Mount and Blade

There is some video footage of Bannerlord and it looks incredible but still faithful to the original.

That does look great and the music is good.

Here is a link to a Banner Lord video.  Looks very good to me.

Something I haven't seen discussed.

These are pretty essential in strategy games. Interesting video once again. That guy is pretty funny.

Bannerlord is going to be awesome!!!

That guy has an opinion on just about everything. Not just martial arts, movies and games but social topics.He did several on torches which I thought quite good. Also one on how medieval and earlier people made fire or rather didn't. Made sense to me.

Ran across this video on one of my favorite subjects.  Interesting comment about the original meaning of the word berserker = champion.  Is he 100% accurate?  I have no idea but I think he is a lot closer than the modern interpretation.

Wolverine is the ultimate berserker.

The origin of the word is bear shirt just like he says. I've listened to the video and he makes sense albeit in a rambling way.

He is right about Celtic berserkers being a terrible anachronism and of course the idea of units is preposterous to begin with. Berserkers were by definition irregular troops.

I really liked the bit about Christian berserkers, I had no idea there were such a thing.

Once again it's a great video. Thanks for sharing Nakia.

I did watch a documentary about vikings and about a skirmish during which one viking on a bridge managed to defeat 40 opponents before his enemies got wiser and managed to stab him with a spear from below. It's no wonder that after witnessing such feats of combat people would credit them with uncanny fighting abilities.

Terror was used by vikings (and other warriors) throughout the ages. When you're a bunch of raiders and looters, having your enemies run with fear makes your work a lot easier.

Terror was used by vikings (and other warriors) throughout the ages. When you're a bunch of raiders and looters, having your enemies run with fear makes your work a lot easier. wrote:

Sure Would.

He may be right about berserkers not using some means of inducing a special rage but there is a state that you can go into that is very focused and is dangerous to anyone who gets in your way. It is actually very cold. It can also induce extraordinary powers beyond those you normally have. I have gone into that state myself. If the Vikings used this state either naturally or induced by drugs or rituals they would have been a fearsome people to face. I would guess rhat many warriors used it to some extent after all when facing a life or death situation what better way to handle it but by becoming invincible or near invincible.

So far I think the game Pillars of Eternity has handled it well with their berserker powers rather than using the Minsc type mindless rage. A troop of Minsc type berserkers? They would be killing each other off.

I can't imagine the Vikings being a bunch of rag tag, undisciplined bandits and being able to terrorise other Europeans for several centuries. Also conquering areas and settling there.

One problem I have though with these martial arts commentators is their attitude towards women. Woman are quite capable of fighting and will do so to protect themselves and their children and community. I doubt that they were used for front line troops since that would be counter-productive but especially in nomadic tribes I can see them actually receiving at least some basic training. Unfortunately we tend to base our assumptions on our Mediterranean heritage where woman were to be blunt basically possessions of their men and rather cloistered. Archery is as much a woman's sport as a man's and although I doubt very many women could use the large swords or be truly effective with the clubbing type of weapons if trained they could use pole axes and possibly even short swords or assassin weapons. Skallaberg, did I get his name right, wife likes pole axes and similiar weapons and she appears to be fairly small. At least compared to him.

In an actual life and death battle it makes sense to me that a commander would send his best warriors into face the enemies best warriors and when possible take out as many enemies as possible with archers, javelins and other thrown weapons.

A commander with a well equipped and well trained and disciplined smaller group of warriors would I think have an advantage over a larger but less well equipped, trained and disciplined troop. Tzu Sun for instance who was out numbered ten to one.

Even in patriarchal societies there have always been women who stood out and managed to become great leaders (but I'm not saying it was easy).

As far as fighters are concerned you just have to adapt your technique to your build and corpulence and that's true of guys as well. It wouldn't make sense for a medium sized woman (or man for that matter) to try and fight like a hulking lout.

There is also the question of morale. If you're going on a raiding party you have to leave someone in charge of your home while you are gone (hence the important role of viking women).

There is also evidence of viking women who were soldiers. Archaeologists unearthed tombs of women buried with weapons, which was common with men warriors.

Yes, sending your best against their best makes sense, but myself, it the numbers are equal in a melee battle, I would rather send my best against their weakest soldiers. I would hope that my other warriors can hold their best (or at least injure them), while my best makes short work of their weakest and join the rest of the army and (hopefully) face a now weakened best opponent. Much like in a bracket sports playoff, where you want to face the least possible resistance while you hope the stronger teams gets ousted by another or at least get banged up before facing you. There's always the chance that's it's you that gets banged up before facing the best other team, but you have to be positive...

You definitely have a point, Tri. According to TzU Sun you want to attack their weakest line while defending your weakest line. I have forgotten who said "The point of sending your soldiers into battle is not to die for country but make the enemy die for his country."

Also if you can cause a rout that is good. Get even some of the enemy on the run and the rout will often spread. As Cara said fear is a really good weapon.

Has anyone heard of a release date for M&B Banner Lords?

We've been waiting for years now. Unfortunately I haven't heard anything conclusive.

https://www.taleworlds.com/en/Games/Bannerlord

At least it's still being made so there is that.

It looks really good and a lot of fun. Please let us know if you hear anything and I will report if I hear anything.

It's a deal.

Nothing on the release date but this did turn up on YouTube

A better Mount and Blade game would be absolutely terrific. It's not that Warband is bad (quite the opposite) it's just that it could be even better with a few additions and improvements.

We know that the graphics are improved, that we will have seige equipment and that we can craft weapons. So we already have a potentially better game of an already good game. Now if it is slated to be released sometime in 2016 how ca life get better>

The Steam page is up so it looks like we can expect a release some time this year (fingers crossed):

http://store.steampowered.com/app/261550/

Yay! I really look forward to it. It seems they might have integrated some ideas from the Diplomacy mod.

I've been playing some Viking Conquest lately and I can say that I'm really looking forward to getting my hands on Bannerlord. Better graphics is a plus but I hope they'll provide better controller support as I like playing these games while reclining on a couch away from the screen.

It's been a few years but I've finally got my hands on Bannerlord and even in Early Access it's a pretty nice evolution for the series. Basically it takes what made Warband so fun and builds upon it.

At the moment it's not finished so there are some issues and Early Access saves won't be compatible with the finished game but it's lots of fun already.

I'm getting a Conan vibe from the main theme and that's definitely a plus:

I definitely have my eyes on it. So how different is it from Warband? What new features does the game bring to the table?

It's very much Warband 2.0 so don't expect anything radically different. At the current stage the game is still a bit rough but they have one year of Early Access to make it work and if they do then it's going to be fantastic.

There introducing permadeath and the possibility of managing your dynasty or clan which sounds intriguing (imagine playing Mount & Blade like you play Crusader Kings 2).

You also have some RPG persuasion system which takes into account the NPC you're trying to persuade, your character's skills and reputation and gives you different options to change an NPC's attitude. For instance I was tasked by a village chief to find his daughter who had ran away with the village good for nothing layabout. I tracked them down and found them in a shack in another village where they had just arrived seeking refuge. I had several options. I could leave them alone, try and convince the girl to go back or kill her suitor. Considering that I'm terrible at fighting I was lucky to convince her by appealing to her duty (but I could have told her that the lad was up to something).

Right now at best the game is a treat and at worst it's terribly messy with texture bugs all over the place. In y experience it seems to be one way or the other. When it runs fine it gives a very exciting view of what to expect in the future.