Sensuki

Yeah that's why I chose it as well - using WL2 combat engine and using Numenera P&P system.

UI is not the problem. I'm not advocating for a rounds-change as stated in my first post in the thread, but there are definitely issues with current action speeds, and the action speed system itself.

I voted for TB in TToN I haven't said turn PE into a turn-based game though, stuff that. I would like a good RTwP game for a change, rather than a bad one.

It's not hard to mod the game to unlock level 12, several people have already done it. I plan to do some full 1-12 leveling tests during the beta myself.

Not all TB games are like that Have you played Knights of the Chalice ? Some of the best TB combat I've played Jagged Alliance 2 is one of the best as well.

I like both TB and RTwP, I don't think one is better than the other. Both combat systems can be good or ****ing terrible.

Obligatory:

Underrail splits AP into movement and action points - I think that's a much better way of doing things. http://www.rpgcodex.net/content.php?id=9657

I play the IE games at 40 FPS. I don't have to wait for anything, and it's not like nothing happens in between the time that your character performs and action and has to wait for the next one. Other units are performing actions, and you can issue move commands. The only difference between the IE system that determines the speed of unit actions and PE's one is that in the IE games, the actions are performed at discrete intervals. The situation you describe "doing nothing for 6 seconds" is because units in the IE games have less activity. Once you issue units to auto-attack, you only have to do something else if the encounter calls for it. I think you are describing IE combat vs trash mobs, rather than against setpiece encounters, where you do not have to use any of your per-rest abilities. In Pillars of Eternity v301, the game was pretty easy and played pretty much the same, all you had to do was make sure the Rogue Crippling Striked at the start of combat and then commanded everyone else to auto attack units.

When did you last play an Infinity Engine game? Are you sure that your recollection of the Infinity Engine games is accurate? Have you done a side-by-side comparison to see which feels better?

No it doesn't :/ Turn-based combat is actually very good with quite a few units, almost always better actually. Knights of the Chalice doesn't promote camping , nor does The Banner Saga, however Expeditions: Conquistador does. It's mostly because AP is usually shared between movement and attacks/other actions, so in many cases it's better to sit and wait and force the enemy to come to you in primarily ranged based turn-based games.

Point of the backer beta is to test systems / content etc and help improve the game. I have only been doing testing, I have not played the beta to enjoy the content.

No, but it uses the zynga model. Game is free, but you can pay to progress. Lots of people won't do that, but heaps of people will because they cbf having to play 50 games just to be able to play a certain hero.

I haven't spent a cent on dota either (not even compendiums) although having access to all heroes at once > having to play to unlock them. It's called the zynga model.

I honestly have to question the claims that the IE combat rounds weren't fluid. I think those people's remarks might be aimed more specifically at the game FPS (30) than anything else. If anything, combat was more fluid because issuing unit actions were often made in clumps due to most actions having to be issued at specific intervals of six seconds. I have done a direct comparison recently and the IE game combat is more fluid and easier to control because of the more coarse granularity and unification of unit action speed. PE feels disjointed in comparison and requires more pausing. When was the last time any of you played an Infinity Engine game?

Why would I want to play League of Legends? It's a horrible game in comparison to DotA 2 (with less mechanical depth and complexity) and a horrible system that locks you out from all of the heroes when you create a profile, because it promotes "pay to progress". For the record I played the game in 2009, it was horrible compared to Heroes of Newerth though, so I played that, then heroes of Newerth was ruined by dumb changes, and then DotA 2 finally became good. No turning back.

[steps to reproduce] Create a Ranger PC Go to the Inn Hire a Ranger Adventurer Exit the inn Ranger companion in slot #6's animal companion spawns inside the inn door upon exiting the building and cannot move Probably gets even worse with more than two rangers.

Not just on creep denial, that was one example relative to the thread topic where a specific mechanic was removed to simplify the game mechanics. Guinsoo (the LoL guy) used to be the designer of the DotA Allstars WC3 custom maps back in the early 00s, and he didn't like creep deny in WC3, even though the community at large did. Removing it does take away things from the game. The examples I gave were related to competitive play. That's a bull**** statement (sorry) about having more time to think and react in teamfights in DotA 2 just because crowd control spells last longer. Longer cc spells are more punishing and it depends what type of CC you are talking about - channeled disables can de disrupted, for example so casting them at the correct time is critical. Not forgetting that the enemy team also possibly has long disables, so using disables too early can be a waste. The reason that disable lengths are toned down in LoL is because the designers think that it's not fun when players have to 'sit out' of gameplay. I vehemently detest League of Legends, having been a DotA player since 2004.

All of it, they're interested in hearing your feedback. If you are looking for specific examples, they were provided in the Backer Beta Kickstarter Update

All of it. Whatever you think needs help.

How, exactly is it 1000x better? I'd love to try and hear you justify that.

It completely removes a strategical/tactical layer from the game. Logic or no. Fact remains that in all areas, DotA 2 remains the more complex game with more mechanical depth. I don't really think that is disputable on any level.

The IE game combat was real-time, there were no turns. Character's own individual 'round timer's were asynchronous, and they would begin whenever you first issued them a command. The reason that I said that it was easier to follow is that most players issued all of their characters a command while they paused the game, and since the IE games used a 6 * (30/FPS) round timer, the need for issuing different non-movement actions would occur for characters at around about the same time. The primary issues with Pillars of Eternity's combat ARE gameplay related, however there is very poor animation and UI feedback in many cases. One thing I find particularly unhelpful is the position and size of the combat log makes it unreadable on the fly, and the amount of stuff that is pasted to it in combat makes it pointless anyway. Animations of weapon attacks are quite short, in the style of the Infinity Engine games. That was a choice they made which they could have abandoned in favor of giving different weapons different animation lengths (such as longer ones for heavier weapons) and I think that would have been a cool feature. Personally I think if units had a recovery time animation, recovery bars wouldn't even be necessary. They weren't necessary in the IE games. Obsidian made this mistake themselves by copying the Icewind Dale games rather than the Baldur's Gate's. I think that was a bit of an oversight.

Thanks, now I know I have to do my version review earlier than normal

Read my earlier post about the lack of denying.