Larian Banner
Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Page 2 of 3 1 2 3
Joined: Oct 2020
addict
Offline
addict
Joined: Oct 2020
Originally Posted by Niara
Originally Posted by fallenj
Pretty sure we just had this talk in a previous thread

Yes, we did, and you had no legitimate response there either, and did not acknowledge the demonstrations and proofs that were shown, and simply reiterated your stance without evidence or back up in the face of actual demonstrations that showed the falsehood of your assertion. Please actually acknowledge the proofs offered and give your equally well demonstrated counter to them, beyond blind assertion to the contrary, which you still, despite several iterations of this discussion, have never done. The demonstrations provided actively prove the opposite of what you're saying, and your only response is just to assert your stance again in the face of them. You never respond to the actual arguments or demonstrations made; the thread is still there waiting for you to do that. All you're doing by continuing to assert this every time it comes up is spreading wilful misinformation. Please don't.

They were legit responses, even if you don't agree with it. I own that game, your only giving examples of Solasta. Those and any video you show for that game will be good enough examples to show case my evidence, you do it for me. Solasta is a single player game, put in actual additional players and response times for that and your done, this is my argument twords any pop ups at all, there is no need for them period. Combat was setup to flow fluently not interrupted with spam questions.


13:59 co-op combat, this is just combat and making choices during combat, slow reaction times. Not all people are lightning fast.

Last edited by fallenj; 29/07/21 05:47 AM.
Joined: Mar 2020
M
member
Offline
member
M
Joined: Mar 2020
+1 to OP, sometimes its hard to see when it triggers

Joined: Dec 2020
B
journeyman
Offline
journeyman
B
Joined: Dec 2020
One option that was floated (repeatedly) ages ago was to allow popups for those who want them, and just auto-everything-else for those who don't. I would be happy with that - and I don't think it would involve much work. So, having to click on something may slow down combat by a whisker, who cares? Seriously, if you don't want to make a decision, then just turn out auto-decide. Done. The issue with combat speed up to now has been painfully slow AI and slow/wasteful animations. Fix those, and I doubt people will worry about an extra click or two (and if they do, they can use the auto-decide option).

Joined: Mar 2020
Location: Belfast
old hand
Offline
old hand
Joined: Mar 2020
Location: Belfast
Originally Posted by Boblawblah
unless you have NO control over the reaction, the combat is going to be slowed down by a player controlled reaction system. Go ahead and show me how a 2 minute long fight would be shortened by adding in more player input.
I don't about yourself, but I play games, to play them. Better, tighter control over character's action and allowing for decision-making during enemy turn, does sound more interesting then sitting through a turn and fiddling with toggles (granted I didn't see many reactions available in BG3 EA). Combat encounter might take more time, if it constantly interested. And enemy turn still being "your turn" is more interesting the pressing "end turn" and waiting to be in control again.

At the moment reaction barely exist - which is a shame.

Joined: Mar 2020
addict
Offline
addict
Joined: Mar 2020
Originally Posted by Boblawblah
i feel like I'm missing something. You're basically saying they need to just redo their entire combat and make it like Solasta. that's NOT going to happen. If they were to implement player controlled reactions TO THIS GAME CURRENTLY, it would be SLOWER than it is right now. Of course if they completely changed the entire system so that reactions were seamlessly integrated into the entire system, it could possibly be as fast as it is now, but then it would be a completely different system.
Well yes and no.
Surely it depends on the outcome of the reaction? If I take less damage as a result, then I do not need to drink a potion on my turn and can concentrate on damage, thus speeding up the encounter (or in this instance regaining that lost time). Plus I prefer for me to be interacting in the combat vs waiting my turn. I am not fussed on combat taking as long as it needs to, as long as I am INVOLVED.

Joined: Aug 2014
1
old hand
Offline
old hand
1
Joined: Aug 2014
I think they should redesign most reactions into Bonus Actions with similar effects.

AoO should just be automated to attack the first possible target. The level of micromanagement pop-up reaction windows would add just isn't worth the constant disruption to game flow imo. When wouldn't you take your first AoO anyway? You never know if you even get another chance. And it makes perfect sense in the chaos of battle.

I also hate how the UI makes you incur AoO's even if you're expecting it and carefully trying to avoid it. The visual isn't clear enough, and often it's impossible to find a spot where to click and move even though there's space. The system should have a clearer visual and assist you better in finding/suggesting a route where you don't draw an AoO.

Paladin Divine Smite doesn't have to be a reaction at all. It could easily be a Bonus Action to charge your weapon with divine power before attacking. Just let it remain until discharged. The way Solasta does Divine Smite, popping up a "would you like to add Divine Smite" question window after every.. single.. hit.. is super annoying and unnecessary. And from a cinematic point of view.. you simply do NOT freeze the action at the moment of imminent impact. It just kills all satisfaction and feel of a good hit.

Shield could be a Bonus Action spell that gives +5 AC for 3 turns or similar.

Last edited by 1varangian; 29/07/21 11:15 AM.
Joined: Oct 2020
journeyman
Offline
journeyman
Joined: Oct 2020
The problem with modifying reactions to become bonus actions is, of course, that many characters already have bonus actions that they now cannot use. Dual-wielding paladin cannot take an off-hand attack if they used a bonus action to smite.

If you, however, mean that reactions should be FREE actions during the players’s turn, we might get somewhere. Unfortunately several reaction abilities, such as counterspell, really need to be used selectively or they waste resources.

Last edited by Mythago; 29/07/21 11:32 AM.
Joined: Oct 2020
journeyman
Offline
journeyman
Joined: Oct 2020
I simply prefer the pop-ups, they give full control over reactions on the AI turns. There's no better solution, even the Final Fantasy Gambit system requires an enormous effort to design all the rules to your liking, and you still need to keep switching those rules depending on the encounters. Pop-ups interrupt the action, but do you really want to either give control away and watch your character act without your input or spend time designing reaction rules where instead you could be playing the game?

Joined: Jul 2014
Location: Italy
veteran
Offline
veteran
Joined: Jul 2014
Location: Italy
Reactions and bonus actions are two entire different things. Not sure why you are conflating the two.
The type of reactions we were discussing about, in particular, are the one that happen during an opponent's turn, interrupting his moves (Attack of Opportunity, Counter-spell, etc).


Party control in Baldur's Gate 3 is a complete mess that begs to be addressed. SAY NO TO THE TOILET CHAIN
Joined: Aug 2014
1
old hand
Offline
old hand
1
Joined: Aug 2014
Originally Posted by Mythago
The problem with modifying reactions to become bonus actions is, of course, that many characters already have bonus actions that they now cannot use. Dual-wielding paladin cannot take an off-hand attack if they used a bonus action to smite.

If you, however, mean that reactions should be FREE actions during the players’s turn, we might get somewhere. Unfortunately several reaction abilities, such as counterspell, really need to be used selectively or they waste resources.
I think using Bonus Action for off-hand attacks was a mistake to begin with. I would separate that first. Bonus Action by definition is a bonus in addition to attacking, no need to nerf dual wielding by effectively removing their bonus action. BG3 makes this even worse because dual wielders now get penalized also for jumping, drinking potions, shoving... list goes on. But that's more of a D&D thing and Larian just made it worse.

Free Action could work better in many cases, yes. The essence of it is making these abilities active instead of reactive to get rid of the problem.

It's just a fact that a 100% accurate reaction system will never be good in a video game. It just destroys the flow of combat by constantly prompting for every little meaningless detail. And the automated system we now have fires off reactions at wrong times, or not at all when you need them to. That's why I would fix this particular issue with the axe.

Last edited by 1varangian; 29/07/21 12:47 PM.
Joined: Aug 2020
enthusiast
Offline
enthusiast
Joined: Aug 2020
I am very in favor of a more accurate reaction system. Having experienced what they did with Solasta, I did not find it to impact flow at all. In Solasta, the shield spell was a must have for any spellcaster that could use it, but now, I don't even bother with it. I like having that extra level of control that reactions provide. It makes me feel like I'm more in control and that I'm being clever more often. It also makes me feel cool for getting one over on my enemies and exploiting an opportunity. I like with Paladin smite that I can use it to finally finish off a weakened enemy or really pile it on a strong one I want to get out of the way. I think it does makes combat more interesting because as it is now, whena bunch of enemies have their turns, I generally just check out until it's my turn again. And when there's a lot of enemeies (looking at you, goblin camp) it gets borning waiting and knowing all I can do is wait.

I think this is one of those decisions where there isn't likely to be a satisfying middle-ground. People who really prefer traditional reactions just prefer them, same with people who don't like them. And there's not going to be an argument that changes either party's position on the matter. So in effect we're making these arguments and hoping to convince someone over at Larian.

Joined: Oct 2020
journeyman
Offline
journeyman
Joined: Oct 2020
Originally Posted by 1varangian
It's just a fact that a 100% accurate reaction system will never be good in a video game. It either destroys the flow of combat by constantly prompting for every little meaningless detail or fires off the reactions at wrong times, or not at all when you need them to.

Unless you add "For me" to the first sentence, I'm not sure why it is a fact. I completed Solasta a couple times and absolutely enjoyed the increased control from reaction pop-ups. I have no trouble admitting that not everyone likes it done that way, and I have no objections to keeping some reactions automatic.

I'd like to see an example of reaction Counterspell that is usable without automation (it can waste the spell on something trivial) or an activated ability (how can you counter something on your turn when you don't know if it's going to happen).

Of course you can simply not implement any reactions that can't easily be done as an activated ability. I simply do not understand why a pop-up is such a big deal in a turn-based game.

Joined: Dec 2020
addict
Offline
addict
Joined: Dec 2020
Originally Posted by Riandor
Originally Posted by Boblawblah
i feel like I'm missing something. You're basically saying they need to just redo their entire combat and make it like Solasta. that's NOT going to happen. If they were to implement player controlled reactions TO THIS GAME CURRENTLY, it would be SLOWER than it is right now. Of course if they completely changed the entire system so that reactions were seamlessly integrated into the entire system, it could possibly be as fast as it is now, but then it would be a completely different system.
Well yes and no.
Surely it depends on the outcome of the reaction? If I take less damage as a result, then I do not need to drink a potion on my turn and can concentrate on damage, thus speeding up the encounter (or in this instance regaining that lost time). Plus I prefer for me to be interacting in the combat vs waiting my turn. I am not fussed on combat taking as long as it needs to, as long as I am INVOLVED.

good point, but then they'd be basically re-balancing every encounter to account for reactions. I will admit, seeing how Solasta plays out seems to be fairly fast, but I'm not sure if they're going to take the time to redo their combat system to appease the 5e fans. The DOS2 fans certainly wouldn't care and the old school BG fans never had turn-based combat anyways, so we're left with the 5e people, who seem to be a minority (albeit extremely loud minority).

Joined: Mar 2020
Location: Belfast
old hand
Offline
old hand
Joined: Mar 2020
Location: Belfast
Originally Posted by 1varangian
I think using Bonus Action for off-hand attacks was a mistake to begin with. I would separate that first. Bonus Action by definition is a bonus in addition to attacking, no need to nerf dual wielding by effectively removing their bonus action. BG3 makes this even worse because dual wielders now get penalized also for jumping, drinking potions, shoving... list goes on.
I am pretty sure jump, nor drinking potiont nor shove shouldn't be main actions in the first place :hihi:. That's the problem with homebrew - you change couple things, and they ended up rippling through the rest of the systems. I personally like off-hand being a bonus action - I think it works very well.

Originally Posted by Mythago
Unless you add "For me" to the first sentence, I'm not sure why it is a fact. I completed Solasta a couple times and absolutely enjoyed the increased control from reaction pop-ups. I have no trouble admitting that not everyone likes it done that way, and I have no objections to keeping some reactions automatic.
(...)
Of course you can simply not implement any reactions that can't easily be done as an activated ability. I simply do not understand why a pop-up is such a big deal in a turn-based game.
I think there is room to improve. Smite was somewhat irritating, having to confirm or deny with every hit - that said, having an exact control of when I am willing to use it was excellent.

I think most of individual reactions can be replaced with something different (smite for example can be just a seperate attack, that consumes resource only when it lands) with only few requiring pop-up (like counterspell) but the issue with using different implementations for different reactions makes the whole thing more confusing then it needs to be.

I suppose everyone nowadays compares their turn-based game to XCOM - so as XCOM doesn't have reactions, that means reactions are bad and will be rejected by wide public. And who knows they might be right.

Joined: Aug 2014
1
old hand
Offline
old hand
1
Joined: Aug 2014
Originally Posted by "Mythago"
Unless you add "For me" to the first sentence, I'm not sure why it is a fact. I completed Solasta a couple times and absolutely enjoyed the increased control from reaction pop-ups. I have no trouble admitting that not everyone likes it done that way, and I have no objections to keeping some reactions automatic.

I'd like to see an example of reaction Counterspell that is usable without automation (it can waste the spell on something trivial) or an activated ability (how can you counter something on your turn when you don't know if it's going to happen).

Of course you can simply not implement any reactions that can't easily be done as an activated ability. I simply do not understand why a pop-up is such a big deal in a turn-based game.
Well, it is a fact that if you get a pop-up window every time your Wizard is hit or when your Paladin hits an enemy, combat does not flow as well as without those extra interruptions. Suddenly you have to make decisions during enemy turns as well instead of just letting their turn run it's course. I can completely accept that some players enjoy slow micromanagement of little details. But I understand Larians take on this and I tend to agree with them for once.

Counterspell won't work without the prompts as it is in 5e. But it could be very well changed into an action spell that would give a spell failure chance, or initiate some spell DC contest or just prevent casting of lvl 1-2 spells for a short duration. Or just be axed completely.

Pop-ups will be especially challenging for multiplayer where everyone needs to understand what the hold-up is about and what's happening. Solasta doesn't have this to worry about.

Joined: Aug 2020
enthusiast
Offline
enthusiast
Joined: Aug 2020
Originally Posted by 1varangian
Originally Posted by "Mythago"
Unless you add "For me" to the first sentence, I'm not sure why it is a fact. I completed Solasta a couple times and absolutely enjoyed the increased control from reaction pop-ups. I have no trouble admitting that not everyone likes it done that way, and I have no objections to keeping some reactions automatic.

I'd like to see an example of reaction Counterspell that is usable without automation (it can waste the spell on something trivial) or an activated ability (how can you counter something on your turn when you don't know if it's going to happen).

Of course you can simply not implement any reactions that can't easily be done as an activated ability. I simply do not understand why a pop-up is such a big deal in a turn-based game.
Well, it is a fact that if you get a pop-up window every time your Wizard is hit or when your Paladin hits an enemy, combat does not flow as well as without those extra interruptions. Suddenly you have to make decisions during enemy turns as well instead of just letting their turn run it's course. I can completely accept that some players enjoy slow micromanagement of little details. But I understand Larians take on this and I tend to agree with them for once.

I have to ask because I don't think I've fully understood; what do you actually mean by "the flow of combat"? Playing Solasta, I found the combat there to have a good, satisfying back and forth that kept me engages constantly. I'm not sure what interpretation of flow you have that doesn't align with that feeling and I think this conversation would be enriched if that term was made clear.

Joined: Aug 2014
1
old hand
Offline
old hand
1
Joined: Aug 2014
Originally Posted by Gray Ghost
Originally Posted by 1varangian
Originally Posted by "Mythago"
Unless you add "For me" to the first sentence, I'm not sure why it is a fact. I completed Solasta a couple times and absolutely enjoyed the increased control from reaction pop-ups. I have no trouble admitting that not everyone likes it done that way, and I have no objections to keeping some reactions automatic.

I'd like to see an example of reaction Counterspell that is usable without automation (it can waste the spell on something trivial) or an activated ability (how can you counter something on your turn when you don't know if it's going to happen).

Of course you can simply not implement any reactions that can't easily be done as an activated ability. I simply do not understand why a pop-up is such a big deal in a turn-based game.
Well, it is a fact that if you get a pop-up window every time your Wizard is hit or when your Paladin hits an enemy, combat does not flow as well as without those extra interruptions. Suddenly you have to make decisions during enemy turns as well instead of just letting their turn run it's course. I can completely accept that some players enjoy slow micromanagement of little details. But I understand Larians take on this and I tend to agree with them for once.

I have to ask because I don't think I've fully understood; what do you actually mean by "the flow of combat"? Playing Solasta, I found the combat there to have a good, satisfying back and forth that kept me engages constantly. I'm not sure what interpretation of flow you have that doesn't align with that feeling and I think this conversation would be enriched if that term was made clear.
Good flow means as little pausing as possible. I think I already mentioned Paladins smite freezing the action at the worst possible time being the worst offender.

Joined: Jul 2014
Location: Italy
veteran
Offline
veteran
Joined: Jul 2014
Location: Italy
I'd LOVE to be proven wrong, but if we have to be honest here despise my previous attempt to "figure out a compromise to make "pop-ups acceptable for Larian" I'm almost ready to bet that their "rework of the reaction system" will end up being as some of their past "reworks": hardly a meaningful change, or at best a crutch rather than an actual solution.

I'm almost confident they'll add a few more *fully automated* reactions and that's pretty much it.
"Counter-spell", for instance, will either be automated as well (which is risky, given that wasting a spell slot in automatic is far more of an issue than wasting an AoO) or morel ikely it just won't be a thing at all. Dismissed as "something that doesn't work well in a computer game" or something.


Party control in Baldur's Gate 3 is a complete mess that begs to be addressed. SAY NO TO THE TOILET CHAIN
Joined: Aug 2014
1
old hand
Offline
old hand
1
Joined: Aug 2014
I'm not convinced Counterspell is a fun spell to begin with. I mean..instead of two casters doing something, both do nothing with those spell slots, and slots just get drained. Spell Mantle vs. Dispel Magic is a much more fun active mage vs mage thing.

Joined: Aug 2020
enthusiast
Offline
enthusiast
Joined: Aug 2020
Originally Posted by 1varangian
I'm not convinced Counterspell is a fun spell to begin with. I mean..instead of two casters doing something, both do nothing with those spell slots, and slots just get drained. Spell Mantle vs. Dispel Magic is a much more fun active mage vs mage thing.

You speak for yourself here I'm afraid. I for one quite enjoy the feeling of negating an enemies attack. And negating an attack very much is doing something. A potentially very important something depending on the tide of battle. Also if by Spell Mantle you mean "mantle of spell resistance" then that is far more like "doing nothing." Passively wearing an item that improves your chancesto stop a spell vs actually making the decision yourself to stop an enemy spell.

Last edited by Gray Ghost; 29/07/21 03:15 PM.
Page 2 of 3 1 2 3

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