Hiro Protagonist II

Smurfs was a great party. They were Gnomes that I changed their skin colour to blue. And changed their hair/clothes to their appropriate colours. I had Hefty, Greedy, Vanity, Brainy, Smurfette and Papa Smurf. Funny seeing their pictures in the game and on their portraits, seeing these blue smurfs walking around. With BG1, a two member party is very easy. I recently did a Fighter and Imoen (Mage/Thief). And it was easy to power level her Mage levels when I dualed her and she was close to my level in no time.

With IWD1, I only ever went with 1 or 6. When it came to 6 it was due to making themed parties. eg. Smurfs. Elemental Mages, Party of Rogues (Single, Multi-Classed Thieves and Bards), etc. Too numerous to mention. I even had a Star Wars party. The Elemental Mages were fun. I named them Fire, Earth, Water, Electricity, Ether, etc and they could only use spells that had Fire, Water (Ice), etc. There were some exceptions but I tried to make it consistent with its own internal world logic. eg. Animate Dead (Skeletons) came from the Earth. It was a pretty fun and challenging party. Back to the 4 member party. When I first finished IWD2 and at the end boss, I didn't need 6 party members. In fact, one of my spell casters died right at the very start of the fight. And another died soon after. I eventually finished the fight with 4 characters and I noticed it was easier to only have to deal with 4 party members.

The fact is you're not observing. Because you haven't played the game. Second, you're creating a hypothetical (6 member party) and then discounting all the negatives associated with extra party members as opposed to the positives. All you're doing is looking at the positives. I have 2 extra people, therefore it should be easier. No, not always. In fact, the opposite is true in a lot of cases because we know the positives and negatives with having played the game. And Stun's healing example is a perfect example of this. You can have 4 party members back to full health quicker as opposed to 6, and those other 2 can be more of a liability than being an asset. And Stun isn't applying a constant to those other two. They are variables. Because they didn't save against the mass confusion while the others did. Why did the other party members save and those two didn't? Was it because the other 4 had better saves? All six are variable and are all different. They are not the same. While the enemy is the same regardless of party size. And without having played the game, it's going to be hard to find out or know what those negatives are. And when we point out the negatives, you dismiss and counter with your own arguments. You're not pointing out anything. You're arguing against our position. We point out what happens in a game. You counter by saying stuff like: "The returns may be diminishing, but they are still in the positive, nonetheless" Your belief seems to be as long as it's positive, then it's better. No it's not because you're discounting all the variables, all the different spells that can affect your party. Your party members being all different. You're discounting that party members can be liabilities.

Stun just gave one example with a logical reason why it is. And it makes perfect sense. And the fallacy is trying to assign constants to variables. You don't have the same 6 characters as you do in a 4 member party. Just because you have 2 more characters doesn't mean it will be easier. Because even if we explain it to you, your first reaction is to dismiss it and then counter why it shouldn't be so without having any experience with the game. Despite the fact that what is being said is true. And there wasn't level scaling according to the number of party members.

Meh. I thought this would prove that, no, boob plates don't redirect a weapon directly to your chest, but it actually does not, it just says that given how thick the armor is, it would be irrelevant. It would still be a massively stupid design decision if you ask me. Same with the fact that falling face down might hurt someone wearing boob plate. It does not refute, in fact, it says that it's actually true. And I'm sorry, that is unacceptable, because falling face down isn't something that would happen only in the heat of battle. Also, the comments refute the refutation. Yep, It's not a reasonable counterpoint at all. In fact the writer doesn't even refute the points raised by the original article that he's trying to refute. His points like, "Secondly you say that landing face down could injure you, while this may be true the reality is ... you'll have bigger problems". Seriously? That's his way to refute points? Oh yes you may be correct but you're going to have bigger problems? Looks like rjshae only read the title and not the actual article. Otherwise nobody could come to the conclusion that it's a reasonable counterargument.

Quite a few people in this thread have experience and knowledge and know what we're talking about. Perhaps go and play Baldur's Gate and test out what people are saying. I think you'll be surprised that what we're saying will turn out to be true. eg. 4 party members as opposed to 6 party members.

Lephys, I was also talking about 4 characters in a party instead of 6 which has been brought up and makes the encounters easier. Having 6 characters in your party is harder than 4. And you still want to deny this fact, even though other people are confirming this. Not one person (except for you) has said this isn't true. Maybe because you have no experience with playing Baldurs Gate. And you are in denial of this. Experience trumps theory in this case. Also your theory is wrong because you don't have 6 of the exact type of characters in your party. So straight away you can't apply 6 characters as the same. You have too many variables with your characters to assign them the same constant. Whereas the enemy may be the same (eg. 6 Kobolds), your characters won't be. And 4 characters against 6 of the same kobolds may have different abilities and skills. So those 4 will most likely be different to the 6 member party. Different variables against the same encounter. Hinder your own thinking by disregarding facts all day long, of you'd like.

No, each armour type has distinct advantages and disadvantages in this game; plate mail isn't necessarily best for every character. At least that's what I got from Sawyer's past explanations on the PoE armor system. So if you have a male Fighter and a female Paladin in your party, both will not be wearing plate? Even if it may turn out that it's better that both characters should be wearing plate than scale? You'll be using scale for your female character to distinguish between your male? Seems like a ridiculous thing to do. Alternatively, you may have a male character that benefits from scale and a female that benefits from plate. There's many possibilities where you may not be using boob scale for a female character but using plate instead. But you need it for that time when you have a) female character and b) scale is better than plate. The devs never said that plate armor will use identical 3D models for both genders; in fact from reading between the lines I'm pretty sure they won't, so they'll still be distinguishable. Reading between the lines, it looks like the plate armour will be the same for both male and female. so they won't be distinguishable. Perhaps a dev can confirm this. What probably will be distinguishable is the female may be smaller than the male and other visual cues. The plate armour may well be the same and if it is, then the argument for having boob scale doesn't hold up if you do change to plate for your female characters.

And that's all I'm asking for, to have that visual distinguishability of character class, race, and gender in PoE as well. Even if all your characters have the same plate armour? Seriously, you can't tell which is your female and male fighter without boob plate? How do you know? Human brains are good at picking up subtle visual cues for the purposes of recognizing larger concepts, even when you don't actively focus on (or even consciously notice) them. In any case, I can't speak for others from my "side" of the debate, but I for one am not arguing for "boob shaped armor" per se; if Obsidian chooses other visual cues (like shoulder/waist/hip/leg forms and sizes) to differentiate between male and female character models, and that turns out to be just as effective in the isometric perspective, then great! Because I couldn't remember ever seeing boob plate on my 0.78 of an inch character on my 22" screen. Even characters smaller on a 15" monitor when BG1 was released. Which is why I said I had to boot up BG1 to find out if there was or not. I do remember using other ways to pick out which character was which and it wasn't by looking at who had boobs and who didn't. Also, when you have characters not facing you like in the below screenshots, I'm not all of a sudden. Gee, which is my female fighter? I better turn the character around so I can see her boob plate. It's the same in battles. And a lot of the time, your characters are facing away from you.

Also, to add and I think Gromnir pointed this out in the other thread (I haven't read this thread entirely). Players for boob scale armour want to distinguish between their male and female characters and so this is the reason for boob scale. But when it comes to plate armour, those same players are okay without it. Presumably, plate armour will be better than scale armour so by the end of the game, all your characters (male and female) will probably have the same armour and that's OK, they're fine with not being able to distinguish between their party members with who has boobs and who don't with their plate armour. So why argue the point that you need to distinguish between your male and female characters when later in the game they'll presumably be wearing the same boobless plate armour anyway, and those players are happy with plate armour?

Not a personal insult or an attack as long as it's in some sort of 'context' or not intended as an insult. Justification by AwesomeOcelot with that quote being okay and not an insult or personal attack against females. Yep. I've had enough. I'm out of here.

I agree with Bryy. Once you take out Amazaon's percentage, Kickstarter's percentage, Taxes, Paradox's percentage before you even look at wages and running costs, then that 4 mil is looking less and less. Once you take all those percentages out, then look at wages for 2 years, running costs, and other things then that doesn't leave a lot of money. I'd be very surprised if they've broken even. Funding does not equal sales.

I'm not sure what the point of your post is 600lbpanther.

oh ok. It's okay to make personal attacks on at anyone. male or female and regardless of age. because you know they're big enough to look after themselves. check. And some people have no idea why some people don't feel welcome. Also, I'm having a hard time figuring out where the 'male' posters fit into this insult to females, considering girls are specifically mentioned: because some flatchested girls are having a hissy fit about big boobs showing That's a specific gender insult/attack. Calling someone stupid is not gender specific. Making a gender specific insult with the quote I linked is not attacking all posters. It's targeting a specific gender. Looks at thread title again.

This seems to be the main argument from the boob armour crowd that I've seen. I had to boot up BG1 to see if I could distinguish between my female fighter and other characters due to titties, because honestly I couldn't remember if the 1 inch characters on the screen did have boob armour. To my surprise I could make out pixel boobs on my Female fighter's plate armour. For some reason I could tell which was my female fighter and which was Minsc or Khalid or any other male/female character and the boob armour wasn't it. There were other ways to work out which character was my female fighter, but it seems for others, they need the boob pixels to help them. It certainly hasn't been something I ever noticed in the IE games when my party is walking around or in battles, and it's not an argument I would be using if I was for boob armour. Btw, I do like the boob armour in Diablo 3. If the armour fits in its own game world, then I'm okay with it. If the dev's are going for a more realistic approach with some armour with revisions (Cadegund's armour) and then months later fly in the face of their own design decisions with other types, I find it a bit odd and inconsistent.

Gold!

Wouldn't that be a long form of reloading? Battle too difficult. run away. rest, heal up and get powers back. enemies heal up and get all their powers back. Go into battle again. run away if battle too difficult. rinse and repeat.

You seem to be missing the point of my posts. Did you not read this part of what I posted before: If you're going to ridicule and take the discussion off topic and attack them, then I can understand why they might not feel welcome. So here's an easy question. If male gamers make personal attacks against female gamers, will they feel welcome?

Okay, you fail to see a problem with those posts even if it misses the point or just stupid. No problem.

You're not grasping this either. As stated by others as well as myself that having less party members doesn't make it harder in combat. Everyone in this thread has said having 6 party members is harder than having 4 party members. And it's not just the IE games. And you're still in denial with this fact. And when you're soloing, the dynamics of the game changes as well and it may be easier than harder to overcome encounters.

I actually like boob armour. I like the D&D fantasy, skimpy chain mail Clyde Caldwell, Fred Fields, Jeff Easley, et al artwork. I'm a guy. I can't help it. As Orogun pointed out in this thread, sometimes people just take the opposing view to disagree for the hell of it which is what I did in the boob armour discussion. What I didn't realise was so many people were in favour of boob scale armour or didn't care either way, even though some of those people were against it with Cadegund's armour or posted in the 'Weapon and Armour Design - A Plea' thread being against boob armour. Gromnir and Amentep made some great points in that thread. And then some people think I'm some white knight? LMAO.

I only saw her being a touch confrontational and impolite at the end. But lets forget about the others who were also being a touch confrontational and impolite from the start.

I was posting an opinion on why females may not feel welcome, uninvited or uninterested. There's plenty of forums where I look and think, not worth it. And don't post on those forums. It has nothing to do with disagreeing with posters. If you're going to ridicule and take the discussion off topic and attack them, then I can understand why they might not feel welcome. You'll also note that it wasn't just a disagreement which I linked. It was also: Where did this come from? Oh that's right. It's okay to give your opinion regardless of personal attacks. Because it's an opinion and this is a discussion forum and we can all agree to disagree.

Can you determine why they aren't active though? Is the forum (or its posters) uninviting or are women uninterested in posting? The recent boob armour discussion is a good example. Mihura posted she didn't like boob armour. (I'm assuming she's a girl). Also, I noticed that it was the guys who wanted boob scale armour or didn't have a problem with it. Yet, when a female posts her dislike for it, there's immediate disagreement from the guys. Even so far as someone pointing out Mihura's forum avatar. So it went from disagreement of boob armour to pointing out forums avatars? Then science and animals was introduced and Mihura pointed out 'Let's not go there'. Eventually, it appears Mihura has decided not to waste any more time and leave. I can see why some females may not be interested in posting on these forums. It's just not worth it. I'm not defending or white knighting. It's just an observation I noticed in that thread.

You would think this is true, and it sounds obvious. But for some reason, it simply doesn't turn out that way (at least with the IE games). But even a game like BG1, where you can compare a party of 6 level capped characters to a party of 3 or 4 level capped characters, it's STILL easier with a smaller party. And I have no idea why. Maybe it's easier to manage a small party. Maybe setting up strategies is easier to do with less people. Maybe you've got less people to heal. Maybe it's easier to load your party members up with powerful gear when there's less people to share the best loot with. Maybe pathfinding is better for a smaller party. Or maybe it's something else, but the results can't be denied. Those games are simply easier with smaller parties. It's something I found too. I've encountered having 6 members in my party is harder than having a mid range number of party members. It seems to be similar to a bell curve where it's easier in the middle (3 or 4 party members) and harder at both ends of the scale with 1 or 6 party members. Obviously 1 being harder than 6 but not impossible.