Starthief
-
Posts
50 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Blogs
Posts posted by Starthief
-
-
It should recover 25% of the target's health or so. Then it'd be worth taking.
-
1
-
-
If the numbers I've seen are right -- and maybe they're not -- a full attack cycle with dual fast weapons is 44 frames and with average it's 66.
The base damage of spears is 11 to 16, and rapiers is 9 to 13.
In damage per frame, that means spears are .16 to .24, and rapiers are .2 to .29.
But this is against 0 DR and with no penetration; against DR spears will start looking better, and I'm too lazy to bother with the math to find the breakeven point.
My personal thought is the whole point of dual wielding is to attack as quickly as possible, so might as well go for the fastest available weapons. -
I just have my butler read it to me, because moving my eyes back and forth takes too much energy.
-
5
-
-
Balance contributes to fun. See all the threads about how the game is too easy (or alternately, too hard). Those are people who would have more fun if the balance was different.
-
And in any fight in which you can door block, you should door block (if you want to play "right"). That's just dictated by the current mechanics of the game and encounter design.
Assuming your party consists of tanks and ranged, sure. (Although there's one particular fight where the beginning is scripted, and my first party got creamed four times in a row trying to hold a choke point. As soon as I switched to rushing the casters instead, it went very smoothly.)
In my second playthrough I'm using five meleers and a druid. I try to avoid choke points in most fights. I lock down enemies with my two tanks, take out priority and opportunity targets with my rogue, engage the rest with pikes, and keep the druid on floating support duty. It's going so much smoother than my first run did.
-
Ugh no.
A lot of classes have very good front-loaded abilities -- and some classes don't really have much else.
There'd be no reason that every fighter, paladin, and cipher wouldn't have a level of chanter. And no reason to ever roll a pure chanter.There'd be no reason that every rogue and monk wouldn't have a level of barbarian, and not much reason to roll a pure barbarian.
Wizards, priests and druids can stay pure for spell spamming -- or they can pick up a cipher level to start spamming earlier while still keeping their versatility, and a barbarian level so their AOE spells become mega-AOE with carnage...
(Rangers... I'm leaving them out, but I already don't believe there's a reason to use them. A chanter-barbarian-ranger would be a big step up of course.)
It's just not a good idea with the way PoE is designed. -
The melee rogue I added to my current party as an afterthought is a ridiculous single-target killer and is my most fun and active character right now. He's also the only one to have been one-shotted in combat, but I was taking a risk both with his glass-cannon build and the tactics I was using in that fight.
I send everyone else except him to attack, then I run him around the back and flank and he starts yelling enthusiastically and scoring brain-exploding criticals with his sabres.
Ranged rogues probably do more consistent, steady damage and are a lot less interesting; you just keep them at the back and let them shoot stuff. -
Many Hands, One Rhythm (monk passive, requires unarmed): The monk hinders the attack and defense of an enemy he is flanking. All allies have +5 accuracy against the target, and the target has -5 accuracy. When any ally scores a critical hit against the target, the monk's recovery timer is reset and can attack immediately.
Disarm (monk per-encounter): 4 second interrupt and -10 deflection penalty if the enemy is attacking or reloading a weapon.
Voice Projection (chanter passive): chants increase spell preparation time 1.3x for all enemies.
Press The Attack (fighter per-encounter): if the target is not prone or flanked, this pushes the target away from the fighter, breaking its engagements with other party members. The fighter automatically follows.You'll Have To Go Through Me (fighter passive, requires melee weapon): the fighter's engagement range is increased to 1.25x his normal reach.
Eye For An Eye (barbarian passive): when the Barbarian receives a critical hit, he deals critical damage to his attacker.
Did I Break Your Concentration? (barbarian per-encounter): the next attack has double the interrupt time against enemies attacking with a weapon, or triple the interrupt time against enemies casting spells.
Flashbomb (rogue per-encounter): blind all enemies and allies near the rogue for 2 seconds.
Wild Affinity (druid passive): increases the druid's melee accuracy by +5 while shifted.
Ever Wild (druid passive): the Druid shapeshifts immediately at the start of combat and remains shifted for 1.5x the normal duration. Per-encounter shift is still available. -
You don't necessarily need to tweak cipher starting focus. You just need to make it so that you don't generate focus with every Blunderbuss pellet. Does anybody *not* use a blunderbuss on their cipher?
I used a pistol on my main Cipher for quite some time, until I picked up Grieving Mother and gave her a blunderbuss. I noticed after the first shot she gained *slightly* more focus than my main. Whether this woud balance over a longer fight I don't know, because longer fights were rare and I generally was too busy using focus (and managing other characters) to worry about differences in focus gain.
After a while I gave my main a blunderbuss too, and did not notice any major difference in effectiveness.
-
Paladins could use some better scaling on their powers. But overall, if I'm going to have two tanks, I'd prefer to have a fighter and a paladin than two of either. And a Kind Wayfarer on the second line with a pike is also pretty useful.
-
If Ciphers started with 0 focus, they'd have the same slow ramp-up that people don't like with Chanters and Monks and it'd contribute to all classes feeling the same. If I were going to tweak anything, it'd be to reduce their focus gain, so they have initial burst but less sustain.
For all that people think Cipher is OP, I think it's simply fast.
My first party was fighter tank, paladin offtank, and chanter, rogue and two ciphers for ranged damage. Heavy burst and heavier CC.
My second party is fighter and paladin as tank, chanter and paladin as second-line pike wielders with a bit of survivability, druid as support and melee glass cannon dagger rogue who comes in after the tanks are engaged and breaks everyone's damage records.
The first party cleaned up the easier fights very quickly. The second party is much more effective on more challenging encounters, though. -
I'd expect the Crucible Knights to have pretty high standards.
In fact one of my minor issues with this game, like many others, is the extent that strangers are willing to trust you and bring you into their secret plots with startling ease sometimes. "Well, foreigner, I don't know who you are, you barged into my house armed to the teeth and killed my bodyguard on the way in, you need a bath, I dislike your entire race, and I'm part of a very secretive and paranoid cult. Here's the combination to my safe and my daughter's hand in marriage!"-
1
-
-
Pallegina was very frustrating. I liked her as a character, but her quests and dialogues never let me say or do the things I wanted to say or do. And I was always confused about which direction she's supposed to be steered -- if you're trying to be "good" are you supposed to try and get to stay in her order, or not?
That was actually what I liked about her story. Typical Paladins are zealots who charge forward doing their god's work until it kills them; everything is black and white to them. Pallegina wants to do the right thing and likes a good fight, but has to make her own tough decisions because Hylea is intentionally withholding her guidance. (Though of course, the game gives you influence over what she does, unlike most of the other characters whose possibly wrong decisions are already behind them.)
Moral ambiguity is kind of a major theme in this game IMHO.
-
I voted for Grieving Mother, but it was a hard decision.
I also really like Eder. He reminds me of Captain Mal from Firefly in a way, and he's so matter-of-fact about his god getting blown up.
And Pallegina, especially when she gets to meet Hylea and they have words.
And Kana -- of all of them he's probably the one I'd want to hang around with the most. -
I found that removing the boots and putting them back on will reset the speed boost.
But it makes me a bit nervous about how many other item-based bonuses might be lost. (Though this could be something specific to the combat auto-slow thing.)
-
If I bother with slaying enchantments, I always go for spirit. I rarely have trouble with kith; I just send tanks to engage their front line, CC all of them, focus fire on casters first.
-
Resting is free in the inn tho
Not true in later inns, although by that point the fees are easily affordable anyway.
Also, there are places where it's pretty inconvenient to pull out and go to inn (or to buy more camping supplies) and go back.
-
I have said this before I will say it again: I will pay an additional $20-30 if they can give me official voice acting DLC for EVERY line of dialog. I know this isn't at all what some people want hence DLC. When they announced BG:EE originally I had only one hope that was shattered: fully voice acting (I know it was a long shot since all the actors are older and had moved on, but still it was a hope).
How much voice acting work do you think would be required to cover all the dialog?
From what I've found online, typical pay rates for voice actors in video games tend to be in the range of $1000 for 45 minutes, or $100/minute for shorter reads. Plus there's a bit more expense in post-production, and developer time to integrate it.
I don't think raising that money would be easy, compared to raising money to pay writers and developers to add more content.
-
Look, I'm all for treating your fellow man good and acceptance and all that, but there comes a time when you need to stop being so thin-skinned and accept that not everyone is going to agree with you, or your beliefs or lifestyle, and you will just have to deal with it and stop whining and stamping your feet, trying to get your way.
I don't agree with GamerGaters and bigots, and they're just going to have to stop being so thin-skinned and accept that some people are willing to stand up for themselves when their identity is mocked. And you'll just have to deal with it and stop whining and stamping your feet, trying to get your way.
-
1
-
-
I used to be a game developer. We did one low-budget game where we hired one professional voice actor and one former radio DJ who was someone's uncle. All the other characters were voiced by us. And we didn't really have a director, just a sound guy -- who wasn't actually an audio engineer, just a programmer who also happened to be a musician who owned a microphone.
(To add to the mess, the programmer actually in charge of the game's audio playback didn't think we needed to support any format but WAV, and the one in charge of the installer decided that our WAV files were too large and we could only use 4kHz mono WAVs, including for the soundtrack.
)
Anyway, what I'm saying here is nobody really wants amateur voice overs.-
1
-
-
These games never go far enough where it comes to realism. You should only be able to use armor of the appropriate size, and you should have to unstring bows when traveling, and clean and sharpen swords, and select appropriate campsites, and you should have to deal with blisters and mosquitos, and there should be a realistic pooping system where you have to avoid poison ivy.
Eh. A lot of games have had breakage and repair systems and it's been fun in... pretty much none of them.
-
1
-
-
I can't believe I'm posting in a thread like this. I should know better. But anyway...
Your issues are not for the rest of the world to have to deal with. Just because you have issues, does not mean that the world is out to get you. The level at which social justice warriors find non-issues and blow them out of proportion is not reasonable by the measurement of any thinking individual...
It is not the world's job to cater to every single brand of crazy all at once. We deal with the default ones and the serious ones, the rest is just incalculable and unreasonable.Somebody made a feeble, old joke. Someone else came along and said "that's pretty offensive, could you fix it?"
And then the GG crowd -- not understanding or caring how such a joke could be offensive -- comes along and decides that being offended is the worst possible thing a human being can do. It's not reasonable! It's crazy and we shouldn't cater to it! It's censorship! It's fascist! It's the thought police! It's a conspiracy of people trying to exercise their power over others! it's blowing things out of proportion! How dare someone be offended at a joke? It's literally going to cause the collapse of civilization! And now we're taking offense that someone else is offended!
Such a shame that Pillars of Eternity is completely ruined by the removal of a lame limerick and society is going to go down in flames.
You're basically arguing that Rosa Parks should have shut up and stayed in the back of the bus, because she literally ruined buses for all the white people who they really belonged to. Gandhi should have just let Britain rule India. Ditto for American colonists. That dude in Tianamen Square should have let the tanks roll on. Women should never have asked for the right to vote. Slaves should have just kept their heads down and their mouths shut. "Lesser" people should never stand up for themselves.
...except this isn't anything like that. It's people asking "could you not make stupid jokes about us? Otherwise we might not buy your game and might make some angry posts on Twitter."
And for this you think they're "crazy" and keep starting new threads to whine about it after it's already done.-
7
-
-
I like it as it is... in fact a little less would still have been fine. In combat it's helpful, but longer bits of dialog really don't need it. There's enough to give you a bit more of a sense for some of the characters -- it adds to my enjoyment of Kana and Pellagina especially, and that's great, but since I read quickly I find someone talking over it distracting.
-
Since my first playthrough currently has two ciphers and a lot of gunplay, I was thinking about a melee-ish low magic party myself. Two chanter tanks, two polearm barbarians, and I don't know what (maybe one druid and a paladin). But this is pretty brilliant.
I wonder how six Moon Godlike monks would do. :D
)
Casual vs Hardcore. Correlation between experience and difficulty.
in Pillars of Eternity: General Discussion (NO SPOILERS)
Posted
The terms "casual" and "hardcore" are vague, mean different things to different people, and have different implications for different kinds of games. As generalizations go, they're not as useful as you might think, and layering another level of generalizations on top of them is very questionable.
It's not hard at all to imagine people who just aren't into game mechanics but love story, who don't want to miss anything, and therefore will explore as much as possible. Or maybe they're just very methodical and want to uncover the whole map. That doesn't make them hardcore.
I spend a fair amount of time on the forums -- partially as something to do in dead time at work. I've put some thought into game mechanics, have explored the game world fairly thoroughly (and was disappointed to find that finishing the main quest prevented me from continuing the Endless Paths and further exploration), am playing a second time with a custom party, am considering a solo or duo run... and have no interest in hard or POTD modes. I don't consider myself either hardcore or casual, frankly.