Normally try to avoid whining on game forums, but since I think the previous whining caused you to make the changes you did here goes...

Why on earth would you patch a non-mmo game base on 'Hardcore!!!!" complainers comments? 80% resist cap, henchmen not leveling after you hire them anymore...neither of these make any god damn sense. The game I paid you for is no longer the game im playing. And since I bought it on steam I cant even roll the god damn thing back again to play the game I was loving. Seriously, this is some horrible decision making! My only hope is someone puts out a mod to change these things back the way they were. Ya, maybe I suxor or whatever, but F-U I do not expect this kinda crap in a CRPG and it is exactly why I do not play MMO's.

For the love of god there were already mods out there to make the game harder for those whose self worth is based on their video game meta-achievments. I just want something to lose myself in for a couple hours a day and forget my soul chrushing job.

I was not born with enough middle fingers.

I agree, it is frustrating when developers change the software you already paid for and are using w/out your consent. I didn't realize Steam had removed the "don't autoupdate" option but they have. A strong reason to buy games in a manner that allows you the user to control when/if you get updates. People who bought the game on GoG apparently are able to choose to apply patches.

We should be able to choose if/when we apply the patches. It's simple. I can look at the patch notes and make that call for myself.

I guess next Divinity game will be an MMO so D:OS (with its heavy emphasis on co-op) is just a testbed. And we're the testers.

Then they would not get my moolah. MMO's are like hamster wheels for insanely bored people, which is evident by looking at their forums. I suppose they make money though and that is the end goal of any company.
Seriously lost respect for Larian at this point.

It truly pisses me off on what they've done with the game since beta. I used to play Larian games addictive threw all hours of the night. I no longer feel compelled to even start the damn game up it is that much of a mess. In beta it was so much better, I was up until 2 and 3 in the morning playing. Now I don't know what to think, keep coming here hoping for a decent patch and it only gets WORSE!

I'm sure the game will eventually be modded like plenty of others that either become out dated or the developers just simply ruin..I can't believe this is happening HERE of all places. It's only a matter of time before a fan cracks the main campaign to finally mod/fix it.

Honestly, if I wanted to play a game that does nothing but frustrate and piss me off, I would go and get Super Ghouls and Ghosts and play without cheats. Life is too damn short to be pissed off at a game that isn't fun to play any more.

Truly disgusted, even with the hot fix to make zombie and leech work again. What a bloody damn mess we got here

You didn't buy the game, you bought the right to play it. There is a difference. The game's owners can change it anyway they see fit. It's their game, their vision.

Honestly, if placing a hard cap on resistances "broke such a great game" for you, you must have thought very little of this game to begin with. I mean, apparently your entire love for it hinged on the ability to buff your resistances to the point where elements like fire and lava healed you instead of hurt you, the rest of the game be damned. Right?

I think maybe you're blowing this out of proportion just a whee bit. And that's pretty much why feedback like this thread should be taken with a grain of salt.

I am going to hold my breath and throw a tantrum about it.

It pisses me off because I was loving the variable strategies I could use and the fact that I wasn't pigeon holed into playing the game one set way. I realize some people enjoy marching they way they are told, the world needs janitors, but I do not. I had a heavy fire mage and a tank that I spent allot of time building a resist set up so my mage could heal him with a fireball while damaging baddies. I was absolutely happy and was working on a poison and ice set to do the same. Then they broke my f'ing entire game and hours of work with one patch that I cannot avoid or reverse.

I am not starting over, I will wait for a mod and warn my friends and coworkers against buying this game as I cannot guarantee next week swords will ot require you tap a simon-says type pattern 'game' before you swing them to "add difficulty and challenge!".

The henchmen thing was absolutely unnecessary and limits the usable pool of henchmen to whoever is in my current level range. I liked being able to hire a level 1 and basically create my own henchmen with the skill points they had after leveling to my level. This is a quality of life thing, but forces me to pick between 6 henchmen instead of 30something.

Most importantly, I did not want these changes in my SINGLE PLAYER game. I could care less how you feel about it as I am sure you could care less how I feel about it. For me it ruined my 30+ hours invested in my current game. So I am going to come here and vent in the hopes someone from Larian notices it and considers another option for those of us that agree. Random chucklenuts opinion, although respected, has no bearing on my current nerdrage.

That doesn't sound like you were using variable strategies. Quite the opposite. It sounds like you were pigeon-holing yourself into one specific, extremely effective (arguably overpowered/broken) strategy, even to the extent of "hey this works well for fire, i'll do the same exact thing with poison. and ice."

In any case, there's a simple mod out right now that reverts MaxResistance to 200%. You can use it and then you can still find some fun in this game.

lol wtf

Maybe Larian should add a godmode talent

Sounds like some people want an easier difficulty mode So far, I like the changes and fully support them.

Danarchy may be raging a bit, but I think he's right on his points. The changes to make the game 'harder' are clearly bandaids stuck on to try and 'fix' problems with the system, but they do so by being diametrically opposed to the game. They don't feel like part of the game- the equipment and crafting system is clearly designed to let you get over 100% resistances, and there's portions of the game where you need 100% resistance to get to something/somewhere special. As for followers, frankly, I find it odd that each /character/ has their own XP in this game instead of party XP. The game is so much about the partnership that the fact that I level a fight or two faster than my partner (due to a few deaths over the course of the game) is always weird to me.

Really, I'd just like the option to opt out of these changes. Can they stick that in the settings somewhere and make everyone happy?

Max resistance to 100 shouldn't be too much to ask for. The healing effects argued here worked both ways. You can be healed if a fireball hits you and you've got 120 fire resistance, the same effect will happen if your opponent has 120 fire resistance. A perfect example was the "mushroom battle" to break the barrier and do the White Witch quest. I thought it was really cool and required only melee damage to kill them off. I actually wish most of the game functioned this way.

There are numerous (damn near every boss) instances in the game where using an specific type of element will heal the enemy. Not allowing us to do the same in reverse seems to be....inconsistent really. But thats not the big issue. I have built my current characters around a now broken strategy and need to start over, minus one potential way to play for no reason whatsoever.

And the statement " extremely effective (arguably overpowered/broken) strategy" is an exact example of the problem I have with this. That's an MMO problem, not a single player problem. If I am playing a competitive game where I have an unfair edge using some specific mechanic then it can be sensibly OP/Broken/unfair. If I am playing a single player game, simply do not use the freaking OP ability in YOUR game, leave mine the fuck alone. That mindset is killing gaming for the rest of us that give 2 craps about balance.

I am really happy to hear there is a mod out there though, thank you very much for that I am looking for it now.

I never denied I was nerdraging, in fact I made a point of stating it outright as that is what seems to get noticed on message boards. Hell look at the response I have gotten already =P

QQ
QQ more
QQ some more
HEY HOW ABOUT I CAN SPLIT MYSELF IF HIT BY ELEMENTAL DAMAGES TOO! DA MUSHROOM CAN DO THAT. ITS ONLY FAIR AND MAKES SENSE!!!

You're absolutely entitled to nerdrage, and this is the ideal spot to do it. I don't mean to sound critical of your own playthrough tastes, the game is a means for user enjoyment, so you should absolutely go for what is enjoyable to you. As you mention, it's a single-player game and you using what I called an "extremely effective (arguably overpowered/broken) strategy" hurts no-one. I do, however, disagree with your point that balance passes only matter for competitive games. This game isn't yours, just as it isn't mine. It's Larian's. They're absolutely entitled to make adjustments if they think that they got their numbers or systems wrong on a first try, don't they? This game will be played for years to come I'm sure, it'll do well whenever it pops up on a Steam Sale. Taking all of our feedback and using that to improve the game in future patches is, overall, immediate inconveniences notwithstanding, probably for the best.

It would be wonderful for the game to have been released in a perfect (in the creators' eyes) state, but that's a pissy wishwash. Ain't happening. For a few years now, the reality of most month-1 players of PC games has been: welcome to the extended beta. I think it's still valid, and natural even, to rail against that when it causes yourself a headache, but I'd argue the practice isn't going to go away and it might be time to just get used to it. Better, more well-rounded games - overall, for the majority, or just for the creators, which is equally valid - are usually the end result.

EDIT: sorry, one last thought I forgot to include, then I promise I'll shut up :P

It's my view that when a dev puts a modding tool into their game - as Larian have done with D:OS - they then get that much more allowance to be headmistress-strict with offering their own intended designers' version of how the game is supposed to play, with the specific experience they want to provide for the player of their game. Hopefully I don't need to expound on the 'why' of that.

????? Seriously?

Ok, enough for me, I'm not gonna start a new game each time they completely change the rules
I'm fed up with the initial run on Cyseal before action really starts, i've already done it dozen of times during beta.
I like to plan my progression, but changing things this way got rid of my patience.
The time i'll be lvl10, new sets of rules may appear and i'll have to restart again? No thank you

I don't have a problem with that 80% cap! But did anyone noticed that resistance maniplated buffs/debuffs ignore the fact that you have over 80% resistance?

Let's have a look at my warriors fireresistance:

+115 from Equipment
+25 from Weather the Storm

effective I have 80% (thanks to the cap), but when i receive the status "warm" and surprise, surprise: I have 70% fireresistance, now. So i can throw away "Weather the Storm" and a lot of my equipment.

I see here two solutions:

1. give us back our old resistances (remove the cap) for having resistances like this, you have not the highes damage.

2. fix it that a reduction of resistances first get subtracted from your "over 80% resistances"

Example:

+115 from Equipment
+25 from Weather the Storm
= 140

effective I have 80%

now get "warm":

+115 from Equipment
+25 from Weather the Storm
= 140
-10 from "warm"

effetive I have still 80%

As people have already pointed out the patch makes melee claracters even more miserable while mages are still kings of the battlefield.

P.S. Mage nerf incoming ca. patch 150 I suppose.

Tip to Larian and would be developer. Always release Hard and loosen reins as you go. Once people are set the majority don't want updates to make a game harder unless it is a specific difficulty setting. How many times do we have to do the same things over and over? Make it hard and they are none the wiser.

I can actually see both sides of the argument. Its hard to make everyone happy but it's possible.
PrePatch Hard just wasn't actually too hard. I think there should be another difficulty level above hard - call it hardcore or whatever.

Have that mode with hard resist caps and OP skills severely limited and leave the rest of the difficulty modes as before. 3 difficulty modes isn't encompassing for a game like this.

I recall not long before release there was talk of tons of sliders for various difficulty adjustments. Perhaps I was dream that.

as per Hotfix version 1.0.132,

- Changes to resistance cap that were supposed to be in the patch but did not make it in (zombie talent fix, can go over cap with potions and temporary effects) -

this is good. hope this only applies to player characters and companions. elemental creatures, summons and enemies, and certain unique enemies, bosses should have 100% resist as before.

for my own playing style, elemental resist isn't that big a deal, 100+ resist would make the game easier, but capping it won't break the game.

the heart of the "game too easy" issue is enemy AI and presets after mid game. at hard difficulty, in addition to HP and hit chance, enemies should have higher bodybuilding and willpower; fire skeletons should know not to attack fire elemental summons over and over again~~.

To clarify, they don't "auto-level" to your current level, but they will level up when you use them in your party. So if you're level 12, and you hire a level 1, they won't automatically become level 12 after hiring them. You'd need to hire a henchman closer to your level.

As for the mod to add resistances back, it was out quite quickly. Here's the link.

http://www.larian.com/forums/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=546666

My opinion is that this was the right intent, wrong execution.

People complain it's too easy to get over 100% resistances? Don't cap the resistances like this and ruin itemization and crafting bonuses for everyone on all difficulties. Change it so that on HARD DIFFICULTY, starting resistances are -50 or -75 or whatever number would make it an achievement to get to 100+ resistances using the current itemization + crafting. It ends up being the same end result, but I as a player would not feel like my gear is now worthless.

Also, making it specific to the hardest difficulty would more easily make everyone happier. Like it the old way? Play in normal or easy. Want to play on Hard? Better collect your resist gear, it's important.

Alternatively, make Glass Cannon have -X% all resists. Then you actually would be more of a glass cannon.

I'm not real happy with needing to mod the game to make the default crafting useful now. And by that I mean that in my opinion, crafting was useful for improving weapon damage, adding resistances, and also a bunch of mildly useful to useless other stuff. Now it's sole purpose is to improve weapon damage and a bunch of mildly useful to useless other stuff.

But either way, I'll live.

Just my .02.

^Good Idea. And it is a very simple number change in 2 cells of a spreadsheet to do that and repack. Seriously.

This sounds weird. It seems there's a group that want balance and more hard and there's a group that love how it's used to be previously. So Larian upset the masses simply by listening to one group of people that love the harder game. Correct me if i'm wrong.

So instead of forcing and changing the game mechanics outright, Larian should have made an "official mod" or a separate difficulty that these group of minority that want the game to be harder. This would be the best way no? Why you have to force it to everyone?

regarding to the resistance cap,I think maybe spiderweb's games can offer some insight.for example,the chest amor offers 20% resisance, then legs 20%,but in stead of being caculated as 20%+20%,it counts as 20%+(1-20%)*20%,and so on,if your hand gear has 20%,it's 20%+(1-20%)*20%+(1-20%-(1-20%)*20%)*20%.so without potions or temporary boosts,you'll never be able to reach 100% by equipments alone.

We're all trying to beat the game, but the two groups you mentioned are wanting to beat different aspects of it. The group that loved the game as it was were the players who enjoyed the game world and were trying to beat that fictional world (which means self imposed limitations are acceptable), while the group wanting a harder game is trying to beat the game mechanics (therefore self imposed limitations aren't acceptable), and couldn't care less about the game world and the fact that this is an RPG.

Now I remember one reason I quit MMORPGs -- not because of frequent balance changes, but because of a hyperbolic playerbase's reaction to them.

My main problem, is the henchmen stop auto leveling to your level, I want that back because it allowed me to make the henchman I Wanted, it wouldn't be a bad deal if enemies re-spawned and I could grind them to the right levels, but they don't, so I can't. Mmm, now that I think about it, thank god for cheat engine, it will solve this issue for me.

I actually wouldn't mind the game harder than it is now, I just think that the two ways that are getting the hate are very bad ways to do it. I'd be happy to see smarter AI, weaker equipment, and less free gold lying about. But the resistance cap seems to be a "because reasons" and doesn't feel natural in a game where enemies regularly absorb things and where crafting allows you to throw your actual number up to 200. In City of Heroes, an MMO I played religiously for years, there were resistance caps- between 75 and 90 depending on your specific class- but getting to these caps was a chore. With the exception of the elemental defense power sets which always wound up at max to that element, you really had to finesse your build and invest to hit the caps. In this game, we just unceremoniously crash into the cap. I don't feel like I was given a "harder game" by having a cap put in. I feel like I was robbed of 120% fire resistance, 25% Water resistance, 20% air resistance, and 30% Earth resistance. These are things I purchased/obtained in character that don't work because random ceiling, not because any given aspect is now less than it was before.


And the followers thing is just... inconvenient. It denies customization but it only ups the difficulty if you want to change your followers later. The game shouldn't punish you for wanting to attempt new things.

That said, my partner probably /would/ mind a difficulty spike. While my Man At Arms was very hard to hurt before, her mage had to struggle hard to get that 120% fire resist to be immune to fire even when burning, and in larger fights she finds herself often having trouble staying alive because I just cannot draw all the aggro. Summons help, but spellcasting enemies are vicious to those who aren't Armor-Plated Men-At-Arms. We only unlocked the ability for her to stand in fire patches to heal and keep foes away recently, and it's definitely helpful and interesting.


So yeah, you can't please everyone, but increased difficulty that feels organic works much, much better than increased difficulty that's obviously just the game mechanics holding you back, and limiting player choice generally makes things less fun.

It was no secret that resistances could be raised to 100 and change from damage reduction to healing when interacting with an element. I think you're patting yourself on the back a little too hard with this idea that you broke the mold and developed a "strategy" here. Because another perspective is that you simply took advantage of a questionable mechanic - you and everyone and their brother, apparently. The world needs lemmings too, I guess.

Ohh noes! The game isn't beyond easy mode anylonger with above 100% all resist!? The game is easy enough as it is, why do you need to be invurnable?

I actually quite liked it as a mechanic, not because it's some illicit way of making things easier. That said, I don't live for hardcore combat and for me it's a minor (and sometimes exasperating) part of gameplay. I've seen numerous comments that it should be more difficult: by all means, make hard mode harder if necessary, but I'd rather easy and normal were left alone.

Part of the problem seems to be that the game is trying to cater for two disparate groups, the very competitive MMO crowd and the more introspective immersion types, and there seems to be limited commonality between the two. I don't think that chucking insults either way is really a productive way to address the problem, though.

I think it is great that they capped the elemental resistances. The game was way too easy before.

I think there's no need to black n' white people into mmo-ers and singleplayers. I myself is of the BG, torment tradition, and won't spend a second of my life in mmo, but I'm not opposed to the elemental resist hard cap.

for all the "balance" discussions here, I consider meaningless those treating D:OS as a pvp game, but those quite constructive when toggling the difficulty issue: combats turn too easy from mid game. yet, whether and how this issue to be fixed really depends upon Larian.

someone mentioned that when Larian provides a great mod tool, they have the right to stick to the core game as they intend to be. I somewhat agree with this, and especially from my wonderful gaming history with BG2. Veteran gamers don't ask Bioware to rebalance the game, they just make the game harder through mods. with or without mods, uber powergamers love all sorts of self-inflicted challenge, "no reload on insane tactics mod" being one of the most popular.

so, I think all those pvp minded gamers should make their own mods; all those think the game just silly easy should do the same. there's already a source difficulty mod out, have these gamers tried already??

then, Larian should really go back to the root of their design, making sure that future fixes really
fit into what they envision D:OS to be.
so, does hard cap elemental resist really make sense? or just a shortcut to fix balance issue?

I always think that the idea is to make elemental creatures to be healed by elemental attacks, but it's implemented incorrectly. but IF it's always part of the core rule that 100+ resist = elemental healing, Larian needs to think more before they change their own core rules.

I seriously, seriously doubt that the next will be an MMO. See how well that worked out for another single player RPG franchise - The Elder Scrolls (ie. not very well).

I think the caps are reasonable and somewhat plausible - the hotfix makes it possible to gain immunity and even healing from elemental damage temporarily through potions and spells, which is a good thing, imo.
I'd say there's still room for some tuning, e.g. by increasing the duration of potions and spells outside of combat a bit (probably just increase duration of a "turn" in realtime mode). Providing different caps depending on difficulty doesn't sound too bad, either (e.g. 120% on easy, 85% on normal, 70% on hard).

There they are again: the childish pathetic loosers that claim to "love challenge" ruining the game for everyone else who enjoyed it how it was, taking options away from other players and destroying the diversity of builds. And why? Because those immature loosers are incapable of making a decision. Yes, yes, they claim they don't want to "gimp" themselves but that is just their way of saying "Waah, I can not make that decision."

This is exactly the reason I mentioned "Lobos Jr" in another thread because he made that decision 66(!) times when he played Dark Souls.
Instead of whining to the developers to make the game more challenging, he made the decision and made the game more challenging for himself and left it how it is for everyone else.

And the fact that this game can be modded so that EVERYONE of them could have adjusted the difficulty to be closer to his/her liking makes them even more pathetic. There is NO difference between Larian capping the resistance and a player making a mod which caps the resistance. The fact that they were uncapable and unwilling to do that is just disgusting.

BTW for LARIAN: Every balance change for this game should be an official mod. That way people can choose which parts of the balance they want to add to the game and which parts they are fine with and enjoy.

That goes both ways, you know? There's already a mod out that does rise the caps back to 200%.

In general I do even agree that sometimes people should just not use certain exploits instead of endlessly complaining about how they trivialize a game, but the resistances in D:OS are a pretty basic concept and you actually need to put an effort into not going above 100 eventually.

Anyway, it's not so much a problem of "childish pathetic loosers", but rather Larian feeling that D:OS probably not provided the challenge they intended. Ultimately it's up to Larian to decide how challenging the game should be or whether certain exploits should be viable or not.
As far as I can tell they probably felt that the game's difficulty was a little bit too easy to break through resistances >100.

The possibility to do so is not bad per se - but it's achieved much too easily pre-patch (and often across too many types simultaneously). Right now you still can have a char capped and then apply situational buffs through potions and spells for that little extra necessary to go up to and above 100% in combat or when you need to reach certain places.

If you ask me, that sounds like a good compromise that actually offers some tactical depth and increases the usefulness of certain skills and potions.

Wait, are you calling the playerbase childish pathetic loosers[sic], or the developers at Larian?

Do you think Larian made this change against their wishes?

I may be crazy here, but I suspect Larian wouldn't make balance passes unless they themselves agreed that the process had merit.

There's a word, 'iteration'. It's a good word, describing a good thing that results in good design.

And, a word in your shell-like, you don't come across as a very pleasant person when you lade your posts with mean-spirited little digs like that. It certainly doesn't help your argument. It kinda makes you sound like a bit of a child.

@ OP, if you keep hearing "I heal myself while walking on lava"

If you're a developers, what's your first reaction and of course your next course of action?

that's what mod for. you can make the game easier or harder, according to your own style and taste. people can mod all those by their standard overpowering classes down to earth or lift the underpowered classes into godhood.



yes, otherwise, all the shield spells are pretty much useless. or from another perspective, shield spells are entry level spells to be used before 100+ resist is achieved prior to hard cap.

why need mod when the game let you choose "easy or hard" via difficulty on the fly?

/thread

Because let's face it, difficulty settings alone will never please everyone - especially the "I should be allowed to play the game the way I want"-crowd will never be pleased by a simple difficulty setting.
There will always be some who will feel offended. Mods are probably a better approach in that cases.

^ I see what you did there.

For those really want to play the game on hard. Try beat the game on hard for your first playthrough.

If you have to start over and resort to using a mod to make the game harder or easier, you know you already failed yourself and your pride. Why? because you cheat yourself, and deep down you know it.

A failure is always a failure and no amount of reload will ever reverse it.

Remember that.

tsk tsk.

ps. hope I wasn't being to hard.

hmmm..so you fixed it or re-posted? you hoped not being to hard on the "pve crowd."

does it matter? as if there's anything but pve in D:OS...

There's a part of the game that's ONLY ACCESSIBLE if you heal yourself while walking on lava. The imp's all "There's three paths: one through immaculates, which there's a lot of but are weak, one through super buffed demons that can only be hurt through tenebrium, and one that is full of lava, so you'll need to be immune to go that way." So, having been maxing my fire resistance, I went that way. Gaining lava immunity is clearly part of the original design.

Mods are for players that want to CHANGE the game to a specific way to be able to do so.
Patches are tools used by the company to fine tune THEIR product.

Now, if people are too lazy to mod the game back (or even to search to se if someone else did it already) to how they want to play, i'd say that they will keep complaining and larian will probably ignore them.

It seems to me that they intended to not be simple to heal yourself with an element. As of version 1.0.130 it's still possible. You just have to use the Shield spells to boost one of your resistances to 130% if you have attained the cap.

One thing i'd like to ask is if they intend environmental effects to reduce the maximum resist (i.e. your maximum resist is 60% to air under Rain without Shields).

I feel very happy with all the changes so far.
It seems weird to me that a tactics game forego ALL tactics at the end game.
And i think it's completely fair for the game to cheat for the enemies if the game itself can't provide smarter enemies.

I won't say you are wrong but there is a third possibility. That they made the change because they felt it wasn't correct. Thus not trying to please or piss off anyone. I know my game wouldn't have such cheese tactics in it. To call it hard by making the change, I look at it as making a logical correcting to the games design.

I like what one said, to make both sides happy either make tie difficulty level dictate it or a toggle. Since they created a precedence, you will always upset someone and we never know the % of the total fan-base is upset when a change is made. I took these matters in my hand once I knew a way to mod them out. For example I have 360 FOV for NPC's so you can't walk into a room and steal from them. That was cheese to. Best thing about PC gaming, with a little know-how many things you can tweak on your own.

The game shouldn't be easy on hard.

This is a turn based game on hard it should be like chess. You should have a legit chance of losing many battles if not played right. If there was an unstoppable move that would always allow you to win in Chess in 4 moves, the game wouldn't have survived the centuries it has.

Chess and D:OS are very different games. The former is a proper strategy game, and the latter is an RPG, and as an RPG, the game world, characters, storyline, etc deserve just as much (if not more) developer time as the combat system might. I think the "the game shouldn't be easy on hard" statement assumes that since D:OS has turned based combat that it's trying to be some ultimate strategy game, and I don't think that is its goal. Therefore, it would be nice if it had a range of difficulty, but it doesn't necessary have to be that way.

I look at TB as chess. Overall the same type of results you are looking for, your move to win, their move to win, each one by one. We are talking about the combat TB model with these changes. Obviously we all have our own opinions, but that is what I look for, a very balanced thinkers game when I play TB.

Technically you can remove the lava with the whirlwind spell, but I agree that the possibility to gain immunity should stay in the game, since alternative solutions to problems is one of the recurring themes in the game - and after the hotfix, the possibility does again exist - through spells and potions.

With the hot fix, isn't it back in? Between shield spells which I heard worked before the hot fix and now spells and potions once again allowing you to go past 100%, seems very liberal to me. Yo just can't have equipment do it alone now. If the game just shipped that way...

I hate it when devs (for whatever reason they may have) starts to impose artificial barriers on players in a SINGLE PLAYER GAME... This behavior reminds me of the limitations that the Devs have been imposing in CK2 & EU4 and it doesn't add anything to the game except an artificial difficulty.

This is not a MMO or some competitive game, so what gives?

Well, at least I finished the game and I was looking forward to doing a second playthough with the introduction of the new NPC companions, but if (or since) they are imposing artificial barriers to increase the difficulty then I am just going to shelf it and move on

---
PS: wtf is with these forums, where I can't use quotation marks in my sentances???

It is relatively common these days with developers actually. Rather than produce new, interesting, and challenging content, they will introduce artificial barriers to stifle player creativity and options. It's a shortcut that has picked up support from the MMO-loving crowd in the name of "balance".

Come on. Whether you care for resist caps or not it's not a reason to defend a typical knee-jerk patch implemented in a very hasty and unprofessional manner.

Let's assume for a moment that elemental healing from high resists was never intended. Well, if you're a developer it doesn't take you months to notice something that is so obviously broken. It may take you a while to come up with a thought-out, working and thoroughly tested solution but this clearly isn't the case here.

Larian may want to take a page from Harebrained Schemes book. Those guys actually spent their time and resources on developing another campaign for Shadowrun Returns and left tinkering with game balance to modding community where it belongs.

What gives is games designers taking pride in their work.

Balancing a game, be it a solitaire, a co-op, a competitive, be it physical or digital, is right there at the very core of what game design is all about.

The "this isn't an MMO or eSport" argument is ludicrous when looking to fault any balance adjustments.

There's a specific reason that the Cyseal area / first ten levels of this games were so good upon release.

And why exactly does a single player game have to be balanced? What is there to balance against? If all choices are equal, then you are not playing a game, you are playing an eBook.

In other words, you hate games?
Because games are all about overcoming (guess what, artificial) barriers. If you don't care about challenge (whatever type), you can as well just play that:
http://progressquest.com

In games design? Several things! Lots. Loads.
Let's look at "interesting choices".

You make a game that has a list of abilities to choose from, let's say there's ten, and lets call them perks since that seems to be the current nomencalture for this kind thing nowadays.

So, as the game's designer, you have a list of ten perks. The player will be able to select three during the course of their playthrough. As it so happens, in playtesting, you realised that two of those perks are super goddam awesome sweet, and the rest offer varied other moderate benefits.

The games released. Within two days, people are talking about the game and it becomes obvious that you always pick the Super Awesome perk first, then the Goddam Awesome perk, then whatever.

You ever play XCOM, the recent one from 2K? Two words: sniper, Squadsight.


Now, there's a quote from a podcast I listen to, 3 Moves Ahead. It's a podcast that focuses on strategy games and the hosts of the show had a conversation about what defines a strategy game. The shortest version of the answer that they could arrive at was, paraphrasing here: "A sequence of interesting choices."

Their point being, the intrinsic part of what engages the player is the act of considering options, selecting one, then dealing with the results. To have a choice be interesting, there needs to be balance. If one is obviously more powerful than the second, that's not an interesting choice. That's deciding whether to apply a handicap to yourself for no good reason.

And while D:OS isn't 100% a strategy game, it certainly has (for example, character build) strategy elements, just as sitting around a Dungeons & Dragons table has (for example, improvisational) strategy elements, just as Spelunky has (for example, split-second reaction) strategy elements, just as any number of other videogames, single-player or otherwise, do. The 'interesting choice' observation is one of the (many) things at the forefront of the mind of any games designer worth their salt. And, to reiterate, you can't have interesting choices without first having a certain amount of balance across the options available to you.

EDIT: Gosh, I typed a lot. Oops.

Short version, smartly applied and considered balance makes games more gooder.

And I'm going to repeat what I put in my previous post: There's a specific reason that the Cyseal area / first ten levels of this games were so good upon release. There's your main reason why even a single-player game benefits from balance passes.

And this is your opinion, which is certainly valid.

However, in my opinion, balanced choices doesn't make a non-competitive game better. If two choices have the same outcome, then there is no real choice involved, and you are once again playing an eBook or Progress Quest.



And I'd just like to point out that Cyseal was so good because it was not balanced. You could choose, like I did in my first run, to leave through the north gate at level 3, and have a tough scrap against Rob and his zombies, and then head south and east into the villa, then accidentally trigger the Diedrik encounter, killing the party instantly. Or like my second playthrough, heading out onto the beach toward black cove at level 4, then having a jolly time running an orc battalion over the landmines they had placed. Neither of these choices were better then my third run, during which I took the "proper" route to the Northwest.

The myriad of possibilities of your choice of exit from Cyseal proper made the area fun and interesting - and the choices were far from balanced. Soloing the burning legion in the northeast with my level 4 ranger, after sneaking through Luculla to nab the Heartseeker bow was an interesting challenge, which I thoroughly enjoyed.

TL;DR
While I understand the need for balance in competitive games, when I play a single player game I would like to have actual choice in my gameplay progression. Not everyone wants to play an eBook.

Cyseal is incredibly well-balanced in terms of game design. It feels really finely crafted, an area filled with quite distinct, separate parts that are all connected cleverly, sign-posted accordingly (for those paying attention). It's a smooth experience from Lvl 1 to Lvl 9 or 10 or whatever. The level of difficulty remains consistant (both within the optimal route and also when you go out of your way to try more challenging, buttclenching encounters) and feeds nicely into subtly signposting the player to the optimal areas (enemies too difficult for you? if you want to, maybe you should try the other way).

I'm guessing we're using the word balance to mean two different things. I'm not actually sure how you're using it, sorry. I can't connect Cyseal's open world freeform structure with imbalance. Balance doesn't imply a controlled corridor-like game experience, like your comment seems to be suggesting.

why balance issue is close to meaningless so far in this particular single player game? because almost all the "unbalance" factors (as mentioned in these forums) could go away based on gamers' decisions. don't like lone wolf and glass cannon? don't use them; mage overpowered? don't play it; 100+ resist healing? don't pump it and don't spend time crafting things. charm too powerful? don't feaking use it. and lastly, don't like everything, mod them to hell.

what exactly does other players using, or "exploiting" all those "OP holes" have any practical impact on those who don't? everyone is playing his/her own singleplayer game...what's the practical/real impact exactly?

as far as the idea that TB = chase goes, it's about enemy AI and higher level combat design. which a mere resist hard cap cannot fix and hardly has anything to make the game more similar to a chess game.

most CRPG have the "late game too easy" issue, because of the nature of the genre: we level up to get more powerful; what's the point of getting xps, attaining powerful abilities, spells, and gathering loots? to struggle like lvl 1 weaklings from beginning to end? if you want to play chess, play chess, and non-leveling up games; there won't be any op holes or "balance" issues (providing that if there's no AI hole to exploit~~).

If Larian is seriously about remedying the nature bane of singleplayer CRPG, take close look at high level enemy AI and unique encounter/ boss designs.

It is being used in different ways.

The "single player game doesn't need balancing" argument is talking about overpowered mechanics being rebalanced so that they are no longer overpowered. This is unnecessary because the game is not competative and players can (artificially) limited themselves to not using those mechanics.

Noaloha, you make some excellent point but I think you're ultimately talking about game design in general, which includes balancing towards providing a certain kind of experience.

It seems to me that individual changes in the former category will effect the overall game design (which you refer to Noaloha), but will not be sufficient to achieve the latter's sense of balance (ie Cyseal vs the rest of the game).


Addition: I still think the easiest and least disruptive way of improving the challenge of the game is to allow the AI to go first in combat. And I think this would be achieved, in most cases, with removing the Initiative bonus from Leadership.

Right and I'll attribute that to, that is what we all played in EA and reported back on. If they did that with all chapters, I have no doubt the game would have been better overall. Time and Money, that's all.

I see, I think.

Well, can we at least agree that these ideas of (1) whether or not adjustments to overpowered stuff is necessary, and (2) the relative value of balancing towards providing a certain kind of experience, can we agree that both of these decisions belong in the domain of the game's designer?

No. At least I can't agree entirely. (Sorry ;/)

It's like something I put in another post: of course the designer can do whatever they want whenever they want. It's their product and they have the freedom to change it however they want. But more realistically, at some point your going to piss off your supporters/fans when you change things too drastically, or when you don't remain faithful to the product you initially released. At some point, the players come to "own" the game and their (reasoned) opinions matter more than initial design intentions (ie The People vs George Lucas).

The question is: having been out for a few months, who "owns" the game now?

Are you kidding? The main, MAIN complaint about this game is that it gets too easy.

this is no different from resist hard cap, or any other form of cutting back resources from the gamer side. you can just not put points on leadership can you not?

imo, it has to be on the enemy side; raise the initiative of high level enemies.

as for who really owns the game? I think Larian should stick to their own concept of core rules of the game. it can be modified based on gamer feedback for sure, but any change should not completely override their original vision of the gameplay. total overhaul is the job of modders.

I think people saying "Balance is unnecessary because this is a singleplayer game" are being somewhat extreme.

Yes, complaining "game is too easy" while exploiting all the OP stuff is stupid and "Don't use this and that" is a valid advice when we're talking about an individual player's choice but that doesn't mean the game can't be improved with more balanced mechanics.

(Here I'm not talking about D:OS but in general.) Let's say I'm playing a hypothetical game with 3 class options and one is broken. That's okay because I can just play the other 2? No. I still want that feature of the game I purchased.

And if there's absolutely no need for "balance"(here the term balance may have a different meaning) at all, why are there multiple difficulties other than the "easy"? You can just limit yourself by not equpping gears and not leveling up your stats to emulate harder difficulties.

What I'm trying to say is that, you all have a valid point and you are not wrong but let's admit that the game could be improved with some careful adjustments.

Overpowered, by definition, means OVER powered. If the mechanic is OVER powered, it's a problem. If you admit that a certain anything in a game is OVER powered, you're admitting it's a problem.


What you want to be arguing is that you don't feel the resistance issue is too powerful for the game and explain why it doesn't make the game worse. An important part of having fun in a game IS an appropriate challenge to most people. An argument of "Sure it's overpowered but people can just not do it" isn't a productive one- especially when it's relatively easy to /accidentally/ get ludicrous +Resistances.

My personal argument shall remain that resistances were too good, but a hard cap that denies permanent immunity to /anything/ gets rid of a big chunk of fun to be had and causes a big dissonance when you've got single suits of armor giving 70% resistance to something by themselves.

Well this whole resistance issue was just handled very poorly by Larian, no matter how I try to look at it they just overplayed their hand.

I understand they can do what they want and personally I am kinda neutral about resistance being hard-/softcapped.

However if you done a playthrough of the game, it should have become clear that either Larian intended 100%+ resistance to be a (big) part of the game or they are really bad at math. I would assume the former.

Now I can understand that Larian is like... hmm this whole 100%+ resistance thing is really unbalanced, we need to fix this. Up untill this point, no complaints from me.

However without realizing what kind of effect of it would have on other items/talents in the game they made the change. Or maybe they did realize and they went like... well let's see how it works. This is the part I can not understand.

Don't they have meetings there... Aren't there people who test stuff and people who would actually realize that hardcapping resistances @ 80% was a bad idea because it would have larger effect then just making the game more balanced/harder.

To me that is what gets to me, it did not feel at all if it was thought through. Whether you have a company of 2000+ people or 20 I expect quality and I expect the companies actions to be well thought through. If they feel that the balance of the game is not as they intended, then they have the right and means to change it. However I do expect those changes to be well thought through. Change for the sake of change does not mean that the intended results of the change reflect the reality.

Like I said earlier, I don't mind whether the cap is 80% or 200%. However if they change stuff I expect other items/skills/talents/terrain in the game to reflect those changes.

Hardcapping/Softcapping affects a lot of areas of the game, not just the difficulty, a few examples are:

Self immolate, phoenix dive, explode: these skills work best with 120%+ Fire resistance, self immolate and explode are probably fairly useless without 120%+ fire resistance.

Elemental shield, elemental absorbtion: these skills are fairly useless with a hardcap and with a softcap I would say the elemental shields are pretty good. (However mostly because they give the target a shield that is equal to their hitpoints...)

Resist all potions are fairly useless with a hardcap and very rarely useful with a softcap, assuming you are @ 80% there is little reason to use large resist all potions.

Weather the storm talent, with a hardcap utterly useless and with a softcap aswell. 25% resistance or 2 attribute points when you are capped @ 80% is a no brainer. So by introducing the softcap this talent went from tier 1 talent, to sub par.

There's a few areas where having Tornado skill or 120%+ resist is useful, but with the current softcap that is all doable, so that is currently solved by having a softcap @ 80%.

Sword of the planets is affected by these changes, and also rubies, elemental essences.

Maybe there is more that is affected by it but this is what sprung to mind at this late hour for me.

Once again repeating myself, if Larian decides to bring more balance, they are blessed to do so, however I do expect them to think about how it will affect the game. Personally I find it hard to believe that someone at their office decided to do a playthrough to test all this and did not see any of this at all. Ofcourse ofcourse there's allways the excuse of well it worked when we tested it and when the patch came it worked differently, but professionals don't make excuses, they take responsibility whether it be good or bad.

With kind regards,

Rashar.

^ this. the devs are chasing two rabbits if they start listening to both groups.

Just create a solid ruleset, and maybe put out a statement that the game is not designed to be "unbreakable," because there is always a way to exploit a game like this. No rpg that I know of is not nerfable by a player who wants to get bored really fast.

Just create a solid ruleset and implementation, and then tell players that it's not the devs fault if someone wants to trivialize the gameplay. That is the whole point of rolling characters: you try to figure out what would be fun or challenging or unique to play the game with.

Kids today. They don;t know how to pretend. They think every game is a speedrun competition.

You mean like having more health is ALWAYS better than having less health? So choosing "Hard" difficulty is already applying "a handicap to yourself for no good reason". This is what pisses me off so much. They always claim that not using a stronger option is "artifically handicapping" them and yet THEY ALREADY DO THAT!!!

So why is "artifically handicapping yourself for no good reason" by choosing "Hard" difficulty considered to be different from " artifically handicapping yourself" by not or rarely using "stronger than others" options????

They are ruining the fun for OTHER players because they are TOO STUPID to get that!

And apart from Chess there is NO game where this handicapping the player is NOT done.

Also even IF an option is clearly better people are still capable of CHOOSING THE OPTION THAT MAKES THE GAME FUN FOR THEM PERSONALLY, e.g.: Playing a sorcerer makes "Dark Souls" much, much easier than playing a melee fighter. And yet thousands of players are playing melee fighters. Are they "artifically handicapping themselves" or are they "playing the game how it is fun for them"??? It is clearly the latter.

How about if they remove the cap and make it so that if you gain resistance to an element on an item, then you lose 50% of that resistance on the opposing element. At the same time reduce the max resistance on items.

e.g. on the highest level items: +20% resistance to fire, -10% resistance to water.

Poison and Tenebrium should stay capped at 80%, because poison already has a talent that allows resistance to go above 200% with a recent patch and Tenebrium is supposed to be more powerful than the standard elements. In addition, if you equip an item with Tenebrium resistance, then every other element gets reduced by 25% of that value.

e.g. on the highest level items: +20% resistance to Tenebrium, -5% resistance to Fire, Water, Earth, Air and Poison.

There should also be talents that increase resistance to each element by 25% (one talent per resistance) but those talents also reduce resistance of the opposing element by 10%. Weather the Storm could then be nerfed again to +15% to each element, and a penalty to block and armor percentage added.

"improved" from and toward what? in the end, it's all personal taste and standard. you think a fine "balance" tuning would improve the game because it makes the game better for YOU, not to everyone. or you suggest there's certain absolute objective criterion for a balanced single-player game?

read carefully in these forums, not everyone throw "overpowering" around as if that's an absolute game breaking problem. mostly I see people use the term in pvp minded discussions.

game difficulty setting is defined by developers rule set, whatever gamers want to do with it, it's up to gamers. of course you can play on easy and don't gear up (in RPG??) don't level up (in RPG??????), knock yourself out.

To be honest, if Larian really wants to mess with "balance" they need to take their time, so they can adjust the whole game to those changes.

We don't need talents that give 25% elemental resistance in one specific school, the talent would be horrible. 25% resistance in one element or 2 attribute points... I wonder what the majority of people will take...

Also no need for a gain/loss resistance system, if they wanted that, they should have tested it in BETA. It would make weather the storm add 12,5% to each element making it not worth it, to take it. Although atm it already has lost it's use.

Larian just needs to rethink their strategy on how they will do this, since it affects major parts of the game. If they are hellbent on balancing the resistance issue they will need to redo a lot of stuff.

"Easiest" balance "fix" at the moment would be something along the following lines:

-Adjust overall resistance gained from elemental essence/rubies.
-Adjust overall resistances on equipment.
-Adjust overall resistances gained from spells.
-Adjust overall resistances on potions.
-reconsider removing the 20% resistance debuff from wet/burning/poisoned etc.
Hardcap 100% so immunity is attainable.
-consider implementing talents that would raise the hardcap from a SPECIFIC BASIC element to 200% with the drawback that you can not attain it for the opposing element or a similiar drawback.

In overall this would lead to a more well balanced resist gain from 1-20+, it would mean that items/skills/spells/abilities/etc would have all been adjusted. It would keep rubies/elemental essences valuable so players finding rubies can still be happy or players going on there essence round on level up, still have something to spend gold on. It would also keep some value to crafting. With a 100% hardcap that allows immunity I'm sure it would keep a lot of players happy and finally allowing 200% hardcap with a specific talent would allow players to still experiment with different builds and it would use up a talent slot on something else then feeding it to the demon for 2 attribute points.

It would also make sure that weather the storm would keep it's value and sword of the planets would again be a viable choise for a 1hander on certain levels.

Atleast team Larian would have to pull something like that of, in terms of truely balancing it, while making it interesting for different groups of gamers while still making sure versatility on builds is safeguarded.

Ofcourse doing something like this would take a long time to pull off and for a finished product it would be considered a big change. However as I stated in my earlier post, rather something well thought that takes time an will work then a hasty change with undesired results.

With kind regards,

Rashar.

I would take talents that increase my resistance to individual elements by 25% over increases to attributes if they helped me gain immunity / healing with the cap removed. Weather the Storm doesn't need to have a loss to each opposing element, but it does need to have another drawback, such as -10% or -15% block and armour.

I don't think you are willing to understand anything.

Well 2 attribute points is way more valueable then 25% resistance in one specific elemental type, however that just my preference.

That makes weather the storm still not worth it, -15% block simply means I won't be using a shield and -10% armour is actually a hefty penalty since it will also increase the opponents chances to hit you.

Basicly each talent should be measured against having 2 extra attribute points and as that stands over 85% of talents already fail that measurement. Some because they are plain bad, some because while they are decent having 2 attribute points is just way better and then there's the tier 1 talents that are worth more then 2 attribute points and they form the staples of the builds.

With kind regards,

Rashar.

This was already addressed two days ago:


http://www.larian.com/forums/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=546961

I want to; I want to understand an objective singleplayer game balance system that's for everyone.

Go learn how to read english...

1. I never said I hated games, it is you that is making a stupid assumation about something you have no basis for.
(Hell I have most likely been playing game since your were born...)

2. I never said I didn't care for challenges, which is yet again, another asuumation that you are making.

Apparently so - I thought we were talking about the balance of the outcome of choices in a general sense (either mechanical, the progression of story, etc).

If you are talking about pure mechanical balance, then I absolutely, vehemently disagree that it is necessary, or even relevant at all, to single player games. If two mechanical decisions have the same outcome - then there is no choice.

If all choices are equal, then that is the same (functionally) as saying that there is a "right" way to play the game. If that is true then playing the game is no different then "playing" a book where you click to turn the pages rather than to make real decisions about gameplay.

My example with the "imbalance" of Cyseal was to indicate the enjoyment that some people (like me) receive from not playing a game the way it was intended - which should still be a valid method of enjoying the game.

To pointlessly illustrate with intentionally narrow examples:
Example 1:
a) Choose to exclusively use found or dropped items
b) Choose to exclusively use your own crafted items
If choices a) and b) are balanced, either exactly or within what I have seen to be generally regarded as the acceptable range of values, then there is no point in choosing between a) and b), making the entire choice meaningless.
[Slippery Slope] The game might as well automatically increase your stats every time you open a chest, kill an enemy, or visit the correct combination of shops - that would at least save time.

Example 2:
a) Choose to leave Cyseal proper via the NW gate
b) Choose to leave Cyseal via the beach gate
If choices a) and b) are balanced - e.g. you will find the same enemies, loot, and types of encounters, then there is no real choice between the two.
[Slippery Slope] The game might as well be a tunnel from Cyseal to the end of the area. That would at least save time.

Example 1 is a decision with regards to mechanics, while Example 2 is a decision with regards to plot progression. Either can exist in two states in a given game: balanced or unbalanced. The former negates choice, while the latter encourages it. The only "right" or "proper" state of each decision can only be determined by the individual gamer - either is perfectly valid. I obviously favour the latter state, because I am a strong proponent of free will, and would rather read a real book than click my way through a stylized, expensive graphic novel.

I understand that this may come across as a very black-and-white view of a subject that is generally considered to be greyscale. However, this is how I would explain my disappointment of Larian's direction with this game (thank the Seven they haven't patched out modding yet), and my disagreement with the views of others on balance in single player games: long-winded (Edit:) and polarizing.

Leadership is hard to AVOID, because at level 2 stopping the fish thief results in PCs getting Leadership 1 (and +5 Initiative).

What makes non-Initiative Leadership a viable player sided balance option is: 1) it's hard to avoid because it's part of the personality and trait system, 2) Leadership is not the focus of character builds and won't break saved games, 3) it would require fewer developer man "hours" than adjusting all the higher level mob entries.


Careful being the operative word.


I disagree. Overpowered does no necessarily mean there's a problem. There's an important question to be asked when thinking about balancing overpowered mechanics: can the in game effect that that mechanic tries to implement be accomplished in another way?

If so, the mechanic shouldn't be fixed because the player can choose another option. If not (if the mechanic is the ONLY way to accomplish the desire effect), then it should be fixed, because in this case the player is forced to use the overpowered mechanic.

ADDITION:

I don't necessarily agree that getting ludicrous resists is too easy, but if it is, it might fall into the latter category above and require balancing. However, if these ludicrous resists are coming from unimproved dropped gear, then the player could always use crafted gear which undermines the necessity for the balance change.

Wbat a bunch of nonsensical whining and screaming from mass market "players" who blindly stumbled upon the fact that the game dishes out elemental resistances way too easily (a clearly unbalanced feature that didnt make the final release cut) - took that as a sign of their own personal superiority - :lol: - and ego affirmation - :lolcopter: - and now someone has taken away that from them.

How dreadful.


btw, just to point out;



This only shows a drastic misunderstanding and ignorance about what kind of gameplay an RPG game is supposed to provide and be.
(you dont even mention an RPG in that tirade, just a "game")

The balance in SP RPG games does not mean that all choices produce the same result or outcome. Or give same amounts of XP for that matter. It only means that all options you have should be similarly viable.

Not the same. Not producing exact same results.

You only jumped to that initial completely wrong assumption because of fear logic and denial of a unbalanced feature being so easily achievable (while its still easily achivable even like this, for extra laughs), and then get your whole logic distorted because of it.

And its not like its a new issue. The same ignorant, misguided, incorrect and laughably wrong assumption have been repeated for Pillars of Eternity since its kickstarter.

..usually by people who cannot understand simple sentences.

For example - you are able to through different gates in Cysael and do different quests in somewhat different order - only because the game is balanced enough to allow it. Mate.

If it wasnt. You couldnt.


But then again all this just shows fundamental misunderstanding and ignorance about a whole genre and, generally speaking a completely different spoiled brat screaming mindset.

When you try and lecture people you might want to practice what you preach. And as friendly advice you might want to change the overall "tone" in your post(s). Personally I am not too bothered with it, however with an underlaying tone like that it makes it a lot harder to reply on your posts in an objective and structural way, especially on the internet.

Not saying I agree or disagree with your point(s) of view though, I will leave that in the middle for now.

With kind regards,

Rashar.

+1

If having a previous version is a big deal to you, you can always make use of a downloaded version for now. Since you have the game bought, it shouldn't even be a bad thing! Just a thought

What horrible advice, since you never know what might come bundled with such a version. The better choice is to rely on mods. That goes for both sides of the argument, in my opinion.

Are you... talkin to me?

And you sign your every post with your nickname? For what? So you dont forget it?
Or is it to try to give a presentation of some kind of eau of nobles?

:lol:

how pathetic and false.


Look buster, when you try to lecture people about what they should do or not do and what fucking tone you like or not, you could at least, very least try not to be laughable before that.
While also being mindful that the person you are supposedly replying to with your incoherent personal "opinions" and "feelings" doesnt really give a damn about what you want, you clown.

got that?

Additionally, either reply to the points of the issue being discussed here or try avoiding falling on your face that bad in the attempt to avoid addressing actual issue by defaulting to personal attacks.

That just doesnt end well.

Hmm, I kinda feel that I could just copy paste my older post again. However since you sadly missed the point the first time, I will leave it at this.

Since the topic got kinda carried away (Which is my fault aswell) here is a link to page 4 for reference.

http://www.larian.com/forums/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=547817&page=4

With kind regards,

Rashar.

cognitive functions arent your forte, obviously so ill let this slide. but dont address me ever again.


btw, we are still on the same page.

Another one for the ignore list.

I have put forth a constructive argument, and Hiver apparently wishes to refute it with a fallacious, albeit impassioned attempt at an argument. Against my better judgement:



Relevance? A single-player game is a single-player game.



Actually, truly balanced choices require the same or similar outcome, or else one outcome would be more viable than another, and be the better, "overpowered" option.



The fact that you have defeated a straw man does not contribute to your argument.



See the refutation above your straw man.



Ad hominem attacks are not an argument.



More irrelevant ad hominem.



Ad hominem.



Petitio principii. You assume your conclusion, "Cyseal is balanced," and then try to prove it with your evidence, that "You have a choice in quest order." Which, by the way, is evidence that contradicts your conclusion.



... Finishing off with more ad hominem.

And, perhaps the greatest fallacy you have committed is that your argument is a massive ignoratio elenchi - you have missed the entire point of my post: that balance is not necessary in a single player game.


Now, if you like balance, that is fine - however you wish to play your single-player games is totally valid. However, I shall continue to support my ability to choose in my games. It's a shame that Larian is removing it from the vanilla game, though.

Please note that I am not trying to belittle you or your argument... I am merely informing you that it neither strong nor cohesive. Try sticking more to your point, and pay more attention to what the argument is about instead of making ad hominem attacks and constructing straw men. If you need help constructing an argument, I would suggest starting your research here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argumentation

As an aside, you may wish to calm your passionate attempts at rhetoric slightly - while Rashar and I certainly have thicker skin than the general populace, there are others who may find your manner offensive and rude.

No, you are wrong here. All options SHOULD be VIABLE not similarly viable, just viable.

But it seems to me you are only talking about combat here because talking your way or sneaking past all enemies is not possible in this game. In fact how many RPGs have a non aggressive path through the game as a viable way to finish it?

You don't need 120% resistance to everything to beat the game but it was an option that was open for those people who WISH to have that.

Similarly viable is the right term i feel. It does not mean the same.

I am talking about the gameplay of this game in this instance, which consists of combat and dialogue options with which you can solve, finish or sidestep some parts of the quests, mostly some combat encounters.

120% resistances is an option which is STILL THERE for the people who wish to have it. The only difference is that it is no so easily achievable anymore.
Which is correct for an RPG and this specific game - seeing how elemental damage and effects play such a big role in its gameplay.




You dont start the reply by making baseless, fallacious claims about your own righteousness and my facetiousness - without proving a single point of it.

Thats just an empty declaratory statement that is completely worthless.

Well, except proving that you dont have a better judgement but instead just imagination in which everything you say or think is somehow automatically right.

What you have put forward is not a constructive argument (just because you say so) but a jumble of misunderstandings and ignorance that lead to completely wrong and incorrect conclusions.



And thus we end the discussion before it even started.
Because you just proved me right when i said you are laughably ignorant.

But because you are so arrogant based on arguments from ignorance ill give you a complete makeover.



No, one outcome would be DIFFERENT then the other, which is the core of the RPG gameplay.

For the player they should be similarly viable, or doable depending on the differences in character builds but each should lead to somewhat different outcomes - in general - for an RPG to play like one.

And infact, when your choices are "similar" and there is no clear one single option that is extremely better then the others - is when the player really has the choice with meaningful consequences. Which also have to be appropriately different, although similar (generally, to an extent), for the choice to even matter.

So, yes, as you just said yourself - balanced gameplay is what creates RPG gameplay. balance in choices, balance in consequences. Which have to work together and make sense.

Mate.




It wasnt meant as a strawman as i didnt particularly claim you have said that. It was an addition to the issue. One particular angle to it all that often gets mentioned in talks about this general issue.




This doesnt have anything to do with the part you imagined was a strawman so your answer is completely ludicrous and nonsensical.

:lol:



Truth is not an ad hominem.




How the flying duck is mentioning Pillars of Eternity an ad hominem?

:lol:

wtf?


Maybe you havent followed, but the lead designer Josh Sawyer is waging a one man war on balancing the RPG, and his ideas and explanations have been met with a lot of complete, utter idiocy and cretinism, especially on the rpg.codex and its PoE thread, where different less intelligent posters are screaming how Josh wants to make everything "THE SAME" and thus ruin the differences in RPG gameplay - for months now.





Truth.



I do not assume anything since ive played through Cysael about 30 times so far.

And i am using your own words as a part of the "evidence" - since it was you claiming that being able to take somewhat different path through the Cysael content is what makes it good for you...



- if you remember?

Its only a few posts back, mate.


And just claiming : "Which, by the way, is evidence that contradicts your conclusion." (without providing any argument why that might be so)

Is just an empty declaratory statement that is laughable in the context since you are refuting your own words.

haha.




... Finishing off with more ad hominem.[/quote]
Truth.

Which youve just proved several times over.

The ones that are screaming the most about this small balance fix are precisely that kind of people. Self entitled mass market brats that dont have a single functioning synapse in their heads except those that seek and want more content! more awesome powahs! more ego massage! more, more,more!

Like some rabid ... hmm... zombies.

ohhh... that what Romero meant with all that "braiiinnzz,... braiiiinzzz!" consumer stuff.

things you learn every day, eh mate?


Right, because you say so.

At the end of your whole laughably incorrect post.


And you think that just repeating the same incoherent, nonsensical declaratory statements that only reveals how ignorant you are - will work if you repeat them more times?




Larian is doing no such thing. Infact, with this little fix they have increased the options and choices in the game since they atleast somewhat lowered or removed a single overpowered unbalanced build.




:crocodile smile:



No?

Really?

wow, your such a nice dear, you and rashar. Informing me... so nice.

:lol:


Maybe you two could hold hands while prancing around forums and telling other people how rude they are and "informing" everyone about this or that instead of replying to actual argument.

Im afraid it is you who needs help. Several years of psychotherapy by the looks of it. Also, i would suggest looking over the term "psychological projection" mate.

I see youre fond of dictionaries.
Well, even an aspergers can serve some good if understanding of terms comes together with their copy-pasting.

Pot. Kettle. Black.

I have to say it. I just have to.

Deus Ex.

Age of Decadence.

That one actually has four different diplomatic paths through the game.
Of course, diplomatic does not need to mean non agressive or non violent at all.


Its a completely another pair of shoes that most mass market RPGs devolved into something barely more then action games, with some superficial RPG features sprinkled over just for show, in most cases.

Please, be so kind to leave my name out of your posts if it is mentioned by others. When I address you, you can give me all the hell you want. However when it is mentioned by a 3rd party it is not of my own doing. So please try and understand that.

With kind regards,

Rashar.

Was i claiming it was of your own doing? How about you complain to the third person or a party that mentioned you instead?



..

Anway, on balance in RPGs.

Its a pretty worn out subject, especially for me, so i wont write much but i would like to point out the correct view of the matter.

For example; in Age of Decadence, or in Original Sin, we have different character builds. They all work differently, more or less, although in OS you can mix and match more then in AoD.

Yet - because they are balanced - they are all viable, even if they are causing more or less different results.

In AoD the results are much more different then in OS - because the gameplay is designed differently. (the game is much less focused on combat gameplay and provides entire different paths through the game based on your C&C)

Yet, all of the builds in both games are viable and with all of them you can finish and "win" the game, even though they are mechanically different and produce different results.

Skills are different, weapons are different, functioning in the gameplay is different.

Therefore - Balance does not mean "making everything the same" - when we are talking about RPGs.

Which should be first grade curriculum in the RPG school. Old school and new school.

I direct my complaint towards you, because you mentioned me in a negative way. There was no reason for you to bring me back up in your posts, yet you have chosen to do so, hence why I kindly ask you to refrain from doing that.

So I complain directly to the source of my/the problem.

With kind regards,

Rashar.

There was a reason and it was that someone else mentioned you while talking to me, so complain to them. If i replied to that and mentioned you in a negative way i had a reason for doing so. Request refused.

No further claims of warranty will be accepted. Get back on topic.

It has been said that the game is a mess. Unfortunately I have to agree.
I had great expectations for this game, but what a gigantic disappointment it has turned out for me.

I very much doubt I will be buying anything else from LS.

Well this exploded over the weekend unexpectedly. Short of some common trolling and crap flinging I am surprised by all the well reasoned argument going on here. I honestly expected a page of being called a noob and suxor with maybe a response or two hehe.

This discussion about min/max'ers and "true" rpg'ers who want the immersion is ridiculous. First, they are not mutually exclusive and second, summarizing the difficulty / mechanics issue by this debate makes we wonder if you understand what you are talking about, and are not just whining for the sake of it.

To me, immersion includes difficulty. If i can roflstomp my way through a game where i'm supposed to fight those mega-super-evil world threatening badasses, and save the world by mashing a fucking joystick, i don't feel immersed. But to you this may be different, i get it. Just don't assume i'm some XBOC live teenager or wow official forum crybaby because i ask for more difficulty.

The game gets too easy from once you leave Cyseal, period. It has nothing to do with resistances or broken mechanics like leech and zombie.

I did my first playthrough on hard, without any prior research, no wiki or forum support. Took the 2 classes that looked the most fun, a bit about complementarity: warrior+mage. Started with my precious and anaconda and other ish... i didn't bother to change the attribute/ability points either as i planned on just testing the combo... well you get the point. Took Madora and Jahan at level 7 iirc. Had done the north / west beach and orcs + start of black cove before. Hardest part of the game tbh.

S&B warrior + pyro/geo mage as main, madora full 2h + jahan hydro/aero for support. I didn't know what i was doing so i ended up wasting points trying to build a paladin, putting aero with no int on madora, and all kind of mistakes a beginner makes. I never _tried_ to min/max. I wasn't looking up cookie cutter specs, ideal rgoup compositions and others. I just had my good sense and admittedly a good dose of RPG experience and built my characters how i felt would be the most optimal for their respective class/build.

I didn't use crafting except for weapon sharpening and skull enchant simply because i generally cba with it in every game. Did go for rubies very late game on one char to get past lava next to boreas. I didn't use lone wolf or leech or zombie or w/e. Built some BD and WP, weapon talents for melee, elem skills for mages and some utility like char and bartering + leadership. I only used glass cannon on my pyro/geo lategame just because i wanted to test it out and i didn't know what to do with my talent point. I ended up with a mage with less than 300HP at level 16-17 before figuring he would probably need some constitution. And still, i found it OP, but that's debatable I guess.

I ended up with WAY to powerful characters without even trying. I didn't min max or whatever. I just played the game the way it was offered to me, without any backup. Simply by taking advantage of the terrain with my geo/pyro build, encercling (is that a word?) ennemies, using teleport/feathers to feed madora, healing with jahan and tanking with my main, i had no problems. This is just basic understanding of the game, nothing that exceptional that they should make a hardcore mode just for me.

The game never posed a problem, at least in combat. I was challenging at times before leaving cyseal. Aftewards, not so much... chars could die, even alot during certain fights, but never did i get the feeling it was an uphill battle. And the very last portion of the game (HE, TotD and final fights) was an utter JOKE to anyone who has a functional brain (haven't tested it out since the patch, getting there on my 2nd pt).

For a game in hard mode, this is dissapointing. Whether you think an RPG should be about difficulty or immersion is irrelevant, a game SHOULD pose a challenge when you put it on hard. This does not affect your experience as you can play in normal. And honestly, it should have immersion PLUS difficulty for those who wish. But difficulty will always be subjective - the only constant is everyone gets gratification out of "beating" a game. But only if they had a challenge in the first place, or at least i hope so?

If i can "break" the game by following its rules and not trying anything cheesy, it means the game is broken, not my way of playing. Are we supposed to gimp ourselves to make the game more enjoyable? Should i dig up 100 pages of forum posts to find out what i can and cannot do before i even start a game?

That takes away my immersion


About the resistances / leech / zombie complaints: we're not talking about a "get the golden chocobo to get knights of the round table with hidden character vincent and mimic materia" cheesing the game. We're talking about "hey what does that do?" "okay my character cannot die anymore, this is op". So really it's the same issue, you can just run into them by testing and end up with OP chars. That's shitty balancing, that's it. Balancing is not only a PVP concept for MMO's, i get your point about the forums etc, but even for solo games it should be about posing a reasonable challenge to your audience - this is a game after all - and allowing us to de/increase the challenge based on personal preference allows us to not impact eachother's experience.

And frankly, if you need those tactics to beat the game in normal mode, i don't know what's wrong with you.

My opinion is that the main problem in combat is the AI. It is so fucking predictable and stupid it poses no challenge whatsoever.
- In a bad spot? Summon a few creatures and mobs forget about you for 1 or 2 rounds.
- Got 3 on 4 chars below 20% HP? No problem, they'll attack the one tank that has 100% anyway because he's closer.
- There's poison all below/around you? I could light it.. but no wait i think this a good moment to buff my party.
- Or simply run back & forth a few times without doin anything and end up with no action points (am i the only one that noticed this?)

It's a fact that the way the game is built, it's hard to let you have the epic feeling of becoming powerful over levels and adding cool skills and keeping the game challenging, because yes - meteor will instakill most of the mobs caught in the AOE and get you a free win - but what struck me is that the ennemies don't seem to have the same "arsenal" at their disposal when facing you.

Imagine casters attacking your 2 ranged characters at start of the fight with boulder bash + fireball? Imagine rogues porting behind you and stunning you? Mages going for rain then stunning your whole party during the same turn with a bolt? Rangers that actually mute your healer when your melee are low health, etc?

TL;DR
- immersion and difficulty are not mutually exclusive
- beating a game in the hardest difficulty mode without any effort is not acceptable.
- this game is (was?) too simple and no amount of nerfing to abilities will change that. It's the AI that needs improving.
- I type a lot.

WDYT?

There was no time for a proper harder mod.

Ai is actually fine and very diverse (although it could be even better but there was no time) - but what it cannot do is deal with several big unbalances, like overabundance of equipment and items and potions and other such things.

I'd agree with this conclusion about the AI. The AI will noticeably not take elementals into account, I had one fight in particular where my fire elemental summon was getting free heals off the AI attacking with two fire skeletons. I never saw it intentionally use an elemental combo, either, though playing on normal it probably wouldn't be expected to go too all out.

DON'T NURF ANYTHING, JUST BUFF!
Give the AI the most powerful talents and skills like:

- 6 leadership and 28 AP
- crafted weapons with 5 CR/BS with all the goodies( speed, strength, dex etc.)
- at least 24 in main stat
- prepatched weather of storms, leech, bully, zombie, Walk it Off and all that good talents
- duelists with 5 sneaking, backstabbing and guerrilla
- fighters with nullify resistances and flurry
- rangers with unlimited special arrows
- mages with Soulsap, Death Punch, Oath Of Desecration and so on...
- ignore summons, double see range and whatever you can suggest

Call it insane difficulty and we are ready to go for another play-trough.

EDIT: Let them focus the weakest of your characters, one by one.


PS: And people, please, calm down! This is one of the best RPG in the last 10 years we can count on one hand fingers, don't force LS to make unwanted decisions. Indeed the elemental resistance nurf decreases the replayability of the game but if you feel screwed you can always choose easy difficulty. I'm on my 2nd play-trough since p.1.0.132.0 (last 7 are on hard difficulty only with reload only on full wiped party) and I can assure you it's more difficult only in the first few levels.

Xiery

No one is forcing Larian to do anything, they are listening to the loud minority, making changes based on their whinging and fucking the game up for everyone else.... THEIR CHOICE.

This whole development has been a fiasco, it's just been one bullshit move after another.

Larian have gained reputation with the casual gamers who know nothing about games in general, but they've lost the loyalty from a lot of their long time customers, but that doesn't matter 'cos they're making moolah.

Another respected dev house in the toilet.

This is bound to happen in a game where half of abilities are damage and CC and high INT decreases cooldowns until you can spam any spell.

I don't know why Larian implements nerfs that don't even make the game harder. But it's even more puzzling that people are complaining about them. Does anyone here seriously find the game challenging?

My first (and probably last) playthrough was on Hard. I didn't pick any OP talents like Leech or GC. I didn't care about resistances at all. I even made some (minor) mistakes in character development early and still I couldn't find a single hard fight after hitting level 6.

First few fights may be demanding but once you get Teleport -> Boulder Bash -> Fireball -> Dust Devil routine going nothing can even touch you.

Exactly my point, prodigy. And it feels good to hear someone put it in the same words.

Here's some interesting read about game balance in an single player, classic rpg, just to add up to my previous post: http://kotaku.com/how-to-balance-an-rpg-1625516832

And here's a snippet that illustrates exactly what i meant, but it's way better put than i ever could: . It's written by some guy from pillars of eternity, and follows a buzzstory apparently, but i don't know the details of it.

Ideally, each type of character build has its own strengths and weaknesses throughout the game's content, but ultimately ALL character builds should feel viable in different ways. No player wants to spend 40 hours working toward a dead-end build. Similarly, few players want to accidentally discover that their fundamental character concept is an unspoken "easy mode" through the game.

That last sentence doesn't describe exactly what happened to me (i supposedly did not end with an OP build like leech/cbk or 100%+ resistances) but that's how i felt - i ended up with way too powerful chars without trying to explicitly, but because the game was too easy, not because i made OP chars. And this shouldn't happen, at least not in hard mode, because this is the REASON we put it in hard mode in the first place - to have it hard. Sounds logic, no?

To the trolls : do you realize your normal mode today is really an easy mode of 10+ years ago? I'm wondering if the vocals on the forums aren't just pissed to realize they are having a hard time in a mode other people consider easy, calling us the special snowflakes while they want everything lowered to their own, low levels... this game is not hard, even WITHOUT the OP abilities.

Try to play a fucking mainstream game from 10 or 20 years ago (like super mario bros 2) now and realize the insane difficulty of it compared to AA titles now (or even compared to D:OS).

And this WAS an all public, mainstream game, that we used to play and finish as 6 year old kids.

What's wrong with you people?

Edit: i just realized Hiver was speaking about the same PoE discussion in his post above. PSo sorry for the redundancy but this illustrates the balance / difficulty issue well.

Yes. And i was also talking about a Hard mode of the game and explained why it isnt really hard.

I actually addressed that some time ago in this thread... or tried to.

http://www.larian.com/forums/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Main=40240&Number=496196#Post496196

It ended up quite "funny", so i just gave up, considering i have said what i wanted and inanity of where it went.


That "some guy" from PoE is the lead designer Josh Sawyer. Lead designer of the "Fallout" New Vegas spinoff too, for example. He was also the lead on the cancelled Van Buren project in Black isle.

He is a... a bit known in some circles, shall we say.

I'd advice to return to that habit If this isn't just spur-of-the-moment-frustrated rant, I find it weird a change of a resistance cap litterally breaks the game for you. You must play this game so much differently than I do.

I have to agree. I've never played a game where I was burned more, splashed with more poison, frozen more, paralyzed more, etc. than this game. It's a major part of the combat mechanic. Making yourself immune to it all ... would be like playing another game altogether. Really pointless. So you take some damage from fire ... DEAL WITH IT like you are supposed to! Coming here crying about it is just pathetic.

You can STILL make yourself immune and heal from specific element. ffs.

Sounds more like people who have issues with the patch have issues with Steam auto-updating and should contact Steam and complain.

Wow. There are a lot of angry nerdragers out there right now. I'm enjoying a game that doesn't have a bunch of quest marker exclamation points all over the place telling me where to go. It has an isometric type camera view, all sorts of rpg mechanics, ways to do quests without always fighting, solid graphics for the type of game it is, a solid price, and yet still people whine. I'm looking at what this game is trying to do and I like it. It's not perfect, but I haven't played a perfect game yet, no matter how good some of them were.

Are the complaints really nerdrage?

Isn't it just a case of getting to know the rules (an enjoyable endevour for most rpg players) working your way through the game then realising that they've gone and moved the goalposts?

That's what angers me. I don't give a shit if the game is easy or difficult, just leave the godammned rules alone and let me play my game without screwing me over halfway through and forcing me to restart (which at this point is getting a bit annoying considering all the changes since release.

As for their continuous efforts to 'balance' the game.. IT'S NOT AN MMO! Balance wasn't an issue in the past, why is it now? and why is it such an issue that changes to it are allowed to break the game?

Balance was an issue in beta and was always being tweaked. They only released the first act to us, the rest of the game wasn't play tested enough, so that is why you have what you have. I'd use a save game editor and back out some things then that one doesn't like and put points elsewhere, even though from the latest hot fix a lot of the tactics are still possible, just not the extreme cheese.

I thought you were going to say is after we started playing, we realized we had to move the goalposts back further.

What happens to the group that would love a classic game with a challenge and one isn't to be found on the Hard Difficulty setting?

I love the changes, please don't listen to the whiners. People are complaining because they can't be flat out invincible, LMAO. "Single player" game or not, no one wants a game that cheesy. I want to feel like I'm playing a legitimate game. The ability to be invincible via 1 turn cooldown invisibility is still a glaring issue, however. I currently have to ban myself from using the spell to make the game feel legitimate, I shouldn't have to do that.

The whole mechanic involving lower cooldowns for spells based on intelligence needs to be changed. Tweak the cooldowns but remove this feature please. Str and Dex skills don't get reduced cooldowns, and it's not like Int characters have any of the restrictions they usually have, like mana or spells per day, so why do only they get this benefit again?

The overall game engine and concept are GREAT. This is a good game that will be great with reasonable balance changes.

I'd argue that several posters should cut down on the [Intimidate] dialog choices around here. Making an effort to work on their Charisma points might be a good idea also.

What Larian should have done (and still can do it, iirc) is leave the last build version of the game as a "beta patch" in steam (I am not sure if this can also be done for GOG & others). That way, those who are unsatisfied with the recent changes can revert to the last patch and finish their game without needing to restart due to their style of playing the game not being viable. Forcing some of the changes on the player (like they did with the resistances) and not providing some alternative, is what (imo) is causing some (or most) of the outrage.

You know what I'm sure modern age developers miss?
Not everyone having access to the internet.

Despite what you may or may not want, or enjoy, the logical and irrefutable facts are thus:

1) The game belongs to Larian. This means they can alter or change any part of the game as they see fit. If you don't like it, please seek life elsewhere without complaining and moaning ad nauseam.

2) All games, whether they be multi player or single player, require balance. If you are using the false argument that due to being a single player game it doesn't require balance, try starting anew in ANY game, cheat/mod yourself to invulnerable-one-hit-kill god mode, and play the entire game from start to finish. See how far you get with no challenge or restrictions on your power curve. Balance is an integral and essential part of any game.

3) Before you complain about alterations to the game or rule-set that don't suit you for one reason or another, consider the corollary: you get fixes and alterations to the game or rule set that DO suit you. You don't stand on a soap box and complain ad nauseam then, do you? Why not? Alterations that suit you are likely to not suit another group.

In this specific instance, players can still have resistances in excess of 100%, for limited periods of time. Being mostly resistant to specific damage types the majority of the time, and outright immune to those types on demand for short periods of time, sounds reasonable, does it not?

It might restrict a single over-used and over-efficient play style, however the system change itself expands the overall tactical game play by increasing the number of decisions and sacrifices that need to be made during battle.

Instead of (easily) gearing immunity to elemental damage, you now balance gear decisions knowing that 200% fire resistance is a waste.
Instead of face-rolling elemental encounters due to immunity, you now need to make decisions as to when to immunize against what elemental damage. Timing and tactics are more involved when you have to decide on state changes, as opposed to always being in a specific state.

TLDR :
1) The changes made have expanded the game and complexity, not made it smaller and simpler.
2) Before you post, consider the overall changes to the game as a whole : Did the change actually reduce the scope, or only seem to have reduced the scope? In this specific case, the tactical game play has actually been expanded.

I don't think that sort of remark really enhances the point your making, nor does it encourage intelligent debate.

There's been a bit too much reference to "whiners" and what-not in this topic and I doubt if any opinions have changed much as a result.

You're correct of course.

I picked up the thread this afternoon, and started at page 1. After going through 3 pages of essentially the same false arguments and complaining, I wasn't in the most balanced of moods when I posted.

I appreciate you calling me out on that, and thank you for it, editing the post to be less self indulgent

YOU CAN STILL HAVE ELEMENTAL RESISTANCES OVER 100.



THE ONLY THING THAT CHANGED IS HOW EASY IS TO GET THEM. NOW YOU HAVE TO USE A SPELL OR A POTION TO GO OVER THE SOFT CAP IMPOSED ON GEAR.




Neither does this post of yours.

Cheers, and apologies if I was a bit of a grump.

That gave me a small chuckle. Thanks for that.

Blaze I am finding this one hard to balance as I mod the difficulty. I don't want nearly any spell less Magnus to have only a 1 turn cooldown, to make a skill spam-able. So the basic one hitters (Bolt/Flare and the like) in each elemental, how do you get that for the entire game as your Int continues to grow? So what I have to do is pick something like Int 12 is the last int level where the basic one hitters per elemental is 2 Turns to cooldown, but 13+ it goes back to one. But at the beginning then for these skills with Int 8 these are 5-6 turn cooldowns, which is a little long at that point. I go with it that way, makes the game harder, but in general this mechanic makes it hard to balance the game throughout.

These arguments can be used by the other side, of which I consider myself one. So....

First, note that it was "complaining and moaning ad nauseam" that seems to have compelled the resistance changes in the first place. Despite "seek life elsewhere" being the weakest possible form of "argumentation" in the history of reason, we could say the same thing to those who complained about impenetrable resists.

Second, "before you complain about [mechanics in] the game or rule-set that don't suit you for one reason or another, consider the corollary: you get fixes......".

You get the point.


Fortunately, not all of your argument is hypocritical. You bring up something that I don't remember being brought up previously:


That is sound advice.



With that out of the way, I consider myself on the "side" of "single player games don't require balance." I no longer consider this position tenable as it is stated in that quotation.

Single player games require balance. This has been well argued by people in this thread. So with that in mind, let me modify the position: "single player games don't require player sided balance changes."

And since most of the balance changes suggested on this forum seem player sided (as opposed to enemy/world sided changes), we are arguing against those potential changes.

Is that less controversial?

Exactly, the mechanic is hard to balance as is, that's why it needs to go away. Each spells should have a reasonable cooldown and it should not change with Int. The basic single target bolt spells should have a 1 turn cooldown from the start.

Ive played hundreds of games in my lifetime. Most of them were patched, most often more than once, most often nerfing an overlooked OP strategy inside the game mechanics. If someone knows paradox games (not RPG) he knows what I mean.

Already at the beginning of these discussions many years ago I found the utterly useless. For 3 very simple reasons:
1) They change nothing
2) They are completely predictable
3) Varied players normally donï½´t have any problems dealing with specific strategy cuts or balance adjustments, only the 1 World Wonder players do. As these normally donï½´t cointribute to balance and game content anyway, let them brag and move on

If I dislike a game or a game patch, I shelve the game. If that happens predictably I shelve the company for my buys, case closed.

And btw - I had a few days ago started a second campaign with the explicite target to aim for 100% immunities. But as I had learned crowd control in the meantime (RPGs are new for me) I did not even notice the soft cap before hitting the boards as I my characters really rarely get hit past the Luculla forest.

Regards,
Thorsten