GOD

[GOD]

Sounds reasonable. This should keep starting players from going after Orc patrols, though you lose that ‘Aha!’ moment where you realised that those Orcs were weak … compared to other Orcs. Is the strength assessment determined by a combination of the value of your gear and levels?

I’m starting to see a pattern of sniping one-upmanship between you. :P

[GOD]

No rush. It’s better to hear that you have a clear vision on what you want to make, than just accepting every single suggestion we throw at you. Makes me confident that this project won’t die of feature bloat! (looking at you, Starbound)

[GOD]

Sweet. Going to keep a list so that I can make a mega thread for my suggestions. :D

Going to wait for feature list first though.

[GOD]

Don’t know about continuing as another company on the same map, but if you lose some of your mercs to wïedergangers in the current version and then procceed to flee the battle, the undead mercs will persist on the world map as part of that group. So there’s a chance of running into them again.

[GOD]

Sounds useful. That would allow us to make more precise suggestions that are useful to you and bicker about the things we don’t like. :D

[GOD]

You are free to do anything you want within the framework of the game. However, that framework has to be set up by the developer. The job of the developer is then to accurately assess what freedom is meaningful to the game and what isn’t. I’ve yet to see anyone talk about how they want accurate defecation mechanics, because they want the freedom to role-play an incontinent hedge-knight who soils himself in combat.
That something is convenient also doesn’t neccesarily make it a good feature. Fast travel is convenient, but putting it into this game is a bad idea.

Jago wrote:

@GOD:
Why, yes, campaign mode would be exactly the same as the main game.

GOD wrote:

I’d rather see them implement mod tools that would make implementing something like that doable, while having lots of other uses.

I agree with this. Character creation or not, a comprehensive mod support is still higher up on my wishing list, AND it would do the game so much more good.
Just by looking at XCOM-EW, Skyrim or M&B, modding is utterly crucial to have games staying relevant for a long time.
We have to see how far the devs, can and want to take this.

It probably depends rather heavily on how much time they’ll able to justify spending on the game, after release. Modding would add a lot to Battle Brothers, but the game itself would have to be good enough on its own to also be able to attract a vibrant mod-scene, so half-assing release and hoping for mods to fix it wouldn’t work. It definitely would add to the longevity of the game, wich means a steady stream of income for the developers and more sales in case they decide to release expansions.

[GOD]

A game consists of a huge amount of small details that pile up as you play it. It’s like how adding toggable floating damage numbers to the combat wouldn’t seem to make much of a difference on their own, yet they would definitely undermine part of the battle aesthetic. Think of how Dark Souls 2 has a worse way of starting the game than Dark Souls 1 (the getting a character before you can make your character). That might seem like a trivial detail, but things like that add up, especially when it is a detail as influential as how you start the game, because it determines your baseline view of it.

Jago wrote:

I’ve had a few good plays already, with beggars, vagabonds and the like. It’s nothing you cannot handle, and is be no means destroying the playing experience.
@GOD: That sums it up. Very well said.
Still I support that the devs add two different modes, a campaign mode and a sandbox mode. In campaign mode, everything is random, while in sandbox you can change anything the way you want it, starting members, traits, funds, world map etc.
However you can still change names, visual and everything that has no effect on the gameplay in campaign mode. And maybe there could be some way to reward the player for playing it the random way.

Thanks, it’s good to hear my effort isn’t wasted. :)

I could see a sandbox mode taking a massive amount of effort to implement, though. Kind of difficult to justify that, since campaign mode would still very much be the main game. I’d rather see them implement mod tools that would make implementing something like that doable, while having lots of other uses.

[GOD]

Min-maxing is always going to happen, but that doesn’t meant that it’s a good idea to make it easier to do. The degree to which this is possible and what form it takes is very important to how a player learns to play the game. Right now, looking for the best possible synergy in traits and backgrounds isn’t really a thing, because it would take a long time to get it right and then your starters might die anyway. Making it easier would suddenly make it much more of a factor in how the game plays and how it should be balanced.

The point of mentioning Dark Souls is that it is a great game that doesn’t allow everyone to play as they like. Take for example how it has no save at will and no multiple save slots for the same playthrough. You could argue that putting it there for people who want to use it couldn’t hurt, because they just want to try to play in a different way and everyone else can choose not to use it. However, this would result in a fundamentally different game with a different atmosphere to it, even if you don’t use it, because choices that cannot be taken back are different from choices that you could take back if you wanted to. You cannot skip out of restarting at a bonefire if you die. You cannot take back attacking Gwynevere. You cannot see both endings without playing the game again. This adds a weight to the actions that you take that is only possible because of how the game does not offer you a reset button, which would result in the game undermining the sense of inevitability build up with the games overall design.

Jagged Alliance 2 is a very different game in terms of setting and how it handles recruitment within that setting. Custom characters there are essentially the player using their network to call in mercenaries that fit their needs, because you as a person are larger than the conflict that you are now a part of. It’s the difference between a player that acts more globally and a player who acts more locally. It fits the setting and kind of conflict that is central to the game (hiring foreign mercenaries), so it doesn’t clash with the design. A rough equivalent of this would be to have the player in Battle Brothers be a noble who’s sending out a mercenary company to handle the situation of the area where the game takes place, which would be a different kind of game.

Mods are fine because they aren’t part of the core game. In fact, I’d say it would make for precisely the kind of thing that modders should make. Modders don’t need to think about whether or not what they’re making fits the design, because what they’re making is not part of the core experience, so they can make things that the developer can’t. The developers, however, are the ones actually responsible for this core experience as conveyed through the design of the game. They make what everyone will play and what mods can build on, so they have to be consistent in what tone they set. They are also just a small team and need to carefully decide what features are worth the effort of implementing, because that means not spending time on something else. Custom character creation is simple nowhere near as worthwhile as some of the other things that I’ve seen them mention of considering and would undermine the tone of what they have so far.

[GOD]

I actually did some thinking and remembered that the second COULD get involved, but was also kind of an assistant who set up the fight and took care of the formalities. I’m not sure if there is a specific term for someone who fights as your representative in a duel. :P Maybe just representative? Or champion. Champion sounds logical enough.

[GOD]

You mean this thread?
From how it’s been described, the event system should have something akin to this – there was an example of a knight being challenged to a duel. It’s just not been impemented yet, so we’ve no clear idea on how it works in practice. :P Could be that they’re planning for the battle the be fought through checks and have it only take place in text, or they might have an actual fight take place.
You’re called someone’s ‘second’ if you could stand in for them when dueling. They could do something with that like have it be a part of a questline where some noble wants to hire you to fight a duel for him. Lose and your man, win and you piss of the other noble with more quests as a result.

[GOD]

Whether or not there should be character generation and what form it should take if it was implemented, was discussed pretty heavily in this thread. Suffice to say, it’s a divisive issue.

[GOD]

Reintroduced is closer and you’ve also got Conan whose SHIT’S BAD, DON’T TRUST WIZARDS seems prominent – partially through Warhammer though, which is a mishmash of stuff.
I think the way the lore is communicated through the art and gameplay will start to work better and better as the world gets filled in more and more. We’re still looking at an ecosystem that doesn’t have all the animals introduced to it yet.

[GOD]

Problem I see with this is that it would only add an option that breaks the game, without adding anything to the overall design. Like Psen says, it would also require time and attention spent on it that would be better spend on features crucial to the game. It does seems like exactly the kind of thing though that modders could implement. Hopefully the game is succesful enough to justify them getting developed. :)

[GOD]

Play the scenario’s if you’re having trouble with the battle. They help you get a feel for the combat and how to survive the battles. As for the fights themselves, pay close to your position so as to minimise the effectiveness of the first round of actual combat. For example: you can move your units so that they are within range of the enemy, but if enemy moves to engage they’ll lack the AP to attack (2-3 hexes should do). Also pay attention to what gear they are equipped with and match your mercs accordingly – against an axe wielding bandit you’ll want to avoid having to rely on a shield, while a shieldwall + riposte is great against werewolves. Gear is also crucial so salvaging it can make a big difference – weapons that can ignore armour are a great way to score some nice armour early on (dagger, knife, etc.). Feel free to play around with the different weapons as all of them have their uses and some might suit your playstyle better than others.

As for Orcs, you can also repel their charge by putting up a spearwall. You’ll want to avoid fighting Orcs until your confident about dealing with bandits and such though. Good armour helps a lot in weathering their charge, as does having higher levels.

There’s also no shame in starting at easy and working your way up from there. Difficulty alters the amount of gold you start with, but nothing else. You therefore get a flying start with good gear and lots of recruits, so you can make more mistakes. As you get better, you’ll be less reliant on those, so you can move up to higher difficulties.

This thread also has some good tips, just read past the arguing.

Hope that helps. :)

[GOD]

Rap wrote:

The thing with ‘Fortified Mind’ is that there are just too few enemies yet that really attack your men’s resolve. We have a bunch more interesting planned with some skills such as charm/dominate, so the perk should end up becoming more useful in the future.

Sounds good. That would also make resolve more viable as a stat to level up.

NewAgeOfPower wrote:

Personally, Return the Favor should be a passive, with reduced % stun probability. I like how the Utility and Offensive tree gives you an option between an Active and a Passive, both of which are fairly strong and viable choices.

I mean, my non-nimble thief tanks are going into melee, and either shieldwall/spearwall or attack or bash. No extra AP to Return Favor on that turn.

Fortified mind is rather useful vs Living Souls, that’s about it.

Battle forged is somewhat strong vs Archers popping off Quick Shots, but a few hits from a crossbow and your armor is still going to drop real quick. Plus, it doesn’t stop you from getting WTFBBQ’d by someone with a Greataxe, at all.

Rotation is insanely strong for keeping your frontline charged up.

Having Return Favour be passive would make it way too powerful though. It would be like giving the merc a perk that gives them a passive chance at reposting every attack that misses.

[Author]

Posts