Enemy respawn

[kabaliero]

i vote 1

 

cause, yes, i used to grind giants in BG and thugs in PS:T

 

and frankly

i hated DA:O for not having this

i mean, it had some re-fillment with enemies here and there

bandits, monster packs

but it was, all, like... pre-made!

 

you know!~

no sense of freedom of randomness, when the game generates that special number of enemies

just for you!

other players might get it, but also might not

 

say, when you have 5 umber hulks spawning on ya, you know there could be 4, or 3.. or 6!

and the random loot! i really liked it

wish it was sort of more random sometimes, though

Edited October 27, 2012 by kabaliero

[Hellfell]

I guess you will be able to grind random world map encounters.

[quechn1tlan]

Random encounters-yes. Monsters attacking during rest-yes.

Respawning enemies in the same areas you killed them already - hells to the no! For me this is single most loathsome feature that can possibly exist in a game.

[ilhdr]

Yes, in certain areas, and I said certain areas.

[Pshaw]

Yes, within reason. Namely I think they should play through an area, clear everything out, and then make it take another hour or 2 of play time before stuff respawns. I don't like beating an area in a games and then needing to fight my way back out of that area. However if I return to that area later it should have monsters repopulate so long as it makes sense.

 

Cleared out the wilderness, a cave, a crypt, or some ancient ruins? These sorts of things should respawn. Cleared out a house in town, castle that was being haunted, a town itself, or anything else where people should 'move' into the space you've cleared? These should not respawn.

[rjshae]

If there is no XP for killing monsters, then that changes the dynamic of respawning enemies. Respawned monsters become a deterrent against withdrawal; if you retreat from a locale to restore your health, then you may have to fight your way back in again.

[GhostofAnakin]

I don't mind enemy re-spawns as long as they don't occur right away (ie. just finished a battle and am backtracking through a small area just to make sure I've got everything I need, when suddenly there are the same group of enemies I just dispatched), and as long as they don't spawn right on top of me after I've taken great pains to scout the area beforehand to make sure no one is there.

[HansKrSG]

I hate "spawns" of monsters with a passion. I am all for monters reappearing in logical places, but not monsters generating all over just because.

Random encounters, sure, respawns, no. I love being able to "clean out" an area or dungeon, when monsters always come back, I feel I haven't accomplished anything.

[nikolokolus]

Sometimes it makes sense that "ecological niches" vacated by one group or power would be replaced by another over time, but considering that the game is going to award experience points for overcoming challenges and not piling corpses like cord wood, I find the farming re-spawns to be a little bit silly.

 

Should rival gangs move into turf vacated by the local thieves guild I wipe out? Sure. Will the wererats infest that level of Od Nua that used to be run by the ogres? Why not. That kind of thing is fine, but I don't want to clear an area only to come back in a short amount of time and find the same kind of group or monsters that were just removed.

[kabaliero]

well, of course

at first there actually was a 3rd poll line about "areas" and "creature types"

 

so, yeah, particular places and circumstances for the re-appearing of the mobs

not just a pack of bandits or trolls out of nowhere

 

And!

 

i was thinking about players who prefer not to fight

and how to play it up for them, so they don't have to,

but >still<, get their way and at least a little xp out of it

[SqueakyCat]

@nikolokolus

 

.. considering that the game is going to award experience points for overcoming challenges ..

 

This is still under discussion. The following is a remark from Feargus on October 16th in the 'Comments' section of the Kickstarter page:

 

"@Adric The XP for kills thing is still an ongoing discussion here. Our goal is to make this a game that is reminiscent of the IE games and in my mind that does mean XP for kills. We just need to balance with other systems."

[Falkon Swiftblade]

I'm sure there would be some challenge to it, but I would love it if enemy's had a wide area they traversed, so you might primarily have like the standard bear region in the beginning of the game for example, but I'd like it if they traversed the whole forested area in addition to designed spawn points. I just don't like mob's that stay there waiting for you to kite without any skill. IE Skyrim when you sneak shot the big skeletons' laying down and 1 shot them every time with your bow, even at low levels.

[Sensuki]

@nikolokolus

 

.. considering that the game is going to award experience points for overcoming challenges ..

 

This is still under discussion. The following is a remark from Feargus on October 16th in the 'Comments' section of the Kickstarter page:

 

"@Adric The XP for kills thing is still an ongoing discussion here. Our goal is to make this a game that is reminiscent of the IE games and in my mind that does mean XP for kills. We just need to balance with other systems."

 

That wasn't from Feargus I don't think, it was from Darren.

Edited October 28, 2012 by Sensuki

[Badmojo]

Depends on if they give XP or not, not to mention the no healing in the game except at certain rest locations seems like it could be a bit troubling. So basically, respawning monsters would seem to cost magic spells/ammo/ to fight and if you get permanent damage you will have to go to a rest area, which if its an unsafe rest area, ironically enemies will spawn/attack you again which repeats what happened earlier causing even more health/damage/loss of resources that might force you to go all the way back to a safe location like an INN or something. So after you heal at the inn and go back to the same area, you will have the same monsters you defeated earlier to fight again repeating everything that just happened. So *shrug*, I think something might have to give, either xp and some minor healing, no respawning of monsters, or have respawning of monsters VERY slowly.

 

Of course, going through an area and fighting the same enemies again that you already defeated might get old quick depending on how often we go through an area. The mega dungeon probably should not respond since going through a dungeon is usually to get rid of the monsters/enemies of said dungeon.

 

Actually, there should be a valid reason some areas respawn with enemies, and stopping the source of the respawning will stop the enemy encounters from returning. An example is a necromancer experimenting on bringing back the dead using special magical devices to create an energy field that is spreading beyond his laboratory and bringing the dead back all around the area, turning off or destroying the magical stones will stop the respawning. Or another, is a band or highwaymen, every time you take them down another appear(possibly stronger), you find out that they are part of a bigger group who work for a crime lord and until you take the crime lord down, they will keep respawning...etc.

[harhar!]

No, especially if there's no exp reward for it. I like "chapter" dependant respawn though. If the story moves on and the time moves on some monsters respawn (see Gothic).

[Dunedain]

I don't mind some respawning in wilderness areas, like dangerous animals returning after some time, maybe a new wolf pack is an area awhile after you may have fought an earlier one in that place. I think that's important out in the wilds, or else those places can feel sterile and lifeless. It should re-populate later on, the wilderness should feel lived in and teeming with life as you travel about, it's part of that vast natural world that surrounds the character.

 

But in a dungeon where I've cleared out all the monsters, the place should be free of them after I've gone to the effort to wipe out that scum. If I return there to look for something maybe I missed earlier, I shouldn't have to fight them again, I've already defeated that evil.

[Loki Ador]

It should indeed be limited to some specific areas. If a forest is known for being infested by trolls, then respawn should be expected. However, if I manage to remove the ancient curse of the necropolis, then zombies should stop spawning.

 

Somebody suggested a change in ecosystem: that would be a nice feature (although maybe a bit delicate to implement): I may have cleaned this cave from the demons and the hellgate the flooded from, that does not mean some neighbouring wilderness will not use this place as their nest.

[Lantander]

Some respawn would be ok, as long as it's within the bounds of reason. I don't just mean putting the same kind of monster somewhere every time, but... if you hack a gang of bandits to pieces, you could expect a dire wolf feasting on the remains when you come back next time. Or have another group of bandits move into the territory _once_ or at maximum twice.

 

Just refilling encounters endlessly with the same monsters leads to something I hated in Fallout 3 - there you have... 30 or so friendly npcs in all of the settlements in total, surrounded by limitless numbers of raiders and deathclaws. After killing 200+ raiders and lots of deathclaws, you have to wonder why they pack their bags and come into the raider death zone from far and wide - and how the hell any friendly npcs are still alive with dozens and dozens of three meter tall clawed monsters roaming about.

 

At some point, intelligent enemies should have the thought "The last five bandits who went to ambush people near <player>'s keep/village of X/... got wiped out, I'm going somewhere else - I want to live!". And barring a wizard summoning/creating lots of monsters or someone shipping in creatures from somewhere else, there is an upper limit of population density for huge predators - lone predators they usually have their own areas and if you kill one, its neighbour might move in - but once that one is dead too, there just are no more nearby who could fill its spot.

Edited October 28, 2012 by Lantander

[Fimbul]

Re-spawning is okay if the monsters stop to yielding XP rather early, based on monster and player level.

I'd hate to go back and find an area completely deserted, the game world would feel less dynamic to me.

 

Re-spawning could very well improve the dynamic and consistency of the world. I know some would argue that re-spawning is the opposite of consistency, but what if you clear a bandit camp in the woods and wildlife would have taken it over when you return. An other example would be if you clear a bear cave (bears being formidable foes at this point) near a road and whenever you'd return there would spawn some minor wild animals or bandits that sought refugee in the abandoned cave. It would be a great way to show the player the consequences of his/her actions.

Those re-spawns should mostly yield less XP and loot (if yielded at all, since it isn't clear yet) and be weaker than those before them, just so that the player can't get much out of them but it doesn't seem like he/she depopulated the whole world!

[Kevin Lynch]

Random encounters-yes. Monsters attacking during rest-yes.

Respawning enemies in the same areas you killed them already - hells to the no! For me this is single most loathsome feature that can possibly exist in a game.

 

Ditto on this. Respawning is usually done in a very poor way, simply putting the same/similar opponents right back in the same place as before. However, I agree with what Fimbul said above: the respawning in an area because another group has taken advantage of the new emptiness makes sense to the gameworld and is something I can support. Only in that manner, however; respawning in general is just wrong in this style of game.

[Dawn_]

I usually play rogue..so, i guess my answer to this would obviously be no (since i tend to avoid fight unless i can make a kill for sure..)

[Wulfic]

Im more into reality. I hate it so much in games that I kill some beasts and they just respawn after 5 min. I would like to see less epic monsters on the map like goblins and orcs more of animals like bears and wolves which should appear randomly Wolves always in packs and so on. Ofc many animals to hunt: Boars, deer and so on. Ther rare beasts should appear once in a place which would fit to them for example goblins in a small encampment but agtr killing them the goblins should never appear and the camp should look after the next visit abandoned this would be epic because u could think u made some difference actually. Or for example if u kill a dangerous troll in the area more wildlife will appear in this exact area THIS WOULD BE AWESOME.

[kabaliero]

i just wish the game world wouldn't have to be an empty place once you clear all the caves and stuff

 

like sometimes when u play it's like "u only have this ammount of resources to complete the whole thing"

it really sux this way :c

Edited October 28, 2012 by kabaliero

[Aoyagi]

Where is the option "yes, but only in a limited manner and only in places where it makes sense, also not so much that it would get frustrating"?

[kabaliero]

Where is the option "yes, but only in a limited manner and only in places where it makes sense, also not so much that it would get frustrating"?

 

im 'fraid, its kinda too late for that