|
Probably the billionth person to ask this....release date yet?
|
#
?
Sep 12, 2014 20:46
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 27, 2024 22:40 |
|
|
Just in case people haven't seen it, Sensuki and Matt516 have developed a really interesting solution to the issues with Per and Res over on the OE forums. I think it's definitely worth a read by everyone. Even if you don't agree with their suggestions, it will really open your mind to the mathematical underpinnings of the attribute system in PoE. http://forums.obsidian.net/topic/68526-how-to-fix-the-attribute-design-in-pillars-of-eternity/
|
|
#
?
Sep 12, 2014 20:47
|
|
|
Jastiger posted:Probably the billionth person to ask this....release date yet? Hopefully not soon  More work needed!I understand what devs feel like now kinda.
|
|
#
?
Sep 12, 2014 20:47
|
|
|
Sensuki posted:Hopefully not soon There was some sort of quote about it being in December or November, wasn't there? Not that I'd want it to be true.
|
|
#
?
Sep 12, 2014 20:54
|
|
|
Oh its not looking good? Boo 
|
|
#
?
Sep 12, 2014 21:02
|
|
|
Jastiger posted:Oh its not looking good? Boo Oh the beta is looking good, for a very early beta. It is just that it needs a lot of work with bugfixing and tweaking.
|
|
#
?
Sep 12, 2014 21:09
|
|
|
Ladolcevita posted:Just in case people haven't seen it, Sensuki and Matt516 have developed a really interesting solution to the issues with Per and Res over on the OE forums. I think it's definitely worth a read by everyone. Even if you don't agree with their suggestions, it will really open your mind to the mathematical underpinnings of the attribute system in PoE. http://forums.obsidian.net/topic/68526-how-to-fix-the-attribute-design-in-pillars-of-eternity/?p=1508219
|
|
#
?
Sep 12, 2014 21:20
|
|
|
evilmiera posted:Oh the beta is looking good, for a very early beta. It is just that it needs a lot of work with bugfixing and tweaking. Ah I'm super excited then! This game is going to be great, and I'd rather it be great than not-so-great because of it being rushed.
|
|
#
?
Sep 12, 2014 21:24
|
|
|
Jastiger posted:Ah I'm super excited then! This game is going to be great, and I'd rather it be great than not-so-great because of it being rushed. e: vvvvvv You can get that deep, or you can totally easily play through it by going "I want my ___ to be stronger, so I put some points into might because that sounded cool". After a few runs through the beta I am seriously considering my first run based on what I wanted my conversation stats (there are a lot of stat-based checks in convos) to be rather than combat utility. The whole point is that any stat-build for any class should be acceptable as long as you play to its strengths, so minmaxing is for the Sensukis of the world (and lets be honest, I'll probably be doing a run like that too, though not as hardcore as that). Ravenfood fucked around with this message at 02:29 on Sep 13, 2014 |
|
#
?
Sep 13, 2014 02:02
|
|
|
Ladolcevita posted:Just in case people haven't seen it, Sensuki and Matt516 have developed a really interesting solution to the issues with Per and Res over on the OE forums. I think it's definitely worth a read by everyone. Even if you don't agree with their suggestions, it will really open your mind to the mathematical underpinnings of the attribute system in PoE. This sort of thing is really impressive but yeowza this game is looking complicated. I'm glad I backed it, but I'm a little intimidated by the thought of playing it.
|
|
#
?
Sep 13, 2014 02:26
|
|
|
You can take even a simple game, run statistical analysis on it, and wind up with truly complex graphs and charts. You don't need to do that analysis to play the game. The reason why they (and we) crunch numbers is to make sure that players are not being unfairly punished by fundamental imbalances in the system. E.g. if Might gave +5% Damage/Healing per point, its basic effects would appear the same, but it would make a tremendous difference relative to other stats.
|
|
#
?
Sep 13, 2014 02:53
|
|
|
Impressive work from Sensuki and Matt, I like the suggestions. One thing that might fit better if Dexterity is going to increase action speed, would be to rename it Agility.
|
|
#
?
Sep 13, 2014 03:53
|
|
|
Whatever with the skills, I just hope they don't have like 6 loving different breach/spell thrust/spell deflection/immunity/secret word/pierce/oracle bullshit. I don't want to play a stupid game where Elminster tears down one color after another of an enemy's Chromatic Shield. Drifter fucked around with this message at 05:40 on Sep 13, 2014 |
|
#
?
Sep 13, 2014 05:36
|
|
|
Hieronymous Alloy posted:This sort of thing is really impressive but yeowza this game is looking complicated. I'm glad I backed it, but I'm a little intimidated by the thought of playing it. Much like gun statistics in games like Call of Duty, there's a lot of number crunching going on to figure out how to keep stuff balanced and it takes several tries. But most players just pick a gun that "feels" good enough for them and can do quite ok with that. To go further with that comparison Obsidian are just trying to avoid another "dual 1887s" scenario. We can all still have fun with the game even without knowing how they fixed this.
|
|
#
?
Sep 13, 2014 07:05
|
|
|
Kar98K always best 
|
|
#
?
Sep 13, 2014 07:23
|
|
|
So what about the hypothetical ability of a heal/buff-focused character to dump whichever stat ends up governing accuracy? Is it just the case that even a priest who attempts to go all-in on party support is still going to end up making enough attacks that their inaccuracy hurts? It seems like ideally you'd want to design some way that "accurate" buffs/heals are better than "inaccurate" buffs/heals, though it's hard to come up with one offhand that doesn't end up with your skills having arbitrary fail chances.
|
|
#
?
Sep 13, 2014 07:30
|
|
|
Hieronymous Alloy posted:This sort of thing is really impressive but yeowza this game is looking complicated. I'm glad I backed it, but I'm a little intimidated by the thought of playing it. Anybody can half-rear end out an rpg system. When they do, it's the player that ends up holding the bag. OTOH, if the Devs put the work in, the Player doesn't have to check faqs and system mastery guides to have fun. POE's Stats are a classic example of this since their stated goal is to avoid the pitfalls of older designs by giving good support to all options. A Catastrophe fucked around with this message at 07:37 on Sep 13, 2014 |
|
#
?
Sep 13, 2014 07:33
|
|
|
The 3 goals of: 1 - attributes define what a character is good at 2 - class defines what a character is good at 3 - all attributes are equally useful to each class are logically self-negating.
|
|
#
?
Sep 13, 2014 07:58
|
|
|
Well all of the attributes are not equally useful to each class though, even in the current attribute system. Intellect is far and away the best choice for Priests, for example. Sensuki fucked around with this message at 08:10 on Sep 13, 2014 |
|
#
?
Sep 13, 2014 08:07
|
|
|
Sensuki posted:Well all of the attributes are not equally useful to each class though, even in the current attribute system. That makes my point. You physically can't have all 3 at once.
|
|
#
?
Sep 13, 2014 08:16
|
|
|
Ratios and Tendency posted:The 3 goals of: What POE is trying to do is have a st of base concepts that attributes influence, but also class specific values which differ: some classes want might for damage, others for healing power, some for both. But in all cases, you can dump Might and go for Resolve instead (or that's the goal). You're assuming Class+Attribute, when it's clearly Class*Attribute. A Catastrophe fucked around with this message at 08:23 on Sep 13, 2014 |
|
#
?
Sep 13, 2014 08:20
|
|
|
Attributes being useful for each class doesn't mean they need to be useful for each role. Passive healer/buffer priest dumping accuracy should be fine if a fighting priest who doesn't is also a viable option.
|
|
#
?
Sep 13, 2014 08:23
|
|
|
Ratios and Tendency posted:The 3 goals of: Not if it's actually: 1 - Class determines the range of roles a character can be good at 2 - All attributes are useful, though not necessarily equally so, to all classes 3 - Attributes determine which of a classes range of potential roles a character is good at
|
|
#
?
Sep 13, 2014 08:28
|
|
|
That's probably a better way of explaining it, yeah.
|
|
#
?
Sep 13, 2014 08:35
|
|
|
Ratios and Tendency posted:The 3 goals of:
|
|
#
?
Sep 13, 2014 08:43
|
|
|
Ferrinus posted:So what about the hypothetical ability of a heal/buff-focused character to dump whichever stat ends up governing accuracy? Is it just the case that even a priest who attempts to go all-in on party support is still going to end up making enough attacks that their inaccuracy hurts? It seems like ideally you'd want to design some way that "accurate" buffs/heals are better than "inaccurate" buffs/heals, though it's hard to come up with one offhand that doesn't end up with your skills having arbitrary fail chances. That said, it's always been a secondary goal to prevent dumping. The main goal is to allow people to play a class with any given set of high attributes and have that be viable/fun. So if someone makes a high Dexterity (soon to be Perception) priest, they should be able to reliably lean more on the priest's offensive spells and personal buffs + weapon-based combat. If someone makes a high Intellect barbarian, they should enjoy bigger Carnage AoEs and longer durations for their Wild Sprint, Frenzy, etc. If we can find a way to always make dumping sting, that's cool, but it's more important that when someone says, "I have an idea for a character based on high X, Y, and Z", that's something that fundamentally works pretty well. Perfect balance has never been a goal. I've seen too many people come up with cool character concepts in class-based RPGs -- cool from a role-playing perspective, but fundamentally bad at doing what their class is supposed to do.
|
|
#
?
Sep 13, 2014 08:56
|
|
|
coffeetable posted:dunning_kruger.txt Feel free to address my post rather than just calling me an idiot.
|
|
#
?
Sep 13, 2014 09:18
|
|
|
Ratios and Tendency posted:Feel free to address my post rather than just calling me an idiot. Class choices are Fighter or Healer Priest. Class choice determines what they are good at/can do. Attribute choices are Raw Power which effects base damage and healing power or Area of Effect which makes your abilities spread out more. Allowing you to hit an entire group or heal your entire party. Attributes are important if you want either class to be really good at damaging/healing a group or if you want to make your character focus on one target at a time. There you have a system were class and attributes define what a character is good at and are equally important to each class depending on what you want to do with it. You can argue degrees of the issue of course but all PoE seems to be aiming for is to get away from the 'Wisdom is a dump stat forget about it for half the characters in the game because it doesn't matter'.
|
|
#
?
Sep 13, 2014 09:33
|
|
|
I got the impression that the aim was less 'all attributes are equally useful' and more 'all attributes are useful'.
|
|
#
?
Sep 13, 2014 09:35
|
|
|
rope kid posted:The main goal is to allow people to play a class with any given set of high attributes and have that be viable/fun. So if someone makes a high Dexterity (soon to be Perception) priest, they should be able to reliably lean more on the priest's offensive spells and personal buffs + weapon-based combat. I'd love to do this, but the lack of lower-level damage spells hurts I think - such as a Magic Stone / Spiritual Hammer equivalent.
|
|
#
?
Sep 13, 2014 09:43
|
|
|
Ratios and Tendency posted:Feel free to address my post rather than just calling me an idiot.
|
|
#
?
Sep 13, 2014 10:12
|
|
|
Sensuki posted:I'd love to do this, but the lack of lower-level damage spells hurts I think - such as a Magic Stone / Spiritual Hammer equivalent. I think it would be a good idea to give the first level a damage spell(it's the only spell level that doesn't have a damage spell), but it still has spells which make an accuracy check(halt and divine terror).
|
|
#
?
Sep 13, 2014 12:42
|
|
|
Yeah just a magic stone equivalent would be fine. I was surprised there was no 1st level damage spell. And a higher level Spiritual (Weapon) would be sweet as well, that imbues your current weapon with X bonuses and makes it shine whatever color for a duration.
|
|
#
?
Sep 13, 2014 12:57
|
|
|
Sensuki posted:And a higher level Spiritual (Weapon) would be sweet as well, that imbues your current weapon with X bonuses and makes it shine whatever color for a duration.
|
|
#
?
Sep 13, 2014 13:43
|
|
|
Something like an accuracy bonus and a bonus damage proc aligned with their deity would be p. cool (i.e. Fire for Eothas) Spiritual Hammer was like +3 attack, +3 damage so something like that Sensuki fucked around with this message at 14:15 on Sep 13, 2014 |
|
#
?
Sep 13, 2014 14:03
|
|
|
evilmiera posted:Much like gun statistics in games like Call of Duty, there's a lot of number crunching going on to figure out how to keep stuff balanced and it takes several tries. But most players just pick a gun that "feels" good enough for them and can do quite ok with that. Yeah, thing is, I'm the sort of player who generally enjoys min-maxing to a fair degree, but I generally don't go to the length of charts and equations :P
|
|
#
?
Sep 13, 2014 14:31
|
|
|
rope kid posted:We did consider having an Accuracy-based roll to determine either power (for healing) or duration (for buffs) without the chance for a full miss. I.e. you could score a Graze, Hit, or Crit with your buff spells. So far it hasn't really seemed too necessary since even priests don't generally spend more than half their time on support (IME, anyway). If it's okay for certain builds to deliberately dump stats then you're in pretty good shape already, since it's already true that someone who doesn't care about their AoEs can dump int, someone who's heavily status effect-focused can skimp on might, etc. You obviously want something to be missed out on regardless, but "the few attacks I do make are even worse" probably qualifies. Grazing with your buff spells would probably feel real bad, because, what, is my ally deliberately loving with me? I guess if the accuracy governing stat also did something universally relevant, like grant defense or concentration...
|
|
#
?
Sep 13, 2014 15:03
|
|
|
Ferrinus posted:Grazing with your buff spells would probably feel real bad, because, what, is my ally deliberately loving with me? I guess if the accuracy governing stat also did something universally relevant, like grant defense or concentration... Yeah I don't like that, that said the healing spells all seem to be too strong. Probs just need the heal amounts/sec nerfed a bit.
|
|
#
?
Sep 13, 2014 15:10
|
|
|
Hieronymous Alloy posted:Yeah, thing is, I'm the sort of player who generally enjoys min-maxing to a fair degree, but I generally don't go to the length of charts and equations :P I, on the other hand, am an idiot and would like/probably need this game to be potentially as idiot-proof as possible, hopefully with the help of a low difficulty setting. As it stands I can't make it through more than a few minutes in the demo before I find the mix of bugs and unfamiliar game systems overwhelming and quit. Also the beetles keep killing me because I just select everybody and right click the bad thing. 
|
|
#
?
Sep 13, 2014 16:56
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 27, 2024 22:40 |
|
|
Dolash posted:I, on the other hand, am an idiot and would like/probably need this game to be potentially as idiot-proof as possible, hopefully with the help of a low difficulty setting. As it stands I can't make it through more than a few minutes in the demo before I find the mix of bugs and unfamiliar game systems overwhelming and quit.   'Sup fellow idiot. I'm in exactly the same boat. As I get older I play games for the stories mostly and want/need the lowest possible difficulty setting. Them ironman (i.e. Normal) modes are for the young'uns 
|
|
#
?
Sep 13, 2014 17:31
|
|
