16407 réponses à ce sujet

[corey_russell]

The Fred wrote...

If you can get somewhere with reloads, you can theoretically get there without them. It just depends on what your chances are as to whether you actually make it, though.

Yes and no The Fred. If your party is so badly equipped/underpowered/missing spells, a particular fight MIGHT (at a particular point) be only 20% chance of success with reloads. With reloads you eventually succeeded.

With no reloads, 20% is unacceptable - you just have to put off whatever it is (like Kangaxx or Firkraag as examples) until the party is stronger.

[Shadow_Leech07]

Here's an update on my progress

Unfortunately the Palidrome Party failed to attract the services of a fully fledged elf, therefore the Palindrome party consisted of a cult group of humans and half-elves bent on creating perfection through the means of perfect balance.

South of Beregost, Ada(fighter/thief) spots a ogrillion by means of stealth. She baits the ogrillion with an arrow and then leads the ogrillion back to her teammates where they slay the beast. The second ogrillion falls in a similar manner.

A simple bandit ambush proved to be a frightening experience. Tenet was hit once, as well as Ada, which brought both down to half health. One more hit, Tenet may have died.

Greywolf assails the party after trying to kill his bounty Prism. Tenet lands the final blow that slays the mercenary.



Appa gains the gauntlets of dexterity off ogrillion thugs at the Gnoll Stronghold.

After visiting the ruins of the ancient civilization and returning Brage to the temple, three of the fighters leveled to the next level. Appa received the least amount of health.

Melicamp the chicken has died. The party rests but is assailed by dagger throwing skeletons. Appa is injured so the party retreat back into the Hedge building and Padap switches armor with him. In a true palindrome situation, Padap would be the exact double of a healthy Appa, however this is not the case, as Padap has more health then Appa. Padap points out that the party itself is not situated palindrome style due to class as there are three who are not true fighters.

The party met with a rude mage named Zordral in one of the carnival tents. They tried to escape when Zordral attacked them with his casting of a spell. He got mirror image out but the party still couldn't escape. Apparently the doorway was jammed. Left with no other choice, the party let loose upon Zordral. Zordral couldn't get another spell off as his mirror images disappeared. He died shortly afterwards.



Padap is slain by the party in the basilisk area, so the party retreat to the north. Ada stealths to scout the enemy, and it seems the woman is camping around Padap's equipment. How clever of her. Her ally is faraway from her, so the Palindromes can strike her. Ada prepares to stealth and strike but the statue has hostiled her so she cannot hide under the treee once the woman has caught onto her. So the Palindromes launch a vicious assault upon this enemy and down she goes. Something needs to be done about the statue.
Once the statue is destroyed, Ada proceeds with her guerilla tactics. The archer of the enemy party was closest to the woman, so Ada proceeds with her hit and run tactics. Unfortunately for Ada, the enemy archer catches on, and Ada is slain. He manages to get a good hit in against Appa, but is in turn slain by Appa. With Ada dead, the remaining party is simply not strong enough to take out the remaining enemy forces and thus retreat from the area. An ambush occurs afterwards, and Tenet gulps down a potion of mirroring eyes just in case a bassilisk shows it's ugly hide.

(Sidenote: I realize now I didn't even pick blindness for my fighter/mage. So no elves, and no blindness for me, I suppose the rust is settling in)
Ada is slain by a kobold archer, the party continues forth to the Friendly Arm Inn. Eve prepares her command spell just in case any suspicious persons decides to take aim at the party.

A man who looked out of place in the Friendly Arm Inn caused Eve to cast aid upon Padap. It turns out, this man named Tarnesh wanted to kill the Palindromes. Eve casts command on Tarnesh, and Hannah proceeds with magic missile. Once the command succeeds, it's lights out. (Forgot to get spider body back in Beregost).

Modifié par Shadow_Leech07, 14 décembre 2011 - 07:56 .

[corey_russell]

Interesting account, shadow_leech. Just curious, are the pictures of your female party members real (that is people you know), or are they just random pics off the internet?

[Shadow_Leech07]

corey_russell wrote...

Interesting account, shadow_leech. Just curious, are the pictures of your female party members real (that is people you know), or are they just random pics off the internet?

Nope, they are not people I know. The very top(the one of Ada) is a sports illustrated swimsuit model, the one in the middle is an actress, I forgot her name, she was in that new Charlie's Angel show that got cancelled. The last one is kind of random, she was a Victoria's Secret Model, maybe she still is? I don't know. Don't know her name either.

[The Fred]

corey_russell wrote...

The Fred wrote...

If you can get somewhere with reloads, you can theoretically get there without them. It just depends on what your chances are as to whether you actually make it, though.

Yes and no The Fred. If your party is so badly equipped/underpowered/missing spells, a particular fight MIGHT (at a particular point) be only 20% chance of success with reloads. With reloads you eventually succeeded.

With no reloads, 20% is unacceptable - you just have to put off whatever it is (like Kangaxx or Firkraag as examples) until the party is stronger.

Well, that's why I said theoretically. If you have a small but finite chance of getting through each fight then (assuming the fights are all independant) your chance of completing the game with no reloads is the product of each chance for all fights in the game (man I wish I could write maths in the forum!). That number's going to be really really small, so you might have to try 100s of times to succeed, admittedly, but it's possible. I don't think anyone would fancy attempting a no-reload on those grounds, however.

[After5CST]

The Fred wrote...
If you have a small but finite chance of getting through each fight then (assuming the fights are all independant) your chance of completing the game with no reloads is the product of each chance for all fights in the game (man I wish I could write maths in the forum!). That number's going to be really really small...

Jeez, I wish I hadn't thought about this.

Assuming 1000 combats in the game, if your average for success per combat is 99.99% of the time (get killed one combat out of every 10,000), then you'll be successful (approximately) 90.5% of the time... or about 18 out of 20 attempts.

If your average for success per combat is 99.9% (get killed one combat out of 1000), then you'll be successful (approximately) 37% of the time, or around 1 out of 3 attempts.

If your average for success per combat is 99.5% of the time (get killed five combats out of 1000), then you'll be successful (approximately) 0.7% of the time, or around 1 out of 150 attempts.

[corey_russell]

By "combats" I assume you meant "encounters" - that is, you meet 5 gibberlings and deal with them that's one combat. Certainly there are hundreds of combats, not sure if 1000. Unfortunately the percent per combat doesn't really tell the whole story - example, if a level 4 party encountered some Tasloi the chance of winning is 100%! - no reload has EVER lost to those enemies, that I am aware. On the other hand, Lendarn the mage who loves lightning bolt in firewine bridge ruins, that has ended at least 1/2 dozen no-reloads, maybe even a dozen. So for that encounter, there might be a 7% chance of defeat. Ghouls, while usually defeated, sometimes surprise PCs and kill them, so they might be 2.5% chance of defeat that encounter, etc. Amazon assassins often catch the unwary no-reloader, so you might have 8% chance of failure there too, etc.

What I am trying to say is most no-reloads end to the same set of reasons (the amazon assassins, ghouls/ghasts, Davaeorn, Duchal Palace Battle (possibly the most popular encounter to fail) etc.). If the game was 100% fighting Taslois, no reload success by everyone would be like 99.9% or even 100%. I think you see what I am getting at.

[AnonymousHero]

corey_russell wrote...
example, if a level 4 party encountered some Tasloi the chance of winning is 100%! - no reload has EVER lost to those enemies, that I am aware.

Heh, I wouldn't bet on that. I've lost a no-reload to weather! (The infamous lightning.). Not quite the same, but still...

I also recall someone (H_T, I think) posting a screenshot of Death by Habib in BG2. That wasn't a no-reload, but it does mean that even an encounter with Habib may be <100% percent.

Generally, I agree that the equation isn't quite as simple as multiplying independent probabilities (which I'm sure pretty much everyone agrees on), but it illustrates that even a few <95% fights can reduce the chances of making it through a no-reload drastically.

That's why most of the successful no-reloaders simply remove the element of chance completely (buffs, metagaming, whatever floats your boat).

In general I think having a party around probably also can increases one's chances drastically if the player is the less careful (or perhaps even risk-taking) type who doesn't rely on removing the role of luck completely. Simply having the PC generally stay out of combat hugely improves the odds. (Not that the accomplishment is any lesser or anything. Being solo also has distinct advantages, but it does probably require a more strict buffing regimen, more resting, etc.)

Modifié par AnonymousHero, 14 décembre 2011 - 09:12 .

[corey_russell]

AnonymousHero wrote...

Heh, I wouldn't bet on that. I've lost a no-reload to weather! (The infamous lightning.). Not quite the same, but still...

Vanilla lightning does 0 damage, the BG 2 engine does actual damage, so yes quite possible to die to the weather...does 50% if I remember right.

AnonymousHero wrote...
That's why most of the successful no-reloaders simply remove the element of chance completely (buffs, metagaming, whatever floats your boat).

I both agree and disagree with this statement. Successful no-reloaders take pains to REDUCE chances for certain via what you describe, stay in the back etc. But mainly due to ambushes in BG 1 you cannot eliminate chance completely in my opinion, just reduce the chances, or at least stack the odds in your favor. A number of no-reloads ended with that huge bandit archer ambush for low level characters is often fatal, or someone more squishy like a mage gets cut up. Of course a solo arcane character can cast invisibility before traveling and make sure to travel less than 24 hours at a time. All other classes though have a chance of failure, even with perfect play. Heck, I know a few no-reloaders who ended their runs to a misclick which doesn't even factor into this combat % chance. I won't name a name, but someone insulted Dradeel by accident and got a fireball that killed them. Someone was in the Sarevok fight and wanted protection from petrification so they used a scroll, but it was cursed actually and killed them.

I suppose what I am saying its, there's always a chance for failure, whether be human error or due to events in the game. But if a game were simple enough (such as tic-tac-toe), it could be 100%, or if the whole game consisted of killing Taslois...but of course BG much more complex than that, even dialog options can get you killed, so yes BG is less than 100%.

But you are right though, that simply keeping the PC in the back regardless of class, increases his chances of survival considerably.

[AnonymousHero]

corey_russell wrote...

AnonymousHero wrote...
That's why most of the successful no-reloaders simply remove the element of chance completely (buffs, metagaming, whatever floats your boat).

I both agree and disagree with this statement. Successful no-reloaders take pains to REDUCE chances for certain via what you describe, stay in the back etc. But mainly due to ambushes in BG 1 you cannot eliminate chance completely in my opinion, just reduce the chances, or at least stack the odds in your favor. A number of no-reloads ended with that huge bandit archer ambush for low level characters is often fatal, or someone more squishy like a mage gets cut up. Of course a solo arcane character can cast

You can arrange your movements and quest order such that you are never ambushed by ranged attackers until you can handle it.
I typically don't bother (often quicker just to restart if you get that unlucky), but it can be done. (I believe with all classes, but I haven't tried all classes yet.)

corey_russell wrote...
invisibility before traveling and make sure to travel less than 24 hours at a time. All other classes though have a chance of failure, even with perfect play.

Nope, you can always chug a potion of invisibility if you really want 100% chance of survival. (Your aura must be clear before traveling.)

EDIT: Potions can counter almost any effect in the game. The lack of potions is is one of the reasons that (solo!) Wizardslayers definitely have to rely on luck to make it through BG1. (Some other classes will definitely also have difficulties due to equipment restrictions or other oddities like wild surges, but access to potions is the biggie.)

corey_russell wrote...
Heck, I know a few no-reloaders who ended their runs to a misclick which doesn't even factor into this combat % chance. I won't name a name, but someone insulted Dradeel by accident and got a fireball that killed them. Someone was in the Sarevok fight and wanted protection from petrification so they used a scroll, but it was cursed actually and killed them.

Those are examples of player error and not luck as such. (I was assuming that the discussion of probability assumed perfect play by the player.)

corey_russell wrote...
I suppose what I am saying its, there's always a chance for failure, whether be human error or due to events in the game. But if a game were simple enough (such as tic-tac-toe), it could be 100%, or if the whole game consisted of killing Taslois...but of course BG much more complex than that, even dialog options can get you killed, so yes BG is less than 100%.

Human error is always a possibility, but perfect play is possible in this game -- at the very least beyond a certain level. If you lose a character before level 5-6ish it's not a big loss -- you can get there in 30 minutes (at least for most classes).

Modifié par AnonymousHero, 14 décembre 2011 - 10:30 .

[Vaclavc]

corey_russell wrote...
Of course a solo arcane character can cast invisibility before traveling and make sure to travel less than 24 hours at a time.

Corey, in my experience, solo character always turns visible during ambush in vanilla BG1, even if he/she cast Invisibility previously. The same applies for resting under Invisibility spell.
I agree with you that it is often not possible to eliminate risk entirely, you can only reduce it greatly.

AnonymousHero wrote...
You can arrange your movements and quest order such that you are never ambushed by ranged attackers until you can handle it.
I typically don't bother (often quicker just to restart if you get that unlucky), but it can be done. (I believe with all classes, but I haven't tried all classes yet.)

It helps to travel only short distances - I  only rarely get ambushed when hopping between neighboring areas (this applies especially for travelling between Nashkel and Friendly Arm).

V

Modifié par Vaclavc, 14 décembre 2011 - 10:40 .

[corey_russell]

AnonymousHero wrote...

[

corey_russell wrote...
invisibility before traveling and make sure to travel less than 24 hours at a time. All other classes though have a chance of failure, even with perfect play.

Nope, you can always chug a potion of invisibility if you really want 100% chance of survival. (Your aura must be clear before traveling.)

AH: I think we we are on the same wavelength. Yes, with careful traveling you can avoid ranged ambushes until you are better prepared. You can take potion of mirror eyes on your PC before headed to eastern maps, etc. However, I play vanilla BG 1 and I usually can only find 3 potions of invisibility before Cloakwood, not enough I'm afraid. Maybe yiou have mods that change that.

I do agree with you that perfect play is possible, and I know of some runs that left no encounter to chance (e.g., they never had to save or else).

So perhaps I should rephrase my statement -- allowing no chances via metagaming, or the other methods we have previously mentioned is possible (and is being done by some players, typically solo). But if you play with a full party, there just isn't enough potions/scrolls in the game to protect everyone all the time and there will be "chance". I know of a thief run where the player played nothing wrong, his hide in shadows failed and a few moments later a kobold fired an arrow and was a critical, killing him (he was playing on insane)

[Alesia_BH]

I know of a thief run where the player played nothing wrong, his hide in shadows failed and a few moments later a kobold fired an arrow and was a critical, killing him (he was playing on insane)

Your definition of "perfect" may a bit off. Relying soley on Hide in Shadows in a situation like that is ill-advised.

I personally wouldn't be inclined to use the term "perfect" in this context at all. The space of possibilities is too wide and the standards for assessment nebulous.


I of course concur that there is always a chance of failure: that's a truish rather than a debatable issue. Some seem to be over-estimating the general case difficulty however. There are and have been a number of players for whom vanilla Trilogy No Reloads are utterly trivial. 

Discussions about No Reload difficulty remind me of those in another hobby of mine: ocean voyaging. When talking about circumnavigation for example, there are many who suggest it is quite difficult and "requires" an extravagant vessel and gearing. Those who know the seas and their ship however, can do it with far less, and with far greater ease/safety. Knowledge well used can dramatically reduce risk. Often times, those who lack that knowledge are inclined to deny the gap and attribute variation to other factors. Additionally, some who have done it frequently have an unconscious motivation to make it seem harder then it is. Human nature is silly like that.

Ultimately, in order to assess risk you have to consider the combination of the vessel and the captain- the same thing is true in Baldur's Gate. For some players, vanilla trilogy no reloads are utterly trivial (with a wide range of party compositions) and it would take a chance event approaching force majeure or a collossal screw-up to fail. For others, an optimized party would be very difficult- it's the combination that matters.

Those who run into difficulty shouldn't feel downcast about this. The wonderful thing about perception of difficulty is that it implies there is more to learn. If you continuously endeavour to learn  -and never fall into the trap of thinking you have more to teach then learn- the space of possibilities will become wider and the perceived risks smaller. The "impossible" can become common place and the options vast.

Happy voyaging no reloaders!

Best,

A.


Btw. With regards to ambushes specifically, it has been many years since I've found them remotely threatening.  

Modifié par Alesia_BH, 15 décembre 2011 - 05:17 .

[Grond0]

I think I have sympathy for both sides of the discussion here. I don't remember a character dying in an ambush for a long time now, so would agree they don't seem remotely threatening. However, I can still see that there is a possibility of this happening. As with everything in the game so much depends on your settings. If you are playing on insane then a single critical from an archer could do 32 HPs - that would mean that a druid, for instance, might need to be as much as 8th level to survive a single arrow (and there are plenty of travel encounters available where it is impossible to avoid the chance of being targeted by more than one).

[corey_russell]

Alesia_BH wrote...

I know of a thief run where the player played nothing wrong, his hide in shadows failed and a few moments later a kobold fired an arrow and was a critical, killing him (he was playing on insane)

Your definition of "perfect" may a bit off. Relying soley on Hide in Shadows in a situation like that is ill-advised.
 

I didn't give you the full details - remember in vanilla BG 1 you have to wait until the next round to hide in shadows again (BG 2 engine is different in that regard) - so before they could hide again a kobold walked into view and fired - he couldn't do anything about it. He wasn't high level either and didn't have the gold for the good defenses yet.

[AnonymousHero]

Alesia_BH wrote...
I personally wouldn't be inclined to use the term "perfect" in this context at all. The space of possibilities is too wide and the standards for assessment nebulous.

I think you may be right. I simply meant "perfect" in the sense of "makes no mistakes" (in terms of available protections, quest order, resource usage, etc.).

Modifié par AnonymousHero, 15 décembre 2011 - 05:35 .

[AnonymousHero]

corey_russell wrote...
I didn't give you the full details - remember in vanilla BG 1 you have to wait until the next round to hide in shadows again (BG 2 engine is different in that regard)

No, the BG2 engine is the same (unless I'm misinterpreting your description).

corey_russell wrote...
- so before they could hide again a kobold walked into view and fired - he couldn't do anything about it. He wasn't high level either and didn't have the gold for the good defenses yet.

He could have been higher-level or had better defenses. Maybe he shouldn't have been in an area where there are ranged attackers?

EDIT: Grond0 is right about playing on Insane difficulty changing things somewhat... simply because of the HP you need to accumulate to be safe.

EDIT: ... but I think this may be derailing the actual play. For my part, I'll stop now.

Modifié par AnonymousHero, 15 décembre 2011 - 05:43 .

[corey_russell]

Grond0 wrote...

I think I have sympathy for both sides of the discussion here. I don't remember a character dying in an ambush for a long time now, so would agree they don't seem remotely threatening. However, I can still see that there is a possibility of this happening. As with everything in the game so much depends on your settings. If you are playing on insane then a single critical from an archer could do 32 HPs - that would mean that a druid, for instance, might need to be as much as 8th level to survive a single arrow (and there are plenty of travel encounters available where it is impossible to avoid the chance of being targeted by more than one).

Grond0, I dont know how you can say the bold statement - don't you remember Gate70 who died in a Wyvern ambush, not long ago (he was using the cursed sword a lot that run) -- you commented on that death even. I myself have had numerous no-reloads end to ambushes when my main character is a mage, also to a number of my thieves.

[Alesia_BH]

Grond0 wrote...

I think I have sympathy for both sides of the discussion here. I don't remember a character dying in an ambush for a long time now, so would agree they don't seem remotely threatening.

Agreed. Once you are aware of the possible situations as well as the tactical options available to you character, a little planning is usually all it takes. Of course, without knowledge and planning, they can be deadly on a regular basis.

However, I can still see that there is a possibility of this happening. As with everything in the game so much depends on your settings.

Agreed again: the details matter and there is always a chance of something going wrong with that probability hinging on the specifics.

Thorough understanding of the possibilities combined with advanced planning and safety redundancies, can mitigate risk however irrespective of your setup. And with Core Vanilla as a reference point those risks can be reduced to near negligibility.

Best,

A.

Modifié par Alesia_BH, 15 décembre 2011 - 05:44 .

[Alesia_BH]

corey_russell wrote...
Grond0, I dont know how you can say the bold statement - don't you remember Gate70 who died in a Wyvern ambush, not long ago (he was using the cursed sword a lot that run) -- you commented on that death even. I myself have had numerous no-reloads end to ambushes when my main character is a mage, also to a number of my thieves.

As mentioned, they can be deadly or non threatening- it depends on what you know and the decisions you make amongst other things.

[Grond0]

corey_russell wrote...

Grond0 wrote...

I think I have sympathy for both sides of the discussion here. I don't remember a character dying in an ambush for a long time now, so would agree they don't seem remotely threatening. However, I can still see that there is a possibility of this happening. As with everything in the game so much depends on your settings. If you are playing on insane then a single critical from an archer could do 32 HPs - that would mean that a druid, for instance, might need to be as much as 8th level to survive a single arrow (and there are plenty of travel encounters available where it is impossible to avoid the chance of being targeted by more than one).

Grond0, I dont know how you can say the bold statement - don't you remember Gate70 who died in a Wyvern ambush, not long ago (he was using the cursed sword a lot that run) -- you commented on that death even. I myself have had numerous no-reloads end to ambushes when my main character is a mage, also to a number of my thieves.

Sorry my mistake.  Try this one - I don't remember one of my characters dying in an ambush for a long time now.  Your mages could use invisibility to avoid ambushes entirely (in a party even if others die the PC does not).  Gate70 could have chosen not to carry the cursed sword - wyvern ambushes are then easy to run away from without being attacked.

[Grond0]

I've been playing around with BG1 for quite a while now and think it's time to have another go at BG2.  Given the recent discussion I also thought perhaps I'd try getting through BG1 using as close to zero risk as possible (it's the perfect play element that will be more difficult than designing the encounters!).

I hadn't got very far with my cleric so have rolled up a new character designed to make things as easy as possible in BG2.  Here he is on leaving Candlekeep.

[Alesia_BH]

corey_russell wrote...
I didn't give you the full details - remember in vanilla BG 1 you have to wait until the next round to hide in shadows again (BG 2 engine is different in that regard) - so before they could hide again a kobold walked into view and fired - he couldn't do anything about it. He wasn't high level either and didn't have the gold for the good defenses yet. 

You still haven't provided all the relevant details really- there were a lot of prior decisions that led to that situation. Risk mitigation is largely about seeing threats before they emerge and planning accordingly. 

In any event, this particular case has little bearing on the larger issues.

Best,

A.

Modifié par Alesia_BH, 15 décembre 2011 - 05:57 .

[Alesia_BH]

Grond0 wrote...
 Try this one - I don't remember one of my characters dying in an ambush for a long time now.

I lost one character a long time ago in a Ghast ambush. Then I learned how to use items and planning to evade the threat. Ambushes are essentially a non-issue now for my characters. 

[corey_russell]

AnonymousHero wrote...

corey_russell wrote...
I didn't give you the full details - remember in vanilla BG 1 you have to wait until the next round to hide in shadows again (BG 2 engine is different in that regard)

No, the BG2 engine is the same (unless I'm misinterpreting your description).

Hmm just did some quick tests, and you are correct I was confused by the two types of leaving shadows -e.g., if you leave shadows, say because you opened a chest, in both games you can try to re-hide. On the other hand, if you try to hide in shadows and failed, then you have to wait until the next round to try again. This 2nd case is what I'm referring to in my post, by the way, they tried to hide, kobold came into view and kapow.