archangel979

Yes, I know. But it is still better than what he have now. By losing Endurance during battles the Fatigue would pile up high fast and still force you to rest. And regenerating Endurance means nothing when you got per encounter Endurance healing spells. Instead of automatic recovery of Endurance you just use those spells which is slower and more irritating.

PoE is not competing vs DAI and TW3, only vs spending cash of some of the people in same time periods. Most people don't buy many games in same month so PoE must not come in same financial month as the big RPG games. It will also have problems during Steam winter sale as most spent money on games on sale and not full price games. So it needs to find its own time.

I can already envision a mod that will fix this mess. Mod features: 1. Health is removed. 2. Your characters can only use Endurance and once they are down they don't die unless the whole party dies. 3. Game time is counted, after x time Fatigue kicks in and gives a noticeable penalty to combat stats. Like in IE games, if you keep moving during fatigue the penalty get bigger and bigger over time. 4. Each time your character Endurance is reduced to 0 that character gets closer to Fatigue state or closer to next level of Fatigue penalties. 5. Fatigue can only be removed by Resting. 6. Resting limits stay as they are now. 7. Monks power their abilities by having their Endurance reduced (same numbers as now). If players turn on option to be able to die, reducing Endurance to 0 gives you 1 minute to win combat or cast spells that restores Endurance or the character dies.

The OP is so negative lol. The game is not nearly as bad as what OP makes it. It is old school yes. OP does not like Old School. I enjoy it a lot. If PoE bugs were removed and it was release right now current WL2 would be a superior product. At least in WL2 you know what is going on in combat and different RNG elements (like FF and Jams) make combat exciting and unpredictable (and both can be reduced by player actions). And to people that complain about not needing to adjust to combat I say, play on higher difficulty. You don't need to adjust only because you succeed too much. Once you lose a battle you will try something different.

I don't like this. RNG was a feature in IE games, not something to fix. At this rate, PoE might be worse than NWN2... good thing beamdog make BG2EE, at least I can continue play that until mods come for PoE.

Really? Then PhDs in physics must be terribly good swordfighters. As Azrael Ultima said. Put two people of same skill to face each other and the more intelligent one is going to win every day of the week. If you watched Game of Thrones, Bronn duel to save Tyrion is pure intelligence win.

While I agree with your that attributes should be foremost logical and more important, I don't agree with your about the D&D statement. Currently the game does not share much with D&D except for a general skeleton. Understanding D&D does not help you much at understanding PoE systems.

Intelligence is commonly described as solving problems on the fly. Understanding your enemy weakness is a part of Intelligence. This can be used both for offense and defense.

I really didn't notice this in this video. If they are there, they need to be more noticeable. The sounds were also lacking, there was some but it never conveyed to me what was happening.

Also I am blind or I didn't see any hit effects in the video. Didn't they implement something in last patch?!

That is cool, but a archetype rogue is a melee character that backstabs. In NWN2 you could buff your Tumble so high nobody ever got AoO vs you and you could play this archetype easily, running between enemies and looking for Sneak Attack opportunities. In PoE you get one per encounter ability that lets you disengage... I am only one that finds this wrong?!

Flanking mechanic is there but a bit buggy currently. However, from what I understand concept is that each mob has a number of potential engages maximum around him, and once that number is surpassed, he'll the flanked affliction, which will be effective for everyone targeting him at this point. So it's called "flanked" but really it's just more "overwhelmed" by attackers and positioning doesn't matter whatsoever. which is bad as it turns a rogue into a different hairstyle fighter. They need to provide different play experience for melee rogue players. 3.5e D&D forced rogues to always look for for flanking positions. IE games forced them to do hit and run or open combat by dealing a massive first strike. How effective it was can be argued but it cannot be argued that they played similar to fighters.D:OS I mentioned really feels like playing a Scoundrel/Rogue, I want something similar.

All I got from these videos is that characters still don't stand apart from background and that although you spend more time paused then not, what is happening in combat still looks confusing. Where are party buffs? Where are enemy disablers? Why does rogue just run straight forward and looks just as another fighter? Even in D:OS they managed to implement flanking for rogue attacks.

You are a real fan gkathellar

I think my arguments vs Graze were good enough.

I think delaying the release for PoE is one of those damned if you do, damned if you don't situations. I am sure more dev time would mean a better game with more polish. On the other hand, they cannot get too close to Witcher 3 release or their game will not get enough time to sell. Also they need to release it before winter Steam sales begin or some time after which again brings it closed to W3. If they could afford it, best would be to release it 1- 2 months after W3 and put it on Early Access until then. Early Access worked well for WL2 and D:OS and it will get them more eyes and feedback. Of course they will need to release more content for Early Access.

That's my main beef with it. The fact that I can employ the exact same tactics and have a wildly different result was always a bit annoying, and I'm glad to see it go. Not that there's a problem with RNG in combat, far from it - but it was badly balanced in 2e rules. And this is just what I am talking about. You are proposing changes to PoE while not liking basic stuff of IE games (and D&D), randomness. I don't know if you played WL2, but lots of randomness is what makes that game good. It also made Xcom the hit it was (and old Xcom is still one of the best games I know because of randomness). XCOM is completely different because if one battle goes south because of RNG you aren't screwed over for the whole game. It creates hardship to overcome. By contrast, in a party-based RPG, losing one battle because of RNG ends your game. I've stated multiple times that I don't mind RNG in battle systems and that I think it can make a game better. But I think the addition of Graze balances the battle RNG better for a party-based RPG when compared to the IE games. You're welcome to disagree, but continuing to claim that I'm not a real fan of the IE games because I hold that opinion is insulting and ridiculous. You are trying to compare whole Xcom with whole IE games which is not what I was talking about. I was talking about combat vs combat. In Xcom, the randomness made the game unpredictable and exciting. All you actions had the purpose of getting favor of the Gods of RNG but in the end anything could happen. Same in BG. Even the perfect plan might fail at first contact with the enemy and it made the game unpredictable and exciting. You maximized you chances to win and let the Gods of RNG do what they do. Maybe you don't like that, but that was at the core of IE experience. Removing RNG from PoE is removing some of the core elements of IE games. IE games were not just isometric, party based RPG with lots of talking and quasi turnbased system. DA:O had all those elements but in the end its combat was crap and boring and I played it only to be able to have more fully voiced fun conversation with my companions (only part of the game that truly shined). So far PoE is following DA:O more than IE games. Only real difference is "2d" backgrounds and 6 instead of 4 companions. I don't want another DA:O and I will be here reminding you of this until this game becomes better.

I am not talking about attack animations here. It does not matter if attack animations are done IE way or PoE way. PoE was is more realistic, IE way was to make it look like something was happening instead of everyone standing still for 6s. The other stuff of your post is meaningless when presented like this. Let me give you a equal level response: "Don't let your guys get gibbed."

That's my main beef with it. The fact that I can employ the exact same tactics and have a wildly different result was always a bit annoying, and I'm glad to see it go. Not that there's a problem with RNG in combat, far from it - but it was badly balanced in 2e rules. And this is just what I am talking about. You are proposing changes to PoE while not liking basic stuff of IE games (and D&D), randomness. I don't know if you played WL2, but lots of randomness is what makes that game good. It also made Xcom the hit it was (and old Xcom is still one of the best games I know because of randomness).

Grazes destroy an archetype of low health but hard to hit character, especially if secondary effects are also transmited through them. As for spells and Grazes, I don't like normal attacks and spells sharing same mechanics. IE games spells where there were 10 different mechanics for them were more interesting. And people reporting lack of utility spells... I don't even..

I'm sorry, but no. NO. Just because someone doesn't like the exact same things about the IE games as you do or is interested in seeing a few new things tried does not make them not a "real fan" of the IE games. There are people in the world who love those games in a slightly different (or even *gasp* very different!) way than you do. Recognize that. That just means they are not real fans. Just as I am not a real football fan because I only watch it on TV while others go to stadiums or go abroad to follow the teams.I want PoE to be the whole package. DA:O was not and that is why it was worse. PoE does not need to be D&D, but it needs to feel similar to playing IE games. Changing mechanics left and right does not help that. Spellcasting has already been dumbed down, grazes are bad, health system sucks, Might is magical damage as well as physical, stats have way too weak affect on game mechanics, only a few skills that you cannot use outside of scripted sequences, super high damage and life values as a result of DT system and so on.. all of that that is worse. EDIT: I forgot, Bag of Holding(limitless stash) from the start of the game, maps too small, they even removed the amulet slot LOL... there are other things like enemies moving way too fast but I expect this to be fixed. I only like limited resting and encounter abilities that let caster do more during combat without worrying about wasting spells. Nope, I'm happy to say you are not the centre of the Universe or BG fandom and that there are plenty of people here who enjoyed the game as much or more than you do. Who have totally different views of what was good about the game and how something like PoE should be. Having only played BG through ~3x and BG2 ~6x I may not be a hard core fan , but a fan I am and a lot of the changes I'm seeing in PoE look to be improvements or equally valid choices.well I played way more than that. Just BgEe I played 3x, I don't even remember the number of times I played Bg1. Same for other IE games. PST is only one I finished only once but I did start it a few more times and got to different parts. And to me if PoE stays as it is, it will be an inferior product. I cannot even judge if it will be better than DAO until I play release version, I hope they are at least capable of that.

I would say available money is a definite limit on how long the game can stay in development. I would love if they put the game on Early Access and gave it few more months of development and polished it as much as possible. From earlier developments, they expect big sales (approaching 1 000 000 copies sold) but D:OS and WL2 have shown that even if the game is polished a lot (like D:OS) it will not get such huge sales, while a good game that didn't have enough polish (WL2) will get even less sales. If they want PoE to sell well, it needs to be much better then D:OS or WL2 in all aspects (and currently D:OS is a much much better game, not to mention Coop multiplayer).

It probably explains the pissy tone of your post, yes. I think you should understand what you are talking about before arguing with others.

Real fans are those that loved the full package of IE games. But you are focusing on less important stuff. I gave my list of bad changes compared to IE games, focus on those.

Might is for damage. Strength didn't make a good tank in D&D as well except minimum strength needed for some armour. STR = Thaco and damage. Puh-leez. And how does thaco and damage help you tank?Strength is dps stat. Con and Dex are tank stats.