Which 3 major features from Warband or Devblogs do you want the most in Bannerlord?

Which 2 of these singleplayer features do you want the most? (You can choose TWO)


  • Total voters
    174

Users who are viewing this thread

MadVader

Duke
M&BWB
Still, keep in mind that - at the end of the day - you are not interacting with a company. Not really anyways. A company is not an entity that feels or thinks or etc. (surpreme court decisions be damned). The people that really see and interact with what you write here are developers.
That's exactly what a company would say.
Given that Callum's PR present the company in an opaque and impersonal way, maybe you need to tell him about this. Maybe instead of "we listen to your feedback" he should drop the impersonal "we" and go with "a few people here read the player feedback on the forum, the others stopped caring long ago and don't even have forum accounts (except me lol), so please be courteous to those that show up".
 

Duh_TaleWorlds

Developer

Dabos37

Sergeant Knight at Arms
Leaving aside the discussion about if some things were promised or not, I would really love if all of at least some of the features suggested in this thread would be added. My favorite features listed here:

- Civil Wars: Not like Warband or Bannerlord current civil wars, I would really love to see a system for creating a civil war and try to usurp the throne. A system where you could persuade some clans before starting the civil war to join your cause, the possibility for being detected while trying to organize the civil war, etc.

- Feats: It is not just about easily meet other lords/ladies, it is also about more challenging tournaments where all skilled lords participate, dedicating victory to a lady, etc. On the other hand, feats should not interfere in wars at all.

- Criminal enterprise: This game really needs to expand the player as a bandit experience. Every single addition to bandit gameplay is pretty much welcome.

- Minor factions bases: I just want a way to be able to recruit minor factions troops, it is all that I need.
 

five bucks

Squire
Turns out ıt wasn't actually in the crime and punishment one from what I can tell :iamamoron:
I made the same mistake earlier :alien:
Deserters - These deserting troops go on to form a new deserted party on the campaign map which the party leader can no longer control.

"Deserted parties" - as in parties made up of troops that deserted the fight - are created in the game under some conditions. They are not a deserter faction, though. Could this have been described in a more clear way? Sure. But then Ozan isn't a native language speaker, he certainly always tried his best to explain his thoughts and I doubt anyone here would seriously think him to intentionally mislead people.
Not trying to say that TW is intentionally misleading people, it just really seemed like the use of the word "deserted troops" meant deserters.
Drunks - Tavern - This is where adventurers and drunks alike gather to share stories over a mug of mead.
Is this the quote? Even in isolation it is pretty clear that it doesn't discuss tavern fights as a feature.
"Some revellers are just a nuisance", in the same paragraph as drunks. Maybe I'm misinterpreting it, but what else would be a nuisance in taverns if not the Belligerent Drunk?
Civil Wars - "if you have taken a liking to the kingdom you are currently in, you can subvert it and seize power for yourself!"
Nothing here mentions civil wars. You can build relations, gather influence and even kill the king in battle "by accident" to seize power through a kingdom decision.
Being able to walk up to Derthert, slowly draw a bow point blank in front of his head in full view of his elite troops, and put an arrow through his head then and there to trigger a vote to replace him, and nobody - not even his family - blinking an eye, with zero repercussions or challenge or even acknowledgement, is pretty obviously an exploit. A bad thing, not a feature. (Also not very "subversive").

It totally shatters immersion, and since the point of features like that is for roleplaying/immersion, it defeats the purpose. No reasonable person would think that devblog was referring to an exploit.

If it was actually designed into the game with repercussions (e.g. all lords in the kingdom, except those with very high loyalty to you, instantly declare you a regicidal traitor and attack you on the spot) then I'd wholeheartedly agree with you that it would fulfil what that blog said.
This blog about persuasion specifically denotes a gameplay alternative to battle and combat just before your quote. To me it thus makes more sense for that quote to be referencing defection by AI and player both.
To me "a plot to betray a king", because of the word "plot", sounds like some sort of concerted attempt on the king's position itself. You're right the wording is ambiguous enough that it could just refer to what's already in the game, but the overall impression we got between that devblog, and the one discussed above, was that there would be some kind of mechanic for plotting to take control of an existing kingdom.
Just a usual disclaimer - I am not saying we can't or shouldn't have these features. The discussion is specifically about the claim that there are some 30 or so features (including the ones listed in the OP) that had dedicated dev blogs and weren't included in the game. Aka the implied accusation of a concerted effort to mislead users.
Unlike some, I wouldn't say TW ever set out to scam anyone. I am worried though that the game will release without these Warband features since you guys have gone so long without confirming it, and being able to take over alleyways to run a criminal enterprise is also not explicitly confirmed.

@Spinozart1
A lot of things in warband didn't work for me, like feasts (faction stop fighting to make a party?)
As the OP says, the obvious solution there is for the AI to not choose to hold a feast if they are at war, and end the feast early if a war starts.
 

Duh_TaleWorlds

Developer
Being able to walk up to Derthert, slowly draw a bow point blank in front of his head in full view of his elite troops, and put an arrow through his head then and there to trigger a vote to replace him, and nobody - not even his family - blinking an eye, with zero repercussions or challenge or even acknowledgement, is pretty obviously an exploit. A bad thing, not a feature. (Also not very "subversive").
That's why it's an accentuated part of the list of things you can do. Not the sole or primary point. But, honestly speaking, I think it's fairly clear that we are just talking semantics at this point. I think it's more productive to go with Dabos and encourage these features based on the merit that they provide to the game.
I am worried though that the game will release without these Warband features since you guys have gone so long without confirming it, and being able to take over alleyways to run a criminal enterprise is also not explicitly confirmed.
The whole discussion kind of showcases why these features weren't and shouldn't be explicitly announced / confirmed unless there is a high degree of certainty that they will make it. Making grand announcement is easy, very alluring and anywhere from useless to very damaging if it doesn't materialize in actual content.
 

AxiosXiphos

Sergeant Knight
M&BWBWF&SNWVC
It seems to me this forum has spent the last year arguing about what Bannerlord should have been - rather then what it is and how it can be improved.

There is certainly some understandable passion behind the former - but it is, and has always been, pointless rhetoric. And it pains me to see both sides (Community & TW) spend so much time arguing about it when we could just be getting on with other things.
 

five bucks

Squire
I think it's more productive to go with Dabos and encourage these features based on the merit that they provide to the game.
Totally agree that features should be included based on whether the players find merit in them. No point bringing back something everyone didn't care about or hated, no disagreement there.
All the listed features add either immersion, quality-of-life, depth or variety to the gameplay experience.
The whole discussion kind of showcases why these features weren't and shouldn't be explicitly announced / confirmed unless there is a high degree of certainty that they will make it. Making grand announcement is easy, very alluring and anywhere from useless to very damaging if it doesn't materialize in actual content.
I understand TW not wanting to go any further in making big announcements that are risky and likely to be too hard to implement, but I don't understand TW not being able to commit to the features which the smaller Warband team managed a decade ago. How are they considered so risky and complex?
 

Duh_TaleWorlds

Developer
I understand TW not wanting to go any further in making big announcements that are risky and likely to be too hard to implement, but I don't understand TW not being able to commit to the features which the smaller Warband team managed a decade ago. How are they considered so risky and complex?
Other outstanding, announced features are as of yet uncompleted. Other present features are as of yet not polished to the desired degree. The actual features in question may or may not be implemented in a simple or a more complex way. An overly early or vague confirmation may build false expectation / hype that can deepen the very frustration that some community members have expressed.
 

Calabanar

Sergeant
I wouldn't mind a crime and banditry DLC at this point. The criminal empire as is... pretty shallow. But there. And a "Scum&Blood" DLC would be nice way of expanding on it, though it would have to be a big expansion, not 5 quests and 10 outfits. It could be paid too, it would just have to be good.

If there are indeed "outstanding" features still in the oven and unannounced along the expected polish, then a DLC later down the line could be worthwhile (again, if feature complete and actually offering an interesting alternative gameplay).
 

Spinozart1

Squire
I wouldn't mind a crime and banditry DLC at this point. The criminal empire as is... pretty shallow. But there. And a "Scum&Blood" DLC would be nice way of expanding on it, though it would have to be a big expansion, not 5 quests and 10 outfits. It could be paid too, it would just have to be good.

If there are indeed "outstanding" features still in the oven and unannounced along the expected polish, then a DLC later down the line could be worthwhile (again, if feature complete and actually offering an interesting alternative gameplay).
Considering that the steam page description is mentioning about the criminal empire, I guess we may expect more for full release before thinking about a DLC...
 

black_bulldog

Knight at Arms
WBWF&SVC
The whole discussion kind of showcases why these features weren't and shouldn't be explicitly announced / confirmed unless there is a high degree of certainty that they will make it. Making grand announcement is easy, very alluring and anywhere from useless to very damaging if it doesn't materialize in actual content.
On this I think everyone can agree. You claim this is all misunderstandings, ok I get where you're coming from. But my question is this: This is not the first time these ideas have been discussed and argued by the community, so why is it taking so long for someone from Taleworlds to clear this up? This a Taleworlds game so make the game you guys want, but just give us accurate info and let us know in a timely manor.
 

NPC99

Baron
M&BWBWF&SVC
It seems to me this forum has spent the last year arguing about what Bannerlord should have been - rather then what it is and how it can be improved.

There is certainly some understandable passion behind the former - but it is, and has always been, pointless rhetoric. And it pains me to see both sides (Community & TW) spend so much time arguing about it when we could just be getting on with other things.
+1

BTW I don't want feasts back. They were a pain in Warband.
 

AxiosXiphos

Sergeant Knight
M&BWBWF&SNWVC
Feasts often interrupted the flow of the game.

Besieging a castle? Nope stop to go have a feast.

Rallying the army to defend a city? Nope stop to go have a feast.

Chasing down an enemy party? Nope stop to go have a feast.

Swadia got a bad name in that game for always getting stomped - and it was 80% due to the fact the lords spend more time feasting then actually doing anything useful. If they did bring it back, it would need to have a lot more mechanics tied to it (the warband feasts were extremely basic) and only be called at appropriate times.

Honestly though I have no idea why so many people want it? I genuinely think people just use it as an excuse to bash on bannerlord. There is plenty of viable criticisms of the new game... but lacking 'feasts' really isn't one of them.
 

vonbalt

Sergeant Knight
WBNWVCM&B
Feasts often interrupted the flow of the game.

Besieging a castle? Nope stop to go have a feast.

Rallying the army to defend a city? Nope stop to go have a feast.

Chasing down an enemy party? Nope stop to go have a feast.

Swadia got a bad name in that game for always getting stomped - and it was 80% due to the fact the lords spend more time feasting then actually doing anything useful. If they did bring it back, it would need to have a lot more mechanics tied to it (the warband feasts were extremely basic) and only be called at appropriate times.

Honestly though I have no idea why so many people want it? I genuinely think people just use it as an excuse to bash on bannerlord. There is plenty of viable criticisms of the new game... but lacking 'feasts' really isn't one of them.
a simple check that disallow feasts while at war would solve all those problems and make it a peace time activity (as it should).

Any lord wanting to call a feast would just check "are we at war? if yes then cancel feast, if no call/proceed with feast", problem solved.

Peace time needs more activities beyond quests and feasts to build relations with your fellow peers and lordly tournaments (more difficult with better rewards) would be perfect for that.
 
Last edited:

Calabanar

Sergeant
Considering that the steam page description is mentioning about the criminal empire, I guess we may expect more for full release before thinking about a DLC...
That's what I would hope too, but there is no guarantee... it could also be free dlc coming after the initial release, I don't care. I just think that to truly make a criminal playthrough good, unless they are working on it, a DLC would be best.
 

five bucks

Squire
Feasts often interrupted the flow of the game. Besieging a castle? Nope stop to go have a feast. Rallying the army to defend a city? Nope stop to go have a feast. Chasing down an enemy party? Nope stop to go have a feast.
This was addressed in the OP and also on this page of this thread.
Swadia got a bad name in that game for always getting stomped - and it was 80% due to the fact the lords spend more time feasting then actually doing anything useful.
Feasting was a symptom, not a primary cause. Every kingdom would feast, they feasted more when they were losing to repair relations, and Swadia would lose more often because they were sandwiched between every other kingdom in the very center of the map.
Also, I think this is the third time that I've told you Swadia's likelihood of being destroyed is exaggerated. They do indeed do worse than other kingdoms, but feasting didn't cause them to get annihilated.
If they did bring it back, it would need to only be called at appropriate times.
Yep, agreed and this was said in the OP.
Honestly though I have no idea why so many people want it?
Again, this confusion would be solved by reading the OP.

Nobles or the player could hold parties and invite other nobles to come, and the host would gain relation with everyone who went. This was a way for non-combat-focused roleplays to gain relations, and gathered nobles together in one place for the player to easily talk to them, plus it added immersion. A tournament with all lords present would also happen with a Feast.
When hosting your own feast, the more varied the food you bought was, the more relations you would get. You could talk to the guests to gain extra relation. (There was an issue where kingdoms losing wars would waste time feasting in Warband. If added to Bannerlord, feasts should only happen in peacetime, and should provide Influence gain.)


TL;DR, four reasons: Immersion, quality-of-life, variety, and providing a roleplaying option.
 
Top Bottom