Install Steam
login
|
language
简体中文 (Simplified Chinese)
繁體中文 (Traditional Chinese)
日本語 (Japanese)
한국어 (Korean)
ไทย (Thai)
Български (Bulgarian)
Čeština (Czech)
Dansk (Danish)
Deutsch (German)
Español - España (Spanish - Spain)
Español - Latinoamérica (Spanish - Latin America)
Ελληνικά (Greek)
Français (French)
Italiano (Italian)
Bahasa Indonesia (Indonesian)
Magyar (Hungarian)
Nederlands (Dutch)
Norsk (Norwegian)
Polski (Polish)
Português (Portuguese - Portugal)
Português - Brasil (Portuguese - Brazil)
Română (Romanian)
Русский (Russian)
Suomi (Finnish)
Svenska (Swedish)
Türkçe (Turkish)
Tiếng Việt (Vietnamese)
Українська (Ukrainian)
Report a translation problem
I also played this game some time ago, and not having servants as companions was the letdown that made me drop the game... I came here to see if they changed this.
That could be tied in with more active enemy patrols/events
Why not? Maybe he likes the idea of role playing with his coterie? No one would force you to use them in your battles. I don't get why people poo poo on ideas that only add something cool without doing anything bad to the game.
Do I agree? Not always (as is my stance on the garlic debuff's post-death lingering effect), but it's ok to disagree. If the greater part of the audience prefers the game to be more strict, then it is likely in the best interests of the developers to follow suit.
Just finished the game yesterday, since i dont have any friends that are interested in these types of games i did it solo, one thing i was super excited about was the ability to have servants and kitting them out, only to find out they are just chihuahuas that only guard your house from wolves. Yeah no the game needs the ability to let you have at least one servant accompany you, and if this change hurts the pvp fanatics, just have it be a server setting and thats it. I doubt most pvp servers would have that enabled anyway.