Larian Banner
Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Page 2 of 6 1 2 3 4 5 6
Joined: Dec 2015
M
journeyman
Offline
journeyman
M
Joined: Dec 2015
Yep honestly I think a large part of why people think RNGless CC makes the game easy is because the current AI is terribad at dealing with the concept of armor countering CC and utilizing CC removals. I don't believe CC without RNG necessarily makes things easier. Sure it means at some point in combat you are going to know for certain what's gonna happen to your target when you smash that lightning bolt in his face. However your opponent should see it coming, too by looking at his own armor values and the positioning of your CC-heavy wizard/fighter preemptively.

Think of it this way: does having guaranteed CC make your life any easier in the Arena against other people? If not, then the problem you perceive in the campaign is not stemming from the mechanic. Most likely it's due to the AI driving the combat.

Joined: Apr 2011
veteran
Offline
veteran
Joined: Apr 2011
I have to agree with Qiox, I don't understand people liking 100% CC (read: Bore-mode). Do you like it because it literally makes stunlock easier than ever? Enemies can't handle it, so it's pretty much only the player exploiting it. And when the AI learns how to use it, I bet people here wont be quite as enthusiastic about 100% stunlock anymore.

Winning in D:OS2 currently is really really boring since using CC to completely trivilitalize opponents is taking away all strategy. Just CC and insta-win... boooooring.

I don't think the 100% defense armor system is bad, but having 100% NO defense if your armor breaks; That's the horrid part of the system.

Joined: Dec 2015
M
journeyman
Offline
journeyman
M
Joined: Dec 2015
See above sir. There are solutions to stun-locks. The AI just doesn't know how to use them. Also, the AI likes to waste its own CC by firing them off without shaving off target armor first. All of these point to problem with the AI, not the mechanics. Larian promised AI improvement in the weeks to come. I want to see what they do with it first.

Joined: Sep 2016
stranger
Offline
stranger
Joined: Sep 2016
Originally Posted by Hassat Hunter

I don't think the 100% defense armor system is bad, but having 100% NO defense if your armor breaks; That's the horrid part of the system.


This is an idea I can get behind. An easy solution to the problem would be reducing the chances for most cc abilities while leaving a select few that are guaranteed (perhaps these would end up being Source skills, or attached to trees that specialize in cc, like Hydrosophist).

Joined: Sep 2016
Location: Texas
enthusiast
Offline
enthusiast
Joined: Sep 2016
Location: Texas
Originally Posted by Hassat Hunter
I have to agree with Qiox, I don't understand people liking 100% CC (read: Bore-mode). Do you like it because it literally makes stunlock easier than ever? Enemies can't handle it, so it's pretty much only the player exploiting it. And when the AI learns how to use it, I bet people here wont be quite as enthusiastic about 100% stunlock anymore.

Winning in D:OS2 currently is really really boring since using CC to completely trivilitalize opponents is taking away all strategy. Just CC and insta-win... boooooring.

I don't think the 100% defense armor system is bad, but having 100% NO defense if your armor breaks; That's the horrid part of the system.


I think you should read what me, messenger and Limz are saying. You and the others are saying two different things at once: #1 that the system makes it too easy, and that this can be proved because #2 the game is too easy. But like I have stated, like messenger has stated, there are plenty of counters to CC already that the player can take advantage of, and I believe that your complaints about the game being too easy stems from an inability of the AI to utilize them effectively, not that stunlocking is easy. If they were able to Armor of Frost out of stunlocks, teleport friends out of stun surfaces and over to your mage, teleport you into your own surfaces, use Phoenix Dive and Hast on friends to cleanse frozen, had a purifying fire and cleansing water equivalent of any kind, I am positive you would be singing a different tune. But again, this is the first pass, of the first release, of open alpha. It should be expected that the current implementation of AI is too easy. I don't know how you could expect otherwise, even with CC being a chance; in the DOS early access, pumping INT gave you 100% CC chance easily, and no enemies had willpower or bodybuilding to counter that. What do you say to that?

Joined: Sep 2016
A
addict
Offline
addict
A
Joined: Sep 2016
Originally Posted by Hassat Hunter

I don't think the 100% defense armor system is bad, but having 100% NO defense if your armor breaks; That's the horrid part of the system.


We can have both?
Armor system in place and RNG defensive combat abilities from last game (ie Bodybuilding, block, willpower)

I'm not a fan of the defensive abilities that exist and blocking would make shields much much better

Last edited by aj0413; 02/10/16 05:46 PM.
Joined: Apr 2011
veteran
Offline
veteran
Joined: Apr 2011
I don't say the game is too easy, I have already said you and all the others will very likely sing the other way once the AI can stunlock YOU till kingdom comes. Then 100% stunlock isn't so fun anymore, is it?

EDIT: I'm saying stunlocking is easy and boring, since, well, it's easy and boring to me now. And I know once the AI learns it will be a total crapfest to play aswell. You can cut out your fake argument I NEVER made.

@ aj0413: That would have my preference yes. 100% immune with armor, but still having options or not insta-win once it's gone.

Last edited by Hassat Hunter; 02/10/16 05:54 PM.
Joined: Dec 2015
M
journeyman
Offline
journeyman
M
Joined: Dec 2015
I have never been able to stun-lock or getting stun-locked playing with any HUMANS in the current system, so what makes you think AI is gonna be able to do that to me without cheating?

Joined: Sep 2016
stranger
Offline
stranger
Joined: Sep 2016
Originally Posted by aj0413
Originally Posted by Hassat Hunter

I don't think the 100% defense armor system is bad, but having 100% NO defense if your armor breaks; That's the horrid part of the system.


We can have both?
Armor system in place and RNG defensive combat abilities from last game (ie Bodybuilding, block, willpower)


Perhaps the chances of CC after having their armor destroyed could be based on the type of armor they're wearing? Leather armor would have less of a chance to resist CC, while the heavier stuff would have the most. This would help balance the movement penalty for heavy armor more.

Obviously, this needs more thought. It'd require Larian to take a look at magic armor and separating that into categories of light and heavy, but it's an idea.

Joined: Apr 2011
veteran
Offline
veteran
Joined: Apr 2011
Originally Posted by M3SS3NG3R
I have never been able to stun-lock or getting stun-locked playing with any HUMANS in the current system, so what makes you think AI is gonna be able to do that to me without cheating?

How many human battles consisted of 8 mages against your 4 player party? 2:1 or 3:1 is fairly common in SP, with all the extra CC that comes with it... CC that only fails now since AI is stupid.
Good luck breaking your lock with your other 3 characters if they're locked aswell. Once the AI learns, it's hell, absolute hell. That's no fun, and maybe you'll all actually get the "pleasure" to learn so too.

Joined: Sep 2016
A
addict
Offline
addict
A
Joined: Sep 2016
Well, while tying chance CC to armor type is doable....I'd still really just prefer to change the defensive abilities back. Seems like less work and gives player control over how much RNG they want to rely on or if they want to stack the deck in their favor.

Also, the current defensive abilities are just really lackluster and unappealing...I can't imagine when I'd ever really feel inclined to put a point in them and thats a problem; all the abilities should be desirable to all players such that we feel really pressured on level up.

Glad people are considering a combination of systems.

Joined: Dec 2015
M
journeyman
Offline
journeyman
M
Joined: Dec 2015
Listen, if the AI actually learns to use his number to its advantage and overcome its current obvious deficiency in understanding basic armor mechanic and CC removal, not to mention the lack of positioning and cover using line of sight, GOOD FOR IT. I for one would welcome the challenge. For people that don't like to face this challenge, maybe reserve this advanced AI to tactician mode only? Isn't letting AI abuse CC, buffs and consumables the big change they made to tactician mode back in the EE days anyway? So you don't like to face it, fine there's always classic mode. But overhaul the whole system "because AI might get smart enough to abuse it" is a bit of a kneejerk reaction when you don't even know just how smart or effective it will be, no?

Joined: Apr 2011
veteran
Offline
veteran
Joined: Apr 2011
Yeah, if we ignore the entire each battle is a snore-fest from the player perspective thing.

Joined: Sep 2016
A
addict
Offline
addict
A
Joined: Sep 2016
Originally Posted by M3SS3NG3R
Listen, if the AI actually learns to use his number to its advantage and overcome its current obvious deficiency in understanding basic armor mechanic and CC removal, not to mention the lack of positioning and cover using line of sight, GOOD FOR IT. I for one would welcome the challenge. For people that don't like to face this challenge, maybe reserve this advanced AI to tactician mode only? Isn't letting AI abuse CC, buffs and consumables the big change they made to tactician mode back in the EE days anyway? So you don't like to face it, fine there's always classic mode. But overhaul the whole system "because AI might get smart enough to abuse it" is a bit of a kneejerk reaction when you don't even know just how smart or effective it will be, no?


Just so it's known....I have no fear of how the AI might abuse the system. I always welcome a challenge. Also, from my limited work and research into the AI field, I feel fairly confident in saying that the AI opponents will never really quiet match up to a player in the current system. It's too determinant and relies on adaptive, strategic thinking involving a fairly high number of variables and tactics. By placing the burden on the AI to consider everything in such an open space of what it can do and then plan out an optimum strategy, you're effectively holding back the system. Even cutting edge AI would have an issue with this...the best you could do (off the top of my head) would be to make one permutation of the system , keep it for a while and release it to a large number of players and than have the AI learn by going over all the data compiled from player decisions and tactics....its an exhaustive process that limits how many changes the developers can try out though.

I just honestly don't care for how the system works and seeing as others agree (regardless of their reasons) there's no reason why we can't have an amalgamation of both.

Joined: Dec 2015
M
journeyman
Offline
journeyman
M
Joined: Dec 2015
All I see is dumb AI getting trashed because it doesn't know how to carry itself. Exactly the same thing back in the DOS1 (non-EE) days. If all your arguments are gonna be clairvoyant and based on predicting things that haven't happened in a hundred years like "oh AI is going to be OP and chain-stuns everyone to death" then I don't see the point in having a discussion. Back it up with observations, please.

Joined: Sep 2016
Location: Texas
enthusiast
Offline
enthusiast
Joined: Sep 2016
Location: Texas
Originally Posted by Hassat Hunter
I don't say the game is too easy


What are you talking about?

Originally Posted by Hassat Hunter
I don't understand people liking 100% CC (read: Bore-mode). Do you like it because it literally makes stunlock easier than ever? Enemies can't handle it, so it's pretty much only the player exploiting it. And when the AI learns how to use it, I bet people here wont be quite as enthusiastic about 100% stunlock anymore.

Winning in D:OS2 currently is really really boring since using CC to completely trivilitalize opponents is taking away all strategy. Just CC and insta-win... boooooring.


Is this not the definition of complaining that the game is too easy? Once again, in a game where no enemy has the proper counters yet? What do you mean, "when you get stunlocked to death"? I have yet to see that happen, and I play builds almost exclusively with Glass Cannon. Because I don't let it happen. Because Armor of Frost, Phoenix Dive and other spells exist.

Once again, you're complaining about an incomplete and half-implemented system because of what seems to be the fact that enemies can CC you at all, which can easily be overcome even on completely gimped builds. Eight mages are eight targets to beat, not instant CC death. Even having no armor, those mages are going to waste some CC on already CC'd targets, which you are going to cleanse anyways. I'm certain such a fight wouldn't even be hard, with the proper tools. What value does having a chance based system add? What exactly about the first game's system, where you could just Drain Willpower and 100% stun someone on the first turn, with a 1 turn cooldown, over and over, was better? Where you could pump bodybuilding and wilpower until you were essentially CC immune? Where in Tactician Mode, you could just teleport enemies into a circle, and blow them up in one turn using pyromancy+geo? Where there were talents that literally made you immune to certain forms of CC, spells that did the same thing, and enemies resorted to unobtainable skills and inveterate immunities just to beat you? What specifically about that system did you like, that the completed current system will disallow?

Joined: Sep 2016
A
addict
Offline
addict
A
Joined: Sep 2016
Originally Posted by M3SS3NG3R
All I see is dumb AI getting trashed because it doesn't know how to carry itself. Exactly the same thing back in the DOS1 (non-EE) days. If all your arguments are gonna be clairvoyant and based on predicting things that haven't happened in a hundred years like "oh AI is going to be OP and chain-stuns everyone to death" then I don't see the point in having a discussion. Back it up with observations, please.


This is highly unfair, not everyone is arguing that. Some of us honestly just prefer a D20 system. Elements of chance in combat add to a game, in my opinion. The determinism of stacking that chance in your favor or choosing to let it suffer is also good. I don't exactly ind the new armor system per se but I don't like how they used it to completely replace the old one. I think a combination would be perfect

Good analogy is that currently the system is more like chess in that you know your moves and you know the opponent moves and you both have set units. For some, they like that; for me, you can only stretch out that system so far till becomes like tic tac toe with each player taking the optimum action. It's why computers playing against eachother will win based on who plays white or black.

The old system throwing chance in the equation added elements of surprise and unknowns. It allowed for the ability of combat to surprise you.

Last edited by aj0413; 02/10/16 06:29 PM.
Joined: Apr 2011
veteran
Offline
veteran
Joined: Apr 2011
Yeah... but the AI cheats with 4 ranged attacks on the player for example. Try doing that with each costing 2AP and 6AP max.
Things like that are fairly common in D:OS2 already.

@ Messenger: Do you actually read my points? Let me repeat... "Well, yeah, IF YOU IGNORE THE ENTIRE EACH COMBAT IS RATHER BORING AND POINTLESS CURRENTLY"... Or is that not a good argument from my point?

@ SlamPow: That's not my argument against this. Difficulty can be balanced, as you already say yourself it says nothing of the system. So I talk about the system. Please don't go all "you just say this cause you think game is easy > system is broke", I never use anything about the current difficulty in my system.
I'm not quite sure how else I could exploit that 100% chance to stunlock enemy is boring, with or without OP skills. Fixing OP skills will just make killing the stunlocked character longer (ooooh, fun... nope), it will not fix the system being boring, which is what I'm saying.

And I will repeat once again, I agree with aj0413 that I would like the armor system supplemented by a way for both friend and foe to not be 100% chicken to be slaughtered if armor goes down, that really is my only beef with the system.

EDIT: Okay, I have to comment on the irony that the old system was hated and things like "100% immune", "drain willpower per turn" or "enemies had to be immune to CC" were caused by it, which I apparently like. Did you read those things? Yup, that's exactly the new system, which I DON'T like. 100% immune is armor, drain willpower = break armor and well, we already know from chapter 1 Larian had to make enemies 100% CC-immune to offer a challenge in this new system. Oh, the irony.

Last edited by Hassat Hunter; 02/10/16 06:42 PM.
Joined: Sep 2016
Location: Texas
enthusiast
Offline
enthusiast
Joined: Sep 2016
Location: Texas
Originally Posted by aj0413

The old system throwing chance in the equation added elements of surprise and unknowns. It allowed for the ability of combat to surprise you.


While I do not debate this, I absolutely DESPISE surprises. I like chess. And even better than chess, gearing and builds allow you to skew the odds in your favor such that there is no black-loses-white-wins, there is only "I beat this encounter because of my own effort and initiative", and adding chance into the equation completely drains that away. A solid win becomes a win because you didn't unlucky. A simple encounter, which could just be a challenge anyways in the new system, is potentially game-ending because of chance. Divinity has never been about chance. In classic, you came out the gate with multiple 100% CC's at your disposal, from Midnight Oil to Teleport. In EE, in honour mode, you had to bring similar 100% CC to the table, or else potentially forfeit your run. I don't find that "fun". I don't find that "tactical". I think it runs counter to the point of the game, and would vastly prefer encounters with enemies that can beat me of their own merit, that know the same spells I do and can use them to win, that have the same 100% chance to CC me that I have against them. There's a reason Divinity: Original Sin 2 is my favorite game already, and it's not even out of early access.

Joined: Dec 2015
M
journeyman
Offline
journeyman
M
Joined: Dec 2015
Originally Posted by aj0413
This is highly unfair, not everyone is arguing that. Some of us honestly just prefer a D20 system. Elements of chance in combat add to a game, in my opinion. The determinism of stacking that chance in your favor or choosing to let it suffer is also good. I don't exactly ind the new armor system per se but I don't like how they used it to completely replace the old one. I think a combination would be perfect

Good analogy is that currently the system is more like chess in that you know your moves and you know the opponent moves and you both have set units. For some, they like that; for me, you can only stretch out that system so far till becomes like tic tac toe with each player taking the optimum action. It's why computers playing against eachother will win based on who plays white or black.

The old system throwing chance in the equation added elements of surprise and unknowns. It allowed for the ability of combat to surprise you.


Sorry I should've used the quote button. I understand D20 style system is not a bad system and has worked in the past. All I am saying is it is ridiculous to use examples where the player exploits the deficiency of the current AI as the sole argument that the armor system is bad and prone to abuse. DOS1 AI was just as easily abused using CC, mind you. So can you attribute this historical abuse of CC to a system involving saving throws? If you want to convince me the mechanic needs serious changes you'll need to show something like a human player getting his whole party chain-stunned at ease by another player without a way to fight back, then demonstrate that no amount of number tweaking is gonna fix it. As far as I know, it already isn't possible to chain-stun a party controlled by a capable player. It *might* be possible if there is significant number disparity between the two sides, but with how easy it is to manipulate line of sight using height, positioning and smoke and the existence of very effective CC removals, honestly I don't see how the AI is gonna do that any time soon.

Quote
"Well, yeah, IF YOU IGNORE THE ENTIRE EACH COMBAT IS RATHER BORING AND POINTLESS CURRENTLY"


Well you found out that fighting a dumb opponent is boring and pointless. Isn't that obvious? When I fight human players under the current system I win some and lose some but never found it boring.

Last edited by M3SS3NG3R; 02/10/16 06:45 PM.
Page 2 of 6 1 2 3 4 5 6

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