Instalează Steam
conectare
|
limbă
简体中文 (chineză simplificată)
繁體中文 (chineză tradițională)
日本語 (japoneză)
한국어 (coreeană)
ไทย (thailandeză)
български (bulgară)
Čeština (cehă)
Dansk (daneză)
Deutsch (germană)
English (engleză)
Español - España (spaniolă - Spania)
Español - Latinoamérica (spaniolă - America Latină)
Ελληνικά (greacă)
Français (franceză)
Italiano (italiană)
Bahasa Indonesia (indoneziană)
Magyar (maghiară)
Nederlands (neerlandeză)
Norsk (norvegiană)
Polski (poloneză)
Português (portugheză - Portugalia)
Português - Brasil (portugheză - Brazilia)
Русский (rusă)
Suomi (finlandeză)
Svenska (suedeză)
Türkçe (turcă)
Tiếng Việt (vietnameză)
Українська (ucraineană)
Raportează o problemă de traducere
Acest topic a fost închis 
Reguli și ghiduri pentru discuții
1 
Raportează această postare
There are several difficulty settings. Core difficulty (might be labeled differently in IWD2) is the setting that the game was designed to play on, especially for first timers. It is the basic D&D 3.5 edition rules applied as closely as possible to the game. You are playing the game theoretically just the way you would in a table top 3.5 game session.
Monster damage, hit points, and saving throws are at the level they were designed for. The insane setting doubles the damage, gives the monsters pluses to their saves, etc.
The insane setting also doubles the amount of experience you get from not only killing monsters but from the side quests that grant experience. So will level up much faster than intended so the game adds enemies to every fight. Story book (or easy) setting also grants double experience but with lower risk from the opponents.
So yes, if you go into an area at a higher level than it was designed for the scaling will up the number of enemies. The first "major" scaling occurs when the party (not just one character) reaches 5th level as an average. The game adjusts its scaling to your party's "average" level.
Some players do what is called "level squatting" Continue to gain experience but do not level up right away. They may select 1 character as a "tank" that they do level up to handle the front line melee and then keep the rest at 4th level or lower so that they do not face high numbers of opponents. They pick a point later on (mid game) to finally level up.
i got up too the final boss of dragons eye when i uninstalled the game again. this level punishment ruined a lot of combat encounters for me, and thats a cardinal sin in a dungeon crawler.
i didnt make a half-orc barbarian too engage with mechanics :P
I played years ago, but I don't think the problem is in those details (D&D edition, enemies balance, adn so on). Consider also that you get more experience.
IWD2 is simply more difficult than IWD1 and much more difficult than BG saga. But I remember that with the right approach you can beat it at highest difficult with no great issues.
So:
1. Stop thinking that the problem is the game, if you think so better stop.
2. Different rules than other games. Are you sure you have understand them well. For example the AC works differently.
3. Party counts, maybe your is not good enough to face the game, try to do another party.
4. Strategy counts, try different strategies. Stealth, ranged and disabling spells always work.
5. Just play the game through the story, dont' try to farm or raise your level otherwise, the game is already balanced to make you enough strong to beat it.
6. Don't be frustrated when dying and reloading, that's normal, it's part of the challenge.
7. preknoweledg helps, so the more you play the esiest it become.
2. i understand the rules, that doesnt mean they cant be unfair
3. fun news too hear when your in chapter 5 and you have too undo everything you worked towards
4. strategy is no match for overwhelming numbers
5. im playing it for the story, but it isnt balanced. it gets harder at a faster rate then you get stronger
6. i get frustrated not from reloading, but from reloading a save i cant progress
7. ive played 13 CRPGs so far, none of them tried level scaling yet and i can see why
I played the game and I didn't find those problem. It is difficult, in some part maybe too much, but I managed it without remained stucked in some parts. But that's my experience.
As a player I can do norhing to change the game, so as long as I play I don't blame the game, I try to find a way to manage it. When I can't do it, i quit that game. But again, it's my thought, you are free to see it differently.
P.S. With 3-4 party member I found the game easier.
I do however, understand your frustration and would not try to trivialize it.
The game did sell quite well in fact though, over 500,000 in its first year. It is still popular today, so much so that modders created a long requested update.
I do not know which 13 CRPGs you may have played but almost all of the ones I have, do some sort of scaling. Even BG1 and 2 do it, to some extent. Morrowind and Oblivion (probably Skyrim too) are very popular CRPGs that do it for example.
The idea with scaling is to keep the game challenging and not to punish you. Like Wicket, I have done the game on insane and didn't experience what you have. If the game did not have any scaling difficulty, it would quickly become a boring "cake walk" and players would lose interest. The experiment I mentioned doing above with the Targos cavern is a perfect example. One 19th level cleric took out an entire goblin horde with one quick spell. Fun to see, but not a lot of replay potential.
Why your situation spiraled out so badly is unfortunate. I could speculate but probably would not help. I do not know the party make up you used, or spell selection, weapons, etc. Tactics can make a difference, even with mobs. But having not had your experience it is difficult to offer anything constructive.
Again, my condolences on your experience.
i also heard from my betters that the game was considered at the time dated on launch, hence i can only immagine it having done better then 500k, another source another opinion: https://youtu.be/8gDw423ZoDo?si=k-PpSY7czkBhKIUV&t=116 though the reason it appearently wasnt seen as positively wasnt the reason i dont see it as positively
yes my sources are opinions but hey atleast i can twist their meaning too turn this argument into a 3v1 :P
well i prefere difficulty by desighn and not by numbers, so instead of adding 2 more orc mages let 1 orc mage use more spells. or instead of facing 5 orcs whelps, fight one orog. as it stands they add an orog too the already 5 orc whelps. but yea hindsight is 20/20
im of the opinion that if you finished all the side quests, have a build made up for combat AND have the best gear you can get on your level, it should be a cakewalk. instead it gets only harder for doing these things, as you will be fighting more enemies. which discourges you from compleeting content in the game.
so instead of a party for this game, i whent with a single caracther, a half orc barbarian. i did this in icewind dale 1 in order too stack XP so i could turn him into a gaint brick of stats with which i could force myself through the game. this obviously didnt work in icewind dale 2 becouse of the level scaling. so i was fighting an enemy army that was desighned for 6 level 9 caracthers while i only had 1 level 9 caracther. the gear for a level 9 caracther was also unavailible.
so in short:
play with 6=fight 10
play with 1=fight 60
that doesnt seem very fair, balanced nor fun too me.
After (in part during) BG, TofSC, PT, BG2, ToB, the idea of using the engine for a pure dungeon crawler came out, so IWD has been made with minor modification on the engine and non to the AI. In all those games, my perception is that the AI got minor revion or none. Always. So either this is an engine issue or choice or both of them, this is a constant in all the games.
Havng played hundreds of hours in a complicated and heroic history, the players would not have liked 30 hours of easy fights in a dungeon with a more linear and simple story. So the point was to make the game more difficult.
Now, we should discuss what difficulty is in this game. Fights have no ability requests, like assassin creed or the witcher, where special moves with specific timing are requested. Here fights are strategic and linked to dice chances. So it is not easy to make them more or less difficult without investing time in an old game engine, time they didn't have because the game was asked in months, considering that difficulty level should apply to very different party composition. I come back to this later. The main things done in all games to make fights more difficult were seeing invisible, increase the number, make enemy move forward and put fights at the entrance of the area.
When IWD2 came out the engine was old, so probably it wasn't useful to make major change to update it. Furthermore 3nd edition has came out so some effort should have been made on adapting rules. I'ts an obvious market choice: you can't continue to use an old ruleset that you are dismissing.
The game should give an higher challegne to the players that went through all the others. So they operated with thing easy to modificate.
In other world we should accept that there was no convinience at the time to invest in rebuild a game system old and near to be dismissed. They used what they had. Consider also that those game were developped in few months and that at the time you bought CD compies, so the game usually wasn't updated after exit. So this or nothing. I choose this.
All that said, it came a good game, not good as the BG saga, but IMHO better than IWD1. Anyway I agree that some fights or riddles are not well balanced and linked too much to chance factor, expecially at the entrance of new areas. But not all of them
But your experience seems a little too difficult regard mine, so probably there is something about strategy, group compostion, rules application and/or, way you like play that doesn't work.
What i disagree is about the scaling system. I never found it inefficient. But most of all it goes in 2 ways. While you face more enemies, you get more xp, so playing at insane gives more XP than playing at core. That is a major advantage and a good reward for playing in a less comfortable way.
About quality/quantity scaling, anyone can have his preferences, but if we see it from an objective point of view, we should agree that scaling by quality get really major issues.
For how D&D works, and as those game works, if a group of 1st level can face a few group of, let's say, zombies, a group of 10 level characters can easily face a group of 30, 50, 100 or 1000 zombies, while could have some more problem to face one single powerful undead (a Lich or someone with high immunities). In ttrpg th GM can choose the enemy based on the party composition, vur not in the game not and very different party can arrive. Consider also that while you get over levelled, you still get the same objects. So you could face enemies that you can't beat (e.g. immune to magical weapons that you don't have). This could happen if you change the enemy instead of the number. Finally also the likelihood of the story: in an old country cemetery you ca find skeleton, but you don't aspect a Lich, in a cave by the mountains you can find a community of wyverns, but not a community of dragons.
Then all can be done, but don't forget the situation: old engine near to be dismissed. They did what could have been done easily.
it does have ability requests, such as killing a mage before he casts a spell. spawn camping isnt a fun challange.
the only reasoning i see for using 3th edition was becouse it was new at the time, and new doesnt mean better
you keep saying that the old engine was about too be dismissed, but i dont see a good reason why
icewind dale 1, atleast the EE is better becouse it doesnt have scaling. level 9>level 3, yes or no? if you wanted a challange you could always put it on insane or hearth of fury. no need for a 3th difficulty modifier that you need too meta game in order not too softlock yourself.
thats the problem with scaling, leveling up is no longer an advantage, its a curse. *consider also that while you get over levelled, you still get the same objects. So you could face enemies that you can't beat* this is true for both a horde of enemies aswell as a single powerfull enemy, with this scaling you get both.
my argument is simply this: if you put effort into something, your reward should make things easier, not harder.
immagine every quest in icewind dale 2 giving you a cursed item as a reward, thats what scaling feels like.
But an extension was granted and the time needed to do the 3.5 edition gave us what we have. As he stated, they did the best they could.
Edit: I read a history of game engines a couple years ago. Developers were already working on game engines for RPGs at least 2 or 3 generations ahead of the ones on the market. The Infinity engine was way behind their (self imposed granted) power curve. If IWD2 isn't the last Infinity engine game it's close to it.
If I read correctly, you only had 1 character in your party, a half orc barbarian?
Since the game engine bases it's scaling on average party level, I think I see why the scaling may have gone so badly. The game engine was designed for a party of about 4 to 6 members. On insane with double XP one character would indeed rise like a rocket but the scaling algorithm would see the "entire" party as the level of that 1 character. So the game is trying to keep it challenging for a "party" of that level.
I am not sure a single character of any class much less one with very limited magic ability could complete the game on insane as there are a lot of opponents (without scaling) that use pretty strong magic.