Incline Battle Brothers + Beasts & Exploration, Warriors of the North and Blazing Deserts DLC Thread

[Kalarion]

Bros I feel comfortable dealing with all enemy types except Lindwurms. What the fuck do I do to make more then 2 at once manageable? My go to strat is having shieldbros with 50+ mdef who shieldwall and peppering them with arrows (I have 3 stellar archers). But any more than 2 wurms and they can usually break my shieldwall before I can kill them, especially once they buff up at day 175. Nets don't seem to work, they're immune to stun, they can be poisoned but it only lasts one turn... I can daze but who brings 2-4 2h mace bros to fights?!

I saveloaded like a little bitch at least a dozen times trying different strats on a 4 Lindwurm fight. Not necessarily because I wanted to win, I just wanted to get some kind of workable idea of what to do, and Lindwurm fights aren't exactly conducive to extensive testing otherwise :D. Finally I gave up and went to kill something easier. I feel so ashamed

 

[Brancaleone]

In other words, it undermines what should be sound tactics, and the only possible results is that now I play even more conservatively, which is not that much fun. Oh well.

You should play very conservatively with good units under level 7. Your bannerman wouldn’t have been 1 shot if he had nimble.

It sounds like this is one of the first times AI has disengaged from you in this way, but it does happen. It seems to happen more with orcs than others, but that’s just anecdotal. I still like to keep valuable targets 2 squares away from 2h’ers even if they’re engaged, but I don’t think you really made the wrong move, you just weren’t aware of the potential cost. If you had known, would you have taken a 0.02% chance of losing your really good bannerman? If that was the best position for him to have killed another orc, probably, but if you could have kept your bannerman two hexes away while still doing what he needed to, probably not.


Also, Taka-Haradin puolipeikko the whole morale system is simulating AI caring for their lives. The odd outlier who rallies and fights back is just like the cornered animal who strikes viciously. BB is one of the few games where enemies caring for their lives leads to viable strategies (eg morale breaking big groups).

My bannerman was level 5. And I never take nimble, because I consider it bullshit, according to my very personal definition of bullshit. It is ridiculous both conceptually and mechanically, and it completely trivializes the middle-game.

I've actually seen the AI many times disengaging from one unit to finish off another which is wounded/close to death. The point is, it usually happens with a confident/normal morale going for a badly damaged bro or an archer, not with a moribund and breaking enemy going for an unscathed bro, instead of 'striking viciously' the bro that has been striking it up to know and that it is engaged with. And I had my sarge one tile away because I had to get him farther away from another of the four berserkers with mansplitter, which I had subsequently managed to kill (but I couldn't have be sure). My complaint is not so much about having a guy killed, but having him killed by what really looks like some conflicting AI algorithms. Unless you mean that the lesson we should take from it is to stay at least two tiles away from any moribund berserker who has an infinitesimal chance of one-shotting a bro.

 

[Kaivokz]

It is ridiculous both conceptually and mechanically, and it completely trivializes the middle-game.

I don't mind if you don't use nimble, but I disagree on both points.

Mechanically, it's still easy enough to lose bros to sub-optimal play. It just lowers RNG of, say, getting OHKO by a berserker with an axe.

Conceptually, if you are a nimble person, then the lighter your armor the more likely you can move your body out of the way so as to be less seriously injured by a blow (given the same armor). Say a berserk orc comes up with a 2h axe and does an overhead chop. If you move only slightly and it comes down on your collar bone--probably dead--if you move slightly more and it lands on your arm, you might get a very deep cut but live.

Unless you mean that the lesson we should take from it is to stay at least two tiles away from any moribund berserker who has an infinitesimal chance of one-shotting a bro.

Specifically what I said was if you can get the same tactical advantage while keeping him two tiles away, why take a 0.02% chance over a 0% chance? If you could not get the same tactical advantage and would have been in a much disadvantaged position, then the 0.02% chance is probably worth it.

 

[Serus]

Bros I feel comfortable dealing with all enemy types except Lindwurms. What the fuck do I do to make more then 2 at once manageable?

supershieldbro(s) tying individual or multiple linds down, polebros (aka everybody gets a pole if they're not on shield duty) whacking the tail at their leisure or taking a step in to get in range of a head and then back out of lind's attack range (because of positioning, or because it's already crowded around the tail)

fuckers make a beeline for archers, so I've also cheesed loose linds around the map by making rangebro(s) run laps

This, also you will need one tank against 2, max 3 wurms. So often 2 tanks are needed. Groups larger than 5 wurms i'd avoid.

 

[Serus]

Ok day 19 with my peasant militia and found 2 famed weapons already...

Peasant militia... 8 people... Are you one of the minmaxing fags who fires non-optimal bros? You don't deserve to be one of us.

They died, served their purpose to conquer riches early game.

Ah in another note if anyone want the seed for my Peasant run, its all right all around

KFKHZIEBCG

I'm currently rolling Beast slayer seeds.

Thanks for the seed but i found one that is good for my tastes myself. The one you posted is nice too, a little too much forests (but forests are not a dead area like mountains so that's ok) but otherwise very nice.

 

[Brancaleone]

It is ridiculous both conceptually and mechanically, and it completely trivializes the middle-game.

Conceptually, if you are a nimble person, then the lighter your armor the more likely you can move your body out of the way so as to be less seriously injured by a blow (given the same armor). Say a berserk orc comes up with a 2h axe and does an overhead chop. If you move only slightly and it comes down on your collar bone--probably dead--if you move slightly more and it lands on your arm, you might get a very deep cut but live.

Unless you mean that the lesson we should take from it is to stay at least two tiles away from any moribund berserker who has an infinitesimal chance of one-shotting a bro.

Specifically what I said was if you can get the same tactical advantage while keeping him two tiles away, why take a 0.02% chance over a 0% chance? If you could not get the same tactical advantage and would have been in a much disadvantaged position, then the 0.02% chance is probably worth it.

Of course, the history of war was made by legions of peasants in rags being able to torque their body just enough to avoid death from a halberd.
Jokes aside, no, its conceptually ridiculous, since it works just the same if you are surrounded, if you are exhausted, if you are bleeding to death, if you have a broken leg + cut achilles + injured kneecap + concussion, if enemies have backstabber, etc. etc. etc. It's not tied to anything, and it works under any circumstances. It's basically Ultrainstinct, and just as dumb.

As I said, sarge had to be there exactly in order not to be squashed by another mansplitter berserker who had no shieldbro engaging it (but was killed, with some luck, after I had moved the sarge two tiles away).

Besides, the point is not that I lost a bro, but that it probably came from an AI brainfart. If came from an algorithm that has enemy units prioritizing inflicting damage when they are about to die, then it is a pretty idiotic one, since it would have made much more sense trying to wound the shieldbro, since it certainly had a much greater chance than 0.02% of achieving that (without risking a 93% sure death just in order to disengage).

That I was salty about losing the sarge has to do with how the battle took place: I had the 5 berserkers + 1 young coming down the mountains, saw them at the last moment (which is fine, that's what elevation is for, even when it works in favour of the enemy), backtracked immediately, my party started going zig-zag on the hills for no reason, and while clicking frantically in order to try and make it go straight I got snagged while being just between a plains tile and a hill tile (with the mountain tile being just next to the hill tile), but that apparently counted as a mountain tile, so I got caught. And as I said, I usually reload when this kind of things happen, but that doesn't mean I don't feel slightly guilty about it, so this time I said "ok, I will retreat manually". Battle starts, and two of my bros are with their back to a two level cliff, and if they go around it they will be caught by orc charge in turn 2. So it's "fine, backs to the cliff, and we go down in a blaze of glory". Turns out than it was much more glory than I expected, but then I just played, you know, suboptimally by not leaving the sarge in the range of the other berserker with mansplitter (who would have got him in case I missed one of two javelin shots), and moved him one tile away from a moribund, breaking berserker being checked by by best tank.

 

[PorkyThePaladin]

Save yourself the guilt my friend, and play Ironman. Then you never have to wonder if you should reload or not, and can just hurl the PC out the window right off the bat.

 

[Kaivokz]

works just the same if you are surrounded

So do shield bonuses even though you can’t protect yourself from front and back with a shield simultaneously. It’s all an abstraction intended to represent combat, not a perfect simulation. The same thing is true of the m.def stat in general.

Like I said I don’t care if you use nimble, but it makes sense as much as any of the in game abstractions used to approximate combat, and it makes more sense than battle forged since you have to suppose a bf bro is somehow moving around in order to minimize the damage to his armor in a way that scales with how heavy his armor is.

Yeah. Some things are just in the game for fun, not to be realistic, but if you enjoy not using tools given to you to succeed in a game, I won’t stop you.

 

[Kaivokz]

but then I just played, you know, suboptimally by not leaving the sarge in the range of the other berserker with mansplitter

I think you think too much like a woman to play this game.

 

[Harthwain]

I've actually seen the AI many times disengaging from one unit to finish off another which is wounded/close to death. The point is, it usually happens with a confident/normal morale going for a badly damaged bro or an archer, not with a moribund and breaking enemy going for an unscathed bro, instead of 'striking viciously' the bro that has been striking it up to know and that it is engaged with. And I had my sarge one tile away because I had to get him farther away from another of the four berserkers with mansplitter, which I had subsequently managed to kill (but I couldn't have be sure). My complaint is not so much about having a guy killed, but having him killed by what really looks like some conflicting AI algorithms. Unless you mean that the lesson we should take from it is to stay at least two tiles away from any moribund berserker who has an infinitesimal chance of one-shotting a bro.

It actually makes sense and is a smart move on part of the AI - instead of doing shit to the enemy it's engaged with, it tries to kill an enemy it knows it can kill (theoretically). The real question would be: should a crazy Orc berserker display such level of tactical aplitude, instead of madly smashing whatever is next to him? Still, I will gladly take intelligent, not-entirely-predictible enemies over brain-dead ones that you can predict 100% of the time. And I will point out that the AI is already playing somewhat suboptimally as-is:

http://battlebrothersgame.com/dev-blog-27-ai-battle-brothers-part-1/

I am saying "somewhat suboptimally", because while its choices are weighted, it's still possible for the AI to pick up an action that will be less beneficial to it in the greater scheme of things. But this is good, because can you imagine playing against a perfect AI? I doubt it would be fun.

Enemy being low on morale is a non-issue as morale only matters when it's broken, otherwise a unit is allowed to act as it sees fit and engaged enemies with their morale still intact will not try to retreat, and will receive bonuses/penalties to their attack/defense, depending on their morale.

 

[Brancaleone]

works just the same if you are surrounded

So do shield bonuses even though you can’t protect yourself from front and back with a shield simultaneously. It’s all an abstraction intended to represent combat, not a perfect simulation. The same thing is true of the m.def stat in general.

Like I said I don’t care if you use nimble, but it makes sense as much as any of the in game abstractions used to approximate combat, and it makes more sense than battle forged since you have to suppose a bf bro is somehow moving around in order to minimize the damage to his armor in a way that scales with how heavy his armor is.

Yeah. Some things are just in the game for fun, not to be realistic, but if you enjoy not using tools given to you to succeed in a game, I won’t stop you.

Oh, right. It is just an abstraction (thanks for telling us, we'd never guess otherwise), but it makes perfectly sense because "Say a berserk orc comes up with a 2h axe and does an overhead chop. If you move only slightly and it comes down on your collar bone--probably dead--if you move slightly more and it lands on your arm, you might get a very deep cut but live." Stop trying so hard.

 

[Brancaleone]

but then I just played, you know, suboptimally by not leaving the sarge in the range of the other berserker with mansplitter

I think you think too much like a woman to play this game.

Also, I never pick taunt, because it's for faggots. :D

 

[Harthwain]

Also, I never pick taunt, because it's for faggots. :D

I never pick it, because it was so inconsistent in the past that I found it to be effectively useless. Having it cost any amount of stamina to be able use it, is a cherry on top, considering how valuable stamina is overall. Does anyone else have a different experience with it?

 

[Brancaleone]

I've actually seen the AI many times disengaging from one unit to finish off another which is wounded/close to death. The point is, it usually happens with a confident/normal morale going for a badly damaged bro or an archer, not with a moribund and breaking enemy going for an unscathed bro, instead of 'striking viciously' the bro that has been striking it up to know and that it is engaged with. And I had my sarge one tile away because I had to get him farther away from another of the four berserkers with mansplitter, which I had subsequently managed to kill (but I couldn't have be sure). My complaint is not so much about having a guy killed, but having him killed by what really looks like some conflicting AI algorithms. Unless you mean that the lesson we should take from it is to stay at least two tiles away from any moribund berserker who has an infinitesimal chance of one-shotting a bro.

It actually makes sense and is a smart move on part of the AI - instead of doing shit to the enemy it's engaged with, it tries to kill an enemy it knows it can kill (theoretically). The real question would be: should a crazy Orc berserker display such level of tactical aplitude, instead of madly smashing whatever is next to him? Still, I will gladly take intelligent, not-entirely-predictible enemies over brain-dead ones that you can predict 100% of the time. And I will point out that the AI is already playing somewhat suboptimally as-is:

http://battlebrothersgame.com/dev-blog-27-ai-battle-brothers-part-1/

I am saying "somewhat suboptimally", because while its choices are weighted, it's still possible for the AI to pick up an action that will be less beneficial to it in the greater scheme of things. But this is good, because can you imagine playing against a perfect AI? I doubt it would be fun.

Enemy being low on morale is a non-issue as morale only matters when it's broken, otherwise a unit is allowed to act as it sees fit and engaged enemies with their morale still intact will not try to retreat, and will receive bonuses/penalties to their attack/defense, depending on their morale.

But I'm not complaining that the AI is too good: actually, I think the game's AI is getting crappier with each expansion (I know, game gets more complex, but still), and it really wasn't top notch to start with. It is quite painful to attack fortified camps with marksmen and watch the AI keeping their melee inside and moving the marksmen just outside the palisade when I have four longbowmen in my back row. I'd say AI plays very suboptimally, which is why I really doubt what I related was the result of the AI doing all its calculations and deciding that 0.02% chance of killing a bro was a sounder strategy than, let's say, 10% chance of wounding another one (I don't really remember what the chances of wounding my shieldbro would be). The game tries to make life difficult for the player much more with the random factor (worldmap, events, chance for weapons and helmets to drop, enemy composition, etc.) than with enemy AI, and this encourages the player to play more and more conservatively. The biggest issue of the game, I'd say, is that there is no point whatsoever in taking risks or moving away from the old and true tactics. When I am in an especially grindy patch (happens often), I really feel like taking some risks to break the monotony. And each time I do, even when things have gone perfectly, my thought is always "this was so not worth the risk, I shouldn't have done that". And it's back to "Grind for the Grind God".

Still, I consider it a very good game, and I will keep playing it even just for the fatigue mechanics alone, they really struck gold with it. I remember when I first played Arcanum thinking over and over how much potential the fatigue mechanic had, if only done right, and dreaming of finding one day a patch that would rework it properly. Sigh.

 

[Serus]

Also, I never pick taunt, because it's for faggots. :D

I never pick it, because it was so inconsistent in the past that I found it to be effectively useless. Having it cost any amount of stamina to be able use it, is a cherry on top, considering how valuable stamina is overall. Does anyone else have a different experience with it?

I have and I disagree strongly. It's a great perk and works well - if you use it in a way it actually works. Which might not be as advertised sadly. I can't even begin to count the times it saved a bros - or at least prevented serious damage. I never understood people who says it is crap or that it doesn't work (at all). Mind you, it works every time - from my experience - only if the AI has you in range already when you use it, be it 1 or 2 (with reach weapon) tiles away. Never tried it on whips and ranged are usually too far to use taunt. Where it doesn't (always) work is when the AI unit doesn't have the reach. But even in the first case there are many uses, I always take it on my tank and, as i said before, use it regularly with success.


Edit: I agree that Nimble makes little sense as abstraction. The mechanic is just silly when it comes to what it tries to represent. However it doesn't bother me. As to being overpowered, this is a question of the % of damage you take. Perhaps it should be 50% instead at max efficiency, perhaps the amount of armor should be even smaller to be able to use it at full. I have a feeling that it's a little (only a little) too strong relative to battleforged. But overall it's ok.

 

[Brancaleone]

Also, I never pick taunt, because it's for faggots. :D

I never pick it, because it was so inconsistent in the past that I found it to be effectively useless. Having it cost any amount of stamina to be able use it, is a cherry on top, considering how valuable stamina is overall. Does anyone else have a different experience with it?

I have and I disagree strongly. It's a great perk and works well - if you use it in a way it actually works. Which might not be as advertised sadly. I can't even begin to count the times it saved a bros - or at least prevented serious damage. I never understood people who says it is crap or that it doesn't work (at all). Mind you, it works every time - from my experience - only if the AI has you in range already when you use it, be it 1 or 2 (with reach weapon) tiles away. Never tried it on whips and ranged are usually too far to use taunt. Where it doesn't (always) work is when the AI unit doesn't have the reach. But even in the first case there are many uses, I always take it on my tank and, as i said before, use it regularly with success.


Edit: I agree that Nimble makes little sense as abstraction. The mechanic is just silly when it comes to what it tries to represent. However it doesn't bother me. As to being overpowered, this is a question of the % of damage you take. Perhaps it should be 50% instead at max efficiency, perhaps the amount of armor should be even smaller to be able to use it at full. I have a feeling that it's a little (only a little) too strong relative to battleforged. But overall it's ok.

I think both you and Harthwain got the post wrong, it wasn't about the perk per se. :D

Although it's true that I never pick it, mostly for an idiosincrasy of mine (I don't know, it reminds me too much of MMORPG's tanking). And it's not crap at all, if anything it's even too effective (in melee).

The problem with Nimble is that it's basically Dodge for dummies: no conditions, no fatigue/initiative management, works in any situation, just slap it on and turn your brain off. What happens with Nimble when you get a two handed mace to the teeth and you get stunned for two turns? I'd say the problem with it is that in order to make even a modicum of sense it should (at the very least) depend on current fatigue/initiative, but there's already Dodge that works like that. You save a truckload of money on armour, you get a ton more fatigue at your disposal, unlike Battleforged it doesn't stop working when your armour gets to zero, you don't have to take risks against bandit leaders or hedge knights in order to stab them to death, you can use Dodge on top of it because you don't get fatigue and initiative smacked to the ground. And when you start getting unique light armours, you even get a decent amount of armour on top of everything else. I don't know if the devs were aiming at keeping light armour relevant (in which case they chose quite a stupid way of achieving that) or they listened to a lot of complaints from players not being able to transition from raider gear to top armour, but I strongly suspect it's the latter.

At this point, why not a perk that increases up to 60% the armour-ignoring damage the lighter your weapon is? I mean, it would be certainly less retarded than the concept of avoiding death thanks to some preternatural twisting of your body, made possible by the fact that you are wearing a mere 12 kg ringmail weighing mostly on your shoulders. After all, the lighter your weapon is, the better you can handle it and the better you can aim for the enemy's "weak spots" and "chinks in the armour". Why not try and keep relevant tier 1 weapons as well in the late game? I want a Cruel Falchion with 80% armour ignore (and 105% with duelist)!

Of course, all this is in jest. It's just that nimble (like quick hands, taunt and disarm) just do not work towards my personal enjoyment of the game.

 

[PorkyThePaladin]

Why is Nimble so popular here? Don't you need to wear light armor to maximize it? Is it worth giving up heavy armor for?

 

[Serus]

Porky:
a) You need good heavy armour to actually make a bro more tanky than a nimble bro with decent health - and you don't have that early (usually)
b) With light armour you can have high initiative, dodge (and relentless), which opens further abilities like acting first (without the need of Adrenaline) and the use of a very good Overwhelm perk.
c) Battleforged eventually gets more tanky with high value armors but it also requires more Fatigue while Nimble can work with any reasonable amount of health, additionally you have Colossus which is "better" than Brawny.
d) In the end, there simply good recruits for both types, better to use them all
e) Personally i prefer battleforged on the front and nimble in the back and only in specific builds on the front (nimble tank, an overwhelm dagger...)
and:
f) I might be talking rubbish, there are others more experienced players here.

 

[hunter1899]

Just starting Battle Brothers and it looks very promising. It does seem like there aren't that many active skills/abilities to use during combat however. Does combat get stale because of this if you're using the same abilities the whole game? Or is this not the case?

 

[PorkyThePaladin]

Porky:
a) You need good heavy armour to actually make a bro more tanky than a nimble bro with decent health - and you don't have that early (usually)

What's the cut-off point? Like is early mail enough (around 90-110 armor)?

 

[Takamori]

Porky:
a) You need good heavy armour to actually make a bro more tanky than a nimble bro with decent health - and you don't have that early (usually)

What's the cut-off point? Like is early mail enough (around 90-110 armor)?

Around 200 AP per piece IMO and you will get around 80% mitigation. If you play really aggressive you can get from bandit leaders early game, bring tons of nets.

 

[Tigranes]

You can get someone early mail pretty much on Day 1, it definitely isn't "you don't have that early (usually)".

 

[Kaivokz]

Oh, right. It is just an abstraction (thanks for telling us, we'd never guess otherwise), but it makes perfectly sense because "Say a berserk orc comes up with a 2h axe and does an overhead chop. If you move only slightly and it comes down on your collar bone--probably dead--if you move slightly more and it lands on your arm, you might get a very deep cut but live." Stop trying so hard.

It does not make any less sense than shield bonus applying to both flanks of a character simultaneously.

Do you refuse to use shields, too, because it breaks your imursi0n and makes the game too easy? How is someone with a 2h sword supposed to hit two people in a line at once and do any damage? Can someone with a wooden stick really stun a fully armored knight? Nimble makes more sense than battle forged thematically—do you refuse to use any damage mitigation talents because in some situations they don’t make perfect 1:1 simulationist sense?

Hmm... I don’t care what you use, but if you’re going to be a dick I’m going to point out how stupid you are.

 

[Brancaleone]

Oh, right. It is just an abstraction (thanks for telling us, we'd never guess otherwise), but it makes perfectly sense because "Say a berserk orc comes up with a 2h axe and does an overhead chop. If you move only slightly and it comes down on your collar bone--probably dead--if you move slightly more and it lands on your arm, you might get a very deep cut but live." Stop trying so hard.

It does not make any less sense than shield bonus applying to both flanks of a character simultaneously.

Do you refuse to use shields, too, because it breaks your imursi0n and makes the game too easy? How is someone with a 2h sword supposed to hit two people in a line at once and do any damage? Can someone with a wooden stick really stun a fully armored knight? Nimble makes more sense than battle forged thematically—do you refuse to use any damage mitigation talents because in some situations they don’t make perfect 1:1 simulationist sense?

Hmm... I don’t care what you use, but if you’re going to be a dick I’m going to point out how stupid you are.

Hey, you are the one who pulled out the realism card with your retarded talk about moving your collarbone a hair away from a mortal blow and getting a 'deep cut in the arm' instead (which by itself says a lot). I did not want to touch the military realism thing with a long pole, since it really makes no sense.
Nimble does not make much sense mechanically. I've written more than enough about it.

You know, for someone who doesn't care at all about what I use or not, you seem to be unable to let go.

 

[Kaivokz]

you seem to be unable to let go

Just responding to what you said.

your retarded talk about moving your collarbone a hair away from a mortal blow and getting a 'deep cut in the arm'

Have you ever been in a fight? Have you ever been in a fight with a drunk? A drunk man will move much slower out of the way of a blow than a sober one. It is not ridiculous at all that a nimble person will be hit less vitally than a slow person. As for realism, you're the one who said it doesn't make sense for a lightly armored person to be able to move out of the way of a blow faster than a heavily armored one.

Nimble does not make much sense mechanically. I've written more than enough about it.

Go ahead and keep dying to RNG because you refuse to take RNG mitigating talents for "personal reasons" and then complain about it on the internet.