Topic: This game is still broken as hell. It's too hard.

looks like the best positive review…

I personally think it’s crazy that you are finding the game so incredibly difficult, but at the same time
you have the mental capacity to make a forum account, start a thread and express some semi-coherent opinion.

luzarius wrote:

I decided to try once more on beginner difficulty like before. I was able to kill the weasel guy. Now I’m trying to find a third mission. I went to four towns so far and the only contract available so far was a single skull. I refused and went to the fifth town and found another contract, a double skull, so I refused. Now I’m going to the 6th town to find a contract and I get attacked by bandits, 5 of them. They kill my entire party AGAIN, lol.

This has got to be the dumbest game I’ve ever played in the history of games. What a fucking waste. The game seems to have potential to be fun, but if a new player can’t even get past the third contract then something is severely wrong. I highly suggest a better in game tutorial or an easier difficulty than beginner.

Suggested difficulties to be added to the game:

Clueless
Rookie
Beginner
Novice
Adept
Veteran
Expert

I know I’m not being unreasonable. I’ve played tons of games on the hardest difficulty and even beat them without dying a single time. Hell, I’ve played Dark Souls 3 and got through 60% of the game without dying. I’m not some clueless person who has never played games before.

This game is seriously broken.

I take the piss out of this game pretty frequently. My steam review is negative with a tentative endorsement for only the most patient gamers to pick it up. Battle Brothers, despite its claims, is not a game that deserves to be played on Iron man. No matter how many people say “losing is fun”, the only reason that tip is in the game is to justify some absolutely glaring design flaws in map generation and two conflicting design philosophies concerning what the hell the game is trying to be. The game does not respect the players time, and progress made from perfect decisions in the past can be immediately erased by one bad map generation or world-map event. You can lose hours by having a high-level brother die to something completely outside of your control. The game isn’t broken, but it can’t claim to be built for Iron man, and whenever I see “losing is fun” I feel like the devs are taunting me by leaving the product in a state where I just have to “accept” bullshit passed off as “fun”. That’s not a feature, it’s a bug. Don’t tell me how to feel about losing the time I put into a product I want to have faith in and enjoy.

Despite all of that, you’re in the wrong. What you played in the past doesn’t matter. IF you played Dark Souls 1 and Dark Souls 2 kicks your ass, sure. There might be an issue. Those two games have essentially the same rules. I can be an absolute monster in Fifa on the console, that doesn’t mean my fifa skills are transferable to a fighting game. Don’t compare apples to oranges and say there’s something fundamentally wrong with the orange.

You’ll need to learn what fights to avoid and what to go after to level up. It doesn’t matter if you fought five “Bandits”. A team of raiders early-game will absolutely trash you right out of the gate. A team of thugs won’t.

I have no problems going to town on this game, despite it being one of my all-time favorites. It certainly is not unreasonably difficult. I beat Ninja Gaiden on Master Ninja mode. I would get trashed in fifa by anyone with even passing knowledge of sports game. Don’t blame the game and ask it to change. Learn the rules. Then trash it like do, because learning to love losing for something outside of your control is like learning to love being slapped in the face by a giant hotdog when you clearly wanted to get slapped by a taco. Now if you’ll excuse me, I expected this apple to taste like an orange. I’m gonna go complain to God.

Ledgren wrote:

I mean, the fact that you finished one mission, the tutorial, and then refused both one and two skull quests that could have helped you get money and experience says quite a lot. Three skull missions are designed to either be unbeatable, a fight you should walk away from, or very difficult, a fight that will cost you a few mercenaries. Doesn’t mean they always play out that way. It does mean you shouldn’t be bee lining straight to them if you intend to get unhappy about losses. As for world-map enemies, running away from a lot of fights is very important until mid to late game.

Am i reading this right, BB is one of your all time favourite games but you gave it a negative steam review? Why not go positive and then add a cautionary note to those that aren’t prepared to sink enough time to learn how to prosper in ironman?

…meant to quote your other post dude sorry!

Trappist wrote:

Ledgren wrote:

I mean, the fact that you finished one mission, the tutorial, and then refused both one and two skull quests that could have helped you get money and experience says quite a lot. Three skull missions are designed to either be unbeatable, a fight you should walk away from, or very difficult, a fight that will cost you a few mercenaries. Doesn’t mean they always play out that way. It does mean you shouldn’t be bee lining straight to them if you intend to get unhappy about losses. As for world-map enemies, running away from a lot of fights is very important until mid to late game.

Am i reading this right, BB is one of your all time favourite games but you gave it a negative steam review? Why not go positive and then add a cautionary note to those that aren’t prepared to sink enough time to learn how to prosper in ironman?

…meant to quote your other post dude sorry!

I have played this game for 1110 hrs on steam’s record, but I don’t think it’s wrong that someone left a negative review for it even he/she mostly like the game. A game deserves both positive and negative reviews from its players. And sometimes, the more you love it, the more disappointment you will get from it.

Ioci wrote:

Trappist wrote:

Ledgren wrote:

I mean, the fact that you finished one mission, the tutorial, and then refused both one and two skull quests that could have helped you get money and experience says quite a lot. Three skull missions are designed to either be unbeatable, a fight you should walk away from, or very difficult, a fight that will cost you a few mercenaries. Doesn’t mean they always play out that way. It does mean you shouldn’t be bee lining straight to them if you intend to get unhappy about losses. As for world-map enemies, running away from a lot of fights is very important until mid to late game.

Am i reading this right, BB is one of your all time favourite games but you gave it a negative steam review? Why not go positive and then add a cautionary note to those that aren’t prepared to sink enough time to learn how to prosper in ironman?

…meant to quote your other post dude sorry!

I have played this game for 1110 hrs on steam’s record, but I don’t think it’s wrong that someone left a negative review for it even he/she mostly like the game. A game deserves both positive and negative reviews from its players. And sometimes, the more you love it, the more disappointment you will get from it.

Yeah sure but it was described as an ‘all-time favourite’ which is a somewhat different vibe to ‘mostly like’. Anyway I’d just like to clarify that I wasn’t trying to be disrespectful to Ledgren’s opinion, I was just intrigued to understand the rational. And I have to say I was really pleased to read his reply which made perfect sense and didn’t indicate any annoyance at my question (hopefully).

I would also describe this game as one of my all-time favourites. I’ve got 1300hrs+ on steam since early access, but i don’t think its perfect either. Really excited for the expansion, it will address some, but not all of the issues that would be on my own list of constructive feedback points. I’m just happy that Overhype are now striving for better, its generally the only way to reach perfect!