Install Steam
login
|
language
简体中文 (Simplified Chinese)
繁體中文 (Traditional Chinese)
日本語 (Japanese)
한국어 (Korean)
ไทย (Thai)
Български (Bulgarian)
Čeština (Czech)
Dansk (Danish)
Deutsch (German)
Español - España (Spanish - Spain)
Español - Latinoamérica (Spanish - Latin America)
Ελληνικά (Greek)
Français (French)
Italiano (Italian)
Bahasa Indonesia (Indonesian)
Magyar (Hungarian)
Nederlands (Dutch)
Norsk (Norwegian)
Polski (Polish)
Português (Portuguese - Portugal)
Português - Brasil (Portuguese - Brazil)
Română (Romanian)
Русский (Russian)
Suomi (Finnish)
Svenska (Swedish)
Türkçe (Turkish)
Tiếng Việt (Vietnamese)
Українська (Ukrainian)
Report a translation problem
Discussions Rules and Guidelines
Report this post
Early on it promotes forgivness for getting stupid quirks from curios that you didn't know better about.
But then it also caps itself a little later on. As you point out it's about 45k as a max - but that's as a max. You may not have good quirks you want to keep or the bad ones you want to remove are on another hero and then before you know it you already have three quirks locked in and it loses a lot of potential money saving.
minus: it breaks the natural flow of economic development and progression. -10 points
plus: cuts the grind. + several million points
red hook 1
busted scoreboard 0
ok ok it's like if you put something broken in to compensate for something else that's broken is that really "better" but really as valid and correct as that argument is
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OnB1TgxgwEA
oh yeah you already took my money
welp, carrying on
For the most part Town Events were meant to be a net positive to the overall campaign. It is true that late game this can be great for the savings you have just mentioned. But you also worked your way to that! Is it too good? Possibly. Would only 1 slot be good enough? Maybe.
The issue is since this town event can be triggered if the quest is completed it makes it a bit more predictable and easy to manage, which isn't an issue to us, as we believe in giving players means to control their campaign. So perhaps based on more feedback we should correct course. One thing our community is great at is identifying when something is _too_ good, which is amazing.
But in our defense those quests have been historically criticized for being not worth the sacrificed inventory slots, and these town events that are associated was a way to increase their overall value.
So, I would love to hear more thoughts on this, topic. I would also like to hear thoughts on all the new town events that are attached to those quests.
welllll the way I see it something like this
early game isn't easy at first because various buildings are unlocked, your roster is limited. this is where you get in on the fundamentals. (ok ok more or less good enough at this point, you're getting used to the game, everything's new, ok)
once you unlock the buildings, you're pushing up into veteran, maybe sooner, maybe later, whatever. new monsters, maybe not as many as some would like, bosses, stuff. (ok ok more or less good enough, you have new content, etc.)
Then the game sorta flails around a little. The heroes have defined roles, they have linear advancement for their various skills and equipment, you can switch skills in and out, but . . . it's the same old same old. You eventually hit champion dungeons, and *THEORETICALLY* you get emergent gameplay (oo emergent gameplay such fine phrase much wow) as the conditions get more difficult, so the players have to take advantage of previously unexploited mechanics (or maybe they were exploiting them already, they just have to get better at it).
This is where lack of clear progress benchmarks kicks in. (I mentioned progress benchmarks ought to be linked to *understanding of the game*, not bosses which are really just a sideshow in previous posts in other threads.) I mean okay nice sideshow, good sideshow but - not a true understanding of progress. Then also, you have lack of failure state. So effectively a player can just grind on inefficiently to finish up the game at that point. But they're hitting this wall that many perceive as RNG, not as emergent gameplay, because the *perception* is - look the monsters haven't changed from Veteran to Champion, the *abilities* haven't changed (either player or monster) so what's different? To the player, they're getting buffs on heroes, the enemies get buffs. But if you're climbing a set of stairs at sea level, or you're climbing a set of stairs a hundred meters above sea level, you don't say "well golly gee! these stairs are so different at different elevations!" You're like "welp, stairs". That's what it is.
There's no perceptual difference, and that's a problem.
Personally I'm aware of it, and I *still* don't really "perceive" it. That's how bad it is. If you're already composing your strongest parties (which you will be of course in any event) then what difference does it make if the margins are a little closer, the overall requirements are higher? If you still hit that mark, you hit it; you're not changing your gameplay at all, you don't need to change your gameplay. I fire up a new game of Darkest Dungeon and what happens when I hit Veteran level dungeons? I use the exact same concepts that I use to prepare for Champion dungeons, and I've already been through Champion dungeons. So where is the real shift when I *actually* make the transition from Veteran to Champion. There isn't much of one. I'm not able to do the full upgrades, so I push for shorter dungeons with more provisions to get resolve levels up so I can hit those max upgrades. I don't even break stride, just get it done, then it's the same old same old. More or less, but a lot *more* than *less*. Hence the perception of grind. Or at least I think one of the more prominent reasons for that perception.
One could make the argument "oh! well the margins are tighter so you have to change your gameplay!" As I've mentioned in other threads, as the guy in that video mentioned in that recent thread - there's a difference between quantitative differences, and qualitative differences. Yes, you can point to numbers &c to state there is an existing difference, but what if I throw a ball to you? If I throw it a few centimeters higher or lower, does your brain find it incomprehensibly more difficult to make the adjustments necessary to catch the ball in those new positions? Is it really a *new game* each time I toss a ball to you? The answer is no. Even if there are loads of calculations going on, when those calculations are largely subsconsious, the perception of difference is not significantly triggered, and that means it feels like the same old same old. (Why the calculations in Darkest Dungeon are "subconscious" I've gone into on other threads too. Well I digress.)
So let's look at this event yeah?
Say you get it early on. Well you're still flailing around trying to set up that economy, if it digs you out of a hole - is that *really* a problem? Some players could complain about RNG because they *didn't* get the event, and *maybe* the game could have a fixed calendar that triggered certain events at certain week intervals . . . but even though that might be a nice feature, is having the event fundamentally a problem at that early stage? I don't think so. If a player's new, they can use the break. If a player's not new, maybe they *wouldn't* want the event to trigger, so maybe in addition to implementing a fixed calendar, players could choose between "sun phase" (easy mode with easy calendar giving lots of bonuses) and "moon phase" (hard mode with hard calendar of events, maybe even events themselves being changed.) Or whatever you get the drift.
Let's say it's late. Well if a player is already maintaining a load of messed up heroes, then they need a hand up. Broken? Yehhhhhhh maybe one could argue that. But what's the point of saying "oh look we're just giving away entirely too much gold here" then saying "ok look, we want you to grind on and on and on to get more gold"? As I see it, if a player is already running a really powerful economic machine, then the event just shortens the path they're already on, and how is that a problem at all? to my mind it isn't. If a player isn't running a powerful economic machine, then again, they might be dependent on RNG events, but then again, allowing a player to set *different event calendars* could . . . yeah yeah well anyways I went down this road with suggesting different difficulty sliders before.
Far as players previously complaining about the quest not being rewarding enough - perfectly true, I was there, you eat up three inventory slots and lose out on 4500 gold(ish) for what? anyways again, maybe some events could have different implementations, and some events might be included or not included depending on player preference.
thingy thingy thingy, extrapolation for other town events &c. personally I haven't played much since Town Events released. But generally - if the gameplay itself isn't fundamentally changed like adding combination attacks to heroes and stuff, then that perceptual gap from veteran to champion needs to be addressed and the perception of grind, and sticking in a big old reward isn't the worst way to go about it to my mind.
Disrupting a natural economic flow and progression is . . . of itself a paradigm shift, mind. A lot of the town events do give these nice little things, and players are not used to that. One could make the argument that it breaks the "mood" of Darkest Dungeon. Like it's supposed to be all emo and dreary, and hey presto, there's a festival or something, wewt. Like what? Oh well, that's as it goes. Personally I don't mind it, but I'm guessing maybe some might find that a bit new. As to the economic states, one could make certain criticisms there too. But as I see it, the game economy isn't terribly tight to begin with, so if you do have an economic bonus, that shouldn't be a problem unless it's enough to create a major paradigm shift, and it's just not - one way or another, as I see it.
Watching a great positive quirk slowly pushed to replacement because you need the gold for more urgent matters was a bit depressing.
Although it's true it made the game easier. The same way secret rooms did, massive help.
Well yeah, would you rather do 3 Long Champion Dungeons or just 1 Medium Weald Mission?
you don't need long champions to pull in the level of loot that Madmax was talking about.
also long champions give you way better trinkets which is really the point
also there's a question of the whole cost to upgrade / grind mechanic &c
yeh ok it feels weird to you. probably you sleep on a mattress made partly of plant fibres, animal products, metal that's been extruded from the earth. probably you used a microwave which is pretty much wholly unnatural to zap some weird conglomeration of chemicals and various products. hopped in a car or got on a bus or train or whatever which is &c. all really weird stuff but it's convenient and you're used to it so hey.
same thing for this innit, convenient, except you're not used to it.
For people who know what they're doing (and with existing files) it hits as a whole potential 45k saving (which will eventually lower itself once heroes start maxing quirks or not needing either one locked in or one removed etc) but for new people who think 'stress faster' quirk is useful it'll probably offer a bit of late game pain.
I'm feeling it may be fairly balanced once the initial "OMG" subsides.