The Matt Sheets Q(&)A thread

[Sensuki]

Also since you guys (QA) seem to have the most influence on Attributes out of everyone you might be able to explain this one, what prompted the removal of Accuracy ? And were you aware of the issue with Damage Calculation overvaluing accuracy when you did it ?

Edited January 31, 2015 by Sensuki

[Sarex]

Do you know if any of the devs actually replayed the Infinity Engine games during the development of Pillars of Eternity for research?

 

We know that Steve Weatherly and Adam Brennecke played Icewind Dale 2 at least a little bit at the beginning, but that's about it. Recently we've heard that all of the T:ToN guys at inXile are all replaying Planescape Torment for research, which I thought was a very healthy thing to do when making a spiritual successor.

 

From all my time on these board, I got a distinct feeling that most of the key devs don't really enjoy IE (or at least not anymore).

[Quadrone]

 

BG1's expansion featured 3 major questlines that didn't have anything to do with the Main game's plot or ending. Ditto with Icewind Dale's. BG2's expansion...that was a different animal all together as it was a seamless transition to a completely different plot.

 

I prefer the former -- specifically, the way BG1 did its expansion pack. It put new areas and stories into the existing game world and did it so naturally that it seemed like they were there all along.

 

 

I'm in the opposite camp then.

To pull me back in the Add-On needs to have continuity and hook into the story of my character. Having extra progression in the form of new side quests and dungeons but no new goal feels lackluster to me.

Maybe it's also the fact that I hope for the expansion to be meatier then TotSC and closer to ToB, minus the epic level stuff of course.

[Clean&Clear]

1. Does this game have an ending? By which I mean, is the story fully resolved by the end of the game OR are there plans for PoE to be duology/trilogy/ect. ?

 

 

 

 

  I won't be answering anything relating to the story... even if your question is vague.

 

[Guest Matt Sheets]

Do you know if any of the devs actually replayed the Infinity Engine games during the development of Pillars of Eternity for research?

 

We know that Steve Weatherly and Adam Brennecke played Icewind Dale 2 at least a little bit at the beginning, but that's about it. Recently we've heard that all of the T:ToN guys at inXile are all replaying Planescape Torment for research, which I thought was a very healthy thing to do when making a spiritual successor.

 

Yes, I know that some of the devs replayed IE games.  I'm not sure about every dev and at what stage.  I know one of our devs pulled information (mainly the maps) and put it up internally so devs could go back and look it over.

 

 

Also since you guys (QA) seem to have the most influence on Attributes out of everyone you might be able to explain this one, what prompted the removal of Accuracy ? And were you aware of the issue with Damage Calculation overvaluing accuracy when you did it ?

 

 

Perception was the stat.  90% of classes/builds always maxed Perception, and it hindered fun builds since it was such an important stat.  QA was aware that the damage calculation was multiplicative and not additive.  NCarver (Nick) and I talked to Josh after he made a post discussing it, stating how it was functioning in-game and we had a lengthy conversation with programming.  Some of these systems are hard to balance when you're still designing and tweaking the end-game.

 

I strongly believe that our current attribute design is our best so far, because it gives you more freedom to make the kind of character you want to build.  With Perception affecting accuracy so strongly, there were plenty of talents that became a no-brainer, but now you'll consider taking the talent that lowers accuracy for more damage, since that accuracy penalty can be a pretty big hit depending on what you're focusing on for items (Fine vs Accuracy vs Damaging for example).

[Falkon Swiftblade]

Can you give an example of what a high level character of each type should be best suited for? I understand we can mix and match skills, but we won't know what opens up for us in the end until we get there, and I might not like the way the dev's chose the talents for a particular role. For example, I would most like to play an archer or a dual bladed wielding dagger striker or maybe assassin of a similar style, but your mechanic's may force me to play frontline when I'd rather sneaky stab for example. I just wondered if the classes at the end game will still feel kind of like they do initially, or will they really branch out, and how much time should we invest into a class before it would be wiser to reroll? 

[Guest Matt Sheets]

Can you give an example of what a high level character of each type should be best suited for? I understand we can mix and match skills, but we won't know what opens up for us in the end until we get there, and I might not like the way the dev's chose the talents for a particular role. For example, I would most like to play an archer or a dual bladed wielding dagger striker or maybe assassin of a similar style, but your mechanic's may force me to play frontline when I'd rather sneaky stab for example. I just wondered if the classes at the end game will still feel kind of like they do initially, or will they really branch out, and how much time should we invest into a class before it would be wiser to reroll? 

 

I can't think of a time where I decided on a character build and then 1/2 through leveling, noticed that my class wasn't able to perform how I wanted to.

 

 

 

During winter break I played 2/3rd of the game with my main character being a Priest of Skaen (who gets a weak form of sneak attack) and was able to be an assassin who could heal and do party buffs.

 

Due to being able to choose multiple abilities and talents during level-up, you can pretty much keep going on the path that you set out in the first few levels.  I'd rather not do a full spread of how exactly I'd build each character type, for a few reasons (it can spoil the fun of leveling up for people).

[Sensuki]

QA was aware that the damage calculation was multiplicative and not additive.  NCarver (Nick) and I talked to Josh after he made a post discussing it, stating how it was functioning in-game and we had a lengthy conversation with programming.  Some of these systems are hard to balance when you're still designing and tweaking the end-game.

Yes, but my point was that the way that damage was being calculated was the reason Accuracy was more important than it should have been, because when damage was multiplicative you get less damage from grazes and more damage from critical hits - making better attack resolutions increasingly more important. With the change to additive, crits are now less valuable and grazes do more damage - both things that give more credence to the Might damage multiplier (as reliable extra damage on every hit) than Accuracy (a chance of a better attack resolution). Accuracy was removed from the Attribute system before this change was made, and I can't help but wonder if Perception with Accuracy would now be balanced against other Attributes, rather than the flat out best choice.

 

Will be interesting to test out next week how the new system feels anyway. but for me it looks very similar to how v278 was.

Edited February 1, 2015 by Sensuki

[Falkon Swiftblade]

are all the graphic fx in game final at this point? I find some of them unintuitive in watching the demos. It's probably second nature for you guys who see it a bagillion times a day, but if you have any say so, the odd shaped line cone and the larger green and yellow circles could use some tlc, not only are they vague, but the simple line art style makes the overall fx look amateurish and unfinished.

[Guest Matt Sheets]

 

QA was aware that the damage calculation was multiplicative and not additive.  NCarver (Nick) and I talked to Josh after he made a post discussing it, stating how it was functioning in-game and we had a lengthy conversation with programming.  Some of these systems are hard to balance when you're still designing and tweaking the end-game.

Yes, but my point was that the way that damage was being calculated was the reason Accuracy was more important than it should have been, because when damage was multiplicative you get less damage from grazes and more damage from critical hits - making better attack resolutions increasingly more important. With the change to additive, crits are now less valuable and grazes do more damage - both things that give more credence to the Might damage multiplier (as reliable extra damage on every hit) than Accuracy (a chance of a better attack resolution). Accuracy was removed from the Attribute system before this change was made, and I can't help but wonder if Perception with Accuracy would now be balanced against other Attributes, rather than the flat out best choice.

 

Will be interesting to test out next week how the new system feels anyway. but for me it looks very similar to how v278 was.

 

 

That was discussed when we were talking about attribute changes.  Major changes aren't just knee jerk reactions from Josh/QA, and are instead discussed for a period of time and with multiple departments so that we can hear everyone's opinions.

 

One of the main reasons, which is regardless of the damage calculation, is that having an easy way to pump accuracy, means that  the -accuracy from guns/certain talents (or talents that provide accuracy) less impactful.  It was just less fun to build characters, since you usually knew which stat you were going to max.

 

QA has always discussed the best optimal builds and our current iteration of attribute system is where everyone has their own preference on how to build a certain character.

[Sensuki]

The main merit I see from accuracy not being affected by Attributes is that it limits the amount of inputs into Accuracy itself, which makes things easier to balance, rather than having to potentially account a swing of ~0-16.

 

the -accuracy from guns/certain talents (or talents that provide accuracy) less impactful.

That's interesting. Personally I've never found anything that gives minus accuracy to be worth taking, even with maxed Perception. Whether it be the 'Power Attack' style talent or using an Arquebus over an Arbalest (which I think now are balanced a bit better against each other with how much DT they bypass or something).

Edited February 1, 2015 by Sensuki

[ushas]

Firstly, thank you Matt for reaching out!

In case you are still around, I would be interested in two main questions. However, not knowing whether you can answer them.

1) Ranges of abilities
   

    a) Is it true, that a range percentage bonus/penalty is removed from the attribute system as well? (in BBv392 it is +5% per point in Perception above 10). If yes, can you share the reasons for the decision?
 
    b) Are there any other means to boost the range of abilities (talents, items)?  
 
    c) How do you in QA feel about a range indication from tactical perspective of a combat in the new build?  For example, do you prefer to move party members to the appropriate range manually?
 
        Context: In current Beta v392, an icon of the spell cursor contains a foot to indicate that the game will firstly move the character closer to the target, before starting to use the chosen ability. However, beside a close range stuff, as a newcomer to the game, I don't have yet a sence of the risk for letting the game to do it for me (eg. how far a character has to move --> thus how much time will be wasted, and whether he runs into a greater danger...).


2) Hostile fauna/flora of the wilderness  
    How is an overall feel about hostility variation of natural inhabitants across wilderness areas? (eg. full game versus BB)
   

    If needed to be more specific: Has a party various means in say whether to wipe out animals while exploring (eg. a different hostility behaviour, for example not hostile till we closely approach a nest)? Or are there other possibilities than high enough stealth to avoid the combat (eg. bug repellents, calming animals by survival skill, etc)?
 
 
 

[ushas]

That's interesting. Personally I've never found anything that gives minus accuracy to be worth taking, even with maxed Perception. Whether it be the 'Power Attack' style talent or using an Arquebus over an Arbalest (which I think now are balanced a bit better against each other with how much DT they bypass or something).

 

Well there is always a limit. In a hypothetical case, if your accuracy is high enough to often score a critical hit to the enemy, but his high DT brings damage to the minimum -- wouldn't you consider the trade off?

 

I guess, If the overall damage numbers are lowered now, this could be more interesting. But that's pretty much a speculation, as I know nothing about a balance of the next BB...

[Sensuki]

With the way previous damage multipliers worked, Savage Attack would have probably been valuable on an Accurate character with high Might wielding a Fine or better weapon. Just tried it then on a Fighter and yep, dealt some pretty nice damage dual wielding Fine Spears. Not sure if it would be as useful now though.

[Guest Matt Sheets]

Firstly, thank you Matt for reaching out!

 

In case you are still around, I would be interested in two main questions. However, not knowing whether you can answer them.

 

1) Ranges of abilities

   

    a) Is it true, that a range percentage bonus/penalty is removed from the attribute system as well? (in BBv392 it is +5% per point in Perception above 10). If yes, can you share the reasons for the decision?

 

    b) Are there any other means to boost the range of abilities (talents, items)?  

 

    c) How do you in QA feel about a range indication from tactical perspective of a combat in the new build?  For example, do you prefer to move party members to the appropriate range manually?

 

        Context: In current Beta v392, an icon of the spell cursor contains a foot to indicate that the game will firstly move the character closer to the target, before starting to use the chosen ability. However, beside a close range stuff, as a newcomer to the game, I don't have yet a sence of the risk for letting the game to do it for me (eg. how far a character has to move --> thus how much time will be wasted, and whether he runs into a greater danger...).

 

 

2) Hostile fauna/flora of the wilderness  

    How is an overall feel about hostility variation of natural inhabitants across wilderness areas? (eg. full game versus BB)

   

    If needed to be more specific: Has a party various means in say whether to wipe out animals while exploring (eg. a different hostility behaviour, for example not hostile till we closely approach a nest)? Or are there other possibilities than high enough stealth to avoid the combat (eg. bug repellents, calming animals by survival skill, etc)?

 

 

 

 

1. Range is no longer being increased/decreased by attributes nor talents.  When casting spells, there is an "ideal" range that's set so if you cast a spell from outside of your range, you won't move to your maximum range and cast but instead move a bit closer and then cast.  To maximize the flow of combat, and utilizing the increased AoE from Intellect, I normally position my casters so I can get the most optimal cast off when needed.  This requires some trial and error to get the mechanics down to where you feel like you might make a better decision on how much you should move to get off your spell vs letting the AI do it for you.

2. There's a good variety in wildernesses, and there's also re-traversal content set up so that you can sometimes find new content in something you've already explored before.  As for different ways to get out of combat, I'll let you guys play the newest Backer Beta to get a feel on somethings that have been improved on.

 

 

With the way previous damage multipliers worked, Savage Attack would have probably been valuable on an Accurate character with high Might wielding a Fine or better weapon. Just tried it then on a Fighter and yep, dealt some pretty nice damage dual wielding Fine Spears. Not sure if it would be as useful now though.

 

It's still useful, just not as easy as a decision as before.

 

Also yes, it's easier to balance around not having such a huge accuracy swing and thus making a better game overall.

[Leferd]

How widespread are "magic" items hidden in the gameworld that can only be found in scouting mode, as opposed to looted from corpses and chests?

[Gorbag]

Piggyback on Leferd's question:
How common are "magic" items in the game as a whole? Throne of Bhaal ballpark (i.e. heaps of different magical items you can experiment with) or Temple of Elemental Evil ballpark (i.e. magical items are very scarce encouraging crafting) or anything inbetween? Do you buy the lot of them (like in IWD2) or do you find more/better than those sold in shops (like in BG2, excluding bonus merchants)?

Do you think magical items are equally distributed among various item types or are there (for example) just not enough magical clubs to go around?

 

Thanks @ Matt Sheets.

[constantine]

On magical items--

 

how useful will crafting be ? Ultimately you will be able to craft weapons/armour/accessories of end-game tier, or it will be: fill the blanks with something inferior until you find that neat piece ?

 

 

On Stronghold--

 

Will Stronghold content be there to give you gold/resources/items or will it be tied in some ways to quests, NPCs you meet or even the main path ?

 

All in all, is the stronghold option completely optional, with not much to miss, as it was in BG2 ?

[Sedrefilos]

Except from extinguishing our curiosity, what's the meaning of knowing all these right now, less than 2 months from release?

[Falkon Swiftblade]

Except from extinguishing our curiosity, what's the meaning of knowing all these right now, less than 2 months from release?

 

Well Constantine brought up a good question regarding magical items and crafting. In the IE games, magical items were so few and far in between you had to sacrifice who got what until the very end of the trilogy. Especially if we're going to make a party of wizards for example. I'm sure it's 100% optional to craft, but it would make a big difference on how you spend your time playing, and it would suck to spend a lot of time and money in game only to barely if ever use the items. I hope that the items we craft are not the same one's in the world though. Also, I hope visually magical items don't look like random drops of the common type.

[Sedrefilos]

Yes, but what changes for us wether they say "yes it'll be like that" or "no it'll be the other way"? Nothing. And it's not going to be changed, not until expansion anyway.

Let's admit it: it's only our nerdy curiosity

[Stun]

Except from extinguishing our curiosity, what's the meaning of knowing all these right now, less than 2 months from release?

Curiosity slaking, about a hotly anticipated game that's still 2 agonizing months away from release isn't a good enough reason by itself...?

[Tamerlane]

Except from extinguishing our curiosity, what's the meaning of knowing all these right now, less than 2 months from release?

I get quest EXP from this.

[Sedrefilos]

 

Except from extinguishing our curiosity, what's the meaning of knowing all these right now, less than 2 months from release?

I get quest EXP from this.

 

Interesting... can you put a marker on my map pointing the quest giver? Unfortunately there is no exclamation mark over their head and I might need some extra xp too