Incline Troubleshooter: Abandoned Children - isometric tactical Korean SRPG

[gurugeorge]

The degenerates here don't even realise anymore how pathetic this 'art style' is.
And Pulp Fiction is also pretty shit btw. It has cool art direction, but the story and presentation are just bad. With bad actors and worse direction, nobody would remember it. Like nobody remembers Reservoir Dogs, which is the better movie overall btw. But I'm talking to weaboo losers, so all hope is lost. Downvote me, kiddos.

The gameplay may be great, but the art is so degenerate that no amount of virgins could convince me to try this.

Honestly mate, you'd be missing out on a great game. Bear in mind that the gameplay itself is just semi-realistic-looking, like the XCOM games, and that's what you'll spending most of your time doing - that and stroking your beard for hours fiddling with builds.

I'm not that fond of anime myself, but I came to love our Korean anime overlords

 

[ERYFKRAD]

Oh no why are Koreans using a Korean art style.

 

[True Ukrainian]

The big triumph of the game is making anime combat actually balanced. Most games that have melee and gunplay end up favoring one over the other. Anime sword hero in this game wrecks shit, but can be head shotted into oblivion if he's not careful.

 

[Suicidal]

The gameplay may be great, but the art is so degenerate that no amount of virgins could convince me to try this.

Nobody is going to convince you to do anything.

From the way you've been talking in this thread it's clear that discussing anything with you will be as useful as trying to discuss something with a wild animal or a drunk hobo lying in a pool of his own piss on the side of the road.

 

[Grunker]

The big triumph of the game is making anime combat actually balanced.

I must admit there were so many times where I was looking for something to bury the balance with. Game is so complex and has so many blatantly overpowered mechanics my brain was instinctively in Kritikal Kodex-mode, just looking for the point where the house of cards would collapse and I could triumphantly come to this thread and declare the game fun but an unbalanced mess.

It never happens. Whenever the game introduces an insane mechanical advantage that lets you break the game in half, opponents will soon get a clever way to fight it.

It's brilliant, simple as. And I say this as one of the people who think it is laughable that any adult male can look at this art and read this story and think it is anything but childish, degenerate sludge. Gameplay is just that good.

 

[True Ukrainian]

The big triumph of the game is making anime combat actually balanced.

I must admit there were so many times where I was looking for something to bury the balance with. Game is so complex and has so many blatantly overpowered mechanics my brain was instinctively in Kritikal Kodex-mode, just looking for the point where the house of cards would collapse and I could triumphantly come to this thread and declare the game fun but an unbalanced mess.

It never happens. Whenever the game introduces an insane mechanical advantage that lets you break the game in half, opponents will soon get a clever way to fight it.

It's brilliant, simple as. And I say this as one of the people who think it is laughable that any adult male can look at this art and read this story and think it is anything but childish, degenerate sludge. Gameplay is just that good.

The game takes the Age of Decadence approach where both the player and the enemy AI use the exact same rule set. So the AI can throw the same nastiness about that the player has at his disposal. I got seriously shook the first time I fought a white tiger swordsman and triggered their retribution attack. It one shotted Irene.

 

[Grunker]

I don't think it's only that. It's also that consideration has been put into what mechanics wouldn't necessarily be great *for* the player but could be used effectively by the AI. Like - Impulse Fields stop being universally useful for the play at some point, but it is simply crucial for the AI to stop the one-shot fest. Masteries that penalize reactions are the same way; hardly useful for the player, but extremely important for the AI later on.

Enemy snipers are maybe the best examples: they are too slow to ever be viable as player characters (and break your rule that the exact same mechanics are available for the player and the AI), but as a threat to the player they can be placed in great number to force you into spreading out or upgrade your defenses.

The game consistently gives you overpowered shit to play with and then responds by applying clever counters to the enemy. It's a joy.

 

[True Ukrainian]

I don't think it's only that. It's also that consideration has been put into what mechanics wouldn't necessarily be great *for* the player but could be used effectively by the AI. Like - Impulse Fields stop being universally useful for the play at some point, but it is simply crucial for the AI to stop the one-shot fest. Masteries that penalize reactions are the same way; hardly useful for the player, but extremely important for the AI later on.

Enemy snipers are maybe the best examples: they are too slow to ever be viable as player characters (and break your rule that the exact same mechanics are available for the player and the AI), but as a threat to the player they can be placed in great number to force you into spreading out or upgrade your defenses.

The game consistently gives you overpowered shit to play with and then responds by applying clever counters to the enemy. It's a joy.

Yeah, I forgot about the snipers. Then there are the upgraded Bricons that always get to move after being attacked, stopping you from just comboing them to death.

 

[Sykar]

I don't think it's only that. It's also that consideration has been put into what mechanics wouldn't necessarily be great *for* the player but could be used effectively by the AI. Like - Impulse Fields stop being universally useful for the play at some point, but it is simply crucial for the AI to stop the one-shot fest. Masteries that penalize reactions are the same way; hardly useful for the player, but extremely important for the AI later on.

Enemy snipers are maybe the best examples: they are too slow to ever be viable as player characters (and break your rule that the exact same mechanics are available for the player and the AI), but as a threat to the player they can be placed in great number to force you into spreading out or upgrade your defenses.

The game consistently gives you overpowered shit to play with and then responds by applying clever counters to the enemy. It's a joy.

Sniper Giselle is a terror.

 

[Grunker]

I don't think it's only that. It's also that consideration has been put into what mechanics wouldn't necessarily be great *for* the player but could be used effectively by the AI. Like - Impulse Fields stop being universally useful for the play at some point, but it is simply crucial for the AI to stop the one-shot fest. Masteries that penalize reactions are the same way; hardly useful for the player, but extremely important for the AI later on.

Enemy snipers are maybe the best examples: they are too slow to ever be viable as player characters (and break your rule that the exact same mechanics are available for the player and the AI), but as a threat to the player they can be placed in great number to force you into spreading out or upgrade your defenses.

The game consistently gives you overpowered shit to play with and then responds by applying clever counters to the enemy. It's a joy.

Sniper Giselle is a terror.

Sniper Giselle doesn’t use the AI’s sniper mechanics.

 

[Zumbabul]

The big triumph of the game is making anime combat actually balanced.

I must admit there were so many times where I was looking for something to bury the balance with. Game is so complex and has so many blatantly overpowered mechanics my brain was instinctively in Kritikal Kodex-mode, just looking for the point where the house of cards would collapse and I could triumphantly come to this thread and declare the game fun but an unbalanced mess.

It never happens. Whenever the game introduces an insane mechanical advantage that lets you break the game in half, opponents will soon get a clever way to fight it.

It's brilliant, simple as. And I say this as one of the people who think it is laughable that any adult male can look at this art and read this story and think it is anything but childish, degenerate sludge. Gameplay is just that good.

The game is fun, but it is an unbalanced mess. Eventually, you will discover some builds that totally break the game. But to make this discovery, you need to put effort. Once you do this, you will feel some kind of satisfaction, but the game will be broken. After that, you will need to apply some home rules to 'fix the game' in order to continue enjoying it.

 

[Grunker]

The game is fun, but it is an unbalanced mess. Eventually, you will discover some builds that totally break the game.

Show me a single RPG that doesn't have that.

When I call an RPG balanced, I mean that its non-abusive gameplay works well and doesn't break from intended use.

I don't know of any RPG that cannot be cheesed - and the ones that could be in the discussion for potentially abuse-insulated games is in the discussion because their mechanics are simple enough to avoid complexity-creep (which is what most of us play RPGs for). Most RPGs are simply too complex to avoid ability combinations that trivialize the game.

As a result, any serious discussion about RPG balance must always be relative to other RPGs. And relative to other RPGs, Troubleshooter is remarkably balanced. Especially considering what kind of bonkers overpowered mechanics are part of its core gameplay.

 

[ERYFKRAD]

Show me a single RPG that doesn't have that

Realms of Arkania HD

 

[Zumbabul]

What I like about the game is that it is not afraid to give you a taste of your own medicine. If you have snipers and enemy don't (like in nuXcom) that is fair. When the enemy has snipers and you don't that is bullshit. When all your team has lots of fire support abilities this is cool and fun, but when your albus takes 10+ fire support sniper shots and die, this is bullshit. When your battle mages don't care about enemy damage this is fine. When enemies battle mage shows you two middle fingers this is unfair. When you have unblockable abilities this is ok, but when an enemy has them that is definitely not ok. When your Sion one shots through block this is totally fine, but when an enemy black mage does this is bullshit.

 

[Cyberarmy]

but when an enemy black mage does this is bullshit.

I stared at screen for a while when some upgraded spoonist mage did this.

 

[gurugeorge]

I don't think it's only that. It's also that consideration has been put into what mechanics wouldn't necessarily be great *for* the player but could be used effectively by the AI. Like - Impulse Fields stop being universally useful for the play at some point, but it is simply crucial for the AI to stop the one-shot fest. Masteries that penalize reactions are the same way; hardly useful for the player, but extremely important for the AI later on.

Enemy snipers are maybe the best examples: they are too slow to ever be viable as player characters (and break your rule that the exact same mechanics are available for the player and the AI), but as a threat to the player they can be placed in great number to force you into spreading out or upgrade your defenses.

The game consistently gives you overpowered shit to play with and then responds by applying clever counters to the enemy. It's a joy.

Yep, and I think that alternation between the feeling of ridiculous power and having to think is what Josh Sawyer missed out on with the Pillars games. I like the Pillars system too, and I enjoy playing those games, in the sense that that "measly/balanced" type of system feels more realistic to me and I like simulation in general (and I do think it's more suited to RTwP in the CRPG context). But if he'd had a system like this in the Pillars games, all would have been forgiven and he'd've been carried through the streets

 

[Grunker]

Sniper Giselle doesn’t use the AI’s sniper mechanics.

NJClaw did you play the game? Otherwise I find it hard to believe you would citation needed-react to the above statement. Anyone who has encountered a Sniper in this game should be able to tell the difference. Enemy snipers can be interrupted after initiating their special heavily damaging ability. They even get a little icon over their head, and you can see they do nothing on their turn.

The reason for this is of course that Troubleshooter primarily balances the fact that the player will always make better decisions than the AI by using overwhelming forces. So you're often against many, many more enemies than your own forces. This causes a problem for snipers, since their one-shot mechanic would be troublesome in high numbers. So what the game does is giving you the ability to play around it. It's very fun, but it's one example of the game not adhering to a strict parity in the rules.

 

[Zumbabul]

Sniper Giselle doesn’t use the AI’s sniper mechanics.

NJClaw did you play the game? Otherwise I find it hard to believe you would citation needed-react to the above statement. Anyone who has encountered a Sniper in this game should be able to tell the difference. Enemy snipers can be interrupted after initiating their special heavily damaging ability. They even get a little icon over their head, and you can see they do nothing on their turn.

The reason for this is of course that Troubleshooter primarily balances the fact that the player will always make better decisions than the AI by using overwhelming forces. So you're often against many, many more enemies than your own forces. This causes a problem for snipers, since their one-shot mechanic would be troublesome in high numbers. So what the game does is giving you the ability to play around it. It's very fun, but it's one example of the game not adhering to a strict parity in the rules.

Man... You will love v46)

 

[Sykar]

Sniper Giselle doesn’t use the AI’s sniper mechanics.

NJClaw did you play the game? Otherwise I find it hard to believe you would citation needed-react to the above statement. Anyone who has encountered a Sniper in this game should be able to tell the difference. Enemy snipers can be interrupted after initiating their special heavily damaging ability. They even get a little icon over their head, and you can see they do nothing on their turn.

The reason for this is of course that Troubleshooter primarily balances the fact that the player will always make better decisions than the AI by using overwhelming forces. So you're often against many, many more enemies than your own forces. This causes a problem for snipers, since their one-shot mechanic would be troublesome in high numbers. So what the game does is giving you the ability to play around it. It's very fun, but it's one example of the game not adhering to a strict parity in the rules.

Giselle has that ability though.

 

[Grunker]

Yes, but she also has a lot of other abilities that can one-shot enemies just the same

 

[Sykar]

Yes, but she also has a lot of other abilities that can one-shot enemies just the same

Sure does not change the fact that she has access to this ability as well so no enemy snipers do not play by different rules, they are just not as good just like most enemies who share similarities with other characters are not as good, like any gang member swordsman not being nearly as good as a well build Albus.

 

[Grunker]

Yes, but she also has a lot of other abilities that can one-shot enemies just the same

Sure does not change the fact that she has access to this ability as well so no enemy snipers do not play by different rules, they are just not as good just like most enemies who share similarities with other characters are not as good, like any gang member swordsman not being nearly as good as a well build Albus.

Enemy sniper's do not have access to her full kit. And if there's a Ray enemy I've yet to encounter it. Troubleshooter does not have complete player/AI-parity at all, IMO.

 

[Sykar]

Yes, but she also has a lot of other abilities that can one-shot enemies just the same

Sure does not change the fact that she has access to this ability as well so no enemy snipers do not play by different rules, they are just not as good just like most enemies who share similarities with other characters are not as good, like any gang member swordsman not being nearly as good as a well build Albus.

Enemy sniper's do not have access to her full kit. And if there's a Ray enemy I've yet to encounter it. Troubleshooter does not have complete player/AI-parity at all, IMO.

None of the standard swordsmen I have encountered so far, including elites, bosses, legendaries, etc, have wind walk and turn a new leaf for example. Hardly a reason to say that they play by different rules.
Full "parity" with the massive numbers advantage the AI has plus unobtainable masteries like "Legendary" that give vast boni would mean that your party would get slaughtered so long as the AI is not complete trash.

 

[NJClaw]

Sniper Giselle doesn’t use the AI’s sniper mechanics.

NJClaw did you play the game? Otherwise I find it hard to believe you would citation needed-react to the above statement. Anyone who has encountered a Sniper in this game should be able to tell the difference. Enemy snipers can be interrupted after initiating their special heavily damaging ability. They even get a little icon over their head, and you can see they do nothing on their turn.

The reason for this is of course that Troubleshooter primarily balances the fact that the player will always make better decisions than the AI by using overwhelming forces. So you're often against many, many more enemies than your own forces. This causes a problem for snipers, since their one-shot mechanic would be troublesome in high numbers. So what the game does is giving you the ability to play around it. It's very fun, but it's one example of the game not adhering to a strict parity in the rules.

Yeah, I played it (usually I don't follow threads on games I haven't played, I'm not rusty). I

'd you because I couldn't remember the difference between Giselle and AI snipers. I haven't played the game in a while, so I forgot about that powered-up attack.

The player/AI symmetry starts and ends with the masteries system: abilities are mostly character-specific (and even within the masteries system there are character-specific masteries).

 

[Grunker]

Yes, but she also has a lot of other abilities that can one-shot enemies just the same

Sure does not change the fact that she has access to this ability as well so no enemy snipers do not play by different rules, they are just not as good just like most enemies who share similarities with other characters are not as good, like any gang member swordsman not being nearly as good as a well build Albus.

Enemy sniper's do not have access to her full kit. And if there's a Ray enemy I've yet to encounter it. Troubleshooter does not have complete player/AI-parity at all, IMO.

None of the standard swordsmen I have encountered so far, including elites, bosses, legendaries, etc, have wind walk and turn a new leaf for example. Hardly a reason to say that they play by different rules.
Full "parity" with the massive numbers advantage the AI has plus unobtainable masteries like "Legendary" that give vast boni would mean that your party would get slaughtered so long as the AI is not complete trash.

I completely agree. Read my original argument. My point is exactly that the game is very clever about its enemy design. I don't think parity is a virtue by definition. It can be in certain designs, but it's not a universal virtue IMHO.