Instalar Steam
iniciar sesión
|
idioma
简体中文 (Chino simplificado)
繁體中文 (Chino tradicional)
日本語 (Japonés)
한국어 (Coreano)
ไทย (Tailandés)
български (Búlgaro)
Čeština (Checo)
Dansk (Danés)
Deutsch (Alemán)
English (Inglés)
Español - España
Ελληνικά (Griego)
Français (Francés)
Italiano
Bahasa Indonesia (indonesio)
Magyar (Húngaro)
Nederlands (Holandés)
Norsk (Noruego)
Polski (Polaco)
Português (Portugués de Portugal)
Português - Brasil (Portugués - Brasil)
Română (Rumano)
Русский (Ruso)
Suomi (Finés)
Svenska (Sueco)
Türkçe (Turco)
Tiếng Việt (Vietnamita)
Українська (Ucraniano)
Informar de un error de traducción
Normas y directrices sobre discusión
Denunciar este mensaje
Look it up, it was removed from the roadmap. Google it.
So that's what this boils down to -- Another 'But they promised' thread.
I'm not going to look it up. You are the one alleging you are not receiving the product you think you were promised. Prove it.
If you can't be bothered to go down to the taleworld forums.. Thats your business. If you had not been such **** then I would have gone there and provided a source for you, but now I can't be bothered. Asking for credential in the internet... I could be Gandalf the Grey for all you know...
Can't have a fixed location for ambushes; what would be the point? With no element of surprise it defeats the purpose.
I mean a general area, where the player could expect an ambush. I was just throwing around the idea, to make them less OP. Maybe alternative could be that with right skill they could be detected.
There's several ways to define "Ambush" in a game like Bannerlord.
Let us assume that you wish to be able to "Ambush" the enemy by catching them at a significant disadvantage. That sound right?
As far as I understand it, and I only looked at this as a non-coder-dude before the attempted Customizable Group/Formation/Stuffs..
There are going to be Spawn Nodes in all battle scenes. Those dictate where everyone starts. There is a limited number of scenes and a limited number of spawn nodes on them.
First, to get a properly "looking" ambush, you need a few things to give the player a sense that they have some kind of advantage for a successful "ambush." One of those advantages could be "positional" where the player has successfully occupied terrain where they have a distinct advantage or the enemy is at a distinct disadvantage. (A force largely of enemy cavalry trying to go through a narrow, heavily wooded, area for instance.)
You need the right spawn points, first and foremost, and the game HAS to know where the player and enemy must spawn based on some campaign map dynamic condition. That can be done, since it's done with "direction" with TW's Dynamic Battlefield Thingie Whatsits they added. So, we know that field-battle scenes have at least one spawn attribute that can be tracked. And, of course, you need these spawn points to be different than vanilla spawn nodes, else the player doesn't get the right "feeling" and it's just an "Ambush" in name only.
You also need the right scene for it... depending on the type of Ambush to be simulated. A big flat piece of desert ain't gonna have impressive "positional" results for an Ambush.
That brings into play how these scenes are chosen and loaded. That may NOT be something that they can easily change. For instance, every possible spot on the map has a selection of field battle scenes that will be offered up should one of those take place. So, it's a situation of loading up an appropriate scene for this Ambush to take place in, provided the desire is to present an engagement where the player has achieved "positional" advantage.
Not all scenes may be suitable for that. That means... additional scenes. And, those additional scenes might end up only being good for Ambush encounters, which would likely be a relatively small number of the total encounters in that terrain type the player would have during a playthrough. IOW - Low Asset Value = Low Work Value
But, there's other sorts of advantages to be had that are easier to do than custom-crafting new scenes - Situational advantage.
Let's say your ambush advantage is situational in that you have caught the enemy "unprepared" to receive an attack. That's a big deal, too, especially when you don't have artillery to take true advantage of position..
ANY field-battle scene could load with enemy troops "disorganized."
It could load with all enemy forces "dismounted."
It could load with enemy forces significantly reduced in strength, simulating catching a portion of the army unprepared or out of marching order,
Any battle scene could load with the enemy having significantly reduced Morale. They could be "dismayed" they were caught unawares.
Etc.
However, there's the problem of incorporated the mechanic into the "gameplay experience."
How do we determine an "Ambush" has occurred? Is it purposeful or a Rogue Perk check? It's gotta be "purposeful" else it'd just be plain broken... So, the player would have to "set the Ambush" and how would that be done? I think it could be easily done by just moving to a point on a map and choose "Set Ambush" for any enemy party that walks in range... That is, in fact, the best way to implement that kind of mechanic as any other way would just "break" the combat experience altogether.
The AI can't do that.
It is full of "teh stoopid."
At least, compared to a human being. For the Campaign Map AI to be able to do that, it would have to be "teh smaht." It would have to be able to "purposefully set an Ambush." And, it is... teh dumb.
Our CPUs are also full of dumb... in the number of cycles they have to process the position of parties and predict behavior well enough for an AI to "purposefully set an ambush."
That is the failure point and that is why we don't have Ambushes in my opinion, even though I have also lobbied in favor of them. And, I've lobbied in favor of them because I do not have the same standard that guides much of TW's design principle - I do not believe that NPCs, AI, Factions, etc, must have access to all the same meaningful mechanics that the player does.
TW, however, has generally always had that design principle and it has served them well, for the most part... up til now. They have no legitimate reason to see advantages outside of that basic principle.
The simple fact of why we don't have it is because it would extremely difficult to give that ability to the AI so that the same ability would feel appropriate for the player.
You want it?
Get a mod that manages to do it, preferably using Situational Advantage rather than Positional Advantage, so you don't also have to have a boatload of extra scenes created. (Those could be added later if the modder was so inclined to work that hard at it. :))
Or, change TW's mind about a fundamental design principle they've tried to keep very close to since Mount&Blade was first released. :)
PS: Had an important phone call during writing this. I hope the above comes out sensible. I'll explain anything that I can if it needs explaining. :)
EA had the disclaimer that game may not be developed further.
If ambush was removed from roadmap then it was never put in the game in the first place.
Too many variables if you make enemy forces undetectable. This basically means that unless you move with a ccking army, you are constantly make random rolls to be screwed. You like RNG that much? I prefer not to.
Absolutely useless, if you just reduce detection range, because if the potential prey has the speed advantage, they will get away anyway. If they don't, you don't have to waste time in the ambush, just get them.
Other questions include but not only: What should be the reasonable limits of the party size to lay an ambush? What should be landscapes? What if an OP party or even army approaches your position? What if the capable scout party detects you, how should other parties in range react? What if PC chooses to exploit stealth mechanics somehow? How should AI react to PC approaching in abovementioned situations?. And other, and etc.
I personally see this potentially implemented mechanics having very limited application - small party vs small party in perfect scenario. And a shttonn of crap from players being screwed by it.
The best proposal I saw - was about spawn points. This stuff could be actually useful.
Well, let's look at Bannerlord's... "reality" for a sec:
It would not be difficult to code Armies, separate from Parties, to adopt some restrictions in their pathing and for goals to be set that they could reach before everyone starved to teh deffs... :) How long did it take TW to "fix'ted" that? You know, like you'd certainly figure out that if you had a "Food" mechanic and that Parties HAD to have food to survive, you'd have covered that, right?
What about the next time they fixed it? And, then there's that other time they fixed it.. Then, there's "water" and "map speed" and "mountains" and other terrain issues that target decider squirrel-code didn't bother with for ages, 'cause squares is squares... But, they fix't it. And, not only that, they fixed it several times!
<scratches head> Progress is measured by how many times you fix something, right?
I think the issue there is just having that event tick off with every combat and Lords constantly "checking" for "sees" and other related checks, like stalking, etc... And, the fact that the Council of Nay has said "Nay," which apparently means "thou shalt not" whenever anyone dares think about suggesting it.
(Sidenotes:
1) Where the heck did the rain and snow go? Other environmentals? Heavy fog? Is it a world-generation problem or what? On EA release, I was fighting in a heavy snowstorm pretty much on the first day. It was glorious! :/ It's too rare and only impacts the "player"... No "wet bowstrings" or any of that kind of thing, as far as I know. :/
2) I'm totally up for "alternative terrain" choices. Some associated scene sets would probably make lots of people happy. Or, "very rare" crap-terrain, too. I recall some of the terrain sets in Floris Modpack that were really harsh for "army battles." It made those feel like meeting-engagements rather than set-piece battles. I think, though, those may have been part of "Tactics" influence, not sure.)
Just playing devil's advocate, of course, but making completely novel and new scenes for that one Ambush mechanic is "work" being put into a sub-mechanic that requires just as much work as creating field-battle maps, maybe, arguably, more. That work could be put into creating more generic field-battle maps which would see more value in the average player's gameplay... /shrug (Just the typical argument, I'd think, against it.)
I'm a sticker for "perfection" in a lot of things. Somethings, not-so-much... But, for me, such "work" would be entirely necessary and would have been seen as "value-added" work. ("Product Perfection"... is kind of my own brain-bug.) And, that kind of detail is why.. "Bethesda." (And, perhaps, is why Bethesday also breaks stuff in so many creative ways? :))
How many times do players remark on some tiny little thing that some dev-coder worked on for a couple of days, or longer, to get "just right," but really didn't matter much in general gameplay? How many times did such a player, who had experienced that, post on forums and media sites that "and this attention to detail is why I love Developer X"? Too many to count... At least, in my experience. So, to me? It's worth the work. ALL that stuff is worth doing. To an accountant and the guy that pays the light bill? Maybe... not. My next meal was never reliant on Bannerlord making it to release. Someone else's was, I'm sure. /shrug
I don't necessarily disagree. Though, expanding on that, I always try not to mistake incompetence, as in being "not competent enough," to malice. If others didn't do so as well, lots of people might be angry at me. :)
I'd love to see it. Practically speaking, it could work just with a "Set an Ambush" mechanic and limiting that behavior, if done by the AI, to extremely Roguey NPCs and no others. The results being "Situational" which could be taken care of by triggers/rng and no need for more "scenes" could be done at first, with a proud, smiley-face, content expansion done later that adds a whole mess of tailored Ambush scenes.
Or, limit it in some other way to limit overhead - Only parties of a certain size could "Ambush." That's practical and realistic, too. So, large parties and certainly Armies couldn't "Ambush" but smaller, faster, parties could. It'd have some roleplay potential and BIG rewards, too, for the player - They could defeat a force much larger and more powerful than they by Ambushing them! (That would be... very cool. :))
These sorts of spicey cool things, though, don't necessarily "fit" in a tinker-toy set of limited mechanics. TW has, understandably, duped certain Warband flavor stuff and haven't added a lot of useful fluff to it. Then, they've gone off the Reservation, so to speak, in "new mechanics" that have yet to fit very well.
I was speaking to someone today about a kinda complex topic -"A.I." This went into a complexity and power sort of argument, with "purpose x" being a sort of goal, but adding power and complexity only goes so very far. After that comes the very necessary question that applies directly to Bannerlord's design:
"And, then what?"
The components in Bannerlord have a purpose, but the "and then what" or, larger question, was never adequately addressed in its design. (Only IMO, btw.) It doesn't mean it can't be a good game with a few small mods or maybe with a lot of polishing. It does mean, though, it's got a fundamental issue that was never provided the needed things for it to be solved for, IMO. (Mostly, late-game stuffs, to be fair.)
PS: Just a note on some of what I've read them state on this and other related issues: There will be or can not be or "it is forbidden" for there to be dynamic Campaign Map nodes/locations to be constructed/enabled by the player and/or for dynamic additions of terrain/objects in scene maps. ie: No "Set a Node" on the campaign map that then triggers a scene, itself, (Different from combat zone detection) and no "prepared ground" sorts of actions where the player does something in the campaign map to affect objects/terrain in a scene map. (ie: No "build fortifications/trenches/stakes/camp/ballistae/cattle-on-fire to be then loaded in the necessary scene)
PPS: I so very, very, very, much want to be able to get a small force behind an enemy Army and attack their "Baggage Train." I want to load up a scene and rush cavalry with torches through their Baggage Train and set it on fire, slaughtering everyone in reach in a lightning raid... I would have demanded that kind of thing be possible in Bannerlord if I had any power to do so, too. But I don't, so it ain't... :/ :)
Go ahead. Say "Placeholderlord" again. It never gets old.