Larian Banner
Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Page 5 of 8 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Joined: Nov 2020
B
Banned
Offline
Banned
B
Joined: Nov 2020
LOl the title of this Thread.......

Height Advantage is the Metagame im BG3. Regardless of class or party compositon. Height Advantage > tactics

Joined: Sep 2020
old hand
Offline
old hand
Joined: Sep 2020
Originally Posted by Seraphael
Originally Posted by Scribe
Backstab can also just be modded out.

That is well and good; people can ignore or mod away much of this, but will always be aware of the fact they're engaging in self-nerfing behaviour, playing at harder difficulty with no additional reward for the added risk.
Also, can Backstab be removed from enemies? If you don't install mods, then you can't just ignore the presence of backstabbing because enemies will do it. If you do install mods to remove the mechanical benefits, will the enemy AI still try to Backstab?

Originally Posted by Dexai
I also want the game to take facing into account (since tbt DnD doesn't have facing by default because it makes it unnecessarily complicated, but a video game with models have facing -- visually speaking -- by default) instead of just giving bonuses for being on the opposite sides of the target.
Facing would also work to solve Backstabbing. According to the facing rules, if someone tries to run from in front of you to behind you, you have the option of using your reaction to
a) spin in place to face the enemy
b) make an AoO as the enemy is leaving your reach
Of course, jump+disengage invalidates ^, but baby steps.

Joined: Oct 2020
D
enthusiast
Online Content
enthusiast
D
Joined: Oct 2020
Solasta manages to incorporate vertical battlefields in an impactful way WITHOUT giving advantage/disadvantage based on height. Basically, the high ground makes it harder for melee to reach the archers. This is aided by the fact that they do not have ridiculous jump physics in Solasta.

There are many non-encounter things that BG3 does better than Solasta, but when dice meet table Solasta is vastly superior. None of this extra crap is needed to make smooth and interesting battles.

Joined: Jan 2021
addict
Offline
addict
Joined: Jan 2021
Super tadpole jumps were such a distorting design choice. xD

Joined: Jan 2021
S
addict
Offline
addict
S
Joined: Jan 2021
Originally Posted by Seraphael
Originally Posted by Topgoon
Both height and backstab advantage are overtuned, but I'd say backstab advantage is by far a bigger offender than height advantage.

Absolutely! Been saying this all along, and it's important to bear in mind with all the focus on height advantage as seemingly the only evil or the bigger evil of the two. Height advantage has ONLY the issue of over-incentivization (incentivization of tactical movement is GOOD however), while flanking has MULTIPLE issues:

1. As you point out, height advantage is not guaranteed for multiple reason, where flanking is a certainty.
2. Height advantage is at least balanced in that it's a tactic the enemy very frequently uses, when they seldom if ever flank.
3. The enemy being totally defenseless/unresponsive to a single attacker makes melee combat unimmersive. Turn-based combat (that I like) is exposed as a sham.
4. The act of flanking is guaranteed, and this in itself is a negative. If something is guaranteed, having to perform a small ritual to get it every time becomes boring and cheesy. When boredom/patience is the only practical limitation of something so significant, it's simply BAD game design. Just like weapon dipping is.

I have suggested the following change in the overly simplistic flanking mechanic:

Melee combatants, even when not their turn to act, will always automatically pivot to threat - unless already engaged in melee with another threat, or surprised. Immersion and balance restored to the system.



Originally Posted by Scribe
Backstab can also just be modded out.

That is well and good; people can ignore or mod away much of this, but will always be aware of the fact they're engaging in self-nerfing behaviour, playing at harder difficulty with no additional reward for the added risk.

The larger issue remains though; the repeated use of resources on "Larian cheese", which too often are unimmersive, unbalanced and clunky implementations, means less resources on implementing actual D&D or story content that has none of these issues.

Yeah, I'd prefer they work on Class Mechanics that are not already implemented, so that we can mod those as well, but it is what it is.

Joined: Oct 2020
enthusiast
Offline
enthusiast
Joined: Oct 2020
If Height advantage not that impactful, there should be no issue with it being removed, yes?

Joined: Jan 2021
S
addict
Offline
addict
S
Joined: Jan 2021
Originally Posted by Merry Mayhem
If Height advantage not that impactful, there should be no issue with it being removed, yes?

Dont worry, its both. Its highly impactful, and it can be removed. laugh

Joined: Oct 2020
journeyman
Offline
journeyman
Joined: Oct 2020
Originally Posted by dwig
Solasta manages to incorporate vertical battlefields in an impactful way WITHOUT giving advantage/disadvantage based on height. Basically, the high ground makes it harder for melee to reach the archers. This is aided by the fact that they do not have ridiculous jump physics in Solasta.

There are many non-encounter things that BG3 does better than Solasta, but when dice meet table Solasta is vastly superior. None of this extra crap is needed to make smooth and interesting battles.

Always with this crapy game 80 people are playing solasta right now. 800 people are playing BG 1 20+ years old game..
And the massive difference in sales... Stop projecting your opinions of combat to everyone. If you like it that doesn't mean it's good.

Last edited by Lastman; 23/02/21 07:05 PM.
Joined: Oct 2020
D
enthusiast
Online Content
enthusiast
D
Joined: Oct 2020
Originally Posted by Lastman
Originally Posted by dwig
Solasta manages to incorporate vertical battlefields in an impactful way WITHOUT giving advantage/disadvantage based on height. Basically, the high ground makes it harder for melee to reach the archers. This is aided by the fact that they do not have ridiculous jump physics in Solasta.

There are many non-encounter things that BG3 does better than Solasta, but when dice meet table Solasta is vastly superior. None of this extra crap is needed to make smooth and interesting battles.
Always with this crapy game 80 people are playing solasta right now.
And the massive difference in sales... Stop projecting your opinions of combat to everyone. If you like it that doesn't mean it's good.

So rude...

Joined: Dec 2020
addict
Offline
addict
Joined: Dec 2020
Originally Posted by ][/quote
Originally Posted by Lastman
[quote=dwig]Solasta manages to incorporate vertical battlefields in an impactful way WITHOUT giving advantage/disadvantage based on height. Basically, the high ground makes it harder for melee to reach the archers. This is aided by the fact that they do not have ridiculous jump physics in Solasta.

There are many non-encounter things that BG3 does better than Solasta, but when dice meet table Solasta is vastly superior. None of this extra crap is needed to make smooth and interesting battles.

Always with this crapy game 80 people are playing solasta right now. 800 people are playing BG 1 20+ years old game..
And the massive difference in sales... Stop projecting your opinions of combat to everyone. If you like it that doesn't mean it's good.

Are you okay?

Joined: Jan 2021
S
addict
Offline
addict
S
Joined: Jan 2021
Originally Posted by Lastman
Originally Posted by dwig
Solasta manages to incorporate vertical battlefields in an impactful way WITHOUT giving advantage/disadvantage based on height. Basically, the high ground makes it harder for melee to reach the archers. This is aided by the fact that they do not have ridiculous jump physics in Solasta.

There are many non-encounter things that BG3 does better than Solasta, but when dice meet table Solasta is vastly superior. None of this extra crap is needed to make smooth and interesting battles.
Always with this crapy game 80 people are playing solasta right now.
Always with this crapy game 80 people are playing solasta right now. 800 people are playing BG 1 20+ years old game..
And the massive difference in sales... Stop projecting your opinions of combat to everyone. If you like it that doesn't mean it's good.

Well, flip the script.

Give Solasta the massive budget. Give Solasta the push from official D&D channels on Social Media. Give Solasta the 'Baldur's Gate' name.

BG3 exists on name value alone. Its nothing special otherwise at this point, it cant even implement D&D properly.

Joined: Jan 2021
D
Darun Offline OP
stranger
OP Offline
stranger
D
Joined: Jan 2021
From what I have gathered it took Wizards of the Coast some 4-5 decades to figure out that it might be a good idea to constrain the ridiculous nonlinearities of their retarded ruleset with bandaids like "bounded accuracy".

And some people here treat D&D rules like they were some godsent commandments L O L

Joined: Dec 2020
Location: CA
S
addict
Offline
addict
S
Joined: Dec 2020
Location: CA
Originally Posted by Darun
From what I have gathered it took Wizards of the Coast some 4-5 decades to figure out that it might be a good idea to constrain the ridiculous nonlinearities of their retarded ruleset with bandaids like "bounded accuracy".

And some people here treat D&D rules like they were some godsent commandments L O L

I'm not following.

Would you play chess with checkers ru!es? Why would you play D&D 5e with another ruleset?

All people are trying to suggest is make the game more like 5e which it is based on, not because it's the greatest system ever.

Last edited by spectralhunter; 23/02/21 07:55 PM.
Joined: Jan 2021
S
addict
Offline
addict
S
Joined: Jan 2021
Originally Posted by Darun
From what I have gathered it took Wizards of the Coast some 4-5 decades to figure out that it might be a good idea to constrain the ridiculous nonlinearities of their retarded ruleset with bandaids like "bounded accuracy".

And some people here treat D&D rules like they were some godsent commandments L O L

Indeed, throw it out. We dont need Classes or Races either, only a scrub would care to do anything but stack Scrolls, abuse Barrels and Ground Effects, and Cross Bow people from the top rope.

Joined: Feb 2020
Location: Belgium
veteran
Offline
veteran
Joined: Feb 2020
Location: Belgium
Originally Posted by spectralhunter
Originally Posted by Darun
From what I have gathered it took Wizards of the Coast some 4-5 decades to figure out that it might be a good idea to constrain the ridiculous nonlinearities of their retarded ruleset with bandaids like "bounded accuracy".

And some people here treat D&D rules like they were some godsent commandments L O L

I'm not following.

Would you play chess with checkers ru!es? Why would you play D&D 5e with another ruleset?

All people are trying to suggest is make the game more like 5e which it is based on, not because it's the greatest system ever.

That's not totally true.

I don't really care about this game to be a "true" 5e D&D game because there's the logo on the box...
But I really think the game would be far more interresting and tactical with less Larianisation of D&D.

Last edited by Maximuuus; 23/02/21 08:14 PM.
Joined: Oct 2020
journeyman
Offline
journeyman
Joined: Oct 2020
Originally Posted by Scribe
Well, flip the script.

Give Solasta the massive budget. Give Solasta the push from official D&D channels on Social Media. Give Solasta the 'Baldur's Gate' name.

BG3 exists on name value alone. Its nothing special otherwise at this point, it cant even implement D&D properly.

Well, reviews are saying different story it seems. Even if i could agree. Majority of people - fans don't go to forums.
I have gripes with BG 3 as well, biggest one is jump/disengage but i know the difference between the two combats and in my opinion they are light years away. I mean if you like clicking on pop ups i do not.
Games can still sell without huge budget for PR. Dos 2 did.

You can still have a good looking game on budget. But Crpg on budget is around one million not at 200k of Solasta.

And if anyone is giving money away i'll take 2 million minimal. I can make an amazing party rpg with a massive budget.:))

Last edited by Lastman; 23/02/21 08:18 PM.
Joined: Jan 2021
S
addict
Offline
addict
S
Joined: Jan 2021
Originally Posted by Lastman
Originally Posted by Scribe
Well, flip the script.

Give Solasta the massive budget. Give Solasta the push from official D&D channels on Social Media. Give Solasta the 'Baldur's Gate' name.

BG3 exists on name value alone. Its nothing special otherwise at this point, it cant even implement D&D properly.

Well, reviews are saying different story it seems. Even if i could agree. Majority of people - fans don't go to forums.
I have gripes with BG 3 as well, biggest one is jump/disengage but i know the difference between the two combats and in my opinion they are light years away. I mean if you like clicking on pop ups i do not.
Games can still sell without huge budget for PR. Dos 2 did.

You can still have a good looking game on budget. But Crpg on budget is around one million not at 200k of Solasta.

And if anyone is giving money away i'll take 2 million minimal. I can make an amazing party rpg with a massive budget.:))

Of course games can still sell, but both are in EA and one is on a shoestring budget with zero name recognition.

Who do you think would have more sales based on that? lol

I mean you think most people give a shit about the combat in this game? The ones leaving positive reviews are 'omg its soo pretty, i get to dress up and there's good cutscenes!' you have people legit asking for combat skips to be implemented here.

Last edited by Scribe; 23/02/21 08:21 PM.
Joined: Jan 2021
D
Darun Offline OP
stranger
OP Offline
stranger
D
Joined: Jan 2021
Originally Posted by spectralhunter
Originally Posted by Darun
From what I have gathered it took Wizards of the Coast some 4-5 decades to figure out that it might be a good idea to constrain the ridiculous nonlinearities of their retarded ruleset with bandaids like "bounded accuracy".

And some people here treat D&D rules like they were some godsent commandments L O L

I'm not following.

Would you play chess with checkers ru!es? Why would you play D&D 5e with another ruleset?

All people are trying to suggest is make the game more like 5e which it is based on, not because it's the greatest system ever.

Early versions of chess were quite different from modern chess, afaik. BG3 is in alpha stage and everything is subject to change. I would rather put my faith in Larian to create a good ruleset for a videogame rather than a company that needed half a century to figure out something like "bounded accuracy". The reason BG1&2 were good is certainly not the D&D rules.

Joined: Dec 2020
Location: CA
S
addict
Offline
addict
S
Joined: Dec 2020
Location: CA
Originally Posted by Maximuuus
Originally Posted by spectralhunter
Originally Posted by Darun
From what I have gathered it took Wizards of the Coast some 4-5 decades to figure out that it might be a good idea to constrain the ridiculous nonlinearities of their retarded ruleset with bandaids like "bounded accuracy".

And some people here treat D&D rules like they were some godsent commandments L O L

I'm not following.

Would you play chess with checkers ru!es? Why would you play D&D 5e with another ruleset?

All people are trying to suggest is make the game more like 5e which it is based on, not because it's the greatest system ever.

That's not totally true.

I don't really care about this game to be a "true" 5e D&D game because there's the logo on the box...
But I really think the game would be far more interresting and tactical with less Larianisation of D&D.

I’m not following this either. Why would you put a D&D logo and say it’s based on 5e if you weren’t going to implement the ruleset and use the D&D setting?

Asking for less Larianism is asking for a more faithful interpretation of 5e. I know you agree because I know from your posts you agree with most of the suggested changes.

I should repeat again. No one is asking for a perfect 1:1 translation of 5e. What most critics want is a system that is first grounded in 5e and then make modifications to fit a video game environment. Larian instead used DOS and then modified it to fit 5e.

Joined: Dec 2020
Location: CA
S
addict
Offline
addict
S
Joined: Dec 2020
Location: CA
Originally Posted by Darun
Originally Posted by spectralhunter
Originally Posted by Darun
From what I have gathered it took Wizards of the Coast some 4-5 decades to figure out that it might be a good idea to constrain the ridiculous nonlinearities of their retarded ruleset with bandaids like "bounded accuracy".

And some people here treat D&D rules like they were some godsent commandments L O L

I'm not following.

Would you play chess with checkers ru!es? Why would you play D&D 5e with another ruleset?

All people are trying to suggest is make the game more like 5e which it is based on, not because it's the greatest system ever.

Early versions of chess were quite different from modern chess, afaik. BG3 is in alpha stage and everything is subject to change. I would rather put my faith in Larian to create a good ruleset for a videogame rather than a company that needed half a century to figure out something like "bounded accuracy". The reason BG1&2 were good is certainly not the D&D rules.

Oh my goodness. Early versions of chess? Seriously that’s your argument? We are talking about the current version of 5e not 1st Ed.

Thank you for your personal opinion.

Page 5 of 8 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

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