Topic: Rollback to base game question

  • Author
    Posts
  • #25188
    galu
    Participant

    TL;DR:
    If I roll back to a pre-Beasts&Barbarians version, but stay at 1.3xx (since I own the DLC), which improvements can I keep?
    What would be important, in order of importance: quest types (eg. locate ruin), events, weapons (mostly 2h mace)
    Actual beasts*, taxidermist crafting, northern barbarians doesn’t matter to me.

    (*I like fighting Schrat and Kraken, but find Hexe and Alp fights very boring and tedious, so it equals out.)

    Long story
    I started with the base game, which I love, and bought the DLC. But somehow it seems that these are not designed for casual/roleplay minded players like me. Thinking back, I enjoyed the base game much more than the additional content of the DLCs. My biggest problems are:

    1: scaling doesn’t seem to work too well. Easy enemies (thugs, dire wolves, ancient auxilia) disappear too soon completely. I would like to continue the game if I am wiped out (eg. “losing is fun”), but currently cannot do so, because direwolves are replaced with spiders, thugs with raiders, orc young with berserkers and warriors. Since it is a similar open world game, compare this to Mount&Blade: even late game, you can find looters and sea raiders to give some levels to your new recruits.

    It was similar in the base game too, some easy enemies (thugs) were removed completely. However post DLC, the other easy enemies (wolf, ghul) are mostly removed too.

    Also, it would be nice if not all new enemies were deadly to level 11+ mercs. I understand it is easier to design “eater of villages” and “apex predator” monsters with late game in mind, then to design interesting early game mobs. As an example, goblins are still my favorite enemies: they can wipe the floor with you, but the fights are interesting and don’t require tedious inventroy management.

    2: my preferance is for roleplay, not minmaxing. I really enjoy the ragtag band of the early game, reminds me of OD&D, with 4-5 player charaters and a follower per PC. The problem is that this early game period is over too soon, maybe 2-3 in game weeks. An option to extend this would be nice. the closest I could get is hard economy+low funds+easy battles, but even with this setup, I start seeing too powerful enemies too soon.
    Any better tips on game settings, and things to avoid? (eg. student perk, 12+ band, etc.)

    3: most of the DLC enemies ignore/destroy armor, which counters the logic of the base game. Actually it makes sense to make HP-nimble-steel brow tanks which is strange in a medieval(ish) game. I figured out how to fight nightmares and witches, but removing armor, redistributing gear is lots of inventory management for little gain. (I usually don’t take these contracts)

    4: it seems that the developement direction is aimed at pro players. With the new DLC enemies, the game became even more difficult than the base game. (even though it was not easy to begin with) I had a similar experience with Panzer General 2 user mods. Unsuitable for causal play, mostly 50-100 pros could play them alltogether)

    So, it would make sense for me to roll back to the base game, but additional items (regular armor, 2 handed mace) and especially new quest types (eg. locate ruin) are nice to have. Can I keept these with 1.3xx, but not installing DLC’s?

    Also, while this seems to be a long whining, the game is great. I think I didn’t find anything like that in years. Keep up the good work!

    #25189
    laViper
    Participant

    Ghouls and spiders don’t disappear – 20+ ghouls “very funy” battle even for 11 lvl bros, cause half of them is swallowed :)
    Spiders have the same strength as ghouls, vs 20+ spiders your company need a lot of fatigue or you will be neted at all.

    What is I am agree with that it should be more tunable parameters of the game. Cause anyway it’s unreal to create game for everyone. It’s better to give players a bit freedom to control a some details of the game.

    #25190
    RusBear
    Participant

    To tell the truth, me personal have same feeling in some way. Most of all about “armor nerf strategic” in B@E DLC. Apls, Hexes and 1st nimble was very bad. Then we got little balance about all this stuff. So now if even ” my way to play” is little broken, but if unbiased – game got more options to play. You can use “no fatigue brothers”, initiative can be used as battle and tactic stat too. More tactics and planing need. So when i remember black interface and 3 branch skill tree – i understand that game makes greate step forward each big update and dlc. It is more importand then some little things that i don’t like personal.

    #25207
    galu
    Participant

    Thanks for the replies guys!

    What I missed to articulate is the good work done on different possible tactics. Since I played the base game, Beasts and the North in quick succession, to me it is really visible that quite some thought went into making different approaches viable. (just compare lightly armored dudes and polearm efficiency in the first release and the currently latest version)

    Looking at the other side of the coin: when trying to make certain approaches* more popular, the devs might went a bit too far with puzzle like enemies. I mean that there are certain opposing forces that once you figured out, and can prepare for, are no longer deadly. Mostly witches and alps come to mind; they are not really hard, but require reshuffling your items. (I am thinking of employing more mercs and shuffle them instead of the equipment. Only one click)

    *mainly thinking light armor-high HP dudes pre-Schrats, or adrenaline-recovery-indomitable before the barbarians.

Viewing 4 posts - 1 through 4 (of 4 total)
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.