Just saw the new notes

[kory]

Not a fan of enemy dodge change, it is the worst thing in a tactical game to have planned out what attacks you are going to do this turn and what enemies are going to be killed to then have it all fall apart because the enemy with 2% dodge chance made the roll.

Even worse if the dodge chances are high, then its just frustrating and no point in planning.

[Fortytudo]

I agree with OP.
Having dedicated monsters with high dodge % is fine so you have to prepare counter measures against them but making everyone revolve around dodge is just a cheap way to increase difficulty. It will lead to cheesing with weapons that have skills with true shot. Having some RNG in your game is fine, but again, dont overdo it or it will lead to many problems and a negative player experience.

And what about melee? You will have to give melee weapons an accuracy buff otherwise everyone will just use ranged. Nobody wants to send their characters in melee just for them to miss everything and die.

The way ranged damage worked in Prologue is perfectly fine. I dont want a second X-COM.

[DearSaintMary]

I don't understand why, from the gameplay perspective, somebody would want to add dodge and dedicated stat to mitigate that dodge?
It looks like I have to spend one point in Accuracy just to be able to hit, and not spending that point on different cool stuff, if there is any.

Where is the fun in mandatory stat point loss?

[Fortytudo]

Also, they have monsters with a massive health pool like boomers. Imagine missing them point blank and then getting blown up because for some reason those hulking abominations can actually dodge.

[Den]

I had the same thought when reading the note.

I can understand that a touch of randomness can spice up a game, but honestly in that case I absolutely don't get it. It creates issues where there were none, and it doesn't give any depth to the already existing game mechanics.

If you want to make the game harder, there are a lot of tweaks you can do on a tactical perspective (HP, damage, armor, resistance and so on) without having to rely on a damn random factor.

[hegor]

Hello!
Thanks for the feedback :) Just so you know, the game will feel very different from the Prologue, since this one is very old and we did a million changes on it :)

[kory]

If the game is so different than the prologue that these statements don't carry meaning, then what was the point of the prologue? wasn't it a demo of the game?

[hegor]

The prologue was supposed to give a first glimpse of the game, but, thanks to player feedback, we ended up reworking quite a lot of things :)

[Fortytudo]

Now Im even more concerned. The Prologue was fine as a foundation. It has some balance issues but for the most part it was amazing. Not sure how I feel about the new version, will have to play it first.

[hegor]

Glad you liked the Prologue :)
We hope you'll like the full game even more!

[aplethoraof]

Oooof, dodge chance is a red flag for me. Just gives me x-com flashbacks of (point blank, 95% chance to hit. . .miss). I absolutely revile that none-sense, it was designed to do nothing but frustrate the player.

Hopefully this game is REALLY solid to compensate for such a stupid design decision.

[Subjekt One]

I don't really go to forums often, but I have to agree with this and It's an important topic for tactical turn based game like this one...

When I saw it in the devblog I was pretty upset. Dodge is trash in litteraly every games I've played. It's so bad. I really hope that it will be implemented properly here. Melee weapons should never miss, except against an ennemy based on dodging... At least this would give a good balance to melee weapons.

I guess we'll have to wait June 3 to test this out ourselves.

[Bleezip]

Sheesh. The game is already hard enough, I couldn't even beat the demo. :P

[kory]

Hard isnt a problem, I want the game to be hard, but adding randomness isnt a good way to achieve hard.

[Sdric]

Originally posted by kory:

Hard isnt a problem, I want the game to be hard, but adding randomness isnt a good way to achieve hard.

I completely agree with this. Dodge chance never feels good to fight against. Difficulty can be done in many ways - cooldowns, tweaking health, defense or offense - or making enemies act smarter. While dodge chance forces players to adapt and shift strategies - which is a good thing for variety ON PAPER - losing to a %-roll is the worst feeling a tactics game can have ESPECIALLY if it's a survival type of game (like The Last Spell is).

In this type of game losses tend to snowball easily, which is punishing if you make a mistake - but a source of pure frustration if it's because of pure bad luck. I might be talking for myself only, but over-reliance on RNG is the main reason why I abandon, refund or skip tactic games (a genre which I otherwise love).

[Redgomor]

I am impressed that there is so much concern and frustration about the accuracy and dodge attributes. Playing around thoose attributes is part of the strategy. Saying: "Disable Dodge, because I am forced to build "No Dodge-Archers" is the equivalent to: "Disable Physical Resistances, because I am forced to build a mage in my runs..."Of course we can send Mellee and Range Heroes into thoose enemies, too, but what's the point, if 30% of their damages is negated? Mages deal 100%, why are we forced to build mages? Same goes for Dodge. 30% of all Mellee and Mages attacks will be dodged, so there goes that. Archers have no dodge abilites, like crossbows. Why are we forced to build Archers? Why not disable Dodge? Why not disable Resistances, too?

Would be senseful with your thought process, wouldn't it?