First of all, I'm sorry if it's hard to understand this LONG post, English is not my native tongue, but I will do my best.
I do not "discuss the validity of the initial claim", I am new to this forum, but you'll should publish this type of thread in "Divinity - Original Sin 2 - Suggestions and Comments" no ?
Maybe moderator could make a main thread listing/sorting all those suggestions/feedbacks because so many points, this thread will get messy if you try to argue about evrything at the same time.
But thanks to you, i couldn't chose wich one of the 10 previous post i should answer.
Please admin / mod, give us a "logistic thread"
Well, that's aside, it feel like people missing something, i don't know if it's sort of taboo but many problem come from the attribute system itself. I didn't read all topics, maybe i miss it.
The feeling i'm playing a different game than level/game designer, just look at the npc attibuts archetype, surely based on archetype close to those on GM mode. that creates many consequences.
How did they expect npc to have more intiative than player loyal to this new "min/max religion" if they put 20% of their points in useless attributs (ranger with INT and STR ...) instead of wits for example.
And i don't think they got legendary weapon/ring with +4 initiative, that's too much.
Sure they all get one shot before they could play.
And now they use this new virtual initiative turn order to FORCE balancing, creating some strange mechanic where ennemy CC this turn, playing after you removing CC, play before you next turn and use CC against you.
npc (noob build like my first game) vs player (optimized build after you failed to go foward in tactician mode)
I don't know if it's the only reason for this choice, and i really want to understand.
sorry dev, but i must be honest, this is the current situation, even if for me, that "min/max religion" is the worst thing in this game, i hate it.
because attribut system is bad, CONS scales bad, i'm part of people that doesn't understand why it doesn't scale with armor as well. that's make it worthless..
Why a ranger should not max STR, putting more strengh could increase the range, alowing better possition, and better scale with balistik shot. Why all magical elemental damage don't stack with INT, what if i want to make a huntsman/pyro with high magique damage on basic attack using fire embuing ?
The best part is when i learn that in this game design, shrek could make summons strong like dumbledore (sorry for the metaphore and spoiler), well shrek was right to put all in CONS, in the end dumbledore is dead.
Maybe they should first keep their promise of "full creativity", but i feel like changing this right after the release will put even more confusion in players head.
But since attributs influence all the game, they need to choseto change soon and then fix it or put half hearted fix like this virtual initiative turn order and maybe change it in the next extension or worst ... D:OS 3 if people still have faith (and i hope larian will continue to release other version of this awesome serie)
Even if it will be hard to change it now for the main story, Larian should let the choice for the gm mode, putting a real initiative turn order and let modder to change attribut bonus/scaling in gm/arena mode.
i will not give all possibilities about attribut bonus for each combat ability/style ... each one should have his on thread.
About armor, i love the current system on the paper. But because magical damage seems weaker than physical damage, i feel like dev failed to proove the viability of this system. So far i only played on tactician mode, but i expected some weakness on ennemy magic resistance, and not a 0% for water resistance on a primordial fire voidling. I got outplayed by this tatics making my mage really useless since their fire basic attack heal more than my spell, fortunately, i got bone widow with me.
I didn't take the oppotunity to play to D:OS 1, but i saw CC used RNG and ignored armor back then. Some people on other thread argues about RNG and his place in tactics. If it was D&D (like i used to played as gm with my friends) i certainly use RNG. But can't imagine myself taking my white board and trying to confirm the optimal decision (ok i abuse a bit). But still the current system feel "one way" fight, the first who destroy ennemy armor chain CC and control the pace because there so much CC instead of cleansing spell.
My opinion is to add new status :
- When you still have some physical armor, if you "absorb" a CC you get a debuff that will allow in the same turn the next CC, normally blocked, will get through the armor, damage still absorbed by the armor. (or maybe you need 2 CC blocked, the third goes through)
- same mechanics for magical armor but separatly.
- When you are CC, you get immunity to this status for some turn, that mean you couldn't get CC two turn in a row by knockdown, forcing player to find other CC status for chaining.
+ :
* more tactical, use CC before armor depletion or after ?
* alow to CC ennemy with insane armor
* a little harder to chain CC
* allow you to finally let the armor scale with CONS without making CC impossible to hit
- :
* it's a bad idea to build 4 warfare abusing ram and battle stomp
* need to both magic and physical CC for more CC capabilities
* maybe more, but since it's my idea it's hard to find
And there's still so much more, but peoples already talk about it.
