Relase game mechanics info pls DEVs

Talk about anything Legend of Grimrock 1 related here.
Chiller
Posts: 89
Joined: Fri Apr 13, 2012 12:13 pm

Re: Relase game mechanics info pls DEVs

Post by Chiller »

Durgha wrote:It makes a significant difference between untrained armor being an inconvenience or an outright liability.
I wouldn't say it does, actually. With the possible exception of snails, mobs will hit you regardless if your evasion is 5 or -45. (5 being a normal evasion value for a back-row char, and -45 being the evasion after you dress them in heavy armor)
Durgha
Posts: 10
Joined: Wed Apr 18, 2012 9:57 am

Re: Relase game mechanics info pls DEVs

Post by Durgha »

Chiller wrote:
Durgha wrote:It makes a significant difference between untrained armor being an inconvenience or an outright liability.
I wouldn't say it does, actually. With the possible exception of snails, mobs will hit you regardless if your evasion is 5 or -45. (5 being a normal evasion value for a back-row char, and -45 being the evasion after you dress them in heavy armor)
I suppose I should've clarified that.

Speaking from the perspective of someone that wants this information specifically to fine-tune combat challenges in the upcoming dungeon editor, the difference is significant. Unquantified mechanics like negative Evasion make the design process murky and frustrating. An extra hit here and there might not be relevant to the game overall, but if you look at an isolated encounter like the Fighter's Challenge then it becomes significant.
User avatar
Disasterrific
Posts: 212
Joined: Sun Mar 04, 2012 6:47 pm

Re: Relase game mechanics info pls DEVs

Post by Disasterrific »

Yeah, all this will come out when the editor comes out.

My general vibe is that negative evasion definitely increases the amount you get hit and is pretty bad for survivability of the back row.
DarkCecil13
Posts: 12
Joined: Sat Apr 28, 2012 5:48 am

Re: Relase game mechanics info pls DEVs

Post by DarkCecil13 »

Yeah, I'm dying to know the exact mechanics too.
User avatar
Anton
Posts: 38
Joined: Sat Apr 07, 2012 4:36 pm

Re: Relase game mechanics info pls DEVs

Post by Anton »

Plus one, OP. As a AD&D kid, my brain is hard wired to the numbers and their effects.
DarkCecil13
Posts: 12
Joined: Sat Apr 28, 2012 5:48 am

Re: Relase game mechanics info pls DEVs

Post by DarkCecil13 »

Anton wrote:Plus one, OP. As a AD&D kid, my brain is hard wired to the numbers and their effects.
Yep, same here bro.
Kostas
Posts: 81
Joined: Tue Apr 24, 2012 11:57 am

Re: Relase game mechanics info pls DEVs

Post by Kostas »

Durgha wrote:I think negative Evasion scores could use a bit of clarification. Is zero the effective minimum, or does a negative score actually make a character easier to hit? It makes a significant difference between untrained armor being an inconvenience or an outright liability. I tried testing it, but the results were inconclusive at best.

As for enemy stats, they should be posted. Access to mob data is requisite for the dungeon editor to work, and releasing the info earlier would be beneficial to potential dungeon authors. Detailed notes on combat mechanics would also be useful to this end. I suspect modders have already data-mined the information anyway, so "officially" keeping it secret doesn't seem to benefit the community at all.

Should it all be posted in-game? I suppose that's debatable. I don't think it should be integrated directly into the combat UI since that would degrade immersion. Eventually a separate bestiary tab from the option menu would probably be a good idea, but for now a simple TXT file with the stats would suffice.
Exactly!
Reminds me of UFOpaedia for some reason >.<
Chiller wrote:
Durgha wrote:It makes a significant difference between untrained armor being an inconvenience or an outright liability.
I wouldn't say it does, actually. With the possible exception of snails, mobs will hit you regardless if your evasion is 5 or -45. (5 being a normal evasion value for a back-row char, and -45 being the evasion after you dress them in heavy armor)
Dude your argument makes no sense, sorry.
Post Reply