Jump to content

corrado33

Members
  • Content Count

    18
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

4 Neutral

About corrado33

  • Rank
    (1) Prestidigitator
  1. I'm the type of gamer who likes to dive into the spell descriptions and figure out which spell is best for each situation. Since I've just started playing PoE, I've begun to do that here as well. I'm currently making a spreadsheet with all of the spells in the game, what they do, damage, buff, etc., and how much of that thing they do. Some of you may call this min-maxing, which may be true, but I've been doing this long before that term was coined. I do this because I HATE trying to look through a spell description in the middle of a battle to figure out if it does what I want. Often times I'll pick a substandard spell for the effect I'm trying to achieve and that makes me... uneasy. (I may be slightly obsessive.) For some of you, reading that spreadsheet would probably ruin the game. That's fine, you don't have to read it. However, being analytically minded, I love doing this kind of stuff. However, my question is this. How would you categorize all of the spells in the game? I've thought of a few categories already. Many spells fall into multiple categories. Damage Buff (AoE or single) Debuff (AoE or single) Summon Healing (AoE or single) I originally had crowd control as a category, but realized that CC is just a subset of debuff (AoE debuff.) There's really only one other category that I may include, and that's the spells that change allegiance. (Charm spells.) Those don't fall very well into any of the above categories, but I'm not sure. There are still other spells which I can't really categorize. Steal a spell from an enemy and cast it for free? What the heck does that fall into. "Other" What do you guys think. How would you split the spells up into categories?
  2. I've seen this once. Quite annoying (although it makes the fight much much more challenging.) I'd think a simple "Don't route the AI through the fog of war." Would be fine. You could turn auto attack off. I have my AI set to "Defensive." My party doesn't move that much in that status. (Quite annoying when an enemy is slightly out of range of on of my defensive (ranged) characters and they just sit there like "Yeah I'll just chill here and watch you guys fight them instead of taking 1 step forward to shoot the guy myself.") Also, I really wish there was an auto-pause that would be set when a character is idle. (Not attacking anyone or casting any spells.)
  3. Yeah. It was totally beyond my understanding as well. Like Marceror, i never, ever used party AI in any RPG (i disabled the AI in Dragon Age Origin quite early too). I always try it for a bit, and i never found it usefull, in any game. AI just mess up everything i try to do. I really hate it. Now... Maybe there are people that are way more talented with AI than i am. Because some people explained it quite well, i kind of understand now, the feeling of accomplishment when everything goes as planned in a battle, thanks to a well handled brainstorming beforehand, tuning the AI behavior. But to me, it looks like having an actual AI that could provide enough options to allow this would require... well, thousands of hours of work. Pillars is not a triple A game. I, now, can understand the pleasure some people here have while playing hard difficulty with a strategy based on AI, foreboding anything that could happen and then, seeing everything going according to plan. But i don't think an AI that could alow this kind of gamplay is possible for such a low budget game. Hence, i'm wondering: is there actually any need for such a debate, unless Pillars 2 have 50 millions dollars budget? I don't think it'd take much development to do. I'm not looking for a 1 button "Look my character casts everything perfectly now." I'm looking for a "manual" AI. One that's programmed by me! The game already knows when something happens. It knows when characters are dazed, it knows when a party member drops below x% of health. The type of AI some of us on here are vying for is the type that allows us to use those statuses to make characters do other things. We want the template to be able to program our own AI, not a fully fledged single button AI system that makes characters play themselves.
  4. I'd vote for SOME type of character import. I LOVED character importation in the BG series. (So much so that I had one of every type of character from every game imported into the next.) I don't care if it's a full character import, or a backstory only import where your decisions in the previous game affect the dialog and lore of the next game (dragon age like/mass effect like (I think.)) Honestly I think it'd be really cool if they let you import your character, but made you dual class, so you still started at a low level, but you'd have access to skills not normal for your character once you passed level X. Remember how dual classing in BG worked? Not multi-classing (different thing.) When you dual classed you stopped advancing in your first class, and you were effectively a level 1 in your new class. You could only access the old class's abilities after you advanced past the level where you chose to dual class. (That may have to be changed.) That'd be cool, but it'd make for a very unbalanced late game (you'd be a god essentially.) So, I vote for some type of importation, but perhaps not a "high level" import, where you start at whatever level you ended at in PoE1. EDIT: Maybe even something really weird. Like they made you start at level 1, but if you imported your character you'd get to choose one skill/spell from your old class every (other) level. Perhaps up to a certain point since high level skills are OP. Basically if you were a rogue in PoE2, but were a paladin in PoE1, you could choose to have a paladin aura eventually. That'd require a lot of thought to make it not OP though.
  5. Well now I feel kind of like an idiot. I didn't know skills offered bonuses, nor have I seen this anywhere in game... EDIT: Apparently survival is the only one that offers bonuses at particular levels other than the main effect. All of the skills should have bonuses like this!
  6. Oh, here we go again. Enough with calling battles and lesser combatants "trash"!!! I'd prefer MORE battles not less. I'd prefer that there were random encounters when you traveled from area to area. I'd prefer that there was a chance for your party's rest to be interrupted with random battles when you aren't resting at an inn. If I wanted to read a story, I'd buy a book (and often do). I'm not here to read a story. I'm here for the BATTLES!!!! And more is better!!! The story is just the means of tying those battles together, not the reason for playing the game itself. I actually agree here. I'd like more MEMORABLE battles. What battles do you guys remember from IWD and BG(2) and NWN(2)? I remember the massive battles. The ones against dragons and REALLY hard enemies like lich kings. The ones where I casted every buff I had on my party before it started and the character portraits were COVERED in status effect symbols. The ones where I accidentally pissed off an entire city and I was running for my life while fighting off hoards of enemies. Those are the battles I remember from the old games. Those are the battles I like. Unfortunately, those battles require forethought. It's hard to create unique enemies. That's why I like the bounty system in PoE. I find PoE a bit wordy, at times. Not all the time. The 2nd conversation with the priest (first one after you recruit him and travel with him for a while) was needlessly wordy. As an RPG I don't dare cut the conversation short for fear of not furthering the relationship, but I just remember thinking "Jeeze, when will this freaking conversation end." It went on for AGES. (And the priest is a **** so it didn't make the conversation fun.) Other than that I ignore the gold plated NPCs, and I ignore the grave markers. Not that hard to do. I do spam tab all the time though (old habit from the older games.) However, I would not want any LESS words in the game. Like people mentioned above, many games today pander to the ADD crowd, and I like my RPGs to be fleshed out, even if I don't read everything. One day I'll get bored and start reading everything, which will add to the atmosphere.
  7. I think the original idea is a really cool one, as like we said above it allows you to have a much more open party (a rogue isn't NECESSARY just to find traps and pick locks, like it is in almost every older RPG) But it's just... lacking. Honestly I find survival useless, but that's probably because I'm not the type of player to rely on consumables. Maybe if it let you gather 2 ingredients instead of 1, then it'd be a little more useful. (I think they had something like this in WoW.) So I guess I'll put some suggestions into a list. Stealth: I think it's ok now. Maybe "allows player to enter stealth in combat" when you reach a really high level. But then that's a combat skill. Athletics: "Faster movement." Not a skill strictly focused on combat. It'd also require a UI button "keep party together." in case some members had faster walk speed. Lore: Fine as is I guess. I don't really use scrolls that much, but I can see it being necessary for a wizard. Maybe an extra level X spell as you get higher in the lore levels. Actually! How about if you have a player with high enough lore it'll tell you what kind of defenses the enemy has even if you haven't fought a lot of them... (I often find myself looking at the bestiary to figure out how best to attack a... beast. Almost like a "scan" or "sensor" from some of the final fantasy series. Mechanics: Fine as is. This is the only skill that's currently a SKILL. Survival: Allows you to recover twice/thrice the amount of ingredients. So if you harvest some moss, you get 2/3 instead of 1. I'd love to hear some more suggestions. Maybe somebody will make a mod.
  8. Oh I have noticed! Hence why my rogue has a high mechanics score and my wizard has a high lore score and my fighter has a high athletics score. But I came to the same conclusion as you have. The skills are only useful to take a character out of their typical role and make them into something very slightly different. I just wish they did... more. Wish they had more of a direct impact. Like athletics increasing reflex defense. (Which makes sense.) Survival eventually giving you a heal wounds skill, stealth eventually giving you the ability to go into stealth in combat, etc. So yes, I think I misspoke a bit in the OP. I appreciate that the devs. let you do this. It opens up the types of parties you can have (and allows you to do crazy things like an all wizard party yet still be able to open locks.) BUT, they just seem so... bland and uninteresting.
  9. Apologies if this has been discussed to death, I didn't find anything in my search. I've been playing for a bit now and anytime I have to increase my skills on a character, I really just apply it randomly if it's not my rogue or wizard. (Rogue obviously gets mechanics and wizard obviously gets lore.) I feel like these "skills" are only useful for scripted interactions. Sure, all of my characters have 3 stealth so that they can sneak around effectively, and all of my characters have 3 athletics so they don't get fatigued so quickly, but other than that? There's no reason to increase sneak any further, my characters almost never get fatigued (only my wizard, who has the lowest athletics will ever get fatigued.) (EDIT2: I guess at higher levels since I'll have more spells available to me I'll be resting less, so I may get fatigued more.) My main character is a rogue with high mechanics so it's useless to increase that for anybody else. There has only been 2-3 interactions when I needed a skill my main character didn't have (lore, survival.) And those really didn't affect anything... I feel like they could have just as easily based the mechanics "skill" on dexterity and "survival/athletics" skill on constitution, etc. etc. (Like most other RPGs I've ever played.) Why the repetition? Am I missing something? Sure, it allows you to have a fighter who can sneak around very well or a fighter who can use scrolls (etc. etc.), but that seems a bit oxymoronic... Yes, it allows you to play in a more open ended manner (like having a party who can sneak through everything.) But it seems...excessive? Anyone agree? Disagree? Opinions? If you're not trying to avoid any combat these skills don't have many other uses it seems. EDIT: And unlike the wiki says, I can't use my companions skills for dialogue checks.
  10. Because its awesome to see your characters intelligently moving / manoeuvring around the battlefield, and you know that you made it happen by setting a particular combination of strategies. Its not like a movie at all. It imparts an enormous sense of accomplishment and fulfilment to the user / player.....it makes you think about countering enemy moves in advance and prepare yourself for upcoming battles in unique ways, it also allows the game to offer players more difficult and challenging encounters (as it provide devs more room and options to play with) and allows the players to have an excellent tool to better manage these intelligently designed superior challenges. Can't imagine why anyone would consider current AI setting options sufficient for this kind of game, most of the settings are dumb and make you waste your spells / abilities in one way or another. One should never do anything half-ass, either give us a comprehensive AI strategy setting system, or don't do it all. I normally keep the AI settings turned off at all times, i even forgot that it exists, its simply that bad. Not sure why its so 'completely beyond you'? There must be a lot that goes beyond you, I am guessing... No, I can't imagine nor understand why anyone would want to use an AI in a game like this. To me, that makes it like watching a movie. If I want to watch a movie, I'll watch a friggin' movie. As for the final sentence, coming from the person who refuses to accept that paladins in this game are useful, even if they're not what some people wish they were, takes a lot of chutzpah. Different play styles for different people. I personally think that AI would add to immersion. If you are playing AS your character, you shouldn't have control over your other characters, other than what you told them to do before the battle. The feeling of accomplishment when you can simply run around with your character and do what's needed while your team supports YOU is amazing. Just because you haven't taken the time to properly set up an AI to play a decent game doesn't mean other's haven't. You're arguing with someone who doesn't think X feature/character is useful, yet you are arguing the exact same thing against AI. Pick a side why won't ya. People like to play differently. Deal with it. To me, this AI crap is a waste of time and resources that could be better spent adding more content. And CONTENT is what the game's all about, not some silly AI for people who are too lazy to actually manage their party properly. Attacking people on a role playing game forum. You big man you. Not everyone plays the game like you do big man. It's a GAME.
  11. Because its awesome to see your characters intelligently moving / manoeuvring around the battlefield, and you know that you made it happen by setting a particular combination of strategies. Its not like a movie at all. It imparts an enormous sense of accomplishment and fulfilment to the user / player.....it makes you think about countering enemy moves in advance and prepare yourself for upcoming battles in unique ways, it also allows the game to offer players more difficult and challenging encounters (as it provide devs more room and options to play with) and allows the players to have an excellent tool to better manage these intelligently designed superior challenges. Can't imagine why anyone would consider current AI setting options sufficient for this kind of game, most of the settings are dumb and make you waste your spells / abilities in one way or another. One should never do anything half-ass, either give us a comprehensive AI strategy setting system, or don't do it all. I normally keep the AI settings turned off at all times, i even forgot that it exists, its simply that bad. Not sure why its so 'completely beyond you'? There must be a lot that goes beyond you, I am guessing... No, I can't imagine nor understand why anyone would want to use an AI in a game like this. To me, that makes it like watching a movie. If I want to watch a movie, I'll watch a friggin' movie. As for the final sentence, coming from the person who refuses to accept that paladins in this game are useful, even if they're not what some people wish they were, takes a lot of chutzpah. Different play styles for different people. I personally think that AI would add to immersion. If you are playing AS your character, you shouldn't have control over your other characters, other than what you told them to do before the battle. The feeling of accomplishment when you can simply run around with your character and do what's needed while your team supports YOU is amazing. Just because you haven't taken the time to properly set up an AI to play a decent game doesn't mean other's haven't. You're arguing with someone who doesn't think X feature/character is useful, yet you are arguing the exact same thing against AI. Pick a side why won't ya. People like to play differently. Deal with it.
  12. I never said I wanted the computer to control every battle, and even with advanced scripting options you can NEVER plan for every battle. It more of just takes care of the repetitive things that you do EVERY encounter. Priest does Holy radiance, tank attacks strongest character, hunter does her wounding shot thing on the person the tank is attacking. Wizard can safely open up with arcane assault on the largest group of enemies. Things like "switch to YY weapons if XX weapons aren't effective." You are still certainly involved in every battle, but you get to focus on the nuances of the hard battles instead of thinking about all of the little things you forgot to do. It's not like you can't cancel actions in PoE. You can see which spell a party member will use long before they actually use it. I mean it's pretty obvious that if my tank is low on endurance (and there's more than a few enemies alive) I'm most likely going to have my priest heal him. Like people mentioned above, it makes the trash encounters less annoying, yet still allows you to play the hard encounters just like you'd like. Besides, it wouldn't effect anybody who didn't want to use it. They could simply... not use it.
  13. As I've started playing this game, I've been mainly disappointed by one thing. The AI scripting for the characters is... less than stellar. I'm not sure if this has been discussed to death as I can't search for "AI," so if it has please point me in the right direction. From what I remember, the AI scripting in BG was amazing. You could be prepared for anything! It was great and took out some of the micromanaging. (I think it was baldur's gate... I don't exactly remember.) Now, I don't mind micromanaging, it's the point of these games, but there is just something satisfying about having a party able to destroy enemies without actually having to do anything. I mean, even a simple "If this then that" type of system would be great. For my ranger, "If doing minimum damage, switch to steady shot modal" (or whatever it's called that gives you DR bypass for slower shots.) Dragon age's character AI was also pretty good, but IIRC they limited it based on a stat or something?) Why not include a more... robust character AI system? Time? Money? One of my favorite things to do in the old RPGs was to take time to set up the characters to take care of each other. <reminiscing>Also, contingency spells were freaking awesome in BG. But they were probably overpowered. I was always modding BG, and I constantly tried to create a "different" contingency spell so each wizard could have more than one contingency at a time (or more than however many was the limit.) I could never get it to work, I don't think the engine was built to handle more than one. </reminiscing>
  14. Oh I agree with you! I've never had to switch weapons that much in older RPGs (or at least, I never bothered, except in neverwinter nights.) Anyway, thanks for the advice guys. I'll have to give my rogue a set of maces (or other crush weapons) for armored foes. (IIRC Plate is weak to crush, I'll have to look it up in game, the wiki is outdated.)
  15. Ignoring weapons that bypass DR and raw damage, that brings the total up to 3, spread over 3 different types of characters. (Penetrating shot boosts DR bypass for the ranger only, not that useful if none of your characters are doing much damage) Thanks for the list. This playthrough has been more of a traditional BG type playthrough with the typical character classes (FIghter, Rogue, druid, wizard, priest, hunter) so I haven't played with ciphers and chanters that much yet. Maybe that's my problem.
×
×
  • Create New...