Why Is Resting/Injuries and Maybe Even Supplies, Still In At All?

[jones092201]

Remember though- people complained like hell about the endurance\health system and the per rest and the camping during POE I.

They simplified all this because, in part, we asked them to.

I love the access to development we get via the crowd-funding dynamic, but I also think at some point we just need to let them make their game; and they need to learn to say, confidently, we have something in mind.

 

If not we’ll keep getting these half-developed features.

[cokane]

Honestly, I think resting mechanics are pretty bad in video games in general because video games operate on a completely different level than a tabletop experience. You see, there is no DM in a video game, so nothing really stops you from abusing the rest system anyway, rendering it moot and something to be used in an options menu (maybe as a difficulty option?). Basically, why have a Per Rest and Per Encounter ability when I can either hike back to an inn whenever I please or just sit my booty down and camp to fix the problem right away?

 

I know it might get some people up in arms but it's actually really important in terms of game design. Are you just wasting people's time for "realism" in a game where people can just drink a potion or cast a basic spell to deal with literally any other health issue? Did nobody think about inventing the magical equivalent of caffeine since they solved their world's other health problems via potions and magic? As with anything, you could just build something entirely around a resting mechanic but it'll be a damn hard time balancing it so you hit the exact right pixel between "Am I wasting people's time by forcing them to rest constantly?" and "Why even bother resting in a dangerous place since I have enough charges anyway?".

 

Some games have attempted to solve this problem with random encounters on rest but that's pretty terrible for obvious reasons and hasn't been used in ages as far as I'm aware. You rest because you're out of spells/skills/whatever and/or have low health, followed by random monsters ruining your day and wasting your time. This is where a DM comes in to be lenient but a computer has no such distinction, it can only operate within the parameters it's given. So either you get swarmed by enemies or you don't - and god help you if the players figure out some health/spell value to achieve leniency vs harshness.

 

I'm all for it as an optional difficulty or roleplaying option. By all means, rest away if you find it fun and/or realistic but I don't think there's any really good option so far that has straddled the line between realism and wasting your time. I never really rested in the previous game outside town visits because it was lenient with charges and such - only severe screw-ups once or twice in a playthrough which doesn't justify an entire game mechanic. Honestly, I don't really think the mechanic was needed at all unless you did a blind first playthrough on PotD, at which point you're such a small part of the playerbase that it might be worth just relegating it to either be mandatory on PotD with limited resting at inns (maybe by making that absurdly expensive or something) or as an extra option as mentioned before.

 

Basically, this is such a fundamental game mechanic that it's at the point of either going all out and virtually eliminating resting at inns (either thorugh economy or just running around tiny villages where no one will take you in) or you don't bother at all and balance your encounters around having X abilities at Y levels among your party. I can deal with either but I'm not a big fan of this middlepoint we have currently and where video games tend to settle. Either I get to go all out all the time against tougher opponents or I get to optimize my resources and alter my gameplay via party class management and item management. PoE2 seems to tilt quite a bit towards the former option, which I'm okay with, but I can see why D&D traditionalists may not be fans. It's also arguable whether or not the opposition is tough enough but I'm not on PotD yet, as I'm doing my first playthrough on the 2nd highest difficulty.

 

This is no small or simple change to make in either direction, as you need to tweak basically every number in the game from the amount of money you get to how much health you have, plus it impacts your gameplay experience in terms of seeing major cities and such (the devs will have to find a really good answer for you either never visiting cities or never being able to find a bed in one). Interesting topic, though!

 

TL;DR: I write way too much. I'm sorry fam.

 

I don't think we should look just at tabletop RPG's when talking about combat/strategy systems. The combat mechanics in Pillars and BG type games has always been based on STRATEGY games. Even the original DnD combat rules were, in part, ripped from older tabletop strategy war games. This is why the original DnD games like Pool of Radiance focused on a turn-based, strategic combat. Just as the new isometric RPG's have a spiritual ancestor in BG, so too, BG's spiritual ancestor was Pool of Radiance and its spinoffs.

 

And these games depended upon a strategic layer that the player is responsible for maintaining. Ultimately the only "reward" players got for doing a good job on that strategic layer was clearing out dungeons faster, i.e. beating the game faster. But that's essentially the core reward for any game. Play some twitch-reliant first person shooter, and guess what your ultimate reward is for having fast reflexes? Not dying as much and beating the game faster. What's your reward in an RPG for buying better gear? Beating the next dungeon more easily than you would have without it.

 

It's no different. And to remove this strategic layer is to give the player fewer things to play with, fewer knobs to mess with to beat the game faster. This makes for more limited game play.

 

I don't think the changes have to be complicated. Make resting more expensive and make wounds pop up more frequently. So players' punishment for playing poorly is less gold to spend on goodies, and thus less chance to beat the game faster.  Your reward is more gold and thus more chance to buy more goodies. The same reward system every video game has ever had. This doesn't even require a big overhaul and doesn't even have to exist in lower difficulties.

[flamesium]

What does it add though? It’s not adding anything to the gameplay if the only limitation to remove injuries / replenish empowers is whether you can be bothered to waste 5 minutes watching load screens and walking.

 

It’s so abstract and involves so many other leaps of logic (Why would going to sleep cure my severe burns? What are the healers in my group healing if they aren’t healing injuries?) I’m not sure it can reasonably be said to be worth keeping for immersion alone.

 

If you have to weigh the benefits of resting against some other significant in-game factor then fair enough, at that point it’s a legit gameplay mechanic.

 

edit: this was in reply to earlier posts. I agree that making resting significantly expensive would work, though it would still be difficult to get right.

Edited May 23, 2018 by flamesium

[SonicMage117]

What does it add though? It’s not adding anything to the gameplay if the only limitation to remove injuries / replenish empowers is whether you can be bothered to waste 5 minutes watching load screens and walking.

 

It’s so abstract and involves so many other leaps of logic (Why would going to sleep cure my severe burns? What are the healers in my group healing if they aren’t healing injuries?) I’m not sure it can reasonably be said to be worth keeping for immersion alone.

Good point to why this (resting) is the poorest of all systems in the old IE games. Which is why games aren't really doing this tedious system anymore. It's a design flaw that was somehow uplifted by the community into something it really wasn't - for nostalgic reasons. Ever since, the rest of us (even people like myself who realized this was a flaw when the games first released in the 90's) still must suffer for it.

 

Like I said, fortunately this system is dying in rpg's and crpg's alike. Thank God. Modern rpg's don't go for this crap and that's just one more thing that keeps IE inspired games from growing more than niche, ancient and outdated mechanics will keep the game from evolving while the rest of the world gets better. It's not immersive but older players will argue that too because that cultic mind of "That's how we grew up with it so that's how it should be and that makes it more immersive".

 

Crap. Let's make this system extinct and make future Pillars Of Eternity games better!!! There are systems more refined, sad that Obsidian is cheapening the experience, shame on you Obsidian!!!

 

If you couldn't tell, I've always hated resting systems.

 

 

 

 

p.s The "authentic D&D/IE experience" excuse is rendered irrelevant when you realize how many other systems are modernized or uninspired.

 

 

That is all.

Edited May 23, 2018 by SonicMage117

[cokane]

What does it add though? It’s not adding anything to the gameplay if the only limitation to remove injuries / replenish empowers is whether you can be bothered to waste 5 minutes watching load screens and walking.

 

It’s so abstract and involves so many other leaps of logic (Why would going to sleep cure my severe burns? What are the healers in my group healing if they aren’t healing injuries?) I’m not sure it can reasonably be said to be worth keeping for immersion alone.

 

If you have to weigh the benefits of resting against some other significant in-game factor then fair enough, at that point it’s a legit gameplay mechanic.

 

edit: this was in reply to earlier posts. I agree that making resting significantly expensive would work, though it would still be difficult to get right.

 

I'd argue that the combat in these kinds of games is never going to be enough on its own. The player has such a huge advantage with being able to pause and being able to use the easy sneak mechanic to prepare for most fights. Not to mention being able to craft items for specific encounters. And, imo, people aren't going to enjoy a super punishing combat system where every single fight is an epic life or death battle. It kind of kills the effect of fighting the big dragon if he was just as tough as the xaurip mob, no? And making weak mobs in this game is just making things that the player will, once they get the hang of it, mindlessly click through.

 

What it adds to the game is a richer diversity of combat experiences and thus gives designers a richer toolset to create dungeons and wilderness areas. A dungeon with a series of medium sized fights can test players' decision making in a different kind of way than having, say, one really big dragon fight. It adds a separate dimension of player decision making, and that's what these games are all about no? Just as the player agonizes over quest decisions, so too, it's nice to agonize over whether to, for example, burn expensive resting supplies or push on with your injured party. Having a strategic layer gives the game greater breadth.

[Karkarov]

 

I think the systems flaw is two fold.  It is too easy to get injuries from stupid stuff like scripted encounters and traps, and injuries are too easy to heal off.  To get rid of an injury they should actually implement like a "medic" system where you actually have to go to an NPC in a town to get treated or something along those lines.  Traps should simply inflict long term debuffs that last a day or two, and scripted encounters should do the same or simply cause you to fail for real and make no progress.

Damn, I nearly forgot about that. There were so many occasions where I was faced with a stat check, half the characters would pass it and half would not...and nothing. I get past the scripted event, not even an injury to my name... So what you're saying is, half of my party failed to climb the rope across the chasm due to their lacking athletics...but we all made it to the other side? My athletic characters managed to swim through the flooded tunnel to the other end while the rest didn't make it...but we're all here in the cave. I...o-ok. I'm with ya on that.

That is absolutely not what I said.

 

I said you fail, you fail.  In your swimming example it would go one of two ways.

 

1:  Your success people are forced to stop and save those who failed, pulling them back to where you dove in because it is close.  So you basically go nowhere.

2: Your success people succeed and got wherever they were going, yay!  Those who failed drowned and are now dead.

 

^ that is how it should work in a no injury from scripted stuff game.

Edited May 23, 2018 by Karkarov

[whiskiz]

Some good discussion on the topic.

 

It definitely seems odd the way it's been implemented, so casually, so pointless.

 

I'd be down for having the rest/attrition system more fleshed out, more enforced, more meaningufl if we had to have it at all - or else again, remove it entirely.

 

It's an archaic and pointless system and adds no value whatsoever in its current state.

 

Because companies in this day and age are all about the bottom line - a properly enforced, meaningful attrition system is not very mainstream friendly (maybe just making the fights much easier on lower difficulties will thereby circumvent it appropriately there.) so in the end the only option left is to remove it.

 

Either that or leave it in half-baked and mostly as a traditional and archaic gimmick and for "roleplay" i guess.

Edited May 23, 2018 by whiskiz

[cokane]

Some good discussion on the topic.

 

It definitely seems odd the way it's been implemented, so casually, so pointless.

 

I'd be down for having the rest/attrition system more fleshed out, more enforced, more meaningufl if we had to have it at all - or else again, remove it entirely.

 

It's an archaic and pointless system and adds no value whatsoever in its current state.

 

Because companies in this day and age are all about the bottom line - a properly enforced, meaningful attrition system is not very mainstream friendly (maybe just making the fights much easier on lower difficulties will thereby circumvent it appropriately there.) so in the end the only option left is to remove it entirely.

 

Either that or leave it in half-baked and mostly as a traditional and archaic gimmick, i guess.

 

I'm not sure they can really remove it though. Wounds are a core part of the game, they're a consequence in many of the text encounters. They're the only things traps do now that there isn't a health system. They're even used in other dungeon puzzles, such as in the fire room in one of the game's very early dungeons. And they're the only consequence right now for fighting poorly, other than total party wipe. I'm not aware of how you could redesign all these elements without them. So, I think wounds are here to stay. The alternative would be to have a much harsher penalty for these things.

 

I suppose you could redesign curing wounds. So you could possibly eliminate resting and replace it with a waiting period or some kind of item/gold-draining cure. I think the problem with a waiting period, is many players would be motivated to just reload rather than lose their favorite companions for a stretch. The sweet spot for wounds should be that it costs the player enough to motivate them to play the battles well but not so much that theyll just reload after every mistake. Some other item could work in lieu of resting+food, but I think the food crafting system is actually really well done, and a great upgrade over the original's. I just think these resources need to cost players much more gold (at least on the top two difficulties?), so that my decision to rest isn't the no-brainer that it is now.

 

I'll also add on resting, that I think a few plot, companion stories are tied around it, so again, like wounds, I'm just not sure you can eliminate this without causing serious downstream problems.

[Ashjyr]

Not a fan of attrition-based gameplay myself.

 

Remember all those classic JRPGs from the 90s where you do not heal to full health after every battle? Players would have to stock up on 98372 healing potions just to keep their health topped up.

 

For rest-based abilities to work in POE, there would have to be limitations on how often you can replenish its use. 

 

Using that one Fireball of Awesome Explosions in one fight isn't really a test of strategy and skill if you can use it every fight by resting before-hand.

 

In order for it to be a meaningful restriction, you would have to limit the way resting works. Maybe make it so you can't rest more than once in a day (who sleeps 8 hours, fights for 1hr, then sleeps another 8 hours?)

 

But if they made it this way then rest-based abilities become too underpowered, and they need to make it more powerful to compensate. But then it creates another problem of having a character who's not being utilized to the fullest in most fights, only going 100% in the more critical fights.

 

Rest-based systems don't make a game better or more challenging. It's just a design choice. What makes it challenging is how the devs design their encounters around the design.

 

There are other systems around:

1. MMOs use cooldown-based systems (you can use Skill X only once every Y seconds)
2. Action RPGs use combo-based systems (you can only use Skill X after hitting with Skill A and Skill B and then Skill C).
3. Back in the 90s, JRPG type limit-break systems were popular (You can use Skill X after killing Y number of enemies).

Of them all, I just happen to like attrition-based systems the least.

[whiskiz]

 

Some good discussion on the topic.

 

It definitely seems odd the way it's been implemented, so casually, so pointless.

 

I'd be down for having the rest/attrition system more fleshed out, more enforced, more meaningufl if we had to have it at all - or else again, remove it entirely.

 

It's an archaic and pointless system and adds no value whatsoever in its current state.

 

Because companies in this day and age are all about the bottom line - a properly enforced, meaningful attrition system is not very mainstream friendly (maybe just making the fights much easier on lower difficulties will thereby circumvent it appropriately there.) so in the end the only option left is to remove it entirely.

 

Either that or leave it in half-baked and mostly as a traditional and archaic gimmick, i guess.

 

I'm not sure they can really remove it though. Wounds are a core part of the game, they're a consequence in many of the text encounters. They're the only things traps do now that there isn't a health system. They're even used in other dungeon puzzles, such as in the fire room in one of the game's very early dungeons. And they're the only consequence right now for fighting poorly, other than total party wipe. I'm not aware of how you could redesign all these elements without them. So, I think wounds are here to stay. The alternative would be to have a much harsher penalty for these things.

 

I suppose you could redesign curing wounds. So you could possibly eliminate resting and replace it with a waiting period or some kind of item/gold-draining cure. I think the problem with a waiting period, is many players would be motivated to just reload rather than lose their favorite companions for a stretch. The sweet spot for wounds should be that it costs the player enough to motivate them to play the battles well but not so much that theyll just reload after every mistake. Some other item could work in lieu of resting+food, but I think the food crafting system is actually really well done, and a great upgrade over the original's. I just think these resources need to cost players much more gold (at least on the top two difficulties?), so that my decision to rest isn't the no-brainer that it is now.

 

I'll also add on resting, that I think a few plot, companion stories are tied around it, so again, like wounds, I'm just not sure you can eliminate this without causing serious downstream problems.

 

 

Plot points being tied around resting is a simple problem - don't tie plot points around resting, haha.

 

A waiting penalty is never a good thing imo, you don't want to have to sit in a time-out for hitting traps or lose your favorite characters, you will indeed just reload or wait etc.

 

Making mostly traps have any sort of impact? Not so easily solvable, true.

 

Maybe the good ol equipment durability/gold sink - they damage gear, make it so it isn't cheap so it's a bit of a meaningful setback - though the economy is never balanced for very long in these kinds of games, before long you're drowning in currency and supplies and whatever else.

 

Maybe when your gear is damaged you lose some stats and maybe the bonus effects like "fine" etc - enchantments don't work very well on damaged gear. A sword isn't "fine" when it was just doused in an acid trap.

 

That's a meaningful stat impact, without just being able to rest almost anywhere anytime to reset - that would mean having to go alll the way back to town for a blacksmith to repair your stuff as well as tying in the gold sink and supplies an stuff used to sail back there. I guess that's similar to resting, though the current resting iteration is much more casual and pointless.

 

 

Not a fan of attrition-based gameplay myself.

 

Remember all those classic JRPGs from the 90s where you do not heal to full health after every battle? Players would have to stock up on 98372 healing potions just to keep their health topped up.

 

For rest-based abilities to work in POE, there would have to be limitations on how often you can replenish its use. 

 

Using that one Fireball of Awesome Explosions in one fight isn't really a test of strategy and skill if you can use it every fight by resting before-hand.

 

In order for it to be a meaningful restriction, you would have to limit the way resting works. Maybe make it so you can't rest more than once in a day (who sleeps 8 hours, fights for 1hr, then sleeps another 8 hours?)

 

But if they made it this way then rest-based abilities become too underpowered, and they need to make it more powerful to compensate. But then it creates another problem of having a character who's not being utilized to the fullest in most fights, only going 100% in the more critical fights.

 

Rest-based systems don't make a game better or more challenging. It's just a design choice. What makes it challenging is how the devs design their encounters around the design.

 

There are other systems around:

1. MMOs use cooldown-based systems (you can use Skill X only once every Y seconds)
2. Action RPGs use combo-based systems (you can only use Skill X after hitting with Skill A and Skill B and then Skill C).
3. Back in the 90s, JRPG type limit-break systems were popular (You can use Skill X after killing Y number of enemies).

Of them all, I just happen to like attrition-based systems the least.

 

That was one of my main points, nicely expanded on.

 

Per encounter isn't easier and/or per rest isn't more challenging - per encounter is only easier in PoE 2 atm because apparently the difficulty is being balanced post release and so hasn't been done yet, especially on PotD and Vet. It's not the combat system, but the balance around it that affects challenge.

 

Good examples of other systems. I personally love the cd-based mmo type system - it's a much friendlier (again not necessarily easier, but more enjoyable and much less restrictive) attrition-based system. You're still able to completely engage with the combat.

 

And you know what? Here's a perfect example of an oldschool-type, isometric, tactical turn-based RPG with cds done right - Balrum. 

 

So it's definitely possible. Check out the pics on steam.

Edited May 23, 2018 by whiskiz

[Elerond]

Game is now build and balanced around resting, wounds, and food, so saying that they don't give value in their current state is quite fallacious statement, because they give so much value in current state of affairs that game would break quite totally if you take them away. It is another question if value they give for the game is such that player enjoys or interesting, but as mechanics they are hard to replace in the game as it is.

 

Harder difficulty levels or optional difficulty option could be forced rest for the party in end of the every day at same time when you pay your ship crews salaries, and when they consume their foods. So that player needs to either use much more money on their party's food or accept weaker food bonuses.

 

There could be also another difficulty option where maybe can rest only once per day and rest would heal only one injury.

[Silent Winter]

Remember though- people complained like hell about the endurance\health system and the per rest and the camping during POE I.

They simplified all this because, in part, we asked them to.

I love the access to development we get via the crowd-funding dynamic, but I also think at some point we just need to let them make their game; and they need to learn to say, confidently, we have something in mind.

 

If not we’ll keep getting these half-developed features.

Who's this 'we'?

Yeah - the people who complained about health/endurance and per-rest got what they wanted.

Those who defended that system...didn't.

 

I liked the long-term health v. endurance thing because every hit you took mattered.  You couldn't just heal yourself through a fight as you'd eventually run out of health. Now it doesn't matter if I end the fight on 1HP or 100HP, or take a bunch of hits and heal them up.

Was it perfect? No.

But getting rid of it entirely was a step backwards IMO.

 

Similar with the per-rest abilities - I didn't rest-spam so that system suited my play-style.  Made it more challenging to get through a dungeon.  Sure I had some party-wipes at times...but so far in Deadfire...one.

 

I'm sure some people enjoy everything being per-encounter - groovy for them.

 

The rest system as implemented in Deadfire works as intended - it's making me think about and use those food bonuses (v. giving them to the crew for morale).  The injuries are...not a big deal but as stated above, simply limit the number of times you can be resurrected in a fight (3 if you've been resting up after getting any injury - less if you haven't).

 

Still - I'm enjoying Deadfire so that's the main thing

[whiskiz]

 

Remember though- people complained like hell about the endurance\health system and the per rest and the camping during POE I.

They simplified all this because, in part, we asked them to.

I love the access to development we get via the crowd-funding dynamic, but I also think at some point we just need to let them make their game; and they need to learn to say, confidently, we have something in mind.

 

If not we’ll keep getting these half-developed features.

Who's this 'we'?

Yeah - the people who complained about health/endurance and per-rest got what they wanted.

Those who defended that system...didn't.

 

I liked the long-term health v. endurance thing because every hit you took mattered.  You couldn't just heal yourself through a fight as you'd eventually run out of health. Now it doesn't matter if I end the fight on 1HP or 100HP, or take a bunch of hits and heal them up.

Was it perfect? No.

But getting rid of it entirely was a step backwards IMO.

 

Similar with the per-rest abilities - I didn't rest-spam so that system suited my play-style.  Made it more challenging to get through a dungeon.  Sure I had some party-wipes at times...but so far in Deadfire...one.

 

I'm sure some people enjoy everything being per-encounter - groovy for them.

 

The rest system as implemented in Deadfire works as intended - it's making me think about and use those food bonuses (v. giving them to the crew for morale).  The injuries are...not a big deal but as stated above, simply limit the number of times you can be resurrected in a fight (3 if you've been resting up after getting any injury - less if you haven't).

 

Still - I'm enjoying Deadfire so that's the main thing

 

 

Are you blind? Have reading problems?

 

As mentioned in this thread and all throughout the forums and even before the game was released - The game is not even balanced yet, especially on Vet and PotD.

 

I repeat, the game is not balanced yet.

 

You have had no party wipes in Deadfire, because the game is not balanced yet.

 

For anyone else that complains about it being too easy currently - the, game, especially, the, higher, difficulties, is, not, balanced, yet.

 

It has nothing to do with the new per encounter combat system.

 

For about the 5th time, they apparently had to choose between bugfixing or balancing the difficulty before release - guess which they went with. So they are apparently having to balance the game post-release - which is why i haven't even got it yet (i don't want to ruin it by having it be a faceroll and would rather pay for something that's actually finished, instead of encouraging otherwise.)

 

TL:DR Pillars of Eternity II: Deadfire, has not been balanced properly yet.

 

Any problems or arguments about it being too easy, currently, are invalid (annoying af)

 

They are working on the balancing and should announce when it's done in the next couple weeks/months.

Edited May 23, 2018 by whiskiz

[vanyel54]

Removing sleep management is another step away from the definition of the ROLE playing game in my opinion.
We already had the removal of weight, the wear of the material etc... Then there will probably be the removal of the personal inventory (which here is really useless in the current state).
You have the right to not like this "realistic" side of this kind of game but it's not my case.

Obidian should have gone to the bottom of his mind and not introduce the system of empowerment and injury.
The problem now is that the fighting has no consequences. We press the magic button and we're gone again.

We could hope for a "realistic" mode but it would probably be too much work.

[Boeroer]

Actually i guess i do speak for most people[...]

 

Yes, you guess. But first of all you can't know until you ask them all before speaking in their name and secondly it's bad style to post your opinion on a matter and then do so as if everybody agrees with it - even if you firmly believe that everybody thinks the same way (which you don't because you opened a thread about that topic and learned that not everybody agrees with your opinion about per rest vs. per encounter).

 

While I may share some of your opinions on the whole matter (I don't think the injury system is nice for example) I don't think that you present your arguments in a way that leads to approval or a fruitful diskussion.

 

I personally really liked the endurance/health system of PoE because it prevented endurance healing from being too strong (see Deadfire) and thus prevented builds and party compositions that circumvent the need for defenses and health by abusing healing. I mean I like powergaming, but breaking the game balance completely is only short-termed fun if you ask me. Others may think otherwise, that's fine - but I think my argument is solid.

 

Of course PotD is too easy in Deadfire. It's known and it's worked on. Bug removal had priority which is a resonable decision. 

 

In nearly every thread you say that you don't play Deadfire yet because you wait for PotD to be fixed - which I can totally understand. But if you didn't play it yet: why do you feel the need to discuss its elements so fiercly (using personal attacks every now and then?) even though you didn't experience them? Wouldn't the discussion be more valuable if you at least experienced and "felt" the new mechanics? Maybe they are not as good or bad as yout thought once you dive into the game? I criticized a lot of the new stuff when the first beta came out - but after playing it for a while now not everything is as bad as I thought (I mean I miss my endurance/health and also my per-rest spells as well as the universal talent pools - but the game still plays nicely for me).

Edited May 23, 2018 by Boeroer

[Silent Winter]

 

 

Remember though- people complained like hell about the endurance\health system and the per rest and the camping during POE I.

They simplified all this because, in part, we asked them to.

I love the access to development we get via the crowd-funding dynamic, but I also think at some point we just need to let them make their game; and they need to learn to say, confidently, we have something in mind.

 

If not we’ll keep getting these half-developed features.

Who's this 'we'?

Yeah - the people who complained about health/endurance and per-rest got what they wanted.

Those who defended that system...didn't.

 

I liked the long-term health v. endurance thing because every hit you took mattered.  You couldn't just heal yourself through a fight as you'd eventually run out of health. Now it doesn't matter if I end the fight on 1HP or 100HP, or take a bunch of hits and heal them up.

Was it perfect? No.

But getting rid of it entirely was a step backwards IMO.

 

Similar with the per-rest abilities - I didn't rest-spam so that system suited my play-style.  Made it more challenging to get through a dungeon.  Sure I had some party-wipes at times...but so far in Deadfire...one.

 

I'm sure some people enjoy everything being per-encounter - groovy for them.

 

The rest system as implemented in Deadfire works as intended - it's making me think about and use those food bonuses (v. giving them to the crew for morale).  The injuries are...not a big deal but as stated above, simply limit the number of times you can be resurrected in a fight (3 if you've been resting up after getting any injury - less if you haven't).

 

Still - I'm enjoying Deadfire so that's the main thing

 

 

Are you blind? Have reading problems?

 

Neither, thanks for asking.

While we're on the subject - it's POTD and maybe Veteran that are being (complained about for being too easy and awaiting a big balance) worked on.  I'm only playing on Classic difficulty.  AFAIK, nobody has mentioned this needing a big rebalance.

Also - my point was not about how many party-wipes I was getting in PoE (1), and only about the reasons for those wipes.  I think only the big optional bosses like Ardra dragon gave me trouble at full strength.  But meeting a lesser encounter at less than full-strength could also prove challenging. It was interesting to me to decide whether to use a more powerful ability to reduce the health-loss (by ending the fight faster) v. saving that ability and risking getting hit more.  (Again, it was health + endurance and both were important).  IMO, the addition of per-encounter 'mastered spells' made the game more boring by making those spells the 'go to' for the lesser fights.  YMMV.

In any event - what's done is done.  I'm still enjoying Deadfire.

[flamesium]

Game is now build and balanced around resting, wounds, and food, so saying that they don't give value in their current state is quite fallacious statement, because they give so much value in current state of affairs that game would break quite totally if you take them away.

But the cost of resting is so negligible that it amounts to a ‘click to remove injuries and replenish Empowers’ button, which renders it meaningless, because why would you ever not want to remove injuries and replenish Empowers? In its current state it’s effectively the same as having no injury system and unlimited empowers.

[whiskiz]

 

Actually i guess i do speak for most people[...]

 

Yes, you guess. But first of all you can't know until you ask them all before speaking in their name and secondly it's bad style to post your opinion on a matter and then do so as if everybody agrees with it - even if you firmly believe that everybody thinks the same way (which you don't because you opened a thread about that topic and learned that not everybody agrees with your opinion about per rest vs. per encounter).

 

While I may share some of your opinions on the whole matter (I don't think the injury system is nice for example) I don't think that you present your arguments in a way that leads to approval or a fruitful diskussion.

 

I personally really liked the endurance/health system of PoE because it prevented endurance healing from being too strong (see Deadfire) and thus prevented builds and party compositions that circumvent the need for defenses and health by abusing healing. I mean I like powergaming, but breaking the game balance completely is only short-termed fun if you ask me. Others may think otherwise, that's fine - but I think my argument is solid.

 

Of course PotD is too easy in Deadfire. It's known and it's worked on. Bug removal had priority which is a resonable decision. 

 

In nearly every thread you say that you don't play Deadfire yet because you wait for PotD to be fixed - which I can totally understand. But if you didn't play it yet: why do you feel the need to discuss its elements so fiercly (using personal attacks every now and then?) even though you didn't experience them? Wouldn't the discussion be more valuable if you at least experienced and "felt" the new mechanics? Maybe they are not as good or bad as yout thought once you dive into the game? I criticized a lot of the new stuff when the first beta came out - but after playing it for a while now not everything is as bad as I thought (I mean I miss my endurance/health and also my per-rest spells as well as the universal talent pools - but the game still plays nicely for me).

 

 

Going off track a bit but:

 

I like how you quote me out of context saying "i guess i do speak for most people" removing the part where i back it up with a link to a positive comment about per encounter being one of, if not the most upvoted comments on the forums and mentioning the fact that even the devs must feel the same, having made the change.

 

You can argue the point all you want, but at this point you're arguing against facts and needing to warp your arguments to do so, by using very specific parts of quotes to do so

 

And you wonder why sometimes i "use personal attacks" at least i'm straight up about it - not doing it in a roundabout way by using out of context and pieces of quotes to make you look bad and to be able to give my arguments even a semblance of validity. 

 

Not to mention the only things classed as personal attacks would be calling people ignorant, nostalgia-ridden, oldschool archaic system fans - that and asking the one guy if he can even read, since he made an invalid argument when the appropriate info as been all over the place including the very thread he made the comment in.

 

 

Anyway:

 

"But if you didn't play it yet: why do you feel the need to discuss its elements so fiercly (using personal attacks every now and then?) even though you didn't experience them?"

 

Has anyone really experienced them properly yet, when the game hasn't even been finished?

 

A good example are the people who complain it's too easy - they are getting misleading impressions from playing an unfinished product and blaming it on the systems, so i don't think engaging with it when it isn't even done properly, is any better than not engaging with it at all - in fact, at least i have a fresh and unbiased viewpoint on the idea of it in it's potentially full and intended state.

 

Especially when apparently even the level scaling was just flat not working on release, as well. Safe to say i'm not missing out on much and that you aren't much better informed on it than i am.

 

That - and it's the closest thing i can do to playing it without playing it and making sure this wait will have been worth it and because i want the game to be as successful as it can be, has the potential to be and really deserves to be.

 

Edit: Sure i could be a little more polite about it, maybe a little nicer in my wording, but i'd prefer to just be straight up so you can take from it what you will, uncoated and unbiased. This isn't a popularity contest, this is to try to make the game better.

Edited May 23, 2018 by whiskiz

[JFutral]

 

Yeah - the people who complained about health/endurance and per-rest got what they wanted.

 

Who's this 'we'?

 

Those who defended that system...didn't.

 

I liked the long-term health v. endurance thing because every hit you took mattered.  You couldn't just heal yourself through a fight as you'd eventually run out of health. Now it doesn't matter if I end the fight on 1HP or 100HP, or take a bunch of hits and heal them up.

Was it perfect? No.

But getting rid of it entirely was a step backwards IMO.

 

Similar with the per-rest abilities - I didn't rest-spam so that system suited my play-style.  Made it more challenging to get through a dungeon.  Sure I had some party-wipes at times...but so far in Deadfire...one.

 

I'm sure some people enjoy everything being per-encounter - groovy for them.

 

The rest system as implemented in Deadfire works as intended - it's making me think about and use those food bonuses (v. giving them to the crew for morale).  The injuries are...not a big deal but as stated above, simply limit the number of times you can be resurrected in a fight (3 if you've been resting up after getting any injury - less if you haven't).

 

Still - I'm enjoying Deadfire so that's the main thing

 

 

Are you blind? Have reading problems?

 

As mentioned in this thread and all throughout the forums and even before the game was released - The game is not even balanced yet, especially on Vet and PotD.

 

I repeat, the game is not balanced yet.

 

You have had no party wipes in Deadfire, because the game is not balanced yet.

 

For anyone else that complains about it being too easy currently - the, game, especially, the, higher, difficulties, is, not, balanced, yet.

 

It has nothing to do with the new per encounter combat system.

 

For about the 5th time, they apparently had to choose between bugfixing or balancing the difficulty before release - guess which they went with. So they are apparently having to balance the game post-release - which is why i haven't even got it yet (i don't want to ruin it by having it be a faceroll and would rather pay for something that's actually finished, instead of encouraging otherwise.)

 

TL:DR Pillars of Eternity II: Deadfire, has not been balanced properly yet.

 

Any problems or arguments about it being too easy, currently, are invalid (annoying af)

 

They are working on the balancing and should announce when it's done in the next couple weeks/months.

 

 

Pillars has been balanced just fine for its opening salvo. I know I don't like being wiped my first play through. As a matter of fact I hold off on PotD and usually start off at Veteran so I DON'T get wiped often. Getting wiped more than a couple of times interrupts the flow of the game and it's story. This is an RPG, not a point and shoot side scroller. If all you play this game for is the fights, yeah maybe you should hold off a year or two until playing. I really doubt they will "announce" balance. I wouldn't. Not if balance means "constantly being party wiped". That's a different game. I kind of like this iteration of health. I am still dumb-founded by injuries my priest can't heal. Even my three gold-star surgeon on the ship seems to be taking his time with a couple of my pirates. Go figure.

 

Joe

Edited May 23, 2018 by JFutral

[flamesium]

Pillars has been balanced just fine for its opening salvo. I know I don't like being wiped my first play through.

 

 

It really hasn't and that's what having multiple different difficulty levels is for. The difficulty of each level shouldn't need to be raised dramatically after release in line with people getting better at the game; they should be pitched somewhere close to where they're meant to be in the first place and people can select accordingly.

 

There are three difficulty levels below the one you're playing on if you don't want the risk of wiping on a first playthrough.

[Rumpelstilskin]

i'm mostly with the OP on this. per-encounter is much better since it actually allows you to plan how to use your abilities when you engage in an encounter. in per rest case, otoh, you can't make an informed decision about their usage since you don't know what lies ahead (unless you are replaying the game). there's nothing "deeply strategic" about it. per rest things that are still in should probably be replaced with explicit consumable resources. for instance, summoning items can all have limited charges, injuries can only be healed with medkits (to prevent medkit spam when you are high on cash, vendors should only have a limited supply of them, which replenishes over time.. which is kind of like resting supplies worked in PoE1). empower points, well, maybe they can be removed altogether or made per encounter, but in much smaller quantity, like 1-2. 

 

forcing the actual rest via mechanics like fatigue only makes sense if it's put to a good use in the game, meaning there are well-designed timed or survival-based quests. otherwise they add nothing meaningful. as for the food, i'm actually not even sure how it works now. at first it looked like the buffs stayed until the next rest, which was pretty strong, and i even considered cooking some of the top-tier meals. then it some moment it clearly became timed, as all of my teammates lost the buffs pretty quickly and one even got a hangover. at that point food even was consumable from a quickslot i think. now it seems like it's back to the original way. maybe there was an intermediate patch that changed that, but they rolled it back later.

[Elerond]

 

Game is now build and balanced around resting, wounds, and food, so saying that they don't give value in their current state is quite fallacious statement, because they give so much value in current state of affairs that game would break quite totally if you take them away.

But the cost of resting is so negligible that it amounts to a ‘click to remove injuries and replenish Empowers’ button, which renders it meaningless, because why would you ever not want to remove injuries and replenish Empowers? In its current state it’s effectively the same as having no injury system and unlimited empowers.

Trade off of resting is food/resting/to next rest bonuses some which are much better than empowers or minor minuses that you get from single injury. But resting isn't designed to be punishing in this game it is just way to buff which abuse is limited little by fact that it consumes somewhat limited resources.

[JFutral]

 

Pillars has been balanced just fine for its opening salvo. I know I don't like being wiped my first play through.

 

 

It really hasn't and that's what having multiple different difficulty levels is for. The difficulty of each level shouldn't need to be raised dramatically after release in line with people getting better at the game; they should be pitched somewhere close to where they're meant to be in the first place and people can select accordingly.

 

There are three difficulty levels below the one you're playing on if you don't want the risk of wiping on a first playthrough.

 

 

No, it's just fine, thank you, though.

 

Joe

[Shadenuat]

Btw wish I could buy Grog for berath points right in the beginning of the game. Worth it just for party members permanently getting killed instead of wounded. It would make me play combat differently.

Edited May 23, 2018 by Shadenuat

[flamesium]

 

 

Pillars has been balanced just fine for its opening salvo. I know I don't like being wiped my first play through.

 

 

It really hasn't and that's what having multiple different difficulty levels is for. The difficulty of each level shouldn't need to be raised dramatically after release in line with people getting better at the game; they should be pitched somewhere close to where they're meant to be in the first place and people can select accordingly.

 

There are three difficulty levels below the one you're playing on if you don't want the risk of wiping on a first playthrough.

 

 

No, it's just fine, thank you, though.

 

Joe

 

 

It's fine for you, who wants to be able to play Veteran without the risk of dying on the first playthrough (sounds like an ego protection thing). That doesn't describe what most people think Veteran difficulty should be, or how the difficulty level describes itself at the beginning of the game, hence why the devs themselves have acknowledged they missed the mark and are addressing it.