Gromnir

is difficult for Gromnir to judge the difficulty o' the game. we got many dozen o' hours invested in the beta and an embarrassing number o' hours in the release version. yeah, we got more than a little experience with crpgs, but our hours o' poe gameplay has robbed us o' any right to make comments 'bout the difficulty o' the game. we have played through the entire game multiple times, and we have purposeful replayed particular challenging battles over and over andoverandoverandoverandoverandoverandoverandoverandover. that being said, the beta folks, back in the summer o' 2014, were complaining almost en masse that poe combat were difficult and frenetic. yeah, there were fine tuning done to make dot from spiders and beetles less lethal, but for the most part, the beta folks adjusted to the relative steepness o' the learning curve. poe had a steep learning curve. that being said, we will observe that it becomes increasing easy to over-level in poe. if you do all side-quest material, then the further you get into the game, the more likely you is gonna be more powerful than necessary to successfully overcome encounters. as you get deeper into the game, not only will your experience make the game easier, but the over-generous xp rewards will result in you facing encounters seeming balanced for a party 2-3 levels lower than your current power. regardless, while we doubt it makes you feel better to hear this, the majority o' hard-core junkie role-play fanatics who were beta testers from day 1 were mewling like babies when they got their first taste o' poe combat. HA! Good Fun!

am thinking obsidian is dooming themselves. assume for a sec that the entire expansion were 30-40 hours. that is better than we got outta totsc and much better than HoW. is only a handful o' crpg expansions that we can recall having seen an expansion in the +30-40 hour range. now, cut in half. 15-20 hours? even if white march part 1 is excellent, that is only gonna anger folks 'cause they is gonna be disappointed in brevity rather quality. yeah, a 30-40 hour expansion is a reasonable offering for an expansion, so 1/2 should be 15-20 hours, but am nevertheless believing that such a short offering is not enough. is not fair for us to demand a +40 hour expansion, but if we play white march part 1 and finish in 18 hours, am expecting we will feel unfulfilled... even if that feel is complete unfair. am glad that obsidian wants to get part 1 released soonish, but... *shrug* HA! Good Fun!

the mostest funny aspect o' the hypothetical problem put forth by gk is the ridiculous paltry sums we is talking 'bout and the obscene number o' additional rest opportunities needed to transform this from a joke problem into a genuine one. has been a while since we paid attention, but poe has a 5 day week, yes? for the sake o' argument, am gonna assume that Gromnir topped out our turns with any given play o' poe so that any additional rest would result in a potential increase in hierling pay w/o generating tax revenue from turns. no quest advance = no turns. again, we don't know what is the actual max turns, so am creating a hypothetical scenario to be illustrating. so, if we spammed rests so that we could generate 4 additional hierling paydays, that would require us to burn 60 additional rest opportunities. depending on hierlings, we see that our paydays from 4 different characters is endgame costing us anywhere from 150cp to 300cp. our 4 weeks o' nothing but resting would thus result in a 600cp to 1200cp shortfall? ... so, given how much revenue were generated by the stronghold, just how many additional rests would it take for Gromnir to see the stronghold as a whole convert from being in the black to being in the red? HA! Good Fun!

speaking from personal experience, pump perception and dexterity high enough to make a difference v. the master below is doomed. our go-to option is aoe charming/dominating the kobold ads so that the big lizard blasts them instead o' you. still worried 'bout death o' your rogue? gotta priest in your party? watchful presence and barring death's door is spells worthy o' consideration. hell, a well-timed withdraw is perfect. and if your rogue dies, so what? priest, in saint's war armour, can revive the fallen. torm's rogue build is likely perfectly viable for a glass cannon. high might & high dex is ideal for generating dps, though talent and ability allocation is more important. am in agreement that backstab is a waste-- your goal is maximize reliable sneak attack options and damage. backstab is nice if you wanna impress folks with a screenshot o' a big damage hit, but am thinking that backstab value is more ego stroke than anything. aloth and hiravias both have access to Many spells that create sneak attack options for your rogue... though again, the aforementioned priest is overlooked for such. priest seals can render foes prone or blind, and seal spells is hazards, so they get wacky inflated accuracy. HA! Good Fun!

you shouldn't feel sorry for the critical path player. nakia getting more power has 0 impact on the crit path player. unfortunately, the reverse is not necessarily true. the crit path player can be a loadstone on nakia's gameplay. the crit path player is the one being catered to when balance is being considered by the developers. the crit path player is the necessary benchmark for balance. in spite o' the grognards who rejected any scaling options during the beta, the expansion will have a scaling feature. good. am hopeful some scaling has been added to the core game, but regardless, the game needs be balanced for the crit path player. the more powerful a completionist becomes relative to a critical path player, the more likely the completionist is gonna notice a decrease in the game's difficulty, yes? seems axiomatic, but we s'pose some folks would argue. regardless, is not a matter o' feeling sorry for the crit path player. HA! Good Fun!

I think that's somewhat Gromnir's point about the gold sink thing : the Stronghold should be attractive to some players not because of the gameplay advantages it brings but because of the "bragging factor", so that players want to continue developping it despite its gold sink status and the poor return on investment it provides. To clarify a little further. I do not think it should be either a sink hole for money or a gold mine but should break even. It should support itself at least after completion. Hypothetically (couldn't resist) it is the place to which the player's character will retire. It is a fortified place and so a refuge to the surrounding kith in time of danger, a residence in times of peace and should be able to support itself. It should be a bragging spot but should also serve a utilitarian purpose as a center of influence. I can imagine all kinds of things. My character has settled down, married, had children grown old and no longer goes adventuring there fore a sink hole for money would be an albatross. The Stronghold is an investment in the future not to bring in loads of money but in its own way to provide peace and prosperity to the area. That is how I imagine it. until the developers complete the expansions, we doubt they will know how many stronghold turns they need contend with. the turn clock makes sense to us 'cause both good and bad events is keeping pace with the player's advancement in the game, and advancing progress in the game may be reflected different on Gromnir's calendar as 'posed to nakia's. conversely, the paying o' hirelings being set to a calendar does discourage exploitative resting behavior, which also strikes us as beneficial from a gameplay pov. however, a hypothetical solution to nakia's concern can be implemented once the expansions is finished. the developers should be aware o' a maximum # o' turns based on total available quests in the game. once a player reaches 90% turn completion, and assuming they has completed all building options, have a major domo or chief steward hierling option available. hire the chief steward functional puts you in retirement. no more paying taxes or dealing with annoying visitors or whatnot. use the stronghold for resting and shopping, but stronghold is effective complete at this point. good enough? HA! Good Fun!

I think that's somewhat Gromnir's point about the gold sink thing : the Stronghold should be attractive to some players not because of the gameplay advantages it brings but because of the "bragging factor", so that players want to continue developping it despite its gold sink status and the poor return on investment it provides. in our links we observed that we understand that the player will want to see return on investment. that is natural. you pay and want something in return. the thing is, you are paying for power. the folks who do the stronghold, the folks who have the disposable copper, have likely already completed a substantial number o' side-quests and are necessarily gonna be stronger than a critical path player. if the stronghold offers tangible benefits that increase player power, it simple exacerbates the problems o' excess gold. now keep in mind that we don't see much need for the developers to find creative ways to sink excess gold. strikes us as a whole lotta effort on the developer's part. unfortunately, the stronghold offers considerable payoff, particularly through the bounties. the value of equipment and experience from the bounties alone is difficult to quantify. the crafting resources, which is time rather than turn sensitive, is also having considerable value and the potential to increase player power. and yeah, the stronghold generates money for Many turns, money which can be spent to acquire better equipment making the game even less challenging. the stronghold is a well rather than a sink. taken to an as yet unspecified number o' rests, the stronghold may, depending on individual players, become transformed from a well to a sink, but as it now stands, the stronghold increases player power. seems to us like a wasted opportunity. am understanding why folks want more power from their gold investment, but that actual is having a tendency to make the game easier for those folks who is already likely to be having greater relative power. the critical path need necessarily be balanced for the critical path player. the more power you give to folks who do tangential fodder such as the stronghold, you necessarily increase the gap in power 'tween the critical path player and the completionist. HA! Good Fun!

you post dictionary definitions but don't understand? using an infinite number o' rests to illustrate a point and you still don't get it? is it possible for an ordinary player to actual transform the stronghold from a well to a sink? dunno. is an imaginary problem at this point. at some unspecified and unknown number o' rests, a player might be able to exceed a kinda rest v. turn threshold to transform the stronghold from a well to a sink. your experience doesn't support. neither does Gromnir's. if the number o' rests needed to transform from well to prohibitive sink is not reasonable, then you don't have a genuine problem. is hypothetical regardless. ... why can you not be reasoned with? and you continue to miss the forest for the trees. HA! Good Fun!

... don't even see the contradiction, eh? HA! Good Fun! There is none. Me personally not having contemplated or noticed something does not make that something a hypothetical. There are, contrary to popular belief, things outside my frames of reference and expertise. Just because I personally haven't experienced something does not make it's existance a hypothetical. Gkthellar makes a pretty good point. Your only argument hinges on it being a hypothetical - which it is not - and the fact that you want the Stronghold to be a gold-sink, something entirely subjective; I, for example, would prefer the game to not need such gold-sinks to begin with, and that sinks gives something back. If not necessarily economically equitable, then at least narratively or mechanically interesting enough to warrant said gold-sink-ing. lordy. hypothetical don't hinge 'cause you failed to suffer the problem. it is GK's hypo... yutz. he poses a potential problem that will occur IF a player rests some indefinite number o' times. that is a spot-on example o' a freaking hypothetical problem. mathematical certitude that will occur at some obscure point does not change the hypothetical nature o' the problem. duh. is not that gk had a problem. you personally didn't face the problem. Gromnir didn't face the problem, but with enough resting... sooooooo slow. let us know when you catch up with the rest o' the class. 'course 'quibble over definitions, as luck is once again wrong 'bout, ignores the actual issue. the stronghold creates considerable revenue via taxes and quests and resources. infinite resting is clear a ridiculous example and is not worth consideration. Gromnir faced no prohibitive stronghold copper/gold loss issue with multiple plays. luckman did not face a noteworthy money sink issue. so, at what point does the stronghold transform from well to sink? at what point does the sink become a genuine issue for the typical player who would still gladly sink copper and gold to be able to continue getting stronghold benefits such as resource generation and the special items vendor. given all the potential resources generated, the transformation from well to prohibitive sink strikes us being remote, but that is based on little more than our personal play o' the game. *sigh* am suspecting you will continue to struggle with basic definitions, but we will try and help you reach understanding. our optimism is boundless. HA! Good Fun!

... don't even see the contradiction, eh? HA! Good Fun!

http://forums.obsidian.net/topic/70731-the-problem-of-being-rich-as-croesus-present-in-most-rpgs/?p=1576721 http://forums.obsidian.net/topic/70731-the-problem-of-being-rich-as-croesus-present-in-most-rpgs/?p=1576939 http://forums.obsidian.net/topic/70731-the-problem-of-being-rich-as-croesus-present-in-most-rpgs/?p=1577057 the stronghold is an ideal sink opportunity for the developers. it should provide attractive options for disposing o' excess gold that do not increase player power. unfortunately, as it currently works, the stronghold provides far too many tangible benefits, and short o' purposefully abusing rest options (*snort*) the pay-off from the stronghold in terms o' bounties, adventures, special vendors and the weekly crafting resource generation, is making the stronghold less a sink and more o' a reasonable investment. as we noted in the included links, we understand the desire to make the stronghold pay-off, but that is actual self defeating. the stronghold makes far more sense as a sink. in any event, the hypothetical issue gk notes is hardly worth consideration. HA! Good Fun!

*sigh* you clear ain't reading. you are creating a hypothetical problem that isn't actually a problem seeing as how you should be losing money as the stronghold ideally is a sink. and various gains is based on weeks rather than turns, not that such genuine matters. HA! Good Fun!

That still doesn't explain why they haven't solved the infinite money sink problem. Taxes need to be based on passage of time, and facilities upgrades need to be based on the passage of turns. This does not require a whole ton of dev resources. that word don't mean what you think it means. It ... what? Okay, let me see if I can clarify. Hirelings at the stronghold cost money. This money is spent over the passage of in-game time. Rest an infinite number of times, and you will spend and infinite amount of money. Money and resources generated by the stronghold only result from the completion of quests. There are only so many quests in the game. My view is that all of this needs to be shuffled a bit, to remove the potential for infinite spending. I also wouldn't mind seeing stronghold upgrades keyed to quest completion (rather than time) to make it a reward for exploring the game. I like the turn system in the Stronghold, but its relationship with in-game time is whack, yo. that is ridiculous. put a dollar in a savings account. set the theoretical time passage on the savings account to Infinite and you will see that you got infinite return on investment. *shrug* infinite becomes a meaningless term given your usage. and yes, the money is generated primarily through quests, but many resources accrue over time... quite valuable resources as it so happens. regardless, nobody plays the game with infinite rests. you create a synthetic problem with a nonsensical hypothetical. a considerable amount o' resources is generated by the stronghold. too much is generated in part 'cause the stronghold should be a sink. in our estimation, you should lose money by doing stronghold as a way to deal with the inevitable money problem that is created in any crpg that allows for non critical path questing. unfortunately, the developers didn't do a particular good job o' making the stronghold an attractive sink. you Should lose money, but you should be happy 'bout it. ... rest an infinite number of times? HA! that were a good one. HA! Good Fun!

Hm, not really from what I've read, but carry on. *shrug* people can be kinda selective in their reading when they disagree. that being said, we didn't play the third witcher installment, so perhaps this game represents a sea change in writing for the franchise. HA! Good Fun!

I guess one could think it is a staple of a certain kind of anime. Still, not a very good one, would have been better to incorporate some Canadian stereotypes given they are the host rather than one of the teams. staple to a certain kind o' anime? HA! that were unintentional funny. HA! Good Fun!

That still doesn't explain why they haven't solved the infinite money sink problem. Taxes need to be based on passage of time, and facilities upgrades need to be based on the passage of turns. This does not require a whole ton of dev resources. that word don't mean what you think it means. the stonghold is quirky. ideally, the player base should be a money sink, but it isn't. as it currently plays, the stronghold not only generates money, but it offers additional powerful equipment. should be a sink that players wanna throw their copper gold into, but it ain't. folks do get rewarded too well, but the sink itself ain't particular attractive to players beyond particular offerings such as the curio shop and the bounties. HA! Good Fun!

Why don't you make a 16 might, 16 constitution fighter if that upsets you so much? It's not like it's not viable. offering such a reasonable suggestion is unlikely to have the impact you would expect. after all, "role playing game (RPG) is all about role playing." "and role-play as a basis for complaint? HA! poe allows a player to play a fighter or tank with high con and high might. hell, poe sure as hell don't force a player to play a tank or fighter with might at 3 and con at 8-- those clear ain't any kinda default numbers. lord knows why we would want our tank to have basement fort saves, eh?" we mentioned already that a more traditional (insert *eye-roll* here) allocation is viable. *shrugs* "The problem is the attribute system immediately lets you do that. So you are bound to only one traditional attribute setup." is wrong... or a misconception. we pointed out earlier with our personal potd examples for dps/support/ tank characters that you sure as heck ain't bound to one particular build. even the logic-impaired luckman opined that, "you can stumble your way through the game like a drunken fool and still not only succeed, but prosper." *chuckle* by then he were a bit agitated and missing more than a few salient points, but it is true that insofar as the attribute system is concerned, you are able to choose virtual any build and still "prosper." that were a freaking GOAL o' the developers. sure, if you wanna prosper with a so-called non-optimal tank build, you are gonna need be a bit more discerning about talent and ability choices, but the game does Not bind you to any particular build. as we noted, (edit: change indefinite article) a mistake the obsinaties made were giving their poe classes the same names as other games. obsinaties created certain expectations. call a poe fighter a fighter and folks have difficulty adjusting to the differences. HA! Good Fun!

That was a bit laboured. oh, we went over-the-top once we got to "bunny ears," but everything previous to that is actual staple for japanese anime. now, if the japanese women had been fighting aliens instead o' Americans, then chances are there would be at least one character with bunny ears, cat ears or a maid outfit... and likely a loli. is that the correct term? loli? (edit: ack, forgot the robot... would almost require a robot/cyborg to be a proper anime.) FIGHT-O! HA! Good Fun!

Well, most tout the setting and nature of some of the quests to be mature for a game, rather than what you're running with there. As for wishing death on posting habits, hm... the setting and nature o' the quests is touted as mature 'cause o' the misbegotten notion that blood and b00bs is mature. *snort* yes, even the most obtuse sjw hating clown is self-aware enough to realize that b00bs and blood is not compelling reasons to label witcher mature. how idiotic would one have to be to posit "i like boobies" as the foundation o' their defense o' witcher maturity? duh. setting? *chuckle* 'least that were better than the more nebulous nature bit, eh? HA! Good Fun!

when somebody uses "sjw" in a post about why witcher is keen, we know it is okie dokie to ignore the post... and the poster. is nothing wrong with b00bs and blood in a fantasy story. conan the barbarian is still our favorite fantasy movie. is nothing prudish 'bout our tastes. sadly, there is folks who mistake a mature rating for mature story... and there ain't nothing particular noble or profound 'bout gratuitous violence and sex. what kinda bizarro opposite-world do we live in where adding comic quantities o' b00bs and blood adds to legitimacy? wanna use a clockwork orange and the postman always rings twice as examples o' media that is arguable mature? hell, use fight club as such an example. michelangelo put naked folks on the ceiling o' the sistine chapel, and he made man as beautiful as God. that were a profound statement. witcher? HA! honest, any yutz that brings up sjw or other similar nonsense as some kinda argument to support witcher quality deserves a swift hard kick to the temple with a steel-toed boot. HA! Good Fun!

we watched the women's world cup and were incredible disappointed. based on our limited viewing o' japanese anime, we expected the USA team to be a bunch o' racist amazons with enormous b00bs who would insult the plucky japanese players by calling 'em "monkeys" and then cheat horribly. the japanese team, by comparison, would do their best and through the power o' friendship they would create a world where nobody would have to cry. the event did not unfold at all the way we expected. even worse, the japanese girls were not particular attractive, and none o' them had bunny or cat ears. no maid outfits neither... and we didn't see one freaking robot on the japanese team. am so disillusioned. HA! Good Fun!

anybody know what the south carolina flag looked like circa 1860? we don't. if folks in south carolina were continuing to venerate their southern traditions (whatever those might be) by honoring their oldie state flag, we doubt any would object. the american civil war lasted half a decade. the confederate battle flag only became a symbol during and after the american civil war. tell us that the confederate flag represents all the grand traditions o' the south is utter bs, just as the revisionist history concerning why the south fought the civil war is bs. most nations, sadly, has committed crimes, but how many nations exist to perpetuate a crime? in 1861 it were less obvious to mostest folks just how terrible and dehumanizing were the institution o' slavery. this ain't 1861. we know better. you can read all the existential philosophers and talk 'bout moral relativism and whatnot, but there is certain crimes that is inherent dehumanizing whether they were accepted traditions for years or centuries. the south fought to uphold slavery. venerate their battle flag and let the southern pride wash over you. dukes o' hazard? 'course the show weren't promoting slavery, or racism, but that ain't the point is it? the confederate flag were such a ubiquitous symbol o' the south that to have the confederate battle flag emblazoned on the roof o' a car in 1979 were hardly shocking. am not sure o' the age o' folks like manifested, but even Gromnir were young in 1979. we sure as hell didn't understand the full implications o' the confederate flag as a symbol. tell you what, google bugs bunny and black face and see what video clips is available. how many o' those cartoons were still being shown on tv long into the 70s and early 80s? chances are if you were old enough to see dukes o' hazard, you were likely old enough to see such cartoons, and as a kid, you likely laughed w/o knowing why they were wrong. so, a kid watching duke's o' hazard as a kid and not seeing a problem don't surprise us in the least. kinda makes the problems wore though, not better. while we doubt it were intentional, romanticizing a symbol o' slave culture to a generation o' kids is not the kinda thing we would brag 'bout if we had been part o' the show. now keep in mind that Gromnir observed earlier in this thread how the confederate battle flag becoming an issue again in 2015 were ridiculous, but compare continued veneration o' the US flag to the confederate flag is equal stoopid. is a battle flag that is being venerated. the battle were 'bout slavery. wanna make US flag, Japanese flag or even Kanadian flags symbols o' evil don't take much imagination. congrats. the thing is, Kanada were not born o' a desire to commit genocide 'gainst aboriginal people. did such genocide happen? sure, but to reduce the kanadian flag to a symbol o' genocide would be, in our estimation, unfair... though we get that kanadian natives no doubt feel different. even so, the red and white maple leaf banner were not adopted as the battle flag in a war o' extermination o' native peoples. by contrast, the confederate flag, not existing as any kinda symbol before 1861, were adopted by a group o' folks trying to maintain a slave culture. *shrug* the fight over the confederate flag at this time is a distraction. is much bigger and more meaningful problems. even so, don't kid yourself that veneration o' the confederate flag is the same as veneration o' the US flag or kanadian flag. *chuckle* three years ago we were on one o' our lengthy hiatuses from these boards. three years ago, to the day, we were back home... our original home in Pine Ridge. we were visiting family and while we did not intend to be home for the 4th o' july, it worked out that way. we had rented a car from budget rentals at the pierre regional airport location... got ourselves a 2009 mustang convertible. *shrug* we would never buy a convertible, but rent? why not, eh? anywho, within a day o' being home, our rental were demolished. get a handful o' folks to throw about 50 frozen apples at a car can result in a rather impressive amount o' damage. budget and Gromnir is no longer on speaking terms. pick your symbol. what did the mustang represent to the folks who destroyed it? excess? greed? America? why apples? well, you see, apples is a thin skin o' red on the outside, but is white on the inside. get it? folks angry with Gromnir were making a... colorful statement on the 4th o' July. symbols is important. anywho, happy 4th... gonna go celebrate. HA! Good Fun! ps funny aside for folks not familiar with sd, pierre is pronounced same as peer even though is named for a french guy. am not sure how many elementary school kids memorizing state capitals has been taught wrong.

kinda sweary HA! Good Fun!

well, http://bleacherreport.com/articles/2513884-bubba-watson-says-hell-remove-confederate-flag-from-his-general-lee-car?utm_source=cnn.com&utm_medium=referral&utm_campaign=editorial a guy named bubba is painting over the flag. HA! Good Fun!

the bg1 companions, with 1 exception, offered little save for a catchphrase and the contents of their character record sheet. perhaps there were a minor quest included, or not. if there were a quest, as with kivan, it were possible to finish the quest without ever realizing. the dour ranger never commented after confronting or even killing tazok in the bandit camp. special abilities were indeed more common in bg1, but again, that was a character record sheet kinda thing. weren't adding to character o' the character to have constitution high enough to generate regeneration, eh? a few o' the bg1 companion abilities caused more than a little anger btw. folks in the interplay boards were not happy that coran were a better fighter/thief than they could build themselves. similarly, edwin were a superior wizard to pc wizards for no reason other than his special ability. etc. there were not much to like about the bg1 companions. that ain't actual the criticism you might infer. what we mean is that the bg1 companions offered little to no story development after we acquired them, and d&d 2nd edition allowed very few statistical character development options after level 1. you liked the characters, if you like'd 'em, based on little effort from the biowarians. character record contents and catchphrase(s)? http://forums.obsidian.net/topic/80089-combat-companions-vs-adventurers/?p=1700741 is no new topics. HA! Good Fun!