Topic: Utility Skill Tree Discussion

  • Author
    Posts
  • #3047
    Sarissofoi
    Participant

    “Rally the troops”
    Enough said.
    This skill is only reason to invest in utility tree. And its simply awesome.
    Rest have little to no use compared to other trees or become obsolete when Rally the troops is taken.
    Few useful perks(in my opinion
    #Pathfinder – useful in hard terrain, especially in pursuit this one last guy with bow or for flanking
    #Captain – decent, bonus resolve can be helpful
    #Fearsome – useful, especially for archers and one hand users
    #Weaponmaster – useful for long fights(or sword user), weapon don’t break that often/no need for spare

    Problem is that offensive or defensive perks are too good compared to utility perks.

    #3089
    GOD
    Participant

    So you tell me it is absolutely intended to use a guy with bags an belts + quick hands standing in front of an orc army having a bilhook, great axe, great swort in the bags and a onehand weapon + shield equipped?
    Now as soon as the enemies have closed in on him, he does not need to move anymore which means, with full ap he changes his equip to lets say a greatsword because there are two orcs in a line. Bam doublekill. Switch back to onehand + shield for def bonus. Now his brothers dying left and right and he is surrounded by orks. HAA nice to have a Battle Brothers´ Swiss Army knife (Greatsword,Greataxe,Bilhook,onehand+shield all in one) take out your greataxe and show them the tornado of death then switch back to get your shield bonus again before ending the turn. Hmm now they are all dead, no orc inside the one hex range. AAHHH there is another orc right behind my next brother. Lets bilhook him to death.
    This cannot be the way to go. This game is about taking meaningful choices aswell in choosing your mercenaries and their equipment and not to have alround fighters. The way this goes it takes all the cons of the different weapons away leaving only the pros…

    Not necessarily intended, but not that big of deal either. This is a case where I’ll go with gameplay that adds more tactical options, over realism in combat. The cons are in that you have to spread out your perks and stats to make the most of it, resulting in a build that’s hardly an optimal killing machine. Being versatile then is your just reward, so I don’t see why they shouldn’t be allowed to do that. Granted, that’s as long it’s not actually overpowered. I barely use Quick Hands, so I wouldn’t know that. If it is actually overpowered, having Quick Hands not be usable after skill use should suffice to balance it out.

    Zolw:

    The strength and weakness of utility tree is that it synergises well with the other trees, but has less cohesive ‘build’ potential on its own. I’m curious how much of that is intended and how much might be related to gameplay that we haven’t seen yet (something like level drain to make Student more useful?)

    I’ve also been thinking about the utility tree myself. The student perk kind of bothers me in that I dislike the idea of a perk eventually becoming completely useless. Haven’t really thought much about how to rectify that though.
    I’ve also used Taunt more times with high resolve. It might benefit from making the effect slightly stronger, but I’m not certain yet. Perk has the potential to be way overpowered if you buff it too much.

    #3090
    Malthus
    Participant

    Not necessarily intended, but not that big of deal either. This is a case where I’ll go with gameplay that adds more tactical options, over realism in combat. The cons are in that you have to spread out your perks and stats to make the most of it, resulting in a build that’s hardly an optimal killing machine. Being versatile then is your just reward, so I don’t see why they shouldn’t be allowed to do that. Granted, that’s as long it’s not actually overpowered. I barely use Quick Hands, so I wouldn’t know that. If it is actually overpowered, having Quick Hands not be usable after skill use should suffice to balance it out.

    Right now this is not the case. And while you only need 2 perks in the first row of the utility tree you can make these mercs damn hard offensive.
    Think of Quick hands + Bags and belts + blody harvest + fast adaptation + crusher
    + berserk (with this you may score a kill get 4 ap back and then do either a second attack and end your turn with the 2 handed weapong drawn or go back to your shield and do a shieldwall, though in that case you would totally need a way to get rid of your fatique) + full force (you can give that merc heavy armor, as he will only wear the shield when waiting for the next turn)
    + hmm the last perk in the offensive tree is open for discussion I do like the killing frenzy perk but together with another merc with Rally the troops Perfect focus would be better
    + then you still have 2 perks left to spend as you please. If you use the shieldwall thing I mentioned regarding berserk you might like to go for 2 more points in utility with ending on Battle flow which also would work good together with Perfect focus IF you hit the easy critters first.
    In which way is such a merc less deadly than any other? I would even say he is more deadly because he has the best weapon for as good as any situation at his hand at any time.

    "I am a Paladin!"
    >OMG, Malthus, there are no damn paladins in Battle Brothers...<
    "OK, OK! Then I´m a wrecked down minstrel drunkard pretending to be a paladin, singing so wrong in the midst of battle that even the undead run in fear... Better?!"

    #3094
    Sarissofoi
    Participant

    My off guys have two hander with six perk off and 4 perks def.
    They are deadly beyond reason. And hard to kill too.
    Zwai hander is all you need.

    #3165
    GOD
    Participant

    Right now this is not the case. And while you only need 2 perks in the first row of the utility tree you can make these mercs damn hard offensive.
    Think of Quick hands + Bags and belts + blody harvest + fast adaptation + crusher
    + berserk (with this you may score a kill get 4 ap back and then do either a second attack and end your turn with the 2 handed weapong drawn or go back to your shield and do a shieldwall, though in that case you would totally need a way to get rid of your fatique) + full force (you can give that merc heavy armor, as he will only wear the shield when waiting for the next turn)
    + hmm the last perk in the offensive tree is open for discussion I do like the killing frenzy perk but together with another merc with Rally the troops Perfect focus would be better
    + then you still have 2 perks left to spend as you please. If you use the shieldwall thing I mentioned regarding berserk you might like to go for 2 more points in utility with ending on Battle flow which also would work good together with Perfect focus IF you hit the easy critters first.
    In which way is such a merc less deadly than any other? I would even say he is more deadly because he has the best weapon for as good as any situation at his hand at any time.

    Thing is that the question isn’t whether he’s useful, but whether he’s more useful than builds that don’t go for that combination. You’re not just investing perks, but also stats and the appropriate gear into this flexibility. That becomes a problem when the less flexible guy can do the job better that you have in mind for him. He might be worse at something else, but that’s not what he’s there for.
    Like Rally the Troops. Better suited to an archer with high resolve. Only really need to give him a stun weapon + shield for emergency. Billhook isn’t lethal enough and your melee skill isn’t high enough for it to be an interesting option. Greatsword is useless to him. Quivers are useful instead.

    #3168
    Malthus
    Participant

    As I told you, I used this with 6 perks in off and 2 + (2) in uti.

    Todays patch did atleast make it impossible to switch weapons attack and switch again. This is good.

    But Bags and belts lets you still carry every weapon i mentioned at the same time without any penalty. I still think this has to be adressed.

    "I am a Paladin!"
    >OMG, Malthus, there are no damn paladins in Battle Brothers...<
    "OK, OK! Then I´m a wrecked down minstrel drunkard pretending to be a paladin, singing so wrong in the midst of battle that even the undead run in fear... Better?!"

    #3170
    GOD
    Participant

    Without the attack-then-switch-to-shield option available there’s no reason nerf it further. Billhook isn’t powerful enough and switching from two-hander to to sword and shield can be useful, but mostly in an adaptive way.

    For more flexibility you need spend not just two perks, but you also need to aim for the appropriate stats and gear. Like, if you want to use the greatsword as a shield wielder you’ll need to put more points into fatigue than with a normal shield build, because you need the heaviest armour to survive while you’re using the greatsword, than if you were still using the shield. You also need to have enough fatigue to compensate for the fatigue hits you’ll take from getting hit more often. Those are points that are not being spent on something else. In return, you get more attack options under circumstances, that also leave you more vulnerable and therefore less reliable if you use them. Seems more than fair.

    #3172
    Malthus
    Participant

    Right now I just gave these guys fatique, melee attack and melee def every level. Did work just fine. I do not use this build for archers if you have mistaken me.

    "I am a Paladin!"
    >OMG, Malthus, there are no damn paladins in Battle Brothers...<
    "OK, OK! Then I´m a wrecked down minstrel drunkard pretending to be a paladin, singing so wrong in the midst of battle that even the undead run in fear... Better?!"

    #3182
    GOD
    Participant

    It’s fine that it works, as that’s the point. You invest into the perks and stats to be able to use them this way. It’s currently not powerful enough to justify further nerfing.

    #3183
    Malthus
    Participant

    I say it is, you say it is not. We brought our opionions forward on this matter and now should let the devs decide. There is no need for further argumentation as we both seem to be out of new arguments for or against it ;)

    "I am a Paladin!"
    >OMG, Malthus, there are no damn paladins in Battle Brothers...<
    "OK, OK! Then I´m a wrecked down minstrel drunkard pretending to be a paladin, singing so wrong in the midst of battle that even the undead run in fear... Better?!"

    #3188
    GOD
    Participant

    New patch seems to have Quick Hands lower the costs of switching to 2 AP, rather than make it free. Have you tried it out with your build? I don’t use it, so I’m curious if this adressess your concerns. :)

    Rally the Troops also recovers waaaayy less fatigue. I might have to be slightly less trigger-happy now.

    #3200
    Malthus
    Participant

    Have you read my post from 17:47?

    As I told you, I used this with 6 perks in off and 2 + (2) in uti.
    Todays patch did atleast make it impossible to switch weapons attack and switch again. This is good.
    But Bags and belts lets you still carry every weapon i mentioned at the same time without any penalty. I still think this has to be adressed.

    Yes of course it does adress a part of my concerns. To be able to carry tons of different weapons remains. And as I already told you this point is less about beeing overpowered and more about the point that it is uneralistic as hell and it does take away the hard choice to choose your weapon wisely.

    I would suggest two handed weapons use 2 bag slots. Every merc should start out with 1 bag slot (so there is still room for a secondary small weapon). Bags and belts will then double the bag slots to 2 (then the perk could stay as it is with the fatique penalty taken away). Then you could take either 2 one handed weapons/shields or one two handed weapon in the bag.

    This would still offer to change your weapon, while beeing more realistically and make choosing your weapon a tough choice as it should be.

    "I am a Paladin!"
    >OMG, Malthus, there are no damn paladins in Battle Brothers...<
    "OK, OK! Then I´m a wrecked down minstrel drunkard pretending to be a paladin, singing so wrong in the midst of battle that even the undead run in fear... Better?!"

    #3202
    Sky
    Participant

    Well, after this balancing update I do belive that there is a problem with hands perks. Unfortunately there is almost no difference in gameplay when changing ap cost for the perk between 4 without and 2 with. Now the perk quick hands in unvalid. If it had a limitation once per turn, there would be no problem at all. Now as it is with the 2ap cost there is just no need to take it at all. Usually when you already engaging the attack is 4ap, you can not move so paying 4 or 2 ap while switching makes no difference whatsoever (unless from a 2h to shield +1h). On the other hand when you are not in enemy zone then its again not so much of a difference since you can easily afford 4 instead of 2.

    About bags. At this point the gameplay will suffer more than the players gain from beig over realistic. Besides, check out the medieval warefare, having two weapons and two shields was ok even in our history. Different troops had different weapon setups. It is not rare to see 2h with secoundary 1h and a shield. Same goes for 1h and shielders having a xbow or other means of midrange attack.

    Feel like while the bags now are good the quick hands became useless.

    #3203
    PsenBattle
    Keymaster

    I agree that the current solution is still a bit unrealistic. Although I think bags and belts really has to offer some decent advantages if you have to sacrifice a perk point for that, as I think most people would still prefer more def or off instead of “just” flexibility.
    We’ll keep an eye on your feedback and keep on discussing it.

    Overhype Studios - Let´s roll!

    Facebook Youtube
    Twitter

    #3206
    GOD
    Participant

    Have you read my post from 17:47?
    Yes of course it does adress a part of my concerns. To be able to carry tons of different weapons remains. And as I already told you this point is less about beeing overpowered and more about the point that it is uneralistic as hell and it does take away the hard choice to choose your weapon wisely.
    I would suggest two handed weapons use 2 bag slots. Every merc should start out with 1 bag slot (so there is still room for a secondary small weapon). Bags and belts will then double the bag slots to 2 (then the perk could stay as it is with the fatique penalty taken away). Then you could take either 2 one handed weapons/shields or one two handed weapon in the bag.
    This would still offer to change your weapon, while beeing more realistically and make choosing your weapon a tough choice as it should be.

    Yeah, but I assumed you meant that you couldn’t switch back because the switching itself was disallowed, not because you ran out AP. As I said, I don’t actually use Quick Hands all that much, so I assumed it was just an old change until I actually used it for a bit again.

    There was a discussion about this last week and having played a lot since then hasn’t convinced me that such a heavy nerf is needed. The weapon taking up one slot and potentially having four slots can sometimes feel less realistic, but it adds to the gameplay and would just cause confusion for the player if you change the value of slots. Why does a greatsword count and not a spear? Why are shields fine? It creates a distinction between items that is counter-intuitive. Also, bags and belts is now mandatory for ranged users if they want to have any survivability.

    Starting with 1 slot that you can double, Quick Hands nerf, plus making two-handed weapons take up 2 slots is way too much of a limit on a playstyle that isn’t overpowered, but just out of the norm. People did not historically go into battle with just one weapon or with just one shield, because stuff broke or got knocked away. If realism is strictly necessary then a reworking of the inventory system is in order while still maintaining the possibility of multiple weapons, because the aformentioned changes would look very out of place in the current system. They only limit gameplay without adding any interesting choices to it.

Viewing 15 posts - 16 through 30 (of 70 total)
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.