you know instantly where and what you'll have to do before beginning to code. This overview comes from experience with working with the code base.

I'd encourage any non-programmers to try to mod too, but then you'll have to start small, with simple code tweaks before you learn more and become confident. It's definitely much easier if you have programming experience already, but not a requirement. One of the best Mount and Blade coders was an economist who programmed as a hobby and other known modders were poor at coding, but had the desire to power through any difficulties and create something cool.
Edit: a basic C# tutorial is a good preparation for Bannerlord modding.
 
Last edited:

Rbtparker13

Regular
Won't you approach it by first listing out all the possible interactions then provide code that handles each case?

What would be the best way to solve this type of problem? I'd very much love to see a mod like this with working relations. Do you guys actually study the whole code before you begin coding?

Is it possible for someone who has never coded to learn how to mod?
If you do make this mod. Message me, I'm still around. I would love to play it. Goodness knows that this game needs to have more life breathe into it.
 

Nalgasucia507

Sergeant at Arms
Honestly, how close is this to be considered false marketing ?
Pretty close or it is actually. If they were a US based company we would have a really strong chance of getting a lawsuit accepted, if they release the game in a similar state of what it is now.
 
Top Bottom