96 réponses à ce sujet

[robmack]

Koyasha wrote...

The multiselect button is nice if you want everyone attacking one target, but sometimes I want people dealing with specific targets. If I want two people on one target, one on a third, and a fourth to circle around to gain position to use a cone spell or backstab or something, it can often be difficult to manage because they don't want to stick on the targets I assign them to.

Tactics are a great part of the game, but it really should be set so that a manual order supersedes all tactics. Individual 'hold position' buttons would also be really nice. I might want some of my party to hold position while others move. Hold position is also a major gripe because if I hold position, then tell party members to attack a target, they'll move to that target but they won't STAY on the target, so if the target moves or is knocked away, I have to re-issue the attack order. A manual attack order should mean 'attack until target is dead or I change your instructions'.

You could try to be more selective with your tactics.  Don't choose any that find new targets.  Also, you can temporarily disable tactics for that character until it is done with what you want. 

It's more micro-management than I would like, but it's possible.

[robmack]

Elfarch wrote...

Pretty much everything already covered but occasionally I would like my "archer" set archer to swith to H-H on close enemies as I have very nasty back up weapons on her. As it is she can only fire arrows unless I take her off the "archer" setting.

You can make the tactics do this.

There is a command, Self, being attacked by melee then switch to melee weapons.

If they are on the ranged behavior they will switch back to ranged weapons when the attacket is gone.

[Haexpane]

I played BG2 so I'm used to being ambushed. It adds variety I think.



My main complaint is "move/hold" works for the whole group, I wish I could "Hold" mages and let rogue/warrior move at will

[Wolff Laarcen]

Haexpane wrote...
My main complaint is "move/hold" works for the whole group, I wish I could "Hold" mages and let rogue/warrior move at will

This would be excellent.

[Sidney]

The problem is finding the magic alchemy of commands that will get your people to not behave like syphilitic monkeys on crack. A problem made worse by the way the game plops you via dialog or random encounters into terrible tactical positions.



The encounters are silly. I've gotten killed over and over by wolves who:

1. Set traps - a lot of them! Clever girls.

2. Have executed a perfect envelopment to hit me from all sides - I guess i didn't see a pack o' wolves anywhere. Survival skill by eleven hiney.

3. Surround a character with 4-5 wolves each of whom will execute a knockdown over and over and over so once that guy goes down it is game over.



Really the game mobs you and the effects of the backstab/flanking rules REALLY start to chew you up.



Going back to the OP the friendly fire rules are a HUGE problem since my foes are soulless about killing their own people while I pretty much avoid AoE spells because of this problem but you need them to fight the mobs.

[Ryazan]

I fully agree on the loot part.

[Nissa_Red]

sleepy__head wrote...
...

Great post. I absolutely agree with your #1, #2 and #3.

Besides...

Koyasha wrote...
I agree with #1 and #3. #2 is marginally valid.

How is #2 whiny if at level 8 or so, you get a random encounter in which :

1/ you find yourself with a dozen of wolves that all can potentially knock you down, stun with their howl and shred in turns ?
2/ traps are laid out conveniently right around your party, so you cannot even move to give yourself a bit more of a tactical advantage ?
3/ said traps don't fire on wolves ? IF some (censored) hunter had placed them there to trap wildlife, they sure would have done it to hurt wolves in the first place, no ?

Don't get me started on how in an abandoned warehouse, that my party stumble into by sheer luck, hordes of hostile mages await me with their already perfectly placed traps and thrown down barricades ? I can't even explore it stealthed because of that so-called feature described in #1

#1, #3 and #2 at least are perfectly valid in my book.

Modifié par Nissa_Red, 16 novembre 2009 - 11:36 .

[Eunomiac]

Okay, I have to agree with what's been said here so far... I haven't gotten to the part where wolves surround you while setting traps, but I have to wonder if something else isn't in play here. Are we sure the wolves didn't come shortly after a fight against more conventional enemies? Because, seriously, BioWare couldn't have intended to have wolves setting traps. Clever girls, indeed (great reference btw :-) )

[Lurchibald]

Eunomiac wrote...

Okay, I have to agree with what's been said here so far... I haven't gotten to the part where wolves surround you while setting traps, but I have to wonder if something else isn't in play here. Are we sure the wolves didn't come shortly after a fight against more conventional enemies? Because, seriously, BioWare couldn't have intended to have wolves setting traps. Clever girls, indeed (great reference btw :-) )

If you read the signs it says traps have been laid out to catch wolves (pretty f****** useless if you ask me since they don't set the damn things off!)

[VeeVito]

I think that some are misinterpreting the term tactics. Yes, it means positioning forces "before" a battle, but it also means how you manage those same forces "during" a battle. The complaint of having your party auto positioned after dialog can be legitimate, I agree, but the game was obviously designed around also testing "that other definition" of tactics, which is "how do you respond with your forces now?!"



Yeah, it's annoying to know that your positioning has been ruined via a cutscene, but it hardly means that tactics are nowhere to be found when you find yourself in that situation. It could be argued that that's the time when tactics are truly tested.



As for the tactics system, well, yeah it can be seen as an if>then riddle, but if that bothers you then you can disable all AI behavior and there you go.



The game is very well done, but I will admit to this: BG2 was and always will be a gem. Maybe it can be said that it is the game that represents the pinnacle of RPGs. I suggest that you keep it and put it in mothballs or vacuum seal it for well deserved posterity. I don't think we'll see anything like it again.

[addiction21]

Sidney wrote...

The problem is finding the magic alchemy of commands that will get your people to not behave like syphilitic monkeys on crack. A problem made worse by the way the game plops you via dialog or random encounters into terrible tactical positions.

The encounters are silly. I've gotten killed over and over by wolves who:
1. Set traps - a lot of them! Clever girls.
2. Have executed a perfect envelopment to hit me from all sides - I guess i didn't see a pack o' wolves anywhere. Survival skill by eleven hiney.
3. Surround a character with 4-5 wolves each of whom will execute a knockdown over and over and over so once that guy goes down it is game over.

Really the game mobs you and the effects of the backstab/flanking rules REALLY start to chew you up.

Going back to the OP the friendly fire rules are a HUGE problem since my foes are soulless about killing their own people while I pretty much avoid AoE spells because of this problem but you need them to fight the mobs.

Sounds like you need some Wolf-Be-Gone. 

[Scimal]

Kelston wrote...



Simple question.

Is this game:

A) A roleplaying game
A hack and slash
C) An AI programming puzzle game based on limited binary/sequential if -> then functions

Because your defense of the tactics system says you believe this game is C.

What was BG2, then? Final Fantasy? The functions allow quicker timing to general situations so that you don't have to micromanage every single character.

Simple solution to the whole "Running at the enemy from ranged" if the Ranged behavior setting doesn't work?
Self:Any -> Equip Bow.

Bam. 5 seconds. Solved one of the OP's problems.

This is not a programming puzzle (now trying to figure out polynomials in Maple - that's a bloody programming puzzle), but I do believe BioWare expected people to use common sense. If not, they at least expected them to ask for help instead of whining about how the game isn't what they want when all they had to do was ask a simple question.

Why not? Are we going for realism here or some roleplay excuse for bad loot implementation and progression in this game? They shot me too didn't they? They clearly sliced into my armor since I needed to heal. They clearly set me on fire as well.

This is true, so for you, please see the 2nd explanation. D&D (and therefor almost all derivative fantasy RPGs) have this funky loot table. Some make less sense, some make more sense - but I haven't played a game yet that was realistic. It's just part of the genre.

Because if you're going with that explanation, let me counter with: Why would you want to buy armor from just some random guy you met standing outside of a town or buy anything from some dwarf guy that admits to being a thief with a mentally deficient son that stalked you into your party camp? Because he says they are special? If some random guy on the street came to your house, said he was a thief, and then offered to sell you a Ferrari, would you buy from him?

If the Ferrari's owner was dead and he sold it to you at a discount, why wouldn't you if you wanted one?

[Nighteye2]

I agree with #1 and #2. #3 and #5 are just a matter of setting the right tactics, and #4 is a non-issue as it's perfectly viable and advisable to flank individual enemies, especially when outnumbered - and to be aware that enemies can flank you, too.

[Demonbox1]

1- cutscene/moving back to a big blob is wierd and not very fun, ok i understand the need to show all your PC/NPCs in the cutscene but that is bad for the gameplay.

2- only problem i see is on the traps...y the heck do wolf traps affect me and not wolves? i mean , c'mon wolves do not deploy traps to catch humans, is the other way around. I agree that a party of tugs will be perfectly in position for an ambush, and that even wolves can  plan that, but while the firsts have thumbs to place traps (so i can imagine they dropped them) the seconds don't...

then i disagree on everything else except the party AI/tactics being a bit bugged, Wynne with ONLY healing tactics (self,member and party) often simply forget to heal until too latem n1 = "heal when under 75%" turns out to be heal when he's dead, and that sucks.

[jawlz]

On the random encounter deal, it's kinda funny, because the very first random encounter I had was one in which I was told 'you stumble upon a group of bandits waiting to ambush travelers' or something like that, and then I had the option to attack them, try to set up an ambush of them, or just leave...

[Mnemnosyne]

I haven't run into one where wolves set traps for you yet, but that's kind of bizarre. The one where you get the option to 'ambush' the bandits I hate because once, I waited until they noticed me, and once I 'ambushed' them. Guess what? I started out in exactly the same place each time, and their positions were exactly the same each time. You'd think that choosing the option to 'spring your own ambush for a change' would actually DO something in your favor, but nope. Same exact positioning and fight.

[Kelston]

Scimal wrote...

What was BG2, then? Final Fantasy? The functions allow quicker timing to general situations so that you don't have to micromanage every single character.

Simple solution to the whole "Running at the enemy from ranged" if the Ranged behavior setting doesn't work?
Self:Any -> Equip Bow.

Bam. 5 seconds. Solved one of the OP's problems.

This is not a programming puzzle (now trying to figure out polynomials in Maple - that's a bloody programming puzzle), but I do believe BioWare expected people to use common sense. If not, they at least expected them to ask for help instead of whining about how the game isn't what they want when all they had to do was ask a simple question.

BG2 never tried to convince you that it had a robust AI programming system. I never recalled a single situation in BG2 where if I commanded a party member to attack something, he randomly decided to attack something different because I no longer had him selected.

The DA:O tactics system doesn't have a filter that says Enemy: THE ONE I SELECTED YOU TO ATTACK -> Attack.

This is true, so for you, please see the 2nd explanation. D&D (and therefor almost all derivative fantasy RPGs) have this funky loot table. Some make less sense, some make more sense - but I haven't played a game yet that was realistic. It's just part of the genre.

Random loot rules exist except for the most part, it fit into the game and you had meaningful levels of progression through items. It makes less sense in DA:O. I just fought an elite mob, why's he drop armor equivalent to the grunt I killed at the entrance? Surely armies would outfit their better soldiers with better equipment. And it worked that way for most RPG games. But DA:O decides to change this rule.

If the Ferrari's owner was dead and he sold it to you at a discount, why wouldn't you if you wanted one?

How do you know the Ferrari owner is dead? Because the random guy that showed up at your house insisted he was? And if he was, why would he sell it to you at a discount? If you're not at all suspicious, you're blatantly lying just to attempt to make your argument.

Was your family the first in line behind the cart of the snake oil salesman?

[sleepy__head]

Thinking about the negative makes you like the game even less. It's no fun to concentrate on it. It's no different in life, if you constantly think how bad everything is you are going to be miserable.
Think about the positive.

If you go to a restaurant and order some food, and 2 of the 5 things you ordered come to you over cooked or not made as advertised, do you just "think about the positive and not the negative because it will make you miserable"?

Essentially that sort of excuses means : "Just ignore everything that bothers you."  I suppose some people are willing to go through life doing that, But based on the feed back here I and many others are not, specially not after paying 60 bucks for a product.  What I *will* do, however, is to think carefully about whether I will buy a sequel or another product from the same development team if they don't change.

Oh and by the way, I wonder which way is better for the game and the community as a whole, having people who just ignore the bad stuff, or having people who hold the folks they are paying to a high level of standard.

Modifié par sleepy__head, 17 novembre 2009 - 05:20 .

[Hollyboatman]

Everything he says is true and it makes me sad

[ackote]

Most answers to your complaints have been posted, but I will say being able to pick up ALL loot off a body would be ridiculous. I just got finished bashing, stabbing, slicing, chopping, biting, freezing, and burning just about every enemy on the battlefield. The majority of that gear is now junk and worthless. Why would I want to carry around armor that is falling apart with gaping holes? What's the point of picking up that smashed shield? ooh! a bow that was cut in twain! All worthless junk.



That is why I believe my characters won't loot every little scrap off a corpse.

[Kelston]

ackote wrote...

Most answers to your complaints have been posted, but I will say being able to pick up ALL loot off a body would be ridiculous. I just got finished bashing, stabbing, slicing, chopping, biting, freezing, and burning just about every enemy on the battlefield. The majority of that gear is now junk and worthless. Why would I want to carry around armor that is falling apart with gaping holes? What's the point of picking up that smashed shield? ooh! a bow that was cut in twain! All worthless junk.

That is why I believe my characters won't loot every little scrap off a corpse.

Except all the magical items the dwarf vendor in your party camp, he claims, is from dead people.

If I shot a guy in the head, why is his armor broken too? Did he wear his shield and chestpiece over his face? Why is the archer's bow broken? I stabbed him, not lumberjacked at his weapon first. Why is the shield smashed? Maybe he died because he failed to use it at all.

How about the armor you're wearing? There's no repair option in the game and obviously you are being hit. Is your armor not getting beaten up? Why can you wear the same shield and chestpiece through fights with dragons without a problem despite being set on fire, stabbed, bashed, picked up and squeezed?

You're talking about combat as if everyone's equipment spontaneously explodes after a battle.

Modifié par Kelston, 17 novembre 2009 - 07:28 .

[sleepy__head]

ackote wrote...

Most answers to your complaints have been posted, but I will say being able to pick up ALL loot off a body would be ridiculous. I just got finished bashing, stabbing, slicing, chopping, biting, freezing, and burning just about every enemy on the battlefield. The majority of that gear is now junk and worthless. Why would I want to carry around armor that is falling apart with gaping holes? What's the point of picking up that smashed shield? ooh! a bow that was cut in twain! All worthless junk.

That is why I believe my characters won't loot every little scrap off a corpse.

Wait... your armor and weapon are damaged after every battle?  I didn't think so.