Exilian
Off-topic and Chatter: The Jolly Boar Inn => General Gaming - The Arcade => Mount and Blade Discussion - Sargoth Town Square => Topic started by: Marcus on October 28, 2012, 10:22:51 PM
-
So, stupid subtitle aside, what hopes and dreams do we all have for M&B2? I'm personally hoping for a better looking world map, or maybe have it completely RPG style, with no world map, and better storytelling and quests. Oh, and an improved AI for both sides as well.
And of course, good modability so we can make it better when it fails our expectations. :)
http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/2012/09/28/its-finally-real-mount-blade-ii/
-
Better quests, better body meshes (no more weird separated heads and limbs), more fluid animations and killing moves with at least some gore (Skyrim style).
That's all I'm asking for.
I still play 1.011 version from time to time. All hail The Eagle and the Radiant Cross!
Never got Warband, though. Too much money for my pocket and too few changes.
-
I like the world map, I have to say... I'd like more depth generally, given the freeplay theory/style there was pretty much only one
Basically if they make Southern Realms, finished, with a graphics upgrade and a few new quests, I'd be a happy bunny. :P
-
Quests, dialouges and other armadillo that gives some sense of immersion.
-
More freedom.
More Quests (MUCH more quests)
A big invasion from a unknown faction after some time,so the game doesn't get boring (I noticed that one Khergit party member said that the Khergits were forced out of Calradia by "The Great Horde",so maybe the Great Horde can Invade Calradia?)
Story Quests (for example,if your dude is in Calradia because of money and power - make the goal of the story quest getting a lot of gold and renown)
Custom Battles
More interaction with your peasants
Players should not be able to get a ton of gold as fast as they did in the original
Weaker Cavalry
More stuff to do on a training field
1 or 2 new factions
Drunks in Taverns that give you quests or play games with you
Randomization - Random NPC's and quest foes,or maybe a random map mode?
And most importantly:
OPTIMIZATION
-
Would like improved AI . Would like playable campaigns in which you or your guild can take cities/castles from other players (or have them taken from you by them)
Would also like to see more of the chance to hit for players based on how they click and turn the mouse rather than skill rating - so real skill as a gamer, rather than just getting experience for your character, makes more of a difference.
Also make it suicide for horsemen to charge infantry armed with pole arms from the front unless they have e.g steel plate barding for their horses (which historically came pretty late on in the medieval period - i think late 15th century) - and even then it should be risky as halberds/braced pikes etc could go through steel plate from the horse's momentum or their own weight.
Reverse damage for momentum and mass - i.e if you're charging fast with a lance on a huge horse it adds to the damage you do, but also to the damage you take, especially from pole-arms.
Would like big changes to assaults on cities/towns so you can use rams, ramps, tunneling under walls etc rather than just everyone charging suicidally up one or two siege towers or ladders.
I'd like to see some magic in it and fantasy races, so it would have more potential for fantasy mods (allowing them be turned off for historical mods). I know the developers of M&B say they don't want to include magic, but i don't see why not - they're already essentially setting the game in a non-historical setting - and you could have options for turning magic and fantasy races off in the main game too.
-
Reverse damage for momentum and mass - i.e if you're charging fast with a lance on a huge horse it adds to the damage you do, but also to the damage you take, especially from pole-arms.
Umm, that's already in.
-
Spear bracing should definitely be in, and shield bashing, and crouching as well as jumping, and much better formation fighting.
-
I was checking out Taleworlds forum and I found out that they're making this sequel from scratch...
That's right, they won't be using anything from the old games.
Makes me kind of worried.
-
Not me, you see how Skyrim turned out when they stared that with a new engine.
-
Yes, but we're talking about Taleworlds here, not about Bethesda game studios.
-
Taleworlds created the most unique and what was widely considered the best melee combat engine in gaming.
Bethesda took a tired, old idea and gave it a shiny coat of paint.
Mount & Blade, in a better Engine, with better quests, a better Endgame and more interaction, would be perfect. It doesn't need a complete overhaul. It's simplicity made it appealing - Hell, I am still playing Warband today. They found a good formula with M&B and made improvements on it with Warband, With Fire And Sword and Napoleonic Wars (Which, James, does have crouching).
-
I didn't think NW had both crouching and jumping, though I may be wrong? I haven't played it in any case, which I'm sure I should do.
I agree though, TaleWorlds have a fantastic track record for innovation.
-
Taleworlds created the most unique and what was widely considered the best melee combat engine in gaming.
I never said anything different.
Bethesda took a tired, old idea and gave it a shiny coat of paint.
I highly disagree.
TES games were always huge breakthroughs in gaming.
And the Elder scrolls universe has an obscene amount of genuinely interesting and original fluff behind it.
-
I believed all the hype for Skyrim.
I had even been playing Oblivion in frenetic preparation for what was going to be a "Wonderful, ground-breaking game".
I got bored after a week, even with mods.
I find the Gamer Poops on Youtube for Skyrim more exciting.
-
It's seems to me that we're now talking about acquired tastes. ;)
The thing is... You can't compare a generic-faction sandbox game to an adventure game which follows a certain storyline.
I still play Morrowind, Oblivion and Skyrim.
I've sniffed, scratched and pissed on every corner of Tamriel, Shivering Isles and Skyrim.
And I still come back after so much time...
I never got bored.
And I still play M&B 1.011 version.
I agree with you. The simplicity is what makes it so wonderful.
But I probably wouldn't be playing it now if I didn't get hooked up on The Eagle and the Radiant Cross mod because of it's community, artwork and fluff (sensing a pattern here). I need a gripping background storyline for immersion.
Warband wasn't even remotely interesting to me.
-
I'd like to see some magic in it and fantasy races, so it would have more potential for fantasy mods (allowing them be turned off for historical mods). I know the developers of M&B say they don't want to include magic, but i don't see why not - they're already essentially setting the game in a non-historical setting - and you could have options for turning magic and fantasy races off in the main game too.
No dude,just no.
-
I think that would be nice, actually. It would make modding easier.
And it's always nice to have options.
But they already have too much work if the fact that they're starting from scratch is true.
So I believe the setting won't be much different than the current native module, possibly even the same.
-
Spear bracing should definitely be in, and shield bashing, and crouching as well as jumping, and much better formation fighting.
Hell no to the first two, hell yes to the second.
-
Why?
Spear bracing and shield bashing are a must if you ask me.
Especially if you want realistic gameplay.
-
Spear bracing sounds good but the shield bashing is a bit unneeded in my opinion.
-
Meh, more options are always good. I'd like shield bashing, provided the mechanics allowed for different types of shield doing different damage.
After all, a targe will be far more painful than an old wooden round shield.
Spear bracing and crouching is needed and I'd also like to see AI jumping. Should make it harder to find places to stand and hit people from where they can't get you.
-
Shield bashing would be good, especially since I enjoy playing infantry more than cavalry. Optimisation is a must, and if they're using a new engine, hopefully it will happen. Of course, the question is are they going for more of the same, or a complete reinvention? Hopefully a middle ground will be found.
-
Leaked alpha footage.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RIz_eiHIBd0
Quote from the developer:
Funny thing is the part they shoot us i was just telling Kabraxis that i hoped that they weren't shooting us :).
. . .
edit2: right now, every character in the game is so ugly that we can't stop laughing while we are developing :). though i can't say any thing about it how it will be in the finished product.
And from what I see, characters have a huge amount of polygons. Especially on their faces.
Graphics are going to be really good in this one.
-
Version with subtitles. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zZUfzAFL5Ek)
-
Shield bashing would be good, especially since I enjoy playing infantry more than cavalry. Optimisation is a must, and if they're using a new engine, hopefully it will happen. Of course, the question is are they going for more of the same, or a complete reinvention? Hopefully a middle ground will be found.
My God yes.
Also,what about more skills and jobs?
How about giving us more options,not just limiting us to being a mercenary knight / lord.How about enabling us to be a,say,farmer,assassin,innkeeper,Arena Champion or a captain of the city guard?
-
As I say, basically they should have all the stuff I chucked into SR. ;D
-
I think giving you too many paths would dilute the game somewhat, and you could end up with lots of options that aren't very well thought out, opposed to a few that are. Mount&Blade has always primarily been about combat, and I think it should stay that way. Any other path should be primarily combat oriented, so arena champion, assassin, captain of the guard etc. Would work, but farmer or innkeeper would divert the attention too much from the focus of the game, and we want them to make a good game, don't we? Besides, if it's as moddable as its ancestor, then we should be able to add that in ourselves. I think the worse mistake they could make is to remove moddability, as it is that which gives M&B the variety it has today.
-
M&B 2 will have even more modding options, according to Taleworlds.
-
As I say, basically they should have all the stuff I chucked into SR. ;D
What? :-\
I think giving you too many paths would dilute the game somewhat, and you could end up with lots of options that aren't very well thought out, opposed to a few that are. Mount&Blade has always primarily been about combat, and I think it should stay that way. Any other path should be primarily combat oriented, so arena champion, assassin, captain of the guard etc. Would work, but farmer or innkeeper would divert the attention too much from the focus of the game, and we want them to make a good game, don't we? Besides, if it's as moddable as its ancestor, then we should be able to add that in ourselves. I think the worse mistake they could make is to remove moddability, as it is that which gives M&B the variety it has today.
Hmm...you have a point there.
But I think we should be given more interaction with the world(especially the people),and maybe some random quests...
Oh,yeah,and a ability to equip your own army.
M&B 2 will have even more modding options, according to Taleworlds.
Thank God.
-
SR (Southern Realms) was my mod for the original Mount & Blade.
-
I now actually know what I want.
I want a better looking, more fluid and optimized version of Warband, which would allow easier modding.
Yep, that's all.
No need for anything else.
-
SR (Southern Realms) was my mod for the original Mount & Blade.
Were can I get more info?
I now actually know what I want.
I want a better looking, more fluid and optimized version of Warband, which would allow easier modding.
Yep, that's all.
No need for anything else.
Well,that is pretty humble.
-
Not really.
It requires a whole new engine. :/
-
SR (Southern Realms) was my mod for the original Mount & Blade.
Were can I get more info?
http://exilian.co.uk/forum/index.php?board=21.0
:D
-
Why?
Spear bracing and shield bashing are a must if you ask me.
Especially if you want realistic gameplay.
Every spear bracing/shield bashing kit I've seen has been utterly crap and I don't see how either one could be done realistically and not annoyingly. How would you want shield bashing to work? And how would you defend against the shield bash? As to spear bracing, meh why need it? Massed spears/pikes already work very effectively against cavalry when you use formations.
-
Spear bracing kit works great from what I've seen. All they need are pikes which break upon high-speed impact.
Defending against a shield bash? Shield bash your opponent too to nullify the effect, raise your shield and you won't receive any damage, or just move backwards if you're fast enough. Seems realistic enough, and would make combat much harder.
-
Moving backwards is too slow using the current engine and would also decrease your momentum and the damage you can deal, raising your shield wouldn't stop you from being pushed back (realistically) and presumably you couldn't attack whilst shield bashing so two people bashing away at each other would be kinda crap. And if you can shield bash why couldn't you also bodily bash your opponents when heavily armored? Or wrestle/leg hook them? Or hook the rim of their shield and haul it down? Meh, if it works within the new engine they are making for the game then by all means go for it, but I can see it making combat on foot much more frustrating but not more realistic or enjoyable.
Haven't tried spear bracing kits for a while (actually I haven't played M&B in quite a while) but I don't see the need for it anyway, polearms work well against cavalry in tight formation but not in a skirmish style battle which is pretty realistic, surely spear bracing just makes cavalry pretty crap altogether in melee.
Really I would much prefer it if TW work on improving the physics of formations (a shield wall ability would be pretty cool if it took into account the momentum of the entire formation) and maybe making the player's footwork more important in one on one combat (sidestepping, backstepping maybe lunging.)
-
Moving backwards is too slow using the current engine
Not if you have high athletics skill. That's why I said "if you're fast enough". ;)
raising your shield wouldn't stop you from being pushed back (realistically)
Yes, that's true, but I never said anything about not being pushed back. I just said that you wouldn't receive the usual damage from shield bash if you raise your shield. (getting hit in the head by a shield and all that jazz)
Counter bashing would stun both players, but for a shorter time than usual.
And if you can shield bash why couldn't you also bodily bash your opponents when heavily armored?
Well you can kick people in Warband...
Shield bashing would be a much safer alternative for handweapon + shield troops.
However, this should all come with a redesign of blocking system. Blocking should be more active, with less coverage and should work similar to way in which weapon blocking works at the moment, depending on the direction from which your enemy is attacking.
Haven't tried spear bracing kits for a while (actually I haven't played M&B in quite a while) but I don't see the need for it anyway, polearms work well against cavalry in tight formation but not in a skirmish style battle which is pretty realistic, surely spear bracing just makes cavalry pretty crap altogether in melee.
Actually, it makes cavalry realistic instead of overpowered.
It works just like couched lance. You give orders to your soldiers, they kneel down and stick pikes into ground and stay that way until you give them new orders. Whatever hits the pointy edge receives damage according to it's speed. Simple and realistic.
Really I would much prefer it if TW work on improving the physics of formations . . . and maybe making the player's footwork more important in one on one combat (sidestepping, backstepping maybe lunging.)
Couldn't agree more. ;)
-
I think close combat friendly fire would be a big addition aka if you have a ton of people waving swords around and they're standing 10cm apart and one of them hits another, they actually do damage. The main issue with foot solo combat in M&B, I found, was that it was so easy for enemies to pile you with all of them at insanely close range as they didn't need to worry about each other's sword swings so combats were really dense rather than fluid (dense combat is fine in the centre of a really packed battle line, mind, but then there should be a good reason to use short swords not battleaxes).
-
I remember reading something similar a long time ago.
One of the developers mentioned an insane amount of friendly fire kills.
AI is practically helpless about that, and introducing some kind of complex code would probably lead to frequent crashes and frustratingly stupid AI behavior.
-
Unless AI is massively improved I don't think that would work at all (friendly fire that is.) Same problem with spear brace, AI is too stupid to circle around a bracing soldier and would probably just ride right into them. Also if you're bracing a spear and a horse runs right into it you won't be able to stop the horses momentum, it would crush you to death in all likelyhood.
"Not if you have high athletics skill. That's why I said "if you're fast enough"." Oh right, I thought you meant if you reacted quickly enough.
"Yes, that's true, but I never said anything about not being pushed back. I just said that you wouldn't receive the usual damage from shield bash if you raise your shield. (getting hit in the head by a shield and all that jazz)" I don't think shield bashing should do any significant damage, surely the pushback/stun would be the advantage of shield bashing? I mean how would you manage to hit someone in the head with a shield without them getting their weapon or arm in the way?
"Counter bashing would stun both players, but for a shorter time than usual." Now that I can see being extremely annoying.
As to kicking, as its currently implemented I don't find it useful at all.
-
I don't think shield bashing should do any significant damage, surely the pushback/stun would be the advantage of shield bashing? I mean how would you manage to hit someone in the head with a shield without them getting their weapon or arm in the way?
About that first part. Ever hit your head into a door or a metal sign, or perhaps saw somebody else do it? Multiply that by three.
And about the second part. It's quite possible. I can't be arsed to find videos right now, but I'm sure you've seen it a hundred times.
As to kicking, as its currently implemented I don't find it useful at all.
I do. You can interrupt attacks and push people off battlements. Good enough for me.
-
You can also interrupt attacks by attacking yourself which I find much more useful. Didn't realise you could shove people of battlements, thats pretty handy (although not particularly fair if the AI don't shove you off ladders as you climb but presumably sieges are going to be sorted out properly since they've always been a bit armadillo.)
And yeah it would be possible to hit someone in the head with a shield in part of a dynamic fight if you get a nice opportunity but how can you simulate that in M&B? If you went to punch your shield up that high you would have to shift your weight forward very quickly and would be opening yourself up for a counterattack or your opponent just grabbing your shield rim and shoving you over/backwards if they avoid the bash.
-
Kicks are helpful if you're using a slow weapon and not carrying a shield, too.
Well, they'll just have make combat more dynamic either way.
Shields without shield bashing are just ridiculous. If they don't include them, I'll add them myself.
-
I usually go sword and board so tis not a problem for me.
Edit:
If the new engine actually makes combat more dynamic in terms of sidestepping/evasion I could see a shield bash working if it was basically implemented as a strike rather than something like the current kick or the shieldbash I've seen in mods, the advantage being that you could strike from a block without having to lower the shield first so your opponent wouldn't get so much warning, the disadvantage being that opens you up to attack and requires a step forward as part of the animation. If it worked when striking against a blocking opponent though it would mess up battles in formation or whenever fighters are mushed up together.
-
Yes, that would be ok.
I just want them to change the combat system a least a little bit.
Add in a few new things, or even change every possible segment, I don't even care.
The point is... If they're changing it, I want to see something fresh.
Like War of the Roses, for example. Occasional killing moves make battles so much more dynamic.
Just a step forward to make battles more fluid and believable.
-
I haven't played War of the Roses but it looked interesting. Was it good/worth buying?
-
I have no idea.
But I saw a few videos and the battles look really good.
-
Oh right, I heard it isn't that good but I did hear that on TW so it could just be the M&B fanbase muddying the waters of competition :)
-
Well it certainly looks better, but from what I've seen it looks like it has no campaign map. Just online battles. :/
-
Yeah I think it has some sort of linear single player but its pretty much all about the fps style multiplayer.
-
Well,it seems that I found a very interesting little site...
https://tricider.com/en/brainstorming/TPYL (https://tricider.com/en/brainstorming/TPYL)
My suggestion is that Helmets Obstract your view. ;D
And yeah,Tale Worlds will read the requests... :)
-
My suggestion is that Helmets Obstract your view. ;D
Yes, that's immersive, but can also be horribly frustrating at the same time.
Should be left as an option.
I remember playing Oblivion with a similar mod. And though it's great, your head really starts to hurt after some time.
Especially if you're trying to pick up something from floor.
-
I remember a mod from M&B had that as an option, I liked it and if it got annoying you could just switch to 3rd person view. Actually that mod had a lot of cool features, such as lord parties chasing you away from cities if they were lurking inside them.
-
The only thing with helmets obstructing your view is that on a standard pc monitor you already have a limited FOV, so in my view making it worse is not necessary.
-
Yes, that's true. I can't remember what's the exact arc in first person games but it's 120 degrees in real life (part of that being blurry peripheral vision).
-
Yeah, part of it is blurry peripheral vision, but you'd be amazed how useful that is in RL. The only time I could see a FOV restriction being realistic is when you're wearing a bucket helm or similar with only eyeholes to see out of.
-
I was just trying to say that first person has much smaller arc.
Third person view is much closer to the actual field of view.
-
My suggestion is that Helmets Obstract your view. ;D
Yes, that's immersive, but can also be horribly frustrating at the same time.
Should be left as an option.
I remember playing Oblivion with a similar mod. And though it's great, your head really starts to hurt after some time.
Especially if you're trying to pick up something from floor.
Agreed.
But we could have a option of lifting the helmet - less Armour,more visibility!
And I think that would put a end to those silly players who wear a ton of armour and are archers. :)
I remember a mod from M&B had that as an option, I liked it and if it got annoying you could just switch to 3rd person view. Actually that mod had a lot of cool features, such as lord parties chasing you away from cities if they were lurking inside them.
Name?
Please,don't tell me you forgot... :(
Yeah, part of it is blurry peripheral vision, but you'd be amazed how useful that is in RL. The only time I could see a FOV restriction being realistic is when you're wearing a bucket helm or similar with only eyeholes to see out of.
What do you mean?
I was just trying to say that first person has much smaller arc.
Third person view is much closer to the actual field of view.
Well,we can fix that pretty easily...
-
I think it was called Rus 13th century or something along those lines. It was a historical mod, think it was either 13th century or 12th
Edit:
Yep 13th century, here's a link to their subforum http://forums.taleworlds.com/index.php/board,161.0.html
It seems they have an alpha out for warband. Much excitement.
-
Skull, what I mean is as the FOV is already restricted due to your view point being a single monitor, rather than your eyes, as it would be in RL, an additional viewpoint restriction would be unnecessary and prohibitive, except in the cases of bucket helms and similar, where your FOV is more restricted than it is by the monitor, and that could be done with depictions of eyeholes etc. I agree with the option of lifting the helmet, which works for helmets with visors, and I believe it was common practice for many soldiers with those helmets to have their visors up most of the time anyway, unless it was seriously hairy, just so they could see. Having a well protected head is pointless if you can't see the peasant with the spear poking into the chink in your armour.
-
I think it was called Rus 13th century or something along those lines. It was a historical mod, think it was either 13th century or 12th
Edit:
Yep 13th century, here's a link to their subforum http://forums.taleworlds.com/index.php/board,161.0.html
It seems they have an alpha out for warband. Much excitement.
Thank you. I hope it will work...
Skull, what I mean is as the FOV is already restricted due to your view point being a single monitor, rather than your eyes, as it would be in RL, an additional viewpoint restriction would be unnecessary and prohibitive, except in the cases of bucket helms and similar, where your FOV is more restricted than it is by the monitor, and that could be done with depictions of eyeholes etc. I agree with the option of lifting the helmet, which works for helmets with visors, and I believe it was common practice for many soldiers with those helmets to have their visors up most of the time anyway, unless it was seriously hairy, just so they could see. Having a well protected head is pointless if you can't see the peasant with the spear poking into the chink in your armour.
Agreed. Also,when the player has his visor up,he can see the whole screen (almoust) as if he was not wearing a helmet at all,but his head armour will be a lot lower.
Also,I don't think a levy has any chances against a heavily armored Knight (he can just stab the poor peasant or cut the head of his spear) -unless the peasant is Flemish,of coarse. :P
-
Ok, the knight will have better training etc, but a peasant with a halberd could dismount a knight and kill him with enough vicious conviction. But my point still stands, if you can't see what you're doing, you're helpless, unless you happen to have jedi powers, which I don't think many knights had back then.
-
Ah but they can just smell where the dirty ole peasants are of course.
-
Ok, the knight will have better training etc, but a peasant with a halberd could dismount a knight and kill him with enough vicious conviction. But my point still stands, if you can't see what you're doing, you're helpless, unless you happen to have jedi powers, which I don't think many knights had back then.
Not everyone had halberds. :)
Well,I was just thinking it would be a very nice feature...
Ah but they can just smell where the dirty ole peasants are of course.
Or hear them.
Also,I think that they could see what they needed - even when wearing great helms...
-
Enjoy.
-
It looks great! ;D
But I have a feeling that it's going to make modding so much harder...
-
Yeah, I can't imagine this will be very moddable - on the other hand, it does look very very pretty indeed.
-
Well, I didn't mean it in that way.
They said that they'll try to make it more mod-friendly, using what looks like Bethesda's construction set for Oblivion and Skyrim.
I just meant that it looks like making and rigging models is going to be a lot more complex, time consuming and harder.
-
Yeah, that was what I meant too.
But also some things like making custom settlements and buildings may presumably be harder, for example, depending on how the weather systems work.
-
That part actually looked pretty nice in the video they made, if I remember correctly.
They've made some sort of preset foliage brushes and editing scenes really looked like a lot of fun.
It would be nice if the weather system could be turned off.
-
Enjoy.
Damn it! Beat me to it.
Still, new blog up on the forums, so new topic on that as well.
Enjoy :)