Jump to content
The Community Blog (An Invitation)

qstoffe

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    60

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by qstoffe

  1. qstoffe
    I think you missunderstood. That's what they will try to avoid. I want them to be more forthcoming in this matter i.e. "ok we're going to use this despite this and that con because we still think it's better than this and that alternative". Some self-criticism with the proposed system is what I'm looking for instead of just criticizing other systems. Turning a blind eye to that is not really helping the discussion imo. It's like they've already made up their minds. I think you're being a bit too optimistic. I'm under the impression cooldowns will be used a little harder than that.
  2. qstoffe
    I would be fine with that. That is, a fixed level from which you can spam ever-replenishing spells. Preferably those spells should be comparable in power to using a sling.
  3. qstoffe
    I like the sound of that last part.
  4. qstoffe
    If they'll use cooldowns in ANY form they are certain to bring some cons with them. I don't think they have acknowledged any of those cons with the system they are aiming for. Or have they?
  5. qstoffe
    But only for lower level spells. Well if we go for the DnD example then being able to "spam" level 3 spells like fireball and haste would be way too powerful imo. Even being able to spam level 1 magic missiles at character level 20 would be a tad too much imo. Because of this I'm afraid they will nerf spells just because they don't fit in with a cooldown system. The dynamic of the wizard class be flattened to a ranged fighter.
  6. qstoffe
    Yes fixing rest spamming problem would be great but not at the cost of introducing COOLDOWNS! IMO they seem to have been pretty locked on using cooldowns from the beginning. I have yet to hear them say ANYTHING bad about them. Most mechanics have cons but if you're partial you won't mention them. If we are talking 30s cooldowns then it's definitely cooldowns in the usual sense (i.e. Dragon Age).
  7. qstoffe
    OMG! That is really, really bad. It's like they don't care for the combat in the old IE games at all? I just can't believe they are going with a cooldown system. Being able to run out of spells was one of the things that really made the combat in IE games special. It was also what allowed spellcasters to be much more powerful than other classes WHEN they had their entire spell repertoire available but it was also what made them vulnerable when they ran out of spells! Cooldowns will flatten this dynamic making wizards no more "spellcasters" than other classes using their abilities.
  8. qstoffe
    I want health potions to be rare enough to make you "feel" the pain when one of your characters get hit. I want scrolls to be very rare which would allow for the few you do find to be very powerful. I short, I don't want these items to be something that is so casual and ordinary that you'd use them in "common" fights.
  9. qstoffe
    Actually no. I don't think classes has to be equally balanced in every aspect so that they basically become the "same" class but in different cosmetics. As you said this is a single player game were it imo is more important to create a dynamic and variance between choices than to balance every choice to be 100% equal. The more differences of pros and cons between two choices, the more difficult and fun they are to make. If everything is too similiar in most aspects it becomes dull to make choices between them.
  10. qstoffe
    Yes. If they really have something completely different in mind it would be pretty unwise to refer to it as cooldowns because of the natural association that follows (i.e. spell mechanics like Dragon Age).
  11. qstoffe
    EXACTLY! The thing that troubles me the most is that I've heard Obsidian talk about how bad the old vancian and resting system is... BUT not a word of criticism towards cooldowns (I may have missed some announcement and if I have, please tell). It would be nice if they at least acknowledged the flaws of that system in the same way.
  12. qstoffe
    Not at all. Many alternatives have been suggested here like various fatigue systems. I have a problem with cooldowns in specific because they have never worked in the past imo and so far I haven't heard of anything special that would make them better in this game.
  13. qstoffe
    ROFL Agreed but that would certainly be kind of dull since you need that extremly powerful spell once in a while too just to create the dynamic.
  14. qstoffe
    Agreed. Cooldowns lead to a waiting system were you come fully refreshed to every combat. That way the combats quickly become linear and boring. This doesn't necessarily solve the problem with combat linearity. Switching between 3-4 top tier spells isn't what I would call enjoyable tactics. Being economical by casting lower tiered spells and saving the higher ones for later combats creates a much richer dynamic for variance in combat.
  15. qstoffe
    Spot on. Especially the part about punishing players "twice". I think that effect is needed to create the feeling that your combat choices matter in the long run. Otherwise the choices you make in combat feels just as shallow as when you're picking "cosmetic" dialog choices that all leads to the same result. Such "choices" quickly become boring imo.
  16. qstoffe
    I would like a discussion of both pros and cons with using cooldown timers as a game mechanic to limit spell usage. I've seen a lot of comments about how bad cooldowns are but very little about what is good about them other than counter complaints on other systems. I can start by describing what I think is both a pro and a con: Combats become isolated In the longer perspective (over multiple battles) you don't need to worry about being economical with spellcasting. Spells will be refreshed before the next combat anyway. This is a pro for some since it's a very "forgiving" system that will spare some people from frustration. I myself see it as a con because I become less enthusiastic to do really well in combats because I see no point in doing better than to just barely survive. A clear pro of cooldowns, however, is that combats become easier to balance for the developers because the designers can always assume you're at full strength at the beginning of every battle since cooldowns usually don't stretch across battles.
  17. qstoffe
    I think combat resources can be looked at in two ways: Were you focus on "just" making it through each isolated combat. Spend as much resources as you want. Even let your party members die if it makes the combat easier. You know they will be replenished/reset/revived and all is "forgiven" to the next combat. Were you focus on getting through every fight as "flawlessly" as you can by spending as little resources as possible. You know that having spent little on this fight will improve your chance of doing well in the fights to come. Having party members die might make you wanting to reload even if you get through the fight since it's so costly to revive. Games that use cooldown mechanics tends to heavliy favor the first alternative. Personally I'm in strong favor of the second alternative since the first makes me a lot less engaged about doing well in combat.
  18. qstoffe
    A refined fatigue system discussed in other threads could be an alternative. In my opinion, basically ANY mechanic is worth trying over the type of cooldowns used in modern RPGs like Dragon Age.
  19. qstoffe
    Agreed but I'm simply worried because so far I haven't seen ANY game with cooldown mechanics that wasn't a lot worse than the old resting system was. I'm all for alternatives like fatigue though.
  20. qstoffe
    I don't know about you but I would definitely see it as punishment enough to make me reserve my spells better the next time.
  21. qstoffe
    Agreed but at least it's a little punishment. That's a lot better imo than using cooldown systems like Dragon Age where there wasn't any punishment at all!
  22. qstoffe
    Simple, it's an experience that rewards you if you have used your spells conservatively and punishes those that don't. It teaches you a valuble lesson that you need to be economical when spending yout LIMITED combat resources. IMO spending your combat resources so carelessly should have a bigger punishment then just an annoying walk.
  23. qstoffe
    I think you misunderstood me. The point I made was that cooldown systems usually have LESS powerful spells just because you can cast them so often. I want spells to be MORE powerful and limited.
  24. qstoffe
    Of course you can abuse cooldowns for a tactical advantage as well though it gets much more repetitive and boring imo. I think the biggest flaw with cooldowns is that it's too rewarding to simply cast the most powerful spell as soon as it's ready. The sooner you use it, the sooner you'll get it back. I don't like that mechanic. There should be a better reward for cleverly saving/reserving powerful spells for later usage. In ALL the cooldown implementations I've seen there really isn't. You're also much less careful with exactly what spells you cast. I think one of the best advantages of a fixed spell quantity is that you, or at least I, have a lot of fun just by browsing/choosing what spell to cast. I gladly pause in the heat of combat just to spend 10 minutes on reading and weighing spells against each other. Cooldowns cheapens this choice a lot. Also cooldowns tend to make magical spells A LOT weaker simply beacuse they are available too often to cast (at least once per combat). I would much rather like spells that are extremly powerful but also so SCARCE in between that I wouldn't even consider using them for most battles.
  25. qstoffe
    Because I wanted an "old school" RPG as compared to the current RPGs with too much streamlined mechanics.
×
×
  • Create New...