Jump to content
The Community Blog (An Invitation)

TrashMan

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    1516

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

 Content Type 

Everything posted by TrashMan

  1. TrashMan
    So Reductio Ad Absurdum then? Because that's what it is - "distilling" the basic reasoning and pushing it to the extreeme. And not really. Aside from Legolas antics, they are pretty much normal. Your example misssed it's mark then. You certnaly didn't frame it like it was a hopeless fight. Obviously the number of enemies and their power are a factor of balance, but it's exactly the notion that LVL1 is pathetic that I'm fighting against. What's the point of playing the game at all? Levelign is an improvement, but why does the improement have to be exponential? Isn't the adventure, the atmospehre, the immersion THE most important thing about a RPG? Not being a demigod and the most powerfull SOB ever? So the question is - why MUST one be SEVERELY more capable? Also, what constitutes as "severly more capable"? I think the problem here is obvious, given that some people expressed desire to de-throne gods. Obviously people want/expect vastly different power levels. Some people want Batman (movie) Some people want Sueprman (JL cartoons) Some poeple want comic Superman (that holds black holes in hands) These desires are not mutually compatible. Staged videos. I will belive one man taking on 50 when I see it live, in real life-or-death combat. Also, figting with bare hands and with weapons are two completely different things. A hit with a fist won't kill you. A sword stab likely will. That wihout going itno the specific of weapon raeach, ranged weapons and stuff like that. ALL the other soldiers? No, not even close. With whom are you arguing again? Also, HP is not luck. If they get trough a fight then they could take it on, now could they? Of course, for the sake of gamepaly you can't have total realism, so characters should be more durable than normal. You have to give a player time to react to things, so dying from 1 hit is not advisable in games with multiple characters. However, the idea that HP HAS to be buffed with levels is just plain STOOPID. There is no inherent need for it. Nicks and bruises in general (except Boromir). Inherent to videogames? Only some. And quite a few mechanics are simply leftovers. Someone did it first, it worked and everyone else jumped on the bandwagon. Doesn't mean it's the only way to do things or that things have to be done that way. I have seen it in some indie games. I have done it myself by modding and changing the mechanics and leveling schemes of games (like BG2).
  2. TrashMan
    Because that is how it ended up in all games with unlimited inventory? Yeah right... Unlimited inventory is a blight on CRPG's. This system kills everything good and pure and murders actual challenge and atmosphere. Fun? There's nothing fun in picking up every bauble. It's anti-fun. ***** And before some genius gets the bright idea of saying "well, then just don't pick up everything", he should remember that if the game gives you a mechanic, it expects you to use it. In other words, if you do have unlimited stash, then the game will be balanced with it in mind. In other words, NOT picking up everything would be a sub-optimal path where you end up worse off and have a harder time. It's ironic, becuase such big focus on loot hunting and stealing everything is the anti-thesis of a good RPG experience and a proper atmospehre/story setup. Do you recall Aragorn and the gang switching items every 5 minutes and stealing everything that wasn't bolted down?
  3. TrashMan
    That's not entirely accurate. Back in my SCA days, my plate armoured sparring partners and I put this to the test, and I can assure you an impact weapon is *very* effective against plate armour. Chain armour or anything non-rigid will inevitably be worse against a hammer or mace etc, but plate is in no way a safeguard against crushing weapons. How is that not accurate? Of all armors, plate fairs best against blunt weapons like hammers. True or not?
  4. TrashMan
  5. TrashMan
    I could swear I read on another forum the exact same thing, almsot word for word....
  6. TrashMan
    You answered your own question. Civilians of today use handguns for self-defnse, because it's not necessary to get anything better. And it's not easy to get to boot. An assult rifle or a carabine/SMG is no doubt superior - in both RoF, precision and lethality... yet a common citizen doesn't need it. And yet you still have some citizen that do have it. Your aventuring party doesn't have much in common with civilians. They have more in comon with mercenary bands - and mercenary bands did use military weapons. Blackwater and similar companies don't use handguns as their primary weapons. The idea that a wepon like a pike or a zweihander is useless outside of a formation is redicolous. There are teachniques and stlyes developed for 1-on-1 combat. Additions that have little practical value in large formation warfare. Then why were you complaining about a PC with dagger being ineffective? Unless I misunderstood you somewhere along the line. Wouldn't be clever? Sez who? When I bash the head of the intruder, we'll see who's laughing. Houses aren't that small ya know. Because a warhammer is ineffective against peopel not in plate? Dude, the opposite - against someone in leather or chainmail, a warhamemr would break half the bones in their body. It's actually the worst against the plate, simply because plate is rigid and distributes the blunt force. Lether or chan offers practiacly NO protection whatsoever against a hammer blow. Pike? Pike has range. It has a piercing tip, a hook. Various version of polearms can get even nastier. It is a versatile weapon and only in confined spaces does it loose it's shine. Pike does have a point without a pike formation. A deadly weapon is a deadly weapon.
  7. TrashMan
    Don't like it. I love the weight/volume mechanics that limits a player. I WANT the game to force the player to abandon loot. I want the game to re-educate the player and do away with the "pack-rat bursting into people's home and take everythin that isn't bolted down" behavior/mentality. Anything that you don't take with you is lost when you leave the area. Returning to the dungeon won't help you. Of course, having a camp/house/base where you can deposit things you find interesting or things that might be usefull (and thus freeing inventory space) is a given. I used to decorate my house in Skyrim/Morrowind with weapons and armor and stuff.
  8. TrashMan
    You weren't simply asking. Don't do that "innocent victim" routine with me. They way you wordered it you deliberately ask a loaded question that makes a mockery of my position. So it's either mockery or a strawmen worded as a question. Take your pick. And hunderds of foes WAS your example..not mine. Rats are lvl 0. I don't ever want to fight such pathetic oponnents. You seriously want to fight rats? Why not fight flies while your'e at it? It is your flawed assumption that level scaling has to be explonential and that LVL1 has to be pathetic. That is not the case, nor is it a law or requirement for a RPG. You want to start as a dirt farmenr and become a god? Well I want to start as a capable soldier and reach elite status. Those two are mutually exclusive. Redicolous argument is redicolous. Do I even need to adress this? Large-scale battles are a compeltely different affair. Not only did Aragorn and gang have thousands of other soldiers with them protecting their flank and occipying the enemy. So at no point did hunderds of enemies focus on them, or was in position to attack at once. And archery in big battles in long-range saturation affair. Not precision sniping (unless you are an elf). Ultimatively, it's a matter of luck more than much as skill.
  9. TrashMan
    More like 4-5 arrows. And yes, it is possible to get up after that...you'll still die. And dont' tell me how deep they were in or exactly what kind of internal damage they caused. You do not know, so don't pretend you do. Like I said - people in real life SURVIVED seemingly impossible injuries. So no, I don't think it's far-fetched for a guy with 4 arrows in his chest to manage 2-3 swings before he dies. It is YOU who makes the assertion that a differnt mechanic cannot work, so it's up to you to prove it. And you have no authority. X being sucesfull is NOT a proof in any way, shape or form that Y cannot be sucesfull - especially not since something similar to Y also sells well. PE is in a way a niche game. If you are so worried about sucess, then why aren't you advocating going for the Lowest Common Denominator? After all, that would guarantee even MORE sales. Except of course, it wont' be the game you want anymore.... Plenty of heroes are rather ordinary - at least in terms of capability. I think mine and your definition of extraordinary is completely different. Player skill IS a decisive part of a RPG.. player reflexes aren't. But tactics/strategic planing is done by the player - not the character - and it is a skill. And your concept of fun trumps everyone elses? Because God forbid, people actually have fun with something you might not? You are so dead-set again any change, even without knowing the specific of hte change. You can't say to me that a different system won't be fun. That is something you just don't know. And I don't give a rats ass about your Krav Maga. A system being intuitive and a having few values are NOT one and the same. Simpler? Maybe. After all, do weapons need anything mroe than a DPS value? Not really...it's the simplest and most intuitive, right? But isn't mass/weight intuitive? Isn't reach intuitive? Not exactly rocket science here.
  10. TrashMan
    I disagree. Plenty of weapons used in large-scale formations are also usefull and effective when used in small groups. While some weapons are more specialzed and usefull in certain situation, it's rarely such a narrow focus that makes it unusable in other situations. There are techniques and weapon variants for a reason. Full plate was aways expensive and time-consuming. Armorsmiths that make replicas pretty much agree on this. You are a full of BS. Breastplates did become more common in mercenary bands and elite troops - who both had money. But mind you, they don't cover the whole body. And at no time perdiod was plate armor so common thet you expected to see it everywhere. What is even more important is that you aren't going to be facing organized human armies - most of your opponents will be monsters and various creates that either don't have armor, or have cruder ones. Everything that can be used as a weapon and is effective enough will be used. I COULD use a longsword or a warhammer in a house. And I COULD bash your head in if you came at me with a dagger. After all, there is a reason why not everyone owns the best and most expensive, efficient weapon and armor - the same reason why not everyone struts around in the field plate - because you simply can't get it that easily. Again, we can talk about levels of realism, but it's pointless. Really? I actually feel they do the opposite - make plate severly worse to make other armors equally valid choice.
  11. TrashMan
    So, you wish LOTR had said "And then, Sarumon sent 200 level 1 bandits at Aragorn and his group, and they all died because they were so normal and not OP. The end!"? Also, if LOTR is such a good example, then how come they can fight 8 billion orcs at once and come out of it just a bit bloody and fatigued? Isn't that a bit inconsistent? More strawmen? Levels are an abstraction and being LVL1 doesn't mean you're a totally useless wimp. So are you saying you want your party of 5-6 to totally wipe the floor with 200 opponents? That's almost 40:1 odds. You should also notice that when they fight multiple orcs in LOTR, they fing in tight places, and move so they can't be flanked. Both in Moria and later on. Aragorn was runing around and fighting them on stairs, where they could only come 1 by 1. And mind you, they lost Boromir in that fight. And people normally die when they are impaled trough the head with a metal rod... yet some live trough that and walk to the hospital in that condition. Humans are both incredibily ressilient and incredibly fragile. A milimiter can make a difference. So without knowing how deep the arrows went and what they hit exactly, you can't say impossible. Improbable? Sure. But stranger things have happened.
  12. TrashMan
    Warfare implies entire armies. A musket was used in formation. Does it mean it wasn't a viable weapon for use by a single man? Of course not. While there's no question that some weapons are more formidable when used in formations, they are still far from useless outside it. There is no need for extreemes. No one is advocating total and complete realism. But is it too much to ask more than what old IE games had? Versimilitude is a good goal if realism can't be reached. They aren't. How many opponents do you think will strut around in full plate? That is a rare piece of armor. And you have a party of 6 plus backup weapons. The bow has been used since the beginign of time. Both in large scale battles and by individuals. It was the staple weapon of both the american indians and the mongol hordes. Hunters used it for centuries. And while small unit battles were rare and not well documented, that doesn't mean they didn't exist. Having range is always a good thing. And bows at close range had a lot of power.
  13. TrashMan
    Arrows are not insta-kills. One would bleed to death, but one doesn't fall down dead immediately. People have survived multiple gunshot wounds and multiple stab wounds mind you. Boromirs scene is possible. And I again ask you who gives you the authority to spak on behalf of the average consumer? You keep harping on how anytihng other than your narrow view on game mechanics is not entertaining or cannot work - without absolutely ANYTHING to support it. Nice strawman there. Because I was clearly advocating tales of normal people doing absolutely boring stuff, no? Get your head out of your anus and read what I write for once. Ordinary people can accomplish - and often do - great things. Your insistance that the protagonist of every story has to be essentialy superman is redicolous. There's plenty of stories of "normal" people that do quite well indeed. You choose to focus on the differences and refuse to think outside the box. It never occured to you that different gameplay concepts and ideas can be merged? Yes, SC is without stats....but offers a consistant challenge. RPG's have stats. So? Does having stats somehow automaticly means all balancing and leveling HAS to be design in just one and one way only? Some RGP's shower you with attribute points...others give you only 3-4 during the entire game. Because game X has you become a demigod, that now means that evry RPG must do it? Again with the black/white mentality...Have you ever heard of a concept called BALANCE? So yea, a character CAN be head and shoulders above others in skill, but still die to 5 lvl1 bandits. A skilled fighter cannot be everywhere at the same time. He cannot defend from every angle. Skills/feats give you more combat options and advantages in combat (especially 1 on 1), but at the end of the day you're still just one man. Nice job comparing large formation combat - where those knights fought in an organized manner with other knights protecting their flanks - and small group/singular combat. Hitpoint as an abstraction for everything is no longer necessary. It used to represent overall combat capacity - how durable you are, trained, hard ot hit, etc.. - but with armor, doge, agility, parry and attack/defense becoming separate skills, it's really redundant for it to serve as anything other than health/life indicator. And health is something that doesn't realy change much with training. Stab me or stab Usain Bolt - not much difference in survival chances.
  14. TrashMan
    Most weapons should be technicly undegredable/indestrucible by normal means. Swords and maces/axes made from qualtiy stell would require some basic mantainance in camp, but that can be abstracted away. So it would very, very rare for a weapon to actually break in combat or get damaged in any meaningfull way to impact the battle...and if it did it would be mostly weapons with wooden parts. If there are specific enemies/spells that can specificly target weapons (like corrosin/acid spells) then tehy might do some damage to a weapon Armor on the other hand is much more difficult to repair and mantain. The better the armor, the better it protects you but it's also harder to mantain - after several battles you will have to get your field plate to a blacksmith for proper mantainance. Lether armors can be more easily mended on the stop.
  15. TrashMan
    I don't care. Legolases antics are a jarring exception. Earlier you said "poeple dont' want that". Who is this mythical people in whose name you claim to speak? Last time I checked, I'm people too and I'm pretty sure I disagree with you. Really? That's all that is to it to make a great story? I guess Superboy Prime punching realtiy is the height of literal accomplishemnt then. Oh, ye of limited vision. They are not mutually exclusive. Unless you deciding what spell/skill to use and when does not fall under "player skill". Things are so black and white for you, aren't they? No it won't. Again with the absolutes here. Also, since when is character having a weakness = mook? Is your defintion of a weak character anyone that can't tank a nuke? Hitpoints are a crap abstraction for everything and remnants of the old days that needs to go away. Even the most experienced and elite can die from a stray bullet. Numbers also have a quality of it's own. Train with swords...go ahead. I'll pit 3 pesants with pitchforks against you. There's a good chance you wont' get out alive.
  16. TrashMan
    No, but I do like to have a more rounded character that has skills that make sense for him and the world. And you are assumign your "game of desire" would be sheer brilliance? You're not an average joe technicly. Is Sam Fisher an Average Joe? Also, game mechanics are fluid and interchangable. Game design is a sea of possibilities. Different type of game? Yes. Does it mean mechanic can't be mixed, tweaked or influenced? No. Except they don't. That is only your own limited perception. Your character is skilled at the begining and he does become more powerfull - but the power is mostly shown/implemented in a different way. Not HP or damage buffs or high stat increases. But feats, options, skills and increases are small and rare. Because swords and arrows stop being a problem when you're a high level because..... why exactly? You are so badass arrows refuse to hit you? Because clearly, navy SEALS are so high level that entire armies pose no threat to them. And good job advocating encounter scaling b.t.w.
  17. TrashMan
    There is no reason why every calss and wepon combo must be effective everywhere or why EVERY playstyle must be accomodated. Rangers can use swords ya know. Personally I never used bows in CC, I always switched to another weapon. Your reasoning is basicly - "game X did this, that is not realistic, therefore realism sucks". Well, it doens't matter what game X did. Eternity has a chance to re-do it, and do it BETTER. Modeling wepon functions more accurately? Why not? Does it mean that always using your perfered weapon will not be a wise option? Yes. So what? Also, comparing the use of a bow in a military formation and use of bow in a small group (or an individual) is insane. In army battles, bows were used en masse to fire a barrage of arrows at maximum range. Numbers were necessary because you couldn't hit the braod side of a barn at that range, so high arrow density + target-rich enviroment = kills. A individual using a bow WOULD use it at shorter ranges (but still at range) where he can actually aim and expect to hit. And he would mostly use it on unaware or otherwise distracted enemies.
  18. TrashMan
    Yeah right ... and elves and dwarves are not xp bags where you kill them or take quest form them ... Dragons, elfves, dwarves are generally at the same level of over used and i don't know what "Playable" is changing .. Orlans where gonna be used only in this game propaby and they playable, is fact that they are mix betwen halfling/ nome/ goblin with new name and are playabe makes them more original ? I'm not taking about "originality" ... I'm talkign about mis-use. Yes, dwaves nad elves are a staple of fantasy RPGs, but at least they are varried. They don't serve a singular purpose and tehy can be (and have been) done in different ways. Dragons are there to be killed. Usually very easily...by pricking it to death for half an hour. In practicly ever fantasy RPG, if there are dragons, you are gonna run into one and fight it. And those great, majestic, powerfull creatures loose so much of their awe because of that. When's the last time you were actually afraid of a dragon in a game?
  19. TrashMan
    I have the idea for the most original companion ever..... a wall. You never had a companion like that? He's always giving you the silent treatment and is not afraid to get in your way.
  20. TrashMan
    So every archetype is OK except that one? If this is supposed to be a roleplaying game and you don't get to choose who your parents are, then I don't see why you should get to choose their personality. You can only react to it. Not every parent can be an abusive bastard ya know? There has to be some more normal, "boring" parents out there too. Does every character have to be some extreeme? I wonder - does life de-sensitizes us to that extent?
  21. TrashMan
    I wound disagree with you there. Elanee was not a bad character. Greately misunderstood, yes. So many people got hanged up on one of her lines, branding her a creepy stalker.... it's sad really
  22. TrashMan
    Not as much. Elves and dwarves are generally playable. Dragons are mostly enemies that are just another bag of XP in the end. The way they were (ab)used kinda killed a lot of their mistique and awe.
  23. TrashMan
    Oh boy: http://imgur.com/a/BL7dL
  24. TrashMan
    You shouldn't be able to swap any items while locked in combat - not even items in quickslots - not without opening yourself to an enemy attack. The enemy isn't going to polietly wait while you sheat your sword and whip out your mace. If you want to switch weapon safely, you have to disengage first.
  25. TrashMan
    Speed and balance of a weapon aren't a big deal? This is a frist... Looks like some people are too afraid of changes or any complexity. The usual defense is that realism does not equal fun. Well, that statement is just as accurate as "lack of realism does not equal fun".
×
×
  • Create New...