Thoughts from a casual gamer

[Starwars]

It'd be real nice if people would stop posting about PoE stuff that is not in the beta but only in the data files, or hide that stuff from us that wish to be unspoiled (yes, even the smallest things).

 

As far as the difficulty goes, I think one has to simply consider that the game is not directed at a "casual" crowd. The IE games were pretty tough (maybe not PS:T as much) and PoE should be comparable. Generally speaking, I would be with the crowd who considers BG1's Cloakwood areas a lot more difficult (and a hell of a lot more boring and "slog-ish" I might add) than PoE backer beta (how valid such a comparison is I have no idea).

I will definitely say that I feel PoE is harder to understand mechanically speaking and I suspect it'd be even more-so for someone not too interested in the mechanics. But it's also hard to say in my opinion, if we took the full BG1 and PoE games and put them side-by-side, and from the beginning. A lot of it depends on how the games ease you into it. If you happen to choose a physically weak class in BG1, you can easily die over and over from the simplest encounter, especially if you have no experience with games like it.

When I played BG1, some of the systems inherent from D&D confused the hell out of me despite me having experience with other PnP systems.

 

After trying Easy though, I dunno... I don't want put anyone down or insult or anything like that, but I could literally auto-attack most things to death very easily. Other things required a minimal use of spells/abilities. And the beetles in this game aren't supposed to be an "easy" enemy, *and* it's in the middle of the game.

Edited November 8, 2014 by Starwars

[Lord Wafflebum]

I think my original point has been lost in the argument. My opinion is this: While playing on a low difficulty, I should be able to progress through the game relatively easily hence "easy" difficulty. My problem is that I simply cannot progress through the first area I'm directed toward. I've tried several different classes and adjusted my strategy with each new build. Every single time I ALWAYS get wiped out by beetles. 

 

You guys bring BG1 up a lot. I very rarely had difficulty progressing through that game as long as I went where the main story line pointed me and did some side quests along the way. If I did hit a rough area I could typically make a tactical retreat, regroup, or go around a tough spot.

 

What happens here is PoE is that my second combat encounter in the game wipes me out no matter what I seem to do. I kill off those guys by the bridge in the village for some slightly better gear and while that encounter is tough you can also see what you need to do to win if you die. When it comes to the beetles it's a matter of how fast I die, but I WILL die. That's not ok for what can reasonably be the very first battle of the game.

 

Also yes, I am say all this knowing that the suggestion that the game would likely be more tactically challenging than most current games, but the old IE games as they sit now are more challenging tactically than most current gen games so that's what level of difficulty I expected. In the old IE games you could have only a toddler-level understanding of how the fighting mechanics work. I didn't realize until my third BG1 play through that a negative armor value was good, but I still played through twice. 

 

What the argument against my opinion seems to be is that "casual gamers are not welcome here." Why must I be alienated from enjoying this game because I want to enjoy a different aspect of it (the lore and story)?

[Sensuki]

It'd be real nice if people would stop posting about PoE stuff that is not in the beta but only in the data files, or hide that stuff from us that wish to be unspoiled (yes, even the smallest things).

You can name names you know. None of the stuff I posted is from there, it's from interviews and Kickstarter Updates. If you didn't already know that and didn't want to know then sorry.

 

We know that Gilded Vale is Act 1 from the E3 previews, the others are from Josh Sawyer interviews.

 

@LordWafflebum - if you want to know how to beat beetles https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLIRfCmyR7ijJVaS8mrbpvsCXPCl61FSaW (not incredibly relevant in the latest patch though)

Edited November 8, 2014 by Sensuki

[zimcub]

Vs wood beetle use fire and blunt damage. Avoid using slashing or piercing damage.

Vs stone beetle use corrode. Avoid using slashing damage.

Vs adra beetle use piercing weapons. Avoid using shock damage.

[Lord Wafflebum]

@Sensuki: Apparently I need to start watching your videos to learn to play the game. Your initial assumption that I don't pause enough is apparently correct. I might finally be able to get past that part now with my paladin. If we're expected to pause that much to be able to manage combat, do you know why they went away from turn-based combat? Because unless I've misunderstood your play strategy, the only good way to do things seems to be forcing the game to behave as turn based for combat.

[Sensuki]

There's also a slow mode, you press S to turn it on. Most of the people I see who are dying are not pausing enough.

 

And yeah it requires too much pausing. Bunch of issues together are causing it. I'm going to do all I can to highlight these issues and hope that they are fixed.

 

My first vs the beetles video is terrible by the way, that was one of the first times I seriously attempted that encounter. You will see me pausing very often there, and then less often in the later videos, because I got better over time.

Edited November 8, 2014 by Sensuki

[Ieo]

I paused all the time in the IE games (enabled nearly all the autopause too) so I'm curious how this will turn out...

 

I would politely point out that a certain degree of difficulty was one of the premises for the kickstarter, and that the IE games themselves were not casual in their difficulty and required a degree of strategy and tactics.

No and yes. "Difficulty" was not a basic premise of the Kickstarter, but rather the idea of strategic party combat. That is a combat approach in a genre sense, as opposed to something like first-person. "Difficulty" as additional options was added as a stretch goal and further clarified on the forum by devs that there would be multiple difficulty settings like in the IE games.

 

The OP issue thus has more to do with what's "difficult" on the easier game settings, while the concept of "fun" is a bit separate though related.

 

I usually run default (BG1 and 2). But considering that PS:T was my favorite IE game and you could skip 80% of combat in that, I probably lean towards the casual side of things. That said, take something like combat in Dragon Age:O and I hated it so much, so boring to me, that I dialed the difficulty to the easiest possible just so I could avoid spending too much time in it.

[Quadrone]

I stand by my point.

A mob of random critters, not part of a dungeon (or other special area), not part of a quest, just fauna on my path inbetween two points.

If I'm playing on the lower difficulty settings and as long as I didn't fall asleep on the keyboard my party should not die there. Never ever.

That's not enjoyable challenge to me, thats grind wearing me down.

Edited November 9, 2014 by Quadrone

[Shevek]

Quad:

Thats just silly. The IE games were not that easy. If you dont like a challenge, why play a game? Go read a fantasy book or rewatch LotR if you just want some sword and sorcery but no challenge. I think its this kind of thinking that led to the decline cRPG gaming after the 90s.

 

As a side note, I just made a Barb, sold excess weapons, got another party member (Pally), killed Mekrath, sold more excess loot, killed off the BB Wizard and got a Cypher. I then proceeded to murder beetles by the score and I needed to pause only sparingly. Admittedly, this was on normal. I might have had to pause more on hard.

 

I dunno. Combat felt alright to me. Maybe some UI tweaks here and there to improve combat feedback but I dont see the problem.

Edited November 9, 2014 by Shevek

[Kjaamor]

No and yes. "Difficulty" was not a basic premise of the Kickstarter, but rather the idea of strategic party combat. That is a combat approach in a genre sense, as opposed to something like first-person. "Difficulty" as additional options was added as a stretch goal and further clarified on the forum by devs that there would be multiple difficulty settings like in the IE games.

 

The OP issue thus has more to do with what's "difficult" on the easier game settings, while the concept of "fun" is a bit separate though related.

 

It was implied that a level of strategy is required in combat, and by extension there is a certain level of difficulty. The game was not set up to be "hard" on all settings, but it was designed to require strategic/tactical input. Even on easy, the player has to do more than simply bring their party to the table to win.

 

Personally, as someone who doesn't consider themselves particularly hardcore in any respect (Played the IE games on "normal", rarely play anything on "hard") I find it slightly bemusing why so many players are struggling to survive the beta. I suspect it is because, like yourself, Ieo, in the IE games I pause constantly and it has got me into habits that are effective in PoE. It blows my mind that so many people were able to survive either BG without being so reliant on pausing, but there you go.

 

Difficulty feedback is important, of course, and "Easy" should be easy. However, like BG (a game I regard as far harder, personally), "Easy" should only be easy when you are playing the game roughly in the manner that it is intended. I don't know what the OP is doing but after a short watch of, for example, any of Sensuki's videos if they cannot then progress with relative speed then perhaps we can talk about toning down the difficulty on "Easy". If, given a very quick introduction into how to approach the game, they then find it easy, as I suspect they shall, then the difficulty requires less tinkering.

 

In other news, I echo the sentiment that the concept of "fun" is different but related.

Edited November 9, 2014 by Kjaamor

[Sensuki]

The game doesn't really require much tactical input, other than what you decide to do at the start of combat - certainly not tactical movement anyway.

 

But yeah I think a lot of people are simply just missing some of the basics. I still think the combat is too quick, too disjointed and not that great, but it's not difficult once you know what to open combat with and you know what abilities to follow up with.

 

The IE game combat was much more reactionary (and thus tactical). Most of the time I didn't bother about a good opening, because it wasn't required. Pillars of Eternity's combat relies about 80% on your opening/first actions of combat. It doesn't go for long enough to bother with half the actions available, I've found casting buffs in combat fairly pointless in v301 and v333. In v278 the poison counterspells were needed, now they're not.

Edited November 9, 2014 by Sensuki

[Sensuki]

@Sensuki: Apparently I need to start watching your videos to learn to play the game. Your initial assumption that I don't pause enough is apparently correct. I might finally be able to get past that part now with my paladin.

 

By the way, Paladins are broken in the current patch, their passive auras do not work properly - so they are a seriously gimped character at the moment.

[IndiraLightfoot]

If Josh & Co don't read this thread and take it into serious consideration, I will scream me head off senseless!

Edited November 9, 2014 by IndiraLightfoot

[Quadrone]

Quad:

Thats just silly. The IE games were not that easy. If you dont like a challenge, why play a game? Go read a fantasy book or rewatch LotR if you just want some sword and sorcery but no challenge. I think its this kind of thinking that led to the decline cRPG gaming after the 90s.

 

As a side note, I just made a Barb, sold excess weapons, got another party member (Pally), killed Mekrath, sold more excess loot, killed off the BB Wizard and got a Cypher. I then proceeded to murder beetles by the score and I needed to pause only sparingly. Admittedly, this was on normal. I might have had to pause more on hard.

 

I dunno. Combat felt alright to me. Maybe some UI tweaks here and there to improve combat feedback but I dont see the problem.

 

Yes, thats right! I don't want any challenge, that's what I said. Please don't blank out after the first word and take note of the quite fine distinction I've made for what type of encounters this should apply to.

I played through BG, BG2 and PS:T just fine more then a decade ago, I didn't back the Kickstarter just to be hipster.

 

Again, I'm not talking about the odd special encounter, nor any encounter related to a side- or main quest, just local beasts siiting on the road between A and B (making these also hard to avoid). Likewise my party is not so low level that everything is dangerous, but is instead of appropriate level and gear for this area.

Now, if these both are true I feel that having to do a "Pause-a-thon" to prevent my party from getting torn appart is tiring. These are just filler battles, rudimentary positioning and spell use should be enough here.

To me these should work as a drain on your party resources: Use powerful but limited abilities/spells to kill your enemies off quickly or safe the abilities/spells and take more damage (not risk death) . Both of which will then force you to rest or compensate with other items/spells.

If I wanted every encounter along the way to be a test I'd play on hard or higher,...but I don't.

Edited November 9, 2014 by Quadrone

[Sensuki]

The pause thing is a combat lethality and speed / activity issue, not an encounter issue. I would prefer combat to be a bit more sensibly paced but have more challening encounters. The current system doesn't really support that for various reasons.

[Shevek]

Quad

"These are just filler battles, rudimentary positioning and spell use should be enough here."

 

 

Thats all thats needed. You are playing the game wrong. Learn the fundamentals and you do just fine. Especially on easy. I sure as heck didnt even need to watch a gameplay vid. I just build my characters for passive fighting and made some smart choices at the start of combat.

 

Frankly, I feel that the IE games were very similar for the most part. In those games you did even more BEFORE combat started (buffing, cheap aoe crap, etc). There was very little reactivity during combat in IE except for potion guzzling or cheap spell protection stripping in late game BG2.

Edited November 9, 2014 by Shevek

[Sensuki]

That's not true. 

 

There was way more reactional movement than Pillars of Eternity (switching of aggro, and tactical retreating especially), reactional potion drinking, buff and debuff dispelling, counterspelling, casting different spells depending on different situations (remove paralysis, dispel magic, neutralize poison, vocalize, silence, breach - literally heaps more). You don't cast any of those at the start of the fight, those are all reactional spells.

 

There was less reactional play required if you issued a perfect strategy or you got a lucky roll or did something cheap, such as Lower Resistance ->, Lower Resistance -> Chromatic Orb -> Dead Dragon combos

 

Here's an example: Final fight of IWD where you can't have any pre-buffs because you get dispelled.

 

This fight is with mods, so it plays out differently to vanilla IWD, as Belhifet is immune to pretty much all spells with the mods I had installed.

 

 

Recorded like last month, as well.

 

Comparitively, combat in Pillars of Eternity would be over in 10 seconds and almost rely solely upon my opening execution strategy, after that there wouldn't be much to it other than using a few per-encounters because it's dumb not to. If you're in melee you can't move, and you can't retreat so melee combat is essentially binary gameplay - zzz

Edited November 9, 2014 by Sensuki

[Shevek]

Most of the combat I recall was using summons, web and/or stinking cloud to cheap out the bad ai and then either AoE stuff (there was an aoe spell, cant remember the name, aoe poison spell, always used it) to death or using ranged to kill stuck enemies.

 

That was the "tactics" you needed for most of the encounters. Harder stuff might have required you prebuff more or strip protections.

 

Also, you said that vid was with difficulty mods? That drastically changes how games play. That being said, I recently did a BG1/2 run with some difficulty mods and I didnt really need many spiffy tactics. It was cloud/web and then that aoe poison spell. Everything else was just hasted tank and spank with summons when I was lazy. Admittedly, I do recall bringing an Inquisitor to dispell the enemies that the mod prebuffed.

Edited November 9, 2014 by Shevek

[Sensuki]

I never did any of that, I played the IE games fairly. There were wombo combos and cheap tactics that you could do in all of the IE games basically, however if you actually played the game properly it was really fun. So if you had a bad experience because you played like that I'd say that's your own fault.

 

I recently did a full IWD Let's Play, I power gamed the crap out of the game but I didn't cheese anything really and I had a great time, so much more fun than Pillars of Eternity's combat.

Pillars of Eternity aims to prevent that kind of play, and fair enough I guess - but a lot of the decisions they have made have also taken the fun out of the gameplay for those that played properly.

Edited November 9, 2014 by Sensuki

[Shevek]

If I had a bad experience because I played like how? Its not like I cheated. I didnt even prebuff as much as some folks do or use silly spell sequencer foolishness. I used standard spells as intended by the devs. In any case, most battles were over before they started. I just dont see the difference.

[Kjaamor]

I never did any of that, I played the IE games fairly.

 

Is this for the lulz or for real?

[Sensuki]

Have you actually played an Infinity Engine game recently? The sole reason why I went back and played Icewind Dale because I wanted to A/B compare how the games felt. I played PE for 2 months, then went back and played IWD. Was very interesting coming from PE back to IWD, I didn't even realize all of the extra micro-actions the IE games required until I did. 

 

Most of the trash mob encounters don't require much other than auto attacks, but the setpiece encounters are very fun to play. Icewind Dale 1 and 2 generally did a better job at the lower level fights with 'trash enemies' as well.

 

Is this for the lulz or for real?

For real, if you don't believe me go watch my IWD Let's Play. In the IE games (especially the IWDs) I try and extend the adventuring day as long as possible. I didn't rest in IWD until the entrance to the Vale of Shadows main dungeon, I did the intro, Kuldahar pass, every mini dungeon in the Vale of Shadows and all of the exterior enemies in one rest.

 

I went to Dragon's Eye and did all that in one go too, I realized I forgot to buy arrows and potions, and just rolled with it, so I had virtually no arrows on my two archers until level 5. I had to reload a few times because I kept screwing up the fight against the Lizard King, but I managed to do the entire last floor with one rest (right before Yxunomei) and I did it with only one single weapon that could harm her (a +3 mace that i bought early on). The mod I had installed made her immune to everything except +3 or better weapons and have really high save vs spells, so that was really the only thing that I could hurt her with.

 

I tanked her with my Priest but realized I wasn't getting enough mileage out of her ap/r so I switched the Mace to my Fighter who wasn't proficient with it and then slowly beat her down with that, while throwing healing spells on top of my Fighter for my Priest. I also had to draw aggro with other characters several times to spread the damage around.

 

Here's the video, fight is near the end

 

Edited November 9, 2014 by Sensuki

[Shevek]

I did do a replay of BG 1/2 recently. 5 man party. A ranger/cleric, an inquisitor, an archer, a fighter/thief and a cleric/illusionist. I dont recall many deep tactics being needed over that the ones I mentioned above.

[Kjaamor]

At a risk of sounding like the complete snob that I am, BGEE =/= BG in terms of difficulty and in many gameplay areas.

 

Anyway...

 

For real, if you don't believe me go watch my IWD Let's Play. In the IE games (especially the IWDs) I try and extend the adventuring day as long as possible. I didn't rest in IWD until the entrance to the Vale of Shadows main dungeon, I did the intro, Kuldahar pass, every mini dungeon in the Vale of Shadows and all of the exterior enemies in one rest.

 

My point is not that you console-commanded your way through any of the IE games, but that your definition of "fairly" is entirely subjective in the context of comparison to Shevek's tactics.

 

Rest-spamming is no more "unfair" - and no more conceptually dissonant - than counter-kiting mobs so that their pathfinding cannot reach you.

 

I'm not saying that you shouldn't do it, or that your successes or experiences of the IE games are in any way invalid as a result, but I am saying that suggesting that your manner of playing the game is "fair" and implying that Shevek's is not is absolutely preposterous.

[Sensuki]

Well I play Core Rules with crap loads of mods, I haven't played vanilla BG2 without mods since probably 2004 or something. I do remember being able to autopilot it pretty easily on the easier difficulties though, which I think is what I did in my first playthrough when it came out.

 

My point is not that you console-commanded your way through any of the IE games, but that your definition of "fairly" is entirely subjective in the context of comparison to Shevek's tactics.

 

Rest-spamming is no more "unfair" - and no more conceptually dissonant - than counter-kiting mobs so that their pathfinding cannot reach you.

 

I'm not saying that you shouldn't do it, or that your successes or experiences of the IE games are in any way invalid as a result, but I am saying that suggesting that your manner of playing the game is "fair" and implying that Shevek's is not is absolutely preposterous.

That's bull**** man, and that's only because you think being able to move in melee is wrong/abuse. It's not. I also wasn't talking about rest-spamming, I was talking about abusing mass webs/cloudkills and **** for cheap wins.

Edited November 9, 2014 by Sensuki