When is Bannerlord playable?

Users who are viewing this thread

WhiteEyedSh4rk

Sergeant Knight
WBWF&SVC
Some people will never be happy. First people were screeching at the devs for a release date and now that we finally have the game in our hands (though it´s early access), people are having similar tantrums over it being unfinished as if they didn´t read the clear and concise statements from Taleworlds that the game would be missing features and overall polish in the initial release.

To be fair, the description for the beta was quite glossed over and when you hear "the early access version of the game contains all of the main staples of the Mount & Blade experience, with a host of content that is new to the series" after 8 years of waiting, you kind of expect at least something better then Warband.
 

Gambles

Sergeant at Arms
M&BWBWF&SNWVC
To be fair, the description for the beta was quite glossed over and when you hear "the early access version of the game contains all of the main staples of the Mount & Blade experience, with a host of content that is new to the series" after 8 years of waiting, you kind of expect at least something better then Warband.

I don't think it's ridiculous to expect a sequel to a 10 year old game be better in at least most ways lol.
 

Delinard

Sergeant at Arms
WBNW
Autoresolve has been really messed up, you used to take no casulties when autoresolving looters because why would anybody want to manually fight their 100th battle against 6 naked men, i autoresolved 1 single looter and lost a tier 2 unit while having more then 30 men, but i guess it's MoRe ReAlistic.
 

Sapurion

Recruit
I don't think it's ridiculous to expect a sequel to a 10 year old game be better in at least most ways lol.
For me the only improvement was the graphics and animation, but as for the rest of the game, its pretty much empty and whats there seems at least partially broken. One would expect that the stuff that was in Warband and VC would be here already...well no other option than to wait.
 

Kharille

Knight at Arms
Strangely enough combat is much faster, feels like its too fast but I'd imagine sieges would be quicker to resolve. I'm focused on chasing looters at this stage. Wish they'd stop doing the default, 'charge in one line', even a blob seems more appropriate, but maybe I'm too used to warband stupidity.

I remember being disappointed that I couldn't buy a lord from prison in warband. Seemed like something that would be easy to resolve but I haven't tried asking the responsible lord if I could buy their freedom / pay their ransom. I'm so useless in combat, I'd much rather try that option.
 

Nordmann

Sergeant Knight
WBM&BWF&SNWVC
Autoresolve has been really messed up, you used to take no casulties when autoresolving looters because why would anybody want to manually fight their 100th battle against 6 naked men, i autoresolved 1 single looter and lost a tier 2 unit while having more then 30 men, but i guess it's MoRe ReAlistic.

I suspect that - like the economy nerfs - it was done to slow players down, and make progress more time consuming.
 

anton97

Sergeant at Arms
WF&SWBNWM&B
To be fair, the description for the beta was quite glossed over and when you hear "the early access version of the game contains all of the main staples of the Mount & Blade experience, with a host of content that is new to the series" after 8 years of waiting, you kind of expect at least something better then Warband.
Bannerlord being better than Warband is purely subjective so I'm not going to waste my time arguing for or against it. In regards to it containing all the main staples, I'm pretty sure it does.
  1. Different factions
  2. Field, village and siege battles
  3. Fiefs
  4. Four-directional combat
 

WhiteEyedSh4rk

Sergeant Knight
WBWF&SVC
Bannerlord being better than Warband is purely subjective so I'm not going to waste my time arguing for or against it. In regards to it containing all the main staples, I'm pretty sure it does.
  1. Different factions
  2. Field, village and siege battles
  3. Fiefs
  4. Four-directional combat

Of course, technically they are in the game, but you kind of expect these features to work. Non correctly functioning features in a game are probably even worse then not having them at all, because they can negatively effect the other features/mechanics.
 
My main thing missing that makes the game kinda unplayable is the "Declare war", "Make peace" buttons. With the bug caused by Conspiracy quest where your kingdom randomly declares war on factions, a declare peace button would make the game so much more playable. Right now if your Kingdom declares war on someone without your input, you gotta leave everything you do and go chase a random lord to make peace. This can cause unnecessary loss of parties, castles, and cities. And if you already are at war with someone else, the bug will make you go insane since now you gotta chase lords from multiple factions to not get screwed.

I did download a mod that fixes the buttons from Nexus so for now the game is very much "playable" as in... its stable
 
I suspect that - like the economy nerfs - it was done to slow players down, and make progress more time consuming.
I think an issue with this is that it indirectly affects AI lords as well.

If a lord retinue runs into a looter party of 20-40, their losses can scale to nearly half a dozen, some of which being elite soldiers.

I think that there needs to be more calculations to protect elites from being killed by any unit, never mind tier 1 looters. At least this way, since proper training doesn't exist, armies/lords that actually defeat their enemy may lose many lower-tier(replaceable) units as it would be more common, but more of the elite armored ones would be wounded allowing them to heal as opposed to being wiped off the map.
Bannerlord being better than Warband is purely subjective so I'm not going to waste my time arguing for or against it. In regards to it containing all the main staples, I'm pretty sure it does.
  1. Different factions
  2. Field, village and siege battles
  3. Fiefs
  4. Four-directional combat
If you think those are all the main staples, you are forgetting one very important one.

AI, and right now, in its current state they are not only bland, but also incompetent.

In a game that centers around being able to properly function without player intervention, there are some issues that are gamebreaking:
  • Bankrupt lords run around with a retinue of wounded soldiers.
  • 3 different 200 man armies of the same faction switching targets from protecting a town because individually they calculate they cannot stop the besiegers despite together outnumbering them 2:1
  • Incompetent battle AI that gets defeated by the most basic of tactics.
Don't get me wrong, these things will get patched in over the year, but do not disillusion yourself thinking the main staples are in most cases finished, balanced, or even existing.
 
Last edited:

Yozzer

Sergeant Knight
M&BWBWF&S
I currently have 372 hours play, great for an early release. I too would like diplomacy, but I can wait.
I have games I have bought with less than 10 hours of play because they were either buggy or grossly over hyped, and they were not early release.
 

anton97

Sergeant at Arms
WF&SWBNWM&B
If you think those are all the main staples, you are forgetting one very important one.

AI, and right now, in its current state they are not only bland, but also incompetent.

In a game that centers around being able to properly function without player intervention, there are some issues that are gamebreaking:
  • Bankrupt lords run around with a retinue of wounded soldiers.
  • 3 different 200 man armies of the same faction switching targets from protecting a town because individually they calculate they cannot stop the besiegers despite together outnumbering them 2:1
  • Incompetent battle AI that gets defeated by the most basic of tactics.
Don't get me wrong, these things will get patched in over the year, but do not disillusion yourself thinking the main staples are in most cases finished, balanced, or even existing.
I never said the main staples were finished or balanced and I´m not sure what you mean by not them not existing. Are there not six different factions? Can you not fight in the field, in the villages or during sieges? Are you not able to get fiefs? Is the four-directional combat missing?

In regards to the AI being a main staple, I very much disagree. When praising Warband it was never for the exceptional AI. It worked, but it had numerous major flaws both on the campaign map and during combat. It was easily exploitable and by far the weakest part of vanilla Warband. The AI in Bannerlord obviously also has its problems, but I never made the argument that it was particularly competent, though I think it will get there in the end.
 

anton97

Sergeant at Arms
WF&SWBNWM&B
Of course, technically they are in the game, but you kind of expect these features to work. Non correctly functioning features in a game are probably even worse then not having them at all, because they can negatively effect the other features/mechanics.
If these non-correctly functioning features were not in the game at all, there would literally be no game lmao
 
In regards to the AI being a main staple, I very much disagree. When praising Warband it was never for the exceptional AI.
Now, this is just incredible.

Allow me to rephrase this. "I don't really like the AI in WB, therefore, it isn't a staple". It's like saying I don't really like the combat of BL because of x, therefore I disagree that it is a staple of the game.

The AI being able to run the game without player intervention is one of the things that M&B as a franchise is known for, and it works well enough in both games(though BL will improve with time), saying that isn't a literal staple is so egregious.
I never said the main staples were finished or balanced and I´m not sure what you mean by not them not existing. Are there not six different factions?
How can you contradict yourself in such a short time period? I kid you not you people think the developers are stupid and unambitious or something.

We have very rough and unfinished troop trees, non-interactive nobles, rulers who mean nothing right now. These will all get fixed, but for you, if they made 6 cities, and dedicated them all a faction with a one branch troop tree, you would be saying the same thing huh.

Example: "Though fiercely loyal to the empire, they adopt many of the ways of the warrior-tribes they face, from weaponry to a preference for blood feud over courts of law." Source

Right now these loyal factions are only merc companies for any faction, but in time they will improve.

Look, imo I think BL is the objective better game, but right now there are many aspects still where WB comes out on top.
 
Some people will never be happy. First people were screeching at the devs for a release date and now that we finally have the game in our hands (though it´s early access), people are having similar tantrums over it being unfinished as if they didn´t read the clear and concise statements from Taleworlds that the game would be missing features and overall polish in the initial release.
Everyone was asking for a release date because the game was on major game events for 5 YEARS. If you can't get a game finished in 8 years, you don't start teasing it 5 years prior to its' barely serviceable EA launch, that's it. Also I don't mind the lacking EA launch, The continued lack of communication and seemingly bad management at development is what bothers me. We have all seen where "They're taking their time guys! The results will be awesome!" got us. Don't dare to put the blame on the fanbase, they were running out of money, that's why they went with the EA.
 
Last edited:

Big Bobby

Recruit
"I pLaYEd morE tHAn X hOUrs So ITs pLaYabLE."

No, it's not - it's testable and this is what we're doing - we are helping a small studio test their game and generate data for balancing and further development. This early access bull**** is only a marketing scheme. THIS GAME IS STILL BEING BUILT and we are all Beta-testers. The game wasn't "rELeasE In EArlY AccESs". You can play sieges and battles but other aspects of the campaign are not finished.

Is the game testable? Yes.
Is the game playable? No, because it is not finished.
 

anton97

Sergeant at Arms
WF&SWBNWM&B
Now, this is just incredible.

Allow me to rephrase this. "I don't really like the AI in WB, therefore, it isn't a staple". It's like saying I don't really like the combat of BL because of x, therefore I disagree that it is a staple of the game.

The AI being able to run the game without player intervention is one of the things that M&B as a franchise is known for, and it works well enough in both games(though BL will improve with time), saying that isn't a literal staple is so egregious.

How can you contradict yourself in such a short time period? I kid you not you people think the developers are stupid and unambitious or something.

We have very rough and unfinished troop trees, non-interactive nobles, rulers who mean nothing right now. These will all get fixed, but for you, if they made 6 cities, and dedicated them all a faction with a one branch troop tree, you would be saying the same thing huh.

Example: "Though fiercely loyal to the empire, they adopt many of the ways of the warrior-tribes they face, from weaponry to a preference for blood feud over courts of law." Source

Right now these loyal factions are only merc companies for any faction, but in time they will improve.

Look, imo I think BL is the objective better game, but right now there are many aspects still where WB comes out on top.
First off you seem to be getting weirdly worked up over this. You can just have a normal conversation, no need to misrepresent me by saying I think the developers are stupid. Engage with what I actually said and chill out lmao

Anyways, consider the AI as a main staple if you want. I don't because I never mentioned it when trying to sell the idea of M&B to others. The AI did its job well enough, but it didn't make M&B stand out to me the same way the other features I mentioned did. The sieges f.ex. were great for the premise behind them and not the bad AI underlying them. Having your entire army squeeze up a single ladder wasn't exactly immersive, but I liked the idea of taking part myself and it having a direct effect on the campaign map.

In regards to the features included in Bannerlord being unfinished and you thinking I'm content with their current implementation I'll quote myself:
I never said the main staples were finished or balanced and I´m not sure what you mean by not them not existing.
That's me asking you what you mean by the features not existing while also indicating I'm aware that the features are unfinished and unbalanced. It doesn't mean that I'm content with their current implementation. It's a literal question.
 
Top Bottom