More like BG2 please

[Namutree]

 

2. Intense combat and dungeon diving of Icewind Dale

 

Combat right now has nothing in common with Icewind Dale combat, that was 99% similar to BG2 combat.

 

Actually, Namutree's complaint of trash mobs being a significant challenge and not orders of magnitude easier than boss fights, would fit IWD2 as well.

 

On my first playthrough of IWD2, the little groups of nameless Malarites on the Shaengarne Dam gave me big trouble and forced me to reload several times (just to name one example), whereas some of the named "bosses" in the game could be disabled in round 1 with Feeblemind or similar.

It's true that this is different from the BG/BG2 outdoor area exploration experience, but those do not define the Infinity Engine "spirit" alone.

 

The trash mobs I am complaining about are the one's you find while exploring. The spiders are fine. The beetles/lions are the guys makin' me mad. The spiders are in a cave and that's kinda a dungeon; thus it falls into the IWD/IWD2 territory.

 

Heck, even in BG the enemies found in caves were though.

 

Keep in mind IWD/IWD2 didn't really have exploration as they were too linear.

Edited August 21, 2014 by Namutree

[archangel979]

 

* The tactical combat in BG2, IWD, and IWD2. My main complaint with BG2 combat is the hard-counter wizard fights. I don't think hard-counters belong in a game where you can easily, unintentionally, build a party that lacks the hard-counter. I also don't think save or die effects belong in a game with save/reload, but that's a larger issue with 2nd and some elements of 3rd Edition A/D&D. Notably, it's mostly absent from 4E and I think that aspect of the game is better for it. 

 

This sounds bad. A guy that introduced perma death in PoE that has no way to raise the dead but load game complains about save or die spells in a game with save/load?! Really?!

 

BTW, this forum code/UI is terrible. I cannot remove the upper empty quote without removing other stuff.

Edited August 21, 2014 by archangel979

[IndiraLightfoot]

IWD2 was linear, and had too much fighting even for me - the story part was too thin - I just stopped caring. The combat challenge, however, was very nicely done, especially in the early maps of the game. Still, ToEE, now with the Eight mod, is the pinnacle of party-based D&D CRPG combat, IMHO.

[Infinitron]

because I didn't find most of the quests interesting.

 

 

 

The solution to this would be to demand more interesting quests, not a bribe for putting up with them.

Edited August 21, 2014 by Infinitron

[Kiel29]

 

* The tactical combat in BG2, IWD, and IWD2. My main complaint with BG2 combat is the hard-counter wizard fights. I don't think hard-counters belong in a game where you can easily, unintentionally, build a party that lacks the hard-counter. I also don't think save or die effects belong in a game with save/reload, but that's a larger issue with 2nd and some elements of 3rd Edition A/D&D. Notably, it's mostly absent from 4E and I think that aspect of the game is better for it. 

 

This sounds bad. A guy that introduced perma death in PoE that has no way to raise the dead but load game complains about save or die spells in a game with save/load?! Really?!

 

BTW, this forum code/UI is terrible. I cannot remove the upper empty quote without removing other stuff.

 

 

 

The save/reload things are more insta-kill effects. A spell that could take someone from full health right to death-not because of overwhelming damage, just because- is cheap. Dying in PoE will hopefully take the other person just being better than you, not luckier on one single dice roll.

[Mrakvampire]

The save/reload things are more insta-kill effects. A spell that could take someone from full health right to death-not because of overwhelming damage, just because- is cheap. Dying in PoE will hopefully take the other person just being better than you, not luckier on one single dice roll.

 

Yeah, let as get rid of randomness in rpg at all. I don't want to miss with my sword only because of luck!

[Namutree]

 

 

 

The save/reload things are more insta-kill effects. A spell that could take someone from full health right to death-not because of overwhelming damage, just because- is cheap. Dying in PoE will hopefully take the other person just being better than you, not luckier on one single dice roll.

 

The IE games had enemies that had insta-kill powers, but it could always be countered. It's fine that it's in the game as long as there is a risk free way to deal with it.

[Mayama]

You guys really start to argue over anything just to have a reason to whine about... 

[PrimeJunta]

@Mrakvampire there's randomness and there's randomness. Insta-kill due to a single RNG event is not the same as hitting or missing in melee combat where winning requires landing a half-dozen good hits or so.

[Ondb]

This thread makes me sick. Don't know why people with nostalgia can't buy old IE games in GOG and stops this.

The game needs a different style. Something new (with old style), but new.

I think people make a huge mistake trying to see this as BG3...

 

I already did. I usually re-play IWD2,BG2,Torment every year (maybe with some different mods). I am not against changed. For example i consider following changes to be really good:

• At-will, per-rest abilities / spells
• Limited rest resource
• 3D characters
• Real-time combat without 6s turns
• Different classes not following traditional classes
• Souls lore - mechanics

and the other changes not so good / i would even say for worse at the end of the day.

[PrimeJunta]

The IE games had enemies that had insta-kill powers, but it could always be countered. It's fine that it's in the game as long as there is a risk free way to deal with it.

Except that it was fairly easy to end up with a character/party that did not have the counter when encountering the situation, and no way to backtrack to get it. I believe that's Josh's main objection to the mechanic.

[Giubba]

You guys really start to argue over anything just to have a reason to whine about...

 

Or they are simply stating the oblivious using as cornerstone the false,inaccurate and mislading promises made in the kickstarter campaign.

Edited August 21, 2014 by Giubba

[Mayama]

 

You guys really start to argue over anything just to have a reason to whine about...

 

Or they are simply stating the oblivious using as cornerstone the false,inaccurate and mislading promises made in the kickstarter campaign.

 

As I already said some people really need to learn what "spiritual successor" actually means.

[Waywocket]

I also didn't really like those all-or-nothing save-or-die spells, but to be fair, resurrection was readily available in BG2 and the later stages of BG1, so it's not actually a total disaster if you don't have the counter to something and end up having to res one of your characters when you get back to town (or even cast it right there by the time you have access to the spells). Unless it was the PC of course; that did suck.

[Mrakvampire]

 

The IE games had enemies that had insta-kill powers, but it could always be countered. It's fine that it's in the game as long as there is a risk free way to deal with it.

Except that it was fairly easy to end up with a character/party that did not have the counter when encountering the situation, and no way to backtrack to get it. I believe that's Josh's main objection to the mechanic.

 

 

It was impossible. NPCs (that guy hates them, btw) were created with idea that they fill all required roles in game. You just can't create a party that is not able to complete the game on easy difficulty.

[archangel979]

 

 

* The tactical combat in BG2, IWD, and IWD2. My main complaint with BG2 combat is the hard-counter wizard fights. I don't think hard-counters belong in a game where you can easily, unintentionally, build a party that lacks the hard-counter. I also don't think save or die effects belong in a game with save/reload, but that's a larger issue with 2nd and some elements of 3rd Edition A/D&D. Notably, it's mostly absent from 4E and I think that aspect of the game is better for it. 

 

This sounds bad. A guy that introduced perma death in PoE that has no way to raise the dead but load game complains about save or die spells in a game with save/load?! Really?!

 

BTW, this forum code/UI is terrible. I cannot remove the upper empty quote without removing other stuff.

 

 

 

The save/reload things are more insta-kill effects. A spell that could take someone from full health right to death-not because of overwhelming damage, just because- is cheap. Dying in PoE will hopefully take the other person just being better than you, not luckier on one single dice roll.

 

While I would agree with you if were talking about a pen and paper system, in a cRPG this just removes diversity. If in the whole game there will not be monsters that can kill you with one ability I will be sad. Most epic battles were vs Basilisks, Elder Beholders and yes mages with Instant kill spells. Fighting these guys until you figured out how to fight them was epic and feeling of figuring out was also epic. 

Game that has no great challenges to overcome is worse than the one that has those.

[hairyscotsman2]

Well this feels a lot more like an IE game than DA:O did.

I like the innovations done here with the mechanics, unbalanced and buggy though they currently are.

The game I'm apprehensive about for combat is the new Torment, because I'm not a fan of the PnP Numenera rules. But I still funded it because I was a huge fan of the PS:T story, it was my own favorite RPG ever.

[Namutree]

As I already said some people really need to learn what "spiritual successor" actually means.

 

 

Ok, for the sake of whomever needs to learn what "spiritual successor" I'll say what it means:

 

Spiritual successor, also known as spiritual sequel, is a successor to something which does not build upon the story/lore established in the previous work, but feature many or most of the same elements.

Edited August 21, 2014 by Namutree

[Mrakvampire]

 

As I already said some people really need to learn what "spiritual successor" actually means.

 

 

Ok, for the sake of whomever needs to learn what "spiritual successor" I'll say what it means:

 

Spiritual successor, also known as spiritual sequel, is a successor to something which does not build upon the story/lore established in the previous work, but feature many or most of the same elements.

 

 

MANY OR MOST - key words here. I see neigher 'many' nor most.

Edited August 21, 2014 by Mrakvampire

[Mayama]

 

 

 

* The tactical combat in BG2, IWD, and IWD2. My main complaint with BG2 combat is the hard-counter wizard fights. I don't think hard-counters belong in a game where you can easily, unintentionally, build a party that lacks the hard-counter. I also don't think save or die effects belong in a game with save/reload, but that's a larger issue with 2nd and some elements of 3rd Edition A/D&D. Notably, it's mostly absent from 4E and I think that aspect of the game is better for it. 

 

This sounds bad. A guy that introduced perma death in PoE that has no way to raise the dead but load game complains about save or die spells in a game with save/load?! Really?!

 

BTW, this forum code/UI is terrible. I cannot remove the upper empty quote without removing other stuff.

 

 

 

The save/reload things are more insta-kill effects. A spell that could take someone from full health right to death-not because of overwhelming damage, just because- is cheap. Dying in PoE will hopefully take the other person just being better than you, not luckier on one single dice roll.

 

While I would agree with you if were talking about a pen and paper system, in a cRPG this just removes diversity. If in the whole game there will not be monsters that can kill you with one ability I will be sad. Most epic battles were vs Basilisks, Elder Beholders and yes mages with Instant kill spells. Fighting these guys until you figured out how to fight them was epic and feeling of figuring out was also epic. 

Game that has no great challenges to overcome is worse than the one that has those.

 

 

Fighting those one shot enemies was a mix of save scumming, randomness, abusing the ****ty AI and outright exploiting.

[Ahvz]

While I would agree with you if were talking about a pen and paper system, in a cRPG this just removes diversity. If in the whole game there will not be monsters that can kill you with one ability I will be sad. Most epic battles were vs Basilisks, Elder Beholders and yes mages with Instant kill spells. Fighting these guys until you figured out how to fight them was epic and feeling of figuring out was also epic. 

 

What? No it didn't feel 'epic', it felt boring. Basilisks especially so, since once you had the proper defenses up they were trivial at best to defeat. Clearing out that area east of Beregost was just a huge chore of casting protection from petrification and then sending in whoever you had cast it on to kill everything, rinse, repeat. 

Edited August 21, 2014 by Ahvz

[Namutree]

 

 

Fighting those one shot enemies was a mix of save scumming, randomness, abusing the ****ty AI and outright exploiting.

 

I don't need to rely on any of those to defeat such enemies.

[Ineth]

Still, ToEE, now with the Eight mod, is the pinnacle of party-based D&D CRPG combat, IMHO.

 

I tried to play that game, but couldn't really get into it.

 

After a few not-that-interesting fetch quests, I accepted a quest to kill some spiders in a small forest area; Somehow I managed to muddle through that encounter, but one party member sustained significant injuries, so afterwards I decided to rest right there.

 

A bad choice as it turns out, as I was awoken by a bandit ambush. The worst part was that they had spawned right on top of my party, so it was a giant cluster**** with everyone being in everyone's engagement circle (or whatever it was called). I read through all the combat ability descriptions in the built-in help system, and tried some "break engagement" type things but nothing worked (or maybe I didn't understand them correctly). Anyway, it became a very confusing fight where in the first three turns only small amounts of damage were sustained on both sides, and then in the fourth turn, my party members suddenly started dropping dead like flies. And I had no idea why it went down that way, or what I should have done to prevent it.

 

So I concluded that this kind of turn-based combat may not be for me, and I should stick to my trusted RTwP games for now...

 

Maybe I should give it another chance someday (Can you recommend any good combat tutorials or rule system documentation for it?), but right now I'm preoccupied with PoE...

 

[Giubba]

 

 

You guys really start to argue over anything just to have a reason to whine about...

 

Or they are simply stating the oblivious using as cornerstone the false,inaccurate and mislading promises made in the kickstarter campaign.

 

As I already said some people really need to learn what "spiritual successor" actually means.

 

 

As already said someone need to learn to read.

 

Copy pasted from the kickstarter page

 

Project Eternity will take the central hero, memorable companions and the epic exploration of Baldur’s Gate, add in the fun, intense combat and dungeon diving of Icewind Dale, and tie it all together with the emotional writing and mature thematic exploration of Planescape: Torment.

 

So for what we saw there isn't even a scrap of Baldur's Gate taken in account as the developer exact words and if the actual combat system is anything close to icewind dale than it's better that you reinstall the game and check it out.

 

Hope that the narrative part is something bearable.

[Ineth]

What? No it didn't feel 'epic', it felt boring. Basilisks especially so, since once you had the proper defenses up they were trivial at best to defeat.

 

Only if you knew ahead of time that you would encounter them...

 

Surprise basilisk encounters never failed to get my heart rate up in BG1!