Larian Banner: Baldur's Gate Patch 9
Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Page 2 of 2 1 2
Joined: Oct 2017
Location: on earth
R
stranger
Offline
stranger
R
Joined: Oct 2017
Location: on earth
Sorry for the long post and my "bad english".

before arging about round robin is good or bad, maybe the previous system was not bad.
Just look at ennemy npc stats, you're literrally playing a differente game.
npc has weird attributs points builds and no legendary item with massive amount of initiative.
And i'm talking about regular npc, not important npc, those have twice more attribut point than player but still easily beatable using min-max because they have put 30% of their points in useless attributs.

Does that mean it's the fault of the previous system and that legimate round robin ?
maybe not, even if in the end, round robin does give more challenge to game, maybe they could be better way or hidden issu not even solved.

Then why player swear loyalty to min-max religion ? sorry for obvious question, but you do that because it's the only way to get better.

Solutions

1 ) make the npc build in the same way as player, why only npc should build theirs stats randomly ?
you can add a little bonus to simulate "item initiative bonuses".
+ :
* it will be way harder for player to play before all enemy exept if they build wits as primary attribute instead of STR/INT/FIN
* npc will gain more damage bonus from the 20% useless attributs realocated
* we could even reintroduce the old initiative system alowing player with the intention to max wits right from the beguining sacrificing damage.

- :
* still the probleme of this one way optimizing build, #FullDamageDealerOrRageQuit
* npc still have too many point in memory.
* time consumming, you need to change and checck all implemented npc stats.

2 ) in this solution the round robin could be improved to make it a bit more fair, in my opinion.
un example fight : 3 ennemy, 2 player

Turn 1 => E1 > A1 > E2 > A2 > E3 .
A2 kill E2.
A2 take down E3.
End of the turn E3 will not play et remove take down status effect

Turn 2 => E1 > A1 > E3 > A2 .
E3 play before A2.
E3 take down A2.
its like he play twice between A3 turns ... does it feels fair?

Now just try this one, we determine turn order at the beguining of the fight and it will be static for ennemy and player already in fight

Turn 1 => E1 > A1 > E2 > A2 > E3 .
A2 kill E2.
A2 take down E3.
End of the turn E3 will not play et remove take down status effect

Turn 2 => E1 > A1 > A2 > E3 .
E3 play after A2
This time killing some ennemy appear to breaking the game pace or having ally or ennemy playing virtually playing twice before the other.
If someone enter the fight after the beguining, like at turn 3 and we want to prevent to stacking new ennemy at the end of the turn while Player are killing all ennemy before them.

Turn 3 => E1 > A1 > E4 > A2 > E3 .
Initiative still only serve to determine the first turn order, pretty pointless. but for me, if you want to stick to this "virtual initiative turn order", it's much more fair.
What do you think about it ? maybe you have some ideas to improve it ?

3 ) this is for me the best choice in term of gameplay possibility, creativity, balance.
but it's a heavy change just right after the release, to be honest, i think it's i bad idea and should be done in EA : Rebalance attributs.
+ :
* npc current build could have some sense
* more possibility about build
* we could turn back to the old system rewarding player who want to play full ambush team
* better base for futur implementation

- :
* high possibility it will confuse players
* you can't find the balance suddenly like a miracle, 100% chaos during some weeks maybe months until they find a proper balance
* the bigger is the change, more people try to prevent it. because it feel like all we learn about the previous state was just a dream, we can now beguin from scratch once again ...

I saw many previous comments talking about wits, initiative or round robin balancing/removing, maybe those mechanics are perfecly fine. and maybe the initiative issu is created from a deeper problem, for me it's the lacking in use of the others attributs or the npc attributs allocation.


c'est si facile de rejette l'autre quand on veut pas assumer sa part de responsabilité.
Au final, tout cela arrive parce que tu manques de réparti.
Joined: Sep 2017
Location: Florida
journeyman
OP Offline
journeyman
Joined: Sep 2017
Location: Florida
It seems I've re opened Pandora's Box.

Joined: Jan 2011
old hand
Offline
old hand
Joined: Jan 2011
Originally Posted by BoogieMan
So they present a mechanic in game even though it's largely non functional and let you put points into it thinking it'll help when it does nothing to very little? In fact you can screw over your own people who benefit the most by acting early? Awesome.

That just blows my mind and seems very.. I dunno... Sloppy? So many other parts of the game are so nice and refined that are a pleasure to experience.. Then you have something like this blemishing it. I went through more than half the game wasting stat points..


Good news is you can quickly see what is going on and adjust, aka if you think it doesn't mean much that gives you a point to put elsewhere when the time comes and we can respec it out if we want just a little later. I have boosted the stat, along with Retribution and Perseverance a bit more, so when it is time to put a point in somewhere it is a close call between all options.

Joined: Jan 2011
old hand
Offline
old hand
Joined: Jan 2011
Originally Posted by Alexstrasza
Originally Posted by Horrorscope
That is why that isn't a good solution and that is DOS1. The issue is the fights are too determined by this solely. Here is what we got from DOS1. Load up on Init and AP. Unstoppable force. They addressed both correctly imo. That is the problem with giving too much a good thing, some can't take being restrained for the greater good afterwards.


Yeah, it's like, why even have stats at all in this game? Just delete stats and scale your attributes for you. Punish people for wanting to go first! Yay!

Sounds like fun!


Cards or the like wouldn't be the game it is, if one player was allowed multiple moves, on top of that the whole team goes first with multiple moves each. THEN... the loser team gets to go after being obliterated out of the gate. Yeah nice mechanic you have there. I'm a believer if DOS1 did this from the start, it would have never been a big question, but it's about "You gave me everything and now you take it away from me", see it all over. That said, I'm cool with a official mod/toggle for you.

Page 2 of 2 1 2

Moderated by  gbnf, Kurnster, Monodon, Stephen_Larian 

Link Copied to Clipboard
Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.7.5