Do you want experience from combat?

[Monte Carlo]

^ Wow that's harsh.

[Cantousent]

I was thinking that myself, MC.  I'm assuming 'promancers' are people who want in game romances?  Sadly, while I don't want to be a naysayer, I would actually rather see combat XP than romances in the game.  Maybe something like Annah or Deionarra, but no actually kissy face romance.  If it came to it, I would actually join with the combat XP folks to do away with romances.  I don't like to be the 'anti' everything guy.  It just that combat XP is merely misguided.  CRPG 'romances' are just plain sad.  I sure as hell hope that they don't have heavy romantic story lines aren't already included in the game. 

[Sarex]

It doesn't make those things pointless at all. Do all games give you experience points for every little thing you do? No. I think that quest exp is the proper way to focus the game. Exploration is a part of completing quests and there's always loot as well and lore, etc.

 

That's a ****ty analogy, first off PoE isn't any other game, secondly combat isn't a little thing, it's the hardest thing in the game to do and it makes up 80% of the game. Exploration isn't part of completing quests, exploration is exploration. In fact many times there are no quest when you explore.

[DnaCowboy]

 

Really, what does it say about a community that seems more than happy to vote and deny the other half something that they desperately want which costs nor affects the opposing subscriber-base anything at all.

Strange.

 

Hint: Saying 'I want X' isn't an argument in favor of X that will convince anyone. Therefore, saying 'I really really...really want X' isn't either. Nor is 'Not having X causes me angst.' Sorry, but the world is mostly indifferent to your angst (Don't blame me for that. I don't make the rules; I just enforce them on the internet ).

 

(Also, if you think kill XP has no effect on the game you haven't thought this through. More below.)

 

 On the other hand, I want X because good reason 1, good reason 2 etc. is useful. We can then understand why people have the opinions they do (and have a sense who has thought about the issue and who is having a kneejerk reaction (something that people do sometimes)). Some people might even change their minds once they really think about the reasons. (Others will smear their kneejerk reaction onto all of the reasons and spout nonsense, but that's not worse than what we have now).

 

So, what are some reasons for kill XP? How about:

1. It is a more conservative way to design the game - IE games were fun and they did it that way and PoE doesn't have a big enough budget to take the risk.

2. Quest XP might prevent some kinds of degenerate gameplay (like killing **** you don't even want to kill because you gain levels) but causes other kinds (insert kinds of degenerate gameplay caused by quest XP here)

or,

2a. Degenerate gameplay isn't even a thing because (reasons why it isn't) (we've had this statement repeated ad nauseam along with disparaging remarks about an Obsidian employee who wants to prevent it - what we need is actual supporting arguments) 

3. XP numbers give you feedback on the difficulty of the fight you just had - it give you an indication of whether your tactics were good or not.

4. Other fantastic reason why you have a well founded opinion and not just an opinion pulled out of ....er, thin air

 

Reasons against kill XP:

1. Doesn't disadvantage any particular style of game play (killing works, diplomacy works, stealth works). (an argument against this point is that killing should be advantaged for some reason (hint, provide reason - **** do I have to do everything for you?  ))

2. Doesn't require encounters to be designed with a specific number creatures of a specific difficulty - the level slider can add creatures (and stronger creatures) without the unintended side effect of making the game easier due to faster leveling (you know, because hard mode should be harder)

3. Doesn't give an incentive to kill everything on a map (which can be chore) - only what you need to kill to do what you want to do

4. Other fantastic reason why you have a well founded opinion and not just an opinion pulled out of ....er, thin air

 

tl;dr More light - less heat.

 

 

Yes, on seconds thoughts you make sense, perhaps introducing XP combat does affect the opposing voter; however, I cannot see why both camps cannot get what they want eventually.

Regarding (reasons against) 3:  I think the crpg community would object vocally to Pillars becoming an action rpg along the lines of say Diablo, that said it shouldn't detract from offering the player xp from combat which crpg's have been doing since Bards Tale and before.

Edited August 30, 2014 by DnaCowboy

[Stun]

*chuckle*

 

it would be hard for stun's example to be any worse as an example o' past failures. ps:t? 

 

A Wisdom of 12 and lower, no bonus

13 gives you about a 2% bonus to experience earned.

14 5%

15 8%

16 10%

17 13%

18 15%

19 18%

20 20%

21 23%

22 25%

23 27%

24 30%

25 35%

 

the game was so skewed in favor of wisdom it were ridiculous. intelligence and charisma also were receiving superior xp rewards, but as we noted in another thread, ps:t were the prime example o' th schadenfreude josh were talking about in his recent balance article. you could not active play as a cleric in ps:t, so no class had wisdom as a prime attribute, but wisdom not only got you the best xp awards, it gave you a freaking BONUS beyond the awards. and unlike other ie games, you could level as a thief, mage and fighter, so you were smartest to do all three if you wanted as much xp to get as much wisdom a possible.

 

stun example o' the best is perhaps the worst freaking example we can recall, and clearly the most arse-backwards ie game as far as experience were concerned.

There were story/narrative reasons for the importance of wisdom. And you're splitting hairs. If that's really a point of contention for you, then you ain't got a case. They could just adopt an XP system like PS:T's only without Wisdom bonuses to XP.

 

 

is ironic that stun edited from bg2 to ps:t, 'cause he backpedaled his way into a complete ridiculous xp mechanic that made so that anybody who played through ps:t as a high wisdom mage character knew very well that playing as a low int/wis/charisma fighter as were oh-so-common, in other ie games were a functional punishment, particularly as combat... sucked.

 

schadenfreude, and stun actual edited his way into it. tickles our sense o' whimsy.

 

we loved ps:t, but stun points to it most farked mechanic as the guide for PoE? we couldn't have scripted this to make stun look more foolish. honest.

I switched to PS:T because it's a better example, and serves as a fairer compromise (there's more non-combat XP in PS:T). But you know what? I didn't have to. And I regret conceding even that much. Because BG2's system is STILL better than the dumbed down, Lazy, Developer-first system you're advocating. Edited August 30, 2014 by Stun

[IRMA]

I don't care how anybody else plays the game, I do care only about the game being as much fun as possible. No combat xp, less fun. If YOU care HOW I play the game, you have problem in your head.

Devs, please make turn off combat xp button and everybody should be pleased, right? Right? You shouldn't really care how I do play the game at my home.

[DnaCowboy]

Devs, please make turn off combat xp button and everybody should be pleased, right? Right? You shouldn't really care how I do play the game at my home.

 

Edited August 30, 2014 by DnaCowboy

[Immortalis]

I want to keep a neutral stance but at this point I'm rather tempted to vote "no" just because all that pro combat XP whining is unbelievably childish. And it spills over to other threads which makes it even worse.

 

You guys are worse than promancers.

 

Basing your opinion on the amount of forum threads on the forum is probably the dumbest thing I have ever head. Let's make the games core mechanics around whatever idea someone had that I don't dislike on a gaming forum.

 

As if we "the Combat XP Hivemind" can control what everyone does and says.. we are all one big hive mind of people who orchestrated thread pollution. Like is that how you see it? WE are all one guy at a computer that you want to channel your hate into?

 

Not only have you shown how childish you are.. you have been anything BUT neutral. For the record.. I am glad Tale locked like 3 of these threads. Spamming the forum with combat xp threads isn't gonna make the developers change their mind or look at it a new way. The devs are gonna see combat xp as something one 15 year old kid wants. It actually hurts our discussion more then help it.

 

But I can't do anything about it.

Edited August 30, 2014 by Immortalis

[Wintersong]

I don't care how anybody else plays the game, I do care only about the game being as much fun as possible. No combat xp, less fun. If YOU care HOW I play the game, you have problem in your head.

Devs, please make turn off combat xp button and everybody should be pleased, right? Right? You shouldn't really care how I do play the game at my home.

   

I don't care about what you feel that it's fun for you. Considering time/resources, they should stick to what they have and use their remaining time/resources to fix/balance/polish the game and not catering some loud people. Unless that loud people want to pay from their pocket those optional systems. Then that's ok a long as the resource known as time allows it.

Edited August 30, 2014 by Wintersong

[Helm]

   

I don't care about what you feel that it's fun for you.

   

 

We don't care what you think is fun either.

[Karkarov]

 

I don't care how anybody else plays the game, I do care only about the game being as much fun as possible. No combat xp, less fun. If YOU care HOW I play the game, you have problem in your head.

Devs, please make turn off combat xp button and everybody should be pleased, right? Right? You shouldn't really care how I do play the game at my home.

   

I don't care about what you feel that it's fun for you. Considering time/resources, they should stick to what they have and use their remaining time/resources to fix/balance/polish the game and not catering some loud people. Unless that loud people want to pay from their pocket those optional systems. Then that's ok a long as the resource known as time allows it.

 

The only way they will have the time to allow it is if the pro-combatxpers come up with around 200k or so and make another donation.  They are asking them to overhaul the one system that has more to do with game balance and power curves than anything else.  It would easily take a month or two possibly more to do just that, forget about all the bugs, polishing, and everything else you have to put on hold.

 

It is a ridiculous request that is not as popular as people think and it is not going to happen.

Edited August 30, 2014 by Karkarov

[Sarex]

The only way they will have the time to allow it is if the pro-combatxpers come up with around 200k or so and make another donation.  They are asking them to overhaul the one system that has more to do with game balance and power curves than anything else.  It would easily take a month or two possibly more to do just that, forget about all the bugs, polishing, and everything else you have to put on hold.

 

It is a ridiculous request that is not as popular as people think and it is not going to happen.

 

Because they didn't pay enough on the KS, is that what you are saying?

[TheNationer]

'You shouldn't care how I play at home' isn't a viable request to change the fundamental mechanics of this particular game, it is, however, a viable request to allow for modding.

 

And the game has modding, right? So what's the issue here, the fact that it doesn't fit your taste? That's not enough.

[DnaCowboy]

 

 

I don't care how anybody else plays the game, I do care only about the game being as much fun as possible. No combat xp, less fun. If YOU care HOW I play the game, you have problem in your head.

Devs, please make turn off combat xp button and everybody should be pleased, right? Right? You shouldn't really care how I do play the game at my home.

   

I don't care about what you feel that it's fun for you. Considering time/resources, they should stick to what they have and use their remaining time/resources to fix/balance/polish the game and not catering some loud people. Unless that loud people want to pay from their pocket those optional systems. Then that's ok a long as the resource known as time allows it.

 

The only way they will have the time to allow it is if the pro-combatxpers come up with around 200k or so and make another donation.  They are asking them to overhaul the one system that has more to do with game balance and power curves than anything else.  It would easily take a month or two possibly more to do just that, forget about all the bugs, polishing, and everything else you have to put on hold.

 

It is a ridiculous request that is not as popular as people think and it is not going to happen.

 

 

I am more than happy to fund Combat XP, just show me where. 

[PK htiw klaw eriF]

 

 

 

 

 

 

I don't care how anybody else plays the game, I do care only about the game being as much fun as possible. No combat xp, less fun. If YOU care HOW I play the game, you have problem in your head.

Devs, please make turn off combat xp button and everybody should be pleased, right? Right? You shouldn't really care how I do play the game at my home.

I don't care about what you feel that it's fun for you. Considering time/resources, they should stick to what they have and use their remaining time/resources to fix/balance/polish the game and not catering some loud people. Unless that loud people want to pay from their pocket those optional systems. Then that's ok a long as the resource known as time allows it.

The only way they will have the time to allow it is if the pro-combatxpers come up with around 200k or so and make another donation. They are asking them to overhaul the one system that has more to do with game balance and power curves than anything else. It would easily take a month or two possibly more to do just that, forget about all the bugs, polishing, and everything else you have to put on hold.

 

It is a ridiculous request that is not as popular as people think and it is not going to happen.

I am more than happy to fund Combat XP, just show me where.

You'll be receiving an e-mail from an African Prince shortly.

[Karkarov]

 

The only way they will have the time to allow it is if the pro-combatxpers come up with around 200k or so and make another donation.  They are asking them to overhaul the one system that has more to do with game balance and power curves than anything else.  It would easily take a month or two possibly more to do just that, forget about all the bugs, polishing, and everything else you have to put on hold.

 

It is a ridiculous request that is not as popular as people think and it is not going to happen.

 

Because they didn't pay enough on the KS, is that what you are saying?

No, I am saying the boat sailed on this one over a year ago and it is time to grow up and accept that the game doesn't have combat exp in it.

[IndiraLightfoot]

 

 

I don't care how anybody else plays the game, I do care only about the game being as much fun as possible. No combat xp, less fun. If YOU care HOW I play the game, you have problem in your head.

Devs, please make turn off combat xp button and everybody should be pleased, right? Right? You shouldn't really care how I do play the game at my home.

   

I don't care about what you feel that it's fun for you. Considering time/resources, they should stick to what they have and use their remaining time/resources to fix/balance/polish the game and not catering some loud people. Unless that loud people want to pay from their pocket those optional systems. Then that's ok a long as the resource known as time allows it.

 

The only way they will have the time to allow it is if the pro-combatxpers come up with around 200k or so and make another donation.  They are asking them to overhaul the one system that has more to do with game balance and power curves than anything else.  It would easily take a month or two possibly more to do just that, forget about all the bugs, polishing, and everything else you have to put on hold.

 

It is a ridiculous request that is not as popular as people think and it is not going to happen.

 

As a D&D CRPG modder, I can tell you, in all sincerity, that this is not true. Even a single experienced person could do it, and well in time, before release. If they wanted to have it in, that is. I have already asked one OE dev about it, and provided a solution/set up for how it could be done, even for free. He declined. 

 

Also, they already have some creature/monster/enemy ranking system in, since you have this "most powerful foe defeated" feature in. It's a design choice more than anything else.

Edited August 30, 2014 by IndiraLightfoot

[Gromnir]

 

 

 

I don't care how anybody else plays the game, I do care only about the game being as much fun as possible. No combat xp, less fun. If YOU care HOW I play the game, you have problem in your head.

Devs, please make turn off combat xp button and everybody should be pleased, right? Right? You shouldn't really care how I do play the game at my home.

   

I don't care about what you feel that it's fun for you. Considering time/resources, they should stick to what they have and use their remaining time/resources to fix/balance/polish the game and not catering some loud people. Unless that loud people want to pay from their pocket those optional systems. Then that's ok a long as the resource known as time allows it.

 

The only way they will have the time to allow it is if the pro-combatxpers come up with around 200k or so and make another donation.  They are asking them to overhaul the one system that has more to do with game balance and power curves than anything else.  It would easily take a month or two possibly more to do just that, forget about all the bugs, polishing, and everything else you have to put on hold.

 

It is a ridiculous request that is not as popular as people think and it is not going to happen.

 

As a D&D CRPG modder, I can tell you, in all sincerity, that this is not true. Even a single experienced person could do it, and well in time, before release. If they wanted to have it in, that is. I have already asked one OE dev about it, and provided a solution/set up for how it could be done, even for free. He declined. 

 

Also, they already have some creature/monster/enemy ranking system in, since you have this "most powerful foe defeated" feature in. It's a design choice more than anything else.

 

a bit misleading no doubt. whether you could slap together a kill xp system ignores comments such as josh made in regard to this issue:

 

"Not only is it extraordinarily hard to balance for designers and QA staff, but it inevitably leads to nasty metagaming that, in my opinion, runs counter to some of the guiding principles of many RPGs."

 

please note josh did not say that implementing a kill system for xp were technical difficult. he did observe that such a system were extraordinarily hard to balance for designers and QA. implement a system is only the start o' the effort that would be needed to Fix your "improvement."  would you give xp for sneaking past monsters instead o' fighting. stun thinks sneaking past monsters is unworthy? does you? how much for lockpicking? if you give for kills, then why not lockpicks... and how much for lockpicks? 

 

again, am believing there is a fundamental misconception 'bout the problem.

 

HA! Good Fun!

[IndiraLightfoot]

Gromnir: Agreed. It's basically what I'm saying: Josh & Co would be more than capable of inserting it (like I just wrote, it's already in, at least rudimentarily). However we do not agree about perfect balance.

 

I say like Sensuki: "balance==banalce", in this case it's true for an xp system in a CRPG. Obviously, it needs quite some tweaking and decent min-max variations over the course of the game, but in essence: I want the game to be slightly imbalanced. This makes each playthrough so much more fun.

 

As for my system (I said that in another thread): I'd keep it pretty close to the BG2 system, so yes, lockpicking and disarming traps, would be in, for instance.

Edited August 30, 2014 by IndiraLightfoot

[Shevek]

Again, if the player gave up combat prowess to be able to sneak better when developing his character, then you would be right Gromnir. This is not the case in Pillars. Pillars is not Fallout. It does not have a skill system where a player must craft a sneaky, crafty, talky or fighty character. All characters can fight. As such, xp fairness has no bearing. Instead, he gives up the xp if he sneaks past but does not risk death or loss of health. In this game, that is a legitimate threat thanks to rest resources and ironman modes.

Edited August 30, 2014 by Shevek

[Sarex]

Indra they are only saying that the system cannot be put in because they want to shut people up, not because they know anything about anything... so your words are pretty much wasted. In a couple of pages you will see then again telling people that it's too late for a bg2 like xp system.

[IndiraLightfoot]

Some NWN2 modders had some freakishly good mileage when making mods. They could make entire games, 30h+, in a year - one single person. Others improved the AI for NWN2 significantly. The same went for spells, etc. In this case, I just wanted to get some facts straight. For once, it's something that I really know something about.

 

I respect everyone that want quest xp only. In theory, I was just excited as the most eager of them merely a couple weeks ago. All that I ask in return is that we all keep the discussion about the pros and cons of various xp systems. Personally, I feel that the game loses an interesting dimension that's something far more than a vehicle for munchkins.

Edited August 30, 2014 by IndiraLightfoot

[Elerond]

Gromnir: Agreed. It's basically what I'm saying: Josh & Co would be more than capable of inserting it (like I just wrote, it's already in, at least rudimentarily). However we do not agree about perfect balance.

 

I say like Sensuki: "balance==banalce", in this case it's true for an xp system in a CRPG. Obviously, it needs quite some tweaking and decent min-max variations over the course of the game, but in essence: I want the game to be slightly imbalanced. This makes each playthrough so much more fun.

 

As for my system (I said that in another thread): I'd keep it pretty close to the BG2 system, so yes, lockpicking and disarming traps, would be in, for instance.

 

So you think that Obsidian should back down from one of their goals and promises that they set in during KS campaign, which was "Avoiding combat does not lead to less experience gain. You shouldn't go up levels any slower by using your non-combat skills rather than your combat skills. We plan to reward you for your accomplishments, not for your body count.". Or do you think that asymmetry should go other way, meaning that non-combat solution should produce more experience than combat solutions?

[Gromnir]

Gromnir: Agreed. It's basically what I'm saying: Josh & Co would be more than capable of inserting it (like I just wrote, it's already in, at least rudimentarily). However we do not agree about perfect balance.

 

I say like Sensuki: "balance==banalce", in this case it's true for an xp system in a CRPG. Obviously, it needs quite some tweaking and decent min-max variations over the course of the game, but in essence: I want the game to be slightly imbalanced. This makes each playthrough so much more fun.

 

As for my system (I said that in another thread): I'd keep it pretty close to the BG2 system, so yes, lockpicking and disarming traps, would be in, for instance.

excellent. see, we are getting clarification by asking questions.

 

we do not know what other questions you asked of developers. did you ask them what were their impressions o' quest xp mechanic via formal QA and the considerable informal testing o' game so far? did you ask if quest xp were functionally discouraging players from engaging in combat as some folks here fear? were quest xp achieving goals o' more diverse gameplay and builds? were quest xp resulting in players replaying various boss battles to see what xp rewards were best. were obsidians pleased or displeased with quest xp thus far? etc?

 

is always a good thing to ask relevant questions. am curious to see what answers the obsidians provided you... if you asked such questions.

 

HA! Good Fun!

[Cantousent]

The button argument is the worst of the whole bunch.  I kind of assume it was facetious, but just in case it's not, I'll point out that that you can't balance a system for combat XP and then tell folks to decide whether they want it or not.  This whole idea that "it should be the players' choice" is ridiculous in the first place, and it could even be carried out to any extreme.  Don't like magic?  Put in a button to prevent magic from being in the game.  Granted, a whole slew of stories, NPCs, quests, and content will disappear, but we've placated people who have a specific gripe.  Once they've balanced for one or the other, the XP system is simply part of the game.

 

There's also no single factor that goes into the decision for the way they design the XP system.  Someone up above did a really good post going over various arguments, which was a good read, but, while I could try to give a good account of the opposing view, I figure someone who is emotionally and personally invested in his position will make a better advocate for it.  Nevertheless, even though I usually only give counter arguments from the other side in order to address them from my point of view, I never pretend they don't exist or trivialize them with button talk.

 

I would think that the design team creates the game first and foremost from a 'normal setting' point of view.  Things like hardcore and ironman can't have much bearing on the design decision for the basic game.  Those are things that require extra care in implementing because they take the basic game and change certain aspects to make it significantly harder.

 

Fairness is a factor, but not in the way that some folks seem to believe.  It's not that someone can get XO for combat and will go around killing folks just to get that XP that bothers me.  From a design perspective, they want the gameplay to be fun, but they also want to engage the player in a campaign complete with backstory, plot elements, interesting characters, and tough choices.  I don't think, as a single issue, it would be worth it to remove XP just because it habituates some players to metagame and undo some of those artistic decisions the design team makes.  ...But the metagaming argument doesn't stand alone.  It's part of a larger list.

 

Combat XP does make it harder to balance.  Now, a while back (like years ago) I was in a thread with Sawyer and Gromnir and I argued most vehemently that they were too concerned with balance, and I still sometimes feel that way.  However, balance *is* an issue.  If we include combat XP and provide enough fodder, the design team has to work harder to ensure the game is challenging enough for some folks and yet hard enough for others.  ...And game difficulty *will* be a source of bitter dispute after this game ships.  I know, I'm playing Nostradamus here, but I'll lay down the bet on it right now.  ...Second And, there will be people complaining that it's too hard and folks complaining it's too easy.  A system that controls the XP will help mitigate something that will already be an issue no matter what the design team does.

 

There is nothing preventing folks from engaging in combat if they so choose.  The fact that people complain about lack of combat XP merely demonstrates the whole point about habituating people to certain behavior.  You don't always get loot drops, achievements, story or character development, or even face new creatures in every battle and yet folks want XP rewards for each encounter.

 

The IE games had combat XP, which is, from my perspective, simply a good argument for it.  However, like everything else, it needs to be taken as part of a whole package.  There are other aspect of IE that are already not in PoE, and the same folks don't complain about each and every one.  In fact, using the DnD 3.5 system, at least one of the games had a lot of combat where I received no XP because the challenge rating was too low.  In fact, the IE games had, within the whole slew of them, modifications to XP, alignment, THAC0, attributes, etc. etc. etc.

 

Combat XP does in fact make combat more visceral for some folks.  I concede that and also see it as a pretty good argument.  However, no XP system will every truly remove the disconnect between an abstraction of something so profound as human experience and improvement on one hand and the game in which it is depicted on the other.  So, while I sympathize with this particular argument, and a couple of others, I don't think they are sufficient to overcome the benefits of creating a system that preserves the artistic vision of the story designers and helps keep the gameplay balanced for all players.  The fact is, while we've heard a lot about letting people play the way they want, combat XP has far more impact on how people view gameplay than does quest/challenge/whatever only XP.

 

With all that said, I think something far more worrisome would be if the design team tried to make every method of overcoming challenges equal.  *That's* where the over inclination to balance would hurt because some methods, and sometimes combat, should sometimes yield better results, and 'quest only' XP is at its heart result oriented.