[Just Right? (Difficulty that is)]

I think it has the typical problem many many RPGs have. It is to hard in the beginning and gets to easy later. The only exception was the final battle and a certain extra boss. Which were still pretty challenging in the end. Though a lot of the difficulty in the beginning comes from the game being designed for a full party almost immediately. 

[Problems with the Ending]

Wael I assume doesn't show up as an option if your character is highly honest(or not deceptive enough?). He didn't show up to me anyway.

I was honest and not deceptive at all and had that option. I also chose it. Didn't end well but mainly because I promissed every god to do what they want and they where super pissed when I didn't do it and all wrecked havok in the endings. 

 

I think you get the option if you actualy talked with Wael on the level before the last one. 

["What have you done?!" (Spoilers)]

 

That's more 'nut case' than 'evil', after all, your character was traveling with them for a reason. Why kill them now? Especially when you are sick and might need them?

well actually this is explained in the quest log, basically they were having you pick some berries so you can make tea for a cure, but you think that killing them will do more to improve your mood than just sipping some tea

 

So the explanation is actually "you are a nut case" then. 

[Is it too late for a redesign of the encounter/daily system for spellcasters?]

I doubt there would be any major changes to the spellcasting system. The game has been released for weeks, many people are already deep into their playthroughs and are firmly set in their builds and character composition. You can expect balance tweaks at best.

 

They did try a more "modern" spellcaster design with no daily spells. The result is a class that excels both at crowd control and AoE DPS, and is probably the strongest class overall. If you dislike the daily spell limit, you can play Cipher and witness the full glory of the "be-all end-all Wizard" trope Sawyer tried so hard to avoid.

I don't know Ciphers are good for trash mob sweeping but in long battles they are great in the beginning and the later effectivenes greatly depends on how well they can hit the enemy to regain focus. 

[The Nest Above the Clouds - bad design?]

I kind of felt bad about killing her, but there doesn't seem to be a good way to deal with this situation. She murdered a lot of people (check out all of the piles of bones lying around) and has absolutely no compunction about continuing in the same vein. Sorry dragon, but if that's how you want to be, there's no place there for you.

 

I'm curious about how you can chase her away though. I guess you have to spare the wyrmling until the dragon is down to Near Death? I might give it a try on my next playthrough.

She murdered a lot of people because they endangered her Hort. I mean how would you react if armed looters stormed into your Child's Room? 

[EI Mod and my opinions]

 

And confusing the target AI exploits its shortcomings because it was not the focus of development.

 

Seriously, I can read BG2 attack scripts, and I'm by no means an expert in AI programming (or programming at all). I can write (or could, a few years back) BG2 attack scripts at a similar level than the original ones. There is nothing special about BG2 AI. Its basic modus operandi is "if I see my attacker, attack him; if I haven't used my one special ability yet, use it; throw in a random chance to do nothing; re-evaluate attack target".

Just because you can easily outsmart something that wasn't a focus of the development doesn't mean that it's an exploit. Dice Poker in The Witcher 1 and 2 is incredibly easy, I win those almost every time, am I exploiting because I think I'm safe on three twos and I know the dumb AI will resign? I don't think so.

 

Creating smart AI is pretty hard, so encounter design should take into account that the player will probably be able to control the situation quite easily, and make it more difficult in other ways.

 

It certainly doesn't completely bypass resource management, it simply makes it a less significant challenge, compared to not rest-spamming. But again, as pointed out many times now, according to your logic, not deliberately gimping your character is thus the equivelent of exploitation/cheating, which is absurd.

What? I don't deliberately gimp my character? I have stated that I do enjoy the challenge of stretching the adventuring day as far as possible but I can't really do that in Pillars of Eternity because there's not much resource management, and Major Fatigue is pretty harsh. Usually kicks in before I can even try.

 

You have simply not presented any argument beyond simply denoting it as an exploit, to support your case.

Don't worry bro, Pillars of Eternity barely has any resource management for you to rest spam and avoid, so it must be the game for you

 

Pillars of Eternity has pretty much the same resource management the IE engine games have. The Spell progression is almost exactly the same and the battles where you only use your per encounter skills are the ones where you would click on the enemy to attack them until they die in the IE games (which is really most encounters in those games) 

[EI Mod and my opinions]

 

 

 

You still didn't answer the question.

 

 

So, I'm about to head into a really dangerous situation against an enemy of unknown abilities. I have no idea of the reception that I'm going to get. It might be positive, it might be negative. Who the hell knows? But one thing I do know -- he has a bunch of mates with him. Lots and lots of the buggers.

 

But, hey, I have some mates along to give me back-up and I know they'll have my back if it comes to crossing swords.

 

What about them? They could come along and stand shoulder-to-shoulder with me if worst comes to worst, right? That would make sense, right?

 

Hell no, I'll leave them behind and march up all by myself to confront this evil dictator! Sure that bad guy has a dozen offsiders but I'll be fine up there all on my lonesome. Right?

 

Sold! I'll buy 100 of those strategies at 100cp a-piece.

 

That's why I think it's cheesey. I don't feel it's a realistic reaction.

 

Again, if that's what others want to do, that's fine. But for RP reasons (and the RP element is fairly important to me), I don't think it floats at all.

 

So you think the  "There are a lot of dangerous guys so I will put myself and and all my companions even the squishy ones right in the middle of those guys. " would be the smart choice. The intelligent thing to do would be to not go up there at all and talk to raedric without going up there but you can't do that. 

The next best thing would be to only send up the ones that can survive in a direct melee battle with those guys and keep the rest of my party hidden somewhere where they can ambush those enemies. 

[EI Mod and my opinions]

 

All these battles have a certain mechanic that makes them interesting; the Raedric's battle is imho the best of them,

Sorry, but this is not the best fight in the game. I sent Eder in to initiate dialogue, all enemies attacked him and then I creamed them all with AoE damage, ranged damage and my Rogue coming in late with dual spears. Foe only AoE makes it a breeze to just sit your tank in the middle of all of the enemies in the room and then carefully aim stuff like Fan of Flames over and over again. Those guys also get minced if you use Eder with a Jolting Touch scroll.

 

I also beat it on the first try. It wasn't even hard and didn't require me to adjust to anything they did at all. I won simply by using the same strategy I use to beat everything else.

 

If spellcasters could actually protect themselves properly like they can in the IE games, then it might be a different story.

 

 

So... you basicly metagame'd this encounter hard by sending in your tank alone to trigger the dialogue that you couldn't know would turn out to be a battle. Come on, really? The fight is fun and challenging when doing it the way it was intended. Ever wondered why the NPCs are placed in a half-circle? That's because the dialogue triggers at a distance in which you are surrounded by those guys.

 

You couldn't know that the dialogue with the guy you came to assassinate would end in a battle? 

[Went to woods before the quest, now I can't leave.]

I think you should not be able to get in there before that. So it is probably bugged. 

[EI Mod and my opinions]

 

Darkcloud1987, on 12 Apr 2015 - 7:31 PM, said:Darkcloud1987, on 12 Apr 2015 - 7:31 PM, said:

 

ComplyOrDie, on 12 Apr 2015 - 3:52 PM, said:ComplyOrDie, on 12 Apr 2015 - 3:52 PM, said:

 

Darkcloud1987, on 12 Apr 2015 - 06:25 AM, said:Darkcloud1987, on 12 Apr 2015 - 06:25 AM, said:

 

Jasta11, on 12 Apr 2015 - 04:47 AM, said:Jasta11, on 12 Apr 2015 - 04:47 AM, said:

 

Luckmann, on 12 Apr 2015 - 04:37 AM, said:Luckmann, on 12 Apr 2015 - 04:37 AM, said:

 

RedSocialKnight, on 12 Apr 2015 - 04:22 AM, said:RedSocialKnight, on 12 Apr 2015 - 04:22 AM, said:

I find the "no engagement" part of the mod very strange.

 

I understand why Sensuki dislikes it, although I disagree. But, engagement is a really central part of how combat is designed in PoE.

 

Remove engagement and it seems to me you're just sort of left with a scrum.

 

Remove Engagement and nothing changes. The AI still acts like it's there. Engagement is not a very large part of how combat is designed in PoE, all it does is inhibit movement and forces everyone to cluster up and stay there, and saves the developers from having to make an AI that would move around and make decisions that would improve their position on the battlefield, for the same reason the player won't do it; it'll murder you with instant free invisible attacks if you even try to move *towards* the opponent that is engaging you.

 

The biggest problem with Engagement has always been for it to excuse it's own existence. I play with it on simply because the game is made for it, and there are Abilities and Spells and Talents that deal specifically with it, and I don't want to break pre-existing interacting functionalities, but it doesn't really add anything by itself.

 

I can't think of any RPG that ever had half-decent AI myself. Certainly not the IE games where enemies almost always just mobbed the first thing they saw. Difficulty in RPGs single-player game has never, ever come from the AI anyway in my experience, unless it's a very tightly scripted boss battle. It's always hard by making the enemy bigger and badder than the player so they have a challenge to overcome.

 

Not really disagreeing with you, just pointing that out. Albeit I do think engagement is preferable to everyone running around willy-nilly like in Baldur's Gate, I love establishing a frontline.

I think this is especially true in Baldur's Gate. It is filled with Mages which would be some of the most powerful ones in Faerun if they only knew how to open a door and well were smart enough for a sensible spell selection and usage of their spells.

 

 

http://www.gibberlings3.net/readmes/readme-stratagems.html

 

The frustrating thing for me is this has been done for Baldur's Gate by one person in their spare time (albeit over many years). It's a solid, partially randomized AI that basically makes intelligent enemies do intelligent things, example, they actually use good contingencies and sequences, and precast spells like stoneskin because if you were a mage you would have an 8 hour spell on so you didn't get backstabbed randomly one day. It doesn't break immersion, and nothing breaks the rules, it's just the AI intelligently uses the same tools that the player has available precisely how difficulty should be done.

 

I just don't think game developers see AI as a priority, which is partially understandable, although less so for single player RPGs like this. I don't care that the Starcraft single player AI doesn't exist because the replayability comes from human opponents, for a game like this you don't have that luxury, and many players want that feeling of challenge everpresent not once in a blue moon as it is with PoE on all modes at the moment.

 

Overall I actually prefer the systems in PoE, nearly all your options in BG came from spellcasters and particularly Wizards, but at the moment the vast majority of fights are basically decided in the first ten seconds, because nothing is thrown at you which forces you to adapt. This is a mix of scripting and bad/inaccurate/"bland" enemies (they look cool but are usually a bag of hitpoints with varying degrees of (in)accuracy). You couldn't stand toe to toe  not doing anything with many enemies for very long in BG no matter how pimped your tank was, certainly at higher levels.

 

And yeah, the final fight in Vanilla BG1 was not more interesting than Vanilla PoE. Difference is Sarevok was fun but so were all the end chapter fights and a ****load more besides, here the final battle sticks out like a sore thumb in that you actually have to think a bit.

 

SCS is nice but has its own problems. Most of them expanding on problems with the Vanilla game.  Mages actually using spells appropriate seems logical but imo gives the game to many strong mages.  The mages where only given such high levels in the vanilla game to compensate their crappy AI and when you are hit by an Abi Dazims Horrid Whitering for the first time you realize that enemies really casting spells at you works even worse than it does in PoE.  

 

Also SCS cheats with those contingencies and spells  even more than the original game did and realizes a lot of them via scripts.  This means they can't be interupted (intended for contingencies but not normal spells) and they are used even if they should not be able to be used. The game also turns into mage chess because mages are the only ones that can truly be protected against enemy spells and they are the only ones that can dispel the protections.

 

And in vanilla fights against mages are: true sight, Breach, hack to death

 

Really a lot of the problems with PoE are even worse in BG. 

 

I completely disagree, but that is the main reason i'm disapointed in PoE and i don't believe patches, expansions and the sequel will improve the game for me. The sole reason i liked IE gameplay was BG2 mage duels, and BG2 with SCS is...perfection. I would like a game made in the BG2 turned to eleven way, and it seems some people disliked the aspect of IE combat i liked the most. And since Sawyer desided to make the game for those people, i understand Sensuki's and Bester's desicion to give up on the game.

Sometimes all you can do is accept you are no part of the target audience, and move on to other games/companies.

I realy hope the next Obsidian kickstarter has nothing to do with PoE, and is designed from Avellone from scratch

 

While I generaly don't like the mage is the one integral class in the game desing thing. There is one thing that really ruins the smarter mages and demons from SCS. Dispel and remove magic. There is no protection from that spell for non mages and since enemies are almost all times at much higher levels it will dispel all of your protections. That means in every battle with a mage or stronger demon your other party members are completely helpless against their crowd control spells. 

 

I also don't like the extended mage chess since it is essentially the same thing every time. You just can leave out some of the parts of the chain with weaker mages.  NWN2 hat great mages where they could pull out strong protections without being completely invulnerable until you pull a big chain of dispels. They just would have needed stronger spells. 

 

My main problem with many spells in PoE and especially with Wizards spells is the short casting range. They almost have to go to melee range for some of them and then you have druids that have spells with the same damage, sensible casting range and huge aoe that is easy to cast party friendly even if the spell is not party friendly because they get such a huge range boost from int.

 

The other thing is that the engagement system somehow doesn't work out all that well. I don't know what it is because I like the AOO system like it is in NWN2 though not having such a thing allowed positioning of your party in the IE engine games to still cast AOE spells even when your melee fighters are already in combat. Though I am not sure if just disabling them like the mod does is a good idea since the game still was build with them in mind. 

[EI Mod and my opinions]

 

 

 

 

I find the "no engagement" part of the mod very strange.

 

I understand why Sensuki dislikes it, although I disagree. But, engagement is a really central part of how combat is designed in PoE.

 

Remove engagement and it seems to me you're just sort of left with a scrum.

 

Remove Engagement and nothing changes. The AI still acts like it's there. Engagement is not a very large part of how combat is designed in PoE, all it does is inhibit movement and forces everyone to cluster up and stay there, and saves the developers from having to make an AI that would move around and make decisions that would improve their position on the battlefield, for the same reason the player won't do it; it'll murder you with instant free invisible attacks if you even try to move *towards* the opponent that is engaging you.

 

The biggest problem with Engagement has always been for it to excuse it's own existence. I play with it on simply because the game is made for it, and there are Abilities and Spells and Talents that deal specifically with it, and I don't want to break pre-existing interacting functionalities, but it doesn't really add anything by itself.

 

I can't think of any RPG that ever had half-decent AI myself. Certainly not the IE games where enemies almost always just mobbed the first thing they saw. Difficulty in RPGs single-player game has never, ever come from the AI anyway in my experience, unless it's a very tightly scripted boss battle. It's always hard by making the enemy bigger and badder than the player so they have a challenge to overcome.

 

Not really disagreeing with you, just pointing that out. Albeit I do think engagement is preferable to everyone running around willy-nilly like in Baldur's Gate, I love establishing a frontline.

I think this is especially true in Baldur's Gate. It is filled with Mages which would be some of the most powerful ones in Faerun if they only knew how to open a door and well were smart enough for a sensible spell selection and usage of their spells.

 

 

http://www.gibberlings3.net/readmes/readme-stratagems.html

 

The frustrating thing for me is this has been done for Baldur's Gate by one person in their spare time (albeit over many years). It's a solid, partially randomized AI that basically makes intelligent enemies do intelligent things, example, they actually use good contingencies and sequences, and precast spells like stoneskin because if you were a mage you would have an 8 hour spell on so you didn't get backstabbed randomly one day. It doesn't break immersion, and nothing breaks the rules, it's just the AI intelligently uses the same tools that the player has available precisely how difficulty should be done.

 

I just don't think game developers see AI as a priority, which is partially understandable, although less so for single player RPGs like this. I don't care that the Starcraft single player AI doesn't exist because the replayability comes from human opponents, for a game like this you don't have that luxury, and many players want that feeling of challenge everpresent not once in a blue moon as it is with PoE on all modes at the moment.

 

Overall I actually prefer the systems in PoE, nearly all your options in BG came from spellcasters and particularly Wizards, but at the moment the vast majority of fights are basically decided in the first ten seconds, because nothing is thrown at you which forces you to adapt. This is a mix of scripting and bad/inaccurate/"bland" enemies (they look cool but are usually a bag of hitpoints with varying degrees of (in)accuracy). You couldn't stand toe to toe  not doing anything with many enemies for very long in BG no matter how pimped your tank was, certainly at higher levels.

 

And yeah, the final fight in Vanilla BG1 was not more interesting than Vanilla PoE. Difference is Sarevok was fun but so were all the end chapter fights and a ****load more besides, here the final battle sticks out like a sore thumb in that you actually have to think a bit.

 

SCS is nice but has its own problems. Most of them expanding on problems with the Vanilla game.  Mages actually using spells appropriate seems logical but imo gives the game to many strong mages.  The mages where only given such high levels in the vanilla game to compensate their crappy AI and when you are hit by an Abi Dazims Horrid Whitering for the first time you realize that enemies really casting spells at you works even worse than it does in PoE.  

 

Also SCS cheats with those contingencies and spells  even more than the original game did and realizes a lot of them via scripts.  This means they can't be interupted (intended for contingencies but not normal spells) and they are used even if they should not be able to be used. The game also turns into mage chess because mages are the only ones that can truly be protected against enemy spells and they are the only ones that can dispel the protections.

 

And in vanilla fights against mages are: true sight, Breach, hack to death

 

Really a lot of the problems with PoE are even worse in BG. 

[has anyone tried to do only crit path to gauge how much xp we get?]

You can only do the first four bounties that way though. You habe to turn them in to get the next ones.

[EI Mod and my opinions]

 

 

I find the "no engagement" part of the mod very strange.

 

I understand why Sensuki dislikes it, although I disagree. But, engagement is a really central part of how combat is designed in PoE.

 

Remove engagement and it seems to me you're just sort of left with a scrum.

 

 

Remove Engagement and nothing changes. The AI still acts like it's there. Engagement is not a very large part of how combat is designed in PoE, all it does is inhibit movement and forces everyone to cluster up and stay there, and saves the developers from having to make an AI that would move around and make decisions that would improve their position on the battlefield, for the same reason the player won't do it; it'll murder you with instant free invisible attacks if you even try to move *towards* the opponent that is engaging you.

 

The biggest problem with Engagement has always been for it to excuse it's own existence. I play with it on simply because the game is made for it, and there are Abilities and Spells and Talents that deal specifically with it, and I don't want to break pre-existing interacting functionalities, but it doesn't really add anything by itself.

 

I can't think of any RPG that ever had half-decent AI myself. Certainly not the IE games where enemies almost always just mobbed the first thing they saw. Difficulty in RPGs single-player game has never, ever come from the AI anyway in my experience, unless it's a very tightly scripted boss battle. It's always hard by making the enemy bigger and badder than the player so they have a challenge to overcome.

 

Not really disagreeing with you, just pointing that out. Albeit I do think engagement is preferable to everyone running around willy-nilly like in Baldur's Gate, I love establishing a frontline.

I think this is especially true in Baldur's Gate. It is filled with Mages which would be some of the most powerful ones in Faerun if they only knew how to open a door and well were smart enough for a sensible spell selection and usage of their spells.

[has anyone tried to do only crit path to gauge how much xp we get?]

That dungeon took me around 5 hours but I went in there at max level as the last thing before the point of no return. If you don't do bounties you should be able to do quite a lot of quests but there are not that many quests that I would call vital to the story. So do the ones that interest you.

[endless path of od nua mistake]

Send a single character to the traps the one with the best resistances and trigger it. Then work your way up from there. The stairs aren't that far away. 

[Roleplaying with the Might attribute]

I Agree. The Might atribute is the best instance to show that the stats are designed for game balance and not for roleplaying.