2.03 patch changes teased

[ComplyOrDie]

For a single player game these small nerfs and buffs seem low priority. Sure if fighters suck relative to other classes boost them a bit but it's just increasing the power of the player in an already ridiculously easy game.

 

Why not focus on making the game challenging more often than very occasionally and then balance stuff if really needed. At the moment fighters are slightly worse at completely crushing 95% of the game without thinking.

 

Hard immunities seems a nice change at least and might help in that regard.

[AndreaColombo]

I guess A.I. updates and changes to encounter design are out of scope for a patch and require more manpower than smaller balance changes. I'm actually happy they keep on fine-tuning their system alongside fixing bugs; it has come a long way since release imo.

 

EDIT: To clarify, I definitely hope TWM pt. II brings further improvements to enemy A.I. and encounter design to the table (I also hope most of it will be high-level content, as in 14+)

Edited October 21, 2015 by AndreaColombo

[ComplyOrDie]

I guess A.I. updates and changes to encounter design are out of scope for a patch and require more manpower than smaller balance changes. I'm actually happy they keep on fine-tuning their system alongside fixing bugs; it has come a long way since release imo.

 

EDIT: To clarify, I definitely hope TWM pt. II brings further improvements to enemy A.I. and encounter design to the table (I also hope most of it will be high-level content, as in 14+)

 

That would be fine by me too if Obsidian had ever stated their intention to do so or acknowledged the issues. Path of the Damned is heavily undertuned and while I really enjoy the combat system and the game as a whole, without the challenge it all feels a little pointless.

 

I'm not just bashing here either, it's a measure of how much I like nearly everything else other than difficulty that I'm still checking the forums regularly to see if it will ever be addressed or acknowledged.

Edited October 21, 2015 by ComplyOrDie

[Gairnulf]

By "undertuned" you mean too easy or too difficult?

[danielkx]

I guess A.I. updates and changes to encounter design are out of scope for a patch and require more manpower than smaller balance changes. I'm actually happy they keep on fine-tuning their system alongside fixing bugs; it has come a long way since release imo.

 

EDIT: To clarify, I definitely hope TWM pt. II brings further improvements to enemy A.I. and encounter design to the table (I also hope most of it will be high-level content, as in 14+)

 

I hope when they address encounter design it isn't just making the encounters for the expansion more unique but also going back through the vanilla game and improving those encounters as well.

 

I finished my first playthrough during the first week of release and enjoyed it however I am holding off until the second part is finished before playing again.

[Gairnulf]

I doubt anyone would tune the base game encounters. Like 99% certain they won't.

[ComplyOrDie]

By "undertuned" you mean too easy or too difficult?

Too easy. Massively so.

[Gairnulf]

As long as I play with a party, I also find it too easy.

[AndreaColombo]

Same here. But I don't see that getting fixed for this game unless they just artificially pumped enemy stats further, which wouldn't be a great solution at this point. Stats on PotD are fine imo; we need better A.I., better encounter design and perhaps bracketed scaling for the critical path.

[Gairnulf]

My thoughts exactly. And I'd also add to that - we need combat redesigned, with some sort of pauses between characters' actions, so that they don't overlap so much and hence combat is easier to follow.

 

Outside of TWM (which plays considerably different, and better than the base game, if you get in TWM around level 9-10), combat becomes too chaotic to control, but at the same time there is no real reason to try to control it because it's easy enough to win almost every combat with the same couple of tactics which are well known by now.

 

IMO, to become more interesting/challenging/tactical, combat has to be slowed down, but I don't mean slowed down as in how many seconds it takes to complete an animation, but slowed down through intervals between characters' actions, like in the IE games. I'm playing with the "automatically go to slow mode during combat" option on, and once the IE mod has a version for 2.02 I'll use even slower than the "slow" setting provided by the game. I'm curious how the majority of people are playing and if they're using the same option.

 

The other thing that could make combat more interesting and difficult is scripting enemy behavior for certain encounters, which if at all possible, would still require manually going through encounters. Not as easy as bumping up stats through the Unity editor.

 

I'm curious if there are scripted encounters in TWM and to what exactly is TWM's better combat owed to. I have my observations, but I wish I could hear it from a dev who has worked on TWM's encounters.

[AndreaColombo]

I used to play with slow combat but not anymore. I don't mind the faster pace, and auto-pause when a party member finishes an ability ensures combat's put on hold often enough for me to plan or rethink my moves.

 

I believe one thing we need is for enemies to act synergistically. Currently they act individually without ever combining their strengths or attacks. It never happens that one debuffs you and another purposefully attacks the debuffed defense, for example, which is something we do all the time as players.

 

Of course some degree of reactivity would be great, but I guess that would be asking for too much at this stage. Perhaps in PoE 2

 

That, and I agree some encounters should have custom (and partially reactive) A.I. scripts.

Edited October 22, 2015 by AndreaColombo

[Anaeme]

Does the Monk Turning Wheel Talent use up or deplete wounds?

 

Is the Turning Wheel a simple passive that activates when wounds are present without consuming wounds?

 

I am concerned that I will not be able to use other abilities if Turning Wheel keeps eating up my wounds

[Ohioastro]

I think that chasing the crowd that will never be satisfied, and who will always complain about the game being too easy, is a fools errand.

 

It's a computer game.  Once you figure out the system you'll find it trivial, full stop, because unlike a real human opponent it has a fixed algorithm.

 

Rather than giving some people a couple of hours until they crack the new system and proclaim it boring, I'd much rather see them designing new content and on working to expand (not shrink) the audience.  I would like to see more encounters that make me think, but too often the "solutions" amount to creating busy work and tedium.

[junk11]

I'm not a fan of immunity system if overly done...

I will wait for more patches before continue the game again or maybe after part 2 is out..

[Nicholas Steel]

CC is for Crowd Control.

 

"Crowd Control" are spells or effects that disable ennemies or weaken their offensive capabilities.

 

For example, paralysis or blindness are crowd control effects.

 

CC immunities means for example that an ennemy could be immune to charm or blind effects.

 

Don't worry. I'm not a native english speaker either. But not understandind "CC" only means that you're not a "native gamer forum" speaker ^^

I would use the term Combat Cancel, as the ability to hinder an opponent can affect individual enemies OR be an Area of Effect effect.

[gkathellar]

I'm just concerned about CC immunities for martial class : a caster could just choose another spell, but martials would "loose" some of their abilities against some monsters. They already have few so it could be a problem.

 

Come on, Elric, don't you know that increasing the power gap between martials and casters is the main goal of patches at this point?

[View619]

 

I'm just concerned about CC immunities for martial class : a caster could just choose another spell, but martials would "loose" some of their abilities against some monsters. They already have few so it could be a problem.

 

Come on, Elric, don't you know that increasing the power gap between martials and casters is the main goal of patches at this point?

 

 

Getting that IE game authenticity!

Edited October 26, 2015 by View619

[AndreaColombo]

So if Wizards can trivialize any encounter via CC-spam, they're too powerful; but if CC immunities are introduced to make that trickier, they are even more powerful, right?

 

Would type in red but the mobile version of the forum is scant on formatting options.

Edited October 26, 2015 by AndreaColombo

[tinysalamander]

So if Wizards can trivialize any encounter via CC-spam, they're too powerful; but if CC immunities are introduced to make that trickier…

 

… gap between casters and non-casters increases.

[View619]

The lesson here is that no matter what you do, magic casters will always be more powerful than martial classes. I don't think that's really a bad thing, as long as martial classes still serve a purpose.

Edited October 26, 2015 by View619

[Sannom]

If only that gap also applied to enemies...

[Njall]

The lesson here is that no matter what you do, magic casters will always be more powerful than martial classes. I don't think that's really a bad thing, as long as martial classes still serve a purpose.

 

Well, the lesson is not really that casters will always be more powerful, rather that, generally, a class with a higher level of complexity will outperform a relatively simple class because, if it has enough good options, it will likely be able to adapt its tactics to just about any conceivable situation.

Incidentally, D&D, and thus the IE engine and its derivatives, PoE included, equate "martial" with "simple" and "spellcaster" with "complex".

Edited October 26, 2015 by Njall

[Elric Galad]

There are 2 different problems with casters : versatility and raw power.

 

Vesatility by itself would not be such a problem without immunities. It could be counterbalanced by less raw power (or lower ressources).

 

Versatility is caster's trademark and it should stay like this.

 

However, increasing the advantage of versatility by introducing immunities does not sound very good for me.

 

 

For caster CC, I think the problem is more about a few spells that everyone knows:

Confusion

Call to slumber (IMHO, this one is the winner, better than Gaze in most cases. It is just too convenient.)

Gaze of the Adragan

Ringleader

Amplified wave

Relentless storm

Repulsing seal (crazy accuracy)

 

Those plus slicken spamming from level 9.

 

Single target spells are less a trouble.

 

It's not even their durations, it is that they are just too reliable. Graze mechanism is one of the biggest problem here...

 

Nerfing the accuracy of AoE CC may solve this issue.

 

 

But honnestly, as long as I stick to "low rest" meta, it is not so much a concern... except maybe for per encounter spells... but that's another topic.

 

Currently, I just play in PotD without wizard, and that basically makes the game more interesting.

[AndreaColombo]

… gap between casters and non-casters increases.

 

I disagree.

 

The gap between casters and non-casters in terms of CC capabilities is already disproportionately big to the point that a small tip either way won't make much a difference, and this is by design—it is not melee classes' job to CC; it is casters' job. It is only fair that casters are better at it than non-casters. That melee classes in PoE are offered a small array of CC abilities to enable for more varied tactics than just auto-attack is gravy, but in no way implies that melee classes should rely heavily on CC to win a fight. Their thing is still to win fights by withstanding more punishment than their foes and dealing out damage faster. *

 

* That Wizards can be better than Fighters or Monks at melee through a number of incredibly powerful spells, on the other hand, contributes greatly to the gap between casters and non-casters. Basically casters can become as good at melee as non-casters, but the opposite isn't true.

 

CC immunities are going to hurt more those classes that more heavily rely on CC—casters. Suddenly, Slicken-spam won't be an insta-win move in all fights (though it will likely stay so in most; only a specific subset of enemies is going to be immune to Prone) and you'll have to do something differently. But when my Fighter can hit for 50 damage per swing with a recovery time of 15 frames, I don't really care if my Knock Down doesn't render my enemy Prone. Besides, in 2.03 Knock Down is getting a 20% damage bonus that lands regardless of whether the enemy is immune to Prone, so it will remain a relevant ability even in those fights; Slicken won't really do much if the Prone affliction doesn't work (the same is true for a Monk's Force of Anguish, for example; I'm talking Fighter because it's the melee class I know best.)

 

As an aside, when a Wizard can deal 50 damage to 10 enemies simultaneously with a Fireball without going through the same degree of optimization that my Fighter underwent to be able to deal the same damage to a single target, I'd say the root of the gap problem isn't really on the ability of Wizards to be better at CC.

 

 

If only that gap also applied to enemies...

 

The last thing we need right now is an even easier game. More like, if only enemy A.I. could be as smart as the player...

 

Incidentally, D&D, and thus the IE engine and its derivatives, PoE included, equate "martial" with "simple" and "spellcaster" with "complex".

 

While this is true, it is also true that melee classes in PoE are generally more varied and complex than their AD&D or 3rd Ed. D&D counterparts (haven't really played 4th or 5th Ed.)

Edited October 26, 2015 by AndreaColombo

[Njall]

 

… gap between casters and non-casters increases.

 

I disagree.

 

The gap between casters and non-casters in terms of CC capabilities is already disproportionately big to the point that a small tip either way won't make much a difference, and this is by design—it is not melee classes' job to CC; it is casters' job. It is only fair that casters are better at it than non-casters. That melee classes in PoE are offered a small array of CC abilities to enable for more varied tactics than just auto-attack is gravy, but in no way implies that melee classes should rely heavily on CC to win a fight. Their thing is still to win fights by withstanding more punishment than their foes and dealing out damage faster. *

 

* That Wizards can be better than Fighters or Monks at melee through a number of incredibly powerful spells, on the other hand, contributes greatly to the gap between casters and non-casters. Basically casters can become as good at melee as non-casters, but the opposite isn't true.

 

CC immunities are going to hurt more those classes that more heavily rely on CC—casters. Suddenly, Slicken-spam won't be an insta-win move in all fights (though it will likely stay so in most; only a specific subset of enemies is going to be immune to Prone) and you'll have to do something differently. But when my Fighter can hit for 50 damage per swing with a recovery time of 15 frames, I don't really care if my Knock Down doesn't render my enemy Prone. Besides, in 2.03 Knock Down is getting a 20% damage bonus that lands regardless of whether the enemy is immune to Prone, so it will remain a relevant ability even in those fights; Slicken won't really do much if the Prone affliction doesn't work (the same is true for a Monk's Force of Anguish, for example; I'm talking Fighter because it's the melee class I know best.)

 

 

If only that gap also applied to enemies...

 

The last thing we need right now is an even easier game. More like, if only enemy A.I. could be as smart as the player...

 

Incidentally, D&D, and thus the IE engine and its derivatives, PoE included, equate "martial" with "simple" and "spellcaster" with "complex".

 

While this is true, it is also true that melee classes in PoE are generally more varied and complex than their AD&D or 3rd Ed. D&D counterparts (haven't really played 4th or 5th Ed.)

 

 

AD&D yes, but then (high level) fighters in AD&D could still be all kinds of powerful due to the way saving throws worked. This was no longer true in 3e, where saving throws DCs scaled better than  low saves, and so being able to target the opponent's worst saving throw often became a winning tactic.

TBH, I think martial classes (especially fighters) could become pretty complex in 3e, depending on how you built them and as long as you allowed enough splatbooks ( see karmic-strike uberchargers, for example ), it's just that high level spells were just way too good. 

Anyway, in PoE the martials range from "dirty simple" ( fighters and barbarians) to "moderately complex" ( monks ), IMHO. They're in no way comparable to casters in terms of complexity, tho, and it's a pity, I'd love to play a martial class with some kind of resource management and an arsenal of tricks.

Edited October 26, 2015 by Njall