KickStarter King Arthur: Knight's Tale - dark fantasy turn-based tactical RPG from NeocoreGames - Legion IX standalone expansion coming May 9th

[Daidre]

I guess the reason end game feels so bad for me is I didn't get any to carry level, they were just good enough to handle the campaign. Just the difference in amount of hp you have to get through surprised me.

This was the place where Ector's curse build that just removed 60+% enemy max hp with debuffs suddenly started to shine more than any direct damager in my party.

I have no idea if the approach still works after all balancing passes though.

 

[abija]

Yeah it turned from "let me shit on their encounter design by removing worst enemy round 1" to bread and butter. I stopped anyway... difficutly barely spiked yet hp per encounter went up 5x or something. And unless I'm missing something you don't have the option to do some "lower level missions" to fix the roster (I didn't min max at all cause normal campaign didn't seem to require it).

 

[Infinitron]

Codex review by Darth Roxor: https://rpgcodex.net/forums/threads/rpg-codex-review-king-arthur-knights-tale.149645/

 

[Infinitron]

 

[Jermu]

 

[CoronerZg]

Meh... I didn't expect a different game, but I expected something new. Pretty disappointing tbh.

 

[Cologno]

A rendition of Arthurian legend not presented as a faggy deconstruction but as a solid RPG along with a solid story was enough for me. I felt like I got my money's worth.

 

[Grunker]

IMO the dash is what makes Lancelot the only champion viable in the late game. The combination of big AP costs, low AP counts and lack of mobility makes champs absolutely non-competitive compared to other classes, because everything's already dead by the time they haul their fat asses to the front line. Meanwhile Lancelot also brings a shitton of utility with himself thanks to Inspire and Ice Spikes. A pretty great hero all around.

This is just false. Champions are stronger than Vanguards, Vanguards are just easier to use, so more players figure them out. Champions can screen clear entire groups of enemies even without OP gear combos.



This is why they were nerfed especially on their AP generation recently.

Anyone can look at Vanguards and put the two pieces together that make them click. Building champions is harder so most people overlook how completely busted they are, but once properly built they’re essentially Vanguards that deal AoE damage and aren’t (or weren’t until recently) AP generation capped.

 

[abija]

You are not talking about the same "late game". He is talking about campaign, you linked an endgame grinded out beast. The video is actually hillarious because whoever gets there probably doesn't need a tutorial on how to play.

 

[Grunker]

You are not talking about the same "late game". He is talking about campaign, you linked an endgame grinded out beast. The video is actually hillarious because whoever gets there probably doesn't need a tutorial on how to play.

Champions are just as good in the last third of the main game - and before that, not even Roxor disputes their strength as at that point their off-tank role is actually useful in addition to their kill potential. There’s no point in the game where champions aren’t great, so at no point is Roxie’s statement correct.

 

[Grunker]

The strongest champion is Black Knight, by the way, because of Leap Attack. I do agree that Lancelot is very strong, though, on a similar level to White Knight.

 

[abija]

Champions are worse vanguards/archers/mages in early game, then they fall behind and you don't bother with them until you finish the game because there isn't any point where the other setups aren't perfectly able to plow through until you finish campaing. So no, they aren't great at any point in the game until you score classes by great, greater, greatest ...

 

[Harthwain]

Champions actually pick up after the early game. Archers were getting weaker with each Chapter and mages needed more time to dominate the game (although they can already start as great support class). While Vanguards were easy to play, Champions were just as powerful (if not more so) although that required some know-how and smart positioning early in the encounter. Which is probably why some people missed out how strong that class actually was.

 

[Grunker]

Champions are worse vanguards/archers/mages in early game, then they fall behind and you don't bother with them until you finish the game because there isn't any point where the other setups aren't perfectly able to plow through until you finish campaing. So no, they aren't great at any point in the game until you score classes by great, greater, greatest ...

horrendously wrong - champions only got stronger as the game went on and were better than all the three classes you mentioned early

 

[abija]

Champions actually pick up after the early game. Archers were getting weaker with each Chapter and mages needed more time to dominate the game (although they can already start as great support class). While Vanguards were easy to play, Champions were just as powerful (if not more so) although that required some know-how and smart positioning early in the encounter. Which is probably why some people missed out how strong that class actually was.

Yes champions pickup after early game but not enough to warrant adjusting your comp. When you say vanguard are easy to play early on it means they are better.
I've played most of the game 2 archers + mage. Archers were the first I could easily stack to 3 to experiment and it worked so great I swapped 3rd archer for the extra utility of a mage and never looked back. That comp didn't feel weak at any point during the campaign and only got stronger. The missions with an extra char were also easier when that char was ranged.

In post campaign endgame group felt weak. Very. (dps wise, no issue clearing missions just takes way longer than I can stand). But no idea how other comps would feel there to make a comparison
and cba grinding some champions on that save. It's just as likely that lack of preplaning for the castle, botching of many events and the mix and match whatever gear is also a big culprit for endgame issues.

horrendously wrong - champions only got stronger as the game went on and were better than all the three classes you mentioned early

They are literally dead weight early on. Fights are done before they even start rolling and Mortred is so strong offtanking is irrelevant.

 

[Cael]

I have never had any issues with Mordred, Kay, Guinevere, Merlin. Swapped out Kay for Faerie Knight later. 3 teleporters plus a charge bot means I can reach most things quickly enough that it rarely became a slog.

 

[Harthwain]

Yes champions pickup after early game but not enough to warrant adjusting your comp.

There is no need to adjust anything. The only thing you needed to do with a Champion is feed him enough kills via Cleave in the first 2-3 turns (which can be done by any composition). After that the ball kept on rolling by itself. Granted, you needed a very specific build for an efficient Cleave Champion, but that's about it. Items bolstering the Rage were easy to find, not some rare drops.

When you say vanguard are easy to play early on it means they are better.

No. I don't mean "early on". I mean easy to play. This makes it easier for players to use them to full effect from get-go. Champions required more effort, meaning fewer people could see their potential after being initially disappointed in them (read: "They don't even hit that hard and take a tremendous amount of damage! Useless!" after parking a Champion next to an enemy and attacking with him once).

I've played most of the game 2 archers + mage. Archers were the first I could easily stack to 3 to experiment and it worked so great I swapped 3rd archer for the extra utility of a mage and never looked back. That comp didn't feel weak at any point during the campaign and only got stronger. The missions with an extra char were also easier when that char was ranged.

I guess they really buffed the Archers, because at the release you were really gimping yourself if you used them. I ran very diverse parties, with only exception being knights that I needed to level up at the moment (and never went past 2 of any given class, ideally launching with 1 of each. Sages being used the least, oddly enough). Also, which difficulty you played on? I was on Hard.

In post campaign endgame group felt weak. Very. (dps wise, no issue clearing missions just takes way longer than I can stand). But no idea how other comps would feel there to make a comparison
and cba grinding some champions on that save. It's just as likely that lack of preplaning for the castle, botching of many events and the mix and match whatever gear is also a big culprit for endgame issues.

I didn't really play the post campaign endgame stuff (I needed a break) so I can't comment on that.

They are literally dead weight early on. Fights are done before they even start rolling and Mortred is so strong offtanking is irrelevant.

They are fine when you get Cleave and Rampage unlocked with a few upgrades to these particular skills, which quite early in Chapter 1. And I have no idea how you were fighting if your "fights are done before they even start rolling", because on my end fights lasted quite a bunch of turns, and Mordred never was strong enough to kill enemies single-handedly. So obviously we were playing different games in terms of our experiences with King Arthur: Knight's Tale. What I am unsure of is whether it can be attributed to a mere difficulty setting or some sweeping changes in a big patch (considering how good your Archers are, I am guessing it could be the latter of the combination of both).

 

[Grunker]

What difficulty did you play on abija?

 

[abija]

Very hard after doing some missions on hard (since it was the only one with supposed better ai, wasn't that impressed with the ai though).
On 2.0.0c so if they adjusted the game a lot that could explain the different experiences.

 

[Grunker]

Very hard after doing some missions on hard (since it was the only one with supposed better ai, wasn't that impressed with the ai though).
On 2.0.0c so if they adjusted the game a lot that could explain the different experiences.

Ah, that clears it up. That's why I spoke in the past tense in my last post. I imagine the AP nerf to champions alone makes every opinion I had about them outdated. Early game is *easily* the hardest part of the game though, on Very Hard the early game of KA-KT is one of the harder games I've ever played due to the attrition and your tiny roster.

 

[Cael]

I started playing after the AP nerf. Now, all I get is +1AP per turn or something like that. I also missed the teleport ring, and just used the +3 movement on the first turn ring. Even so, Champion is pretty strong. However, the Faerie Knight is just insane.

 

[Galdred]

Champions work a lot better with mobility gear, like teleport ring, +tp on kill, or -mv cost.
The nerf hit them hard, but Balan or Lanval can tank just a well as Mordred with defensive stance while dealing more AoE damage that scale on kill.
Balan has great damage and Lanval has stun+taunt.
I don't bother with defenders except when I need to bring mordred(act 3, very hard).

Vanguards are great, but only for single target damage, and they cannot tank at all.

 

[Cael]

Champions work a lot better with mobility gear, like teleport ring, +tp on kill, or -mv cost.
The nerf hit them hard, but Balan or Lanval can tank just a well as Mordred with defensive stance while dealing more AoE damage that scale on kill.
Balan has great damage and Lanval has stun+taunt.
I don't bother with defenders except when I need to bring mordred(act 3, very hard).

Vanguards are great, but only for single target damage, and they cannot tank at all.

Mordred murders things in my game. Lightning, Chain Lightning, Charge. He also gets that heal on attack skill that Champions don't get. With +AP gear, he is the Energiser bunny.

 

[Galdred]

Champions work a lot better with mobility gear, like teleport ring, +tp on kill, or -mv cost.
The nerf hit them hard, but Balan or Lanval can tank just a well as Mordred with defensive stance while dealing more AoE damage that scale on kill.
Balan has great damage and Lanval has stun+taunt.
I don't bother with defenders except when I need to bring mordred(act 3, very hard).

Vanguards are great, but only for single target damage, and they cannot tank at all.

Mordred murders things in my game. Lightning, Chain Lightning, Charge. He also gets that heal on attack skill that Champions don't get. With +AP gear, he is the Energiser bunny.

I was very disappointed in Mordred, but now that I got to items(armor and sword) that provide %damage on missing vitality, I will see how well he fares (it should roughly double his damage if I can keep him at 30% VP).

On a side note, I hate that the game encourages you to swap titles every turn (like, Court chandler: get + relic on Merchant with Sir Bors, then - build points on constructions with Sir Brunor, then to get a discount on items with Sir Yvain...).
Granted, it is pretty minor, but still it feels like I am gimping myself by not using extreme tedium.

 

[Cael]

Champions work a lot better with mobility gear, like teleport ring, +tp on kill, or -mv cost.
The nerf hit them hard, but Balan or Lanval can tank just a well as Mordred with defensive stance while dealing more AoE damage that scale on kill.
Balan has great damage and Lanval has stun+taunt.
I don't bother with defenders except when I need to bring mordred(act 3, very hard).

Vanguards are great, but only for single target damage, and they cannot tank at all.

Mordred murders things in my game. Lightning, Chain Lightning, Charge. He also gets that heal on attack skill that Champions don't get. With +AP gear, he is the Energiser bunny.

I was very disappointed in Mordred, but now that I got to items(armor and sword) that provide %damage on missing vitality, I will see how well he fares (it should roughly double his damage if I can keep him at 30% VP).

On a side note, I hate that the game encourages you to swap titles every turn (like, Court chandler: get + relic on Merchant with Sir Bors, then - build points on constructions with Sir Brunor, then to get a discount on items with Sir Yvain...).
Granted, it is pretty minor, but still it feels like I am gimping myself by not using extreme tedium.

I would never use items like that under any circumstance. Any item that requires me to be injured badly in order to take effect is a bad item by definition. For Mordred, just get the +15% chance to double damage weapon and give him the +10% double damage potion. He can quite reliably nuke things at range with those.