Jump to content

countblah2

Members
  • Content Count

    6
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

7 Neutral

About countblah2

  • Rank
    (1) Prestidigitator

Badges

  • Pillars of Eternity Backer Badge
  • Pillars of Eternity Kickstarter Badge
  • Deadfire Backer Badge
  • Deadfire Fig Backer
  1. Is it fair to assume that despite significant feedback suggesting that changing the turn based mode by altering the way action speed, dexterity, etc could impact a characters frequency to act (action economy?) and restore some of the strategic depth of combat available in Rtwp, now that it's out of beta we are essentially looking at the final product of turn based mode? Also, is there any rationale developers can share regarding this issue? Is it related to pen and paper rules/players? Thank you.
  2. I agree, and there are other posts here that say the same thing. I have always thought Obsidian devs were talented--that there must be SOME reason to elect a turn base system with hard turns. But I can't find it. Rather than introduce more balance and diversity, the latest patch just increases the weapon damage of smaller weapons to make them more competitive with larger, heavier, higher damage weapons in turn base mode. It feels like a lazy solution, and I fear the rest of their balance solutions will look like this. Rather than tackle the root cause--the "hard turns with one action"-
  3. We already had a fairly balanced system that didn't include arbitrary "rounds" (whatever they are--in this case, 6 seconds) called RTwP. We can debate whether it's entirely balanced but I don't think most players would consider a high dex chanter very broken, to use your example. Maybe the difference is that you assume that the chanter abilities are tied to when the character acts (chanter acts so his next chant takes effect) vs tied to how they behaved in RTwP, which was according to the ability specifics itself (this chant plays for X seconds and lasts for Y seconds, next chant starts in Z
  4. Not sure the best way for devs to see this feedback, so I'm trying here. I just got the "turn based" survey via email. Based on the final questions, I fear devs may draw the wrong conclusions and want to clarify my view. The final questions reads like it wants respondents to rate their view of the current turn base mode against RTwP. I selected "Worse" both times because the implementation still needs work. You don't need to spend that much time with it to run into various bugs (AE-spell bug, ship crew AI bug, etc.) and that the balancing needs a lot of work (my conclusion: it'd be ea
  5. This is a great point--there are some things that would have to be tweaked in removing turns/rounds, like adjusting for stride for short delay actions. Having a wizard move plus cast a short delay spell like mirrored image, then have another full stride available .4 seconds later, could be abused (since they could theoretically dance around the battlefield using short delay actions with zero recovery time). I don't think coming up with a solution is insurmountable; you could just have a stride meter for each unit based on their stride/stats/effects. As you move, it is exhausted, and repleni
  6. I tried to review the four pages of feedback so apologies if I'm not adding anything new here. I suspect a lot of the (non-bug) issues I'm experiencing with TB is because somehow Turn Based, with each character taking turns performing combat actions, got conflated with having DnD-like "combat turns" (or rounds), which just like in a lot of incarnations of DnD, last 6 seconds in PoE2. I suggest keeping the first part of turn based and getting rid of the notion of having turns/rounds, since this second aspect, more than anything else, changes the way stats and abilities work in such a drama
×
×
  • Create New...