Warhammer Warhammer 40,000: Rogue Trader Pre-Release Thread [GAME RELEASED, GO TO NEW THREAD]

[ItsChon]

Okay so one of the reasons you mentioned you were on this forum is to get feedback, so I will offer you some if you are interested in hearing it. It refers specifically to this.

As the difficulty increases, various modifiers (dodge chance, hit chance, debuffs, stats, etc.) will change.
In addition, with increasing difficulty, enemies will use new abilities. That is, their intelligence changes. Also, the number of mobs for some encounters will change.

Changing modifiers, increasing the number of mobs per encounter, and enemies using new abilities are all great, and what is to be expected of a higher difficulty. Let me just give you some advice, and if doubt the merit of said advice feel free to ask any Codexers on this thread and I am sure they will agree.

Changing the types of enemies you see at different points in the game (as long as it's logically coherent within the game world) is a great way to increase the difficulty while also making the higher difficulty, and the game in turn, far more engaging and interesting. Believe me, it feels way better to run into chaos spawn variant number three with its stats and abilities, than it is to run into chaos spawn number one with buffed stats and abilities, even if mechanically it would feel the same as chaos spawn number three, if that makes sense. Instead of giving new abilities to the enemies that were in the encounter on normal mode, why not add a mob that has said abilities to that encounter in addittion to the other mobs in hard mode? Obviously this wouldn't work if it doesn't make sense for said enemy to be there, but when possible to implement it's great, and in those situations, it would be awesome if the team did a reskin of that enemy in a way that would fit the current encounter at the time, just for that harder difficulty. This has the added benefit of encounters on higher difficulties getting more tactically complex, versus just a higher stat check, which is typically what higher difficulties are in most games (although you did mention plans to add new abilities to mobs in higher difficulties which would be taking steps to avoid this, so that is good to see). This also doubles as an easier way to make more complex encounters. Many times it feels that developers struggle to make encounters complex at higher difficulties because encounters have preset unit compositions/types, and for consistency reasons, units between each other need to have the same stats (they don't NEED to, this is just a common thing in most games). By adding new, more "advanced" mobs that would usually be seen later in the game, with their own special abilities that require special tactics to deal with, to these encounters, you can create a higher difficulty encounter that is actually engaging versus boring. Trust me when I say, this adds a ton of replayability to the game and it's the type of care/attention to detail everyone, even the more normie gamers, love to see, and I can't imagine it requiring too much effort.

It requires a ton more effort as you want them too add whole new enemies to every encounter based on difficulty. And then people will still complain if difficulty in between that they are playing on does not also have its own unique enemy.
While this is good idea, it is better kept for few special battles and not expected to be done everywhere.

Just to be clear, the enemies that I want them to add would be enemies that already exist in the game. An example of this is in Underrail (one of the greatest RPGs of all time) where in a certain area you run into a crawler on normal while you run into a death stalker on dominating in the same area. Both enemies exist in the game, though you only see death stalkers much later into the game on normal mode, while you will see them earlier on dominating mode. This doesn't really require any extra work at all assuming the enemy already exists, and it is what I am suggesting.

 

[ArchAngel]

Okay so one of the reasons you mentioned you were on this forum is to get feedback, so I will offer you some if you are interested in hearing it. It refers specifically to this.

As the difficulty increases, various modifiers (dodge chance, hit chance, debuffs, stats, etc.) will change.
In addition, with increasing difficulty, enemies will use new abilities. That is, their intelligence changes. Also, the number of mobs for some encounters will change.

Changing modifiers, increasing the number of mobs per encounter, and enemies using new abilities are all great, and what is to be expected of a higher difficulty. Let me just give you some advice, and if doubt the merit of said advice feel free to ask any Codexers on this thread and I am sure they will agree.

Changing the types of enemies you see at different points in the game (as long as it's logically coherent within the game world) is a great way to increase the difficulty while also making the higher difficulty, and the game in turn, far more engaging and interesting. Believe me, it feels way better to run into chaos spawn variant number three with its stats and abilities, than it is to run into chaos spawn number one with buffed stats and abilities, even if mechanically it would feel the same as chaos spawn number three, if that makes sense. Instead of giving new abilities to the enemies that were in the encounter on normal mode, why not add a mob that has said abilities to that encounter in addittion to the other mobs in hard mode? Obviously this wouldn't work if it doesn't make sense for said enemy to be there, but when possible to implement it's great, and in those situations, it would be awesome if the team did a reskin of that enemy in a way that would fit the current encounter at the time, just for that harder difficulty. This has the added benefit of encounters on higher difficulties getting more tactically complex, versus just a higher stat check, which is typically what higher difficulties are in most games (although you did mention plans to add new abilities to mobs in higher difficulties which would be taking steps to avoid this, so that is good to see). This also doubles as an easier way to make more complex encounters. Many times it feels that developers struggle to make encounters complex at higher difficulties because encounters have preset unit compositions/types, and for consistency reasons, units between each other need to have the same stats (they don't NEED to, this is just a common thing in most games). By adding new, more "advanced" mobs that would usually be seen later in the game, with their own special abilities that require special tactics to deal with, to these encounters, you can create a higher difficulty encounter that is actually engaging versus boring. Trust me when I say, this adds a ton of replayability to the game and it's the type of care/attention to detail everyone, even the more normie gamers, love to see, and I can't imagine it requiring too much effort.

It requires a ton more effort as you want them too add whole new enemies to every encounter based on difficulty. And then people will still complain if difficulty in between that they are playing on does not also have its own unique enemy.
While this is good idea, it is better kept for few special battles and not expected to be done everywhere.

Just to be clear, the enemies that I want them to add would be enemies that already exist in the game. An example of this is in Underrail (one of the greatest RPGs of all time) where in a certain area you run into a crawler on normal while you run into a death stalker on dominating in the same area. Both enemies exist in the game, though you only see death stalkers much later into the game on normal mode, while you will see them earlier on dominating mode. This doesn't really require any extra work at all assuming the enemy already exists, and it is what I am suggesting.

Ok but what are they supposed to add later in the game instead of those "death stalkers"? At one point you run into a wall.

 

[ItsChon]

Ok but what are they supposed to add later in the game instead of those "death stalkers"? At one point you run into a wall.

Later on in the game they will have access to all the different enemy types with all their abilities, so they won't have to do what I outlined above to keep encounters complex and interesting and difficult, they can just use the enemies they would normally use. In general, late game is far more complex than the early game due to how many more resources are available, both to the player and their enemies. The trouble is making the beginning interesting enough to replay at a higher difficulty, and also making the beginning authentically difficult by requiring more complex strategies to be used, versus just making all the enemies stronger.

 

[Reinhardt]

good luck entering that house in candlekeep in prologue and instead of dagger-wielding assassin meeting werewolf.

 

[ItsChon]

Forgive me, I forgot most Codexers are retarded and there is no point in asking half of them.

 

[Nortar]

Okay so one of the reasons you mentioned you were on this forum is to get feedback, so I will offer you some if you are interested in hearing it. It refers specifically to this.

As the difficulty increases, various modifiers (dodge chance, hit chance, debuffs, stats, etc.) will change.
In addition, with increasing difficulty, enemies will use new abilities. That is, their intelligence changes. Also, the number of mobs for some encounters will change.

Changing modifiers, increasing the number of mobs per encounter, and enemies using new abilities are all great, and what is to be expected of a higher difficulty. Let me just give you some advice, and if doubt the merit of said advice feel free to ask any Codexers on this thread and I am sure they will agree.

Changing the types of enemies you see at different points in the game (as long as it's logically coherent within the game world) is a great way to increase the difficulty while also making the higher difficulty, and the game in turn, far more engaging and interesting. Believe me, it feels way better to run into chaos spawn variant number three with its stats and abilities, than it is to run into chaos spawn number one with buffed stats and abilities, even if mechanically it would feel the same as chaos spawn number three, if that makes sense. Instead of giving new abilities to the enemies that were in the encounter on normal mode, why not add a mob that has said abilities to that encounter in addittion to the other mobs in hard mode? Obviously this wouldn't work if it doesn't make sense for said enemy to be there, but when possible to implement it's great, and in those situations, it would be awesome if the team did a reskin of that enemy in a way that would fit the current encounter at the time, just for that harder difficulty. This has the added benefit of encounters on higher difficulties getting more tactically complex, versus just a higher stat check, which is typically what higher difficulties are in most games (although you did mention plans to add new abilities to mobs in higher difficulties which would be taking steps to avoid this, so that is good to see). This also doubles as an easier way to make more complex encounters. Many times it feels that developers struggle to make encounters complex at higher difficulties because encounters have preset unit compositions/types, and for consistency reasons, units between each other need to have the same stats (they don't NEED to, this is just a common thing in most games). By adding new, more "advanced" mobs that would usually be seen later in the game, with their own special abilities that require special tactics to deal with, to these encounters, you can create a higher difficulty encounter that is actually engaging versus boring. Trust me when I say, this adds a ton of replayability to the game and it's the type of care/attention to detail everyone, even the more normie gamers, love to see, and I can't imagine it requiring too much effort.

What a flood of words for what boils down to "I want special mobs, instead of extra mobs or buffed up mobs".

Even such a trivial thing as increased HP, so you can't kill an enemy in one hit (or before he does X) could affect the way you deal with him.
As for numbers, two common archers positioned at different sides of room could be much harder to deal with than one speshul-uber-arch3r.

If you want an increased tactical challenge there's no universal solution.
In fact, the best outcome would combine all the possible options - more mobs, special mobs, buffed up mobs, improved AI and attrition.

I think it was Tyranicon who posted the idea that the proper way of adjusting the difficulty, is to plan the game around the hardest mode first, and then gradually adjust it for easier modes by removing bits and pieces.

 

[0sacred]

enemies using abilities = more intelligent? Hardly.

 

[ERYFKRAD]

I'd prefer ruthless enemies over smart ones or ability spammers.

 

[Camel]

I think it was @Tyranicon who posted the idea that the proper way of adjusting the difficulty, is to plan the game around the hardest mode first, and then gradually adjust it for easier modes by removing bits and pieces.

I think most games are balanced around normal difficulty since most people and reviewers play only on normal. Also there is a mistake many devs of MP and co-op games make when they listen only to a small group of hardcore players.

 

[ItsChon]

What a flood of words for what boils down to "I want special mobs, instead of extra mobs or buffed up mobs".

What does special mean? If by special you mean that I want mobs that require extra thought and strategy to deal with on higher difficulties versus what we get on standard difficulties, you are correct.

Even such a trivial thing as increased HP, so you can't kill an enemy in one hit (or before he does X) could affect the way you deal with him.

Yes, no shit. The thing is, most encounters aren't balanced on such a finely tuned knifes edge that just adjusting a few modifiers will drastically effect your strategy, and it would be nearly impossible to design a game that had a majority of encounters this finely tuned.

As for numbers, two common archers positioned at different sides of room could be much harder to deal with than one speshul-uber-arch3r.

Yes, no shit, but I assume the game on normal would already have an encounter like that instead of just having one archer. So the question remains, how do you make said encounter more interesting on hard mode? There are many things you can do, and that depends on the specific combat system in place as well. One of the things you can do as an example, could be adding an additional "special" archer, that you might run into in a later area of the game on normal difficulty. This archer instead of just shooting at you, has an ability to lay a trap on the floor from a distance, which if walked over roots you in place for a few seconds. This would obviously drastically change the nature of the fight, and is a great way to make the fight more engaging and complex without just mindlessly adding more archers (although this could definitely be something that makes the encounter more interesting) or making the existing archers harder to kill. Why is this such a hard concept for you to imagine?

Again, Underrail is a game that has done this already and it works quite well.

 

[ArchAngel]

Ok but what are they supposed to add later in the game instead of those "death stalkers"? At one point you run into a wall.

Later on in the game they will have access to all the different enemy types with all their abilities, so they won't have to do what I outlined above to keep encounters complex and interesting and difficult, they can just use the enemies they would normally use. In general, late game is far more complex than the early game due to how many more resources are available, both to the player and their enemies. The trouble is making the beginning interesting enough to replay at a higher difficulty, and also making the beginning authentically difficult by requiring more complex strategies to be used, versus just making all the enemies stronger.

So they will just add more of same enemy?! That does not make it more interesting like you want. It just moves the problem to higher levels.

 

[ItsChon]

Ok but what are they supposed to add later in the game instead of those "death stalkers"? At one point you run into a wall.

Later on in the game they will have access to all the different enemy types with all their abilities, so they won't have to do what I outlined above to keep encounters complex and interesting and difficult, they can just use the enemies they would normally use. In general, late game is far more complex than the early game due to how many more resources are available, both to the player and their enemies. The trouble is making the beginning interesting enough to replay at a higher difficulty, and also making the beginning authentically difficult by requiring more complex strategies to be used, versus just making all the enemies stronger.

So they will just add more of same enemy?! That does not make it more interesting like you want. It just moves the problem to higher levels.

They would be doing that anyway without my suggestion so I don't understand why you are being so purposely obtuse. I will repeat it for the third time, Underrail did this, and it literally works flawlessly. Of course, Underrail is one of the greatest cRPGs of all time period, but still, I hold onto a glimmer of hope that Owlcat can learn from something they did and implement it in their own title.

 

[Nortar]

As for numbers, two common archers positioned at different sides of room could be much harder to deal with than one speshul-uber-arch3r.

Yes, no shit, but I assume the game on normal would already have an encounter like that instead of just having one archer. So the question remains, how do you make said encounter more interesting on hard mode? There are many things you can do, and that depends on the specific combat system in place as well. One of the things you can do as an example, could be adding an additional "special" archer, that you might run into in a later area of the game on normal difficulty. This archer instead of just shooting at you, has an ability to lay a trap on the floor from a distance, which if walked over roots you in place for a few seconds. This would obviously drastically change the nature of the fight, and is a great way to make the fight more engaging and complex without just mindlessly adding more archers (although this could definitely be something that makes the encounter more interesting) or making the existing archers harder to kill. Why is this such a hard concept for you to imagine?

Bro, it's you who are having a hard time with concepts of tactical challenge.

What if instead istead of "mindlessly adding more archers" they would mindfully add one basic-ass shieldguard to protect the archer?
Or even place than one lonsome archer on a hard to reach balcony instead of ground floor?
But your proposition is to break out the super-speshul-trap-laying-arch3r early.

Using higher level or special mobs certainly have their place in making the encounters harder, but it's not the only and not even the best solution.

 

[Shadenuat]

Forgive me, I forgot most Codexer's are retards and there is no point in asking half of them.

You realise every time new rpg comes we ask the same thing, devs provide same replies and it all leads to same result?

Bunch of ex Nivals making their third game probably arent idiots, they made some decent fights in Wrath. Its just that AAA pipeline isnt compatible with strong RPG fundamentals. Half of a playerbase doesnt care about if its even rpg or not plays for shit giggles story. 90% dont even finish the game.
What we love in rpgs is often a labour of fine tuned lovingly crafted custom content. Popping every flower to be collected every item to have a story etc. Styg or other indie dev can sit there for years doing that, since it is also easier to do on simplier framework. But big studio cant. They are on timer, they cant put everyone for 5 years on to craft perfect codexers DM experience, they need to ship this mf and also do lots of petty shit like cutscenes and vo and its cutthroat business, nobody needs just a good rpg, they need something bombastic to get attention.

So there will be good encounters early, maybe some peak ones midgame, then a slog as devs try to hastily throw on you something to fill endgame and wrap everything up. Considering it is also new system and they been making d20 for years I d also expect some major hiccups until first addon.

 

[serch]

More enemies, different mob composition, more aggresive ai, better positioning and equipment are all preferable to stat bloating (feels like cheating) though far more difficult to implement.

 

[Norfleet]

I dare you to say that to their faces:

That's why it's called a kilt, it's what'll happen to you if you try that.

 

[Heroic Liberator]

Forgive me, I forgot most Codexer's are retards and there is no point in asking half of them.

Perfectly balanced, as all things should be.

 

[whocares]

I will not eat the bugs. I will not live in a pod. I will not use 2FA.

 

[Humbaba]

Male skirts are very cool and I wish I owned a fustanella.

 

[Gumsmith]

As promised, I got you some details about the difficulty mechanics of the game.
Since we don't have automatic battles, and they are turn-based, the player will have to control the companions on their own even on easy difficulty, so one way or another the player will have to figure out the abilities and how to use them.
As the difficulty increases, various modifiers (dodge chance, hit chance, debuffs, stats, etc.) will change.
In addition, with increasing difficulty, enemies will use new abilities. That is, their intelligence changes. Also, the number of mobs for some encounters will change.

Is difficulty customization in the game? E.g. playing a game with enemies that have more abilities and are in greater number without changing stats or hit chances.

 

[Storyfag]

Holy hells, ItsChon, you are on a roll. While your contributions to the DnD-film-turned-BG thread were amusing, those here are truly insightful. Would that more of the recent KKKodexian crop were like you

 

[Reinhardt]

Male skirts are very cool and I wish I owned a fustanella.

what stops you? it's current year after all.

 

[Ryzer]

They would be doing that anyway without my suggestion so I don't understand why you are being so purposely obtuse. I will repeat it for the third time, Underrail did this, and it literally works flawlessly. Of course, Underrail is one of the greatest cRPGs of all time period, but still, I hold onto a glimmer of hope that Owlcat can learn from something they did and implement it in their own title.

Are you sure about Underrail being one the greatest RPGs of all times? it's been the 3rd time you repeat it. You seem extremely uncertain.
Owlcat better stay as far away as possible from serbian bootleg Autismo simulator.
At least Pathfinder was fun and didn't have beyond sawyer-tier balance unlike Underrail.

 

[Mortmal]

Underrail that still one character only small indie, one of the greatest one man effort for sure that hardly anyone play , even here with less than 30% codexers. A full professional team could do lot better if there's a will, and apply its formula to a full team of characters however. Now that could turn out into one of the greatest rpg ever.
I like that they plan to add more enemies instead of HP bloat them so they are on the right track at least on paper, if there's use of terrain and many abilities.

 

[Tyranicon]

Is Owlcat considered AAA now?