80 réponses à ce sujet

[Dragoro21]

While I agree that it should remain in game, question is, I cant think of a time when your party wouldnt be in the way of aoe spells.

[- Archangel -]

Those real issues of course being what YOU want them to work on and "screw everyone else".

[- Archangel -]

Mythgaard wrote...

This is a rather amusing sideshow...I'm not really clear on where the opposition's stance is coming from...are you all afraid that if the option is there that someone will *suspect* you use it and it will somehow shrink your e-peen? Seriously, get over yourselves.

I'd probably use it, were it an option. Oh no! Am I not internet elite and a hardcore gamer?!

My life is over!

/golfclap for the wankerbrigade

That's exactly what it is...the e-peen syndrome.  Also, they want the devs to work on whatever their pet issue is, so they think it's in their best interest to try to convince the devs no one likes other suggestions.

[Veex]

- Archangel - wrote...

The subject says it all.

Is there a specific reason why you'd like to see this? I am assuming by your avatar that you're playing a mage. Did you take a bunch of AoE spells and learn you can't use them as lucratively as you'd like on Normal? I am just curious as to what prompted the request.

[Mythgaard]

lordhugorune wrote...

- Archangel - wrote...

Stand by to have the 'tards tell you how horrible the idea is because it's not what THEY want the devs to work on.

The challenge levels are set the way they are for a reason.

If you find that a normal challenge setting is too much for you, there are two very good options available to you already:
a) improve your tactics
adjust your challenge setting to casual, which eliminates friendly fire.

There are real issues for devs to work on, they shouldn't waste their energy solving problems that don't exist.

How very condescending of you. So anyone who thinks that FF in Normal is a pointless pain in the ass needs to get out of your hardcore game and play on Easy?


I think FF is a pointless pain in the ass, one which could be easily rectified by the dev's with a simple checkbox on the options screen. And I'm playing your game! Oh noes!

Do you feel less hardcore knowing I feel this way? Are you going to stay awake late into the night grinding your teeth and wishing with all your sad little heart that only the select few can play games you play?

Still here, still playing. Probably move on to Hard mode next, and I'll want no FF there as well...Nightmare as well. Oh God's above, your game is ruined! The dev's will die from exhaustion from adding a true/false checkbox! No errors will get fixed because we're in your game, ruining it!

[lordhugorune]

I'm not being condescending - the only people throwing insults have been Archangel and yourself. It may be fun to troll, but I've been around long enough that I'm not impressed or perturbed by it.



The point remains: if you find the Normal Challenge Setting to be too difficult for you, due to friendly fire, the option already exists for you to lower the Challenge Setting.to Casual.

You may eloquently consider friendly fire to be a 'pointless pain in the arse' but I think just about everyone else sees it as an integral part to the tactical challenge that the game is designed to provide.

If you are unable or unwilling to deal with that aspect of the challenge, then I think the answer has already been provided to you.

[Mythgaard]

Ruining it!



No options, it's integral (for some reason)!



Ruining it!



Also I suggest you look up the definition of condescending, that word...I think it does not mean what you think it means, Mr. Condescending.



/insult



And I'm a troll. My very condescending and elitist little friend, your sanctimonious patronizing assurance that anyone who doesn't like FF is playing out of their league in anything other than Easy is the very definition of elitist trolling tripe.



Ruining it!

[- Archangel -]

lordhugorune wrote...

I'm not being condescending - the only people throwing insults have been Archangel and yourself. It may be fun to troll, but I've been around long enough that I'm not impressed or perturbed by it.

The point remains: if you find the Normal Challenge Setting to be too difficult for you, due to friendly fire, the option already exists for you to lower the Challenge Setting.to Casual.
You may eloquently consider friendly fire to be a 'pointless pain in the arse' but I think just about everyone else sees it as an integral part to the tactical challenge that the game is designed to provide.
If you are unable or unwilling to deal with that aspect of the challenge, then I think the answer has already been provided to you.

Yeah all those retarded strawmen people were throwing up (like not being affected by enemy weapons)  weren't your side of the isle throwing fits were they.

[nimzar]

Holy crap, people are defensive!



I agree with Archangel on this one. And this is feature that I probably wouldn't even use.



I agree because I think difficulty settings should be itemized anyway. Just glancing at in manual descriptions of the difficulty settings shows that there are three to five (depending on how you count them) things contributing to the difficulty levels. I feel we should be able to adjust each of those individually. Yes we should keep the option to use the preset difficulties. But there should be the additional option of "custom" difficulty.



We should be able to individually adjust:



Friendly Fire: 0% FF damage, 50% FF damage, and 100% FF damage (200% FF damage?)

AI Level: Easy AI, Normal AI (are Easy and Normal the same?), Hard AI, Nightmare AI.

Enemy Stats: (Which may be broken up into two options, enemy damage, enemy resistance)

Healing: different levels of effectiveness of healing effects.



(Note: all these things are mentioned in the manual as part of the existing difficulty settings)

[addiction21]

Why even have difficulty levels if you can remove freidnly fire? You could just spam fireball on your party whose standing on top of each other. Cone of cold thru your tanks since it wont effect them anymore. Just stand inside the inferno, blizzard, lighting storm, earthquake, etc etc etc.
The difficulty levels are there for the challenge and friendly fire is part of that equation.  Just my two cents on the subject.

[Edner132435]

Archangell, I like how you say the forums are infested with ignoramuses for not agreeing with you, yet you don't agree with them not agreeing with you.

[Damar Stiehl]

I can't believe the amount of BS surrounding topics like this ON A SINGLE PLAYER GAME FORUM!!



As far as the option goes, I would LOVE to turn off Friendly Fire on Normal. It is a right pain in the arse and I hate it.

[bzombo]

- Archangel - wrote...

ReadNLearn wrote...

- Archangel - wrote...

It's always funny how there are some who try to convince people more options are a bad thing.

As a software developer, I can tell you that it is *absolutely* true. More options are OFTEN a bad thing. Here's a few reasons why:
1. Complicates the UI
2. Needs to be documented
3. Increases overall complexity in the software
4. Introduces bugs

There are actually several more reasons, but they become more specific based on target audience of the software, sophistication of the users, current complexity, etc.

Now, overall that's not to say features shouldn't be added, as there can be considerable value obviously in new features. Plus, a good feature can lessen the minuses listed above rather than add to them. My point is that there is a lot to take into consideration, and one should not blindly assume that it is always a good thing to be adding features.

Your argument is moot as the option is already built into the game and activated when the game is in easy mode.  This would just add one checkbox on the options panel...somehow I don't think that is going to clutter the UI to unuseable levels...probably take the UI team about 5 minutes to add it, and the coding team about the same length of time to link it to the switch that's already there.

bottom line is people are asking for ways to make the game easier and less about thinking. this game is about strategy and thinking. there are other games out there that don't require this much thought and planning. just play one of those. do you go buy madden and then ask for an option that makes it so no one can tackle you? play the way it was made or knock down the difficulty. asking for this is already asking for easy mode, so just use easy mode!

[ItsToofy]

We'll have a fireball that doesnt have friendly fire when we can create a bomb that only incenerates the "bad guys".

[Suron]

scyld wrote...

- Archangel - wrote...

S.Hall wrote...

This community is incredibly rude and closed minded to suggestions.

It's not unique to this community.  Pretty much any community has it's fanboys who don't want to change anything because the game is "OMG PERFECT !!!!1111" and the "Games must be as hard as possible so I can feel tougher" contigent.

However, what you're asking for is to selectively turn off and on some one of the aspects of the game that makes it challenging. That's silly and unprecedented in most RPGs.

then by your logic the difficulty slider turns on/off aspects of the game that make it challenging so it shouldn't be there either...there should just be ONE set of rules the game uses to play by and nothing else..no easy/normal/hard/nightmare...it just is how it is.

let's use more intelligence in our argument...more customization of the difficulty is a good thing...if someone wants to turn off friendly fire even on nightmare difficulty how exactly is that any different then downing the difficulty?  It's not.  I makes the game easier..just as changing the difficulty does.

so, again by your logic, we need to do away with the difficulty levels and just have one set of rules that govern how everything works with no way to change it at all...

afterall allowing such a change takes away what makes it challenging right?

[Sarethus]

Problem:

Thread starter wants to be able to turn FF off.



Fact:

Option to turn FF off exists already. Set difficulty to easy.



Problem Expanded:

Thread starter wants to turn FF off while setting difficulty to Normal/Hard etc



Question:

Won't turning FF off make the game much easier?



Answer:

Yes



Question:

Why not just set the difficulty to easy then?

[EXTINCTION XL]

I use Alistar as a tank and I give him anything I find that adds spell resistance, he still gets burned to counter this in tactics I set Wynne to heal him, give him herioc defense etc... It works for me. I love watching him go flying and burn anyway since I really don't care for him all that much.

[GamerGeek87]

Because it changes the difficulty in a diffrent way. I know I would like to play on Normal with full FF. Some poeple want the enemies more difficult but dont want to care where they have to cast spells. Just setting the difficulty to easy might make the game somewhat boring for those poeple who want FF off.

[Mythgaard]

GamerGeek87 wrote...

Because it changes the difficulty in a diffrent way. I know I would like to play on Normal with full FF. Some poeple want the enemies more difficult but dont want to care where they have to cast spells. Just setting the difficulty to easy might make the game somewhat boring for those poeple who want FF off.

DINGDINGDING

We have a winner!

[Zenon]

I also think this request is rather ridiculous. You can tell your companions to halt, and they won't rush in battle, then do your fireball and send them into the fray afterwards. I'm already surprised how little the tank gets hit from arrows in the back or similar things... (Or did I miss something there?) I know it is a game, but some realism is needed unless you want to forget about tactics. If your tank engages two foes, then move your mage to the flank of the foes and aim carefully to avoid burning your own people with a blast of fire or cone of cold.



You can't throw a grenade into a cluster of friend and foe and later complain your own people got hit. Play on easy, if you want to rush or are too lazy to use tactics. Making the foes harder without friendly-fire will only prolongate your fights without more thrill... At least that's what I think.

[Keeoto]

- Archangel - wrote...
Yeah all those retarded strawmen people were throwing up (like not being affected by enemy weapons)  weren't your side of the isle throwing fits were they.

Yet here you are, calling names to anyone that does not agree with you, and trying to belittle their arguements with a "strawman arguement" accusation.

I understand that you want to play the game on normal setting, without friendly fire. Fact is , that friendly fire is probably the setting that has the most weight towards the games difficulty.

How relevant is it that enemies have nightmare difficulty resistance/ attk bonus modifiers and such, when you can just fight inside a stacked Blizzard/Storm/Inferno/Quake, thus permanently crowd controlling and doing such a significant amount of dmg w/o any drawbacks towards your party. Any other difficulty setting becomes nearly irrelevant if you disable friendly fire, because of the potential to trivialize all encounters with overpowered AoE.

[PhilthoOo]

How about having another difficulty instead? About Easy, Almost Normal, Normal, Hard Nightmare.

And the only difference between Almost Normal and Normal is that friendly fire is turned OFF.

That way you don't have all the people trying to force their viewpoints down your throat over a simple checkbox that they can or cannot check.

Question:

Why not just set the difficulty to easy then?

Are you intentionally trying to be naive over this? Obviously the EASY setting is far too easy on its own with or without friendly fire. People want the normal difficulty without FF. It really isn't that hard to understand.

Modifié par PhilthoOo, 16 novembre 2009 - 06:23 .

[VeeVito]

Gorfinger wrote...

I find that the inclusion of friendly fire in Normal on up should be set. They even nerfed it a bit for normal from what it seems, it works both ways so that the ten trillion fireballs that the Emmisaries cast will hurt their meat shields as well... magic in this work of fiction is just that.... very dangerous... take the danger out of it... then its a walk in the park and ya might as well play on easy. Thats just my two cents though.

Hold on a minute. If friendly fire from emissaries damages their meatshield warriors, wouldn't turning it "off" (and thereby removing the chance that the enemy will take out their own) make the encounter more difficult, not less?