Eternity Pillars of Eternity + The White March Expansion Thread

[Slaver1]

It's amazing how badly Sawyer blew it. He had just about the entire PC-gaming ecosystem let alone the 'Dex primed to embrace anything that resembled a homage to Baldurs Gate 2. As it turned out, JS had nothing but disdain for BG2 and labored out something that only mimicked it visually. The compelling, addictive gameplay found in the older, better games was entirely missing because Soyer presumed to know better. He missed the mark with the abhorrent combat system completely.

A pity he couldn't have been relegated to making Macromedia Flash games for subscription services back then instead of tackling genres he didn't care for.

 

[Lacrymas]

He did know better, he just didn't know how to fix the problems he saw.

 

[chuft]

In the end, POE was the game that taught me I really dislike games where you win in the party build/design/Excel pregame, not the moment by moment tactical combat game. I never played MMOs and barely tried D&D 3 (and never 4), nor did I get into deck construction games like Magic, so it was a rude surprise to find an unoptimized party might have no winning moves despite the "balance" claim. The fewer choices there are in character/party build, the more important the tactical moves during battle become. In BG1 the tactical moves were everything. BG2 less so but still they were crucial and the skill/spell combos were comprehensible without a spreadsheet of what stacks with what and recovery time vs protection. You wore the best armor you could.

It didn't help that patches constantly changed everything and many of the online discussions and resources were wrong/obsolete.

Fallout 1 and 2 had fun battles not least because you had no control over most of the party's skill set nor did you have 20 companions to pick from.

 

[mediocrepoet]

In the end, POE was the game that taught me I really dislike games where you win in the party build/design/Excel pregame, not the moment by moment tactical combat game.

You think PoE is a build heavy game? Seriously?

 

[Slaver1]

In the end, POE was the game that taught me I really dislike games where you win in the party build/design/Excel pregame, not the moment by moment tactical combat game. I never played MMOs and barely tried D&D 3 (and never 4), nor did I get into deck construction games like Magic, so it was a rude surprise to find an unoptimized party might have no winning moves despite the "balance" claim. The fewer choices there are in character/party build, the more important the tactical moves during battle become. In BG1 the tactical moves were everything. BG2 less so but still they were crucial and the skill/spell combos were comprehensible without a spreadsheet of what stacks with what and recovery time vs protection. You wore the best armor you could.

It didn't help that patches constantly changed everything and many of the online discussions and resources were wrong/obsolete.

Fallout 1 and 2 had fun battles not least because you had no control over most of the party's skill set nor did you have 20 companions to pick from.

Infinity Engine fights were so much more legible. You scoped out the battlefield at a glance, knew where everyone was, what status effects were in play or coming into play. There was always some distinctive move that could change the course of battle. There was a fear factor when an enemy mage was casting a spell or impending triumph when your guy was doing the same. You felt something when you engaged with the combat system.

POE was incremental nothingness most of the time. Positioning alone was enough to win you a schizoid combat victory most of the time. How satisfying were any of those fights really? Not even as fun as or outcome determinative as destroying a Clay Golem with a flail, let alone casting Sunray in a hive of Vampires.

 

[Haplo]

And yet the 2nd ed. DnD games had very primitive systems, outside of caster characters. The spellcasting systems were admittedly great. But all the other classes - just sad. Point and clik. Or worse yet, kite.
Also next to no choice in character building: max your casting or damage stat, that's it!

PoE is so much better then this. As well as 3rd+ ed. and Pathfinder games...

 

[mediocrepoet]

In the end, POE was the game that taught me I really dislike games where you win in the party build/design/Excel pregame, not the moment by moment tactical combat game. I never played MMOs and barely tried D&D 3 (and never 4), nor did I get into deck construction games like Magic, so it was a rude surprise to find an unoptimized party might have no winning moves despite the "balance" claim. The fewer choices there are in character/party build, the more important the tactical moves during battle become. In BG1 the tactical moves were everything. BG2 less so but still they were crucial and the skill/spell combos were comprehensible without a spreadsheet of what stacks with what and recovery time vs protection. You wore the best armor you could.

It didn't help that patches constantly changed everything and many of the online discussions and resources were wrong/obsolete.

Fallout 1 and 2 had fun battles not least because you had no control over most of the party's skill set nor did you have 20 companions to pick from.

Infinity Engine fights were so much more legible. You scoped out the battlefield at a glance, knew where everyone was, what status effects were in play or coming into play. There was always some distinctive move that could change the course of battle. There was a fear factor when an enemy mage was casting a spell or impending triumph when your guy was doing the same. You felt something when you engaged with the combat system.

POE was incremental nothingness most of the time. Positioning alone was enough to win you a schizoid combat victory most of the time. How satisfying were any of those fights really? Not even as fun as or outcome determinative as destroying a Clay Golem with a flail, let alone casting Sunray in a hive of Vampires.

Did you do things like arquebus alpha strikes or using gaze of the adragan to just ruin something?

 

[chuft]

To me fantasy is about magic. If I don't want magic I play a game in a magic free setting like Fallout. I don't really care about mundane characters in a fantasy setting. They are the supporting cast for the spellcasters, like grogs in Ars Magica. That's all. Swords and shields are not supposed to have a hundred options. You block or you swing.

D&D tried to make mundane classes more interesting because real humans were playing these characters and some of them were smarter than the characters themselves and wanted lots of gamey options. Fortunately this is a problem CRPGs don't have. I have zero desire for a fighter or thief to be as complex to build and run as a spellcaster.

And yes obviously it's a build heavy game. I have seen some of the spreadsheets people use for it. I know people who win battles easily just by letting the game run itself because of their party build. And I've had a 13th level party get TPK'd multiple times in WM1 because I apparently had the wrong build.

 

[mediocrepoet]

And yes obvious it's a build heavy game. I have seen some of the spreadsheets people use for it.

You can make spreadsheets about Mario Kart. Anyway, some people are into that fractional damage and shit that Sawyer put in, but still. I wouldn't say it's build heavy, you don't have all that many choices really unless you're comparing to IE which basically had none.

I know people who win battles easily just by letting the game run itself because of their party build.

On PotD? I suppose it's possible, I don't normally bother using the AI, but I'd have to assume they're using conditional commands in it which is more of a decision matrix optimization than a character build thing.

And I've had a 13th level party get TPK'd multiple times in WM1 because I apparently had the wrong build.

Could be. Or maybe you're just bad at the game and should play on Story mode.

 

[Delterius]

poe isn't build heavy. you pick a race, a class, then you pick which attributes to emphasize, and thats it. want build heavy play pathfinder or one of the 3E games.

yeah people turned pokémon into a highly competitive game, optimists are the worst and can spreadsheetize anything.

 

[chuft]

Yeah cause I had to do that to beat every IE game, Fallout 1 and 2, Arcanum etc.

 

[Slaver1]

And yet the 2nd ed. DnD games had very primitive systems, outside of caster characters. The spellcasting systems were admittedly great. But all the other classes - just sad. Point and clik. Or worse yet, kite.
Also next to no choice in character building: max your casting or damage stat, that's it!

PoE is so much better then this. As well as 3rd+ ed. and Pathfinder games...

The pure point and click hack and slash gameplay itself is more satisfying in the IE games compared to POE. Every impact feels great, every sprite in the diverse bestiary has incredibly satisfying and unique death animations. The feel has always been right in those games and it's one of many reasons they're (specifically Baldurs Gate 2) still unsurpassed & better than POE or any other CRPG.

In the end, POE was the game that taught me I really dislike games where you win in the party build/design/Excel pregame, not the moment by moment tactical combat game. I never played MMOs and barely tried D&D 3 (and never 4), nor did I get into deck construction games like Magic, so it was a rude surprise to find an unoptimized party might have no winning moves despite the "balance" claim. The fewer choices there are in character/party build, the more important the tactical moves during battle become. In BG1 the tactical moves were everything. BG2 less so but still they were crucial and the skill/spell combos were comprehensible without a spreadsheet of what stacks with what and recovery time vs protection. You wore the best armor you could.

It didn't help that patches constantly changed everything and many of the online discussions and resources were wrong/obsolete.

Fallout 1 and 2 had fun battles not least because you had no control over most of the party's skill set nor did you have 20 companions to pick from.

Infinity Engine fights were so much more legible. You scoped out the battlefield at a glance, knew where everyone was, what status effects were in play or coming into play. There was always some distinctive move that could change the course of battle. There was a fear factor when an enemy mage was casting a spell or impending triumph when your guy was doing the same. You felt something when you engaged with the combat system.

POE was incremental nothingness most of the time. Positioning alone was enough to win you a schizoid combat victory most of the time. How satisfying were any of those fights really? Not even as fun as or outcome determinative as destroying a Clay Golem with a flail, let alone casting Sunray in a hive of Vampires.

Did you do things like arquebus alpha strikes or using gaze of the adragan to just ruin something?

Just not really having to use anything at all except a well equipped party to march through 80% of encounters. This was on hard difficulty after navigating through some of the trickier early game encounters.

 

[Delterius]

Yeah cause I had to do that to beat every IE game, Fallout 1 and 2, Arcanum etc.

you had to do what? optimize? poe1 is rather straightforward you just have to hit the right defences. what you need to learn to do well on PotD is by playing the game and learning what your abilities do and what your enemies' weaknesses are. it's not really won at character creation. it's really not a build heavy game. consider:

builds in bg1 and 2 consist of wether you want to be a kensai/mage or a gnome/elf fighter/mage

builds in poe1 consist of wether you want a high int wizard or a high mig wizard

builds in a 3E game consist of wether you want to be a 1RDD 1Bard 1Paladin 1Sorcerer 1Time Hierophant or if you want to swap the RDD level with a level of Arachnid Stan

it's pretty clear that one of these is not like the other

 

[NJClaw]

i wish fassina, rekke and ydwin were more fleshed out instead of them.

I wish Fassina would just BLOW HER FUCKING NOSE ALREADY

 

[IHaveHugeNick]

I wanna see those magic builds that play themselves through boss fights on POTD. Go ahead, make my day.

 

[chuft]

On PotD? I suppose it's possible, I don't normally bother using the AI, but I'd have to assume they're using conditional commands in it which is more of a decision matrix optimization than a character build thing.

Conditional commands and builds go hand in hand. You can't conditionally use some power or spell you don't have. They're both things you do BEFORE the battle, not decisions you make during the battle, so the game plays itself based on you programming robots.

 

[chuft]

Yeah cause I had to do that to beat every IE game, Fallout 1 and 2, Arcanum etc.

you had to do what? optimize?

I was being sarcastic. I did not have to play on Easy to beat any of those games, or even Normal.

 

[chuft]

I wanna see those magic builds that play themselves through boss fights on POTD. Go ahead, make my day.

Obviously I'm not the guy to ask for the perfect build. I do work with someone who creamed everything using 6 chanters. He would just sit back and watch the battles. All their stuff stacked. Every time JS heard about something like this a nerf patch would appear so I think only the less obvious exploity builds remain.

 

[The_Mask]

Yeah cause I had to do that to beat every IE game, Fallout 1 and 2, Arcanum etc.

you had to do what? optimize? poe1 is rather straightforward you just have to hit the right defences. what you need to learn to do well on PotD is by playing the game and learning what your abilities do and what your enemies' weaknesses are. it's not really won at character creation. it's really not a build heavy game. consider:

builds in bg1 and 2 consist of wether you want to be a kensai/mage or a gnome/elf fighter/mage

builds in poe1 consist of wether you want a high int wizard or a high mig wizard

builds in a 3E game consist of wether you want to be a 1RDD 1Bard 1Paladin 1Sorcerer 1Time Hierophant or if you want to swap the RDD level with a level of Arachnid Stan

it's pretty clear that one of these is not like the other

Okay, okay, but when are you going to mention Perception?

 

[IHaveHugeNick]

He's got the point though, if anything, the major criticism throughout the years was how combat and itemization have been so oversawyered the builds barely matter.

 

[S.torch]

There are quite a few noticeable improvements in the technical construction of WM1 (not so much in the artistic aspect).

You're admitting here that White March is worse than the main game. If you had to deflect to "technical" differences, is because nothing of substance is really changed.

And I say worse, and not the same, because you can tell something similar from Deadfire in comparison with Pillars 1: Is better optimized, better organized, is more polished, has turn-BASED combat, controls and movement are more clear, visual aspect of the environment is well cared. But is a worse game than Pillars 1 in every aspect. The writing is less genuine, the characters are all unlikable, the lore stopped mattering and the combat is a joke (yes, is a joke even in hardest difficulties).

A more fitting description would be is that if you enjoyed Pillars 1 you can enjoy White March. Not that is a jump from the base game.

Who fucking plays POE for the writing?

Kek. You have my condolences if you play this for the combat.

i don't dislike where deadfire took eder, pallegina and aloth in terms of character development.

Disgusting.

 

[Delterius]

Kek.

damn you're stuck in your joindate aren't ya

 

[S.torch]

Yes, I have autism. Any other questions?

 

[MajorMace]

We figured.

The game was always good

Fake news. It wasn't even properly working at release.
It got good with its xpacs and talents overhaul though.

 

[Lacrymas]

Not touching this with a 10-foot pole.