Vault Dweller said:
However, I'd LOVE to actually read some arguments and learn from such enlightened folks. What I'm getting tired of reading is the usual "i hate!" crap. It's your fucking right to hate whatever the fuck you want, but can you do everyone a favor and explain why you hate it so fucking much and maybe we'd join you and hate shit together. Won't that be something?
I'll tell you why the encounter design and the combat in general is better in BG2. (I don't hate DA, I think it even excels in quite some areas, but not in combat)
"Challenging, tactical combat" :
1) Challenging: I played on hard, now on nightmare and I can assure you there is no challenge to speak of in DA - if you don't count the challenge of crafting potions, mid-combat if need be . Every single lich (at least if you actually fight them and don't resort to cheese) in BG2 poses a bigger threat to the party than even the archdemon in DA. And not only is drinking potions the pinnacle of tactics to overcome the challenges in DA - no, most often it is the only thing that works at all.
You think you can face Demogorgon in BG2 armed with no plan, unprepared, without the right spells memorized, but in possesion of 50 healing potions and prevail?
2) tactical:
That means you should have options, many options and different approaches to win specific encounters. Not only lacks DA the options - even worse it doesn't even require them, using the exact same approach for every encounter wins you the game easily.
As soon as you fight some boss most spells will be resisted anyway, except a few like cone of cold. Others that have a slight chance to hit like glyph of paralyzation have a supershort duration suddenly, like 3 sec. Force cage hits reliably but has also shortened duration. What are you gonna do? Winning the fight by utilizing healing until you slowly mowed the boss down. Are there other options? No. Is this the pinnacle of applied tactical combat? I doubt it.
You can never change your spell selection and are doomed to use the same spells and spell combos forever. In BG2 you can use a multitude of different tactics to win an encounter in the most efficient way. (need examples?) I remember a lot of situations where things really got complicated, like having stumbled into the astral prison without a +3 weapon (for the golems). Or fighting the cowled wizards that come after you (don't pay for the licence) if you cast spells in Athkatla. Every group is stronger then the previous one. The first time I beat the Ascension fight I needed like 15h to finally prevail without casualties. There are no such challenging fights in DA, not a single one, and I don't regard keeping an eye on the healthbar as difficult.
Then there is the manabased casting. Manabased casting imo often suffers from either of these 2 conditions: 1) mages can only cast like 2-3 spells and then are useless and have to enter combat as some sort of weak fighter (Drakensang) or 2) Mages are overpowered because they have infinite mana supply (DA) Can't say I like that. And I can't say I think it adds to the challenge.
The only combat related thing I prefer in DA is the fact that rogues and especially warriors are more interesting to play than in DnD CRPGs. That's an improvement.
However every encounter in DA basically has you do the same thing. I'm pretty sure the inflexibility of the spellsystem is to blame, because you couldn't do things differently even if you wanted to. In BG2 you can handle things differently (and no Grifthin, "Well in Buldurs gate 2 every battle went exactly the same way" is pure nonsense, you wouldn't even be able to win certain difficult fights that way)
- you enter Firkraags dungeon
- a couple of Orcs, no matter
- vampiric mists, you use someone protected from leveldrain and Azuredge or Mace of Disruption
- next level, orcs shoot at you from both sides, doors are hidden, you cast invis on the party, then have a thief detect and open the doors, have a fighter deal with the orcs
- you meet some golems, you use someone who can take a beating, Haerdalis or a fighter/mage with access to mirror image, use a scroll of protection from poison vs the poison cloud of the adamantine golem
- next room, weak orcs, kill them or not
- next room powerful undead, if you're high enough level it will be like 15 ancient vampires, a real threat. you hide your party and use someone with the amulett of power, or turn them, or sunray
- many doors with genies behind them, you use a mage with true sight and protection from fire, kill them with chromatic orb
- a room with an elder orb, you're buffed? antimagic ray will debuff you at once and make casting impossible, you use someone with rage to hit hard and ignore most effects of the rays, or you use someone with high MR
- you find treasure, another adventuring party attacks, you retreat your party and have your mage unleash 2x sunfire amidst them, or skull traps while under the effect of protection from magical energy
- you move forward, werewolfs, fighters chop them up
- next room more golems
- more werewolves or wolfweres and then more golemns
- you dispose of the underlings of firkraag nothing special here
- you enter next level and talk to the Dragon then you have to defeat a high level wizard
- you go back to kill the dragon, certainly a special approach is warranted here? You make everyone immune to fire with potions/scrolls, you cast remove fear, you have the melee attack him, while the mages cast 2x lower resistance (yes in Bg2 you can actally remove the boss-resistances with the right spells), a cleric casts doom, a mage cast malison, and then you try to kill him with Chromatic Orb or FoD
I daresay you can and should use varying tactics in BG2. Compare that to room after room after room of identical foes (3 archers, 3 melee, 1 mage, numbers may vary) in the temple in DA.
edit: forgot the elder orb
