Larian Studios Forums Divinity: Original Sin 2 Divinity - Original Sin 2 - General AP, Movement and Weapon Balance

In D:OS 2, the plan is that characters will generally only get 3-4 AP per turn, and generally speaking, every action will use 1 AP. I was thinking about that, and wondering what it meant in terms of weapon balance.

In D:0S 1, you have your 2-handed weapons, costing 4 AP to attack with, single-handed weapons which cost 3 AP to attack with, Crossbows, which cost 5/6 AP to attack with, and bows which cost 4 AP to attack with.

The powerful weapons cost more AP to attack with, but did more damage. In D:OS 2, with the AP cost the same, I thought: "what reason would there be to pick a one-handed weapon over a 2-handed weapon?"

The answer came quickly. In D:OS 2, the movement calculation will be changed, probably to something like 1 AP lets you move 5-7 meters with Speed 5. Armor in D:OS 1 affects your Movement, so in D:OS 2, weapons should now also affect your movement.

• Two-Handed weapons and Crossbows should give a movement penalty.
• One-Handed weapons and bows give neither a movement penalty nor a bonus. (Does not stack when dual-wielded.)
• Daggers give a movement bonus. (Does not stack when dual-wielded.)

There, now there's a clear trade-off for using different weapon types, and it's one that's fairly intuitive as well. The bigger the weapon, the slower you can move with it.

Thoughts?

I guess that's one possible way of dealing with things and it does make some sense, though I think I prefer the higher AP costs of using more cumbersome weapons.

To answer the question about why would one pick a one-handed weapon, the extra defence and potential enchantments/whatever of a shield would make it worthwhile, I guess the choice being whether the character in question has a primarily offensive or defensive role. Or something.

Why is this formula being changed? I felt the system for AP in D:OS worked great. Did anyone have a complaint about this?

This feels like a step backwards.

From my understanding of all of the streams that they had, is that the system with many APs was particularly hard to balance and unwieldy for new users of the system. They wanted to go with something more simplified, where single moves would be the determining factor on which you would either win or lose a battle, rather than say, attacking 4-5 times a round.

I'm not really fond of the change myself. I think it has the potential to create a whole bunch of imbalances. But Larian's apparently going to try the reduced AP thing anyway because it will "simplify" things.

As such, they can't really have different AP costs for different weapon types (although one thing I heard them float around for the Rogue is that they could do 2 attacks for 1 AP).

I think it was changed because it was pretty easy to get a lot of available AP per turn while at the same time reducing a lot the cost of actions, leading to some serious imbalances when your most powerful skills would only have at worst 2 turns of CD and cost relatively nothing.
It reached a pretty stupid point where a backstab rogue could literally annihilate half the opposing army in one turn and still be able to sneak at the end... I dread to think of what could be done in DOS1 Classic with both Lone Wolf AND Glass Canon ( I didn't go the Glass Canon way mostly because I felt I already had too many spare AP per turn ).

Back to OP, I'd say it may be a solution. On the other hand, everything could also still cost 1 ap but maluses / bonuses could come from other sources :
Less hit chance with 2handed or malus to defense.
More hit chance / inherent backstab capabilities with Daggers.
No close quarter attacks with Bows.
Inherent Attack of Opportunities with Spears.
Better chance to crit with only one single-handed weapon.
Etc.

I feel movement should overall be left alone, as it never is very fun when it takes forever reaching your goal only for it to have already been killed by the ranged characters. More diverse maluses and bonuses depending on the weapons/playstyle you chose could go a long way in providing a fun and somehow more customised experience to the players. It's also way harder to balance, but heh, nothing is easy.

I think a better solution would have been just keeping the AP range the same, but more in check and don't make increasing AP part of the leveling process.

Fair point about a malus to movement not being fun. On my current playthrough I've got a tanky character and he moves at the speed of a dead giraffe and hits half as hard.

But I'd also avoid a malus to chance to hit, that's also not very fun at all and could seriously discourage using that kind of weapon style at all.

I hope the leave it alone. Playing ee I like the way the ap costs are.. Really don't like the idea of it being changed

Fair point too about chance to hit.
If anything and to be honest I'd rather never deal with chances to hit / RNG in a tactical game - sure, chance IS a part of tactics by being a constant menace, but I'd rather leave it to Critical strikes or Block. 3 "failed" Criticals still result in actual hits and you don't feel as if your turn was wasted because you took a chance to deal MORE damage rather than taking a chance to deal ANY damage at all.

But I digress !

Maybe based on the "weight" of the weapon, there could be an inverse relation between damage and crit multipliers.
Two handed high damage but low crit multiplier and Daggers with low, low damage but very high crit multiplier ( 100% chance to crit from behind AKA Backstab ). Single-handed weapon/no shields would be the median.
Adding a shield may remove any crit chance to bring the obvious defensives bonuses like armor and block chances.

Based on the TYPE of weapon then, additionnal effects could apply - Spear for longer reach and maybe act just in real life as anti-charge, Blackjacks may stun, axe may cripple, maces may lower armor, swords may make the target bleed, combat staves if any may knockback, whips may pullforward or knockdown ...

So many possibilities ranging from "classic" to "original"... Yeah, I think 1ap per action regardless of the weapon type could work as long as each of them bring something special to the table making them balanced =)

Or, because they are still making the game, they could simply change two handed weapon attacks to a 2ap action. Made for dealing large swaths of damage with high criticals.

Yet that would step on the heels of special moves to an extent I guess...

As for their difference simple.

One hand with Shield = Full defense
Dual Wielding = Balance
Two handed = Full Offense

So lets just assume they stick to 1ap

Think about it. "All" actions take one AP now. So dual wielding does as well, meaning putting points into it is useless for diminishing AP penalties, except as a sort of hybrid of the system.

As for making One Hand with a Shield worth it. Expand what it can block. Give it a chance to mitigate some magical damage and attacks.

Suddenly the Shield becomes extremely useful.

---

I don't actually dislike the reduced AP system. It just means it has a different idea of an action economy AND it makes true hybrid classes actually viable.

Sure you COULD make real hybrids in Divinity 1, but because you were split two ways the best method is really just to have a main skill and a minor one. Going 50/50 made you extremely subpar.

@DrKoin: If you do not play it already, you should play Age Of decadence. There you have realistic combat (well, at least much more realistic than in any other turn and AP based RPG). Realistic means also that it is very hard, so only combat optimized chars have a chance to survive combat (It is possible to finish the game without combat) and even than it will be difficult when you are outnumbered (which is almost always the case).

Divinity games were never realistic and this wil not change in D:OS2. The main goal of the combat system of D:OS is to be fun and interesting (I think it is, D:OS has my favourite combat system of all RPGs.). While keeping it interesting, the best thing they can do is to make it balanced. Right now some builds are much better than others, but the game is so easy that you can beat it with almost any group. (I play on normal. In my original playthrough and now in the EE I have an archer, a warrior (madora), a mage (jahan) and a hybrid (Mage/warrior) and I am doing well.)

I like the system as ot os now and I do not know how having less AP and only 1AP per action can make it better.

Yeah. I'd prefer they tweak the existing AP system rather than throw it out.

If you're just barely out of range of an enemy and you have to take just a couple of steps to reposition yourself... Well, it shouldn't have to be a big problem.

Where did you find/hear that ?
The gold rule is: When something works, dont change it.

The combat works great. So why dumb it ( diplomatic say streamline it) down?

As long as AP number is under 20 then its ok. Number above that are diffcult to get for human brain.

However dividing all HP related numbers by 5 is a good idea. Dont understand why thousands of HP. Well maby becouse of chinesse market. Base HP of regular chinesse web browser MMO is about gazilion.
Also the HP progress is quite steep. From 100HP to 2500HP is a lot. Less HP difference also helps difficulty tuning and over leveling issue.

To me they aren't dumbing it down but rather making every single AP count.

It is actually managing to make the game a lot more strategic then the billions of AP points you had before. As well as adding leagues of balance.

The previous system isn't bad... but this new one is... kind of better when it comes to what it was trying to attempt.

So instead of moves costing random amounts of AP, instead the AP costs are tied directly to how useful they are compared to similar moves.

As well because you have less AP you have to make it all count AND you cannot simply win battles anymore by having 5 attacks to the enemies 2.

It's probably for the best, though I do think it does make subtle nuances of balance a bit harder. Simplification isn't always dumbing down, but it's a fine line. Sometimes it's fun to count out your AP and calculate the exact moves and ability combos you can make, but it's also nice to just keep the combat moving, especially with 4 people. Just as the focus on two player co-op meant big design decisions in D:OS, an an effort to let 4 people play at once and all feel involved will mean making systems as uncomplicated as they can.

Crossbows could take an AP to reload. Two-handers could have a one or two AP basic attack option. I like the idea of the 2 AP basic attack being a cone attack that can hit multiple targets, but for less damage than the single attack.

They could also have more abilities that combo movement with an attack, like battering ram. An ability where you rush to within a couple meters of an ally. An ability like teleport but causes some of elemental explosion around the person you teleport. A two-pronged battering ram. More abilities like Nether Swap. Hard part is making the AI use these abilities well.

Crossbows would really have to do a heck of a lot more damage than bows to make them more worthwhile than bows if they'll use up twice the AP. The cone idea is neat, but again, for double the AP it has to be worthwhile, so if there would be a damage penalty, only about 75-80. (Although I'm not sure why a cone attack would need a damage penalty at all if it's going to cost 2 AP. How often will you have three enemies nearly lined right up beside you together?)


--------


I hope that their idea for "Rogues Dagger-users can attack twice for 1 AP" isn't just some purely cosmetic bull. here's why:

Let's say I've got a dagger-user (Rogue) within dagger-range of two enemies. Enemy A is at very low HP. The Rogue attacks Enemy A, killing it on the first hit. There are two possibilities for what happens next:

Possibility 1: The Rogue's "second attack" will go off automatically, uselessly striking out at the empty air where Enemy A used to be standing. (i.e. Purely cosmetic bull)

Possibility 2: The Rogue can now manually use their second attack to attack Enemy B. (a REAL second attack)

-----------

If Possibility 1 is chosen, I'll be quite disappointed, as that means the "two attacks for the price of one" is just cosmetic bull. That would not be "Dagger-users can attack twice for 1 AP" at all. What it would be instead is "Daggers actually do twice the damage listed on the weapon tooltip, but with a cosmetic-only animation which shows two hits.

Since a DOS 2 Rogue can only perform the same number of attacks as everyone else, it's simply a matter of comparing the numbers between daggers and other one-handed weapons and seeing whether it's Rogues or 1H Warriors who get gypped in terms of damage.

We're already getting a slight preview of this in the EE, with the increase in AP cost of daggers from 2 to 3. That has made the single-dagger Rogue pretty much obsolete. They're still okay because Speed still boosts AP per turn. But once Speed only affects Movement in D:OS 2, what will they be good at?

---

If the daggers do more damage than the other weapons, the only reason to go 1H warrior is for shield stuff, because damage with any other weapon won't be as useful as a dagger. A Rogue will be better at a warrior's job than a warrior?

If the daggers do less damage, then the Rogue's skills will be the primary reason for making a Rogue, because why get into melee range with a fragile, inefficient warrior?

I guess perhaps Rogues in D:OS 2 will deal most of their damage from sneaking and reverse-pickpocketing bombs into enemies inventory?

Well Knives generally have two weaknesses

Because they split their attacks into two they essentially double the defense of the opponent. So if the opponent reduces damage by 20 points, they reduce the entire volley by 40 points. They have an impossible time against high defense opponents... or at least they should.

The other is that if you aren't getting a back attack, it is a wasted attack. While quite a few enemies prevent you from going there.

To balance knives just emphasize the above. Create more of a need for maneuvering with rogues.

If I am not mistaken the defense system in the EE has been changed to absorb a percentual not an abolute value of the damage, so 2 hits with a 10 damage weapon would deal the same amount as a single attack with a 20 dmg weapon.
Also 2 hits not only increases the chance to inflict your opponent a with a negative status effect, but also can cause status "combos" (chill + chill = freeze).

With only 3 AP weapon range becomes more of a factor, because getting attacked with something like a spear means that your char with a regular range weapon has to use 1/3 instead of ~1/10 of their APs to be able to retaliate.

Probably you play another game. AP are curently pretty titght related to lenght of movement.

I count every sinlge AP in curent system. Dont know why you are not able. Also in the possible new system you can have 5AP to provide 5 attacks. You arguments are trash.
--------------------------------------
Reducing number of AP in half makes it less granular. Less chance to differentiate a quick single dagger stab to two-hander swing. Originaly there was dagger 2, Single handed 3, two handed 4. Great system shows that bigger weapon attacks slower but pierce thick armor.

Enhanced edition introduced flat armor mitigation and only two weapon timings. 3AP single handed, (include dagger ! why 2AP dagger attack cant stay?) and 4 AP two-handed.
I am quite sad that we might see flat AP cost - melee attack 1AP next :-/