Jump to content

endolex

Members
  • Content Count

    79
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by endolex

  1. In PoE, all buffs fade after combat ends, and even if this were to change (because otherwise buffs would probably fade immediately when cast out of combat), inside combat their duration is measured in seconds, not hours. The whole comparison to BG2 is therefore irrelevant. This also applies to the assumption that enemies would have to be pre-buffed as well. Buff durations in PoE are just too short for this to make any sense.
  2. If you haven't seen people argue that Path of the Damned is too easy, which is hardest difficulty currently in the game. And only ways to make game even harder is to gimp yourself like trying to soloing the game, not using foods, not resting, etc. And this is already before any changes in game balance that probably make encounters even easier. So it is not issue that developers can/want ignore even if it don't matter to you. There are a zillion easy ways of making encounters harder at hardest difficulty that do NOT involve taking choice away from players by labeling spells as 'combat on
  3. If you haven't seen people argue that Path of the Damned is too easy, which is hardest difficulty currently in the game. And only ways to make game even harder is to gimp yourself like trying to soloing the game, not using foods, not resting, etc. And this is already before any changes in game balance that probably make encounters even easier. So it is not issue that developers can/want ignore even if it don't matter to you. There are a zillion easy ways of making encounters harder at hardest difficulty that do NOT involve taking choice away from players by labeling spells as 'combat on
  4. Low = good for one (1) encounter, especially since all buffs fade after combat ends. And spell slots are limited. So if you buff yourself up as much as you can before every fight, your priest will run dry pretty fast.
  5. If you haven't seen people argue that Path of the Damned is too easy, which is hardest difficulty currently in the game. And only ways to make game even harder is to gimp yourself like trying to soloing the game, not using foods, not resting, etc. And this is already before any changes in game balance that probably make encounters even easier. So it is not issue that developers can/want ignore even if it don't matter to you. There are a zillion easy ways of making encounters harder at hardest difficulty that do NOT involve taking choice away from players by labeling spells as 'combat
  6. Nope. And it has been explained in this thread quite a lot why this is nonsense. Low buff durations, wasting spell slots for encounters that don't need buffs, making ubiquitous buffing quite costly, etc. etc.
  7. 'Being able to cast all spells I have whenever the hell I want to would make the game too easy': Use the difficulty slider. The only way there could be a problem is either when easy is too hard for many, or when Path of the Damned / Trial of Iron with all QoL options turned off is still too easy for most. Otherwise: use the difficulty slider. Change some options. They are there for a reason.
  8. I never cease to be amazed by this strange assumption that being able to cast all spells anytime would somehow immediately need to be 'balanced' by having enemies always buff themselves before combat (how would that even work, buff durations being what they are, and the enemy not knowing when you are going to attack them).Nothing needs to be balanced there. It should be a player's choice, much like whether to bother using traps or not, when to use potions and when not, and so on. The whole notion that there is 'one true way of playing the game (even just combat-wise) and doing anything els
  9. There's nothing absurd in the notion that more choice doesn't necessarily = better, as has been argued several times in this thread. It's the same thing as with the narrow doorways. It's just an option to block the corridor with your tank, but the fact that it's clearly the optimal strategy, makes not taking advantage of it, the same as deliberately gimping oneself. The same can be argued with regards to pre-buffing. Exactly. Buffing in general, be it combat only or not, is NOT MANDATORY. You can play a party without Paladins or Priests or Chanter and do fine.
  10. If anyone's main argument against being able to cast all spells anytime is 'I hate buffing' -> just don't take classes in your party whose main strength is all about buffs. Problem solved.
  11. I don't mind things like these per se. But in this case it's just...I don't know, usually in this case it's spelled out a little better, exactly what you're going to sacrifice. Some clear indication that you won't be able to finish the ritual if you don't have the thingy.
  12. Ah, alright...mistook the 'Spoiler warning' for 'no spoilers'...will do that next time. Well I could easily give the artifact to a party member, no?
  13. I'll try and keep this rather vague and spoiler-free: Let's say there's an item which is needed for a ritual that lets you craft a powerful artifact. But this item is needed by an NPC to survive. You could kill them for no reason and complete the ritual, or you can decide not to do it - and get nothing at all. Having played Paladins and Priests a lot, I know a lot of times you can / should tell people to keep their money or trinkets after having done a good deed. In this case however I feel a little stupefied, especially when seeing that every guide recommends to kill said NPC exactly
  14. I really don't know how to reproduce this, but I'm currently at Pearlwood Bluff, just encountered some Wind Blights who did nothing but stand around and let themselves get hit. Then I roped down to that cave, same thing: They do nothing. oO
  15. Yeah I thought about doing that, too, but in my case once the front lines stabilize they're just too darn irregular to hit anything without hitting my people. Never mind, I won't worry about it that much anymore.
  16. Pretty sure there is more variety between those two worlds of either playing "geometry-dance revolution" or just diablo-esque durr-dumbclicking. But like I replied to another post, I seem to have already found my preferred way of resolving combat: Lots of charms, control and the like. Don't have to position much to use those!
  17. Detailed decision making - to some degree. Detailed positioning - not so much. It just seems to me once combat starts, every carefully laid tactic flies out of the window anyway and I react instead of planning much ahead. I find control spells (Hold, Charm, etc.) to be very helpful, though! Luckily, PoE accomodates that playstyle just as well - I can even mindcontrol dragons, it seems...x)
  18. I couldn't even get enemies to stand where I want them, and moving out of engagement is risky as well. It usually goes like this: I enter combat, some enemies attack my melees up front, but others walk past them and flank them from behind (can't move back and out of engagement without risking disengagement attacks) - therefore I can't fire anything sensibly without hitting my melees. But thanks for the feedback so far - I guess those spells just aren't for me then. Microing of that depth (or worrying over tradeoffs) is nothing I want to spend much time on in this game. I will just pick sp
  19. I really am at a loss here: A lof of spells (Cipher, Wizard, etc.) damage 'anyone' in the line of fire / in AoE range. But very rare is the case enemies will line up nicely or let themselves be controlled in such a way that these spells can be fired without hitting someone from my party as well. So the question is: Should I just fire them anyway and don't mind the damage I do to my own guys, or is there some scenario where wizards, ciphers etc. are suddenly front line material and have only enemies in front of them and nobody in-between? I guess in large battlefields, you could build one
  20. Hm, it's really just one track (at least in my ears) and for throwback purposes I adore it. Otherwise PoE has pretty much its own musical style.
  21. I agree! I haven't noticed so far, but now I've encountered my first dragon..a special 'intense' combat music for this kind of encounter would be great, and of course one unique theme for the final fight.
  22. Ouch. That bad? I think the Divinity games have a very quirky, unfettered style - when the devs at Larian think something could be fun, they just do it, and the same goes for the composer of all the music in those games, I feel. While they rarely seem to bother with overall consistency or setting a certain 'mood' and sticking with it, somehow all the elements always seem to come together to make an entertaining, if unusual game, and unusual music as well. But I do realize this approach may not be everyone's cup of tea.
  23. Yes, I'm pleasantly surprised as well at how 'weird' PoE got, story-wise. The whole thing with soul fragments, earlier lifes and the like reminds me of PS:T in some regards. So in a way, I understand how you would like to have that reflected in the music as well. Good news however! Torment: Tides of Numenera will release this year, and with Mark Morgan who also did PS:T back for more music of the 'weirder' type. So I'm looking forward to a lot of this: https://www.youtube.com/embed/qBc842j4vpU
  24. Definitely agree with this point. One of my regrets for this project for sure. We've discussed solutions but they are pretty risky to try right now. We'll continue to investigate though. I believe good old Michael Hoenig (and Mark Morgan in PS: Torment) did a lot of small 'transitional' ending segments to their combat music, so the music could stop at certain points in the track, with the 'correct' ending instead of just stopping or fading out. Takes a lot of work I guess, and boy, do I know the composers lament: It is always a small minority of players who ever notices consciously.
×
×
  • Create New...