Loren The Amazon Princess

Loren The Amazon Princess

View Stats:
Ohio9 Apr 13, 2014 @ 5:35pm
No stat tracking
It's kind of silly that the game keeps track of kills for each character after individual battles, but not kills for a character's "career".

Any chance the sequal might include better stat tracking, such as keeping track of each character's kills for the whole game, as well as maybe some other stats like total damage inflicted. I know this is a pretty minor issue, but in a game that is so heavily character oriented, it's nice to be able to keep track of their stats and be able to check who is making the biggest contribution to the "team".
< >
Showing 1-15 of 20 comments
Winter Wolves  [developer] Apr 14, 2014 @ 12:36am 
I didn't think about this but shouldn't be a problem to add that stat tracking feature :)
Ohio9 Apr 14, 2014 @ 2:07am 
Also now that I think about it, including "Battles fought" would be nice too. I try to give all the party members some parity in battle participation, and including that would help to avoid leaving someone out too often.
Dorok Apr 14, 2014 @ 4:37am 
Your last post above is linked to the problem of roster management. I like RPG with rosters but not much to have to put detailed on focus on their xp increase nor to have to grind to keep the full roster more or less on par for xp/levels.

The game brings many xp through quests and the whole roster get the xp, but battles xp are only for those in the battle. There's certainly a logic but I felt not fun to involve some troubles in roster xp management.

Have to manage it from an equipment point of view is more ok even if for equipping fairly the whole roster pushed me to some farming but manage it for the xp was/is mildly tedious.

I feel it could be an hardcore option, but another option would be to use a different xp management for the roster. For example a player non hardcore option would be to allow match xp of roster to xp of Loren or the main character, a follower with more xp wouldn't be changed.
Winter Wolves  [developer] Apr 14, 2014 @ 7:50am 
Yes that's another good suggestion. Writing down everything for future games :)
Ohio9 Apr 14, 2014 @ 8:06am 
Originally posted by Dorok:
Your last post above is linked to the problem of roster management.

I didn't consider it to be a problem. I liked powering up everyone. This was a game where grinding was actually kind of fun due to the wide variety of skills everyone gets to learn. That and the fun of seeing how different combinations of characters work out.

That being said, I do think this game did have a disproportionate amount of characters in comparison to how many could be on the field of battle at once. It's always frustrating to leave so many of them "on the sidelines" during battle.

But this was mitigated by the many "iron man" events where you had to handle multiple fights in a row without recovering health or stamina. I thought that series were the best events because they forced you to rely on everyone on the team, rather then just mixing your party up for the sake of letting everyone participate.

I hope the sequal has many such events where you have to rely on every party member as opposted to playing like a little league coach and simply mixing up your roster for the sake of letting everyone play.
Winter Wolves  [developer] Apr 14, 2014 @ 10:04am 
Well I offered many character to offer a better choice to the players. I don't expect people to try to level up EVERYONE! :)

But this topic is really a matter of preferences - some people prefer less choice, others like to have a big roster of characters (Suikoden fans anyone?), others want autolevelup of chars not taking much part of the action while others like to level up each one... is hard to please anyone.

Not sure yet how the sequel will work, but in my upcoming RPG Seasons Of The Wolf, you'll have 8 characters in total, so under this aspect will be different. I'll see what kind of feedback people give about that choice.
Ohio9 Apr 14, 2014 @ 10:20am 
You may not have expected it, but that's what I ended up doing anyway. Again, it just doesn't feel right leaving anyone out. I tried to set up the battles so everyone participated as equally as possible (which was difficult for warriors since Loren and Saren have to be in almost all the story battles) It's just the same as the way I play a franchise mode in the Madden NFL games. I always try to make sure everyone will get a chance to handle the ball, even my second and third stringers.

Choice is good, but there are plenty of us out there who value total participation just as much, if not more. I just hate it when half my team or more has no valuable role whatsover, and I don't think auto-leveling is the solution. I don't like auto-leveling because it builds up team members who didn't earn it. I prefer setting up a system that allows everyone to have a valuable role so they can level up because they work for it like everyone else.

Like I said, the "iron man" events in this game that required you to use your "backup" characters were a good idea. They were an excellent method of increasing team participation, and doing so in a meaningful way as opposed to putting someone in the field just for the sake of playing them

So in the sequal I hope you set it up so that there is more participation from the whole team. If that means less characters, that's fine. I prefer less characters who get to participate more over tons of characters who have nothing productive to do.
Last edited by Ohio9; Apr 14, 2014 @ 10:23am
Dorok Apr 14, 2014 @ 10:31am 
Originally posted by Winter Wolves:
Well I offered many character to offer a better choice to the players. I don't expect people to try to level up EVERYONE! :)
The new characters are a serious improvement on the whole by bringing in the team more troubles characters that add spice. But the result is a quite bigger roster and the player has no clue on what roster size it's advisable to support.

This is creating a negative gap for equipping the whole roster but that point is roughly ok, this creating a negative gap for level up the whole roster and I felt that point not that cool.

Originally posted by Ohio9:
Originally posted by Dorok:
Your last post above is linked to the problem of roster management.

I didn't consider it to be a problem. I liked powering up everyone...
I totally understand players will enjoy farm and grind to manage it, that why I don't request to remove this feature but instead add a Hardcore player option that enables few options like that.
- Hardcore option : Roster xp is manually managed.
- Non Hardcore Option : Player can trigger xp level up of roster to match xp of Player Character (or Loren, not sure).

- Eventually the Hardcore option could includes a slight xp bonus from xp combats like +15% of xp combats.
Dorok Apr 14, 2014 @ 10:35am 
Originally posted by Ohio9:
...Like I said, the "iron man" events in this game that required you to use your "backup" characters were a good idea....
Quite agree on that, the game could use more events splitting the roster in some teams and less combats forcing use Loren and Main character.

Anyway even with that approach I feel cooler to have a player option to manage xp of a large roster in a different way, but just a player option, and the equipments of the whole roster is still to be managed manually.
Dorok Apr 14, 2014 @ 10:36am 
As we are on Rosters mechanism, have a part/event of the game where a Roster part have to Rescue another Roster part.
Last edited by Dorok; Apr 14, 2014 @ 10:37am
Ohio9 Apr 14, 2014 @ 10:51am 
Originally posted by Dorok:
- Non Hardcore Option : Player can trigger xp level up of roster to match xp of Player Character (or Loren, not sure).

- Eventually the Hardcore option could includes a slight xp bonus from xp combats like +15% of xp combats.

I was going to say I disagree with this, but I suppose it does make sense if the hardcore option offers a significant (not slight) bonus incentive for doing so.

But really, what would be much better then that and would be more likely to satisfy everyone would be to keep the munual experience, but set up the system so that everyone has a valuable role and they all gain experience naturally, without excessive grinding. The best way to do this is simply to ensure the number characters in the party is proportionate to the number that can participate in battle. Either less characters or more battle participants. I'd prefer option #2 myself. Who wouldn't love to have 8 on 8 fights or 10 on 10?

The iron man events were another way to help with this. It also would help if you didn't have to use Loren and your player character for almost all the story battles, even the ones that are not explicitly about them.

Another thing that would help would be setting up the system so that participation in battle will unlock dialog choices, player quests, and romance options.

The idea here is that the game keeps track of battle participation for every character (all battles, including random encounters and training missions in town). After participating in a certain number, a line of dialog is opened in the camp. Do it enough and it unlocks potential quests or affection points.

I think this is good from both a logic and gameplay standpoint. Logically, it makes sense that increasing participation in battle with the main character makes it more likely for someone to bond with and open up to them. Likewise, feeling left out makes it less so. This also provides a great incentive to let everyone participate, especially the ones you want affection with.
Last edited by Ohio9; Apr 14, 2014 @ 12:49pm
Dorok Apr 15, 2014 @ 11:52am 
A Roster is meaning a large group quite larger than a party/combat group otherwise it's not a roster game.

I wonder why complain that other players could use an option you don't want use, just don't use it if you don't want it. For me it's like if you feel the option you want isn't fun but a penalty, then it's unfair other players could skip it, nope all have to suffer. :-P

I have played many Roster games and those not managing xp with one character reference generally end in more or less grinding or a fake roster with soon pointless characters because too low level. Exemple Baldur's Gate 1, you can make a few switch but despite a huge roster at your disposal you'll end specialize and choose a few among them. At reverse Dragon Age Origin base xp on a character reference and your roster is a real roster. A third example is Etrian Odyssey, the roster is purely fake and force to a huge grinding, it's not even useful to use a roster.

Managing equipment of a roster is already materializing well the roster management. Events forcing split the rosters in parallel groups hence making use a larger part of the roster, or events forcing some characters in some combats, are good points even with xp managed with a character reference.

Now I admit that LTAP roster is working better than usual with roster games not using a reference character for xp. One reason is most xp come from quests instead of combats, and it ensures a roughly equal leveling of xp of the whole roster. There's many opportunities to spread the members use in combats without a too heavy xp penalty probably because the game difficulty management is soft. With a more strict difficulty management ensure this spreading will involved a penalty.

I don't think that giving a significant bonus of xp to grinding combats would be right, it would just allow break difficulty through quick grinding and specializing a bit the roster.

And about forcing the player level up evenly the whole roster it's not an easy management. For example the game tries ensure not force too many secondary characters in a combat so if one or two are weak you can compensate by using the best to complement them in the combat. So the point is you can specialize your roster and focus only on a part of it and then have characters with higher level.

Now ok the current system can be improved and in fact a main improvement is to have a view of all your roster on one panel with a hint of their level, with the current UI it's rather tedious to check this. More or less it's the main flaw of the current system, all in all I don't grind much and more with theb idea of some farming for equipments (gold to buy equipments for the whole roster) and then take care use more lower level characters.

Another way to solve minimize the problem of manually managing xp of a roster is to use a sort of exponetial xp amount per level, like 100, 200, 400, 800, 1600, and so on. In such system a character level 0 level up to level N for the same amount of xp a character level N level up to level N+1. It just ensure you can level up with a quick grinding a character to the current normal level without to provide a significant boost of level through this grinding for characters already at expected level.
Last edited by Dorok; Apr 15, 2014 @ 11:57am
Ohio9 Apr 15, 2014 @ 1:51pm 
I'm not saying I have a problem with options you proposed. What I am saying is that an even better solution that would better satisfy everyone would be to simply eliminate the need for the option in the first place. It would be far better to set up the game so that everyone on the team participates heavily in the gameplay naturally, without the need for excessive grinding or throwing guys into the field just for the sake of giving them something to do. Who would oppose that? That would remove the problems both of us have cited, without the need to chose between two radically different styles of gameplay.

Again, the iron man events in Loren were a good start on this process. Likewise, the split team concepts you brought up would be a good solution too. All I proposed was expanding on this concept by making the number of battle participants more propotional to the total number of characters on your team, as well as throwing in some extra incentives (but not requirements) to utalize your whole team by basing dialog and romance options on battle participation, which not only works a proper incentive in the game, but also makes logical sense in the real world.

I agree that "forcing the player level up evenly the whole roster it's not an easy management." As someone who just finished the game doing pricisely that, no one knows that better than me. That's why my solution is to make total participation from all team members more natural and less forced, so it's not excessive grinding that maintains team parity, but nartually flowing story-based gameplay. Everyone gets heavy participation regardless of how much or how little grinding you do. See what I mean?
Last edited by Ohio9; Apr 15, 2014 @ 2:17pm
Dorok Apr 16, 2014 @ 4:53am 
Originally posted by Ohio9:
See what I mean?
First answer is no, and that's the point, you believe in a natural flow and I don't see how it can be natural without to remove player choices to compose team among a roster for most combats. If it ends removes most player choices of team composition for most combats, ok I can see it can work but then I'm totally opposed to such solution.

Second answer is yes, I understand the fun of your suggestions like have some more events where you split the roster in multiple combats teams forcing use a larger selection in the roster, or take care force less combats have Loren/MC, and some more. But it won't solve the problem of having a frequent manual survey of xp of the whole roster.
Ohio9 Apr 16, 2014 @ 2:21pm 
The goal isn't to remove choices for team compistion, just make sure everyone gets a fair chance to contribute in some way. Under my system, you still have full choice of who you want in the front lines, it just encourages you to find some use for everyone. I fail to see why anyone would oppose that. You really want all these do-nothing free loaders tagging along?

You also wouldn't have to frequently check everyone's XP. The idea is to create a system that nartually allows for everyone to heavily participate, so their levels would generally be equal. Loren already does this somewhat with the iron man events and the shared experience from quest completions. I just suggested a few expansion on that concept.
< >
Showing 1-15 of 20 comments
Per page: 15 30 50