Mount &Blade:Warbands

[Paelos]

I agree, so much of this game needs to be expanded upon. It's an amazing idea that's begging for an Elder Scrolls world treatment.

[koro]

With a little refinement and some better visual feedback, Mount & Blade would have arguably the best melee combat of any RPG I could think of.

[Mrbloodworth]

It does already.

[Speedy Cerviche]

Well they are working on M&B2, I wouldn't expect it until sometime next year tho. Hopefully it will expand on the game in all areas, take up the stuff modders have worked on (persistent multiplayer campaign, better RPG questing/dynamics in single player) but modders are limited by existing hard code, and lack of professional resources.

Given its limitations, it's about 10 years old now, and the way it started as a non-published indie game (Paradox only picked it up years later for Warband) made by a turkish couple in their garage, it is IMO one of the biggest gaming success stories of the past decade. Would love to see what kind of nice polish game they can do if they re-do it from scratch with a new engine, and a full dev/art team from the beginning along with full publisher support  (I would assume Paradox again).

[Sky]

Not sure why they should move development to Poland.

[Paelos]

If I was adding things to the game, I would add.

- More fleshed out economic trading system, including trading quests
- More interaction with guilds, different types of guilds, and guild missions.
- Better faction balance with available access to all unit types: horse, archer, infantry
- More interesting loot, with legendary and epic weapons
- Boss armies with awesome loot.
- Game objectives for victory.
- More control over cities, and city building options. Kingdom management options as well.

[Mrbloodworth]

One of its strong points is. There is no Fantasy or Sword +1 in the game, for the love of god it does not need "legendary and epic weapons". And AFAIK, you can get any unit in the game, regardless of being a Vassal or not. We have enough Generic RPG games with loot treadmills. Why taint such an awesome title with this crap? Here is your win condition: "To crush your enemies, see them driven before you, and to hear the lamentation of their women. ".


Here is what I would add: Multi-player Campaign.

[Paelos]

The units don't really balance. Certain factions have outstanding archery and no real horses. Certain ones have outstanding infantry and crap archery. While that's fine, it usually boils down to taking the faction with the best Knights because they win everything. That's what I mean by better balance.

The strong point is the combat Bloodworth, but there are still weapons and better armors. There are still skill grinds to make your weapons stronger. I don't care if they do that with multiplayer, I want it for the single player experience. This is a single player game to me, not a multiplayer one.

One of the most common things that people ask for in this game when they overhaul mods is updated units, better equipment, better economics, and victory conditions. People like goals more than they like sandboxes. You have to deal with that.

[Speedy Cerviche]

Well like Paelos said, we're talking about single player here, andl phat loots plus unit progression is an important part of RPG play to a lot of people, and what they expect. You can still do it without tacky fantasy elements.

If you defeat the king of Swadia (which in-game represents western latin style) you should get a chance to retrieve maybe some unique & high quality gear he would sport, or you could raid some bandit headquarters and retrieve treasure too, or commission a master blacksmith to make you some unique & ornate pieces suited to your style, etc.

[Sky]

I'd like to see some Civ elements baked into the next one. Resource management (and battles for control of resources), town building based on research trees, etc.

Or do I need to stop being a noob and get further into the game. The clunky interface kinda bums me out, along with kind of wandering aimlessly. I love those open kind of games....once you know what you're about. 

[Paelos]

No they need to do that Sky. You are able to trade resources, but they don't do anything other than feed armies. I would like to see a better economy and research, yes.

[Sky]

Yeah, think of one county or duchy or whatever controlling the only iron mine on the map...

[Mrbloodworth]

The units don't really balance. Certain factions have outstanding archery and no real horses. Certain ones have outstanding infantry and crap archery. While that's fine, it usually boils down to taking the faction with the best Knights because they win everything. That's what I mean by better balance.

The strong point is the combat Bloodworth, but there are still weapons and better armors. There are still skill grinds to make your weapons stronger. I don't care if they do that with multiplayer, I want it for the single player experience. This is a single player game to me, not a multiplayer one.

One of the most common things that people ask for in this game when they overhaul mods is updated units, better equipment, better economics, and victory conditions. People like goals more than they like sandboxes. You have to deal with that.

You are not locked to one kingdoms units. You can have a mix of all the best units of each faction ( At a cost, Moral hits ), that's kind of the point, build your army to your play style or what you are going against ( Bust out your pike men if fighting mounted units..ETC.. ). As far as gear, nothing is truly better than another, with exception of quality ( Rusty, forged, ETC.. ) its is completely dependent on the build you are going for ( Skills ). Not sure why you are arbitrating what I am saying to multi-player, I'm talking about single player. My want is for the campaign to be multi-player ( Technical issues aside ).

Phat loot is the wrong direction for this type of game. Its not currently in it. So why add it? None of the kings or lords have anything you can't already get. Yes you progress in skills, but you put points into areas that have nothing to do with combat as well, its always a tradeoff.

The outcome of a battle is determined by your in field tactics, what units you field, and your skill as a hero ( on paper, and in playing ). Adding the sword of omens will just go against the basic principles of this title.

This is my point, it sounds like you guys want Everquest loot grinds and imposable armies where you just face roll the opposition because you grinded more. Not that you are a better tactician. That's not the attraction, or intent of the game. Its a strategic, historical(ish), medieval simulation with gamey trappings.

Let me quote the website, because apparently some of you didn't read it.

In a genre all its own, come experience
the one and only medieval combat /
kingdom building sandbox game.
Mount and Blade Warband is a unique
blend of intense strategic fighting, real time
army command, and deep kingdom management.
   

Push your gaming skill to the max, in a multiplayer
player experience wherein teamwork is paramount,
timing is crucial, and skill is everything.
   

Massive 64 player battles in a multitude of modes including Deathmatch, Team Deathmatch, Capture the Flag, Conquest, Battle, and Siege.
Best your foes with realistic physics based combat, that takes into account momentum, attack timing, and position.
Master the feeling of dozens of weapons and conquer all with true skill.
Seek adventure alone and get lost in addictive empire building bliss or equally satisfying banditry.
There are no limits in Calradia, your story and gameplay experiences are truly unique.
Be ambitious and claim the throne of Calradia, appoint vassals to manage lands, tax villagers, marry for power, fight for honor or cold expansionism.

I'm all for expanding some of the systems you mention, like more ways/Variety of shops and better kingdom management. But come on, loot grinds, +1, Uber skills, 1 to 1 units in each faction ( Ignoring that the factions ARE balanced already ).

[Mrbloodworth]

phat loots plus unit progression is an important part of RPG play to a lot of people, and what they expect.

You need to stop playing MMO's.

[HaemishM]

Your sperg is showing. 

[Paelos]

<quoted the website>

Glad you found the website. That's good work. Allow me to refute a few points.

1 - The tactical side of this game sucks as it stands. Army orders are clunky, the interface is bad, and certain units dominate the map if you get them. There is very much an IWIN button if you stack knights.
2 - Kingdom management isn't deep enough. It's wandering around building things in small towns while you wait for more Taiga bandits to decapitate.
3 - The point of this game is decapitating people. There isn't some sort of magical thing a weapon will do except add more to do while you ride around the map. Maybe the weapon increases your leadership stats or something, which are already IN THE GAME. This isn't like an MMO where you walk up to someone with a better sword and die because you're holding a cleaver. There's still timing and skill involved, not autoattack.
4 - Who cares what the developers think their game is about? Alot of the time they are dead wrong, or have no idea what their customers really want. See: Minecraft Modding API, Mass Effect ending, DAOC ToA, etc.

[Ingmar]

I don't really want any loot progression type stuff beyond what is already in there. I like that there aren't any fantasy elements and that even a level 20 armored dude can get overwhelmed by superior numbers, at least on foot.

I want them to polish up the actual world elements - give the various lords and stuff more distinct personalities, tactical tendencies, unit preferences, etc., than they do now. Make it more obvious which ones are related to each other and make it matter more. Let the player get better connected into those elements. Fill in the history more so that places matter more to people, give houses grudges against each other, flesh out the joinable NPCs. Hire some real writers and get some Game of Thrones type shit going.

More city-building type elements would be great too.

Don't really care about multiplayer at all.

[Speedy Cerviche]

You are not locked to one kingdoms units. You can have a mix of all the best units of each faction ( At a cost, Moral hits ), that's kind of the point, build your army to your play style or what you are going against ( Bust out your pike men if fighting mounted units..ETC.. ). As far as gear, nothing is truly better than another, with exception of quality ( Rusty, forged, ETC.. ) its is completely dependent on the build you are going for ( Skills ). Not sure why you are arbitrating what I am saying to multi-player, I'm talking about single player. My want is for the campaign to be multi-player ( Technical issues aside ).

Phat loot is the wrong direction for this type of game. Its not currently in it. So why add it? None of the kings or lords have anything you can't already get. Yes you progress in skills, but you put points into areas that have nothing to do with combat as well, its always a tradeoff.

The outcome of a battle is determined by your in field tactics, what units you field, and your skill as a hero ( on paper, and in playing ). Adding the sword of omens will just go against the basic principles of this title.

This is my point, it sounds like you guys want Everquest loot grinds and imposable armies where you just face roll the opposition because you grinded more. Not that you are a better tactician. That's not the attraction, or intent of the game. Its a strategic, historical(ish), medieval simulation with gamey trappings.

Let me quote the website, because apparently some of you didn't read it.

What the hell are you talking about? I want an EQ grind? You are the one describing the game as some kind of cheesy min/maxer experience where you go around grabbing the best troops from different NPC kingdoms.

I've played the shit out of this game, since 2004, single and more recently multiplayer, and when I play single player I pick RP restrictions just to add challenge and fun (cuz any chump can grab a mix of the best cav/archer troops and beat the NPCs, big deal, with some heavy in for sieges).

There is a multiplayer campaign for c-RPG mod btw, it really needs to be in vanilla M&B2.

[Paelos]

Oh add a rework to sieges for my list. I think there needs to be a reason for ladders v. tower, the pathing needs work, and there are various sticking points where your troops can hang on the walls. There's nothing more frustrating than watching your guys turn into pincushions because one jackass at the top of the one ladder won't actually move forward into the melee.

[Ingmar]

I'd like to order archers to hold and have none of them ignore me and go up the ramp, yeah. Or hell tie it to leadership, that might be fun. Crappy leadership, some % of troops ignore your orders and go up the ramp one at a time like Albs.

[WayAbvPar]

Goddamn it, now I have to go home and fire up a session of this.

[Ceryse]

Goddamn it, now I have to go home and fire up a session of this.

This.

Damn you all.

[Der Helm]

New Napolean Era multiplayer DLC now released for 10$ also.

It's not really a traditional DLC tho, it's actually "Mount & Musket" mod, one of the most popular & successful multiplayer mods along with c-RPG. The devs were hired by Paradox/Taleworlds to do a professional update to it, and then release it as DLC. This is good, because it's a fully fleshed out total conversion with a lot of neat features that these modders have been working on for years, it's not just normal Warband with medieval armor models replaced with 19th century and breaches.

Bought the DLC on steam. Wicked fun. Sadly it's MP only, but that one is great.

[Njal]

Well like Paelos said, we're talking about single player here, andl phat loots plus unit progression is an important part of RPG play to a lot of people, and what they expect. You can still do it without tacky fantasy elements.

If you defeat the king of Swadia (which in-game represents western latin style) you should get a chance to retrieve maybe some unique & high quality gear he would sport, or you could raid some bandit headquarters and retrieve treasure too, or commission a master blacksmith to make you some unique & ornate pieces suited to your style, etc.

Or you could play the Brytenwalda mod which has all of this already. Mind you the custom stuff doesn't have the best stats.

[Speedy Cerviche]

I've been meaning to try that one, but I'm addicted to c-rpg multiplayer at the moment. When I get an urge to hack out some single player I will check it out.

[bhodi]

I want to replay this, if there was only an alternative to the takeover-world-siege grind.

[koro]

Did CRPG ever improve from being a soul-crushingly grindy newbie experience where you are so useless as to be a liability until you started getting better equipment where you then became a nearly unstoppable god of destruction?

[Speedy Cerviche]

I dunno when you last played it..

Now xp is gained by team performance, and it just takes few hours to get from lvl 1 to 15 where you are decent and can start getting kills. You dont have to retire either, just keep going after 30 if you really hate retiring.

I prefer c-rpg over native cuz it has better balance. Things are slowed down a bit so less spammy, range less powerful too. Also with the "strategus" clan campaign map, clans overall arelarger and more organized than native, so you get decent group tactics going on even on public  servers when clans are on and playing together.

[koro]

I last played CRPG maybe a year, year and a half ago. I lost interest in bothering with the grind when it became obvious that development focus was shifting to be primarily about Strategus, which I did and still don't give even the tiniest ghost of a shit about.

[Raguel]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=DYHlFtGN0JE

 

[bhodi]

If we're going to talk about Napoleonic War, yeah, I do line battle with goons.

I've been recording our battles.

Here's two of me on Artillery mowing people down
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2RqBLyufeFA&hd=1
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3zp98dw_FKA&hd=1

And here's last night's battle where we're line infantry.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aGL8KI4mXjY&hd=1

There's a line battle almost every night, and generally about 15-30 random people who make it to any given one, with about a hundred players on each side overall.

[HaemishM]

So I did start a new game of this on normal level. Ummm, why is it every time I get started I'm captured and fucked within like an hour or two of playing? Am I just missing something? Not paying enough attention? Should I be paying off bandits until I get a few levels?

[Paelos]

Early in the game you really need to focus on winning matches in arena, hiring a small team of peasants (10ish), and only fighitng small bands of brigands that are 8 or less.

Also, run jobs for the guildmasters in the cities. They give huge xp and will get your level up fast. Do that until you're level 10, invest in some training, and hire the max amount of troops you can get. Ride out to win!

[Mrbloodworth]

You also, Personally, want to avoid direct combat. To a point. Reason I say this, if you go down, you take a major moral hit and your health suffers if you are allowed back in.

PRO-TIP: Doing things for villages, and towns increases your standing with them. Get this high enough and when you recruit there, they will be higher tier troops than recruits. Makes losses easier to recover from.

[Ingmar]

Start by beating the shit out of looters and selling their stuff, upgrade your gear a little bit and hire some peasants to take fire for you. You can work your way up to harder bandits as you go. The recruitable companions are really good since you can equip them yourself, pick their skills as they level up, they're cheap (salary wise), and they never die permanently. Avoid mercs, they're expensive.

Never ever get off your horse unless you're really sure you know what you're doing, and you probably shouldn't even then.

Don't start in Khergit lands until you're good at the game. Steppe bandits are significantly tougher than the ones in other areas. Watch out for sea raiders as well.

I don't think I've ever seen what Bloodworth is talking about with higher tier recruits from a friendly village. That may be a mod thing. I am pretty sure in the normal game they just give you more dudes, not better dudes.