Jump to content
The Community Blog (An Invitation)

Sensuki

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    9931

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    133

 Content Type 

Everything posted by Sensuki

  1. Sensuki
    You only build one character (unless you plan on actually making adventurer's hall characters). I am not the one who came up with the design goals. The aim is for there to be no dump stats and every attribute useful for every class right ? I am only interested in the game being better. Currently if one of the Recruitable NPCs had a high Perception, I would probably "dump it".
  2. Sensuki
    For the UI, you could also use two horizontal weapons to reflect the Accuracy values (or like one axe or maul head) ie
  3. Sensuki
    I still think it could be slightly better, but it is better than before. Here is my suggestion.
  4. Sensuki
    If any more criticism is wanted regarding the character attributes I'm still seeing a little bit of a problem with the Perception attribute. I like Might, Dex, Con, Int and (maybe) Resolve, but Perception seems a bit off. Here are the issues I see (this may just be me not fully understanding but anyway) Perception and Dexterity both raise Reflex Defense. Dexterity gives you accuracy (always very good, on every character). Perception gives you Penetration and Interrupt. If Penetration is staying, these are both once again reliant on the fact that you have to actually hit (Accuracy). Does Interrupt count on grazes? (I assume not, or at least, at a reduced amount) Because once again, the combat stats of the Perception attribute are highly reliant on the Dexterity attribute. It kind of seems like a similar situation to the last setup (but not as bad as the last Perception). In order for Perception to be useful, you still need a high Dexterity as well. Numbers aside, I can see Perception being useful for one or two characters - it would be beneficial to have a character with max Perception to be able to interrupt enemy spells and whatnot. Could be melee or ranged, with a fast and slow attacking weapon depending on the unit (Bow & Crossbow or maybe Pike & Maul). And depending on whether Penetration is kept it might be alright in a couple situations with slashing/piercing damage dealing characters as well, the penetration value could make a sword or axe more viable vs armor, depending on the math between higher might +dam and perception +pene). So I dunno, maybe that's acceptable, maybe it isn't. I know that the PE design philosophy likes mirrored mechanics, but perhaps Concentration (or Resolve) could square off against Bonus Damage (Might, which is importantly intuitive) for the purposes of determining whether a hit reaction is played or not and have something else on Perception? I know I keep crying "Attack Speed", but with the right math it could work. Move Accuracy to Perception (also intuitive as hand-eye coordination comes from the brain as well as muscle) and put Attack Speed on Dexterity ? Make it so that max Dexterity negates (or nearly makes up for) the action speed penalty to the heaviest armor (ie the max amount is the same - 20 Dex = +30% (1.5 per point)). (for the record, that's probably not the best or only solution, just an example of one)
  5. Sensuki
    They don't really need the double spacing either. Just creates more scrolling.
  6. Sensuki
    Accuracy is more of a no-brainer than Might is because it's used for every attack, whereas not every attack causes damage. That's the good thing about the Might, Dexterity and Constitution attributes atm is that they're all quite good. Intellect is pretty good and the other two we aren't sure how effective they are yet (and maybe they're still up in the air). But overall it's a better spread than the last lot.
  7. Sensuki
    I'm also okay with percentile modifiers and I like the Character Record UI. Any updates to UI scaling ? Will it just stay the same size or will it scale up ?
  8. Sensuki
    I like the new attributes. Good job.
  9. Sensuki
    Loves easy money.
  10. Sensuki
    After playing around with Karkarov's UI trying to organize the features that I think should be in and elsewhere I actually realize that due to the portrait and icon sizes and the fact that the portraits will almost certainly be left-aligned on the screen - that there is no way to center the amount of space the portraits take up with other elements of the UI. The UI is no doubt going to be symmetrical and in order for it to be so, the combat log is going to be as large as the portrait area of the screen plus whatever other menu they have to it's right. There will then likely be a centrepiece of the UI with the main menu section and whatnot. Here is how that works out. As you can see the dialogue window is waaaaay too wide. If the dialogue window is made any smaller at all, the other side of the screen has to be compressed as well to be symmetrical. I think there is almost zero chance that Obsidian will not have the portrait and action bar section of the UI left aligned, so this makes the full bottom bar almost impossible due to this design. I think this is evidence enough that the UI will in fact be a centered bar, rather than taking up the full screen width - because otherwise the design would have to be changed, such as action buttons being grouped on the left of the portraits and UI buttons going a long the top of the character portraits (such as skill use, weapons, items, guard etc). You can only do a full screen width UI keeping to the UI design principles that Josh Sawyer mentioned in Art Update 54 with action buttons on the left of the portraits and portraits more centered. I think that design is unlikely, so I'm going to guess there will be around 240px width free on either side of the UI.
  11. Sensuki
    dp.
  12. Sensuki
    Oh dear Helm. This is absolutely hilarious. Why are you so angry that I disagree that RTwP is superior ? I think they are both good and both require different skills to beat on harder difficulties (some overlapping). It is not me refusing to listen to you at all, it is actually quite the opposite. You claim that people who prefer turn-based cannot micromanage their characters very well. I have not said that this is an untrue statement - what I have said is that RTwP (emphasis on the wP) offers a lot of concessions to these people so that the number of required actions per minute is less. You have ignored absolutely everything I have said about the PAUSE feature of Real Time with Pause and AI Scripts for unselected party members. If you are going to make any arguments about micromanagement you really need to talk about Real time combat (not often featured in RPGs), not Real time with Pause. I will let others be the judge of that, as I'm pretty sure it's only you that thinks that. Wrong. Let me quote myself Is that an untrue statement ? I have said that turn-based combat, when easy - is ****. Easy RTwP wins vs Easy TB IMO. And that is why I think many people like RTwP. If you play on easy or normal difficulty - RTwP is probably going to be your preference because then combat can be pretty brainless, and you can just click a few buttons, sit back and watch the AI/auto attack of your character(s) win the encounter. I have said that you cannot undo your actions in TB Combat whereas you can in RTwP with an efficacy loss of time. You can't react to current actions in TB combat - which reinforces my statement that TB places higher stakes on individual actions. Essentially Real-time with pause combat only requires a lot of inputs per minute if the game and difficult demands it and the player does not make much use of the pause function OR the party AI available to them in many games such as Baldur's Gate 2. The way you and I might play RTwP (not using auto pause, not pausing very often and not using party AI scripts) might be very different from the way another person plays their RTwP (full auto pause clauses, takes lots of time between pauses to make sure they've issued optimal actions their characters and/or sets AI scripts to characters that they do not want to control to reduce the amount of micromanagement required). I'm not sure if you read my post correctly - perhaps you were unfounded by the first paragraph. The theory is in fact in the last post I made on the 17th of December. Hahah, I feel sorry for you if that is going over your head.
  13. Sensuki
    I find it interesting that a lot of people have mentioned that they want Deflection to be based on armor, when Deflection is actually not based on armor. Armor provides damage reduction only (magical bonuses aside). Shields provide deflection, however.
  14. Sensuki
    Do you really want random whopping criticals in the game - when the attack resolution design is specifically to take a lot of the randomosity out of it ?
  15. Sensuki
    Say what? I've read every post in this thread. Three or four suggestions over the course of the thread. You know, you could be right - it depends on how much Stamina and Health a character has before attributes are applied, however since Stamina takes full damage from attacks and Health only takes 25% damage from attacks, more Stamina equates to more longevity in an individual encounter. More Health only matters after "a few encounters" - Josh has said that in some edge cases characters have lost 70% Health in an encounter. Since you have the ability to rest and probably the ability to abuse rest (such as constantly retreat to rest locations and your Stronghold after a few battles), the Strength attribute may not be as valuable as the Constitution attribute. As for your comments regarding Perception - Critical Damage would be useful in the cases where your character has a very high accuracy and/or is attacking a monster's weak defense. If that weak defense is Fortitude, Reflex or Will - most attacks that target those secondary defenses are ability and spell based, and most of those are per-encounter and per-day use. Even with a 25% chance to score a Critical Hit (+20 higher than the defense), you are still probably better off increasing Intellect, Dexterity or Resolve for a flat increase in DPS through damage, more accuracy or longer durations/larger AoEs. What I am saying is the bonus only applies very situationally as opposed to on EVERY_SINGLE_ATTACK like the other attributes. Perception is just a loser compared to Dexterity, so I wouldn't be surprised if that attribute sees a bit of a revision.
  16. Sensuki
    That is pretty much exactly what is happening at the moment, minus the defenses. And hello Mor, forever tagging along disagreeing with my posts - but as always not reading the whole thread, or my other posts and making big misinterpretations. Let me help you understand once again. First have a read of this: http://forums.obsidian.net/topic/64891-attribute-questionnaire/ In that explicit example, yes. Although as I state down the bottom - I don't like that system, but it changes less things than the other ones I have suggested. No actually your defenses will go up automatically (in PE), you won't be assigning points to them every level up. You also haven't actually stated whether you like the current system or not, but I am going to assume that you do. You can't really say whether having a defense tied to two attributes is more balanced than a separate pool or not. FTR I don't actually like the separate pool idea. Refer to: http://forums.obsidian.net/topic/64891-attribute-questionnaire/ I know plenty, and no way am I finding you all of the quotes that I reference in that statement, you can do it yourself for a change. You can have an attribute that controls Action Speed without breaking anything, it wouldn't be that difficult at all. IMO it's definitely a better combat stat to use than critical damage. Effect Reduction would also be another one that mightn't be too bad.
  17. Sensuki
    Not in regards to RP aspects. Balance though - I believe so, as STR and PER atm are ****ed, but I don't have defenses across six attributes because that is the most limiting thing about the design so far. There is another way of doing attributes that hasn't been mentioned yet. At the moment, attributes are groups of combat stats thrown together in a semi-simulationist manner. Another way of doing things would be to "technically" remove the attribute concept altogether while keeping the naming conventions for attribute checks in dialogue and scripted interaction. So for combat stats we have Damage/Healing Accuracy Health Stamina Durations/AoEs Fortitude Reflex Willpower Deflection + others Josh appears like he wants all characters to have the same number of points in defenses. So we can segregate the defenses from the others as he has done. I don't like Critical Damage as a combat stat as it is inferior to the others, so I'm gonna add in action speed as the 6th Now we have Damage/Healing Accuracy Health Stamina Durations/AoEs Action Speed Let us give all six of these combat stats an alternate name for the purposes of attributes, so the only thing you get from the attribute is a bonus in one combat stat. Name them whatever you like - here is my 10 second naming attempt Intellect - Damage/Healing Dexterity - Action Speed Perception - Accuracy Endurance - Stamina Vitality - Health Resolve - Durations/AoEs 3 PHYS, 3 MENTAL. Now have a separate pool of points to be placed in Defenses upon Character creation. No longer to attributes have to compete with one another for the purpose of defenses. 10 points to spend - go! Fortitude Reflex Willpower Or just no points at all and make them all totally class based. Inventory size could just be a talent or something called "TEH STRONGZ" or whatever, like in Fallout. FTR I don't like this system but whatever.
  18. Sensuki
    I am a power gamer bro. To me it doesn't matter. I would be giving more of a damn if Josh was giving more of a damn, but he's coming at it from a "balance" perspective rather than a RP/simulation perspective. The RP elements will take place in the attribute checks and scripted interactions - of which the names of the attributes may matter, but for combat purposes, the only things that matter are the the combat stats themselves. When I make a character in a game I *never* have a pre-determined vision of what that character is going to be if I haven't played the game before, I just go in and make one based on the options available. When I have played a game I optimally choose things based on efficacy rather than concept.
  19. Sensuki
    No I understand your point completely. What I am saying to you is that that issue is insignificant when compared to the other ones. The issues lie in the distribution of the combat stats themselves, not the names of the attributes. The names do not ****ing matter. You could call them something completely abstract - Eagle, Wushi, Hawk, Mung-Fo-To-Bing, Rhubarb and CrabApple and they would be no worse off than they were before. TBH I'd like to see what your answers are to my questionnaire.
  20. Sensuki
    No. There is no point talking about that stuff regarding PE's attribute system - nothing of the sort is being taken into consideration by design and it seems that there are LOTS of people that find it very hard to disassociate themselves from a simulationist discussion regarding PE's attributes. I was once like that but over time I now see there is little point. Kveldulf also seems to be suffering from the same problem. The accuracy system is unified, bonus damage is unified. The only discussion worth having should be how to place those combat stats together and how to balance them across the attributes.
  21. Sensuki
    Dude. That is exactly the kind of pointless discussion I am talking about. I am not trying to justify it, rather give suspension of disbelief.
  22. Sensuki
    Might doesn't have to mean 'physical might'. Could even give a soul-based description. That one, and resolve are the two best attributes at the moment. The others all need work.
  23. Sensuki
    You are correct, but that is not really something that I have to pay attention to as I find it pretty easy to make a more intuitively named system than the current one. A lot of the attempts also provide worse mechanics and balance along with the inclusion of stufff that will never happen - such as splitting accuracy across two attributes in ranged and melee etc. Damage isn't governed by the resolve attribute, and in my attempts I changed it to Might.
  24. Sensuki
    They see me rollin' They hatin'
  25. Sensuki
    It is not my job to care about what you guys like. The fair majority of discussion AFTER sawyer revealed the current attributes was QQ about the lack of simulationism. That is a discussion I am not interested in, I didn't really read any post that was very constructive and every other attribute lineup was less balanced than his and didn't provide any new ideas. I don't think the system is perfect and my posts & threads are aimed at providing some constructive feedback. Well guess what - as I previously stated I don't think talking about PE attributes with any sort of simulationism in mind has any point whatsoever because that's now how Josh thinks about them. The only other "feedback" I get from reading the last 10 or so pages of this thread is "QQ Intellect governs damage" and "QQ attributes aren't simulationist". End of discussion.
×
×
  • Create New...