POLL: What kind of battles do you prefer?

Remove all ads!

Felinoid's last RBP post made me think about all the battles we've had in our IE and Aurora cRPGs. I started wondering if I prefer battles that are challenging but require preparation and planning up to the point of making you reload and use foreknowledge (resistances, immunities, vulnerabilities etc), or battles which are challenging but fair without much preparation (i.e. as you go around exploring, before you buff yourself to the max), although turn ridiculously easy if you happen to be fully buffed. Then I thought perhaps this would be a good idea for a poll. So here it goes.

Poll Information
This poll contains 1 question(s). 27 user(s) have voted.
You may not view the results of this poll without voting.

Poll Results: What kind of battles do you prefer? (27 votes.)

What kind of battles do you prefer? (Choose 1)
* Battles which are challenging but make you meta-game (reload, use foreknowledge) and spend hours buffing - 7% (2)
* Battles which don't make you metagame or spend hours buffing but may be too easy if you have all your buffs on or metagame - 41% (11)
* A little of both or other - 48% (13)
* I don't want to vote -- just show me the results - 4% (1)

 

Definitely the easier ones; that's why I like BG1 so much. You don't have to mess with all that ****, and you can just wander blindly into any situation and still have a decent chance of getting out without losing anyone (if you're as good as I am). I was only complaining about having a solo character with Aslyferund Elven Chain +5 fighting a bunch of idiots with normal weapons. I could've just stood there while they pounded on me and it wouldn't have made a dent. Simple is good, but simpletons get boring.

 

Couldn't care less, let the important aspects of the game be great; Story, gameplay, music

 

Bit of both. You should get your walks in the park and the real challenging stuff. And everything in betweeen. Keeps things interesting.

 

I find it doesn't matter what character I RP; if I've played the game before, I know what to do. First time through, I have to reload at one time or another. After that, I prepare and see how bloody easy the 'Boss' is to defeat/kill. I like fighting things and sometimes just want to run in there like Rambo without a jockstrap and beat the crap outta whatever!

 

A bit of both. But I think most minor battles should be relatively easy. Your fully rested party will take some damage, but no one is in danger of dying. Your moderately battle-weary party may lose its weakest character. But it may take 5-6 consecutive (no resting in between) minor battles to finally defeat your party. These battles I assume are random, so no foreknowledge, no preparation and no buffing.

Of course there should be the occasional challenging "boss" battle. It should be very challenging without buffs (say you got surprised, you can still win with the right strategy). But the frequency of these battles is low, so you don't have to keep buffs memorized at all times.

 

Good call, Apeman. I'd say that challenge is another element of gameplay, so it's relevant, but not a determinant of game quality.

Battles that require pre-battle buffing and reload knowledge suck, IMO. There's a difference between fights where someone gets killed (in my case, almost invariably against Draconis) and where you're wiped out with barely a chance in hell unless you pull some ultra-specific ultra-slick combination that requires you to know exactly what to do beforehand (for example, Improved Bodhi in Chapter 3) and/or a hefty dose of luck. Improved Guarded Compound is perhaps the best example of a tough but winnable-without-cheese battle I can provide.

After all, even though it's a fantasy setting, you should only really be struggling to beat the main villains of the piece; the rank and file goons should be testing, certainly, but not brain-bendingly hard to stop. There's no reason why the lowliest flunky is throwing out high-level magic and spell triggers/chain contingencies o' doom.

Then again, I prefer a more "realistic" experience - if I'm assaulting a castle or a Bhaalspawn stronghold, I won't have my party rest until I've reached my goal in that area.

EDIT: Yeah, NUKE them Xvarts, people!

[ September 29, 2005, 01:50: Message edited by: NonSequitur ]

 

It just becomes sad when you realise you wouldn't really pull that off if you had to do it for real, that is, without reloading. Hope they are going to take this in consideration when making future games. But it looks like they stick with pre-knowledge-driven battles for whatever reason. Well, they are an epic experience that provides for epic bragging, but still... I especially hate those ultra-slick heureka combos as NonSequitur calls them.

 

lol the 4th choice

a bit of both

 

I'm with Nonsequitur I mean the world *has* to be filled with low level creatures. All those insane monster and warrriors and wizards everywhere only because *you're* powerful, nay don't buy this story.

Ultimately I found that using ultimate power on lower creature is very fun!

 

Yes...a lvl 40 Kensai Improved Hasted, weilding Ravager +6 vs...a Diseased Gibberling.

Fun, much?

I voted for battles which actually make you think a lot.

That is the ONLY reason BG2 keeps me coming back for more after 65+ play throughs!

 

@Faraaz:
Bah, he was talking about fireballing a group of Xvarts, or casting a cloudkill into a room full of ogre mages.

@Ofelix:
Where's that xvart screenshot, BTW?

 

Holy cow, 65+ play-throughs?!?!?!? Someone needs read more books.

Anyway, I prefer having to do a little planning, but nothing so ridiculous that it takes me away from the plot of the game -- if we're talking CRPGs. Beating that one dragon (shadow? I don't remember now) in BG2 seemed to rely so much on luck that I just got annoyed with the game and stopped playing it for a while.

If we're talking about MMORPGs, then they should be long, loud, and messy. Nothing's more fun than watching your buddies get whacked, respawn, and come back for more.

 

what screenshot? I don't have any screenshot...

 

Nevermind. I guess I was thinking of something Biffle Chump said once.

 

i prefer a challenge...if i have beat the game before and know that the boss is there ill try to go in at a fairly low level, so that its more of a challenge, instead of waiting to do it when im to the level most people are there...more fun imo

 

Abit of both. If it gets too hard I get easily discouraged, but generally if it's too easy you get bored. So a nice balance of both.