How many foes would you like to face?

[qloher]

Occasional, rare hordes are fine as long as they consist of some mindless simple creatures. Humans/elves/dwarves etc. should have some dignity and skill, slaughtering those in dozens feels wrong unless we are near the final and have a godlike level both technically and plot-wise.

Edited October 4, 2012 by qloher

[Dawn_]

I would like to face battle where my character would be alone let say again 5 characters (tough one) to make some sort of challenge.

[Director]

Loved the "100 goblins rush to attack" in the Gold Box games.

 

I doubt this engine will make that kind of battle possible though - still larger groups 10+ of weak creatures are fun to fireball.

[Jarmo]

I want enemies to be strong, but few in number. It feels weird slaughtering dozens at a time...

 

Indeed, and my problem with 'horde' enemies is that it usually follows from a simplified worldview of mindless good/evil, which doesn't fit with the more complex world I imagine PE to be--will there be a "demonic" or "demon spawn" race of significant number? I hope to heck not. Lord of the Rings: goblins and orcs. Dragon Age: darkspawn. D&D: all manner of 'evil' things. Blah blah blah.

 

In narrative, a large battle such as forcing your way through a well-organized bandit stronghold might work better, or defending a small village against a coordinated attack (more coordination than a pile of orcs and goblins, at least).

 

Well yea, I wasn't thinking of random encounters, or the evilness of the horde.

It's just there's often in games a situation of fighting a tribe or parts of army or something,

and I don't like when/if those are represented by 5-12 opponents.

 

So how about defending a frontier village from a war party of those barbarian elves?

You're in village, elves attack, no time or chance for diplomacy.

 

Later you could maybe try to resolve the disputes, or wipe out the rest of the elves or the villagers.

[Death Machine Miyagi]

Many or few is less important than whether sheer quantity of enemies is being used to compensate for awful enemy AI. NWN2 would be an example of that, and that should be avoided.

[Rink]

I would like a enemy-dish with diversity. Sometimes a horde of weaker creatures (rats, goblins), sometimes bigger stronger creatures, sometimes a party like yours. Sometimes respawn of enemies if it makes sense or an enemy with several "forms". Especially if some skills and spells are area-based others are for 1 person, then this gives some tactical depth to battles.

Was always fun to use fireball on gnoll-hordes in BG1 (although a lot of work to collect the rewards afterwards)

[Theomen712]

I personally love when the Infinity Engine games threw a mixture of fights that were basically wars of attrition (Like the fights in Icewind Dale 2) with fights that had you watch every move you made down to the last enemy (In Baldur's Gate 2, the battle with Irenicus in the Pocket plane). I just want Project Eternity to keep me on my toes. I've played some real time strategies that i could sleep playing, and as long as P:E isn't that way (and it wont be since as soon as i boot up the game i'm hitting the Expert Mode button) i'm Happy

[Theomen712]

I would like a enemy-dish with diversity. Sometimes a horde of weaker creatures (rats, goblins), sometimes bigger stronger creatures, sometimes a party like yours. Sometimes respawn of enemies if it makes sense or an enemy with several "forms". Especially if some skills and spells are area-based others are for 1 person, then this gives some tactical depth to battles.

Was always fun to use fireball on gnoll-hordes in BG1 (although a lot of work to collect the rewards afterwards)

This is also a good idea. I love when i'm playing a game and it hits me "I'm fighting my own party!". Theres a mage, a couple of fighters, archers in the back pincushoning my party with arrows. I LOVE these kinds of fights more than rabbles of goblins, or orcs because you fight a force with the same potential power as yours. It forces more tactical play, and less of you just mowing down enemies whose AI can't compare to your own intelligence.

[Ignatius]

The party v. party battles are where it's at. I think the sweet spot is about 7 well armed NPCs with a nice mix of rogues/mages/warriors.

 

The best battle was the one for 'Cera Sumat' Holy Avenger sword in IWD 2, where you bring the previous sword owner's amulet to the grave yard and fight his old companions brought back from the dead. Excellent battle, excellent loot. And the sword had a great story behind it to boot!

 

I'd think Obsidian agrees considering their backer goal at 5k, which let's you name and design an adventuring company to do battle with.

 

 

And here's a nifty video of that epic battle if you have a lot of free time.

Edited October 11, 2012 by Ignatius

[Ieo]

As a random note, I remember a BG2 mod that included a battle against clones of your own party with all the same gear and skills. That was really tough, though I don't remember the exact mod.

[Gorth]

I can say what I do not want, Dragon Age two style seemingly endless waves of enemies dropping from the ceiling.

 

Infinity Engine games are a good example of what works well, they should stick to that.

Two words... Hook Horrors.

[Falkon Swiftblade]

I want a mixture of enemy types in each encounter. Preferably with some respectable AI. I really liked how Reckoning scripted some of their encounters so that you may be fighting a bear, and suddenly a pack of wolves come by and attack the same bear, and other creatures seemed to have some type of animal faction system going on so sometimes they fought each other. I just wish they were not so stationary, and wandered the environment a little more. Kind of like Skyrim.

 

I would love it if battles had a good mixture of fast creatures that maybe by themselves are pretty weak, but a pack of like 6 would make you feel overwhelmed, while also having a big tanky type of creature in the mix that you had to move around so you weren't squashed. Mobility is important to me. I would prefer to always be moving my heros around the encounter and give me options of how to take them out. I would prefer battles to not just be a pack of 2-3 of the same creatures or one on one battles. Truthfully, if they had to choose between having 25 monsters that were one on one, versus 10 enemy groups made up of a triforce of attacks or strategic battles I would prefer more variety. Really I'd rather have way more than 25 monsters or enemy's in game, but I also don't want the same creature with different colored skin texture dictating he's the tougher version we fought earlier. That's laziness. Maybe they decide to just make 10-25 really interesting and intelligent encounters, but I sure hope it's not a ton of recycled materiel.

[jivex5k]

Numbers when appropriate....

But yes I agree, for the love of god, no monsters magically spawning please!

No waves!

[Sylvius the Mad]

99 Red Dragons.

 

Those were the days.

[nerevar]

I prefer tough enemy parties over hordes but there should be balance of course containing both fights.

 

 

When i run into this group, i was not that advanced in the game and my guys have no shiny full plate armors because i was low on money so can not afford to buy. It took tactics and thinking on strategies for me to defeating them. And guess what? I loot full plate armors and other useful stuff from the dead bodies in the end which made me feel really satisfied.

That feeling makes me want enemy party fights over unending silly hordes.

[Aldereth]

I would really like to see more 1 on 1 duel, however cRPG combat system usually make it a combination of the "dance" until one side HP dropped to 0 and doesn't have the depth to make it interesting.

[duskwind]

At high level there should definitely be large hordes of easy-to-kill enemies, as well as tougher individual opponents. The same sorts enemies that proved a great threat even as individuals at low level should still be around as you get more powerful, attacking in ever greater numbers to provide challenge rather than levelling up themselves. It's immersion-breaking to only ever encounter enemies of comparable power to yourself.

[Radwulf]

I think that the numbers should be limited both in terms of single engagements and in terms of the overall game. Battles should be skirmishes with a limited party against limited opposition that requires tactical use of one's environment and skills. The occasional battle against a single boss is acceptable from time to time. Battles against hordes should be limited to plot situations and give AI or environmental support (or force you to escape). Although this will be a big game and there will be more variation in play-styles I don't want this to turn out like my current game of Baldur's Gate Trilogy where I'm close to finishing the second game and have 2,250 kills with just my main character in a three (wo)man party. It defies belief somewhat when your individual kill count is enough to wipe small towns off the map.

[High Octane 881]

I think the general consensus is YES. We need a variety of differnt encounters to keep things interesting. Something that previous Infinity Engine games have pretty well excelled at. My #1 concern when it comes to enemy type is have a LOT. Screw seeing the same three types of Orc warrior/Orc mage/Bigger Orc Warrior, I want to be pushing moster manual territory. If you're making a world....make a WORLD and all the creepy crawlies that belong in it.

[Sacred_Path]

I'd like it if often, there were lots of enemies (not random encounters), but you can reduce the number you have to face by using stealth and/or diplomacy.

 

I also actually like how monsters are recycled in Wiz8, they are all variations on the same theme but with some significant differences, like using more or fewer ranged attacks, causing different status effects etc.

[Pshaw]

A mix of everything is best.

 

Beyond that a high amount of monster types helps keep things from feeling grindy. I think mobs of enemies is probably the least appealing type to see over and over as they lead to that grindy feeling faster than a few more challenging monsters.

 

Oh also boss fights that mostly consist of defeating a larger than average amount of monsters are boring and don't feel functionally different from the trash you need to clear to reach them. As such they shouldn't be done or done very sparingly because the last thing I want to do upon reaching the end of a dungeon is get more of the same for the boss.

[Alexjh]

The whole ranged of mixed, same as most of the other infinity engine games where you might fight anything from multiple waves of goblins to a single overwhelming foe like a dragon. Generally for an average encounter I'd say 2 or 3:1 in favour of the enemy with opponents being mixes of canon fodder and legitimate threats in any one encounter.

[Hormalakh]

I want more than anything else, not variety in the numbers of my enemies, but variety in the strategies my enemies utilize and thus the number of strategies that I have to utilize. I don't want to be able to win every single fight the same way (fireball, fireball, and fireball, then send in melees to crush). I'd like certain enemies to be more viable against pulling and kiting, while others don't fall for those tactics. I'd like some enemies to make me have to think about what strategies would work best and what tools I'd need to handle these enemies. Be it a horde of goblins or an adventuring party.

[Jorian Drake]

I want an encounter with 100+ poisionous 1 HP tiny spiders, for the awesome horde/zerg effect

Edited November 13, 2012 by Jorian Drake

[Jojobobo]

A mix would be nice, but not too heavy on the hordes as they can get tedious.