Sweet Realistic Medieval Combat (Mount and Blade)

[rajpoot]

Companion interactions can be bugged this way. But you must not be keeping them happy if he defected after being made a lord.
Who all are in your party?

[Kekvit Irae]

He defected because there's a really bad game mechanic where everyone loses reputation with you if you give someone a fiefdom. Kinda hard to juggle 15 lords and a large empire and still keep them out of the negatives.

[SwordsMaster]

Is anyone else interested in a Game of Thrones mod?

[johnhughthom]

http://forums.taleworlds.com/index.p...,194610.0.html

Haven't checked it out for a while, pretty basic last time I looked.

[Voigtkampf]

I still enjoy a decent Napoleonic round here and there, I took an hour off today and go some MP time with it, it is incredible.

I can't help but be a bit giddy about War of Roses, seeing how that will seem with more tech finesse invested into the game. Can't imagine that engine being able to support 200+ soldiers on one map at the same time, though.

[Voigtkampf]

Attention, dear fellow Mount & Blade fans!

I am currently setting up a list of questions for an interview with Mount & Blade developers. Org seems to have a fair share of passionate M&B players, so I decided to give you all girls and boys a chance to ask whats on your heart.

Post your questions here or PM me, and I will pass them on in couple of days. When I publish the interview, I'll announce it here.

[rajpoot]

Nice!
Two off the top of my head are-
When's the next one coming out?
And are they planning to add more interactions with other people?

[Crazed Rabbit]

Ooo, questions! Now to think of a good one...

I played mount and musket a while back. Got in a big server, got all lined up to shoot at the enemy several hundred yards away. And then I got headshotted before anyone else died, and there were still ten minutes left, so I decided to play something else.

CR

[Voigtkampf]

Ooo, questions! Now to think of a good one...

I played mount and musket a while back. Got in a big server, got all lined up to shoot at the enemy several hundred yards away. And then I got headshotted before anyone else died, and there were still ten minutes left, so I decided to play something else.

CR

Haha, yeah, that happened to me as well... Well, maybe once or twice. There is a simple solution to that, though. Play on a server with different rules, where there are respawns. Search and destroy MP modes (got one life, die and wait for the next round) seem to be going out of fashion in the favor of deathmatches.

[Graphic]

Attention, dear fellow Mount & Blade fans!

I am currently setting up a list of questions for an interview with Mount & Blade developers. Org seems to have a fair share of passionate M&B players, so I decided to give you all girls and boys a chance to ask whats on your heart.

Post your questions here or PM me, and I will pass them on in couple of days. When I publish the interview, I'll announce it here.

With the series a success now, will production values be a higher priority going forward with M&B2?

[Voigtkampf]

With the series a success now, will production values be a higher priority going forward with M&B2?

What do you mean exactly with "production values being a higher priority"?

[Hooahguy]

What do you mean exactly with "production values being a higher priority"?

As in "will making the game look good be of higher priority?"
Basically he is asking if they are going to improve the graphics.

[Voigtkampf]

Thanks, thought that might be the point, but wanted to be absolutely sure. Cheers!

[Graphic]

If I meant just graphics I would have said graphics :). Production values is the entire presentation. Menus graphics, font, interface design, music, sound effects, voice acting, animations, etc. and yes, graphics.

I actually think the 3D graphics of M&B aren't that bad. It lacks everywhere else presentation wise.

[Vuk]

If I meant just graphics I would have said graphics :). Production values is the entire presentation. Menus graphics, font, interface design, music, sound effects, voice acting, animations, etc. and yes, graphics.

I actually think the 3D graphics of M&B aren't that bad. It lacks everywhere else presentation wise.

Feck presentation. There are plenty of games out there that are polished till they shine, but I choose to play M&B over them. You can polish a turd all you want, but it will still be a turd. People play M&B because of the gameplay, not the 'polish'. I would much prefer them spend time on gameplay, as everything looks and feels good-enough to great. (graphics wise it is beautiful)
Honestly, I think Warband took a step backward in graphics. Yeah, they may have added more HD effects or whatever, but M&B looked more realistic.

[Graphic]

Feck presentation. There are plenty of games out there that are polished till they shine, but I choose to play M&B over them. You can polish a turd all you want, but it will still be a turd. People play M&B because of the gameplay, not the 'polish'. I would much prefer them spend time on gameplay, as everything looks and feels good-enough to great. (graphics wise it is beautiful)
Honestly, I think Warband took a step backward in graphics. Yeah, they may have added more HD effects or whatever, but M&B looked more realistic.

Yes, but good presentation doesn't have to be a cover-up for a bad game. Good gameplay + good presentation = better game.

I don't expect them to try and do something like The Witcher 2, but some menus that look like they took longer than 10 minutes would be nice. The papyrus font also looks really cheap.

[Voigtkampf]

Corrected as indicated.

As for the "over production value", I was bothered by "jumpy" menus in Napoleonic, they seem to have stuck in some beta level. But overall, as I wrote in my review of the game, the gameplay is the undisputed king. I love it, its very relaxing.

However, if they go after graphic improvements, better animations and such, I doubt that 200+ MP battles will still be playable. And personally, to me, this is all the game is currently about - huge Napoleonic style 200 man battles, and you don't get that easily these days.

[Vuk]

Keep us updated!

[Voigtkampf]

Questions have been added to my own and sent out, I was promised a direct contact to the developer. All that remains now is to wait for them to get around to answering them so we can go to round two.

[Vuk]

Questions have been added to my own and sent out, I was promised a direct contact to the developer. All that remains now is to wait for them to get around to answering them so we can go to round two.

Sweet, I can't wait to hear the replies!

[Kekvit Irae]

I would like to see if they rebalance the damn bayonets in NW. A single good hit will kill anyone, but I was in a saber fight with someone and the guy STILL didn't go down after four solid hits. FOUR. There's absolutely no point in using swords unless you are cavalry (and even then the lancer easily wins out in that department since they have a lance for charging and a sword if you get dismounted). A sharpened saber should be no less dangerous than a bayonet. Sure, the bayonet is perfect for taking out charging cavalry when it's couched, but the only advantages it should have over a sword are easy access for line infantry and for the range.

I'd like to see a way to prevent engineers from building stuff inside buildings. It's just too easy to build sandbags and barricades in the second floor of a house (often ON the stairs) and just wait for the timer to go down.

More fixed artillery, or incentives for people to play as artillery trains.

/rant

[Vuk]

I would like to see if they rebalance the damn bayonets in NW. A single good hit will kill anyone, but I was in a saber fight with someone and the guy STILL didn't go down after four solid hits. FOUR. There's absolutely no point in using swords unless you are cavalry (and even then the lancer easily wins out in that department since they have a lance for charging and a sword if you get dismounted). A sharpened saber should be no less dangerous than a bayonet. Sure, the bayonet is perfect for taking out charging cavalry when it's couched, but the only advantages it should have over a sword are easy access for line infantry and for the range.

I'd like to see a way to prevent engineers from building stuff inside buildings. It's just too easy to build sandbags and barricades in the second floor of a house (often ON the stairs) and just wait for the timer to go down.

More fixed artillery, or incentives for people to play as artillery trains.

/rant

I have not played NW, so I can only go off of what you said about it. That said, I long rifle with a bayonet on it is a far better infantry weapon than a sabre. A lance is also a far more lethal cavalry weapon. If you are stabbed through by a lance or bayonet in the torso or head, you would likely die from that one wound. That said, as a sabre is a slashing weapon, and good depth of cut cannot always be easily achieved (for instance, in the chest, of you do not work your way in between the ribs, you will likely only give a flesh wound that will not be lethal. (unless it gets infected) Also, Thick clothing, gear, etc. protects much better against a sabre wound than a stabbing wound from a lance of bayonet. While I do not agree that it should take four hits for someone to go down, I think two would be reasonable. I definitely would not rebalance the bayonets though, I would rebalance the sabres. The bayonets are not over-powered, the sabres are underpowered.

[Kekvit Irae]

I have not played NW, so I can only go off of what you said about it. That said, I long rifle with a bayonet on it is a far better infantry weapon than a sabre. A lance is also a far more lethal cavalry weapon. If you are stabbed through by a lance or bayonet in the torso or head, you would likely die from that one wound. That said, as a sabre is a slashing weapon, and good depth of cut cannot always be easily achieved (for instance, in the chest, of you do not work your way in between the ribs, you will likely only give a flesh wound that will not be lethal. (unless it gets infected) Also, Thick clothing, gear, etc. protects much better against a sabre wound than a stabbing wound from a lance of bayonet. While I do not agree that it should take four hits for someone to go down, I think two would be reasonable. I definitely would not rebalance the bayonets though, I would rebalance the sabres. The bayonets are not over-powered, the sabres are underpowered.

Your argument about realism would be valid if it wasn't for the fact that we're talking about a game with health bars, females as rank-and-file soldiers, mortally-wounded players being just as efficient as unwounded ones, players running all across the map and doing their own thing, players magically getting higher accuracy when standing near officers, engineers who build spiked barricades on stairs in farmhouses, a 10-minute time limit, and (depending on map settings) respawns.

I'd like to make one point clear: The game has a health bar. Your argument is invalid.

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

Actually, I wouldn't mind the bayonets so much if the sabers weren't less effective than a Nerf bat.

[Vuk]

Your argument about realism would be valid if it wasn't for the fact that we're talking about a game with health bars, females as rank-and-file soldiers, mortally-wounded players being just as efficient as unwounded ones, players running all across the map and doing their own thing, players magically getting higher accuracy when standing near officers, engineers who build spiked barricades on stairs in farmhouses, a 10-minute time limit, and (depending on map settings) respawns.

I'd like to make one point clear: The game has a health bar. Your argument is invalid.

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

Actually, I wouldn't mind the bayonets so much if the sabers weren't less effective than a Nerf bat.

Now don't get your proverbial knickers in a twist. It was my assumption that most fans of games like M&B or TW appreciated realism, and would consider more realism to be an improvement. Sure, it is not perfect, but that does not mean we should make it less perfect. Why not improve it, so it is more realistic and your balance issues are fixed?

[Kekvit Irae]

Now don't get your proverbial knickers in a twist. It was my assumption that most fans of games like M&B or TW appreciated realism, and would consider more realism to be an improvement. Sure, it is not perfect, but that does not mean we should make it less perfect. Why not improve it, so it is more realistic and your balance issues are fixed?

You missed the

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

[Crazed Rabbit]

Now don't get your proverbial knickers in a twist. It was my assumption that most fans of games like M&B or TW appreciated realism, and would consider more realism to be an improvement. Sure, it is not perfect, but that does not mean we should make it less perfect. Why not improve it, so it is more realistic and your balance issues are fixed?

M&B games have always balanced realism and gameplay. There's no reason to tilt to far towards one view of realism that leads to a weapon being overpowered when other much less realistic aspects form a core of the game. One hit kills with bayonets don't sound fun, and could lead to unrealistic tactics to avoid death.

CR

[Vuk]

M&B games have always balanced realism and gameplay. There's no reason to tilt to far towards one view of realism that leads to a weapon being overpowered when other much less realistic aspects form a core of the game. One hit kills with bayonets don't sound fun, and could lead to unrealistic tactics to avoid death.

CR

I honestly don't see how realism can lead to unrealistic tactics, but whatever. I disagree completely that gameplay and realism are mutually exclusive, or that one is opposed to the other. I would argue that the game with the funnest gameplay is the one that is most realistic. It is also the one that will encourage the most realistic tactics and that will play out more like real life. People want to base the game on a scenario from real life for a reason, it is appeal. That real life is so appealing, that they make a video game out of it. The video game (if done properly) will have all the exciting aspects (matching skill, using tactics, etc), without the depressing and painful ones (actually being shot, having to march for hours, catching diseases, etc, etc.)

I know where you are coming from, but I think you are mistaken to think that more realism results in less fun gameplay.

[Crazed Rabbit]

I honestly don't see how realism can lead to unrealistic tactics, but whatever. I disagree completely that gameplay and realism are mutually exclusive, or that one is opposed to the other. I would argue that the game with the funnest gameplay is the one that is most realistic. It is also the one that will encourage the most realistic tactics and that will play out more like real life. People want to base the game on a scenario from real life for a reason, it is appeal. That real life is so appealing, that they make a video game out of it. The video game (if done properly) will have all the exciting aspects (matching skill, using tactics, etc), without the depressing and painful ones (actually being shot, having to march for hours, catching diseases, etc, etc.)

I know where you are coming from, but I think you are mistaken to think that more realism results in less fun gameplay.

Sometimes, more realism means less fun. Like if you got shot early in a NW match in the arm, then couldn't hold your gun and bled to death over the rest of the match.

CR

[rajpoot]

I would argue that the game with the funnest gameplay is the one that is most realistic.

So not true.

[Kekvit Irae]

I know where you are coming from, but I think you are mistaken to think that more realism results in less fun gameplay.

I know where you are coming from, but I think you are mistaken to think that a subjective opinion is objective fact.

There are people like you who believe that realism = fun. That's fine. There are also people who believe that running up the side of buildings, jumping 200 feet in the air, dodging bullets in slow motion, and/or casting magic spells = fun. That's fine too. Your opinion doesn't invalidate someone else's opinion, nor vice versa.

Personally, if I wanted super ultra realism in my games, I'd play Train Tycoon 2 with its 3000 dollar DLC or Microsoft Flight Simulator XXXIV. No, scratch that. If I wanted ultra realism, I would turn off the computer and go outside. Most people, like myself, play games as a form of escapism. For that, there needs to be a fine balance between the realistic and unrealistic, one which isn't going to please everyone. I absolutely hated Jane's 688i Hunter-Killer, but I absolutely adored Battlestations: Midway.

Different people, different ways of having fun.