"Philosophical" questions, What is a cheesy method? Bug or feature? Options

[DavidW]

abusing area - imagine this - 2 enemies (for example, take elemental golems) are standing on a narrow bridge. Behind them, thus out of your reach are 2 high level figh/mages beating the crap out of you. That wouldn't be fair. and that's how enemies usually fare when you do that.
But, I do believe that in IA final battle it is completely justified to abuse it. It is used in strategy games, but IA is more of a tactical thing. Defeating hard battles usually is much more dependant on what you do in a round and not if your enemies can reach you or not. besides, if they can't reach you, you can't reach them also. I remember a line from "call of duty 4" which says "tracers work both ways":) . for surprises, I think backstab is a very nice surprise and is as such covered in BG

Why the hell would it be not fair? This is a fair tactics and I would be very happy to see that enemies use it.

It's basically a game-engine issue. The scripting language for IE AI is very limited, and doesn't really have any spatial awareness. You just can't tell the computer things like "see if the enemy can reach you; if not, shoot with abandon" or "get the golems to hold off the enemy fighters". (You can occasionally fake it in very specific areas, but you can't do it generically). Shame, but there you go.

[Vuki]

This is not true (except for vert particular monsters for whom it is justified to have abilities you don't have-- see above)

Ok, so this is true. You told it in a complicated way but it is still the truth. But this was not the main issue in my comment. Please when you comment my words then try to comment the whole meaning and do not rive a sentence off from my text and concentrate only on this small portion! That way you do not answer the matter, you only answer to a - usually falsely interpreted - small part of it.

[Vuki]

It's basically a game-engine issue. The scripting language for IE AI is very limited, and doesn't really have any spatial awareness. You just can't tell the computer things like "see if the enemy can reach you; if not, shoot with abandon" or "get the golems to hold off the enemy fighters". (You can occasionally fake it in very specific areas, but you can't do it generically). Shame, but there you go.

Yes, I am aware of this problem. But there are several narrow corridors in the game where the game can set up the enemies in front and mages in the back and therefore can use this tactics without any problem. Not too much cases but again you are not able to use this tactics also not too much times. As I remember I never used it in my IA game.

[Sikret]

No humanoid enemy has such an ability. Actually, only red dragons, demon lords and noble efreets have the ability to lower fire resistance. If this is your argument, then keep it only to justify yourself against those rare and few enemies (though I don't agree with your argument even for those enemies, because they don't use them against you before you are actually engaged in combat).

You misunderstood me here. The point is not that they are humanoids or not, the point is that they use something that you do not do.

And I said that it is not true unless for very few and particular monsters. I also added that even those monsters don't use those abilities before the battle actually begins (= they play fair with you). But I also said that if you think that your argument is sound (I don't think that it is sound, but if you think so), then just use the argument to justify casting spells from distance against those few enemies. You can't use that argument for all cases and against every enemy. The enemies who have abilities which you can't have are very rare. You can't make a general argument for all battles and all enemies just because a few dragons and demons have special abilities.

But the best example is the second drow ambush: they dispel your protections. This is very-very similar to the offscreen casting (you do something before they can react to it).

They don't do any such thing. It's an invisible trap which does that with your protections. <sigh>!

You did not react to some important comments of my like for example prebuffing.

I did react. I said prebuffing is fair, because you can do it as well. If you don't agree, then let's agree to disagree and leave it.

I told you once and I repeat again here that in order to be able to give any useful suggestions to me, you need to have a good idea of what is going on in the game when IA is installed. You really need to complete the whole game for a couple of times.

[Vuki]

They don't do any such thing. It's an invisible trap which does that with your protections. <sigh>!

It does not matter how you implement it in the game, only the result count. But agian before you misinterpret my words: I have absolutely no problem with it. It is just an example to argue against my opinion.

You did not react to some important comments of my like for example prebuffing.

I did react. I said prebuffing is fair, because you can do it as well. If you don't agree, then let's agree to disagree and leave it.

You told that "enemy prebuffing is fair because you can do it", but ok I did not read it very carefully and it can be interpreted also in the other way aroung (you can prebuff because they can do it). I will cover it in a new post because I forgot to mention something yesterday evening. BTW, you still not react on some of my others comment (like thief special ability). Of course you do not have to react to them, but would be nice because I am interested in your opinion.

I told you once and I repeat again here that in order to be able to give any useful suggestions to me, you need to have a good idea of what is going on in the game when IA is installed. You really need to complete the whole game for a couple of times.

And I repeat it again that you were right in one case but not right in other cases. In one of my comment this is true but not in the other 10-15 cases.

[Sikret]

They don't do any such thing. It's an invisible trap which does that with your protections. <sigh>!

It does not matter how you implement it in the game, only the result count.

You thought that those drows had a special ability to dispel your buffs and wanted to make an argument that in addition to the dragons, demons, etc, there are also these drows who have such special abilities.

I explained that you were mistaken. The dispel protection effect in that area is not applied by those drows. An invisible trap (probably set by a divine creature long time ago) does that. So, the assumption that those drows had such a special ability was refuted. That's all.

Read my previous posts again; if you don't agree with me on any given point, that's fair enough. We can agree to disagree.

The main practical consequence is that articles submitted to the "Academy of Tactics" have to follow the criteria mentioned in the "Cheat_and_Cheap.pdf" very accurately. We already have a couple of submissions which will be uploaded to the academy as soon as we find the time to completely examine them.

Journals sent as forum topics including players' experiences don't need to follow those criteria very strictly. We can tolerate some minor deviations from the content of the "Cheat_and_Cheap.pdf" document in such fan-written journals as long as they are not submitted to the academy.

[Vuki]

It is the previously promised post. I wanted to write it yxesterday but I forgot to do.

As I mentioned earlier Sikret made the mod more tactical. And I am sure that most of our different opinions can be derivated from the different viewpoint how we see the game. I see it as an rpg that has a tactical aspect and Sikret view it as a tactical game that has some rpg aspects. Maybe I am wrong but I have some reasons to think it is right.

First example is the prebuffing. My main reason was that it break the rule of a role-play gfame because you heavily use an information that is not known by your characters. I emphasized it more than one time and the strange think was that Sikret did not react to it. I cannot be sure about his reasons but I still pretty sure that he did not answer it because he see the game in a tactical point of view. In a tactical game it is not a problem but in an role-play game it is a serious cheat. Additionally he argued that you can do it because they can do it and of course it is a good reason in a tactical game and not really a strong reason in an RPG (at least in my opinion).

He did not react also to the IA: Divination vs. thief's detect illusion argument. I think he did not react because he thinks it is not important. Yes, in a tactical game it does not matter but in an RPG game reality and the credibility of the game world is very important.

Third example is his missing reaction to steal important items issue. He used to argue against it in Ryel's topic and it was very interesting to read. I realized our different viewpoint while I was reading that topic. He was not really able to formulate why the quest item should not be stolen and he ignored or RPG-based reasons of Ryel. In a tactical game of course it is evident that you should not do it but in an RPG it is absolutely not clear. It is interesting that it does not mean that he avoid seeing it as an RPG because the new quests I have already done have really nice RPG contents. The discussion with Dracolich is brilliant and one of my favorite in the game (and the whole quest is really fantastic and has a good feeling). Also I had a very good feeling when the girl whom I saved from drows come to me and say thank you. These are very nice RPG moments of the game ans they easily match the standard of the vanilla game. So, for me it seems that when he thinks about tactic and battles then he avoid seeing it as an RPG and see it only as a pure tactical game.

It does not mean that his view (or my view) is wrong. I think that most players think BG2 is an RPG and only partially a tactical game but everybody could have a different view of the game. I was pretty sure when I start this discussion that we will not agree and my reason to think it was this different view of the game. This is so different then we will never agree. But I still think it has a reason to start this discussion because here we can clearify our viewpoint. Which is very important even if nothing changes. I did not use cheesy and cheats methods (based on his pdf), so I play the game as it was intended but I will continue to find all "philosophically" false or wrong issues (IMHO of course) and report them here.

[Kerkes]

@Vuki

I REALLY am looking forward to your post on final IA battle

@other people visiting this great thread

I do belive that enemies should have abilities you do not have. Since you do also. No enemy has "conatct with nature" I believe. More important, no enemy has fully functional several billions of braincells to use. Take that noble djinni guy. Imagine him without his extra ability, and your guys running about with 100+fire resistance, add red dragon plate, helm, two rings of fire res etc., than even remove magic won't touch you. And I do believe he doesn't cast remove magic (even if he does, you can have mages take it). What fun is he then?

for prebuffing, I find that a bit annoying too, but have spell deflection, turning and SI in quickspell slots (usually far more useful then stoneskin). I'd personaly hate enemies standind behind golems (happened to me once in sewers hidden door from which you get key from tazok). Played that battle for 1min and reloaded because the cleric and figh/mage were beating me so so badly, not to mention that it's a BAD thing to be "emotionalized" in front of a golem.

I found battle with Draco to be as fun as it is especially because you have to think who to protect, how, who should rely on saves etc with no prebuffs. It really adds different flavour to battles, and I'm sure that any other player who has played the battle agrees with me. As for getting dispelled with the drow...it's supposed to be an ambush. Add some RPG with that fact, it can be a very fun and exciting battle. Insane, yes, but CAN be fun if you get really lucky. It's not an ambush for anyone who's ever played it, but if it can be simulated, I find this to be the best way. Imagine them teleporting around you with those spiders at a completely random point in that area. This way you know where they are, can memorize Chaotic and free action spells, use optimal equipment etc. Haven't you ever backstabbed a yuan-ti mage before he finishes true sight? Is that also cheese then? IMO, no. I saw him while invisible, he smells something is going on and starts casting, my figh/thief is a bloodthirsty no-good-dooer, and the lizard is gone! I'd say the same thing would go for drow - I think they should know when a party armed to the teeth enters underdark.. It is their home, anyway, and it is supposed to be dangerous, not like vanilla "walk in the myconid park". Loth could probably dispel your buffs if they asked nicely:). Besides, you wouldn't even feel that dispel hurting you if you haven't buffed yourself. So, who is cheating:) the oh so mighty band of a 15.level Bhaalspawn or those filthy drow?! Just joking, but I hope you see my point.
I've given some tought about the idea of no pre-buffs. IMO It would make most of the battles a walk-over (if not ridiculusly easy), and who ever has more mages with improved alcatry wins.
As for IA being more tactical/rpg - I don't know, really. It has both. A read lot of new quests will be added to IA6 so there will probably be much more RPGaming for druid lovers, tree-huggers and other such beasties.
All praise Korgan!!!:)

This post has been edited by Kerkes: Aug 12 2008, 06:24 PM

[Kerkes]

one other thing.. It is stated in IA readme that "this mod has some of the hardest battles......for experienced players.....etc" Personaly I don't know why Sikret even bothered with blocking possible exploits. What I mean, who actually uses stuff like that? We wanted a challenge, now we have it, and again, some of the threads are crawling with "tactics" such as: set time trap, summon something, attack it so that time trap triggers, kill everything because creatures immune to time trap may not be immune to TS from time trap if they have not triggered it themselves. YIPPPEEE! I laughed my ass of when I read this. I'd actually like that traps be removed from game, along with spell shield, but this is probably for another thread. And magic lasso from planar warden upgrade - save vs.breath at -2 or die instatly due to suffocation and being a coward:)

thieves detect illusion vs SI:div - imo yes, as a hla . I'd keep it this way for ordinary skill. Not to soon, and you don't see mages casting that often later in game anyway. It is a bit overpowered skill early in game.

I agree with Raven, there's much diveristy in IA, even some extra spell-like abilities.

This post has been edited by Kerkes: Aug 12 2008, 06:32 PM

[Vuki]

@Vuki

I REALLY am looking forward to your post on final IA battle

I am also eager to see it.

I do belive that enemies should have abilities you do not have. Since you do also. No enemy has "conatct with nature" I believe. More important, no enemy has fully functional several billions of braincells to use. Take that noble djinni guy. Imagine him without his extra ability, and your guys running about with 100+fire resistance, add red dragon plate, helm, two rings of fire res etc., than even remove magic won't touch you. And I do believe he doesn't cast remove magic (even if he does, you can have mages take it). What fun is he then?

Yes, I agree with you. Luckily I did not say that enemies should not have such an abilities. This is great and makes the game more interesting. For example the web lariat effect of the spiders is a real fun to watch and I enjoy it very much. The noble djinni fire resistance reducing effect also made my first meeting with him harder and more interesting. This is ok, it is in the vanilla game and it is nice that in IA there are much more similar effects.

I found battle with Draco to be as fun as it is especially because you have to think who to protect, how, who should rely on saves etc with no prebuffs. It really adds different flavour to battles, and I'm sure that any other player who has played the battle agrees with me. As for getting dispelled with the drow... it's supposed to be an ambush. Add some RPG with that fact, it can be a very fun and exciting battle. Insane, yes, but CAN be fun if you get really lucky. It's not an ambush for anyone who's ever played it, but if it can be simulated, I find this to be the best way.

Yes, that is the point. It is an ambush and it is very challenging. Maybe too challenging. But you catch the point! Enemies can ambush you. They did not do it too much times but they do it simetimes. This is a tactical manoveur. Now, the question is how can you ambush the enemies in IA? It is really a question, so I am waiting for the answers. BTW, there are other ambushes even in the vanilla game. For example the final fight with Jon is an ambush: he invokes other creatures while you are not able to attack him. (Comment: again this and other similar situations is not a problem. This is great and good to have). So, the question, how can you ambush your enemy in the game?

[Raven]

one other thing.. It is stated in IA readme that "this mod has some of the hardest battles......for experienced players.....etc" Personaly I don't know why Sikret even bothered with blocking possible exploits. What I mean, who actually uses stuff like that?

Yes, I know what you mean. I used to wish Sikret spent the time he spends blocking exploits on making new content instead (I'm sure he wishes he could do it too). But not everyone sees the game the same way; like it or not lots of players will resort to the exploits if they are available, and if I had spent as much time on a mod as Sikret has with IA, I would probably hate to read reports glorifying cheap methods and want to block them as much as he does.

some of the threads are crawling with "tactics" such as: set time trap, summon something, attack it so that time trap triggers, kill everything because creatures immune to time trap may not be immune to TS from time trap if they have not triggered it themselves. YIPPPEEE! I laughed my ass of when I read this. I'd actually like that traps be removed from game, along with spell shield, but this is probably for another thread.

Agreed. Fortunately IA keeps Spell Shield (and its various bugs) largely under control.

This post has been edited by Raven: Aug 12 2008, 07:39 PM

[Vuki]

one other thing.. It is stated in IA readme that "this mod has some of the hardest battles......for experienced players.....etc" Personaly I don't know why Sikret even bothered with blocking possible exploits. What I mean, who actually uses stuff like that? We wanted a challenge, now we have it, and again, some of the threads are crawling with "tactics" such as: set time trap, summon something, attack it so that time trap triggers, kill everything because creatures immune to time trap may not be immune to TS from time trap if they have not triggered it themselves. YIPPPEEE! I laughed my ass of when I read this.

Strange, but I have never used in my play (not only in IA) such a cheesy methods. I never heard about for example the project image cheeting (undispellabkle invisibility) or the multiplied bard songs. These are cheats and I have never used them. I also skipped every time the cheesy solutions while I was reading DSimpsons guide (you know, the comments from readers).

I'd actually like that traps be removed from game, along with spell shield, but this is probably for another thread. And magic lasso from planar warden upgrade - save vs.breath at -2 or die instatly due to suffocation and being a coward:)

I do not know what you are talking about here. Can you explain it to me?

thieves detect illusion vs SI:div - imo yes, as a hla . I'd keep it this way for ordinary skill. Not to soon, and you don't see mages casting that often later in game anyway. It is a bit overpowered skill early in game.

I agree with Raven, there's much diveristy in IA, even some extra spell-like abilities.

Yes, I agree that thief's detect illusion ability is overpowered in early game. The problem is that the solution for this problem is illogical and bad. Of course from playability it is ok, no problem with it. The problem is that it affect the credibility of the game world, it does not fit to the game logic.

[Raven]

I'd actually like that traps be removed from game, along with spell shield, but this is probably for another thread. And magic lasso from planar warden upgrade - save vs.breath at -2 or die instatly due to suffocation and being a coward:)

I do not know what you are talking about here. Can you explain it to me?

Small spoilers for this battle...

SPOILER!

The magic lasso drags a character towards the Warden (used if you run away so that he can't attack you). So Kerkes is suggesting that when the lasso is used it should actually be able to kill a character too.

[Sikret]

The thief "detect illusion" ability is a divination tool. It's not divination spell or magic, but it's still sort of divination tool. See the mod's readme about this tweak.

If the ability was a plain divination spell, we wouldn't even need any tweak. It would be blocked by default. The change is called a "tweak" exactly because it allows SI:divination to block a divination tool which is not a spell.

The tweak is fully justified in my book; if it's not logical for you, well, again we can agree to disagree.

[Vuki]

Small spoilers for this battle...

Ok, I noticed it. But I thought that Kerkes is talking about something existing but he just wished something.

[Vuki]

If the ability was a plain divination spell, we wouldn't even need any tweak. It would be blocked by default. The change is called a "tweak" exactly because it allows SI:divination to block a divination tool which is not a spell.

The tweak is fully justified in my book; if it's not logical for you, well, again we can agree to disagree.

First of all, the spell description does not reflect it. Secondly, I still think that this not the right spell for it. Simple: this spell stop spells and spell-like effects from a school and this ability is not something like this. Theoretically high intelligence give protection against illusion spells, 19 protects against 1st level illusion spells, 20 against 2nd level and so on (in standard AD&D). I am not sure if it is implemented in the game or not (I think it is not) but the modified version of IA should protect against it also (based on your description). Do you think it is reasonable?

Also, if you apllied such a tweak then you should apply it to all versions: so, it should protects against all spells from the given school, all spells-like effect and all such an abilities. That way it would somehow logical again. Not 100% logical, but at least more logical.

But again, I think we will not agree in it because of the different view. No problem.

[Kerkes]

@ Vuki

well, I suppose Raven knows what I was aiming at with planar prison warden. And yes, it is something I would wish for. Nghhhhhhh...magic anti-cheese laso o'doom "coward executor". I can already hear Viconia's screaming!!

@Sikret

Please make one for IA6! Will make me wanna run away just for the fun of it

[Kerkes]

@Vuki

just read your reply on ambushes and such
How to ambush an IA superpowered enemy? Well, I usually use Imoen. Most fun for those rune assasins - prebuff, enter, run like hell, time stop, Impr.Alcatry and watch the assasins get their moisture evaporated:). Ambush? well, I suppose it would be better to call it "surprise" or "flashbang" but it works. you can't use tactics from strategy games like surrounding your enemies, jumping from bushes to slit their throats and other Hollywood stuff from "The Last of the Mohicans" . at least I think so.

[Sikret]

Enemies can set an ambush, because the arena is their territory. It's most unrealistic if you expect your party to set an ambush in their homeland.

Almost every method you may want to use and call it your "ambush" against the enemy in enemy's homeland will end up being (at best) cheesy method (if not plain cheat) in my book. This is different for the enemy, because as I said, those ambushes are taking place in their own territory.

[Kerkes]

Pt 2. Don't use game editors
I would not use game editors to buff my characters with XP, items, statbonuses or check on enemies. Sikret also says that you should not give your character illegal classes. Whereas I agree that kitted multiclass characters (save Gnome, illusionists) is wrong, I do sometimes feel like playing something really different. A dwarven sorcerer, a kobolt cleric, an elven paladin... I see little wrong with such adventures. So, if I want to play such a character I feel fine with using an editor to change my protagonist or an NPC into something else. If I do know how to script it, then I try to keep the use of editors to a minimum by editing the character generation and leveling files (ab***.tp2 files, clab****.tp2 files). For example, I can add a component in the paladin CLABfile to change the race into an elf at level 1 and adjust the minmax stats in the abclsmod.tp2.



Pt 10. Killing a sure enemy before he turns hostile and starts to fight. And Pt 1. Hostile Spells from a distance.
Depends... If I scout an area and find a suspicious party, then I'll cast a detect evil to see what they are. If I'm (lawful) good I may decide to jump them, since the world is better off without evil people. If I'm neutral, I may cast a protection spell such as bless and some long lasting armour/stoneskin spells. If I'm chaotic or evil, I'll jump on them anyway. In any case... if I decide to jump on them, then yes I will cast a hostile spell from a distance. If that happens to kill the quest, lower my reputation or whatnot, that's what my protagonist has to live with. It may seem cheese, but I think surprise fights are allowed in a roleplay-type context. This does not mean that I'll always do these things on every encounter. In certain quests when you know that there are going to be future foes around (such as an infiltration quest as in the bandit camp in BG1), my protagonist will have to find a way to "play along" and not confront every foe in sight.

A dwarven sorc has +5 to saves unlike human, elf or half elf. That's a major bonus, I believe the game itself does'n allow it because of balance. As for Pt.10 - doesn't it mean you'll be killing them regardless of your aligment?
I believe that not everybody with a decent weapon in this game should be evil buggers who are off to kill somebody walking around. But this game is pretty much like that
@sikret

Don't you consider Time trap to be an "ambush"?

This post has been edited by Kerkes: Aug 12 2008, 10:47 PM