Harder difficulty enhances encounters - not damage?

[Hassat Hunter]

Discussing things in the XP thread, one good thing someone mentioned that I think deserves it's own thread.

 

Which is; Objective-XP allows encounters to be enhanced, without giving more XP.

While in most RPG's, even the BG's, higher difficulties would mean higher enemy damage and lower player damage, how about in PE we just adjust the encounters instead?

On Normal you might meet the Ogre solo. On Hard he might have 5 kobold archers firing fire arrows, making the battle harder, without artifically giving the ogre zillions of HP (DA:O I look at you). However in a kill-per-XP system this would mean XP from these 5 kobolds, and all other enhanced encounters, which end up giving you enough extra XP to compensate, making hard not hard anymore. The fallacy of BG, where easy wasn't easy at all, but harder than normal because you got a 50% XP cut. The more we can prevent that, the better.

 

Same with rewarding higher difficulties with powerful items, as another thread suggested, it would just make harder difficulties not harder. Which shouldn't be why difficulties exist in the first place.

 

Of course this does require developers to imput more time into encounters, since they need to setup not just the encounter, but any potential reinforcements on a higher difficulty. Which isn't an issue if you just make "Hard" a +50% damage bonus to all enemies.

So I would ask the players here, would it be worth the time investment?

[quechn1tlan]

It can be argued almost indefinitely, until Obsidian say otherwise. But for now there is no xp granting system assigned to PE. So making a thread assuming one over another is redundant.

[Sacred_Path]

If the additional XP would make up for the fact that you have to deal with 6 foes instead of 1 is just a balance issue. Especially if you count the additional "cost" that comes with it (like spells and items used up). IOW, I'm sure difficulty could be increased as you describe it w/o XP alleviating the problem. Especially in an Ironman game, and considering that you probably can't resurrect anyone.

[freche]

There are many ways to improve difficulty without increasing damage & hp. Damage & HP just seem to be the easy way out.

 

I wouldn't mind encounter larger groups of enemies on harder difficulties for encounters that justify it (I still think we should get XP for killing things, if this be an issue with too much XP in general just slightly balance Objective XP for those difficulties)

 

More importantly the enemies should act "smarter" in higher difficulties.

• Give them a chance to receive random potion (that they will use), e.g. haste, healing, etc (I don't know what will be in PE)
  
• Give them more abilities/spells to use (while still following the rules, a lvl 4 Wizard shouldn't have lvl 8 spells).
  
• Make them co-operate, make the priest heal his allies, let the Wizard cast invisibility on the rogue so he can go and backstab someone, etc.
  
• Initially they could have different priorities, on Easy they attack Warriors/Paladins, Normal - First character they see, Very Hard - Their ranged will focus your squishy & casters and you have to make them attack your tanks instead.
  

[Jarmo]

I'm all for choices that actually make harder difficulties harder and easier difficulties easier, not the other way around.

So no nothing like "less xp at easy" or "bonus items at hard" or anything else of the counterproductive sort.

 

Actually, why not just give less XP at hard and more XP at easy and things will start getting hard or easy soon enough?

More gold from missions at easy and less at hard and you'll have to make do with less stuff at harder levels.

 

And while scaling monster hitpoints and damage up in harder mode can lead to frustration,

just scaling them down at easy is a working non-frustrating solution.

 

And yeah, might be a good thing to add extra monsters on hard difficulties, here and there, but if there's like 6 difficulty levels,

it'll be a whole lot of work and I'm not at all sure that's a well placed effort.

 

 

And no smart enemies at hard level, stupid monsters at easy.

If there's different levels of intellect in the game, make smart enemies act smart and stupid enemies act stupid.

That'll be a whole lot better way to justify the effort, adds immersion and variety into the game no matter what difficulty level you play.

Edited November 8, 2012 by Jarmo

[Alexjh]

I'm all for encounter complexity going up rather than individual monster power, but I'd instead just suggest that complexity goes up in a curve on harder difficulties, but more specifically relative to party power rather than just an an overarching difficulty level. If difficulty level is a linear increasing line of difficulty of encounter, harder difficulties should be increasingly sharp curves.

 

You could concievably automate the process a bit if you preprogram the "groups" so it's a bit easier, so one group might consist of "goblin warrior (w)" "goblin mage(m)" "goblin archer(a)" "goblin shaman(s)" and "ogre(o)". If you then have the encounters generated in a formula like where it generates encounters like:

 

Very Easy: (2w + 1d4)

Easy: (4w + 1d6) + (2a+1d2)

Normal: (4w + 1d8) + (4a+1d4) + (2m)

Hard: (6w + 1d10) + (6a+1d6) + (1d3 m) + (1s)

Very Hard: (8w + 1d12) + (8a+1d6) + (1d4 m) + (2s) + (1d2 o)

 

This is obviously a very simplified version, but it means you can generate mixed encounters (with manually added additions) without actually having to go in and manually create 5 versions of each encounter.

[wanderon]

Well they have pretty much laid out how the difficulty modes will work in Update #9 where Josh says:

 

 

Expert Mode will disable all of the common ease-of-use / in-case-you-missed it gameplay elements like the display of skill thresholds, influence/reputation modifiers, and similar "helper" information. In a fashion similar to Fallout: New Vegas' Hardcore Mode, Expert Mode will also enable more punitive and demanding gameplay elements, in and out of combat. We're not saying we're going to have weighty gold (for real, we're not saying that), but if we did, you can bet that would be automatically turned on by Expert Mode.

 

If you guessed that Trial of Iron is like Temple of Elemental Evil's Ironman Mode, you guessed right. When you start a Trial of Iron game, you have one save game that persists for the entire campaign... or until you die. And if you die, your save game is deleted. Enjoy!

 

Path of the Damned is a spiritual successor to Icewind Dale's Heart of Fury mode. In our encounters, we like to turn individual combatants on and off based on the level of difficulty. If you come into an area on Easy, maybe casters are replaced with weak melee enemies. If you come in on Hard, maybe the casters are augmented by a tough melee enemy or two. With Path of the Damned, that goes out the window. All enemies from all levels of difficulty are enabled and the combat mechanics are amplified to make battles much more brutal for everyone involved.

 

Certainly doesn't sound like they are looking to take the easy way out and with this info coming way back at Update 9 at the 2.3M goal I'd say they are going to be part & parcel of the essential core of the game (not just duct taped on at the end as an afterthought).

 

For my money these sound pretty close to perfect.

[Hassat Hunter]

It can be argued almost indefinitely, until Obsidian say otherwise. But for now there is no xp granting system assigned to PE. So making a thread assuming one over another is redundant.

This isn't about objective XP vs. kill-XP, that's the other thread.

This one is more about how to make hard harder without ramping up damage/HP of foes. And I just think this works perfectly for PE (sure, combined with Objective XP but that wasn't the point of the thread).

More importantly the enemies should act "smarter" in higher difficulties.

I agree with Jarno that making the AI "better" only at higher difficulties would be bad. Making proper AI is difficult enough, dissecting it for different difficulties, making them very stupid on easy... I don't see it being a good idea.

They should work together by default. Rather no more "everyone rushes to their dead" most modern RPG's have, like old FPS used to have. We can do better nowadays.

 

Having said that, ideas you had like giving them potions and spells does sound good. However they have nothing to do with the AI.

Well they have pretty much laid out how the difficulty modes will work in Update #9 where Josh says:

Nope. That's just extra difficulty modes... not an easy/medium/hard (and whatever else there may be). What's what's discussed here.

The modes are just on *top* of that again.

I'm all for encounter complexity going up rather than individual monster power, but I'd instead just suggest that complexity goes up in a curve on harder difficulties, but more specifically relative to party power rather than just an an overarching difficulty level. If difficulty level is a linear increasing line of difficulty of encounter, harder difficulties should be increasingly sharp curves.

I've read it thrice, still not sure what it says... :confused:

You could concievably automate the process a bit if you preprogram the "groups" so it's a bit easier, so one group might consist of "goblin warrior (w)" "goblin mage(m)" "goblin archer(a)" "goblin shaman(s)" and "ogre(o)". If you then have the encounters generated in a formula like where it generates encounters like:

I was personally more thinking the entire encounter is created as if it would be the hardest difficulty. However each opponent has a difficuly setting. If set to easy it would appear on easy and above, set to hard only hard and above, etc.

Alternativily checkboxes for all difficulties, which could offer even more leverage, like making enemy x appear on normal and hard, but it's replaced by the veteran x on very hard (which has only the very hard checkbox marked), without having both.

 

It's the system the Deus Ex mod "The Nameless Mod" used, and it's very effective.

[Somna]

You can also use the environment for added difficulty on harder modes. Walk into a really hot part of an active volcano? Take some stamina damage every round and boost the effectiveness (maybe harder to avoid/resist) of fire spells on top of whatever else is going on just from the heat, unless you can actually lay down some area effect cold spells to temporarily cool things.

[BetrayTheWorld]

Hmm, an interesting curiosity; An idea I'm completely ambivalent about.

 

I will likely only play the game on default/normal difficulty.

[freche]

I agree with Jarno that making the AI "better" only at higher difficulties would be bad. Making proper AI is difficult enough, dissecting it for different difficulties, making them very stupid on easy... I don't see it being a good idea.

They should work together by default. Rather no more "everyone rushes to their dead" most modern RPG's have, like old FPS used to have. We can do better nowadays.

Reason for modern games having bad "AI" is because the average gamer is bad and you still want to sell to them too. I'm not saying that as a negative thing, it's just how it is.

That's why I think harder difficulties should have smarter enemies, since I'm quite sure that there will be stupid enemies that rushes to their death, just wishing it could be on the easier settings.

Edited November 9, 2012 by freche

[Sacred_Path]

I will likely only play the game on default/normal difficulty.

 

In most games, that's the only reasonable thing to do. Play w/o reloads and against the clock for difficulty. I hope that PE will be balanced in such a way that the higher difficulties are still superbly balanced in all respects like melee vs. magic, direct damage vs. status effects etc. but that kind of thing is very rare.

[wanderon]

Well they have pretty much laid out how the difficulty modes will work in Update #9 where Josh says:

Nope. That's just extra difficulty modes... not an easy/medium/hard (and whatever else there may be). What's what's discussed here.

The modes are just on *top* of that again.

 

 

Perhaps you missed the part where he specificly mentions how they treat encounters from easy to hard....

 

Path of the Damned is a spiritual successor to Icewind Dale's Heart of Fury mode. In our encounters, we like to turn individual combatants on and off based on the level of difficulty. If you come into an area on Easy, maybe casters are replaced with weak melee enemies. If you come in on Hard, maybe the casters are augmented by a tough melee enemy or two. With Path of the Damned, that goes out the window. All enemies from all levels of difficulty are enabled and the combat mechanics are amplified to make battles much more brutal for everyone involved.

 

By turning combatants on & off and/or changing them to increase the both the general combat difficulty (easy enemy vs harder enemy) and/or strategicly (replacing melee with mages or vice versa) and/or adjusting the combat mechanics (scripting what those enemies will do).

 

It may be a relatively simple statement but I think it clearly indicates the manner in which they will handle encounters at different difficulties.

[Jarmo]

Sounds like a lot of work but if they feel it's worth it then who am I to argue.

But this does open a new avenue for "easy difficulty is actually harder".

 

Assume you meet a bunch of goblins with wooden clubs and smelly leather loincloths on easy.

On hard you meet a couple of plate armored bugbears and a bugbear shaman.

 

Loot:

 

easy - couple of clubs and soiled loincloths

hard - 2x plate armor, 3x potion of healing, 1x wand of frost

 

Obvious solution, you don't loot what they use -> Jarmo is unhappy

[Hassat Hunter]

Perhaps you missed the part where he specificly mentions how they treat encounters from easy to hard....

 

Path of the Damned is a spiritual successor to Icewind Dale's Heart of Fury mode. In our encounters, we like to turn individual combatants on and off based on the level of difficulty. If you come into an area on Easy, maybe casters are replaced with weak melee enemies. If you come in on Hard, maybe the casters are augmented by a tough melee enemy or two. With Path of the Damned, that goes out the window. All enemies from all levels of difficulty are enabled and the combat mechanics are amplified to make battles much more brutal for everyone involved.

 

By turning combatants on & off and/or changing them to increase the both the general combat difficulty (easy enemy vs harder enemy) and/or strategicly (replacing melee with mages or vice versa) and/or adjusting the combat mechanics (scripting what those enemies will do).

 

It may be a relatively simple statement but I think it clearly indicates the manner in which they will handle encounters at different difficulties.

I apparently did.

So my suggested system is already in? That's pretty sweet. Sorry to waste a topic on it then... :/

[GhostofAnakin]

On the subject of enemy encounters, I prefer facing enemies that are difficult because of their abilities, rather than being difficult because a swarm of them come at you from all directions.

 

I'd rather face a powerful mage and try and take him down, rather than 50 kobolds whose only real threat to my party is the fact there is so many of them. The former is a fun combat experience, the latter is just annoying, IMO.

 

So I guess in relation (semi-related) to this topic, I don't want to see encounters made difficult due simply to increased swarms of enemies, but because the enemies have more abilities available to them that your party has to deal with.

[AGX-17]

Define "enhance." "More enemies" or "higher tier enemies" isn't necessarily an "enhancement." What about better enemy AI/tactics?

[Karkarov]

Actually, why not just give less XP at hard and more XP at easy and things will start getting hard or easy soon enough?

More gold from missions at easy and less at hard and you'll have to make do with less stuff at harder levels.

...

 

And no smart enemies at hard level, stupid monsters at easy.

If there's different levels of intellect in the game, make smart enemies act smart and stupid enemies act stupid.

That'll be a whole lot better way to justify the effort, adds immersion and variety into the game no matter what difficulty level you play.

Best post I have seen all day. Well said.

[Hassat Hunter]

What about better enemy AI/tactics?

As stated before, gimping on AI due to difficulty would be bad. Tactics could automatically unlock with more enemies. If there is no cleric, there is no healing. If there is a cleric, it should use healing on teammates. Dispite whatever difficulty the game may be on.

IMO

[SGray]

As mentioned above difficulty-related enemy spawn system in encounters is sorted out long ago. (Was pretty happy when I've first read that update.)

 

But there really is important (imo) matter about exp and loot scaling with scaling the encounters.

If simply scale down exp gained on higher difficulties it could have cumulative effect later on. That could lead lead to stucking on certain points if difficulty is high enough. Say, a battle designed to be hard for 5-th lvl party, but you've done everything and couldn't have higher than third lvl. Avoiding such thing is possible when available to the current difficulty at current moment exp is taken into account. But that's additional work and could lead to opposite side: start is hard, but as you gain wider access to the world you gain more and more unaccounted exp and getting above and above expected strength, so encounters become easy again. King's Bounty: Armored Princess on max difficulty is a good example of this.

So, imo, the best decision is to assign exp per encounter, not per enemy and divide that exp between critters on spawn.

 

More difficult - is to balance loot drop rates. It could be done when some creatures are replacing other, but requires different approach when they are all in (Path of the Damned), though I'm not against such boost in loot when toggling this option on.

 

P.S. Managing difficulty by dumbing down AI is always a bad thing. Costly one, and gimping game experience for those, playing on lower difficulties. (Little care about it myself, but still.) Same with removing/adding unique abilities from enemies. Giving enemies some or adding more consumables (fire arrows, scrolls, poisons) or other buffs, justified by game mechanics - is pretty fair though, imo.

[anubite]

Monsters do not tend to become more "challenging" when you simply add to their life and damage values. They just tend to FORCE you to use some lame strategy to win, like kiting, or some spell combination abuse. It narrows the number of viable strategies.

 

The best way to enhance difficulty is to give monsters access to more active skills/spells, boost their damage/life slightly per difficulty increase, add a few more monsters per area per difficulty increase, increase the variety of monsters in a zone per difficulty increase, increase their AI and planning per difficulty increase, and to give them special passive abilities per difficulty increase (maybe some monsters become heavily resistant to fire, or high evasion / block chance). You cannot make harder difficulties fun or challenging if all you do is change one or two statistics.

Edited November 15, 2012 by anubite

[Somna]

[...]

But there really is important (imo) matter about exp and loot scaling with scaling the encounters.

If simply scale down exp gained on higher difficulties it could have cumulative effect later on. That could lead lead to stucking on certain points if difficulty is high enough. Say, a battle designed to be hard for 5-th lvl party, but you've done everything and couldn't have higher than third lvl. Avoiding such thing is possible when available to the current difficulty at current moment exp is taken into account. But that's additional work and could lead to opposite side: start is hard, but as you gain wider access to the world you gain more and more unaccounted exp and getting above and above expected strength, so encounters become easy again. King's Bounty: Armored Princess on max difficulty is a good example of this.

So, imo, the best decision is to assign exp per encounter, not per enemy and divide that exp between critters on spawn.

 

More difficult - is to balance loot drop rates. It could be done when some creatures are replacing other, but requires different approach when they are all in (Path of the Damned), though I'm not against such boost in loot when toggling this option on.

 

P.S. Managing difficulty by dumbing down AI is always a bad thing. Costly one, and gimping game experience for those, playing on lower difficulties. (Little care about it myself, but still.) Same with removing/adding unique abilities from enemies. Giving enemies some or adding more consumables (fire arrows, scrolls, poisons) or other buffs, justified by game mechanics - is pretty fair though, imo.

 

I thought they mentioned doing objective XP? That is, you get XP for finishing the goal/quest, not killing things, so it doesn't matter how many creatures you throw in--they won't be bags of delicious XP.

[Hassat Hunter]

That's the plan. I think you would be right lowering XP would be bad, and force grinding, so that would be a no-go.

 

I do see the point about equipment. However, I suspect in most of these encounters, the one really giving the good loot are the ones that are already there with easy anyway, and any potential added don't suddenly drop 150K swords or something but minor items. Still a small boost, one probably offset by increased need of consumables, healing and what-not that requires gold.

Alternative sell values could be slightly lower on harder difficulties to compensate more equipment. It would be the easiest and least annoying counter I can think of right now if the added items and gold prove problematic.

[SGray]

I thought they mentioned doing objective XP? That is, you get XP for finishing the goal/quest, not killing things, so it doesn't matter how many creatures you throw in--they won't be bags of delicious XP.

Doubt that there won't be any xp from mobs at all. Times less (10 times) than regularly, compared to quests - possibly. With epic monster roughly equal to small quest in exp. Either that or sub-objective "kill everything" per most encounters, which I'm pretty fine with too.