Jump to content
Double Fine Action Forums

Selke

Members
  • Content Count

    284
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by Selke


  1. Finally wrapped up my 0.90 playthrough, and I'm still pretty not-enthused about the hybrids. It kinda feels like we had red, orange, and yellow crayons at first, but when we decided to expand the collection, we picked up red-orange, orange-red, orange-yellow, and yellow-orange. They're visibly different and not inherently bad colors, but our overall range hasn't really expanded at all.

    Attempting to keep this relatively quick...

    (1) Pure classes basically ceased to exist after the early game. This is partly because I used my 3 families/5 keeps model, and inbreeding restrictions put a damper on getting pure Cabers or Alchemists. Hunters never really had a chance, since they only had 1 keep to work with. I never really paid attention to what hybrid was going to be coming out of a keep - dealing with Traits, Personalities, fertility, and relics was plenty.

    (2) Hunter hybrids are terrible. I think the base Hunter nerfs were a little much to begin with, but these hybrids are truly the "worst of both worlds" model.

    (3) Caberjack hybrids are usable but generally feel worse than base Cabers. Shadowjacks are at least somewhat unique thanks to stealth and the reliable stuns of Knockback, but Blastcappers mostly struck me as "worse Caberjacks who happen to have acid." I used Explosive Caber for its intended purpose maybe twice; I found it more useful as a way to not kill enemies (since it doesn't appear to be able to crit), allowing me to build up other heroes and their relics.

    (4) Alchemist hybrids are strong, but not really that interesting. Notably, Brewtalists are murder machines for much of the game, but the lack of Free Throw hurts them a bit in the final battle.

    (5) I think one of the things that makes hybrids such a dubious prospect to me is that you get to choose your skills in the first place. The base classes are already somewhat flexible, and I found the hybrids frequently leaning towards the original skills in their trees over the new ones, further failing to distinguish themselves. If hybrids absolutely must be in the game, they might be better served by being "upgrade" classes that you unlock (meaning a Brewtalist is an Alchemist with EXTRA abilities rather than having tradeoffs) or by making skills a fixed progression rather than a tree.

    (6) Not inherently hybrid-related, but Fury and Chalk One Up both feel too weak to matter right now; they rarely change how many attacks it takes to kill enemies. I.E. dealing 33 damage is almost exactly the same as dealing 30 damage when the bad guy has 40 HP. Go big! I'm thinking of Chalk One Up along the lines of "+50% damage if you killed an enemy last turn," forcing the Hunter to maintain the pace of the action to keep his buff. Or +100% damage. Or a guaranteed crit. But it needs to be noticeable, especially as a capstone ability.


  2. @Cheeseness: did you save mid-battle? That seems to be a recurring theme for the infinite spawn problem.

    Finally finished my 0.90 playthrough! Final battle is still a little wonky.

    I felt much more boxed in initially - I think I had the nearest possible Cadence spawns to start - but after that initial hump it was smooth sailing again. I did have a couple injuries, but 2 Ultralixirs cleared that right up, so I still haven't encountered any deaths in the final fight. Probably should've tried that given the new auto-equip logic that's supposed to be in place. The Chalice only got hit once, on a Bulwark shot that tagged a unit halfway across the map. Cradles seem to be behaving a little weird, as well. A few took shots at me, but there were a couple times that they ran right by in order to get closer to the Chalice. Honeypot too stronk.


  3. Quick question for folks that pay closer attention than me. A number of traits have the possibility of suddenly appearing on a hero late in their life: Arthritic and Heart Disease come to mind. If the hero already had 3 traits associated with them, will this new appearance override one of the prior traits, or does it simply "mask" the other?

    Clearer example: Alice Smith has the traits Hearty, Bear Strength, and Quick. When she turns 50, her Trait lists changes to Hearty, Bear Strength, and Arthritic. Is she still Quick, even though the list doesn't show it?


  4. Question for the team regarding kids in battle. Is the trainee model intended just be a decoration for the strategy layer (to show people running around their Keep or something), or will they eventually be usable in combat? I'm mostly wondering about what will happen when a keep whose regent is a trainee gets attacked. Are they forced to participate in that case?


  5. The more I think about this idea, the less I like it. It screws up the game flow way too much.

    Right now, you turn on the timeline, and the game stops when a regent or partner dies and prompts you to do something about it. If you put in a system that lets you retire a ruler in Old Age, you can't do that anymore. Instead, you're going to keep starting and stopping the timeline to double check that you haven't let any regents slip into old age, since it means you have a lower-leveled, lower-fertility unit on the throne. The "right" way to play becomes this herky-jerky micromanagement of checking your rulers' age brackets. Which also means shorter reigns, which means more regents & partners to monitor over 300 years.

    The Longevity/Heart Disease issue is a tangential matter to deal with in isolation. Off the top of my head, I'd have it affect when the age brackets kick in. That way a unit with Heart Disease is losing years off of all three age brackets rather than just off of his less-useful Old Age years. And vice versa for longevity; drag their young and prime years on a little longer than normal to adjust for their extended lifespan.


  6. If this does happen - and I think it'd need to be qualified as opposed to a "whenever you want" thing - I'd like to see the regent and partner retired in tandem rather than individually. These poor people have to deal my hand of god so much already, it'd be cruel to sling them around even more. I've already seen some pretty elaborate family trees thanks to repeated remarriage - as in 3 or more family emblems in the "Children" display on their profile - and don't need to see that get even weirder.

    If you're kicking a king off his throne, at least give him the decency of settling down with his wife afterwards.


  7. I think events are just about where they need to be, conceptually. It's true that individual outcomes and circumstances aren't always structured or communicated well; A Standard Baby has gotten a lot of flak, and I had an instance with Relic In Time yesterday when the unit was already holding a level 10 relic, I told them to chill out, and they jumped in the portal anyway never to be seen again. But I don't want to see a huge system tacked on top of this. It does feel like some events should allow you to pick which units are involved, and we're going to unnecessarily constrain the kind of events that can be written for the game by forcing them to be purely reactive. (And if that segues into certain events adjusting their outcomes on the presence of specific traits or personalities, great. But I don't think that's a requirement by any stretch.)

    Where I'm more concerned is with the rest of the strategy layer; I echo the idea that it doesn't really feel that strategic. Looking at XCOM (which was also pretty simple on this front) your options are basically rushing ALL the satellites, churning out a few satellites at a time, OR ignoring sats to do an alien base rush. You have some minor variation via base building, research paths, equipment, etc., but it's pretty much those 3 overarching plans of attack. And even the alien base rush strikes me as more of a novelty than a good, solid plan.

    Right now, I'm not sure we even have that much strategic variety. The little twists are there: traits & personalities, which class gets the first keep, what research order you use. But I don't feel like I can go into a game and say "I'm going to do things differently this time by doing X" except where X is something like "No Caberjacks," which isn't so much a strategy as a silly challenge. Ultimately, you build your hero engine and chill in a holding pattern, and your engine is only ever going to be a little bit different from mine by way of keep count, crucible count, and so on.

    As for what to actually do about that? I don't entirely know. Beefing up the research tree some might yield more definition in mid-game strategy. (I'm thinking of something like Civilization, where your choosing to research Animal Husbandry vs. Ironworking vs. Navigation is a big deal. Everyone gets them all eventually, but the one you choose now has a big impact on how you get to that endpoint.) Making Traits & Personalities more impactful might contribute some. I do like the idea of individual keeps being upgradable in some capacity, but the economy system would need to remain pretty stripped down to not become a distraction. Maybe some standard growth over time, combined with Cadence corpses, similar to Banner Saga's system of Renown? That would at least give me something to do with the 900 Lapse corpses I have sitting around by the end of the game.


  8. There's been no indication that we'd start with more than one keep, but it's been talked about on the forums a fair amount in the past. Last word I remember Brad offering on it was that he didn't like taking any more building placement out of the player's hands. Especially because some of the extra keeps would need to be pre-staffed with regents and partners as well so that the player wasn't immediately prompted to marry their entire team off.

    Re: enemies, I agree that they could benefit from a little more complexity. But specifically regarding the Seed, am I correct in thinking that only Advanced Seeds can combine, and they only ever create a non-advanced Cradle? That seems like a potentially bad tradeoff for them. The Seeds are 3x31 = 69 HP, have the benefit of Slippery, and (barring explosions) require at least 3 attacks to eliminate by virtue of there being 3 of them. While the Cradle has a dangerous attack, it's still a single 58 HP enemy that doesn't have great defenses. I'm wondering if that interaction requires some tweaking. Maybe not all of the Seeds get consumed in the transformation, maybe Cradles provide some ongoing aura or Mind Meld-y benefit to nearby Seeds, and/or maybe Cradles are just scripted to move after Seeds so that the newly transformed one can attack immediately? I dunno.


  9. I don't think Cadence weapons' problem is lack of endgame viability so much as it's that their window of midgame relevance is ridiculously small. I compare it to XCOM's weapon tech. You can capture some Thin Men and research light plasma rifles right away, but that's a long research item for the start of the game. The other option is to spend a much shorter time researching laser rifles. Lasers will become obsolete eventually, but the plasma-first guy is going to have a tough time scraping out battles while his research finishes, and he may fall behind on other tech in the mean time.

    My experience in Massive Chalice has been that the first relic pops up around year 50, and you've probably got a few by year 150. For my unit economy, I like to build 4 additional keeps, 2 crucibles, and 1 guild; I don't have numbers handy, but that's probably 80-100 years of research. And splash in a Recruit Heroes and item research here and there, too. By the time I feel like I can catch my breath and branch out my tech, I've already got a couple of relics cooking and still haven't upgraded my armor. This also assumes that I have the necessary Cadence corpses - you can't very well sneak in a Time Fist in if you haven't fought Twitchers yet.

    It's further compounded by how quickly relics level up; I think that they get XP from both kills AND missions. (Random thought: do relics benefit from natural trainee growth right now? If the secret recipe for a maxed relic is just to hand it to a newborn and wait 15 years, that's probably an issue.) This is another spot where the mid-game sort of just doesn't exist.

    Utility-oriented Cadence weapons (the cabers & the pillar thrower) are still useful if you have units along to just soak up mission XP in preparation for life in a keep or crucible. (Your other units are presumably doing all the killing in order to help generate new relics or level up their existing ones.) That's a little more specific than I'd like, but there's at least some niche to exploit there. It does make me think that the process of making a new relic may need something more to it than "kill a bunch of dudes" though.

    On a tangential note, how do people feel about the ability to give multiple keeps to the same bloodline? I've turned it into a staple of my strategy in part because it makes relic handling easier, but I think it's starting to bug me, thematically. Partly because same-name marriages squick me out, and partly because of moments where the game says "Ned Stark, Regent of Winterfell has died!" and my response has to be "Okay, which Winterfell?" It also makes losing regions less impactful since it means you're unlikely to ever lose an entire family. Winterfell Alpha may have dissolved into goo, but Winterfell Bravo is still churning out Starks. I could definitely see restricting families to one keep and/or one relic, though you may need to make relics hand-off-able in order to make the restriction less punitive.


  10. I guess to expand on my earlier thoughts in a meandering kind of way...

    What I keep coming back to has been my experience pulling Final Fantasy Tactics out of storage this past summer and looking at it with my Designer Goggles on. I played it to death as a kid - probably 15-20 times through - and it's long been a favorite game. But exploring it again, it's clear that there's a lot less variety between classes than on initial inspection, and there really isn't a coherent structure to it all. On the physical (Squire) side of things, the best classes are, with little competition, the Monk and Ninja. They're both relatively advanced classes, requiring you to cycle through a few jobs to get there. On the magical (Chemist) side, the strongest options are generally the Wizard and the Chemist itself. These are available basically immediately, with utility-oriented classes opening up as you advance.

    Already there's some conflict there - one side wants you to tech up so that you can get stronger, whereas the other side wants you to tech up to get different. And then you sprinkle in some classes that are basically junk (Squire, Archer) and some that have cool abilities that you'd rather be using on other jobs (Thief, Calculator, Samurai, etc.). And it all boils down to this core feeling of: yes, you want a bunch of classes to be in your game. But why, and what purpose do these different classes serve? I don't feel like there's a clear message.

    I'm getting the same sort of feeling out of the Hybrids we have. The core classes were chosen in part because they had well-defined roles, and the hybrids expressly do not. They exist because it seems like 9 classes should be cooler than 3, and they muddy the waters between where one class ends and the next begins. But having those lines of specialization is largely the point of having a class-based system, so I keep coming back to this point of "What is ultimately the goal of these 6 classes?" If they're intended to be basically as effective as a "pure" class but lack the stark definition of their parent classes, it strikes me as something of a wasted effort to implement them at all.


  11. I'm at about year 170 of my first playthrough, and overall I don't really care for the hybrids.

    My experience re: "pure" classes has been pretty similar - they mostly disappeared after the early game. I'm working with my usual 3 families/5 keeps setup, so the only time I get a pure class is in a borderline-inbreeding scenario. I could recruit heroes to get purebreds, but there's a lot of die-rolling involved in that - you need the right classes, the right sexes, and not-awful Traits or Personalities. And you still don't actually end up USING those new heroes aside from slotting them in as partners, so it seems like a raw deal to halt your research for.

    The hybrids themselves have been almost universally underwhelming.

    Hunters have been hit hardest. The class was obviously too strong on the first release of the game, but repeated smacks of the nerf bat rendered them arguably worthless in the mid and late game. Their hybrid versions suffer even more - I want a Hunter in my party to (A) be able to scout and (B) deal big spikes of damage to high-threat targets like Bulwarks, Ruptures, or Lapses which are difficult to assault with melee classes. Losing Follow Up means they kinda suck at the latter.

    Enforcers: Knock-Back Shot is okay, but mostly I want knockback abilities to stun nearby enemies I wasn't able to finish off in one go, which makes the ranged aspect unhelpful. It's also more difficult to determine 100% which way the enemy is going to be knocked. Point Blank Shot is an okay damage amplifier, but it again is serving a purpose - melee combat - that's totally at odds with what I want a Hunter for. The fact that Hunter damage is generally worse than a Caberjack's also makes this a dubious ability. I keep flashing back to XCOM's Snapshot ability - in a vacuum it seems fine and you'd rather have it than nothing. But any time I'm using Snapshot, I'd have been better off just bringing an Assault unit instead. Same story for Stand Ground and Fortify; this is still primarily an aggressive, ranged unit - defensive melee abilities don't add any value.

    Trickshots: Flask Shot seems pretty much terrible. You're getting lower damage than a basic attack for a bigger AOE, but it rare to actually be able to hit multiple units in the first place. Enemies don't tend to cluster until they begin closing in on your party, and needing to center the attack on an enemy means you're restricted beyond what an Alchemist would be. The other abilities likewise seem questionable - the only item I need is a Steady Hander, and Crop Duster just creates a defensive zone for enemies that are about to charge at me.

    Alchemists have gotten a lot of love since the game first launched, and rightfully so. Repeated buffs to their flasks have made their limited ammo feel better, but I'm worried it's gone a little too far and made them into monsters. The hybrid melee/ranged nature of the class makes them best suited towards the hybrid system, and their hybrids are arguably just as out of hand.

    Boomstrikers honestly don't feel very different from Alchemists. Precision Flasks are only a small change from the 3x3 ones (especially since prior patches used the cross-bomb). Aerodynamic Flasks serve basically the same purpose as Spirit of the Dart Falcon. You get a little bit of variation further up the tree, but honestly I didn't care much for the Alchemist's level 8 abilities to begin with so the only real difference is not having The Acid Solution. And Honed Hearing is almost enough to make me swear off Hunters completely, except that I need a Hunter in order to make a Boomstriker... truly a vicious cycle.

    Brewtalists are candidates for best class in the game. Hack'n'Slash is terrifying, especially if you have a relic. Knockback Flasks deal crazy amounts of damage AND stun reliably. Fury and Prime Target are still kinda bleh, but you still have Second Item (Steady Hander + Haste Hooch for life) and Acid Solution. And I haven't gotten to Bladestorm yet, but I'll almost certainly use it more than Bees or Fertilizer.

    Caberjacks were fine before, valuable across the whole game as they transition from control units to damage units as they level up. I don't think either hybrid is up to snuff with the original though, so the difficulty in obtaining pure classes is a negative for them. More than anything these guys need a UI upgrade to make lining up Charge better, which is a contributing factor to the loss of Knockback hurting them.

    Blastcappers are... okay. Explosive Caber is mostly pointless. Small AOE, centered on an enemy, lower damage than a basic attack most of the time... I'd rather have a reliable stun. Rebound and Fury are both pretty inconsequential skills, so Second Item is decent if not phenomenal. Logjam and Prime Target likewise were not great skills, so Acid Solution is a net upgrade albeit in a kind of boring way. I haven't gotten to Beebound yet, but I guess it seems decent-ish?

    Shadowjacks are the class I have the least experience with, but again, the skills they have are not what I want out of a Caberjack. Stealth & Sneak Attack are probably scary but stand at odds with Put It Down. And between the inability to use Veil Armor and the loss of stuns, it strikes me as a messy combination.

    ***

    The overarching theme to me though, is that hybrids are frequently giving up the primary class's core strengths in order to do a cruddy imitation of their secondary class. Some tuning may help mitigate this, but my first impulses are to either scrap hybrids entirely, or to balance them as being strict upgrades to the base classes and lock them away until you've completed some kind of associated research. As is, I don't think they're helping the game's overall health.


  12. Yep! This has been mentioned on the forums here as well, and I'm all for it. Don't think the team has responded to it yet, but I imagine that's partly out of a desire to get some of the other core kinks worked out before developing what is essentially a brand new feature. I'm hoping that this gets addressed after the Hybrid Classes patch has been released and we've had some time to chew on their addition.


  13. I'm generally on the side of things being a bit too easy, but with a caveat: the early game is a meatgrinder. There's very little margin for error in solidifying your bloodlines, and the introduction of Bulwarks and Cradles are big spikes in particular. But if you can squeak by and hit the mid-game without putting yourself too far in the hole, it feels like a smooth coast to the finish. Very XCOM-like in that respect.

    At the same time, it occurs to me that losing at the final battle (or really anywhere in the latter third of the game) is sort of its own kind of problem. Dying at the end of Binding of Isaac or FTL kinda sucks, but a run of those takes something like 30 minutes or 2 hours, respectively. The idea of playing Massive Chalice for 8-10 hours, then losing and having to start from scratch seems significantly suckier.


  14. The RNG feels very off in combat, so it would not surprise me if it was off here as well.

    In combat 50% miss chance seems to be much closer to 80% and 20-% seems much closer to 0%.

    Accuracy can be (intentionally) wrong on heroes with the Optimistic or Pessimistic personalities.

    Beyond that, this is just humans (not you specifically) being dumb. We're really bad at assessing randomness and often create narratives to fit our faulty observations. And in particular we tend to be much better at remembering instances in which we got screwed than those when we got lucky.

    Some games circumvent this by using structures called (I think this is the right term) Markov chains to adjust the odds behind the scenes in order to make games "feel" more random. (Fairly certain that the recent XCOM does this.) The gist is, if you miss a shot at 95%, the game will, without showing you, treat your next 95% shot as being even MORE accurate. Missing on two consecutive 95% shots is very unlikely (0.25%), to the point that people expect it to literally never happen, leading to frustration when it actually does. Likewise, it's totally possible for someone with a 5% chance to crit to do it twice in a row (again, 0.25%), but our brains treat "shouldn't happen often" as "shouldn't happen ever" and construct weird narratives to fit them. Maybe it's "the game cheats," maybe it's "this die is hot tonight, better keep rolling this one." It feels right, it's just... totally wrong.

    Essentially, Markov chains when used in this fashion validate the gambler's fallacy by reducing variance based on recent events, which makes our dumb brains happy. The RNG might feel bad because people don't actually like randomness deep down, but it's almost certainly working correctly. Now, do we need a less-random RNG? Maybe a more interesting question.


  15. in this game you, the player, have direct control of all these systems and these systems make you responsible for your success and failure in all these areas over time. though the systems are not always easy to manipulate or transparent about the effectiveness of your choices-all the time, actions have predictable results that streach across generations.

    You do realize that that's exactly the same as the systems you just described as awful, right?

    no it isn't the same.

    all the systems in the game have an absolute result. kids born of a parent with asthma- have asthma in their genetic code always. the game dosnt show you the code but if you as a player are paying attention you can figure out what genes will become dominant in certain pairings allowing for certain dominant traits. the game doesn't have tool-tips in it yet and dosn't show you the genetic code but it is not a random system and will produce consistent non-random results from player choices.

    the suggestion to add a % based system for defining a hero's clas. into a game which is built on the principle of the player makeing choices is counter-intuitive. as a player you have control over every aspect of a hero from their parents clothes personality and genes... but the class is random?

    it dosn't make sense

    Okay, let's unpack this a little bit. Asthma is a trait that doesn't have a direct opposite (such as Quick/Slow/normal speed) so we have two alleles, the dominant A and recessive a.

    If asthma is recessive, then a parent with asthma (aa) will absolutely pass down asthma genes to their child. However, if their partner does not have asthma, we're either guaranteed children who do not have asthma but carry the gene (aa + AA = Aa) or we have a probability spread of kids who carry and kids who express the gene. (aa + Aa = Aa, aa).

    If asthma is dominant, then a parent with asthma may or may not pass down the genes to their children, because it's not clear whether they're homozygous (AA) or heterozygous (Aa). If the partner is not asthmatic, then there's a chance that asthma will not be passed down (Aa + aa = Aa, aa), cutting it from the family's genetic code. This remains a possibility even if the partner is asthmatic. (Aa + Aa = AA, Aa, aa)

    Even for the simplest scenarios above, the existence of heterozygous (Aa) units means that we had to use words like "chance," "probability," and "possibility" a whole lot there. Even if we knew exactly which genes were dominant/re-cessive/incompletely dominant/co-dominant (and I'm going to call you on that "if you as a player are paying attention" dig here, because I don't think anyone has a great sense of which are what) there's still uncertainty in cases where we don't know if the unit is homo- or hetero- zygous. Even if the game adds the ability to view genetic code, those heterozygous units still are handing down alleles based on probability.

    And then there are the two monkey wrenches. First, there's a random mutation factor, which can derail even the most absolute of absolute scenarios. And second, there's still a hard cap on 3 Traits and Personalities. Even if your unit has the perfect genes for a Trait, there's still a chance that it won't be expressed because 3 other genetic Traits he had randomly happened to be the ones expressed.

    Calling any of these systems "absolute" is a huge overstatement. You have direct control of the inputs to these systems, but that doesn't give absolute results on the outputs. All we're ever doing is tweaking the odds, even if there are corner cases where we can tilt them far enough to hit 100% - and even then we often have to couch it in probability statements. (I know this guy is AA, so I know his kids will have at least one dominant allele, and they'll probably express it.)

    It's the same for Crucibles. Having one Patriotic Standard gives a chance to pass it down to my Trainees. I can tilt the odds by having five Standards with Patriotic. But even then, there's no direct control - I can't point at a unit and say "This guy is going to be Patriotic" with certainty. All I can accurately say is that, as a trend, the vast majority of my units should be Patriotic. (And even then there's likely a remote chance to whiff on all of them.)

    Right now, class inheritance is the only absolute system in the bloodline side of the game. That in and of itself isn't inherently bad, and nobody is saying we need to go all or nothing in terms of deterministic or probabilistic systems. And even on the probabilistic side, we're still not pulling sub-classes out of a hat. Just like inheritance and Standard-training, the ideas being presented draw on the player's decision, hitting expectations more often than not and adding in some understandable diversity on the fringe.


  16. in this game you, the player, have direct control of all these systems and these systems make you responsable for your sucsess and failure in all these areas over time. though the systems are not always easy to manipulate or transperant about the effectiveness of your choicesall the time, actions have predictable results that streach across generations.

    You do realize that that's exactly the same as the systems you just described as awful, right?


  17. It was the opposite, as I recall - classes got scoped back to 3 because hybrids introduced so much complexity. Keeping in one more class (the Vanguard in this case) really meant keeping in 7 more classes.

    You're right that the modular approach isn't a magic wand that makes everything simple and perfect, but it's still pretty clearly an easier process than tailoring individual skills to suit the specific primary+secondary combination. And it doesn't handcuff you extensibility-wise like this approach does; I don't expect to ever see a Vanguard unless Massive Chalice becomes a monster hit that prints money for the team simply because of the level of effort involved.

    Under the circumstances of having only 3 base classes, I agree with you that creating specific hybrid version is much more interesting than a modular primary/secondary system. But if we could take it from the top, I'd still much rather have seen a greater number of base classes and leave the bulk of synergy-hunting to the player rather than the design team.


  18. I mean, the core class is in the mix if... (A) you use the Recruit Heroes research, (B) you use heroes received as mission rewards, or © you breed together heroes of the same bloodline. I consider both A & B bad moves since strategically, I'm much more concerned about eliminating bad Traits than I am about introducing new good ones, meaning I don't want to introduce a genetic crapshoot into the mix. A has an additional strike against in that it wastes research time for no real gain. C avoids those pitfalls, but it's only available many generations into the game, and it's kinda gross feeling even when the relation is distant enough for the game to allow it. I don't think any of those are good options, which will lead to core classes disappearing almost immediately and never coming back.

    The other thing I'd throw out there is that the "default" strategy is to use 3 bloodlines and field your squad in a 2/2/1 class breakdown. (I'm liking 2 cabers & hunters in the early game, switching to 2 cabers and alchemists towards the late.) This gets a little more nuanced - and more clearly highlights individual heroes - if my two Muir caberjacks have (or can have) different secondaries. Likewise, it makes team composition and unit selection more interesting once your gene pool has stabilized and you start getting multiple siblings with near-identical Traits and Personalities.

    I agree that the player needs to feel like they're mostly in control of the classes they're going to get, which is why I'm suggesting a pretty heavy weight in favor of the partner's primary class. But I think there's something to be said for making this a little more organic.


  19. Another reason is that adding another class explodes the number of hybrid classes:

    3 Main classes = 6 Hybrid Classes (2 variants + 2 + 2)

    4 Main classes = 12 Hybrid Classes (3 variants + 3 + 3 + 3)

    5 Main classes = 20 Hybrid Classes (4 + 4 + 4 + 4 + 4)

    etc. 3 is about the most you can have before the numbers start to get out of control.

    Interestingly, this is one of the two big reasons why they mentioned not wanting to do hybrids in the initial teamstreams. I'm still confused how we ended up with them as opposed to a more flexible primary/secondary system. (The other big issue was, for every intuitive combination like Warrior + Cleric = Paladin, there were twice as many bizarre ones like Wizard + Paladin = ???. This was well before actual class workshopping had been done, so we were working in more traditional fantasy concepts.)


  20. Yep, had exactly this concern. If we maintain the strictly deterministic system of classes we have now (all children get Primary Regent as their primary, Primary Partner as their secondary) you're pretty much never going to see a "pure" class after the first generation. People generally seem to like one keep for of the core classes, and your options afterwards are either to mingle those three bloodlines (producing only hybrids) or introduce additional bloodlines as you add more keeps. The latter is mostly a bad move though, since it slows down your leveling & relic processes, and since hybrids are intended to be just as good overall as pure classes, why go to extra trouble to create the latter?

    Due to the way relics work (and in order to make kingdom management comprehensible in the slightest) the Regent's primary class must become the children's primary 100% of the time. But for secondaries, I think we're much better served using a weighted distribution to provide variety in the children. I'm thinking something like:

    60% get the Partner's primary as their secondary class.

    20% get the Partner's secondary as their secondary.

    20% get the Regent's secondary as their secondary.

    You still have a relative degree of certainty regarding what you're going to get, but some sensible variety comes in as well.


  21. Right now, I agree that you're likely to get all the research you want by the end of the game unless you end up restricted by Cadence corpses somehow. (And even that seems unlikely.) The bigger question is how well you're keeping up in the mid-game. Being able to get all of your armor and accessories by Year 250 does you little good if you're in Year 100 and haven't started any of it.

    You're right in that the Guild's research boost is relatively minor, and in light of the last patch upping the building time and cutting the research bonus, I'd never build more than 1. On the other hand, at some point, you don't need more Crucibles or Keeps either, and you'll end up with a bunch of junk heroes that aren't good for anything else. In light of that, having a Guild is a bit of a luxury, but it's an affordable one that uses up a resource you already end up with a surplus of.


  22. Kind of a small issue, but the closing years of the game have struck me as really weird, thematically, on my playthroughs.

    A big part of the story - both systematically as well as in the cutscenes - is about building a kingdom and legacy to stand throughout time. But when you're closing in on Year 301, there's no longer a reason to look towards the future. Somewhere between years 270 and 285, you're going to be able to identify your 5 units for the final battle, and at that point there's no reason to care about anyone else. It ends up being a weird tonal shift in that I suddenly want to leave my buildings empty; Keeps birth and raise trainees I'll never use, Crucibles likewise aid worthless trainees, and Sagewrights have almost certainly wrapped up any relevant research. So staffing these all becomes pointless, serving only to clog up my timeline with alerts of leaders dying.

    Hence "Senior Ditch Day" - the closing years have a feel specifically like second semester of senior year in high school, when college plans are finalized and the bulk of motivation just stops applying. The ending may say that your efforts allow the kingdom to stand throughout time, but from a gameplay perspective, you might as well run your kingdom into the ground on your way out the door.

    I'm afraid I'm at a lost as to what can be done to smooth this out. Is this something anyone else has noticed/been frustrated by?


  23. I hate to be negative in here, but I've been finding that the event "A Standard Baby" is just not working for me, to the point that I've been savescummingg past it out of frustration. Some of that is the mechanical effect - potentially losing or screwing up a Standard (one of the most valuable units you have) - but it's also frustrating that the writing presents it as a huge deal, where my normal response to the situation is "ok you had a baby, I'm fine with that," which is not at all reflected in the options. Any chance we can take this back to the drawing board?


  24. To get a new house going with a low-level hunter, Make the hunter a regent and marry him/her to high leveled partner to gve their kids a large XP boost.

    Actually, Partners appear to not contribute any XP to kids in the current build. I think zdesert is the one who's been documenting his experiments on this front.


  25. Just wrapped up the final battle on my 0.86 playthrough. Definitely less tedious killing 5 waves than 10. Or infinity. :P Definitely agree with the posts above asking for feedback along the way. The Chalice is calling Cadence in - it should have some idea how far there is to go.

    Alchemists have come a looong way since 0.82 or whatever when I last hit the endgame. I went with 2 Cabers, 2 Alchemists, and 1 Hunter for my party and it felt like the right balance. You probably could've subbed the Hunter out for anything else and been fine though; their damage may have been reined in a little too much in light of the fact that they can't go on single-turn killing sprees like the other classes can. Even having stacked Chalk One Up to 50% (10 kills) had me just barely guaranteeing kills on Lapses and Wrinklers

    Also, I noticed this time that you can actually bring Standards, Regents, and Partners to the final battle. Has it always been that way? Definitely loosens up the need for Relic juggling in the end game, though honestly I had relics to spare.

    It's difficult to say whether the honeypot aspect is too strong, or if a team of maxed out murderers is too strong; I had one unit get hit one time (de-leveling him from 10 to 9, natch) and that was it. The Chalice remained untouched, and vast majority of enemies never even got to launch attacks. Probably should've sacrificed someone to see the ancestor thing.

×
×
  • Create New...