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

[luzarius]

I lost all 7 of my men on the third mission. They got slaughtered. Wtf? I spend as much gold as I could on weapons & armor, but it wasn’t even any competition. They just got slaughtered by 5 brigands. I’ll check back in a year, but I doubt this game will ever get a lower difficulty. You should add a super easy difficulty. Once I figured out how to beat super easy, then I’ll kick it up to easy, then normal, then veteran, etc. If you don’t add proper difficulty settings, then you need a better in game tutorial and better quest system that prepares you for battles.

I tried this game a year ago, but it was broken back then and still broken now.

[luzarius]

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.

[RusBear]

looks like the best positive review…

[kem]

One ingame tip for you: “Losing is Fun”
And one from me: “Not losing is even funnier”

[ForceEcho]

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.

"A plethora of peasents"

[KillerRabbit]

I have never finnished the game, and sure it can be frustratingly hard sometimes – however you need to know how to retreat, how to accept losses and also: Not every combat can be won in the beginning – you need to avoid unwinnable encounters.

Of course, from the sound of your post you are simply using wrong tactic. Retreat to higher ground on the map, use tons of archers in the early game to soften up the enemy before he even closes in on you.

No one is questioning the difficutly of the game – but I do question your ability to adapt to the game, “luzarius”

[Ledgren]

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.

New profile, old player.

[Ledgren]

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.

New profile, old player.

[Trappist]

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!

[Ledgren]

Trappist wrote:

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!

When I left the review it was after the devs made the official announcement that they were discontinuing work on the game even though it didn’t live up to the goals it had in EA, when I initially bought the copy. I’ve been around since the armor bar was no more complicated than an extra health bar. After so many hours played and so many feedback posts ignored here in the forums, I felt somewhat cheated. Still do every time I see “losing is fun” in a loading screen.

I’m glad that Overhype decided to return to the game, but I’m under no illusions that they give a damn about forum feedback or plan to fulfill some of the original goals. When I paid for the game originally, I paid for the game knowing it wasn’t finished. It was an investment in a promise. I can’t suggest paying 30$ on steam to new players for what the game has become after Early Access.

Hell, I still get a bug sometimes during caravan missions where the bandits auto-win and the screen goes from worldmap to the caravan loss event. Map generation is still completely godawful and lacks any form of strategic choice, it’s pure RNG. The “negotiation system” is meaningless flavor text, and other mercenary bands are only relevant for all of one ambition. I mean whether you’re playing in a “graveyard”, a “goblin pit”, “orc camp” or “ancient burialground” the map tilesets don’t go beyond basic terrain. You look me in the eye and tell me this game was finished even ignoring the unmet EA stretch goals.

To be clear, coming back to the site and seeing that Overhype is working on BB again is the gaming news I’m most excited about this year. Maybe I’ll retune the review after seeing everything the new patch has to offer. At the moment, there are a lot of other games worth 30 bucks that are well polished and have a bit more respect for the players time. The condescending “losing is fun” tip might have tilted me to this side of the fence on that opinion.

A stubborn forum goer might think I’m being unreasonable. Posts like this one from the horses’s own mouth http://battlebrothersgame.com/dev-blog-22-battle-brothers-faq/ might add some substance to why I love the game, but can’t give a 30 buck thumbs up on steam. Frankly, I consider myself a saint on the issue. I left a negative but even-handed review. The fact is we’re going to have to buy crafting in the DLC, something that was originally announced when the game was in EA. Any consumer could take the studio apart just on that ballsy move alone. Close development on the game and move on to another project with it unfinished. If you need some extra cash, release what you promised the first time as paid DLC. I’m damn near Jesus Christ if the steam review doesn’t become more negative.

New profile, old player.

[Ioci]

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.

[Ledgren]

Ioci wrote:

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.

That’s pretty much what it is. I love this game, and am sorely disappointed. The dev’s disconnect definitely didn’t help. You’ve been around for about as long as me if not longer. I’m only behind you in playtime by about 50 hours.

New profile, old player.

[Trappist]

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!

[lordmidas]

I know this is an old post, but in case you still haven’t figured it out you need to buy better armor. I recommend starting the game and immediately buying at least Padded Leather or a couple of Leather Lamellar Armors for most of your mercenaries. You will see that your casualties in the early game will reduce significantly or will go away altogether. If you are buying “Thick Tunics” for your mercenaries in the beginning, you will die a lot.

[Author]

Posts