KickStarter King Arthur: Knight's Tale - dark fantasy turn-based tactical RPG from NeocoreGames - Legion IX standalone expansion coming May 9th

[Harthwain]

I finished Tegyr's mission and I have to admit - whoever was behind it did really good job at making it as creepy and uncomfortable as possible. He has great perk (granting XP for people who don't go on missions), but my relationship with Balin is so good (despite him being a Tyrant) that I don't see the point of making the swap now.

I am amazed by Bors though (kicked lukewarm Yvain to make a spot for him). I thought Dash is a wasted skill when I first played with this character, but it turns out it is great for quick repositioning and flanking (extra 2 movement helps a lot too. This is something Dindraine lacks, because she can only attack once if she has to reposition for any reason). He can also set up heavy-hitting Overwatch with a proper build (Ready + Keen Eye + Sprint + Sentinel's Hexmark + Deadyeye's Lucky Charm): -2 AP cost of Overwatch + 20% Overwatch damage + Overwatch always deals maximum damage (19) + 2 Damage = 3x attacks worth 25 damage each. He can also wear medium armor. His only downside is the inability to go on more than 3 missions in a row (Lazy).

I was concerned about Pelleas, but it turns out the combination of Shield Charge and Guard is really good. He got enough items to tank a lot of enemies AND provide armor to teammates and himself when needed. With a sword that deals 21 damage to Unharmed enemies he suddenly started dealing more damage than some of my Champions(!). By the way, it turned out that Mordred (who gave some of his items to Pelleas, to sustain his tanking as he was levelling up) can still tank really well when he ignores 50% of the incoming attacks armour value.

Got the Excalibur, but Mordred and Lanval got severely damaged in the process (2 Injuries each, not counting a plenty of Vitality lost). I usually avoid taking this much damage, but sometimes there are sudden spikes during quests for some reason. I guess I am too used to fighting Lost and Picts are tougher to crack for my playstyle (especially shield bearers + archers combo)? It's a good thing I have two side missions and the ability to skip one turn to give Mordred time to heal up before next main mission quest, where his presence is required.

 

[Parabalus]

Spoiler

The challenge does not necessarily have to be linear. You can have easier encounters and more difficult ones. This is not the same as trivializing the difficulty.

What you consider "trivialising", other people consider "progression". What you dramacunts consider "immature powerfantasy" or "munchkinism" other people consider "fun". Fuck off with your arrogant "the only right way to play is my way" asshattery.

Lmao did I hit a nerve or something?

Flashbacks to woketard of the cunts 3.5 CharOp forum.

Yes. Fucking sick of dramacunts calling people who optimise characters as munchkins and how it is unrealistic, etc. Motherfuckers think hunting down monsters and adventuring is not an Olympic sport but something a blind, crippled child can do, because that is what they are and they think of themselves as "normal".

Not quite sure what you are babyraging about. The simple point is this, combat without challenge is fucking boring. If you want trivialized difficulty stick to story mode and let "hard" or "very hard" stay that way throughout the whole game. You seem to crave some lame powercurve where your stats eventually carry you through the rest of the game.

Nobody said optimization is bad, if you actually read what I said it should be expected and emphasized. But you shouldn't be able to optimize your way out of difficulty just by your builds. You might get away with that in a traditional CRPG that focuses only on character building as a means of overcoming challenge. But this is a tactical RPG. Positioning and adaptation of the skills you should use and when must matter all the way through. Else you get comments like in this thread that the end game is boring. How you are incapable of seeing that is beyond me.

Even something as basic as nuXCom gets "the end game is samey and boring". That is because it is impossible to satisfy dramacunts. You add any form of customisation of characters, be it through stats, skills or equipment to a game, and you will get those kind of complaints. The only way to stop it? No customisation and you only gain stuff when the game allows you. Linear, railroad, campaign-locked shit. Therefore, the challenge of you vs the enemy is the same and only your tactics and skillz will win the day. I got a perfect game for you in that case. It is called CHESS.

Or you can ignore the complaining fucks and just make a game the majority will like.

You can't be serious, they can EASILY keep the combat difficult despite your party growing in powers. How about giving the enemy new abilities such as more CC, new resistances/immunities, having the AI send in flanking mobs that are in stealth, give summoning abilities that spawn mobs next to the weaker classes like arcanist or sage, etc. Of course none of this means shit if your characters warpdrives in the powercurve by spamming inspire with endless AP to a Vanguard who oneshots everything in sight or just CC everything endlessly until they are dead.

Your answer of "what's the point of growing in power if you don't end up becoming godlike" is a lazy non-solution to the problem. Yes it's difficult to balance out these opposing interests but it's not impossible. RPGs that give a shit about combat but especially tactical RPGs should always strive to maintain difficulty throughout the whole game. What the fuck is the point of the endgame if the difficulty is trivialized? So you can jerk off to your powerful pixels destroying anything by mindlessly mashing the same buttons repeatedly? Might as well delete it and stop the game at Act 3 in that case.

Why bother? If you want to keep everything the same, keep it the same. This is exactly what I have been saying right from the beginning.

You want the same challenge all the time throughout the whole game, play chess.

You want to have a feeling of growing in power, increasing stats, getting better gear, get more and more abilities that, if used intelligently, makes things easier for you, then play a RPG.

The best solution is both you and the enemies growing in power.

This game does this wonderfully, upon entering each new Act the previous ones feel like tutorials.

Outside of some broken combos the difficulty actually goes up.

 

[Cael]

Spoiler

The challenge does not necessarily have to be linear. You can have easier encounters and more difficult ones. This is not the same as trivializing the difficulty.

What you consider "trivialising", other people consider "progression". What you dramacunts consider "immature powerfantasy" or "munchkinism" other people consider "fun". Fuck off with your arrogant "the only right way to play is my way" asshattery.

Lmao did I hit a nerve or something?

Flashbacks to woketard of the cunts 3.5 CharOp forum.

Yes. Fucking sick of dramacunts calling people who optimise characters as munchkins and how it is unrealistic, etc. Motherfuckers think hunting down monsters and adventuring is not an Olympic sport but something a blind, crippled child can do, because that is what they are and they think of themselves as "normal".

Not quite sure what you are babyraging about. The simple point is this, combat without challenge is fucking boring. If you want trivialized difficulty stick to story mode and let "hard" or "very hard" stay that way throughout the whole game. You seem to crave some lame powercurve where your stats eventually carry you through the rest of the game.

Nobody said optimization is bad, if you actually read what I said it should be expected and emphasized. But you shouldn't be able to optimize your way out of difficulty just by your builds. You might get away with that in a traditional CRPG that focuses only on character building as a means of overcoming challenge. But this is a tactical RPG. Positioning and adaptation of the skills you should use and when must matter all the way through. Else you get comments like in this thread that the end game is boring. How you are incapable of seeing that is beyond me.

Even something as basic as nuXCom gets "the end game is samey and boring". That is because it is impossible to satisfy dramacunts. You add any form of customisation of characters, be it through stats, skills or equipment to a game, and you will get those kind of complaints. The only way to stop it? No customisation and you only gain stuff when the game allows you. Linear, railroad, campaign-locked shit. Therefore, the challenge of you vs the enemy is the same and only your tactics and skillz will win the day. I got a perfect game for you in that case. It is called CHESS.

Or you can ignore the complaining fucks and just make a game the majority will like.

You can't be serious, they can EASILY keep the combat difficult despite your party growing in powers. How about giving the enemy new abilities such as more CC, new resistances/immunities, having the AI send in flanking mobs that are in stealth, give summoning abilities that spawn mobs next to the weaker classes like arcanist or sage, etc. Of course none of this means shit if your characters warpdrives in the powercurve by spamming inspire with endless AP to a Vanguard who oneshots everything in sight or just CC everything endlessly until they are dead.

Your answer of "what's the point of growing in power if you don't end up becoming godlike" is a lazy non-solution to the problem. Yes it's difficult to balance out these opposing interests but it's not impossible. RPGs that give a shit about combat but especially tactical RPGs should always strive to maintain difficulty throughout the whole game. What the fuck is the point of the endgame if the difficulty is trivialized? So you can jerk off to your powerful pixels destroying anything by mindlessly mashing the same buttons repeatedly? Might as well delete it and stop the game at Act 3 in that case.

Why bother? If you want to keep everything the same, keep it the same. This is exactly what I have been saying right from the beginning.

You want the same challenge all the time throughout the whole game, play chess.

You want to have a feeling of growing in power, increasing stats, getting better gear, get more and more abilities that, if used intelligently, makes things easier for you, then play a RPG.

The best solution is both you and the enemies growing in power.

This game does this wonderfully, upon entering each new Act the previous ones feel like tutorials.

Outside of some broken combos the difficulty actually goes up.

I agree the game is good at keeping the difficulty level up, and even increase it as it goes on. That actually invalidates his argument that the game becomes too easy and samey towards the end, but of course, the dramacunt won't admit that.

 

[Saravan]

Spoiler

The challenge does not necessarily have to be linear. You can have easier encounters and more difficult ones. This is not the same as trivializing the difficulty.

What you consider "trivialising", other people consider "progression". What you dramacunts consider "immature powerfantasy" or "munchkinism" other people consider "fun". Fuck off with your arrogant "the only right way to play is my way" asshattery.

Lmao did I hit a nerve or something?

Flashbacks to woketard of the cunts 3.5 CharOp forum.

Yes. Fucking sick of dramacunts calling people who optimise characters as munchkins and how it is unrealistic, etc. Motherfuckers think hunting down monsters and adventuring is not an Olympic sport but something a blind, crippled child can do, because that is what they are and they think of themselves as "normal".

Not quite sure what you are babyraging about. The simple point is this, combat without challenge is fucking boring. If you want trivialized difficulty stick to story mode and let "hard" or "very hard" stay that way throughout the whole game. You seem to crave some lame powercurve where your stats eventually carry you through the rest of the game.

Nobody said optimization is bad, if you actually read what I said it should be expected and emphasized. But you shouldn't be able to optimize your way out of difficulty just by your builds. You might get away with that in a traditional CRPG that focuses only on character building as a means of overcoming challenge. But this is a tactical RPG. Positioning and adaptation of the skills you should use and when must matter all the way through. Else you get comments like in this thread that the end game is boring. How you are incapable of seeing that is beyond me.

Even something as basic as nuXCom gets "the end game is samey and boring". That is because it is impossible to satisfy dramacunts. You add any form of customisation of characters, be it through stats, skills or equipment to a game, and you will get those kind of complaints. The only way to stop it? No customisation and you only gain stuff when the game allows you. Linear, railroad, campaign-locked shit. Therefore, the challenge of you vs the enemy is the same and only your tactics and skillz will win the day. I got a perfect game for you in that case. It is called CHESS.

Or you can ignore the complaining fucks and just make a game the majority will like.

You can't be serious, they can EASILY keep the combat difficult despite your party growing in powers. How about giving the enemy new abilities such as more CC, new resistances/immunities, having the AI send in flanking mobs that are in stealth, give summoning abilities that spawn mobs next to the weaker classes like arcanist or sage, etc. Of course none of this means shit if your characters warpdrives in the powercurve by spamming inspire with endless AP to a Vanguard who oneshots everything in sight or just CC everything endlessly until they are dead.

Your answer of "what's the point of growing in power if you don't end up becoming godlike" is a lazy non-solution to the problem. Yes it's difficult to balance out these opposing interests but it's not impossible. RPGs that give a shit about combat but especially tactical RPGs should always strive to maintain difficulty throughout the whole game. What the fuck is the point of the endgame if the difficulty is trivialized? So you can jerk off to your powerful pixels destroying anything by mindlessly mashing the same buttons repeatedly? Might as well delete it and stop the game at Act 3 in that case.

Why bother? If you want to keep everything the same, keep it the same. This is exactly what I have been saying right from the beginning.

You want the same challenge all the time throughout the whole game, play chess.

You want to have a feeling of growing in power, increasing stats, getting better gear, get more and more abilities that, if used intelligently, makes things easier for you, then play a RPG.

The best solution is both you and the enemies growing in power.

This game does this wonderfully, upon entering each new Act the previous ones feel like tutorials.

Outside of some broken combos the difficulty actually goes up.

I agree the game is good at keeping the difficulty level up, and even increase it as it goes on. That actually invalidates his argument that the game becomes too easy and samey towards the end, but of course, the dramacunt won't admit that.

There are videos out that show you can one shot the last boss on the hardest difficulty in the first turn retard. And the setup doesn't require anything special. The difficulty becomes a joke when you got access to inspire sages and vanguards by the endgame.

I have no idea what game you guys are playing if you say the game gets harder after Act 3 but it certainly ain't this game.

 

[Cael]

There are videos out that show you can one shot the last boss on the hardest difficulty in the first turn retard. And the setup doesn't require anything special. The difficulty becomes a joke when you got access to inspire sages and vanguards by the endgame.

I have no idea what game you guys are playing if you say the game gets harder after Act 3 but it certainly ain't this game.

The guy did it by abusing potions and pre-battle blessings.

 

[Saravan]

There are videos out that show you can one shot the last boss on the hardest difficulty in the first turn retard. And the setup doesn't require anything special. The difficulty becomes a joke when you got access to inspire sages and vanguards by the endgame.

I have no idea what game you guys are playing if you say the game gets harder after Act 3 but it certainly ain't this game.

The guy did it by abusing potions and pre-battle blessings.

So now we call it abusing for using tools you are given by the game? I thought you were an advocate for le-epic-godlike powers else it's not an RPG.

This is just an example taken to the extreme. The game is still considerably easier after Act 3. By then you are reaching maxed out powers on Sages and Vanguards. If you are not an absolute retard you can keep practically all mobs CC'd for at least 3-4 turns (Lightning from Mordred + Icewall from Sages), plenty of time for a Vanguard to jump-stealth-backstab the entire encounter. You can approach literally every encounter the same way. Sure, handicapping yourself by not playing two of the six classes then you might be able to say that the difficulty increases. With this logic however you can make any game become harder. The fact is, the game is at its best between Act 2-3 and becomes considerably easier in Act 4 due to the powercurve, you know that thing you were arguing for an entire page about.

 

[Harthwain]

I have no idea what game you guys are playing if you say the game gets harder after Act 3 but it certainly ain't this game.

I think they mean changes to enemies between the Acts and introduction of new ones. For example: I saw "evolved" Lost in my Excalibur mission and Acts 2 introduces a whole new enemy "type" (by the way, I am glad I do have at least one ranged character with me, because it really makes dealing with ranged enemies much easier). The game will also be harder if you don't use certain strategies.

I am not fond of Vanguards' playstyle myself. Not because I find it broken, but because I prefer a more direct clash of arms over moving 1/4 of my force behind enemy lines. It also doesn't feel very knightly. One could say that using armor-piercing bows and crossbows isn't knightly either, but I still find it a more direct approach and something that took place in the actual battles, so I don't have a problem with that. However - and more to the point - considering that Marksmen don't perform well straight out of the box (although they do have potential to be amazing, as I shown in my previous post) it is easy to see how a party with a Marksman isn't going to have as smooth of a run than the one with a Vanguard. Even if you do know how to utilize your characters properly.

I got Guinevere and I am not a fan of her. She showed up uninvited (unlike Brunor and Tegyr who are waiting to be called) and isn't exactly compatible with my set of beliefs. Or at least not enough for this run. Old-Faith + Rightful + Disloyal is a bit too much for me to stomach. Her skills are nice for a supporting character and I like that playstyle a bit more than a Vanguard's, but I think I am going to swap her for either Leondegrance or Lucan the moment they appear and I run out of space at the Table. If anything I am very positively surprised about how many characters there are in the game. You really have to curate who joins the Round Table.

So far I do manage to keep everyone on roughly the same level (the current challenge level or a level below that, which the game seems to treat as good enough, because it didn't allow me to use joust to level up a knight from level 7 to level 8, for example, but I did read about someone running into problems, because he had basically the A Team and his bench was, like, half on the level of the A Team.

I can

Spoiler

ressurect Isolde.

But is this even worth it? I have no use for Old-Faith + Rightful Sage (Guinevere) so I am going to have even less for Old-Faith Sage. Is there any good mission, item reward or something that I can get after she is ressurected? I am willing to do it even for the achievement, if there is one. Otherwise I will let her rot and wait for my Old-Faith run.

As for the Master Builder achievement - I think this is fairly easy to do. It says you need to unlock all upgrades for "a building", meaning you can just focus on a single one and obtain it that way. I will most likely upgrade my Training Ground, because it is a great way of keeping my knights properly levelled up and the other upgrades give extra skill points to various classes. With Edicts I can buy workforce, because I can get gold from missions and selling unwanted artifacts.

So now we call it abusing for using tools you are given by the game?

You are correct, but I am expecting something like unlimited AP to be nerfed soon, because I doubt the developers planned to have this kind of strategy going in the game, so I wouldn't relay on that too much (which is yet another reason for me to not attach myself to Vanguards at the moment).

 

[Saravan]

I think they mean changes to enemies between the Acts and introduction of new ones. For example: I saw "evolved" Lost in my Excalibur mission and Acts 2 introduces a whole new enemy "type" (by the way, I am glad I do have at least one ranged character with me, because it really makes dealing with ranged enemies much easier).

Yes there are changes and new themes of enemies (Lost, Picts, Unseelie, Seelie, Formorians) between each Act. Some difficulty is obviously derived from new abilities these new enemies bring which is a good thing. However, a lot of the difficulty also comes from the fact that new sets of relics become available in each act. These are generally considerably stronger than the previous act's relics. You will notice this especially between Act 3 to 4 jump. So during the "intro phase" of each act you got one or two initial missions that are more difficult due to having to catch up in your equipment.

The game will also be harder if you don't use certain strategies.

Yeah but you can say that for literally any game. On the harder difficulties you are obviously going to optimize your builds and strategies, if the game breaks due to that then that's an issue in balancing. Purposefully handicapping yourself is something I did to keep the game challenging. I for example did a clean playthrough without any Sages or Vanguards.

You are correct, but I am expecting something like unlimited AP to be nerfed soon, because I doubt the developers planned to have this kind of strategy going in the game, so I wouldn't relay on that too much (which is yet another reason for me to not attach myself to Vanguards at the moment).

Yes the unlimited AP strategies will most likely entirely disappear with the planned nerf, which is a very good thing and I will do a new run to test out the difficulty. I fear, however, that it won't be enough to stop the powercurve of Sages and Vanguards from making the difficulty a lot easier near the endgame. You can still stack damage buffs like bless and Vanguards will still have incredible mobility, be able to oneshot enemies and get out safely every turn with stealth. The nerf might stop encounters from being cleared in basically the first turn however. Whether it will be trivialized (which is a term I reserve for when the tactical gameplay becomes practically braindead) remains to be seen.

 

[Harthwain]

get out safely every turn with stealth

This is going to change if you have cooldown on stealth mode. And a longer cooldown for Jump.

You can still stack damage buffs like bless

I find this surprising, because Vulnerability debuffs don't stack (the latest replaces the earlier one) so I wonder if this is a bug.

 

[Cael]

There are videos out that show you can one shot the last boss on the hardest difficulty in the first turn retard. And the setup doesn't require anything special. The difficulty becomes a joke when you got access to inspire sages and vanguards by the endgame.

I have no idea what game you guys are playing if you say the game gets harder after Act 3 but it certainly ain't this game.

The guy did it by abusing potions and pre-battle blessings.

So now we call it abusing for using tools you are given by the game? I thought you were an advocate for le-epic-godlike powers else it's not an RPG.

This is just an example taken to the extreme. The game is still considerably easier after Act 3. By then you are reaching maxed out powers on Sages and Vanguards. If you are not an absolute retard you can keep practically all mobs CC'd for at least 3-4 turns (Lightning from Mordred + Icewall from Sages), plenty of time for a Vanguard to jump-stealth-backstab the entire encounter. You can approach literally every encounter the same way. Sure, handicapping yourself by not playing two of the six classes then you might be able to say that the difficulty increases. With this logic however you can make any game become harder. The fact is, the game is at its best between Act 2-3 and becomes considerably easier in Act 4 due to the powercurve, you know that thing you were arguing for an entire page about.

No. That is your lying dramacunt misrepresentation of what I said. Anyone who disagrees with you is automatically the other extreme.

I said I wanted a power curve that allowed you to feel that you are getting stronger. That your levelling makes a difference. One way of doing that is to get better stats, stronger units and the like. I have never advocated consumables as the method of doing so. That is all on you.

 

[Daidre]

Yeah but you can say that for literally any game. On the harder difficulties you are obviously going to optimize your builds and strategies, if the game breaks due to that then that's an issue in balancing. Purposefully handicapping yourself is something I did to keep the game challenging. I for example did a clean playthrough without any Sages or Vanguards.

So, you've completed the game on Very Hard in Rogue-like mode without Sages and Vanguards? My respect.

Or you are handicapping yourself without playing actual hardest variant of the game as it is proposed by developers? For me for example, no proper saving is a huge NO.

 

[Saravan]

Yeah but you can say that for literally any game. On the harder difficulties you are obviously going to optimize your builds and strategies, if the game breaks due to that then that's an issue in balancing. Purposefully handicapping yourself is something I did to keep the game challenging. I for example did a clean playthrough without any Sages or Vanguards.

So, you've completed the game on Very Hard in Rogue-like mode without Sages and Vanguards? My respect.

Or you are handicapping yourself without playing actual hardest variant of the game as it is proposed by developers? For me for example, no proper saving is a huge NO.

No I can't do Very Hard in Rogue-like mode without Sages and Vanguards. If they are balanced out so you aren't 100% safe in every encounter you are looking at a really fun and challenging game.

There are videos out that show you can one shot the last boss on the hardest difficulty in the first turn retard. And the setup doesn't require anything special. The difficulty becomes a joke when you got access to inspire sages and vanguards by the endgame.

I have no idea what game you guys are playing if you say the game gets harder after Act 3 but it certainly ain't this game.

The guy did it by abusing potions and pre-battle blessings.

So now we call it abusing for using tools you are given by the game? I thought you were an advocate for le-epic-godlike powers else it's not an RPG.

This is just an example taken to the extreme. The game is still considerably easier after Act 3. By then you are reaching maxed out powers on Sages and Vanguards. If you are not an absolute retard you can keep practically all mobs CC'd for at least 3-4 turns (Lightning from Mordred + Icewall from Sages), plenty of time for a Vanguard to jump-stealth-backstab the entire encounter. You can approach literally every encounter the same way. Sure, handicapping yourself by not playing two of the six classes then you might be able to say that the difficulty increases. With this logic however you can make any game become harder. The fact is, the game is at its best between Act 2-3 and becomes considerably easier in Act 4 due to the powercurve, you know that thing you were arguing for an entire page about.

No. That is your lying dramacunt misrepresentation of what I said. Anyone who disagrees with you is automatically the other extreme.

I said I wanted a power curve that allowed you to feel that you are getting stronger. That your levelling makes a difference. One way of doing that is to get better stats, stronger units and the like. I have never advocated consumables as the method of doing so. That is all on you.

First of all, I don't really get where you get this dramacunt term from. If anything you are not being really much of a munchkin if you want, as you say yourself, a powercurve that always makes your party stronger over time to the detriment of any semblance of difficulty. This is the only way I can interpret it as I'm, and always have, argued for a powercurve that maintains challenge. For the hundreth time, this is not the same as having the challenge "always stay the same in a linear fashion", but it must not at any point trivialize the difficulty, which it clearly does in this game, save for purposefully handicapping yourself by not using certain classes or strategies. This is not the way you should go about it to solve that issue.

And in regards to the "lying" you really are just making a point about semantics as to why consumables should for some reason be excluded by your principle of "if you aren't getting stronger than the enemy what is the point of a powercurve and progression in a RPG". Everything from levels, abilities, gear and yes consumables all come into play in the question of difficulty. Part of your progression is in fact amassing these consumables for you to utilize in missions. Saying it is "abusing" is a cop-out. Are you then "abusing" using two Sages that can rotate CC spells and cooldown on those with inspire or achieve close to the same result as consumables by stacking bless? You can't cherrypick which tools should be accounted for in your version of how character progression should work in RPGs just because I put up an example which shows you are being full of shit when you say the game gets more difficult throughout the whole game.

 

[Cyberarmy]

So I hunted down Red Knight and Lady Morgana in act 4 as a righteous Christian, I think you hunt their counter parts if you go tyrant Old Faith. Nice for replay value.
Also there are some missions after succesful events, again tied to morality chart. Nice to have those kind of things nowadays, instead of same missions but you are just being mean. Some little incline in this decline jungle.

 

[onemananadhisdroid]

I know there's significant differences between both games, but: This or Wartales or both?

 

[Harthwain]

I did the quest to recruit the White Knight and got wiped out. Thankfully apparently when you die on ironman you do not lose - you restart from the last encounter/campfire. Still, it took me three more times to finish the mission, because my team has been mauled due to lack of Defender. Which proves how vital it is to have someone to tank a ton of attacks and keep the mobs focused.

It doesn't help that the knights and NPCs remain under AI control and can do some reckless/stupid things until you're given direct control over them (this is the main reason why I took so much damage, because after the first fight the White Knight got so damaged that I had to make sure he's safe, which led to some tactically suboptimal decisions.

I only managed to win because rushing down the boss stopped the waves, meaning I had "only" to deal with the initial two enemy groups. Balan's ability to tank was crucial to let Balin and Kay to focus down the necromancer, while Ector wiped out 2 crossbowmen and a spearman with scroll of fireball (after lowering boss' vitality first so he died on the first turn). Thankfully he had an items that gave him +3 or +4 to area of effect attacks. Having a bunch of potions (2 invisibility/1 50% AP/1 50% HP) also helped to keep everyone alive.

I think the only one who walked away from that mission without any injury was Ector. The rest got 1 or 2 wounds (minor and major ones) and with Vitality close to 0.

About consumables and buffs they provide - I think the real issue is the ability to stack them and the amount of bonuses these items give. If they were to give 10% or 15%, and without the ability to stack the bonus (basically how Vulnerable works right now), then you won't be able to spam them and you'll have to think what buff to give to whom to make the most out of it. I don't really use consumables myself, because I tend to "keep it for a rainy day" and re-buying items drains your gold (assuming you even have that option), which you could've spent on permanent upgrades in Camelot. And my upgrades went into Training Ground and healing Vitality/Injuries, not potions.

Maybe I will try more consumable-focused build in my second run.

From other news - I figured out I won't get much out of Tristan, so I gave him the boot. I just got Leodegrance so Guinevere gets the boot after I recruit Percivale/kill the Fisher King. I wish he had a teleport (which Guinevere has), but oh well... Kicked the Big M too. The guy already hated me and I could tell it would only keep getting worse, with me being a Christian and him being a Greedy bastard.

So all in all I will have two more slots left. I am most likely getting Lucan. This is pretty much a guarantee. I won't get a better chance to recruit him as he is Rightful + Christian.

I don't need any more Champions (I got rid of the White Knight), so I am going to ignore Lancelot. I am thinking of taking Galahad. Mainly because he is a Christian, meaning I can take Gawain if I go Tyrannical/Old-Faith path next time. That said, I may consider taking Lancelot if Lanval doesn't start shining by the time I am able to recruit the former. He technically has the potential, but I don't feel like he's doing as well as Balan for some reason.

 

[Cael]

There are videos out that show you can one shot the last boss on the hardest difficulty in the first turn retard. And the setup doesn't require anything special. The difficulty becomes a joke when you got access to inspire sages and vanguards by the endgame.

I have no idea what game you guys are playing if you say the game gets harder after Act 3 but it certainly ain't this game.

The guy did it by abusing potions and pre-battle blessings.

So now we call it abusing for using tools you are given by the game? I thought you were an advocate for le-epic-godlike powers else it's not an RPG.

This is just an example taken to the extreme. The game is still considerably easier after Act 3. By then you are reaching maxed out powers on Sages and Vanguards. If you are not an absolute retard you can keep practically all mobs CC'd for at least 3-4 turns (Lightning from Mordred + Icewall from Sages), plenty of time for a Vanguard to jump-stealth-backstab the entire encounter. You can approach literally every encounter the same way. Sure, handicapping yourself by not playing two of the six classes then you might be able to say that the difficulty increases. With this logic however you can make any game become harder. The fact is, the game is at its best between Act 2-3 and becomes considerably easier in Act 4 due to the powercurve, you know that thing you were arguing for an entire page about.

No. That is your lying dramacunt misrepresentation of what I said. Anyone who disagrees with you is automatically the other extreme.

I said I wanted a power curve that allowed you to feel that you are getting stronger. That your levelling makes a difference. One way of doing that is to get better stats, stronger units and the like. I have never advocated consumables as the method of doing so. That is all on you.

First of all, I don't really get where you get this dramacunt term from. If anything you are not being really much of a munchkin if you want, as you say yourself, a powercurve that always makes your party stronger over time to the detriment of any semblance of difficulty. This is the only way I can interpret it as I'm, and always have, argued for a powercurve that maintains challenge. For the hundreth time, this is not the same as having the challenge "always stay the same in a linear fashion", but it must not at any point trivialize the difficulty, which it clearly does in this game, save for purposefully handicapping yourself by not using certain classes or strategies. This is not the way you should go about it to solve that issue.

And in regards to the "lying" you really are just making a point about semantics as to why consumables should for some reason be excluded by your principle of "if you aren't getting stronger than the enemy what is the point of a powercurve and progression in a RPG". Everything from levels, abilities, gear and yes consumables all come into play in the question of difficulty. Part of your progression is in fact amassing these consumables for you to utilize in missions. Saying it is "abusing" is a cop-out. Are you then "abusing" using two Sages that can rotate CC spells and cooldown on those with inspire or achieve close to the same result as consumables by stacking bless? You can't cherrypick which tools should be accounted for in your version of how character progression should work in RPGs just because I put up an example which shows you are being full of shit when you say the game gets more difficult throughout the whole game.

Power levels of a character/class should not take into account consumables. It is the permanent skills and abilities that you take into account. The idea you add consumables to the power curve means you are forcing people to pick a particular consumable or else. That is just bad game design.

As for dramacunt, you are one because you piss and moan about muh powergamer vibes!!! Fuck off, cunt. The old term for your kind is dramafag, but I prefer my version. You want to play your 8Int wizard, go ahead, but don't you complain, cry and try to force others to play the same, bitch.

 

[Nortar]

Power levels of a character/class should not take into account consumables. It is the permanent skills and abilities that you take into account. The idea you add consumables to the power curve means you are forcing people to pick a particular consumable or else. That is just bad game design.

This is more related to the "why magic is powerful" discussion, but most people don't realize or care that a lot of D&D spells require hard to get or costly material components that could be hard or even impossible to come by while adventuring in an "orc dungeon". Should a 100gp pearl for Identify, a pinch of bat-shit for Fireball and some Onyx gems for Animate Dead be treated as consumables when measuring spell-caster power curve?

 

[Saravan]

Power levels of a character/class should not take into account consumables. It is the permanent skills and abilities that you take into account. The idea you add consumables to the power curve means you are forcing people to pick a particular consumable or else. That is just bad game design.

Yeah they should, if you add consumables - just like any other tool that you decide to add into the game - you must take that it into account when designing the powercurve in relation to the difficulty. Especially in this game where consumables can make a major difference in the outcome of a mission as clearly demonstrated by being able to oneshot the goddamn endgame boss on the first turn. Disregarding that example, you are pretty much expected to use them on Very Hard difficulty during the early stages to ensure you don't take vitality damage.

It's obvious when you say stupid shit like this that you don't know what the hell you are talking about and I'm certain at this point that you have never played a Very Hard run.

As for dramacunt, you are one because you piss and moan about muh powergamer vibes!!! Fuck off, cunt. The old term for your kind is dramafag, but I prefer my version. You want to play your 8Int wizard, go ahead, but don't you complain, cry and try to force others to play the same, bitch.

What are you even talking about? 8int wizard, what? From the very start I have said that the game should stay difficult on the harder difficulties. They simply don't at the moment. You are the one that wants the harder difficulties to end up easier as you progress through the game strictly from your leveling and builds. What are you not grasping here? This is a tactical RPG, it's not enough that the difficulty is resolved by optimized builds, you must maintain the relevancy in positioning, use of environment and all other factors that come into play during actual combat, not just outside of it. Winning strictly by optimized build is insufficient in a game such as this one with very streamlined build mechanics. Powergaming, in terms of optimizing your builds, should be an expectation on the harder difficulties but they shouldn't on their own win you the battles in this type of RPG. When the tactical elements of the combat are made redundant by the powercurve the combat becomes boring because your stats end up carrying you through the rest of the game.

I'm not forcing others to play any particular way. You want it to get easier? Go and play storymode and shut the fuck up about the progression allowing the harder difficulties to become storymode by endgame.

 

[Cyberarmy]

so I am going to ignore Lancelot. I am thinking of taking Galahad.

Both Galahad and Lancelot are awesome, bringing 2 of them together makes most missions a cakewalk (for this games standarts). Lancelot is the standart lonewolf with good damage and defansive skills, Galahad is The Tank of the game.
Only problem with them are the lack of spellcraft, perception which leads to missing some loot.

 

[Grunker]

Yeah but you can say that for literally any game. On the harder difficulties you are obviously going to optimize your builds and strategies, if the game breaks due to that then that's an issue in balancing. Purposefully handicapping yourself is something I did to keep the game challenging. I for example did a clean playthrough without any Sages or Vanguards.

So, you've completed the game on Very Hard in Rogue-like mode without Sages and Vanguards? My respect.

Or you are handicapping yourself without playing actual hardest variant of the game as it is proposed by developers?

I distinctly recall some developer saying roguelike wasn't really what the game was designed for - and it is certainly mirrored in the design. There's a ton of stuff you need to sit through again here on a restart if things spiral out of control.

I usually play ironman in most games with the mode - certainly nu-XCOM - but I think it would be incredibly tedious with a game like this.

You don’t have an endless bench, for example, and you have plot central characters. In X-COM ironman means I might lose my best guy to a mistake and then lose the mission having to retreat. In this game it’ll mean a total restart

 

[Alienman]

Did anyone else here turn Sir Ector into an AOE fire burning God? It seems he single-handedly wins some missions for me. I'm not actually sure what I would do without him, since nobody else have his capacity for such massive damage on so many enemies.

Spoiler

Sir Ector burning stuff

 

[Parabalus]

The fact is, the game is at its best between Act 2-3 and becomes considerably easier in Act 4 due to the powercurve

Gets a bit boring too, they should have ended it with A3.

 

[notpl]

Did anyone else here turn Sir Ector into an AOE fire burning God? It seems he single-handedly wins some missions for me. I'm not actually sure what I would do without him, since nobody else have his capacity for such massive damage on so many enemies.

Spoiler

Sir Ector burning stuff

The arcanists are all pretty interchangeable. Merlin gets all the same fire abilities, Morgana does the same thing but with ice. Morgaus isn't an arcanist but she gets as many AoE spells as one. In particular the "bonus damage against undamaged foes" enhancement is really good for a big opening AoE salvo.

 

[Harthwain]

Did anyone else here turn Sir Ector into an AOE fire burning God?

I managed to turn Kay into a monster (a fair warning; a lengthy description of potions, items and skills incoming):

Spoiler

10% chance to deal double damage (relic potion) + 10% extra weapon damage (relic potion) + 25% damage against the Lost + 3 Damage per turn per each kill AND 2 MP for each kill (weapon) + kills an enemy unit if it is left at 15% Vitality after an attack (relic ring - accessory) + 2 damage until the end of the encounter for each kill + 15% weapon damage per kill (Rage skill) + 10% more weapon damage (Strength skill) + 5% weapon damage per movement until the end of turn (Juggernaut skill). And that without mentioning upgrades for Strike and Cleave.

Once the ball gets rolling the heads start rolling. Kay moves from target to target and starts the carnage. This is not infinite, because he gets 1 AP per kill and Cleave has cooldown but it is still pretty good and with 2 Movement Points per kill it allows you to save more APs for killing. You can get the damage so high that even a kick from Kay can be lethal.

 

[Alienman]

Did anyone else here turn Sir Ector into an AOE fire burning God? It seems he single-handedly wins some missions for me. I'm not actually sure what I would do without him, since nobody else have his capacity for such massive damage on so many enemies.

Spoiler

Sir Ector burning stuff

The arcanists are all pretty interchangeable. Merlin gets all the same fire abilities, Morgana does the same thing but with ice. Morgaus isn't an arcanist but she gets as many AoE spells as one. In particular the "bonus damage against undamaged foes" enhancement is really good for a big opening AoE salvo.

I did notice he had some overlapping skills, but Ector was my first. I just gave him all the fire based stuff, and a perma buff from challenges that gives 20% more fire damage. Initial damage is high, then it ticks for such a ridicules amount, and for a good while too. Funny to see everyone running around on fire