Jump to content

Captain Shrek

Members
  • Posts

    578
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Captain Shrek

  1. Which in real life would GET WORSE not better in a matter of minutes.
  2. health and stamina loss are indipendent of one another. however you always lose more stamina than health when you are hit. to make an example: if in real life you get shot at a non vital spot, you will not die imediatelly (in game terms you will lose 40-50% of your hp) but you will lose most of your strength due to the pain and the shock of the impact and will fall to the ground semi conscious (you will lose 90% or more of your stamina), unless you have a high pain tolerance, exelent physical conditioning and an iron will (or are on drugs), in which case you will be able to keep focus and control of your body (meaning you will have 30-40% stamina left) Just to point out that realism has nothing to do with it. You don't magically regenerate stamina when hit in the stomach with a blade and then running away from battle for a while. Only in games like COD:MW2 such things are considered tactics though.
  3. More so: In order to avoid rest "spamming" the damage to health will have to be proportionately little.
  4. No I cannot, because neither of your cases seem to make sense. They are not the full list of potential options for how a dual Stamina/Health system can work, for one, and your case one seems to assume that your current Health affects your max Stamina somehow. Your second case seems to assume a relationship between Stamina and attack damage, somehow. All I wanted to know is if these were merely hypothetically decided upon during the thread or if a developer had actually suggested them. Because neither of them are good, and the smart thing to do is to have your attacks at full strength regardless of your Health/Stamina and have your maximum Stamina remain the same regardless of current Health. That is why it is nice thing to read the entire conversation first. I was replying to a person who suggested the idea that there MAY be a relation between Health AND your effectiveness. Either way, the two options are mutually exclusive and all inclusive nevertheless.
  5. Yes. It is not action points either as long as one uses that word with Fallout context (probably the game with best mechanics ever in RPGs).
  6. I am not against stamina. I am against regenerating stamina (And cooldowns). All you said is irrelevant. It can be equally well be in a classic IE game where simply there is no place to rest between two towns.
  7. 18 months + 13 level dungeon + 2 big cities + 11 races + new setting + new ruleset + obsidian's track record for amazingly balanced games = > No worries, everything will be okay, honey and rainbows, move along. Yeah sure.
  8. When was it said that Stamina would determine attack strength? Or do anything other than allow encounters to be individually hard without forcing rest spamming? Can you guess why that is being called Case 2?
  9. That is a nice mission statement for a corporation. But as has been discussed earlier in this thread, there are more problems with continuously regenerating stamina than simply being a health shield (Assuming it is; but we will have to wait for that to be explained). Still, for a second let us assume stamina is not health shield. FACTS: It has been mentioned that stamina will be lost during combat when you are hit and so will be health and that, there will be no rest spamming. Case 1: So suppose your Health affects max stamina as you suggest: The first implication of that is you will be at a suboptimal combat level before next encounter. There will be NO way to get to optimal without consumables (potions?/Kits?/food?) or rest. Now tell me how this situation is NOT exactly analogous to IE games where you had used up spells for mages and depleted health for other chars? These are the same reasons to which the entire anti-rest-spamming argument still apply. You will still do rest spamming if allowed under these assumptions if you are so inclined. Essentially the new system is simply a stand in for the old system except it has a stamina regeneration and cooldowns to spam your best attack per encounter unlike the tactical combat in IE games where you had to plan beforehand on how to use your resources. Not to mention with the regenerating resource of stamina if there are abilities related to that, you will also spam those based on the stamina "cooldown". Case 2: So suppose your Health does NOT affect max stamina as you suggest: Then the combat will be EVEN less tactical with your best attacks remaining at full strength throughout the encounter chain. The problem as I see it, is that this system purportedly is designed to avoid rest-spamming, which in fact is an artificial issue (As in it does not really exist) and can be easily averted by good encounter design. The new system turns the game into spam-fest no matter how you cut it, simply because you are almost certainly using your best attacks per encounter even if at lowered potential (case 1). This is exactly against IE game spirit (except Escape from planet tournament) where the planning required to actually see through the game was the charm of it's combat mechanics. It had faults, no doubt. But nothing so severe as to merit overhaul except for probably in the high magic setting (which is probably still in PE, we can't tell right now).
  10. Hi. Can you tell me what do you think Hack and Slash means?
  11. It.... depends. SOZ had a nice system where party synergy paid off. But that was because of the way how skills were available. In this game skills may be available to all and a similar party synergy may be NECESSARY or not depending upon how the points are allotted to these skills.
  12. Really? Explain to me how this rules out shielding.
  13. Do you lack basic reading comprehension? These quotes do not, in anyway, describe a shielding mechanism. You take damage to stamina, you take damage to health. INDEPENDENT of each other. Your stamina is NOT shielding your health. if your health is 1 and your stamina is 100, you're going to die with the next hit. In fact you're going to die no matter what you're stamina is because it doesn't matter. Wow. I am actually waiting for Josh to clarify this. But you seem pretty sure that this is not so. I must assume Josh has told you so personally!
  14. This is best interpreted (unless clarified) as heath (HP) shield.
  15. THis is indeed a great news if true! But source?
  16. Of course you are correct, I did not mean that literally. Sorry if it came across like that. PE is not an IE clone anyway.
  17. Except that ME3/DA2/SKYRIM/PE have CONTINEOUS IN COMBAT Stamina Regen. Secondly, I have tried to make this point several times. Just because a game was old does not make its mechanics great. Darklands did not necessarily have great combat implementation but what was good about it was its low magic setting and the skills. Compare its good parts with PE and that would be a fair comparison. The aim of PE is create IE clones; not darklands clones. Otherwise in the same vein one would say that PE is not like darklands because.... *1000 irrelevant points* .
  18. Just lol. You should take better look how system in them work for character with high constitution. Enlighten me please. How did High Con cause health to regenerate? If character has 20+ con s/he will get per turn health regeneration. So you mean that it was not always on for all characters?
  19. Just lol. You should take better look how system in them work for character with high constitution. Enlighten me please. How did High Con cause health to regenerate?
  20. You are joking, right. You are a troll, I hope for the sake of humanity.
  21. There is no reason a game with good story can't have excellent combat. e.g. Betrayal IN krondor.
×
×
  • Create New...