Disengaging a tank is so simple

[Teioh_White]

Just out of curiosity, what games released in the last 5-6 years have catered to your prefrences? I've got a lot of issues with PoE myself, even lots of the same ones you have (insufficent interface, poor use of micro, very underwhelming story), but I still play it largely because of how underwhelming it's competition in the field has been. If something's out there I'm missing that's really good, I want in on that.

 

I've got some hopes that PoE 2 benefits from the experience of PoE and doesn't just get a remix of the combat system, and gets more attention paid to it than what backers gave (I'd also prefer backer stuff not bleed over in-game, but that ships sailed). Wouldn't hurt if they could actually get MCA to write it, either.

[Sensuki]

Backers gave pretty good attention to the combat system but the majority of people's opinions on it were somewhat ignored by the developers, who insisted that "we don't need people's help to get the basics right" (semi-quote/paraphrase from a Josh Sawyer interview) or that it was too late to make major changes.

What I think might have helped is getting backers in earlier than the beta, such as during the alpha.

In regards to what I've enjoyed from the last 5-6 years. I'll edit my post with that info soon.

edit:

What I've enjoyed between 2009-2015

Knights of the Chalice - GREAT OGL D&D style turn-based RPG in the style of Dark Sun Shattered Lands
The Witcher 2 - horrendous action combat made serviceable with the Rise of the Sword mod. Fairly good story/plot, writing and political intrigue but not as good quest design as The Witcher 1. Have not played The Witcher 3, don't intend to at this stage.
Mass Effect 2 - the best cinematic popamole RPG experience, combat was better in Mass Effect 1 though. Hated Mass Effect 3. Will not buy another BioWare game ever again.
Aarklash Legacy - Good RTWP with fun setpiece encounters in enclosed spaces, can get repetitive and boring after a while though.
Path of Exile - better Diablo 3 than Diablo 3.
Expeditions: Conquistador - really good strategical RPG, passable turn-based combat, fun resting system, decent overland exploration mechanics, surprisingly good writing and unique companion style ... which they are dropping for Vikings in favor of traditional style companions *facepalm*
Shadowrun Returns - pretty fun detective style story for first half of the game that goes full retard later on, combat has a few good encounters but it's a short game so you don't really have the chance to get too bored. I did not like what I played of Shadowrun Dragonfall (writing sucked) and I have not bothered with Hong Kong either.
The Banner Saga - I actually don't like the strategical resource management side of this game, but I really like the combat system, would be super good with encounters against unique enemies but I'm not sure if that will happen for the sequel.

 

Non-RPG
 

DotA 2 - DotA player since 2004, best tactical combat game ever made

Edited November 3, 2015 by Sensuki

[Gairnulf]

For me, it's pretty clear that now that i've tried out the game myself, a sequel with this kind of combat doesn't interest me at all.

Me too. The combat, which takes up a large part of one's playing time, doesn't offer diverse problems for the player to solve. It feels repetitive, to put it simply, I can't go into details why, but that's how it feels for me. I haven't played the new patch with a party, and my solo playthrough hasn't put me against enemies with lots of immunities yet, but I'm interested in whether they'll add more variance and report when I have new info.

 

I think before starting development of PoE2, developers and testers should play through IWD (I'd suggest the first one rather than the second) and BGII, at least to the end of Chapter 2, in order to know what their own fans understood under "in the spirit of the IE games" back when they were doing the first KS. After they know that, or have formed an idea of it, they should take what they identify as good in IE combat and throw out what's bad.

 

I don't mind PoE2 being easy on most difficulty levels, like PoE is. People who have no understanding of the combat mechanics or rules should also have their fun, especially since they are the majority, including on the official forum. But what I want from PoE2 for players like myself is a difficulty level and combat mechanics that provide for this difficulty level, where I can feel challenge while playing with a party, and this level of challenge is comparable to the IE games. I'm not saying difficulty, but challenge here.

 

Unlike most of the raving fanboys acting on an imagined obligation to defend the game, and taking every criticism of the game personally, Sensuki can back his opinions with arguments and evidence. That's what causes the butthurt. It's amusing to watch, along with the childish troll attempts that also come in response to his posts.

Edited November 3, 2015 by Gairnulf

[Sensuki]

Good luck getting many of them to do that

 

I did an IWD playthrough during the beta and I found it a very helpful and grounding experience. Because I was looking at the gameplay with a more critical eye, it helped me understand things I previously took for granted.

 

From what I've read Pillars of Eternity 2 will go even further down the path they've gone - I'm probably thinking that per-rest abilities might be totally eliminated in favor of per-encounter or alternate replenishing resources like the Monk, Cipher and Chanter. Strategical resource management will be out the window, though I believe there will be less system bloat, and less item bloat.

Edited November 3, 2015 by Sensuki

[Gairnulf]

When you say "from what I've read", does any of this info come from official sources? I wasn't aware they'd comment in such detail on PoE2 so early.

[archangel979]

Good luck getting many of them to do that

 

I did an IWD playthrough during the beta and I found it a very helpful and grounding experience. Because I was looking at the gameplay with a more critical eye, it helped me understand things I previously took for granted.

 

From what I've read Pillars of Eternity 2 will go even further down the path they've gone - I'm probably thinking that per-rest abilities might be totally eliminated in favor of per-encounter or alternate replenishing resources like the Monk, Cipher and Chanter. Strategical resource management will be out the window, though I believe there will be less system bloat, and less item bloat.

I am certainly not interested in a game that is more DAO and even less BG.

[Sensuki]

When you say "from what I've read", does any of this info come from official sources? I wasn't aware they'd comment in such detail on PoE2 so early.

That was me making an assumption based on this quote

 

http://forums.somethingawful.com/showthread.php?goto=post&postid=450779261

 

And wizards, druids, and priests were largely made to emulate their pre-4E equivalents. Per rest resources are enough of a problem that we are very likely to change how they work if we make a sequel.

I am not 100% sure exactly what he meant, I was just saying that if they think that per-rest resources are the problem (they are not in my opinion) then I wouldn't be surprised if they remove them altogether, or change the resting system or something like that.

 

They do not seem to be too interested in resource management. It's not too surprising as it can be a difficult thing to perfectly achieve and their new 'audience' does not seem to be too concerned about it either. I believe the IE games did a fair job IF you rest as you might in P&P. For them, and for many players the lack of a hard restriction is not acceptable.

 

I have my own ideas on how to fix such problems, but I'm not going to publicly state them as some of them will likely end up manifesting in Copper Dreams.

 

I am certainly not interested in a game that is more DAO and even less BG.

Well that's the thing. Obsidian has found a 'new' audience with this game, and this audience probably doesn't care about such things. As a prominent RPGCodex poster called Roguey often says Obsidian's outlook seems to be "grogs can take a hike" and I believe he/she is probably right.

Edited November 3, 2015 by Sensuki

[archangel979]

I hope your contribution to Copper Dreams end up a positive thing overall

Your ideas might seem good on paper but only when implemented and tried by thousand players you can find out for sure

[Sensuki]

depends how well implemented they are

Edited November 3, 2015 by Sensuki

[Fenixp]

Expeditions: Conquistador - really good strategical RPG, passable turn-based combat, fun resting system, decent overland exploration mechanics, surprisingly good writing and unique companion style

Everybody needs to play this. Fallout meets King's Bounty in a largely unexplored setting.

 

DotA 2 - DotA player since 2004, best tactical combat game ever made

I would argue that DOTA is essentially an arena-based action RPG with less persistence, so it would technically fit into the action RPG genre quite nicely.

[Sensuki]

DotA's not an RPG. DotA Allstars is a mod Warcraft 3, which is an RTS and DotA 2 is essentially that in a new engine. It's a MOBA.
 

DotA and Action RPGs have nothing in common.

Warcraft 3 and the Infinity Engine games control veeeery similarly though.

Edited November 3, 2015 by Sensuki

[Fenixp]

It used to be a mod for Warcraft 3, which is an RTS. It's a MOBA or Action RTS.

That doesn't mean much, Half-Life 2 has a mod called Lambda Wars which is a strategy game - genre shifts are hardly a rarity in modding scene. Besides, one of the major features of WarCraft 3 was that it somewhat mixed two genres Blizzard was known for - real-time strategy game, so base building, logistics, resource collection and management, and a lite action RPG, so character progression (both experience and loot-wise), so it can't really be argued that it ever was a pure RTS.

 

What then dota did was to take away pretty much all the real-time strategy part of the game and only left the lite action RPG bits, which it expanded and built upon into an arena-styled game. It ends up sharing a lot more with Diablo than it ever did with Warcraft 3 - you construct your character in such a way that it's as efficient as humanly possible at any given situation, grab the appropriate skills and items to grow the character in a desirable way which will help you win the match. Everything else is quite commonplace in action RPGs - yes, even skillshots. The argument for MOBA being called "RTS" is that you need to utilize tactics and strategy to win, but that applies to pretty much all team-based MP games. There's a reason it got its own genre tho - it doesn't share all of its fundamentals with neither RTS nor Action RPG.

 

Just to further my point, moba games can work with a different perspective and a different control scheme, like Smite, Monday Night Combat or Awesomenauts, but it would never work without the RPG elements.

 

Edit: The mod's called Lambda Wars, actually.

Edited November 3, 2015 by Fenixp

[Sensuki]

Warcraft 3 is definitely a pure RTS. The single player has some RPG-like elements to it, but there's no choices to be made. You follow the story in a linear fashion and complete mandatory and optional objectives just like in the Starcraft singleplayer, which had no 'heroes', just named units with more health/damage etc.

 

I do not consider a unit progression system to be what defines an RPG. Most RPGs have them, but I'm pretty sure if you had an RPG with no unit progression system but with choices and consequences, then it would be an RPG. I'd like to see that actually - particularly with action combat similar to Jedi Knight 2 lightsaber mode or something like that - combat that is based purely on player skill, rather than character skill.

 

DotA did not take away the 'real time strategy' parts of the game, it took away base building and *some* of the resource management (wood, training units and food supply). The game is still real-time, the game is VERY strategical and your team still has to farm gold although it is gained in a different fashion.

There are some RTS games without base building.

 

Action combat also implies constant player input, such as if you are not holding down a movement key, your character is not moving. If you are not holding down the mouse button then your character is not attacking ... etc

 

DotA is a MOBA but it uses an RTS engine, and has RTS controls. You could say it is both a MOBA and an RTS. Kind of like how some RPGs use an FPS engine - thus they're RPGs and FPS games.

Edited November 3, 2015 by Sensuki

[Fenixp]

Warcraft 3 is definitely a pure RTS. The single player has some RPG-like elements to it, but there's no choices to be made. You follow the story in a linear fashion and complete mandatory and optional objectives just like in the Starcraft singleplayer, which had no 'heroes', just named units with more health/damage etc.

Yup, that's why I said the RPG elements in Warcraft 3 were quite lite, and that dota expanded upon them ;-) As for whether WarCraft 3 is or is not a pure RPS... I don't care TBH. I don't think it is, or at least I don't think it's a traditional RTS, ymmv.

 

I do not consider a unit progression system to be what defines an RPG. Most RPGs have them, but I'm pretty sure if you had an RPG with no unit progression system but with choices and consequences, then it would be an RPG.

Me neither, thus me using the cop-out term of action RPG.

 

it took away base building and *some* of the resource management (wood, training units and food supply).

In other words, vast majority of resource management.

 

The game is still real-time

So is counter-strike.

 

the game is VERY strategical

So is counter-strike, on higher level anyway.

 

and your team still has to farm gold although it is gained in a different fashion.

Kiiind of like money in counter-strike.

 

Majority of team arena games, regardless of them being shooters or hero clicker things, require a large degree of strategy and resource management. It's dictated by their format of being based around a group playing as a team which has to properly allocate its resources to achieve a given goal. These aspect won't make them RTS games.

 

The real reason DOTA games are being called RTS is because people are hung up on it being Warcraft 3 mod, that's it. There's not a single reason as to why it could not have been made in a mod for, say, Half-Life 2. It doesn't use just about any base characteristics of Warcraft 3, it is its own thing - and that's fine.

 

There are some RTS games without base building.

Yes, there are, and they're all defined by a single player always being in control of numerous units around the battlefield that he has to single-handedly manage. That's the key thing here, it's a single, lonesome player who makes the strategy in strategy games, not a team - not to say a team can't play strategically too. No, controlling summons does not make a strategy game alone, because vast majority of gameplay for vast majority of people does not contain this. Yes, even Dawn of War 2 stretches boundaries of RTS in its singleplayer. When all is said and done tho, moba games play nothing like RTS games to date, which makes RTS lose all meaning when calling moba games that, which is why they got their own genre. I do not want to see RTS games defined "But you have to click to tell people where to go!", we might as well merge action RPG and RTS then.

 

Action combat also implies constant player input, such as if you are not holding down a movement key, your character is not moving.

When was the last time you played a dota game without nearly constantly providing input? :-P Seriously, even some RTS games require you to constantly micromanage everything, that's not a very good argument. And, as I said, it has been proven that DOTA formula can work with different control schemes.

 

Right, I'm repeating arguments already, so I'm out :-P

Edited November 3, 2015 by Fenixp

[Sensuki]

By constant player input I mean literally holding down a key as input. If the key is not being held down, nothing happens. This is a feature of (all?) action games. You can certainly click or press once to move once or attack once but to constantly perform an action you have to hold down a button or key, it is not automatic.

 

Much earlier in the thread I said "constant input stream" when talking about real-time gameplay which just means that the game accepts input at any time. Real-time non-action combat games have auto attack and waypointed movement.

 

The reason why I consider DotA 2 to still be considered an RTS is because it uses RTS camera and controls, unit movement and features pretty much everything that you would find in an RTS multiplayer game aside from the base building. No doubt it incorporates some RPG-like elements as well - but it's a multiplayer game with no story, just an objective - destroy the enemy throne.

 

I don't really see the need for a comparison with Counter-Strike. Sure they're both competitive multiplayer games that involve some resource management. Counter-Strike is clearly an FPS game though with FPS mechanics. The controls require constant (or active?) player input. DotA 2 has RTS camera and controls with RTS mechanics and does not require constant player input [as in you don't need to literally hold down keys to do things].

Edited November 3, 2015 by Sensuki

[Teioh_White]

Thanks for the list, Sensuki. I'd never heard of four of those. I especially love the Dark Sun setting, so looking forward to a game set in there.
 

 

As for Dota, it's great if you love it. Endless entertainment, which doesn't look to be going anywhere. My best friend has quite literally become addicted to it, and I tried really hard to like it and played with him for 6 months. Didn't matter how hard I tried though, I just do not care, at all, for the gameplay of Moba's. (an aside, don't really talk to my friend anymore outside sparse texts, as he literally spends 70+ hours a week in Dota)

Edited November 3, 2015 by Teioh_White

[Sensuki]

Yes, I actually do not play very often anymore simply because it can be very addictive and it's very easy to just sit there and play it all day.

[aweigh0101]

i think the biggest change in 2.03 is the UNDOCUMENTED increase of enemy engagement "threat-zone", in addition to the also undocumented text pop-up displayed on a disengagement-attack.

http://forums.obsidian.net/topic/82975-a-closer-analysis-on-class-balance-and-the-203-patch/

"the disengagement attacks' dmg values were increased/tweaked because I DEFINITELY notice in my current run on potd taking MUCH more damage, and MANY more disengagement attacks than ever before (due to the increased threat zone). the combat log does NOT specify the details of the disengagement-attacks so i can't present "proof", but all you have to do is get into a fight with some lions and try to kite them from close (i.e. just make them chase you) and you will immediately notice the lions "trapping" your unit as soon as they get close and immediately inflicting a disengagement-attack for considerably more damange than i've ever noticed before.

i picked lions to test with because they're fast, and unlike other mobs they don't give up chasing you (perhaps this is ALSO due to the 2.03 increased threat zone ranges). there is a very noticeable and new distance at which some enemies can land the disengagement-attack on your unit that was not there before."

NOTE: i play on potd, and it is POSSIBLE these changes i am detailing don't happen on other difficulties.

[Fenixp]

That's ... Kind of bad, actually. The AI seems to take a lot less disengagement damage since 2.0 or so, if AI's engagement radius and damage got buffed in turn, that would pretty much eliminate option of using engagements to your advantage and only keep the aspect of your party being locked in place. Hm.

[aweigh0101]

(finished reading the actual thread)

Knights of the Chalice is the best tactical turn-based cRPG ever made. Period.

I've finished it 5 times and i never do that with games of that type.

the guy who made it literally LITERALLY went insaaane after he was done because it is simply a masterpiece, a masterwork; knights of the chalice is a the type of technical and creative inspiration that happen together only once in a life time. the poor man was left broken and is currently locked away living in fear of people emailing for KotC 2. he knows he can never make a superior effort so he burns.

Do yourself a big favor and download Knights of the Chalice. it's only 150mb or so.

If you manage to win the very first fight with the group of enemy orcs let me know it's a trial by fire sort of game you gotta come prepared. there are no "trash fights". every encounter is a genuine set piece and every mechanic in D and D and in tactical turn-based combat is utilized.

i think i'm gonna go play it again right now.