Larian Banner
Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Page 3 of 3 1 2 3
Joined: Sep 2016
Posts: 39
Q
apprentice
Offline
apprentice
Q
Joined: Sep 2016
Posts: 39
Originally Posted by Hassat Hunter
No, it really is the PvP. I recall the "epic battles" (and insults, so many insults) I got thrown about with by PvP players when complaining about armor in EA.
And no one listening that what works for 10m PvP matches might not do so in a 100H SP-game.

It's probably a bad system for PVP actually. As I explained, if both teams are equal on everything else, a skewed team has some inherent advantage over a balanced team, and depend on makeups, a skewed team can counters another skewed team. So PVP outcome is significantly influenced by pre-game decisions on armors and damage types.


Joined: Dec 2016
Posts: 540
addict
Offline
addict
Joined: Dec 2016
Posts: 540
Consistency from the armour system really allow you to come up with more creative battle. The sad part is that there's a very limited amount of fights like that in the game. Larian failed to take advantage of a modern system that allows for much better scripted battles.

The easiest one being the final boss fight of Act 1. You have a bunch of hard enemies to deal with and sudden spawn of the 3rd faction that everyone must defeat. The map layout also allow you to be creative. That's the kind of scripted fight we need more in the game.

The armour system is fine. Lack of variety in combat is the main issue created by lack of creative skills and interactive battles. There's not a single time in the game you get to use the Balista they showcased. Man, imagine if there's a proper Kraken battle on the sea where you have to keep killing the adds it spawn and use balista to damage it while getting buffed by Lady Vengeance.

TOO BAD IT DOESN'T HAPPEN. When your entire gameplay is all about using the same attacks and strat, people will just find an easy target to complain about and atm, it's the armor system because that's where the strat of the entire game stems from. As there's only 1 strat in this game, enjoy using your most damaging combo to beat 99% of the fight.

Last edited by Ellezard; 01/10/17 12:09 PM.
Joined: Jul 2014
Posts: 282
enthusiast
Offline
enthusiast
Joined: Jul 2014
Posts: 282
On the above, I think that tunneling tactic is just a bit too effective and NPCs seem to not have ways to deal with it effectively enough, that's why you can focus and nuke down biggest threats there are first turn or two in the fight after which it's cake. I do think NPCs should have more tools and abilities to prevent this, like using repositioning tools to get away instead of just closing gap 100% of the time and there should be more NPC enchanter/cleric pure buff/defense types with a lot of shields and HP that can save the guys that get focused.

And each NPC should have some sort of combo breaker ability that gives it a turn of grace.

All that may be annoying, but right now nuke shit down in two turns simply infallible tactic just because there is not much there that can prevent it. Maybe damage output from players needs to be toned down at higher levels, especially pure melee teams which are just unstoppable. I'd slash player melee damage 40% really to begin with, because it really gets out of hand level 15+ and makes any sort of tactic aside nuke shit down a waste of time.

Joined: Sep 2017
Posts: 27
apprentice
Offline
apprentice
Joined: Sep 2017
Posts: 27
Originally Posted by Ellezard
Consistency from the armour system really allow you to come up with more creative battle. The sad part is that there's a very limited amount of fights like that in the game. Larian failed to take advantage of a modern system that allows for much better scripted battles.

The easiest one being the final boss fight of Act 1. You have a bunch of hard enemies to deal with and sudden spawn of the 3rd faction that everyone must defeat. The map layout also allow you to be creative. That's the kind of scripted fight we need more in the game.

The armour system is fine. Lack of variety in combat is the main issue created by lack of creative skills and interactive battles. There's not a single time in the game you get to use the Balista they showcased. Man, imagine if there's a proper Kraken battle on the sea where you have to keep killing the adds it spawn and use balista to damage it while getting buffed by Lady Vengeance.

TOO BAD IT DOESN'T HAPPEN. When your entire gameplay is all about using the same attacks and strat, people will just find an easy target to complain about and atm, it's the armor system because that's where the strat of the entire game stems from. As there's only 1 strat in this game, enjoy using your most damaging combo to beat 99% of the fight.


No matter how I look at it I really can't see that to be true, even if the battles were scripted well. The act 1 boss was amazing, but I feel that was because of the scripting and interesting terrain. It would have been good with or without the armor system, which in my opinion only served to make the first half of the fight worse.

In d1, when a fight starts, you had to choose. Do you buff first, because buffs were actually useful? Do you try to cc the enemy, or do you try to apply damage immediately? In divinity 2 buffs are useless, and armor blocks every single useful effect and the enemies have massive amounts of it. The only remaining option is to start the battle applying max damage.

This is of course not even touching on the 4 ap/turn limit imposed as well. But I think that one example shows my opinion on how the new armor system limits options, not expand them. RPGs have always been about risk management, there is always a chance for battles to go awry. That's what makes them dangerous and fun. Having to think of a backup to your backup in case your house of cards falls is fun.

Having 100% chances of everything and battles going the same way every time might prevent the frustration of some. But the people who this is made for are those who don't want to even think of what to do if things don't work out perfectly, and would rather reload a save. Those are not the kinds of people I want the game to appeal to, personally.

Joined: Dec 2016
Posts: 540
addict
Offline
addict
Joined: Dec 2016
Posts: 540
Originally Posted by HUcast

No matter how I look at it I really can't see that to be true, even if the battles were scripted well. The act 1 boss was amazing, but I feel that was because of the scripting and interesting terrain. It would have been good with or without the armor system, which in my opinion only served to make the first half of the fight worse.

In d1, when a fight starts, you had to choose. Do you buff first, because buffs were actually useful? Do you try to cc the enemy, or do you try to apply damage immediately? In divinity 2 buffs are useless, and armor blocks every single useful effect and the enemies have massive amounts of it. The only remaining option is to start the battle applying max damage.

This is of course not even touching on the 4 ap/turn limit imposed as well. But I think that one example shows my opinion on how the new armor system limits options, not expand them. RPGs have always been about risk management, there is always a chance for battles to go awry. That's what makes them dangerous and fun. Having to think of a backup to your backup in case your house of cards falls is fun.

Having 100% chances of everything and battles going the same way every time might prevent the frustration of some. But the people who this is made for are those who don't want to even think of what to do if things don't work out perfectly, and would rather reload a save. Those are not the kinds of people I want the game to appeal to, personally.



There are bigger issues and they all stem from Larian failing to capitalize on the advantage that comes from using the game system. They could have used consistency to create new and unique environment. Most of the combat can easily be replicated in even a GM mode with no effort. Just place units with their skills and stat and put them on the same side.

I remember when Enrage used to be useful as both a debuff and a buff. You used to be able to enrage enemies to grant your mages massive damage from the negative resist. They went and removed that because they wanted Enraged to be a damage booster with risk. Then they went and nerf it so it is no longer a good damage booster. This kind of situation is why certain tactic in the game now feels like trash and it's not because of the armor system.

The 2 to 4 AP itself could have been used to make more interesting skills. Armor piercing could have been on a 3 AP and 4 AP could be a game changer. Shame skills just deal more damage based on AP spent and get a large AoE on 3 or 4 AP.

The current armor is like moving from to a new and fancy but empty house. That's the problem. The house is currently empty because Larian forget to add the furniture. People just don't spot this and instead of demanding that furniture be added, they try to burn down the new house and demand Larian reopen the old one for them to live in.

Last edited by Ellezard; 01/10/17 04:22 PM.
Joined: Apr 2011
Posts: 1,771
veteran
Offline
veteran
Joined: Apr 2011
Posts: 1,771
So your sollution to the armor system being bad is spells that ignore the armor system?

Don't you kinda make our point?

Joined: May 2015
Posts: 131
Z
banned
Offline
banned
Z
Joined: May 2015
Posts: 131
Originally Posted by Ellezard
Consistency from the armour system really allow you to come up with more creative battle.


hahaha

Joined: May 2015
Posts: 131
Z
banned
Offline
banned
Z
Joined: May 2015
Posts: 131
Originally Posted by HUcast
Originally Posted by Ellezard
Consistency from the armour system really allow you to come up with more creative battle. The sad part is that there's a very limited amount of fights like that in the game. Larian failed to take advantage of a modern system that allows for much better scripted battles.

The easiest one being the final boss fight of Act 1. You have a bunch of hard enemies to deal with and sudden spawn of the 3rd faction that everyone must defeat. The map layout also allow you to be creative. That's the kind of scripted fight we need more in the game.

The armour system is fine. Lack of variety in combat is the main issue created by lack of creative skills and interactive battles. There's not a single time in the game you get to use the Balista they showcased. Man, imagine if there's a proper Kraken battle on the sea where you have to keep killing the adds it spawn and use balista to damage it while getting buffed by Lady Vengeance.

TOO BAD IT DOESN'T HAPPEN. When your entire gameplay is all about using the same attacks and strat, people will just find an easy target to complain about and atm, it's the armor system because that's where the strat of the entire game stems from. As there's only 1 strat in this game, enjoy using your most damaging combo to beat 99% of the fight.


No matter how I look at it I really can't see that to be true, even if the battles were scripted well. The act 1 boss was amazing, but I feel that was because of the scripting and interesting terrain. It would have been good with or without the armor system, which in my opinion only served to make the first half of the fight worse.

In d1, when a fight starts, you had to choose. Do you buff first, because buffs were actually useful? Do you try to cc the enemy, or do you try to apply damage immediately? In divinity 2 buffs are useless, and armor blocks every single useful effect and the enemies have massive amounts of it. The only remaining option is to start the battle applying max damage.

This is of course not even touching on the 4 ap/turn limit imposed as well. But I think that one example shows my opinion on how the new armor system limits options, not expand them. RPGs have always been about risk management, there is always a chance for battles to go awry. That's what makes them dangerous and fun. Having to think of a backup to your backup in case your house of cards falls is fun.

Having 100% chances of everything and battles going the same way every time might prevent the frustration of some. But the people who this is made for are those who don't want to even think of what to do if things don't work out perfectly, and would rather reload a save. Those are not the kinds of people I want the game to appeal to, personally.


Yep to all you said...

About the boss battle, i think you are talking about the Fort Joy one with the big void thing that appears.

I cheesed that battle so bad... (MUH TACTICS!!!)

All you needed to do was to engage from the right side of the place and put a barrel infront of the stairs or even oil... the stupid AI will just go all the way around to get you and in the mean time you will just wait for them 1 by 1, and they will not even get there in time because the big void or whatever is gonna spawn, so they are going to GO BACK to were they started and they will kill that thing for you while you get rid of the archer, the bitch with the wings will never do anything to you EVER, in fact she is the last one to die.

SO MUCH FUN!!!

NOPE.


Try to engage normally and see how many times you have to reload until you just rage quit, also has to do with my party which is half physical half magical which makes everything harder than it should be.

Last edited by Zherot; 01/10/17 07:11 PM.
Joined: Dec 2016
Posts: 540
addict
Offline
addict
Joined: Dec 2016
Posts: 540
Originally Posted by Hassat Hunter
So your sollution to the armor system being bad is spells that ignore the armor system?

Don't you kinda make our point?


We already have em, Piercing attacks.

We just don't have enough of em to make it armor-pen a viable strat.

See what I'm getting at? If armor penetration is expensive compared to direct damage then people will have to choose which situation to use which. That is what the game needs to capitalize on. Add more stuff to introduce more viable strat instead of just trying to revert everything back to old "CC them with RNG until it works".


Joined: Sep 2015
Posts: 68
L
journeyman
OP Offline
journeyman
L
Joined: Sep 2015
Posts: 68
Again I appreciate everyone's input.. But I feel there still isn't any compelling argument for the armour system.. I don't agree with people saying it helps against cc and increases tactics because I ferl it limits your options as a bunch of abilities are blocked while armour is up. I hadn't considered that it was maybe implemented due to pvp.

Also, what is your feelings about the constant sprouting of blood in melee that increases the status on the floor? Do you think it's over the top?

Joined: Dec 2016
Posts: 540
addict
Offline
addict
Joined: Dec 2016
Posts: 540
RNG limit tactics more than it helps. Why would I use anything if I can roll a dice and get a chance to CC my enemies? Every turn, I will dedicate my AP to using AoE CC. I will use the bought Charm arrow nonstop and if it hits, I will laugh because I just RNG my enemy to victory.

What will they do? Make the chance so low it doesn't work unless the armor is broken? Why even change it then?

Last edited by Ellezard; 02/10/17 12:48 AM.
Joined: Apr 2017
Posts: 49
J
apprentice
Offline
apprentice
J
Joined: Apr 2017
Posts: 49
Originally Posted by Zherot

Try to engage normally and see how many times you have to reload until you just rage quit, also has to do with my party which is half physical half magical which makes everything harder than it should be.


Well…Since they will attack the void monster first, I only reload one time to check if there's something happened if I kill the monster first.

Joined: May 2015
Posts: 131
Z
banned
Offline
banned
Z
Joined: May 2015
Posts: 131
Originally Posted by July_chang
Originally Posted by Zherot

Try to engage normally and see how many times you have to reload until you just rage quit, also has to do with my party which is half physical half magical which makes everything harder than it should be.


Well…Since they will attack the void monster first


Not true. And the monster will attack you too.

Last edited by Zherot; 02/10/17 02:39 AM.
Joined: Apr 2017
Posts: 49
J
apprentice
Offline
apprentice
J
Joined: Apr 2017
Posts: 49
Originally Posted by Zherot
Originally Posted by July_chang
Originally Posted by Zherot

Try to engage normally and see how many times you have to reload until you just rage quit, also has to do with my party which is half physical half magical which makes everything harder than it should be.


Well…Since they will attack the void monster first


Not true. And the monster will attack you too.


Not True. And the Monster didn't attack me.
(Maybe that's just because I'm too powerful and not getting my brain hot to rush close enough LOL. So the monster choose those stupid Magister)

Joined: Jul 2017
Posts: 304
G
enthusiast
Offline
enthusiast
G
Joined: Jul 2017
Posts: 304
Originally Posted by Littlebob86
Again I appreciate everyone's input.. But I feel there still isn't any compelling argument for the armour system.. I don't agree with people saying it helps against cc and increases tactics because I ferl it limits your options as a bunch of abilities are blocked while armour is up. I hadn't considered that it was maybe implemented due to pvp.

Also, what is your feelings about the constant sprouting of blood in melee that increases the status on the floor? Do you think it's over the top?


I'm not sure what you'd like to hear. There is this armor system of different armor protecting against different weapons till it's gone, also used in some space battle games, and the armor mitigating damage plus resists plus random effects.

The second system we are used to from diverse games. It is mostly garbage from a look how armor works in reality, if you are hit with a sword in the lower belly, your plate armor does not take out 5 of 8 points damage to yours guts. Usually it is "deflect or hole in the body". The armor-till-it's-gone is not much better, armor is not diminished part after part in reality, it is holed.

In games both systems have their merits. If you don't like the current system, it's ok. But it is like it is in this game. It removes a lot of randomness above all, that's it.

The views of DOS1 sound a bit like unrealistic nostalgia. Hard to imagine this allgedly extremely better system was in a game often said to have become very boring relatively soon because of no-difficulty-after-x.

Sometimes I have the feeling many posters are playing partly different games. One wrote, in DOS1 you had to decide to buff or cc or damage, in DOS2 it's only damage, the rest is useless. That's not entirely true because buffs do count, sometimes a lot. Ok, you cannot CC iimediately (hmm, unless you use oil, but let's avoid it), so damage it is. Until the armor is gone.

That does not mean that no decisions and tactics have to be made. They differ sometimes from the decisions of the first game, partly they are only to be made later. For example to focus or the recuce armor on more than one foe to CC earlier? The decisions in the other system are not better or more interesting, just partly different.

Last edited by geala; 02/10/17 05:13 AM.
Joined: Oct 2016
Posts: 1,695
veteran
Offline
veteran
Joined: Oct 2016
Posts: 1,695
There is not only 'deflect or hole', it could aswell get dented before you manage to get through. And even if the weapon breaks through and makes a hole, the armor would have still damped the impact. Mainly piercing weapons are more likely to break through armor, because they concentrate all force on one spot. But armor preventing you, to lose your footing or deflect a taunt, sounds really odd. Armor is no exoskeleton, that improves your balance.

As far as I read, D:OS2 is not really different from D:OS2, it's more worse regarding difficulty later on. The start is harder compared to D:OS1 and the difficulty in the endgame only depends on the fact, if you have appropiate level and actual gear for that level. There are no different built sets fpr attribute, because there is only damage possible.


In D:OS1 you could split up your fire power to keep different enemies occupied. If you managed to CC someone, you were able to ignore him for a while, and focus your damage on someone else. In D:OS2 you are more forced to group enemies up and mass-aoe them to get rid of armor of as many as possible. There is never a tension after armor is gone, because your CC can't fail. In D:OS1 CC could always fail so you had to be prepared for that case.

Joined: Jan 2014
Posts: 349
L
enthusiast
Offline
enthusiast
L
Joined: Jan 2014
Posts: 349
Originally Posted by Kalrakh
There is never a tension after armor is gone, because your CC can't fail. In D:OS1 CC could always fail so you had to be prepared for that case.


It's because everyone's defensive options suck; El-whatever-the-fuck-his(or her)-name-is made a good point about the house being empty.

Larian half-assed the abilities and load-outs (player and environment side), coupled with a few other questionable decisions (scaling of gear, AP economy etc) leads to odd pacing.

The current armor system can work, but it is 100% dependent on abilities not being so... bleh. However, that would have required a lot more testing, iterations, and other resources (graphics and otherwise).

Page 3 of 3 1 2 3

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