Heroica RPG General Discussion

[CMP]

Concern? Compassion? A thought even?

Won't somebody think of the newbies?!

It's super hard to balance battles for such a huge range of levels, and I tried my best to avoid having many AoE specials, but it's still difficult, especially when you're in a final battle and the enemies are supposed to be strong even relative to the strongest of heroes.

[UsernameMDM]

Concern? Compassion? A thought even? When you go back and read through everything, you'll see how much they've produced, and what a travesty it is that everyone seems to be ignoring them.

I'm sorry, didn't know this was a group therapy session. When I was PL in that situation, I was looking for a way to win, which I may add HELPED THAT PARTY IN THEIR QUEST.

It's hard to produce much when your arrows only do 4 damage and every target has 5, 10, 20 SP.

That's something to take up with the QMs. I feel your pain though (not really though. Can't remember the last time Hoke was KO'd, but I will say I was never picked for a quest that was out of my league. Sadly, a lot of this really is out of the newbies' league).

Edited April 21, 2014 by UsernameMDM

[Zepher]

I can also speak to the balancing issue. It is tough. We have been trying. We are aware it's very difficult to seem useful. I stuck weaker foes with lust in, and those horses, but Guts is too damn powerful and steam rolled them all. AoE is very difficult to balance against.

Edited April 22, 2014 by Zepher

[Endgame]

I apologize in advance if my passive is inconveniencing anyone.

In terms of balancing... I almost would've grouped everyone by their level as a QM. It damages versatility, sure. but sometimes that needs to be sacrificed in such a massive brawl to be fully enjoyable.

Big battles have potential, though. I don't think they're a lost cause in the slightest.

[Scubacarrot]

Sadly, a lot of this really is out of the newbies' league).

I don't agree, on our sides, I was joking earlier, but it's true, those horses need to be down, and I actually like the mechanic of having them there for that. Those Party Bombs Purpearl has, would be really useful contributions if most enemies weren't immune. If you don't have the brawn, use the brain. If you're low level, and you know there's high levels out there, try to pick up a scroll, useful items, bombs! Contribution for lower levels is not in damage, probably, but there can be contribution.

Edit: and hey, there's always the fodder option.

Edited April 22, 2014 by Scubacarrot

[CMP]

Big battles have potential, though. I don't think they're a lost cause in the slightest.

Absolutely not. Dastan, the battles of Quest 44, and this are the only seriously overwhelming sized battles. That's like five or six over the course of 100 Quests, which seems reasonable enough.

[Scubacarrot]

but Guts is too damn powerful and steam rolled them all. AoE is very difficult to balance against.

He really does ruin everything.

[Kintobor]

He really does ruin everything.

Dancing his way to victory.

Edited April 22, 2014 by Kintobor

[UsernameMDM]

I don't agree.

It was true for the battle in Quest 88. Not sure about this current one as I have been paying attention to where Hoke is at. Plus, if multiple big hitters went down and were unable to be revived en masse ala Phoenix Incense, I don't see the newbies lasting very long.

Edited April 22, 2014 by UsernameMDM

[Zepher]

It's not really Guts' fault he's so good, it just makes balancing a little more difficult. If he didn't have an AoE he'd be easy enough to deal with.

[Scubacarrot]

It's not really Guts' fault he's so good, it just makes balancing a little more difficult. If he didn't have an AoE he'd be easy enough to deal with.

I think it's the fault of the guy that designed his most important piece of kit and helped him build his ultimate weapon. That guy messed up.

[Endgame]

Absolutely not. Dastan, the battles of Quest 44, and this are the only seriously overwhelming sized battles. That's like five or six over the course of 100 Quests, which seems reasonable enough.

I'm actually curious: is Big Battles judged by the number of heroes, or number of enemies? I'm noticing all of the examples you have listed have had the heroes outnumbered, while the one I'm planning actually has a number of enemies approximately equal to the heroes... But will be more excruciatingly difficult nonetheless.

[Zepher]

Maybe. I hear that guy made him really rich by balancing a battle poorly in the opposite direction as well. Jerk.

[CMP]

I'm actually curious: is Big Battles judged by the number of heroes, or number of enemies? I'm noticing all of the examples you have listed have had the heroes outnumbered, while the one I'm planning actually has a number of enemies approximately equal to the heroes... But will be more excruciatingly difficult nonetheless.

Number of heroes. Lots of battles have a surplus of enemies.

[Myrddyn]

These are some of the most promising new players I've seen in a LONG time

She may have just not seen it. I had to read through twice to find it, and I was looking for it.

The problem was that Nelvin didn't attack son of light C, correct?

[Scubacarrot]

What would have happened differently would be that Purpearl would be KO'd instead of Dreyrugr, basically. Dreyrugr was lucky and an assassin, so that's very useful if we're up against an untargettable enemy that IS able to be killed by assassins. Also Nelvin and Son of Light C. very low risk move to target because he'd be able to be rezzed by Benji's incense if things'd go wrong. It's more of a challenge now.

[CMP]

Dreyrugr is a black knight.

[Scubacarrot]

Is he? Look, I don't know what's going on, clearly. It's a miracle some people follow my plans at all.

Edited April 22, 2014 by Scubacarrot

[Zepher]

Raguel should also very obviously be immune to instant kill, just like all bosses, but I wasn't the one to post that round and so I guess we won't change it now. Poor Paladin.

[JimBee]

Terrible rule! We need a committee on that one!

Brought this up from in thread. How many people actually think this rule needs changing? I'm fine with it as is, but I could also see the logic in changing it to "two turns need to target a Hastened enemy to prevent a Free Hit".

[Endgame]

I think a Hastened enemy dealing a free hit no matter what is fine.

[Zepher]

I also like it as an effect! Though perhaps this should be in the "rules" discussion.

[Flipz]

I like Hastened=unstoppable Free Hit in theory (at least as a temporary buff), but I absolutely despise it as a permanent buff on enemies, and I also despise it on things in groups. In terms of difficulty, each additional Hastened enemy is an exponential increase rather than an additive (enemy Level) or multiplicative (number of enemies) one, since for each Hastened enemy you have to be able to survive both Damage AND a Free Hit (not to mention any AoE specials).

Regarding the low-level peeps using things like effects: that would be absolutely great if the enemies these days (in general, not just Baltarok) weren't immune to most of it. It's what I did starting out, after all. (I blame myself for that a little--with the exception of WBD, all the QMs there have QM'd me back when I was a Status of Doom Sorcerer, and it shows in their respective QMing styles--compare Pie and Zepher before and after they had to deal with my Scroll shenanigans. Sandy, too, now I look at it. )

[Endgame]

Sandy, too, now I look at it.

Well, considering Aureole is border-line brick wall, yeah.

[StickFig]

It's super hard to balance battles for such a huge range of levels, and I tried my best to avoid having many AoE specials, but it's still difficult, especially when you're in a final battle and the enemies are supposed to be strong even relative to the strongest of heroes.

I stuck weaker foes with lust in, and those horses, but Guts is too damn powerful and steam rolled them all. AoE is very difficult to balance against.

Once the hitpoints/healthpoints controversy of the horses was worked out, I realized I actually really like that mechanism as a balancing agent. Taking hastened away from enemies is important, and hitting horses is (at this point, since they're not immune to everything and have no SP) doable.

If you're low level, and you know there's high levels out there, try to pick up a scroll, useful items, bombs!

This is an honest question, because apparently I'm doing it wrong: where does a level 6 Ranger get scrolls, bombs, and useful items in his first quest ever?

....I don't see the newbies lasting very long.

Nope.

Edit: and hey, there's always the fodder option.

It's a miracle some people follow my plans at all.

Yeah, why does anyone follow Guts' plans?

Well, looks like I'm cannon fodder now.

Brought this up from in thread. How many people actually think this rule needs changing? I'm fine with it as is, but I could also see the logic in changing it to "two turns need to target a Hastened enemy to prevent a Free Hit".

In terms of difficulty, each additional Hastened enemy is an exponential increase rather than an additive (enemy Level) or multiplicative (number of enemies) one, since for each Hastened enemy you have to be able to survive both Damage AND a Free Hit (not to mention any AoE specials).

I think the rule needs a limit. Maybe not two, but three? So that there is more meaning than just "attack this guy twice" (even if it's only "attack this guy three times") but it's still a very significant strategic hazard.