Which leveling system do you prefer Warband or Bannerlord?

[durbal]

You can't go very far beyond that cap, and it would take hundreds of hours of play to push out more than 1 or 2 more levels this way, so the point stands.

How does the point stand? OP's premise was wrong (learning limit is not a hard cap) and your calculations for the 'hundreds of hours' claim is based on...what exactly? Having more points in an attribute increases learning rate both by increasing the learning limit and also -- most importantly -- simply on its own regardless of the learning limit (something like a 0.2 increase per attribute point -- not sure if this is a constant or not).

So yeah, what's this outcry about?

 

[Floyd]

I was lurking the game files and in one script i found that maxlevel is 100, max stat is 11.

 

[stevehoos]

They’ve only had, oh, 10 years to develop a system that works. There are one-man development teams that can make functioning levelling systems in 1/100th of the time.

I feel bad for the developers, they clearly had to crunch in the last year to make something barely functional due to whatever horrific management problems the company has. 10 years!

Agreed, the new leveling system is just bad, and that has noting to do with EA. It's a mess

 

[Jhaerik]

How does the point stand? OP's premise was wrong (learning limit is not a hard cap) and your calculations for the 'hundreds of hours' claim is based on...what exactly? Having more points in an attribute increases learning rate both by increasing the learning limit and also -- most importantly -- simply on its own regardless of the learning limit (something like a 0.2 increase per attribute point -- not sure if this is a constant or not).

So yeah, what's this outcry about?

Tell you what go grind to 26 without cheats and post a screenshot when you do ok?
Cya in a few months

 

[pryt]

My thoughts about the current system and how to maybe improve it:

They should remove the "cap" to be achieved by putting points into attributes/focus, so you could reach 300+ in any skill IF you just play long enough, on a 1x exp modifier.

But, to add a downside to it, you need to put focus points in your favourite skill trees to speed up leveling AND get access to the perks in that tree. Focus should cover all perks from 75 to 275, by extending the max perks you can choose in a skill tree. Attributes AND focus should add to the multiplier of learning speed.

So, without any focus in riding you could still be at 300 riding, but have only access the skill 25 and 50 perks, but get all the other passive bonus from the level of skill (like as it is now: skill of riding / 5 = bonus to personal horse speed, or as for tactics: skill of tactics / 10 = +% dmg in simulation and so on).

This would remove a lot of hassle and let you develop your char the way YOU want it, by "focusing" on what you deem useful and important. In a reasonable time too.

 

[Tiberius_Invictus]

I should read this thread, but I have no time. I just want to say that I hope the devs do not go the route of God-teir end-game characters - where your character ultimately becomes good at EVERY skill/ability in the game. A good RPG skill system should force the player to think about the design of his character and take into consideration a limited number of skill points. You want your character to be a master Horse-Archer with maxed related skills/abilities? Well, ok, just don't expect him to be a heavy melee hitting tank (obvious example).

I STRONGLY disagree with not having God-tier end-game characters. That's exactly what makes the game fun!

 

[CalenLoki]

Despite silly hard limits and other flaws, I still like the current system more than WB.
At least the base idea that all skill leveling is automatic (based on actions you take), and only thing you can affect manually is speeding up specific skill.

Instead of hard cap I'd go with more dynamic skill XP multiplier.
Focus xp multiplier=focus level*30/current skill level.
So when you're half the way to the soft-cap, you have x2. When you reach it, you have x1. When you double it, you have x0.5. Ect.

I'd also make attributes automatic, proportional to corresponding skill levels.
Attribute level=average of all corresponding skill levels/20.
Attributes would affect xp multiplier proportionally to current skill level, just like focus points.
Attribute xp multiplier=attribute level*20/current skill level.
That would serve purpose of encouraging players to try different weapons to speed up their main weapon leveling. It's also logical, as learning one style of melee fighting should make learning others easier.

Regarding perks - I don't like the way they're achieved. There is no real choice ATM, and you often get completely useless ones.

So instead I'd make perks the way to manually fine-tune player character. Allow us to buy perks with skill points.
Skill points (SP) would be earned along skill levels (i.e. archery skill level up = +1 archery SP).
Each perk costs specific amount of specific skill points.
I.e. extra arrows for horse archer cost 10 archery SP and 10 riding SP.
extra HP costs 20 1h SP or 20 2h SP or 20 polearm SP.
Each perk would have tier (so you can't just buy the end perk right away). To get tier 5 you need at least 4 perks for given skill.

 

[Timmortal]

They’ve only had, oh, 10 years to develop a system that works. There are one-man development teams that can make functioning levelling systems in 1/100th of the time.

I feel bad for the developers, they clearly had to crunch in the last year to make something barely functional due to whatever horrific management problems the company has. 10 years!

ffs stop with this "they have had 10 years" idiocy. Warband came out 10 years ago. 8 years ago they announced they had started working on Bannerlord. 5 to 6 years ago they said they had scrapped the old engine and started completely over on a new one, lets say that takes a year. that means they have had 4-5 years to make this game, and i ask you to find me a small indie developer that have made such a complicated leveling system that needs to work in a game like this, in shorter time than that.

 

[Cepheiden]

ffs stop with this "they have had 10 years" idiocy.

You don't need a working engine to plan a system. It is correct to say, that they had 10 years to think about a good system for this.
That is done by game designers, which most of the time are also the higher ups of a studio, because they hold the vision for the whole game.
Clearly, the people in charge failed to see what players expect from the single player mode.
That is not some mistake, or something that needs testing. It's plain error of judgement and poor attitude on the side of the taleworld. That is something that shouldn't happen to people that get paid for doing their job.
That's why it is completly justified to ask: What the hell were they doing for 8+ years?


That being said, while looking for a quick solution I found this:

Attribute Per Level

Allows you to gain an attribute point per level.

www.nexusmods.com

It adds 1 attribute per level instead of every few levels. This will increase the actual level cap to something around 33. With this it's possible to create a character that can fulfill all the requirements for leading an army.

 

[Timmortal]

You don't need a working engine to plan a system. It is correct to say, that they had 10 years to think about a good system for this.
That is done by game designers, which most of the time are also the higher ups of a studio, because they hold the vision for the whole game.
Clearly, the people in charge failed to see what players expect from the single player mode.
That is not some mistake, or something that needs testing. It's plain error of judgement and poor attitude on the side of the taleworld. That is something that shouldn't happen to people that get paid for doing their job.
That's why it is completly justified to ask: What the hell were they doing for 8+ years?


That being said, while looking for a quick solution I found this:

Attribute Per Level

Allows you to gain an attribute point per level.

www.nexusmods.com

It adds 1 attribute per level instead of every few levels. This will increase the actual level cap to something around 33. With this it's possible to create a character that can fulfill all the requirements for leading an army.

by the logic of you two, Diablo 3 should have been the best game ever made so superior to everything else, because it was made by a AAA studio over 11 years, with zero bugs and no errors at all, plus that game did not even release in EA and it cost more.

 

[Lorenzzo]

At this point there should be a temporary ban on anyone posting "THEY HAD 10 YEARS" unironically. It's dumb, it's annoying, it's not constructive and it's just plain false.

 

[stevehoos]

Implementing a system takes time, coming up with the system itself is far less tedious. They had a long time to come up with something that works. That is true weather people like it or not.

 

[Beaowulf]

I am pretty sure the caps are there because they expect the player to play as their heir, and I remember a dev blog that said heirs dont have the max that the player had in their skills but their learning curve is exponentially better, so you wont become 250 in one handed in your lifetime but maybe in the lifetime of your grandchild?

 

[Floyd]

ffs stop with this "they have had 10 years" idiocy. Warband came out 10 years ago. 8 years ago they announced they had started working on Bannerlord. 5 to 6 years ago they said they had scrapped the old engine and started completely over on a new one, lets say that takes a year. that means they have had 4-5 years to make this game, and i ask you to find me a small indie developer that have made such a complicated leveling system that needs to work in a game like this, in shorter time than that.

Just ignore those ignorant peasant

 

[bodhi]

I STRONGLY disagree with not having God-tier end-game characters. That's exactly what makes the game fun!

You can have a god-tier PARTY, consisting of members who all compliment each-other, resulting in an unstoppable force on the map. I don't see what the problem is here? M&B has never been about individual/overpowered super characters being god-tier in every aspect. It's a party based game where you need to think a little about party composition.

I'm sure the devs fully understand this - so I'm not worried about the demands of people here who just don't seem to understand.

 

[Pseudo-Gerber]

It is really weird that charm doesn't level up from attempting and passing persuasion checks. My merc spent the early game mostly negotiating blood feuds and convincing wayward maidens to return to their fathers. Somehow this career as a negotiator didn't make him any more persuasive.

Just sit in settlements and you gain Exp for charm, going to double check this. It also increase your relations with notables

edit: It seems you have to form an army to do this
edit 2: I have no clue how this works but some towns receive relation increases some will not

 

[Tiberius_Invictus]

I'm sure the devs fully understand this - so I'm not worried about the demands of people here who just don't seem to understand.

Lol, ok bro. And I'm not worried about players who think that their preferences on gameplay are the way things are "supposed to be" and that everybody else is just wrong.

 

[bodhi]

Lol, ok bro. And I'm not worried about players who think that their preferences on gameplay are the way things are "supposed to be" and that everybody else is just wrong.

I'm not saying you're wrong for wanting that. I'm saying go play Dynasty Warriors or Skyrim if that's what you want. because you're not going to get it in this game, bro.

 

[BattanianDruid]

Hey! This is a bug that will be fixed in the upcoming patches. Also successful bartering will give some charm xp as well.

Fantastic news! I look forward to being able to play a conniving rogue with a silver tongue.

 

[Negative]

I am pretty sure the caps are there because they expect the player to play as their heir, and I remember a dev blog that said heirs dont have the max that the player had in their skills but their learning curve is exponentially better, so you wont become 250 in one handed in your lifetime but maybe in the lifetime of your grandchild?

Ever timed how long an ingame year takes you to play? My estimation was around 12 hrs.
Sooo after 240 hrs you'll have a heir you'll have to retrain to reach the level they dangle like a carrot in front of you - you really think that's great gamedesign?

-edit-
i mean i might be missing that aging is not connected towards the ingame day counter or something...