|
Sensuki posted:The way I play the Infinity Engine games is to minimize the amount of rests, and that is the indication of my performance in the game - rather than how easily I was able to cheese an encounter. The longer I can go without resting (and not using exploits) - the better I have played / the more I have succeeded. This playstyle promotes using the resources available that the game gives you that people probably just ignore because they can install the rest anywhere mod and spam resting - I know lots of people that never use potions, for instance. You get given a metric gently caress tonne of potions in BG2 - quaff a few of those and you're back to full HP, no worries. No need to rest. Similar play style for me as well the party keeps going until they're completely out of spells or more than half the party is fatigued. I was also one of those that pretty much never uses potions excepting the occasional health potions and a wider range for boss fights. Apart from the boss fights BG2/ToB was fairly easy until you loaded it up with the tactics mods and other difficulty improvements. To me I always seemed to be one of the core features of an RPG, play it like it's reality and sleeping after every enemy in the middle of an enemy dungeon just isn't realistic, as such a lot of emphasis on the whole 'role' playing bit after all it is an RPG. I can understand why people do the whole resting thing but at least personally I never found it fun, just made the game far far to easy...
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2015 09:13
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 25, 2024 02:03 |
|
|
I have used save game editors in all IE games, i even did it in Wasteland 2. There comes a point in any rpg where i feel that it is more fun to use all the abilities the game offers. It feels extremely weird when i sometimes see game developers use words like save scumming, or just the general judgement of how other people play single player games. I don't see why the minority of gamers who want games to be as hard as possible, are more legitimate than the ones who simply want to have fun in their own way.
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2015 09:29
|
|
|
The Crotch posted:Spamming rests in an IE game is as cheesy as rerolling your stats. Rerolling is like a given though. Who wants to end up with a 7 STR goober of a fighter? Point buying ala Icewind Dale II was much better.
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2015 09:29
|
|
|
FRINGE posted:Enemies doing the smart thing? NO!
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2015 09:40
|
|
|
FRINGE posted:Enemies doing the smart thing? NO! Because it's really fun manually kiting a monster around your squishy party members for half the combat How about developers doing the smart thing and making a combat system that allows you to plan ahead and position your guys so that the monster can't just casually stroll past your frontline fighters and smack around your mage. The disengagement system in PoE is way more intuitive and better than any gauge-based aggro mechanics. Or whatever it is BG had, it was probably just kinda random
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2015 09:53
|
|
|
Krowley posted:The disengagement system in PoE is way more intuitive and better than any gauge-based aggro mechanics. Or whatever it is BG had, it was probably just kinda random I think the AI just latched on to whatever it saw first and stuck to it until it was knocked loose. Also I am more than moderately amused by Sensuki complaining about people winning in "not fun" ways after posting this: Sensuki posted:Think about it for a second, what is tactical blocking ? If an enemy is chasing one of your friends and you want to stop him, what do you do? You block them. This is a common practice in RTS games. It's also related to how the AI targeting works in the game. IWD:HoW had particularly snappy target reacquisition, so when an enemy 'lost' a target they would quickly re-acquire a new one (likely a kiting prevention mechanism), so to stop an opponent from chasing one of your wounded characters down, simply clicking to attack them didn't work most of the time due to the way the round system worked (you would not always attack instantly when you reached an enemy) and because it was difficult to attack units moving units from several angles if you have to move to attack them first. Even if you landed your attack ... that enemy is not going to stop to attack you. Therefore, the best way to stop an enemy was to block them, by placing your character in the direct path between your ally and the enemy. They would bump into your selection circle, stop, and then try and path around you. If you moved to block their movement again, by now 99% of enemies would have re-acquired a new target, often to the blocking character - job well done. Selection circle snooker sounds only slightly more fun than feeding your gonads to a food processor.
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2015 10:13
|
|
|
Basic Chunnel posted:Actually in anything even remotely resembling an actual combat scenario, trying to walk past a line of defenders is a monumentally stupid idea. This whole rousing defense of IE combat mechanics is embarrassing. It wasn't that the enemies were smart, it's that the combat design was trash Speaking of - are big/strong enemies and flying enemies allowed to freely move past people?
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2015 10:14
|
|
|
Some people really hate movement.
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2015 10:18
|
|
|
Oasx posted:I have used save game editors in all IE games, i even did it in Wasteland 2. There comes a point in any rpg where i feel that it is more fun to use all the abilities the game offers. It feels extremely weird when i sometimes see game developers use words like save scumming, or just the general judgement of how other people play single player games. It's obviously fine to have fun your own way but you can turn it the other way too, not every game needs to designed to cater to your specific definition of having fun. A lot of people get their fun from challenge, making difficult decisions and overcoming obstacles the hard way, and incidentally it's those games that are in the minority today. Ultimately it's up to the developers who they're making the game for, there's plenty of space in the universe for a large variety of games catering to a large variety of people. Either way it's not like PoE doesn't have a bunch of difficulty levels so there should be something for everyone.
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2015 10:23
|
|
|
yea guys, what do you mean you don't like having to move your mage around in circles after getting their first spell out because for some reason your fighter decides to let that big bulky dude in armor walk right past his face. what are you, casuals?
Roobanguy fucked around with this message at 10:30 on Feb 25, 2015 |
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2015 10:25
|
|
|
FRINGE posted:Some people really hate movement. It is funny to see Sensuki argue the depth of IE combat with examples of breaking poorly designed systems and then be surprised that people broke different poorly designed systems to the same end. I like microing and prefer rtwp to turn-based games, so it kind of sucks that apparently movement in combat has a pretty large opportunity cost but it'll probably work out fine in the end.
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2015 10:30
|
|
|
Arzachel posted:It is funny to see Sensuki argue the depth of IE combat with examples of breaking poorly designed systems and then be surprised that people broke different poorly designed systems to the same end. It is working out fine right now, far as I can tell. Especially if you grab some abilities to dodge out of disengagement attacks or shield up with.
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2015 10:35
|
|
|
It's not like movement is on an absolute lockdown, like forums chucklefuck FRINGE seems to imply above. If you absolutely need to move somewhere there's plenty of stuff you can use to get away. Or just roll a Monk and punch them out of your way Krowley fucked around with this message at 11:08 on Feb 25, 2015 |
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2015 10:53
|
|
|
Kanfy posted:It's obviously fine to have fun your own way but you can turn it the other way too, not every game needs to designed to cater to your specific definition of having fun. A lot of people get their fun from challenge, making difficult decisions and overcoming obstacles the hard way, and incidentally it's those games that are in the minority today. Ultimately it's up to the developers who they're making the game for, there's plenty of space in the universe for a large variety of games catering to a large variety of people. I am not saying that they should make games easier or more casual, I am fine with having a range of difficulty options. But once you have made the game, I think it's stupid to be annoyed when people play it their own way. Resting after every encounter is just as legitimate as doing some sort of hardcore challenge.
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2015 10:58
|
|
|
MartianAgitator posted:If you find that fun, ask for a harder difficulty setting in PoE. But c'mon. You can recognize that rest-spamming was integral to the enjoyment of the game for many, many people. And PoE is not just for the hardcores who scoff at it. They've taken that into account with the way the camping supplies system works at least. Personally I would have preferred a campfire-style system like KotC, but YMMV. quote:I think the AI just latched on to whatever it saw first and stuck to it until it was knocked loose. No, but that is how the Pillars of Eternity AI used to work. They've made some changes to it but it is still largely "attack the first player unit seen/the first player unit to attack". There is no AI targeting loop when units are idle, only moving - and it is rather slow to tick. Targeting in the IE games worked differently in every game and it also varied depending on the unit. Icewind Dale Heart of Winter features a few (perhaps unintended) cases where units just target the one unit and never change targets. Most of the time though it is handled rather well. In Baldur's Gate 1, I believe units do attack the first unit they see, but they react to changes based on distance and then a new AI targeting check is made, and it is not simply 'closest unit' either. If your Mage is being targeted by a Vampiric Wolf coming at him from the other side of the screen, you just need to micro him back behind your warriors and the wolf should generally change targets. Do you enjoy RTS games? Because most RTS games generally involve managing the movement and positioning of your units. The Infinity Engine games were built off an RTS engine, and the games that I was into before I got Baldur's Gate 1 were Warcraft 2 and Age of Empires 2. It's only natural that it attracts people like me who enjoy that part of the combat, which may have been an unintentional feature. quote:It is funny to see Sensuki argue the depth of IE combat with examples of breaking poorly designed systems I'd like to know what poorly designed system you're talking about? Because the AI targeting systems in the IE games were not poorly designed - and they were better than what Pillars of Eternity currently has. quote:I like microing and prefer rtwp to turn-based games, so it kind of sucks that apparently movement in combat has a pretty large opportunity cost but it'll probably work out fine in the end. The poor pathfinding/movement between units actually hamstrings movement in combat far more than the engagement system does atm. Adam Brennecke said they may or may not have time to look into it before release. Sensuki fucked around with this message at 11:29 on Feb 25, 2015 |
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2015 11:17
|
|
|
Is there a limit to the amount of camping supplies you can have in your party at all times? I don't even remember if it's an actual item. Or can I just cheat and add 999999 of them at the start of the game and never have to worry about NOT being able to rest like I'm used to.
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2015 12:00
|
|
|
frajaq posted:Is there a limit to the amount of camping supplies you can have in your party at all times? I don't even remember if it's an actual item. Or can I just cheat and add 999999 of them at the start of the game and never have to worry about NOT being able to rest like I'm used to. Dear god, what is wrong with you
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2015 12:25
|
|
|
Sensuki posted:Do you enjoy RTS games? Because most RTS games generally involve managing the movement and positioning of your units. The Infinity Engine games were built off an RTS engine, and the games that I was into before I got Baldur's Gate 1 were Warcraft 2 and Age of Empires 2. It's only natural that it attracts people like me who enjoy that part of the combat, which may have been an unintentional feature. I do, actually, though I typically prefer to focus on the base-building and economic side of those games rather than micromanaging tactical engagements. The thing with micro is, well, let's take the Selection Circle Snooker example. The interesting tactical decision in that scenario, at least to my mind, is in figuring out where exactly you need to position your front-liners to properly screen your artillery. The actual act of microing units into other units is not an interesting decision- it's not actually a decision at all. There is skill involved, but it's the skill of wrestling an uncooperative UI into doing what you already decided to do. That is wholly uninteresting to me, mindless busywork I'd much rather the computer took care of. I like the idea of engagement because it suggests a scenario that preserves the interesting decision- positioning- but at least partially obviates the tedious micro involved in pulling it off. This doesn't, let me be clear, mean I'm against flanking- I don't expect or want forming a battle line to be a once-and-done affair with no dynamic component. But in the IE games fighters were so unsticky that the enemy could practically flank you from the front. I think I prefer my flanking to involve actual flanking.  (As an aside: I play a lot of poo poo like Fire Emblem and other SRPGs, where controlling enemy movement has to be something like 95% of the gameplay. It doesn't bother me there at all, which is interesting. I guess it probably boils down to the fact that those games are turn based and give you a lot more units to work with.)
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2015 12:40
|
|
|
Man I really hope the last beta drops this week so we can stop talking about the thrilling subjects of walking mechanics and playing video games Objectively Wrong.
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2015 12:44
|
|
|
VDay posted:Man I really hope the last beta drops this week so we can stop talking about the thrilling subjects of walking mechanics and playing video games Objectively Wrong. I'm sure SA will get a few watered down versions of that but the real fun will be other RPG sites.
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2015 12:50
|
|
|
VDay posted:Man I really hope the last beta drops this week so we can stop talking about the thrilling subjects of walking mechanics and playing video games Objectively Wrong.
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2015 12:51
|
|
|
The idea that you have to artificially add difficulty to your own game otherwise it isn't fun has another name: "The developer hosed up." If playing the game in a natural way that reduces risk is the "unfun" option then something went terribly wrong during design.
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2015 12:58
|
|
|
Autonomous Monster posted:The thing with micro is, well, let's take the Selection Circle Snooker example. The interesting tactical decision in that scenario, at least to my mind, is in figuring out where exactly you need to position your front-liners to properly screen your artillery. The actual act of microing units into other units is not an interesting decision- it's not actually a decision at all. There is skill involved, but it's the skill of wrestling an uncooperative UI into doing what you already decided to do. That is wholly uninteresting to me, mindless busywork I'd much rather the computer took care of. In A Real RTS Game choosing to micro something absolutely is a decision. When you micro something, you're choosing to spend the most valuable resource, Your Focus, on that unit. This isn't really the case with RTWP games though, because as long as you're patient enough you can execute "perfect micro" and still do everything else you need to do as well. You're no longer choosing how much focus to spend on what, but how much effort you're willing to put into getting "optimal" results. That's a-ok though, because these are single player games anyway.
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2015 13:02
|
|
|
frajaq posted:Is there a limit to the amount of camping supplies you can have in your party at all times? I don't even remember if it's an actual item. Or can I just cheat and add 999999 of them at the start of the game and never have to worry about NOT being able to rest like I'm used to. I assume this is a joke, but if not, yes there is. It's 4 on easy and normal and 2 on hard as I remember.
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2015 13:21
|
|
|
quote:But in the IE games fighters were so unsticky that the enemy could practically flank you from the front. I think I prefer my flanking to involve actual flanking. Only if you didn't do anything about it. I liked that control of the battlefield in the IE games required active player input - that is how it should be. Engagement doesn't really require you to do anything except move and forget, and is a system with many downsides/limitations. I don't believe that systems should or need to be created to facilitate stickiness in these types of games whether they be RTS games or RPG games. Crowd control abilities and AI targeting are enough. The Infinity Engine games had crowd control abilities, but the front line characters did not have them. I like that Pillars of Eternity has these abilities, but I think that the engagement system combined with the underdeveloped AI targeting confounds them a bit.
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2015 13:44
|
|
|
Yes, clearly needing to make use of frontline defenders and understanding the mechanics of all players pales dramatically in comparison to the tactical genius needed to run your wizard around in circles or cast entangle then walk away while plinking with your bow. Or casting stoneskin and ignoring all of that.
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2015 14:08
|
|
|
The Engagement system is just another form a crowd control that doesn't require a wizard or a priest. Turning it off is like saying that you're not going to cast Hold Person or Maze at all during the IE games.
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2015 14:20
|
|
|
frajaq posted:Is there a limit to the amount of camping supplies you can have in your party at all times? I don't even remember if it's an actual item. Or can I just cheat and add 999999 of them at the start of the game and never have to worry about NOT being able to rest like I'm used to. Time to come out of your comfort zone my friend.
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2015 14:25
|
|
|
It's more of an aggro mechanic and that's a poor analogy, as one is a passive static system, whereas the two spells you mentioned are level/item gated spells of one class.
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2015 14:25
|
|
|
Sensuki posted:It's more of an aggro mechanic and that's a poor analogy, as one is a passive static system, whereas the two spells you mentioned are level/item gated spells of one class. This isn't an MMO, 'Aggro' is merely a function of the enemy AI picking targets of opportunity. Engagement gives fighters and defensive melee classes an actual use in combat outside of "Hit things with other things" and promotes tactics and positioning, forcing the player to think about the layout of the battlefield rather than running everyone around like headless chickens because the computer (rightfully) targetted your squishiest damage dealers. I love the IE games, especially the combat, but this is one area where Pillars has outstripped its predecessor.
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2015 14:40
|
|
|
Honestly combat in infinity engine games was just a matter of using the universal solutions. Place enemy magic defenses in dumpster, make sure you have free action, make sure you have enchanted weapons, then you just plough everything with zero thought whatsoever. And rip challenge if you had an actually optimised build : ( I don't think I even paused most of the time. Especially not with spell contingencies (which owned).
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2015 14:58
|
|
|
The Crotch posted:Spamming rests in an IE game is as cheesy as rerolling your stats.
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2015 15:08
|
|
|
Will there be spell contingencies in PoE?
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2015 15:10
|
|
|
Sensuki posted:Only if you didn't do anything about it. I liked that control of the battlefield in the IE games required active player input - that is how it should be. Engagement doesn't really require you to do anything except move and forget, and is a system with many downsides/limitations. I don't believe that systems should or need to be created to facilitate stickiness in these types of games whether they be RTS games or RPG games. Crowd control abilities and AI targeting are enough. The Infinity Engine games had crowd control abilities, but the front line characters did not have them. I like that Pillars of Eternity has these abilities, but I think that the engagement system combined with the underdeveloped AI targeting confounds them a bit. If there is no way to lure enemies to another character so they suffer disengagement attacks and enemies always stick to the first person the see, then that half of the engagement system doesn't matter. If your characters would suffer disengagement attacks if they went after the back line, and you want to go after the back line, and you have to use abilities to slip away from engagement to do that, then that's a system at work. If you never want to go after the back line then that half of the engagement system doesn't matter. You seem to be arguing that (a) the AI isn't complicated enough to ever suffer disengagement attacks, so that half isn't needed, and (b) that when a front-liner drops there should be a good chance to cue the Benny Hill music while your strategy collapses and your other front-liner has to get aggro from the marauding enemy using aggro mechanics not visible to the player, while also dragging around whatever other enemies he happened to have aggro on, hoping that they don't suddenly switch targets thanks to the invisible aggro mechanics. Well, (a) doesn't invalidate the system because of the other half: having party members slip through aggro to assault the enemy back line is very cool conceptually, is very role-defining, and may matter often in actual combat. (B) is the fallout of having no engagement system: when your strategy fails it more often fails hard. Aggro mechanics, like taunts, are used to mitigate that catastrophic failure. Yes, it's not an activate-able ability but if you are conscious of it then you can still use it strategically, like other CC. Here's what you've never proven to me: that there is less strategic depth to placing your characters where you need them to be at the start of the fight and determining your actions from there versus constant juggling. PoE characters are vastly different from 2e D&D characters. Your front-liners are turrets just like mages, rather than just being CC DoTs. In IE games, moving your front-liners was almost literally their only action that could have an effect on combat. PoE might have a system where maneuverability is less common but why are you saying that's bad? Your front-liners do stuff rather than chase stuff. Why do you think it requires less attention or strategic thinking?
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2015 15:12
|
|
|
Is this chart still accurate?  If so I finally understand how attack speed works. Well, except that for some reason I thought some spells/abilities were "fast". Hieronymous Alloy fucked around with this message at 15:33 on Feb 25, 2015 |
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2015 15:28
|
|
|
CottonWolf posted:I assume this is a joke, but if not, yes there is. It's 4 on easy and normal and 2 on hard as I remember. Dang. Well I'm sure it will work out if I just put strong dudes on the front and squishy dudes on the back. Kinda wish demos still existed so I could try this game out since it's gonna be different from what I'm used to, or just pirate it I guess.
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2015 15:41
|
|
|
Almost March, Ya'll. Got my poopsocks ready for the end of the month~~~
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2015 15:42
|
|
|
Gyshall posted:Almost March, Ya'll. If they change the release date it'll be real hard to explain to my boss why my vacation needs to move. frajaq posted:Dang. Well I'm sure it will work out if I just put strong dudes on the front and squishy dudes on the back. Kinda wish demos still existed so I could try this game out since it's gonna be different from what I'm used to, or just pirate it I guess. Dude, talking about pirating the game in a thread the lead dev regularly posts in just seems rude >_<. To answer your concern though the backer beta plays really well, like a mix of the IE games and the tactical positioning I loved in the old Gold Box titles (Pool of Radiance, etc.). If it really bugs you you could probably just set the difficulty to Easy and waltz through. Hieronymous Alloy fucked around with this message at 16:05 on Feb 25, 2015 |
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2015 15:45
|
|
|
Protip: Rebind item highlight to right mouse button.
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2015 16:36
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 25, 2024 02:03 |
|
|
Sensuki posted:I'm honestly surprised at the amount of people that admit to rest-spamming the crap out of the IE games.
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2015 16:41
|
|
