TrashMan

My ignorance is my shield! Have at thee! I disbelif in toffee!

... Again with the extreems. Frankly, all these strawmen and Reductio Ad Absurdum are startign to irritate me. First you complain that the feature would be too frequent. Then you complain that it will be not frequent enough. It's like you only exist to invent problems. No. Your assertion is wrong. Partially because you're still tied to that simple durabiltiy system in your head. A feature doesn't have to be used 10 times per minute to be justified. Nor does it always have to be utilized the same way. Repairing/reforgin an item at the blacksmith is not something you'd do regulary, no. But that doesn't mean durabiltiy wouldn't come into play. After all, party memebers would mantain weapons between battles/durign resting. The initial proposal was that weapons have fixed number of durabiltiy points nad each hit reduces durability. Craftign skill reduces the loss, but that's it. The alternative is that: - durabiltiy points are lost depending on materials involved in the clash and are a % chance, not a fixed event (more realistic, makes the rate of degradation less predictable and more predictable at the same time) - crafting skill restores a number of points during resting (also depends on the item - you can mend a lether armor in the field compeltely, but not a plate armor) - weapons can break but can also be reforged relatively easily. - some of the items you find may already be damaged/worn - there are other ways to affect durability (re-forging a weapon, durabiltiy enchantments, wheatstones, etc..) - armors require more frequent repairs than weapons Then maybe we should avoid wounds and status effects. Those make party memebers useless too and can also harm your progression.

Only a turd in your eyes. Which allso happen to be smeared in turd. Hence why you only see turd. I don't care why durabiltiy was initially introduced. As a mechanic it offers more. Things have mroe that one purpose or reason to be there. Binary to you. I disagree. Potions? There's always 1 or 2 that are always a better investment. Thus no choice there. Get a good potion or don't. Binary. Rest? Excuse me, but have you forgotten about fatigue penalty? Binary. Except NONE of that is binary, since no system exists in isolation. They work in tandem. Money is a resource and it has to be spread around. Thus the calculation isn't as simple as you want it to be. I have 100 gold. What do Ispend it on? I can't get everything. So what do I prioritize? Inn? Potion? New sword? Repair of old one? Where is the binary choice there? There isn't one. Triplify? Why woudl you triplify? Oh, wait, is this the "weapons will break every 5 minutes so yo uhave to carry a dozen of them" strawman? Only towards people worthy of the title(s). So far you have proven to be nothing but close-minded, so I'm not inclined to think of you otherwise. I'd like you to prove me wrong tough. I really would. I'd rather respect you then feel sorry for you.

Back in my days we didn't have those fancy-schmancy romances or graphics. We had to do with our immagination and we liked it! We also had to go barefoot to school...both ways. During the winter snow. On Sundays! I kinda doubt that. I am curious as to what those counter-argumnets would be.

No. I don't agree. The specific implementation of a specific idea can be tedious. But that applies to any idea. Like for example HP. What if enemies had huderds of thousands of HP and you had to plink away at them for hours? Tedious? Yes. Would you go and argue that HP as a idea is completely broken and has to be removed? Because that's the level of logical fallacy you are commiting here. What does rarity have to do with anything? Attribute gains are rare. Are you saiyng we should remove them because they have no purpose? Again, you make no sense, starting from a redicolous preconception about what gives any speciifc system value. So yes, not-at-all is the domain of stupid poeple, incapable of understanding the clear difference. Repairs (re-forging) at the blacksmith is something that you'd do rarely for weapons (but more frequently for armor). But basic mantainance is something you'd be doing after every fight. The system does see use and it simulates reality closer than anything I?ve seen you come up with...which is nothing b.t.w. You like your strawmen, do you? Again, projecting and pulluign numbers out of your ass. Please, tell me where did you ghet that numbers? Who told you the speed of weapon degradation or repair frequency? No one, that's who. You are are projecting your worst-case scenario and letting your shriveled imagination run wild with it. Yes. Because that's the same risk I would have in real life. A small risk - a risk made even smaller with proper mantainance. But since I'm going to have a spare weapon with me anyway, I don't see a problem. If the weapon breaks, I can still continue. Again, where do you get "your weapon will break in each of them"? You again and again keep pulling redicolous numbers out of your ass, like they somehow prove your point. From this point on, I'm going to ignore all the BS numbers you are spewing forth. It would be a sound advice if it didnt' come from a blind man. What is the likelyhood of both weapons breaking? A question like that is something that never occured to you? But of course...since you hate the system, the only scenarios going trough your head are the worst ones, thus you end up further convincing yourself how right you are. False. The options you present are fake, like all of your examples and numbers. You assume wrong. In most cases, you should be abel to continue with the secondary. Why wouldn't you be abel to hit that Lich with a +3 weapon? And don't give me that infinite magical immunity crap. As a limited-duration spell it might work, but otherwise no. Trolls? You got other options, like acid. Poison. Or just enough physical trauma. But let's assume you do end up having to go back. So what? It's part of hte experience - especially in Trial of Iron mode. It's not that differenent from an encoutner that's too high-level for you and you have to regroup and try gain later. How is that different from reaching the troll fight without a fire weapon? Either way, it's not a scenario that is likely to happen, or happen often. And yet you were only quoting me. Split posts or quote properly. Don't blame me for your incompetence. *** Actually you couldn't. Because at no point do you even consider alternate viewpoints. I am adressing the problem with the initial system many anti-durabiltiy people proposed. You on the other hand..are adressing nothing. Suggesting nothnig.

I'm curious as to what you think of hte system I proposed, as it doese exactly what you say. But prolonged use does weaken the blade (micro-fractures) and having it re-forged is basicly how you fix it. Of course, you're not gonna be doing that every time you visit the town.

Allow me to translate your text: "You contribute nothing! All you have to do is invest SOME to get 500% in return after first month. And yet you refuse to invite five of your friends to invest in our promising business. But no, you just complain and complain. Questioning the safety of your money instead of thinking about the future, expensive car and your own villa." ... What? Whut? This... makes so little sense.. I don't even... WHAT?

Your "victory" is a blow to the depth and creativy. Your "victory" is a celebration of ignorance and fear. Like I said - all you did was complain. You never attempted to ponder on how to make that system work or how to improve it.

Durabiltiy CAN add to the gameplay. That is a self-evident and non-negotiable. The specifics of it are another matter. but are peopel liek oyu even interested in specific? Doesn't look like it. Oh and what would you call "durabiltiy sucked in X! Therefore it will suck in Y and can ONLY suck in Y." Except practicly no one on the Bio forums was actually rooting the DA2 twitch-combat, awesome-bottun system. The ones who did were a vocal minority - like the anti-durability crowd here.

No, I'm acting like someone who tries to convince others to use their brains and think and try to improve upon things instead of dismissing them outright. "At best not-so-annoying"? Well, according to you. Others clearly disagree, but I guess you and ONLY you get to decide what is annoying for all of us. Next thing I know, you'll probably consider leveling annoying. Or maybe stat alocation..Since it's a chore to click and allocate all those points. Your "victory" - if you can call it that - is a hollow one.

And you believe it has potential to be great based on... what, exactly? I've seen lots and lots of examples and explanations of how the system could go horribly wrong, but no examples or explanations of what the system could add to the game: All that the defenders seem to have to say is "You just hate innovation." I believe I have proposed changes to the system that improve it. See, your problem here is that you were fixated on exactly what Sawyer proposed, as if it were the final draft. People were quick to point out the flaws without suggesting anything other than "ditch durability". Which is redicolous. It's like giving up without a fight.

One is a logical, constant expenditure, and one is a event like a mini-quest and are thus compeltely different, thus any comparison is meaningless?

Aha.. Because you clearly were ery helpfull to the developers and immediately suggested ways to make the system work. No, you went "This system sucks. Durability sucks! No durability!" It sucks, becuase all you do is complain and demand removeal. NOT ONCE did you suggest a way to improve it. Repair isn't a choice? It's click here? Tell me, what abotu resting at the inn? What about purchasing a potion? Isn't THAT in essence also "click and deposit gold here"? Yes, it IS A choice. You choose to repair an item or not. Will you spend your mony on something else and use your secondary weapon till you get more money? Will you continue with your damaged weapon and risk it breaking? Maybe your hoping you'll find a better one along the way? Repair is more than a gold sink it's a also a ecomomic/strategic consideration. Yes and spending money on mantainance and repairs or something else IS A choice, and it's not arbitrary. Weapons DO need mantainance.

Timers glued to equipment? Again, you have such a limited view. Tunnel vision. It's sad. Also, not everyone has "failed" creating a good durabiltiy system. and I'm glad you acknowledge your arguments are retarded. Saves me the trouble of pointing the obvious. Name me one mechanic that someone COULDN'T label as "annoying". I dare you. Name me one mechanic that you can guarantee here everyone will like and no one will find anyoying. Name one mechanic or improvement of mechanic one cannot dismiss out of hand using ignorance as a shield? Because if "X annoys me tehrefore it shouldn't be in a game" is an argument you actually want to make, then realise that I can use that same argument to attack EVERY. SINGLE. MECHANIC. EVER. O you know....you could actually use your brain for a bit and try to figure out the *WHY* behind it

The change of frequency and the way degradation is applied to something more closer to real life and less ..."tedious" is hardly a bad move It is. Because it makes sense. What makes sense is a good argument. Quod Errat Demonstratum People in the middle ages always had a backup. Archers had short swords Knights had a secondary weapon and a dagger in adition to their man weapon. Most weapons were made to take abuse and weren't easy to break. But it could happen. And you could loose your weapon in a fight, it can be knocked out of your hand, etc.. (and this is possibly also a in-game move/talent) Having a backup makes sense. Going into prolonged comabt wihout it doesn't. If your weapon breaks while in the dungeon no one is FORCING you to go back to town to re-forge it. You have a backup, the dungon is pefectly doable with it. You are given a choice. A credible, sensible, logical choice. One you do not want to even exist. Wut the hell you on son? Weariness? When have I ever meantioned that? Or infinite gold economy?

*Walsingham rolls a critical miss* "Command, critical faliure caused a bad pun backlash! Our ammunitions stores exploded! We got dead and wounded everywhere! Send medics!"

Not everyone. Frrankly I think CRPG's are getting TOO loot-centric as of late and it leads to the entire experience getting watered down.

... Seems to me liek you are letting your fear get the beter of you. So that game had a bad implementation of a durability mechanic. Does that mean PE will have the same mechanic? Nope. But people keep projecting their fears to a redicolous levels. A little while ago I proposed a durabiltiy system that makes that specific example impossible. Which proves that for any problem regarding mechanics you can find a solution if you just use your little grey cells and have a bit of creativity.

Normally I'd agree with you...but you hit the nail on the head in the underlined part. POTENTIALLY ANNOYING. Also POTENTIALLY GREAT. But quite a few people saw only the first and are blind to the second potential. Personly I'd prefer if they stuck with it. Keep it and test it in beta/alpha. Then if it doesn't work it can be tweaked or removed. As it is, a system is being removed without us even seeing if it's potential can be reached. By definition, a deep game will give players a lot of options and things to do. And not everyone will like everything offered equally. Saiyng "X is a chore" is somewhat irrelevant, given that in a big, deep game tehre is ALWAYS going to be something that someone considers a chore. The question is if the game is good enough that he won't mind it. Some of the best games out there have things that can be easiy yclassified as chores. Different things to different peoples. Some consider inventory tetris a chore. Others consider it a part of the experience. Soem don't wnat resting. Some don't want to travel on foot but want instant-travel. Or quest markers. But the point is that those "chores" are there. And without them, those games wouldn't be as great.

The Ilithid want to say hi. Also, bolded the relevant. Funyn how your lack of imagination/vision should become everyone elses problem.

The only thing you are proving is your ismall-mindedness. You are dicounting a system IN PRINCIPLE based on a single implementation. Because CLEARLY all games are the same and ALL games have EXACTLY THE SAME implementation of ALL mechanics. Oh wait. Resting. So much fun. I have to click something! Let's drop it. Auto-heal after each battle. Drinking poitions? Also clicking! Let's drop that too. Oh, let's not even begin with combat. I have to CLICK on an enemy!! THE SHEER BOREDOM! THE TEDIUM! IT IS KILLING ME! Drakensang is easily one of the best CRPG's out there mechnics-wise. Tehrefore, no such game can possibly exist? And therefore, there's no way you can suffer trough an extra click or two occasionaly, even tough it would improve the game for so many other people? Clearly, that is too much to sacrifice, because frak everyone else.

So those of us who liked Sawers idea now "have no faith" in him? And those that railed agaisnt it now have faith? If it wasnt' so sad, it would be funny. "Significant number of players" is an illusion. What happens here is what happens in politics areound the world. There has been a shift from the mases/majority pushing a change, to a overly-vocal minority pushingit. The biggest fanatics and the most obsessed people are the oens shaing the world these days - because they shout the hardest and again and again, thus creating the impression of mass.

Personally I was more interested in item durabiltiy than crafting. Sad to see it go. Many anti-durability arguments are downright RETARDED. "Oh, I didn't like the durabiltiy system in game X so it can't possibly work here!" "Oh, I didn't want to be bothered with it!" "What? Having to cary a sidearm in case my main weapon is damaged? So tedious! So stupid! Who would EVER carry a sidearm?" "But magican weapons should NEVER break...because magic" Really? I could go to a mental ward and write down statements that make more sense. You people are a cancer that's killing good games and are removing all depth from them. Yes I said it. Feel free to hate me, cause I sure as hell hate you. That said, I think the system could have been designed better. Instead of a wepon/armor damaged on every hit, a %chance based on the power of the hit and the materials involved. Resting restores part of the durability in a simialr way to resting or healing. Durabiltiy damage is basicly split into repairable and non-repairalbe. The higher the crafting skill, the more damage is repairable. But you can never repair all of it no matter how much you rest-spam. You need to visit a proper blacksmith. However, you can repair most of it. Sicne there is a random element to durabiltiy damage and the chance to damage a wepon is low in the first place, you can go for a long time wihout any significant weapon damage. Or if you go on bashing foes in mithril plate with all of your might with a normal steel sword, you might see that weapon degrade really fast. Basicly something like a 5% chance for 1 point of durability damage - if the material of your weapon and whatevery you're striking are the same. Difference in materials changes the chance, so you have literally 0% chance to damage a high-quality weapon agaisnt leather armor. Also, weapons CAN break. Even magical ones. But they aren't destroyed. They can be re-forged (and it's not redicolously expensive either)

"You must try everything" is a flawed philosophy. I would not try drugs because i know they will screw me. Or go to ghetto to know that being robbed and beaten is actually makes me feel bad. So yes, I think that I know. My experience is based on interaction with various durability systems in various games. SO rather than go full Dragon Age 2 and trying things a lot of people hate, Obsidian decided to stick with traditional Infinity approach. I never said "you must try everything" See how you are jumping to conclusions and pre-judging? Ya know, there is a difference between something being proven objectively bad, and something being a subjective, psyhological issue. I told you before - you forged your own cage, and only you can break it. But you have to want to do it. And you don't.

You lost me at anime It's an example. You have to use SOMETHING for an example, and anime preconceptions is a good one. How can you call yourself open-minded and objective if you stop reading simply because you don't like the example used? Honestly, all you are doing is proving everything I wrote RIGHT.