morhilane

You are kidding, right? Diablo is a single char game. And each char has more active skills than any one char in POE. Regardless of the number of active skills Diablo has, it's combat system is not complex.

There's always one isn't there? Someone who doesn't read. You didn't read my post did you? I'm talking about what you see on the screen. I'm talking about scale. What you currently see on the screen compared to the rest of the area map. In my post from the previous page of this thread. I showed that what you see on the screen with PoE compared to BG is that the characters, the doors, buildings, barrels outside are the same size when PoE is zoomed in. Note: The same with the doors, buildings, barrels outside is the same size. And then when you zoom out, PoE is similar to BG:EE with similar sizes with the characters. Okay let that sink in for a moment. If it hasn't sunk in yet, I'll say it again. The characters are the same size on your screen with BG and PoE zoomed in. I measured the characters with the screen shots when I put the screen shots at the same height. The characters are also similar size when PoE and BGEE is zoomed out. Now given the characters are the same size, then lets look at what else you can see on the screen shall we? Looking at the map, we can see how much screen takes up in the area map when zoomed in and zoomed out with PoE, BG:EE and BG even though you can't zoom out with BG but it's still relevant. Because it's about screen to area. What you see on the screen compared to the entire area map. And with BG/BGEE the wilderness maps are all the same size as the one I used. And Beregost is also the same size. And Nashkel is also the same size. Nashkel is also 10 x 10 screens in the Original Baldurs Gate. The whole area is 100 screens with what you see on your screen. That's called scale. Below is a screen shot from a 22" 1680 x 1050 widescreen monitor. So instead of jumping in, frothing at the mouth and saying it's crap. How about you do some research, measure the maps, and compare the scale of all three games. It's not about pixels, it's about scale. You are not comparing scale. You are comparing viewport size.

Sorry to tell you this, but I think your way of comparing the game maps is crap. First, BG:EE and BG have the same map size regardless of what you think about it, Beamdog couldn't re-render them because the original assets were lost (hence the blurring of texture when zoom). Second, you should have compared Dyrford Village map with the Naskel Village map by using the buildings has references.

They're putting way too much work into it for it not to be a combat focused game. If combat weren't the focus then combat wouldn't have been a big priority for Obsidian. They would have just built something that is simple and fast to save development time for more important things. Diablo has a way more simplistic combat system then PoE and that is a combat focused game. Seems to me that you think that if a game has combat, that means it's a combat focused game. I don't think that how the majority of gamers categorize a "combat focused" game.

Lots of people keep on saying it's a combat-centric game, that's not the impression I got from reading interviews with the devs (or the Kickstarter pitch). In fact, one interview especially mention that the Endless Paths of Od Nua was the section of the game for the combat lovers (PC Gamer UK November 2014, so it's recent).

Technically, the term sandbox is supposed to be another word to mean open-world/free-roaming and it has been in usage since the mid-80s when the Space Sim Elite was compared to a sandbox by a reviewer. The idea that sandbox means "a place where i can build anything I want" is an invention from the WoW area gamers who pretend gaming didn't exist before 2004.

There is no level scaling in PoE.

I did a melee Wizard a few days ago, he wasn't one-shot more than any other BB characters can get one-shot. I gave him the fine scale armor form BB Fighter inventory + shield spell + arcane veil. I also tanked with the BB Priest (her default hammer+shield setup), worked surprisingly well. Only the endurance/health conversation ratio sucks to have a real tanky Priest.

The White That Wends native (and most of its) population are Pale Elves and their racial is a 20% DT bonus against Freeze and Burn damage. I like that culture choices give you different gear based on class, it gives some flavor to those places that we will probably not see in the game. The stat bonus could probably be moved to the background though, might even make more sense than being on culture (which already grant gear). Although, I also like skill bonus on backgrounds.

Sigh. I held the understanding that spells could not miss on a roll--that the Graze was merely adjusted from 45% (base) to 50%. This has a significant impact on my calculations, as they are very fastidious. Ugh. Everything can miss if your accuracy is too low compared to the target's deflection/defense (depending what it is attacking). Also, Fortitude/Reflex/Will shouldn't be 30 for all the classes going by old posts by Sawyer (noted in the Wiki). That explain why everyone has more defense than deflection at the moment though.

Giving them more debuffing abilities isn't going to change their DPS focus, no talents are going to take that away from them. If you want to play a rogue has a debuffer you can: focus on applying the debuff on targets that need it as opposed to do it to maximize sneak attacks.

They already are debuffers (to single target). They get Blinding Strike (Blind), Crippling Strike (Hobble) before level 8. The wiki list two others strikes that apply Weakened state that are probably gained at later levels has well.

It was in the first beta version, happened to me with my first character.

Going by this post by Sawyer, it should be +50% multiplier for SA (yet I'm pretty sure I've read +25% in a post somewhere, oh well), but it really looks like x2 is what is used currently in the game.

I took some data with a self-made Rogue because the number have been bugging me. Might at 10. Race: Hearth Orlan. Stat: maxed Perception&Dexterity left everything else at 10. Talent: the one that convert more hits into crits with dirty fighting. Weapon: the arbalest (for bigger numbers). The damage value is before the DR/DT in the combat log, classified by string that comes before it. I fought Medreth's group and a bunch of Lions (elder and not) with the party. Reckless Assault was on all the time. The results Grazes without sneak attack 28.3 17 Grazes with sneak attack 73.4 52 Normal hits without sneak attack 48.4 47.2 49 69.4 61 Normal hits with sneak attacks 109.6 122.6 Criticals without sneak attacks 136 Critical with sneak attacks. 175.5 Reckless Assault (x1.20 damage) and weapon quality (x1.25) is applied everywhere. Criticals are supposed to be +50% damage. Grazes are supposed to be -0.50% damage. Sneak attacks are supposed to be +25% damage (or 20%?). How can the grazes with sneak attacks deal more damage than a normal hit when the sneak attack bonus is supposed to be half the grazes damage reduction?

You are trying to solve a balance issues (that could be caused by a bug) with a new feature. Lets start by fixing the damage multipliers problem first. A rogue shouldn't deal 78 damage on a critical with a siletto when the weapon damage range is 10-16 (I've seen it yesterday).

There is no vocal majority in a gaming forums, only vocal minorities that can't even agree on anything. Also, the silent majority isn't silent because they don't care how the game turn out. They will still be silent once the game is released regardless if they like it or not. Most people just don't post on official gaming forums or even hang out in them. They hang out in tumblr, facebook, twitter or other online communities. I even know PoE beta testers who never posted here, that don't stop them from making comments about the beta elsewhere.

Depends who does the hanging...

That these spells target different defensive stats isn't important. All defenses increase uniformly and linearly for all character classes each level. Some will start with higher Reflexes, whilst others will start with higher Deflection. Yes, in v301 Crackling Bolt actually does 30-50 base damage, and Jolting Touch does 55-75 base damage to the initial target and 41-56 to two secondary targets. Jolting touch does an average of 65 damage to one, then 48.5 damage to two foes with at +15% chance to hit and critical with no harm of friendly damage. Contrast Crackling Bolt which is 2 levels higher, but does an average of 40 damage to 5 targets, with 5% less accuracy bonus, while incurring friendly fire damage. It's a very dubious claim to assert Crackling bolt is the better spell--especially for one two entire tiers higher. What is important, is that Jolting Touch vs. Crackling Bolt is more broadly representative of how many spells lack intuitive or logical progression. Consider the average damages of Fan of Flames, Rolling Flame, and Fireball. Each are respectively level 1, 2, and 3 spells. Each does a respective average damage of 52.5 (FoF), 25 (RF), and 42.5 (FB). The 1st level spell, Fan of Flames not only does more damage, but has twice the AoE as Fireball (Base 5m vs Base 2.5m)! Examples of this abound for just about every spell parameter. It's the major inconsistency that's the problem. There is no predictable behavior nor established power level with increases in spell level. This is important, because the Wizard, Druid, and Priest classes are more or less the sum of their spells. Jolting Touch target friendly right now in the game. I killed BB Priest with the rebound once. The wording is also the similar to Crackling Bolt, neither talk about hitting allies (this is confusing because both do). Not really arguing with your, just correcting facts. Also, my different defense is that +15 is always used for spells that target Deflection and +10 is used for spells that target the "saves" stats. That part is consistent. Although, I personally think it is just a balance problem, not a conceptual one. Oh and Rolling Flame sucks, I never hit enemies with it (always show miss in the log).

Certainly true. Why this accuracy bonus is only applied to damaging spells is unknown, as debuffs are also reliant on accuracy. What accuracy bonuses do exist are seemingly random and have no logical consistency. The same applies to damage and durations. Contrast: Jolting Touch Level 1 Foe only +15 Accuracy Bonus 30-40 Damage Crackling Bolt Level 3 Friend and Foe +10 Accuracy Bonus 39-65 Damage A very similar spell that is 2 spell levels greater only does about 33% (average) more damage, is 5% more likely to graze, 5% less likely to critically hit, and has the risk and bother of friendly fire. The notion is that spells improve with level. The improvement of this spell is very debatable. Put into the context that Endurance/Hit Point values have doubled by the time a wizard has access to Crackling Bolt, that poor spell comes up even worse. Comparisons truly become painful when comparing these two spells to the level 2 spell Ray of Fire and the level 3 spell Fireball. The interesting thing about all of these horrible spells, is that Jolting Touch is the most appropriately powered/balanced to its level. The greater spell system and spells are a total mess. If it were a balancing issue only, I'd be ecstatic; however, it's the near total absence of logical consistency and general ad hoc nature of each spell that unnerves me. They don't target the same defense, that's why the bonus is different. Jolting Touch targets Deflection and Crackling Bolt targets Reflex. Also, Crackling Bolt will hits up to 5 targets, Jolting Touch will hits only 2 with slightly reduced damage on the second one (or will hit twice the same target if there are nothing else nearby, could be bug but I insta-killed a spider with it because of that). Both these spells have their damage revised in v301 too, it doesn't match the wiki.

No, everything should be miniaturized! Miniature Antelope. Miniature Aumaua. Miniature Druid shapeshift form! Miniaturized things are cute and cuddly, so enemies aren't going to target them...unless they are Ogre that eat cute things of course. Joke aside, this might have been a temporary fix until they get to write a better area transition code.

There are two main factors in why wizard damage is so mediocre. Mr. Sawyer wishes it so. Graze. On paper, a purely average wizard against an equivalent opponent has a 50% chance to graze, 45% chance to hit "normally", and 5% chance to critical. Since the wizard has an innately low accuracy, this is actually closer to 55% to graze, 45% chance to hit "normally", and 0% chance to critical against an "average" equivalent opponent. It gets worse when you're against something that is better than average as you might imagine. Yikes. With a >50% chance to do half of your gimped damage very few times per day....and you get one mediocre bit of output. Factor in that a note-worthy fraction of your spells will not be offensive, and your output is even more...lacking. This has been a major emphasis of my explorations in fixing the wizard. I've reached a point where I believe I've found a desirable/equitable balance, and am beginning to compile everything into as a concise a piece as I can manage. It's likely still a week or two out. Damaging spells gets a bonus to accuracy (depending on what they target, I've seen +10 and +15). When casting damaging spells the Wizard get his accuracy boosted to reach Rogue/Ranger/Fighter's level. They only sucks with weapons. There seems to be a bunch of spells that were forgotten in a balance pass though. The Druid's Dancing Bolt or the Wizard's Chill Fog for example. But Jolting Touch and Souless Grasp can't be said to not deal enough damage.

Well, you're also starting at level 5 with 5 characters in the beta. It might be easier with a learning curve, both in terms of level (complexity) and number of characters. Not really. Many people popped their CRPG cherry with BG2, where you start in Château Irenicus with a party of five-six level seven adventurers. If you had a couple of fighters then it was pretty manageable. That was back when people read the 1 inch thick player manual before playing a game.

I don't remember anything about Pillar of Eternity being a dark gritty rpg.

Matt hates Lock XP so much that he turned into a ghost...right on time for Halloween. I'm still trying to understand why Josh wanted to add that in personally. There is nothing to reward to unlock something. You are either getting loot from a chest, progressing in a quest or exploring.