Let's Play Baldur's Gate 2, and reflect on Pillars of Eternity (2)

[Sensuki]

I am also forced to play very differently, and I hate it. I will not budge on the less tactical thing. It is less tactical.

Edited January 14, 2015 by Sensuki

[Stun]

some comments:

- What is the difference between strategy and tactics? Is one thing character creation and party composition and the other thing is positioning and ability use in combat?

Sort of. I often find myself using the two words interchangeably lol. But if I had to venture a guess, I'd say "strategy" is the general gameplay philosophy/approach one employs, and "tactics" are the specifics.

 

- What is the main target group of PoE? IE veterans or new players? You cannot please everyone. I have played so many RPG that I know most basics

Now there's the real question. A couple of years ago I was absolutely certain that there was only one target group for Poe: People who loved the Infinity engine games and wanted another one. But since then I've noticed a definite 2nd target audience: The Obsidian fan. Of course, if it was just those two groups, I wouldn't be worried at all, as they're neither mutually exclusive, nor at any sort of cross purposes. But I suspect Obsidian is attempting to branch out and target an even larger audience than that. That's good for sales but not necessarily good for the game's design.

[PrimeJunta]

@PrimeJunta, but in PoE i’m forced to play differently, in BG2 i can play someone who stabilizes the battlefield or play differently. Regarding the stabilizing of the battle in BG2, there’s vampires you can use hold undead, there’s beholders you can use hold monster (or so i read, never used that myself). Later you get sunray against vampires and there’s no need to stabilize anything against them anymore if you don’t like. There’s web to stabilize, you still can move with e.g. ring of free action. Then there’s those slow opponnents in BG2 like ghouls, mummies where you don’t need to stabilize anything. Sure, it’s not your Total War level… really, i think you can play BG2 the way you now play in PoE if you wanted.

I can't actually. Sure, CC spells work, but there's no way to form a battle line and hold it, unless there's a choke point. I've come to enjoy IE combat too, but I still prefer something that's based on tactical positioning rather than moment-to-moment tactical movement.

 

For months now since the first beta build Obsidian is trying to fix their melee system; imagine if they instead worked on designing BG2 combat that would allow for all of us to play like we want.

That's impossible, because we have different preferences. I want mechanics in the game that lets me control the battlefield by positioning. You guys do not want such mechanics. There's simply no way to reconcile the two positions within the same game. The best that can happen (Bester/Sensuki's grognard mod aside) is that (a) we learn to enjoy combat without such a mechanic, despite my preference, and (b) you learn to enjoy combat with such a mechanic, despite your preference.

 

I hope you’ll continue with your BG2 replay and hopefully you’ll have more fun than negative experiences. No game can please anyone 100% but in end the positive side hopefully will prevail. If you haven’t done the Planar Prison quest yet, that’s a fun thing to do in BG2 as well, many cool items to find there. Cheers..

I will, and I think I am. I'm starting to enjoy it for real. I have shifted my position of some of the things I didn't like, but many of the beefs I have with it remain as strong as ever. Still, yeah, there is a uniquely great game there, no question.

[Luckmann]

[...]

 

I want mechanics in the game that lets me control the battlefield by positioning. You guys do not want such mechanics. There's simply no way to reconcile the two positions within the same game.

 

[...]

 

Maybe this is the disconnect here, because I would love mechanics in the game that lets me control the battlefield by positioning, and currently, there is no such thing. That's my main issue with the Engagement system as it is, that it locks down the battlefield and makes it impossible to reposition both yourself and the opponents.

[PrimeJunta]

- What is the difference between strategy and tactics? Is one thing character creation and party composition and the other thing is positioning and ability use in combat?

Tactics is how you win a battle. Strategy is how you win a war. It's also a continuum. Going from most strategic to most tactical, character build, party composition, order in which you complete quests, choice of expensive purchases, how you equip each character, which spells you load up, whether and how you employ scouting, whether and how you employ pre-buffs, which opening move you choose in a battle, what you do as the battle progresses.

 

- What is the main target group of PoE? IE veterans or new players? You cannot please everyone. I have played so many RPG that I know most basics ( but I am not a very good player, I don´t think I could solo an IE game.)

Going by what Josh has said, I'd guess IE veterans who are not grognards. I.e., more or less people like me -- folks who played some, most, or all of them and had a good time, but did not turn Baldur's Gate 2 into a hobby or a lifestyle, or seek to fully master the system or the games. I think Josh/Obsidian believe that there just aren't enough grogs to sustain a franchise.

 

- about party interaction: I don´t mind if there is no romance in PoE. But I liked the way PST did it. Your companions will comment on what you do, up to extreme results like Vhailor attacs you if you commit a crime or you rufuse to kill a criminal. But you have to talk to them to learn more about them. Like your discussion with Dakkon about the ring of zerthimon. It was nice (and realistic, if this word has any meaning in a fantasy game) that you could learn something from your companions and they could learn something from you.

Yeah, party interaction was one of the best things in PS:T. I hope P:E has something similar, as well as similarly interesting companions.

[PrimeJunta]

Maybe this is the disconnect here, because I would love mechanics in the game that lets me control the battlefield by positioning, and currently, there is no such thing. That's my main issue with the Engagement system as it is, that it locks down the battlefield and makes it impossible to reposition both yourself and the opponents.

Have you even tried using the disengagement abilities tactically and/or trying to keep some of your toons unengaged and mobile, or do you just march your toons forward, engage, and swing until one side falls over?

[Luckmann]

 

Maybe this is the disconnect here, because I would love mechanics in the game that lets me control the battlefield by positioning, and currently, there is no such thing. That's my main issue with the Engagement system as it is, that it locks down the battlefield and makes it impossible to reposition both yourself and the opponents.

Have you even tried using the disengagement abilities tactically and/or trying to keep some of your toons unengaged and mobile, or do you just march your toons forward, engage, and swing until one side falls over?

 

 

Disengagement abilities are severely limited and the moment you're back in Engagement, it's all over. Disengagement abilities are useful when you want to get out of engagement in order to attack someone else or flee, but useless for battlefield control. Likewise, keeping some of the CNPC:s unengaged does nothing to help with controlling the battlefield through positioning; not only is it hard to avoid with a very limited amount of party members (moreso accounting for those that are deliberately trying to stay out of Engagement), but it doesn't actually affect the positioning of the involved setpieces in any way.

 

Edit: I touched upon the exact same issue here.

Edited January 14, 2015 by Luckmann

[Sensuki]

There's also micro and macro strategy.

 

I believe PJ was talking more about macro strategy. Micro strategy is the strategy you employ for a specific combat scenario. Same as the strat you use for a round of counter-strike or cod competitive.

 

Micro strategy involves pre-positioning (and also IMO immediate positioning), planned ability sequence, planned targeting sequence, any gear changes for that encounter, so on and so forth. In Pillars of Eternity, I have found that most encounters are won through micro-strategy and the opening round of tactics, before Engagement begins. After that, it's yours to screw up. Even though 'line of defense' is a tactic it is not more tactical than the Infinity Engine games. You can absolutely win encounters through use of smart positioning. I have several examples in my IWD Let's Play where I did that, it's just that there are so many more options than that. Pillars of Eternity limits your options. Not only in movement but also in the way in which you choose to deal with encounters. There is more ability choice, more character creation freedom and a lot more item builds are viable for more classes but in the actions that you actually take to win an encounter, IMO there is less flexibility and less tactical variety.

 

On hard it's difficult to get fancy with Engagement. There's too many enemies in most encounters, at least until you start killing some. Moving however has an opportunity cost in and of itself, and in PE why move if you don't need to ? The map terrain, pathfinding and whatnot also don't tend to be very supportive of it. 

Edited January 14, 2015 by Sensuki

[Luckmann]

There's also micro and macro strategy.

 

I believe PJ was talking more about macro strategy. Micro strategy is the strategy you employ for a specific combat scenario. Same as the strat you use for a round of counter-strike or cod competitive.

 

Micro strategy involves pre-positioning (and also IMO immediate positioning), planned ability sequence, planned targeting sequence, any gear changes for that encounter, so on and so forth. In Pillars of Eternity, I have found that most encounters are won through micro-strategy and the opening round of tactics, before Engagement begins. After that, it's yours to screw up. Even though 'line of defense' is a tactic it is not more tactical than the Infinity Engine games. You can absolutely win encounters through use of smart positioning. I have several examples in my IWD Let's Play where I did that, it's just that there are so many more options than that. Pillars of Eternity limits your options. Not only in movement but also in the way in which you choose to deal with encounters. There is more ability choice, more character creation freedom and a lot more item builds are viable for more classes but in the actions that you actually take to win an encounter, IMO there is less flexibility and less tactical variety.

 

I was reflecting upon this just earlier today, actually, on an issue completely separate from the Engagement system. As I've said before, I'm currently playing Baldur's Gate 2 too, and this time, I'm an assassin (actually, a Fighter/Assassin, I ended up restarting).

 

And I've mentioned in another thread how I find it sad that there is no ammunition in Pillars of Eternity. Likely, this went the way of the dodo because Sawyer or someone else doesn't feel like it's good for the playing experience to deal with piecemeal ammunition, fair enough, but this also ended up neutering combat. I'm currenly playing that assassin in Baldur's Gate 2, and I've got a backup bow, because, honestly, why wouldn't I, and the way it affects combat is remarkable.

 

My poison + Arrows of Biting, for example. Or changing that ammunition out for something else, depending on the enemies I'm facing, is like night and day, and really adds another layer of that extra shine that made the Infinity Engine games great. It's another one of those actions that it takes to win an encounter that adds to flexibility and tactical variety; yes, there's less hard abilities as granted through a class, but it's also freer, relying more on using assets than mashing buttons.

[Sensuki]

There was going to be different kinds of ammo but it was cut, don't know why. For instance an early example was Bodkin and Broadhead arrows. Although heh, after seeing the armor system ... Broadhead arrows would have been woefully bad since slashing damage ain't very good in the first place.

 

Will miss the magic arrows and whatnot, as well.

Edited January 14, 2015 by Sensuki

[Luckmann]

There was going to be different kinds of ammo but it was cut, don't know why. For instance an early example was Bodkin and Broadhead arrows. Although heh, after seeing the armor system ... Broadhead arrows would have been woefully bad since slashing damage ain't very good in the first place.

 

Will miss the magic arrows and whatnot, as well.

 

It irks me that ultimately, the IE armour system was little more than hit/miss, where heavier armour somehow meant you were hit less, yet the fact is that the armour system in PoE is arguably worse. With only DT, it's incredibly lopsided in favour of high-pen weapons. While significantly harder to balance, a system accounting for DT, DR, Dodging and Blocking (for Shields) as well as the current recovery system would probably be a lot more fun to play with, weighing different builds with different setups against eachother.

 

In the IE games, there were actually very little that was always worse than something else. Pretty much all those arrows had a role, at least up until the higher levels where everything just sorta broke together (necessitating a certain enchantment level meant you either use those +3 arrows or you don't do anything).

 

The fact that currently in PoE you can say "Heh, Slashing damage? More like slushing damage." and be serious about it is kinda sad.

Edited January 14, 2015 by Luckmann

[Guest 4ward]

@PrimeJunta, i understand. Should you want to replay BG2 for another time, i’d suggest to take the sorcerer. You’ll be able to summon creatures with not much resting inbetween required. Skeletons at later levels become skeletal warriors immune to magic, then there’s all kinds of summon elementals spells to give him and there’s the staffs in the game that let you also summon elementals. I don’t know what the max number of summoned creatures is, but you could build yourself a small army and outnumber the opponents, flank them, do whatever you want to get control of the battlefield, there might be just a little bit more movement involved in this than what you’re used to from PoE..

[Luckmann]

@PrimeJunta, i understand. Should you want to replay BG2 for another time, i’d suggest to take the sorcerer. You’ll be able to summon creatures with not much resting inbetween required. Skeletons at later levels become skeletal warriors immune to magic, then there’s all kinds of summon elementals spells to give him and there’s the staffs in the game that let you also summon elementals. I don’t know what the max number of summoned creatures is, but you could build yourself a small army and outnumber the opponents, flank them, do whatever you want to get control of the battlefield, there might be just a little bit more movement involved in this than what you’re used to from PoE..

 

Did you just suggest making a Sorcerer and waste the precious spell slots on summoning spells?

 

o_o

 

 

Mite b fun, though

 

Edited January 14, 2015 by Luckmann

[PrimeJunta]

@Sensuki man you have some weird defintions for words

 

@4ward Thanks, but I'd rather learn to enjoy to play BG2 the way it wants to be played. The whole point of the movement system is that it lets you move freely, just like the whole point of the engagement system is that it lets you stop the enemy from moving freely. Trying to play one like the other is a recipe for frustration.

[PrimeJunta]

BTW I made a dual kensai/thief and soloed Irenicus' place (after a leeetle help from Imoen to get me up to about level 5 or so). The backstab damage is rather lulzy. "KIAI!" (chunks)

 

I think I still prefer my mage/thief multiclass though, as magic is rather interesting.

[Sensuki]

@Sensuki man you have some weird defintions for words

 

I do?

[Luckmann]

@Sensuki man you have some weird defintions for words

 

@4ward Thanks, but I'd rather learn to enjoy to play BG2 the way it wants to be played. The whole point of the movement system is that it lets you move freely, just like the whole point of the engagement system is that it lets you stop the enemy from moving freely. Trying to play one like the other is a recipe for frustration.

This is only partially true. The point of the movement system is that it lets everyone move freely, conversely, the whole issue of the engagement system is that it stops everyone from moving freely. If you're going to paint up a dichotomy, at least make the points equivalent.

 

I maintain that the goal of the engagement system is good, but that the concept suffers a lot in execution.

[Sensuki]

Yes, it's very poorly executed. Still abusable too, btw.

[Luckmann]

Yes, it's very poorly executed. Still abusable too, btw.

Is it your hope that, by repeatedly pointing out that it's exploitable, Sawyer's hate of "exploits" will win out over his love for easymodo game mechanics and he'll end up binning the Engagement system?

 

Could work.

[PrimeJunta]

Not gonna happen. He's just going to disable movement in combat altogether. Exploit that, fools!

[Sensuki]

Not until a Something Awful goon or somebody like that complains about it, which I don't think they will because they won't try to play like this.

 

They aren't going to bin the system. I'm not sure it's worth reporting anymore bugs/issues with it to be honest.

[Luckmann]

Not gonna happen. He's just going to disable movement in combat altogether. Exploit that, fools!

I think the concept of a movement system is outdated. What if we simply press where we want to go, and then the toons go there? We don't need any systems!

 

*shakes fist*

[Sensuki]

See now if the designers actually played RTS games or MOBAs, they might have not actually chosen to go the direction they did 

[PrimeJunta]

I for one am glad they don't.

[PrimeJunta]

 

@Sensuki man you have some weird defintions for words

 

I do?

 

"Microstrategy." It's called tactics, mang.