Larian Studios

Fight Imbalances/Disparities

Posted By: Scrye

Fight Imbalances/Disparities - 05/08/17 05:06 AM

This is not a post on physical/magical armor on enemies.

So I ran through the alpha experience on normal difficulty using any armor upgrades I could on my balanced party (Red Prince as a sword/board fighter, Ibfan as a ranger, Loise as a cleric, and PC as primarily a dps caster). Fights were approached at equal level (at the very least).

I found that some fights were fine, and others were grossly overtuned. I'll go into specifics in a moment, but here are the general issues I consistently ran into.

Initiative: Almost every fight started with the opponent getting a full free round. This might be a bug (I hope), but usually the enemies got the entire first round to themselves. Sometimes Ibfan would come in dead last on that first round (and ONLY him), even if the other party members were standing next to him. The following round would be more normal. I can see enemies getting surprise rounds if they are actually ambushing the party, but if I'm talking to them and the fight starts, I'm not being ambushed. This free round also makes things very, very difficult when combined with other issues. It's very frustrating to just stand there and watch your party get annihilated and not being able to do a single thing.

Damage: Damage is frequently pretty high. When you have multiple sources of high damage, this kind of snowballs out of control for a player who has MUCH lower armor and health than even a single one of the enemies. Also, money is scarce, potions are uncommon (I had a very hard time finding enough potion bottles and mushrooms in particular in the first section), and resurrection scrolls are a rather limited (and expensive) source. The damage in fights is only appropriate for when death is cheap, which it is not. If you intend to make death expensive (which is fine in principle), the damage really needs to be scaled back. Having the party dying in the first or second round. . . or hell, having even one character die in the first or second round before the player has a chance to react is not suitable to this model.

AI: The way the enemy AI is currently configured, if you try to build a tank to try and strategically control the fight, you're doing it wrong. Enemy AI will frequently bypass your tank every chance they get and target one of the squishier members of your party (poor Ibfan!). Now, this could be interesting, but this would require that there be some sort of aggro-pulling mechanism that you could use on enemies for it to work as something interesting for the player. As it stands now, it's just frustrating and feels punishing if you chose a preset for a tank, and not another damage dealer.

Specific Fights

I’m going to preface this by saying I picked up and upgraded the gear whenever I could for my characters. I sold, bartered, crafted, and picked up damn near everything I could get my hands on. Spell books are very expensive -- probably too much given how you’re trying to equip four party members on the same budget. Staff of the Magi does NOT need a one-round cooldown considering how you can dual-wield wands (why the hell did I not find out about that sooner?); if you get pair of wands approaching in dps, they are strictly superior to a staff.
Anyways, I approached each of the fights at the same general level, and it wasn’t very long before every single party member had the ability to cast restoration on cooldown. My only sin here is not realizing that you could cheese your way through everything by making a pure physical damage-dealing party and burst through everything.


Griff Fight:

I attempted this fight probably 8 times at level 4 before I found out from an online source that you got more experience from giving up the lizard and could just take out the assassin that goes after him. I had some genuine success from cheesing some of the AI by positioning most of the party just outside of the ruins on the side closest to the cave and having my toughest member start the fight and run back to the party. Being able to move my party in the first round would would have been nice, but the worst offender of this fight is probably not the one you think. There is a female mage stationed on the top that is WAY over-tuned. She single-handedly almost caused a one-round TPK on a full-health party with some of the members having non-trivial amounts of magic armor. Being able to do over 80 points of damage per member for an ice hail on a party is just ludicrous at that level. I usually had at least one of the other ranged enemy marksman/woman up at this point. I’d heal up and resurrect at least one party member, and then she’d launch another attack that would take yet another party member out. And I couldn’t get close enough to her to attack. She’d launch an attack, then backpedal out of range. (How many action points per turn does she get anyways?) She’s the real reason why I gave up. Griff was a piece of cake compared to her.

Skeleton Ambush in the Woods :

Resistances out of control and a really obnoxious skeleton marksman made this fight way harder than it needed to be. Magical spells don’t do as much damage one would think, and they have too long of a cooldown when you take into account resistances. I had major problems managing the skeletal axeman because my wands were fire (I really needed money, and didn’t realize that you could run into things that were completely immune this early in the game), a bit more than half of my damaging spells were fire, and the others were always on cooldown. And then there was the marksman. The skeleton marksman did a crazy amount of damage and would target a single squishy party member and stay on them the whole time. (And how does skyshot not have a cooldown?) I got through this fight by engaging from a different angle and forcing the marksman to focus on the blind magister (I really kind of wanted to save him, but the party comes first), and using the teleport gloves to teleport the axeman around the map so that I could work on him last. Having such high (multiple!) resistances this early in the game is a bit punishing, especially since physical damage isn’t mitigated or made immune in the same way. Players who unknowingly make magic-based parties are going to be in for a very hard time, but that’s a larger, more widespread issue.

Witch in the Cave

This is the fight with the witch in the cave full of rotting corpses and blood roses. This fight is mechanically wicked, and I had to abuse the AI and positioning to get through it (Also, necrofire is awesome). Once again, she and her minions got all the turns first (And she always seemed to have 6 AP. . . why??). I had to pull back to the other side of the bottleneck leading into the cave and roast all of the zombies first, which was fine. It was the decay effects which seemed weird and abusive. She throws blood on the field, the beetles make you bleed, and then the zombies turn all the blood (which is all over the place) into cursed puddles, and then the witch bypasses any and all armor by casting a heal on you. This mechanic kind of seems broken, especially in this fight. Once I realized that a decayed heal bypassed armor (and resistances apparently), I proceeded to abuse it for my own purposes (All four of my characters have heals, so once I realized the witch had decay on her, she didn’t last very long at all.). Broken mechanics aside, if the AI of the witch and two of the beetles hadn’t stayed in the room, I would have been screwed since my ability to sustain myself through the damage of the fight was in serious jeopardy. Maybe remove the blood rain from the witch’s spell list so that players have the ability to dodge the blood puddles? That might give them a chance to actually fight in the room.

Alexander Fight

The magister damage on this fight is beyond broken. I tried this fight three times before trying any positional cheesing (ie, pre-positioning to abuse AI/leashing/range), and every single time it was a total party kill even before it got to the last enemy. It was almost a total party kill with the first spellcasting Magister’s turn. I never had a chance to act. Ever. I only got through this fight by pre-positioning my ranger and character on the side wall, the cleric at the top of the ruins, and using my fighter to trigger the fight. And then, once I managed to get a turn, using source magic to summon the void worm to distract everyone while I murdered the magisters. Then abusing the high wall and the worm’s AI (for some reason it couldn’t reach me and wouldn’t move) once all the magisters were dead. If I have to isolate the problems, it would be that A) the entire enemy force gets to act first in the first round and you don’t, and B) the spellcasting magister that casts hail/ice storm on the party is over-tuned above and beyond everyone else. That hailstorm not only stripped off all of my magic armor, and took out most of the health of my characters, but it also froze everyone in place, which meant that the enemy got two free turns, instead of just one. Player characters are nowhere near that powerful, so it isn’t the spell by itself. It’s the stats given to the enemy npcs.

Sorry for the very long document, but while there are still balance changes possible, I wanted to be thorough with what happened and reasoning. To reiterate, this is NOT primarily about the differences between physical and magical armor on enemies; this is (mostly) about the survivability of fights for a player controlling a party of four with the resources available. This isn’t a complaint about the limited resources either; this is just a comment on tuning with regards to those resources. If resurrection was a regular spell available to player characters, the cost of death wouldn’t be so high, or if higher quality equipment was easier to come by, it probably wouldn’t be quite as bad. But in many cases, I think that by reducing some of the damage, or modifying a couple of npcs in particular, the problem could be taken care of. Players shouldn’t have to rely on AI leashing or other quirks to get through fights. Some reloading is to be expected, but it’s a bit much when you consistently die in the first round before getting a chance to act.
Posted By: Sotnik

Re: Fight Imbalances/Disparities - 05/08/17 10:21 AM

Hi, Scry! A few advises and ideas:

Initiative - invest in Wits.
Damage - I have not had such hard times (in case of equal levels) due to 1-2 characters with high Wits, focus on magic armour and use of healing potions. It is also recommended to properly position everybody before the battle as well as using buffs - unless you are ambushed.

AI - you are completely fair about tanks. I wish the Opportunist talent had an additional, alternative mode interrupting enemies that try to run or attack your allies, like postures in DOS1 (where are they all BTW). Plus a taunt ability.

Posted By: smokey

Re: Fight Imbalances/Disparities - 05/08/17 02:13 PM

It seems your main crime here is having played the game fairly, without investing in any of the overpowered classes or skills or exploits to get the job done. Your party is more or less the same stock party I use, and I find it keeps you from ever getting too powerful as to be godly, or too weak as to be boring.

You’ve also described better than most what makes the game so great – yet ironically, you also feel this is what makes it so bad. From my perspective, you got the lucky experience. You didn’t cheat or try to create overpowered builds. And you were handed out a tough challenge around every corner that you still managed to overcome by the skin of your teeth – that’s the sort of play through I enjoy the most.

Mostly on these forums you read how the game is ‘too easy’, but who knows how it’s being exploited for people to come to that view. Your critique is more familiar to how I experienced it, and I’d say the majority of other players as well. Except for the complaint about the gold shortage – I always had more than enough of that to buy plenty of ‘cool stuff’, and was never left wanting.

So the thing is, to me the game puts up a very fair challenge in the manner you described (when you play fairly, with balanced builds). I wouldn’t want to see it made less challenging. However, it may need more difficulty options, to allow you to dial it down, if that’s what you feel it needs. But I believe they already said they’d have more options on release. So the difficulty you describe should definitely be kept as one of those options for people who like it.
Posted By: UnderworldHades

Re: Fight Imbalances/Disparities - 05/08/17 07:09 PM

I agree with you on a lot of the parts;

The free round, I REALLY HOPE that is a bug, because I find it bullshit that they get one free round. Like why? I'm not being ambushed. It's not like this is Xcom2 and the enemies in front of me suddenly went into "concealment" and got a free round or some shit. There is zero reason for them to have a free round (if its a feature, i hope this is confirmed by someone from larian) and if it s a feature, it should be removed. Early game you are already weak, and yet enemies get multiple things to just cheat? That forces you to cheese the game, doesn't make the game hard, makes it unfair. 2 different things.

Didn't do Griff fight, saw no reason or benefit to do it (Aside from roleplaying aspect, but even with that i didnt bother bc you're too weak early and they have skillbooks and other items for sale, which is what i care about more).

Took me a 2nd try to beat the Witch in the cave fight, first one my rogue just got stuck next to her with the ongoing "stun blood" thing where electricity doesnt go away. Or blood/water stay there and it looks like the stun water lasts like 20 turns. But there are a lot...A LOT of adds, who actually do decent damage as well, need to position carefully before fight.

Same with Alexander fight, you have to position before, which is okay in a way, makes it more "Strategic", but on the other hand, if the game forces you to do this (and dont say it doesnt, the game does, it did in the first game as well. i am not doing some shitty cheese builds or w/e and other crap). Not only is the enemy always going first, but they get that free round, so you HAVE to position beforehand while one person talks, in ALMOST EVERY SINGLE FIGHT in act 1. (I didnt do ship after alexander bit, so please dont use any fights or stuff from there to counterpoint).

Also tanks are pretty much useless, as you point it out. AI will always go for squishy meatbags first, which in a way makes the AI smart, wise, it makes the tank useless really. Now, they might have a "taunt" skillbook later in the game, bc i didnt find it in act 1, but the book should be early game. (And it should bypass armor as well obv, otherwise no bloody point of even adding that book).
Posted By: Cyka

Re: Fight Imbalances/Disparities - 06/08/17 11:58 PM

Isn't that the problem? wit build is so mandatory right now but should have no place in a game that advertise play your own build.
Posted By: Sotnik

Re: Fight Imbalances/Disparities - 07/08/17 11:22 AM

There is no need to invest more than 1/3 of your points into Wits to keep initiative up-to-date and even this is not mandatory for all the 4 characters.

What should be fixed in this respect is that if a character joins a fight after it started, he loses a turn. Not very convenient and predictable.
Posted By: smokey

Re: Fight Imbalances/Disparities - 07/08/17 02:29 PM

Yeah, you need to keep your initiative topped up, or it’ll seem like the AI is cheating its way to getting the first action every battle. I had that problem initially, but it disappeared on a second play through after I invested skill points a little more widely, so I don’t think that’s an issue.

I’m also not having the problem of being forced to play a certain build to have a functional party. Trust me, I’m completely against following a design plan for the most powerful build, and my party is always a very mixed bag. Last time I played, my archer-type was by far the most neglected and weakest member of the party, but I actually liked that, as she still wasn’t completely useless, and it felt balanced.

And then there was my tank guy – by far the best in the party. Wings, shield and sword. The wings are basically self-teleport. Very powerful, so I only allowed this guy to have the skill. I'd fling him directly into the fray as a distraction, and he always attracted the enemy’s attention in this way. I didn’t notice any overly robotic behaviour from the AI, in laser-seeking the weakest party member and avoiding the tank, but it could be just my playstyle.

As for losing to the witch and having to start over – that’s a good thing, in my opinion. You want to be beaten by the AI, otherwise it’s just win-win-win, and no sense of reward or challenge. If we kept winning in life, there’d be no personal growth. Same is true of a video game.

Now you might say – well, I don’t play video games for a struggle or to lose all the time. And that’s fine – there should be, and will be, several difficulty settings, and you should be able to choose one that suits how you want to play the game. But equally, there should be a tough-as-nails difficulty setting for those that expect to lose, and don’t feel that’s a bad thing.

I will admit that for a balanced party that’s not exploiting the game, the Alexander fight is a little much. I just got lucky and the worm went to town on his crew while I hung back. Without that, I doubt the party I had would have stood much of a chance.

The game has bigger problems than combat balancing, though. Namely CC and armour. It is possible to be near-permanently stunned by a large pool of electrified water (once the stun is shaken, it just stuns you again). CC is the most unimaginative and problematic part of the game for sure – but I doubt this will be addressed before release.
Posted By: Sotnik

Re: Fight Imbalances/Disparities - 07/08/17 05:26 PM

Originally Posted by smokey
it’ll seem like the AI is cheating its way to getting the first action every battle.

And then there was my tank guy – by far the best in the party. Wings, shield and sword. The wings are basically self-teleport. Very powerful, so I only allowed this guy to have the skill. I'd fling him directly into the fray as a distraction, and he always attracted the enemy’s attention in this way. I didn’t notice any overly robotic behaviour from the AI, in laser-seeking the weakest party member and avoiding the tank, but it could be just my playstyle.

The game has bigger problems than combat balancing, though. Namely CC and armour. It is possible to be near-permanently stunned by a large pool of electrified water (once the stun is shaken, it just stuns you again). CC is the most unimaginative and problematic part of the game for sure – but I doubt this will be addressed before release.

1. The AI attributes scale with level, so it's reasonable that their Wits and initiative grows.
2. I had feeling like AI chooses targets randomly. Did it focus on your tank because he was just closer to casters/rangers? Or were the other party members out of their range? Or is there another explanation?
3. Actually, permastun is healed with teleport or magic armour buff, so it does not seem like a major problem. Maybe just from the class balance point.
Posted By: smokey

Re: Fight Imbalances/Disparities - 07/08/17 06:38 PM

Yeah, for point 1 above that’s the assumption that I made and that’s how I expect it to work, so that’s all good.

For point 2, it was intentional to get them to focus on the tank, which is what I’d expect from using the wings ability to ‘teleport’ so far from the main group that the AI can only cause any damage to your tank, so it prioritises it. That’s all fair, from my perspective. If the AI gets in closer to your group, I’d expect it to ignore the tank and go for weaker targets – it also seems to have this covered.

I do believe there’s a major problem with CC, however, and that permanent stun is just one small part of it. You say you can use teleport or magic shell to remove the stun, but that forces you into a very narrow style of play. It means you have to have these abilities to deal with the problem, and you should never need to have a specific skillset. It also assumes your non-stunned character will even have these skills to begin with. I’ve been in battles where a random stun pool formed, and just locked down 3 characters for the whole match.

That’s a major issue, IMO. There’s no creative solution to the stun. It’s just – you must have these skills to undo it, or you’re toast. The game’s strength is in how it encourages creativity. I’m not a strong believer in rule-following to fix things (even if it's my job, or perhaps because it's my job). The less formulas, the better. So there should be an imaginative, unique way out of all of the game's problems that’s ideally scenario specific and can’t be easily recycled. So far, I find that most of the game allows for a richly inventive experience – but that there’s nothing inventive about being CC’d or having to have a specific formula to undo it.

Just my opinion, of course. I’m not saying ‘this is how it should be done’. I’m saying, if I could make my own game from it, there’d be no CC at all.
Posted By: Sotnik

Re: Fight Imbalances/Disparities - 07/08/17 07:44 PM

When I was playing the Alfa, I focused on items with magic armour and rarely was stun locked. In this case I think it is enough to keep some scrolls for emergency and you don't need to adjust your build.

It would be an interesting solution to this specific problem if strength and telekinesis (the latter does not seem useful enough at the moment) allowed moving characters for a short distance - both friendly and rival ones (with an attack of opportunity provoked). Moving with strength should require having at least one free hand; this would also be a small bonus to one weapon style. It could be a "common action" like lock-pick on the skill panel or just require dragging with a mouse, just like you interact with any other object.
Posted By: smokey

Re: Fight Imbalances/Disparities - 07/08/17 08:32 PM

I just don't think CC is interesting, that's all. Again, just my opinion - I'm not saying I'm right. It's a video game, we all have our take on it. For me, CC has always been the weakest link. It's not imaginative, since it just stops you from having to think (you can't think with a character who can't do anything).

I'd rather CC punishes you in some other non-restrictive fashion. Other people have made many good suggestions for alternatives. Stun could cripple your ability to move, for example, but you could still fire an arrow or cast a spell. You should always be able to think, IMO. And do something. If the game prevents that, you're not playing a game - you're just watching a screen.
Posted By: Deadknight

Re: Fight Imbalances/Disparities - 09/08/17 10:24 PM

In the current state of the game I would rather see most CC only reducing the initiative and dodge of the character for the current turn instead of making them completely skip their turn.
If all stunned would simply act last and anyone attacking them has his max chance to hit, this would be a good enough advantage I think for the amount of CC currently in the game.
And of course this will also help having more diversity in CC. Right now most CC just make you skip your turn (Frozen = Knockback = Stun, ... etc with only minor resistance variations).
Posted By: RandomTobias

Re: Fight Imbalances/Disparities - 09/08/17 11:30 PM

CC is what makes the game interesting. Removing it is akin to dumbing down the game and getting rid of what makes it so unique and interesting.

Originally Posted by smokey
Stun could cripple your ability to move, for example, but you could still fire an arrow or cast a spell.

That already exists, that's the crippled status.

Originally Posted by Deadknight
Right now most CC just make you skip your turn (Frozen = Knockback = Stun, ... etc with only minor resistance variations).

Those are very different, since they are prevented and cancelled using different ways.
Posted By: Deadknight

Re: Fight Imbalances/Disparities - 10/08/17 02:57 AM

Originally Posted by RandomTobias

Originally Posted by Deadknight
Right now most CC just make you skip your turn (Frozen = Knockback = Stun, ... etc with only minor resistance variations).

Those are very different, since they are prevented and cancelled using different ways.

Yeah I get that it is just that chain CC where the enemy can't do anything is very present in the game and except certain hard fight, it becomes very easy to just virtually remove some enemies from the fight.
First you teleport them, ... then you teleport them again (I regularly play with 2 teleports mages), then you stun, then freeze, then knockdown, then teleport again...

If the enemy is alone, that's not even an option because if you don't Control them they'll probably kill one character per turn or even more.

I am still happy with the combats as of now but I wish it was less binary.
You can CC? then he is always CC
You can't CC? Wear their (Magic?) Armor down.

The first time I played the game I thought it was challenging, now I feel it's too easy so I try things that are less powerful just for fun.
Posted By: RandomTobias

Re: Fight Imbalances/Disparities - 10/08/17 07:38 AM

Once you've taken magic armor off, then you've essentially won against that enemy at the cost of AP upkeep.
How is that a problem?

The hard part is getting the magic armor to 0 on all enemies without dying or running out of AP or skills.
Posted By: Deadknight

Re: Fight Imbalances/Disparities - 10/08/17 05:22 PM

The problem is, that is too easy to do.

2 Mages with high aerothurge (and some secondary points for spell variety) and you shred Magical armour so fast that you only need one lightning to remove and stun enemy fighters with no shield.
And if you cast rain before he will be chain stunned for subsequent turns as well (with the electrified pool you created under him)
So 2 spells to neutralize 1 fighter for multiple turns.

Here I speak of 2 mages but even just 1 with 1 Hydro and rest in Aerothurge, I played the current alpha build and on her own she was shredding the magical armour.
To me the armour could be fun but is too easily removed considering all CC will be 100% success.

However with this, Your tank, even if not targeted, can control the fight With CC (Cripple, Charge, Earth Shatter).
I actually like the fact that they avoid your bulky guy to go for the dangerous party member. I use the tank to annoy them, have attack of opportunity, knockdown, etc.
Posted By: Cyka

Re: Fight Imbalances/Disparities - 11/08/17 05:43 PM

Most CC should make you LOSE APs rather than skip a turn completely, only those that cost source points or end game spells with high CD should make you skip a turn.

I cannot understand why something this simple no body can suggest. Oil CC is perfect in terms of balance, stun enemy in electricity until there dead is not.
Posted By: smokey

Re: Fight Imbalances/Disparities - 11/08/17 09:31 PM

Originally Posted by RandomTobias
Removing it is akin to dumbing down the game and getting rid of what makes it so unique and interesting.

Assuming you’re the definitive authority on what’s dumbed down and what isn’t is the biggest misstep in your argument. Note that I emphasised that I do not believe ‘my way’ is the ‘only way’. I do believe in my opinion over counter-opinions, but I’m not here to wage a crusade and burn down anyone else’s ideology.

I’ve been on these forums long enough to know everyone here is very different in what they believe a game this complex, design-wise, should be. So it’s impossible for Larian to actually accommodate everyone, since even one topic – CC in this case – can generate such impassioned yet tunnel vision defence of the mechanic.

So why not just be democratic about it, and let people decide via a game setting configuration?

Something like:

CC: hard/soft

Hard = the current system, where you or the enemy loses all control.
Soft = the countless creative alternatives for each CC type that don’t make you lose control.

At this stage, the game is clearly balanced around ‘hard CC’. So what? I’m willing to bet that everyone who prefers the alternative will make do with an ‘experimental’ soft CC at launch that doesn’t have to be perfectly balanced. Honestly, I believe it’ll be self-balancing, but either way it would remove the time sink that goes into rebalancing – while it would also satisfy both parties.

I likewise believe hard CC is too binary, too simplistic, too boring, to belong in this game. Again, this is just an opinion – I believe this, and some others may believe this, but it’s not an attack on anyone who wants CC to stay as it is: yes, you should get what you want as well.

I do believe it would infinitely improve the game to give the option of an experimental soft CC as a game setting. I also think Larian is forward-looking enough that they might do something like this: make your own game, at your own expense. The core game should be balanced around mainstream expectations, with the option for experimental, unbalanced features to override them. I want this company to make money too. It deserves it – but I also, shamelessly, would like to see their staff get enough cheques to keep them making patches, and hopefully an expansion as well someday…
Posted By: Cyka

Re: Fight Imbalances/Disparities - 16/08/17 07:20 PM

I completely agree with this, unless you spending 3+ source points for an end game skill, CC should never be so powerful as it is now. Make characters lose APs rather than skip turns, make their turn swap, push their turn back, make some of their ability disabled.

So many ways to do this instead of "Herr durr magic armor off, rain+electric discharge = win."
Posted By: TraceChaos

Re: Fight Imbalances/Disparities - 16/08/17 09:48 PM

Okay, in t his hypothetical "Every CC lowers AP instead of stunning." please, tell me the difference aside from graphics, and without using any examples I give (As you clearly haven't thought of them), between Hail Storm or whatever the three-ice-bolts-from-above is to an unarmored target who would get "Frozen" and lose one AP, and "Lightning barrage", a hypothetical three-shot lightning blast that removes a single ACP on the same unarmored target.

Does one make them lose the AP for longer? Does one cause them to take damage from moving? Lower the range on bow attacks due to inaccuracy? Does one make them move less distance per AP spent on movement(Which is already done by oil)? Does one lower attack accuracy from twitching limbs?

It's a bad idea to make all CC do the same thing one existing CC does, for the same duration, for 'balance'.

This isn't a Roll playing game, this is a role playing game. A story told by your actions adn choices as the character or characters you play.

Freezing should not let you run full speed ahead but take one less 'point' of action that turn. Being electrocuted definitely should not leave you to sprint unimpeded out of the electrified blood or water. Slipping and falling on ice should not leave you able to get up with the same amoutn of effort required to pull out a new wand.

CC is fine as is. It's slightly imbalanced, but it's tactical and fun.
Posted By: smokey

Re: Fight Imbalances/Disparities - 18/08/17 09:51 PM

Hello there amigo. Are you directing these questions at me? Couldn’t be, because I never said ‘make all CC do the same thing’, as you seem to imply. No one else did either. I’m too lazy to dig up the other CC threads that have been referenced in the above posts. They expand upon literally dozens of much more creative, intelligent alternatives that cause a whole spectrum of penalties too diverse to describe.

Maybe English isn’t your first lingo or something – I’m not sure what’s gone wrong here in the comprehension dept, but it’s gone very very wrong, so it’s hard to summon the enthusiasm for any dedicated counterargument.

At the moment, all CC does exactly the same thing – stops you from taking an action (yawn). The advocated alternative is hardly as simple-minded as the ‘freezing should let you move, stun should let you move’. The limits of your own imagination are limiting your understanding of a ‘better’ alternative.

Either way, I’m not asking for hard CC to be removed. If that’s how you want to play the game, fine. It’s boring to me: random silly stun pools that stop both me and the enemy from making a move. Another gimpy knockdown stops my opponent from being able to think: oh look, here’s me proving that I’m smart enough to point and click at a set of pixels that can’t do anything.

It’s ok! You can have that game – enjoy it mate. I’ve specifically said they should concentrate on delivering a mainstream experience first and foremost. But what I’m asking for is that they give us the option to set an alternative – so those of us who find hard CC mindless can enjoy the game we want to play as well. I’ve also emphasised that I do not expect the alternatives to be balanced, so you get to be the 'special one' who gets all the nice special treatment from a dedicated group of designers. And the rest of us will gladly settle (well, I will anyway) for something the devs threw together in a day, based on the suggestions of other people, in other threads on the issue.

I’m struggling here to be any more generous of spirit…
© 2020 Larian Studios forums