Jump to content

EbonKnight

Members
  • Content Count

    24
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

4 Neutral

About EbonKnight

  • Rank
    (1) Prestidigitator
  1. Dude, that's fine. All I'm saying is that in order to fast track your reputation to the "op" levels of this skill, you will have to always choose the options that align with your Paladin order. Now if you play normally, and sometimes choose to be snarky, sometimes rational, whatever, yet your order mostly wanted you to be Benevolent and Honest, for example, you will get these benefits much later, therefore their "op"-ness will be... well... much less so. Now ofc if you are the type that wants to go out of their way to be a **** or to be an unreasonably goodie-two-shoes honest fella in every damned scenario then it will align better with your chosen order, but for everything else there's a nice balance of choosing options which sound natural to you in the moment, or being a power-gamer and having dispositions visible and making sure you always select what's best for your order so that you can fast-track F&C to "op" levels. Anyways, enough of that, like I said, no more derailing for me, you guys have fun x)
  2. Ah, I see. So you play Faith and Conviction trying to maximize it by naturally knowing what disposition each option gives, right? It's robotic play IF you want it to be "op", that is to say IF you want it to be OP you will HAVE TO choose options that are optimal which is robotic play. But whatever, you're right, I'm going to let you guys get back to it, I'm out .
  3. Given Josh has made it clear that he thinks balance is important even in a single player game I doubt our discussion is going to divert dev time in any significant way. My own view is that balance is important. It doesn't have to be balance in the sense that games like DotA strive for, but it's important that there isn't too big a disparity between class power (PoE achieved this pretty well by the end) and, ideally, no abilities should be massively over or under powered. I want (and I suspect most players do to) to be able to take a spell or ability because it appeals to me and know that it'll be roughly as powerful as its power level suggests. I don't want to have to decide my builds based on power first and appeal of abilities second. To give an example of this: I like the idea of Sacred Immolation and really enjoyed it in PoE. In Deadfire it does 43 raw damage per tick to the Paladin which is terrible. I can't play a SI Paladin at the moment and so I would very much like Obsidian to rebalance the ability to make the self damage less harsh. Similarly the Monk ability Inner Death might appeal to someone thematically but perhaps they don't want to be able to one shot any enemy in the game. Scaling it back a bit so that it's still a powerful single target ability but is less likely to one shot bosses seems sensible to me. Bro I never said I am against balance, nor that overly OP abilities shouldn't get looked at. All I'm saying is that this easily gets out of control and people start bitching about things like Faith and Conviction (a powerful ability clearly balanced by the fact you HAVE to robotically play a character instead of RP saying whatever you want, a form of power-gaming much like dumping stats, imho) and that starts creating a nearly endless loop of to-and-fro balancing, which takes some serious dev time. And all because someone REALLY wanted to use THAT ability, but not have it THAT powerful. I get it, we all want balance (believe it or not, me too) but what gets me is when everyone starts chiming in on what they find too powerful and then it becomes a cluster****, since things are already hard enough to balance if they didn't manage it in what two years of alpha and beta testing?! Or how about the fact that the single class rogue has been underpowered since PoE and that still hasn't changed? xD Like I said, I'm not AGAINST balance, far from it, I just think that people go a little bit overboard on this, that's all.
  4. It's a discussion forum man, I get it. Everyone has the right to voice their concerns - his concern is a perceived lack of balance, mine is that all these threads derail more important dev time such as bug fixes and completely new content. We can agree to disagree, but everyone has the right to chime in, no?
  5. You're wrong. Balancing the game properly is indicative of the game's overall quality and results in a wider variety of strategic and tactical choices for player permutations. Once again you're using a straw man, this time saying people will bitch regardless what you do so why do anything. Previously you were saying why spend dev time on one thing instead of another thing. What nonsense straw man will you use next? EDIT: I forgot to address your usage of the logical fallacy that is "just don't use it" twice! God , I can't. It's like talking to a wall. A back-talking, offensive wall, that thinks it's very smart. How the **** is saying "why spend time on something only SOME people have a problem with AND can EASILY be circumvented if you want to" vs "Let the devs focus more on creating NEW CONTENT THAT EVERYONE CAN ENJOY than trying to endlessly balance a billion factors based on the feedback of a group of people who spend time trying to find OP things to complain about" the same?! Do you not see that this is the same logic as saying "Why spend your time on one thing (making the world a better place through science) instead of another (being a successful mass murderer)?" Yes, they are both things... but they don't have the same inherent value to most people. They obviously do to you, and that's cool, but don't throw around big terms when you don't even know what they mean.
  6. @aweigh - Yes, since REMAKING THE MUSIC SCORE was something done in oh... not a single game in known memory in my 25+ years of playing video games. Great argument, bro. Sigh, look, we are not going to agree here, but please don't make non-sensical arguments and then accuse me of doing the same. Balance is important, I said as much, but it's not CRUCIAL that, in a game, with a billion different options, classes, talents, skills, builds, devs spend time and time and time on making sure that everything is just perfectly balanced according to your needs... in a single player game. If you think it's too good - don't use it - it really is that simple. Yes, if things are utterly broken, sure, they can and will get around it, but trying to make fun of me for saying that dev time is better spent on adding more content to the game than 'fixing' the balance between a billion different variables in a single player game - well, buddy, you know... I don't even know what to say to that, honestly, it's that dumb, imho. Again, I must draw your attention to the original PoE - it had a billion iterations of patches, a lot of this sort of stuff was done for balancing and STILL casters were so far ahead of anything else that they had to massively nerf them in the second part, because people were still bitching. That and ofc the fact that those not bitching about their OP-ness bitched about the per rest abilities, so once that was taken out, the balance hammer added annoying cast times, which rather effectively neutered a lot of the casters. And what's the story on release? A bunch of people complaining that melee classes are the only real way to go atm and that casters are too weak. Go figure.
  7. I hate this argument against balance in single player games. It is the designer's responsibility to balance the game, not the player's. Avoiding content is not a solution to balance issues. Players who want to feel more powerful can lower the difficulty. Players who want a challenge should have access to that experience on the highest difficulty, regardless of what abilities they want to make use of. Thing is, on games of this scale there are ALWAYS going to be glaring balance issues. I dare you to name ONE Infinity-Engine style game that was balanced, even after a slew of patches. Heck, D&D itself was a horrible mess that was unbalanced, but people still enjoyed it. I'm not saying balance is not a good thing, I'm just saying that I get a bit annoyed when people go out of their way to come up with game-breaking things which lead to over-nerfs, and yet others still munchkin their way to ridiculous dump-stat builds (something I seriously could not bring myself to ever do, not even in Icewind Dale where it was basically mandatory) so that they would feel more empowered to tackle clearly ridiculous challenges such as PoTD solo. I mean, clearly, once you start wanting challenges that involve using one character on things that were supposed to be borderline impossible to beat with a party, then either the game is too easy still or you are breaking it with OP abilities/classes/glitches. And if so much of this community that enjoys that sort of play (heck, I myself often do, but I do draw the line at dump-stats) is able to pull off ridiculous feats with some classes/builds then clearly there's an inherent balancing problem, either with the game's difficulty or the fact that some classes and skills are just better than others and thus, by definition, OP. And I'm talking about PoE here. After a billion patches, including a ton of nerfs. Dunno, I guess the bottom line is, I don't see that much of a big deal in these things, as they take a **** ton of the devs' time post-release, players will always find new ways to break the game ANYWAY, -and- that dev time would have been much better spent on making new content, unless things are absolutely drastically game-stoppingly broken, which they are not.
  8. I never understood the need to nerf things in a singleplayer game. So, some things are OP, and? It doesn't kill build diversity because a) there are a lot of OP things as of now b) more importantly: this is part of the game's challenge. Just like anything is ez mode on story, and almost everything is underpowered on PoTD solo, I look at this as just one more way to differentiate between players who want that godly feeling and those that want an easier time of it. I mean, I'm not saying that perfectly balanced classes (whatever that is) wouldn't be a noble ideal, but, really, who is suffering (other than your enemies) if you have something overpowered in a single player game? Your challenge? Well then, pick a class/skill combo with less immense results, problem solved xD
  9. Yeah, I could have bet money on this, tbh. I mean, let's face it swords and greatswords are THE staple fantasy weapons, arguably. Sabres would also be a sure-fire bet, what with the pirate theme of the game and all. What does surprise me is that battle axes (another staple) are very poorly represented in both PoE's so far. But yeah, a Devoted/Shattered Pillar focused on sabres and dual-wielding just seems like a stupidly brutal choice for mince-meating through the game.
  10. And then you add a chanter to the party (doesn't have to be the main character) for that sweet sweet chant and it's pain city for anyone getting into range.
  11. Well it is not rocket science.. they could write code specifically to counter that one thing, while allowing respecs for everything else. I haven't looked at 2 yet, still finishing up my Pillars run, but I'm sure that companions will have stats just as tragic as they did in the first game, and with the inability to respec those -or- all of their talents, it's looking like no PoTD run for me on the first go, as I can't bring myself to use mercs.
  12. Completely baffling decision. AND after we bitched about the inflexibility of no stat respec for companions, they not only skip on implementing that, but make respecs even worse than they were before. We need dem patches.
  13. So, basically, a monk is literally THE best multiclass for Devoted, as you can easily pick a strong slash/pierce weapon like the GS or longsword and go to town with crushing (in more ways than one) unarmed damage. In fact, it makes most sense to go longswords, as both unarmed and longswords can benefit from the dual wield perk. Then add lightning strikes or whatever other op attack-speed-increasing-recovery-reducing stuff Monks have and I can fully see 10 dex characters wearing medium armor interrupting and critting like crazy.
  14. Ooooh right. Yeah, my bad.. that's a whole lot better actually, thanks. Opens up other options, so I imagine a really boring mix of Devoted/Berserker is disgustingly powerful and has no issues with confusion still. Ah, man.. too many choices. :D If money's as ridiculously unimportant as it was in PoE, though, a drug-addled monk zerker still sounds the most fun, though xD
  15. ^Damn, what about that and that druggy monk class? That just sounds absolutely positively disgusting. A drunken master on steroids. I'm kinda annoyed at how good monk is cause I just kinda cannot get behind a monk Watcher, especially not in this setting, which SCREAMS some sorta swashbuckly character. However, a psychotic druggy drunk brawler might just be the ticket :D
×
×
  • Create New...