The "Unbreak Lheticus' Brain" gaming thread

[Lheticus]

Well, the "Lheticus is a N00b" thread is pretty old by now. I dunno if it's 45 days by now, but I'd rather not risk thread necromancy. If I have a non-gaming issue, I'll post a similar thread in the appropriate forum.

Now to get to it. The culprit is once again, I'm sure to some of your chagrin, Bravely Default.

Copypasted from the message I composed on the Gamefaqs forum:

I just got to the part where you go into the Witherwood for a sidequest. The FAQ here I was using indicated that level 28 was a reasonable level to take the boss of the sidequest on in hard mode (all the FAQ boss stats were from hard mode, so I interpreted that being level 27 and most of the way from there to level 28 (Tiz actually being at 28) was a reasonable place to be to enter the dungeon. However, I came down with yet another case of pwned-up-the-butt syndrome when I went up against a D'gon. They're capable of outspeeding my entire party thanks to the game's turn order randomness factor, they have a magic attack stat prodigious enough to wipe out any member of my party in a single turn with the Fireball attack unless that member Defaults, a Magic Defense stat to match and render all water attacks not made by a Spell Fencer freaking useless, and an HP amount befitting its bulk.

The only thing I can figure to do is make it so EVERYONE has the Fire Resist skill, but that involves training my 2 non caster party members, (I use 2 caster, 2 non-caster) in classes they will literally never use in proper battles just to level up for the support skill.

My issue isn't that I'll have to grind--I think the skill is level 3 or 4 or something so it shouldn't be long where I am--but that I feel like the game is bossing me around with stuff like this. I want the freedom to win through in unconventional ways, darnit! Guess I'll take a break and find something like that.till the urge leaves me, then come back.

-----

That is, unless someone can come up with something else I'm doing wrong. My party is Spellblade, Ranger, and 2 mages.

[Vitruviansquid]

I haven't played that area in awhile, but the obvious answer to me is to make sure your party members who can be one-shot by Fireball is defaulting when the fireball goes off or is able to be resurrected on the next round with either an item or a spell.

I've noticed that Bravely Default's combat really is less of a traditional RPG and more of a puzzle game. Even mook-level enemies usually tend to pack some sort of ability that can reliably wipe an unprepared group, so you really want to adapt your party to what you're going to face a lot of the time.

[Lheticus]

I haven't played that area in awhile, but the obvious answer to me is to make sure your party members who can be one-shot by Fireball is defaulting when the fireball goes off or is able to be resurrected on the next round with either an item or a spell.

I've noticed that Bravely Default's combat really is less of a traditional RPG and more of a puzzle game. Even mook-level enemies usually tend to pack some sort of ability that can reliably wipe an unprepared group, so you really want to adapt your party to what you're going to face a lot of the time.

Um, I'm pretty sure ALL of them can be 1-shot fireballed.

[Vitruviansquid]

Then default it or bring two people who can resurrect.

[Lheticus]

Then default it or bring two people who can resurrect.

I'm not sure what you mean by "Default it". Even using Default any of my party members still get their HP cut in more than half. If I default with EVERYONE, I don't get to attack at all ever. If I try a Sleep spell or something, it seems to fail quite often in the particular case of D'gon and the D'gon usually outspeeds my fast caster anyway. Resurrecting does no good--since I'd need at least 1 BP to resurrect someone beyond minimal health, it alongside whatever appears as the 2nd enemy in the formation can damage my party faster than I can heal it.

It's like I said--fire resistant items/abilities are mandatory here. I'm just grumbling about it really because I don't like the game telling me what to do so firmly.

[Kaptin Keen]

It always seems to me that two types of games have a Hard Core or Nightmare Difficulty setting.

#1: Games that allow players to pat themselves on the back for completing the game on Hard Core and tell their friends that "it wasn't even all that hard" and feel good about themselves.

and

#2: Games that go .... "Huh? No. No no. Um ... no, it really is quite nightmarishly difficult." And let players feel bad about most things, and reward only the most bull-headed and stubborn with the sweet vindication of (eventually) winning regardless.

=D

[GloatingSwine]

So, you identify the problem: Strong fire attacks.

You identify the solution: Fire resist skill and/or gear.

And you refuse to apply the solution to the problem because reasons.

[Lheticus]

So, you identify the problem: Strong fire attacks.

You identify the solution: Fire resist skill and/or gear.

And you refuse to apply the solution to the problem because reasons.

Oops, I could swear I posted something here that explained the problem was over, in an edit. Long story short, I got around not wanting to do it, so yeah.

[Lheticus]

Several times, I've had it explained to me why items and stages with hazards are completely omitted from competitive Smash Bros play, and that the "tripping" mechanic is despised in Brawl for the same reason--they turn the game into a contest of something other than pure skill.

Now, I'm with EVERYONE 100% on the tripping thing. It's cumbersome and annoying no matter what from a gameplay perspective, and it makes no sense for the characters to be capable of such incompetence from a story perspective. I also support the non-use of items--while everyone has an opportunity to acquire them, there are a significant number that are frankly OP--the hammers, for example.

What I don't understand is why proponents of the "pure skill" aspect of fighting games are against stage hazards. Yes, it's something other than your opponent hurting you, but stage hazards (at least in many cases, with exceptions such as the Halberd that has weapons that actively target someone and that stage where a huge wave of lava rolls in and there's only room enough to save 1 person) are impartial, affecting all players on the stage the same way. I've heard there are tricks to exploit stage hazards in some cases, but I would think there are also a number of ways to stop each of those tricks. Instead of cutting out all but like 4 stages of Brawl, why did players not simply adjust the metagame to counter such exploitation?

And another thing, I can't say I fully comprehend the "fighting games should always be pure skill" mentality in the first place. I've brought up once before how high level tournaments can be so anal about it that they actually mandate fresh controllers for all participants, significantly increasing entry cost because this is such a thing. Exactly why is the very concept of a fighting game with any random elements at all so taboo? Plenty of game genres have random elements--except for competitive video games, where the randomness is always nonexistent or unimportant to the point of meaninglessness. If we accept randomness as a factor in games like MtG and Scrabble, what's stopping us from accepting it in competitive video games?

[Math_Mage]

When stage features (let alone hazards) are significant enough to drive gameplay, one or more (usually more) of four things happens: (a) they inordinately imbalance matchups due to differences in how easily some characters can take advantage of the hazard; or (b) they permit permastall tactics or glitch abuse; or (c) they interrupt gameplay, such that players have to focus more on accommodating the stage than fighting the other player; or (d) they're random. Even something as simple as a moving stage (e.g. Poke Floats or Rainbow Cruise) can severely punish characters with low mobility.

As for why competitive fighting games cultivate a pure skill mentality, well, that's the whole point. MtG has randomness inherently due to being a card game--take away the randomness, there's no game left--but the designers aren't eager to add random effects to competitive cards. Same for Scrabble.

[Manticoran]

Simply because that's what they want out of their game. Might as well ask why people who like to go out and hike don't want it to be a race, or why people who enjoy watching sports get so hung up on individual players. It's because that's what they enjoy, so they find the hobby that exemplifies that enjoyment. The fighting game community just happens to have developed into one that does that. Also, in general, competetive gaming tends to hate RNG. See SC, SC2, League of Legends, (Not DotA, for some reason, although averages still win out to make it not really that random), etc. I can't think of many esports where you compete for money where RNG plays a major role. Also, RNG plays a very minor role in MTG for the most part, I should point out. Yes, it's possible to get "God hands", but... Laws of averages means that over time decks that aren't very very consistent lose more than decks that are.

Oh, and I should note that the reason people don't like stages that kill you in Brawl is because they're not consistently going to kill you. No one objects to falling off the edge killing you, but it's when 90% of the time the bottom of the stage is safe, but 10% of the time you get eaten by a fish.

[Lheticus]

When stage features (let alone hazards) are significant enough to drive gameplay, one or more (usually more) of four things happens: (a) they inordinately imbalance matchups due to differences in how easily some characters can take advantage of the hazard; or (b) they permit permastall tactics or glitch abuse; or (c) they interrupt gameplay, such that players have to focus more on accommodating the stage than fighting the other player; or (d) they're random. Even something as simple as a moving stage (e.g. Poke Floats or Rainbow Cruise) can severely punish characters with low mobility.

As for why competitive fighting games cultivate a pure skill mentality, well, that's the whole point. MtG has randomness inherently due to being a card game--take away the randomness, there's no game left--but the designers aren't eager to add random effects to competitive cards. Same for Scrabble.


Simply because that's what they want out of their game. Might as well ask why people who like to go out and hike don't want it to be a race, or why people who enjoy watching sports get so hung up on individual players. It's because that's what they enjoy, so they find the hobby that exemplifies that enjoyment. The fighting game community just happens to have developed into one that does that. Also, in general, competetive gaming tends to hate RNG. See SC, SC2, League of Legends, (Not DotA, for some reason, although averages still win out to make it not really that random), etc. I can't think of many esports where you compete for money where RNG plays a major role. Also, RNG plays a very minor role in MTG for the most part, I should point out. Yes, it's possible to get "God hands", but... Laws of averages means that over time decks that aren't very very consistent lose more than decks that are.

Oh, and I should note that the reason people don't like stages that kill you in Brawl is because they're not consistently going to kill you. No one objects to falling off the edge killing you, but it's when 90% of the time the bottom of the stage is safe, but 10% of the time you get eaten by a fish.

Call me an idealist, say my standards are too high (to be fair they probably are,) but I feel that a truly strong competitor should be able to overcome bad turns of luck, even against a player of roughly equal skill--to be able to mitigate misfortunes so the consequences from them aren't sufficient to really tip the balance. In the cases of Math_Mage's examples, I concur with a and b, but feel that with c, it is only annoying rather than game-breaking as long as the interruptions are relatively infrequent. With d, so long as a randomized hazard makes allowances for human reaction time, giving fair warning, I don't believe that would render a previously equal match unequal.

[Math_Mage]

Call me an idealist, say my standards are too high (to be fair they probably are,) but I feel that a truly strong competitor should be able to overcome bad turns of luck, even against a player of roughly equal skill--to be able to mitigate misfortunes so the consequences from them aren't sufficient to really tip the balance. In the cases of Math_Mage's examples, I concur with a and b, but feel that with c, it is only annoying rather than game-breaking as long as the interruptions are relatively infrequent. With d, so long as a randomized hazard makes allowances for human reaction time, giving fair warning, I don't believe that would render a previously equal match unequal.
Your proposed solution to (d) is simply to shove it towards (c), which doesn't really solve anything. Arguing that (c) is merely annoying rather than gamebreaking isn't the same as saying (c) actually has any redeeming qualities that justify its inclusion in competitive fighting games. Moreover, usually (c) leads to (a) because some characters will be Just Better at dealing with the distractions posed by stage features.

And that really is the word: "distraction". Fundamentally, why bother with stages that distract from the parts of the game that are relevant to competitive play?

[Lheticus]

Your proposed solution to (d) is simply to shove it towards (c), which doesn't really solve anything. Arguing that (c) is merely annoying rather than gamebreaking isn't the same as saying (c) actually has any redeeming qualities that justify its inclusion in competitive fighting games. Moreover, usually (c) leads to (a) because some characters will be Just Better at dealing with the distractions posed by stage features.

And that really is the word: "distraction". Fundamentally, why bother with stages that distract from the parts of the game that are relevant to competitive play?

I understand what you're saying, and if you were to put a TM sign after Just Better, I would fully support that and think it hilarious--in fact, I think I'll do that myself when given cause--but I feel that there surely MUST be a way to incorporate stage hazards into a fighting game that does not detract from the game and the inclusion would be justified. My reason for this is shaky logically, but I believe it's enough to conclude such a thing POSSIBLE--that reason being that in many hypothetical real-life engagements, and heck, a good number of video game based engagements though none in the genre of fighting games, using one's environment against an opponent is an excellent tactic. I don't honestly know what the trope for using the environment to win a fight is, but I do know I'd like to see a fighting game with that as a major point.

[Manticoran]

There are, though. In Brawl, falling down the bottom of the stage or off the sides IS a hazard, and is commonly accepted as a game mechanic. So is going off the top. It's when it's unpredictable that it becomes not good for competitive play, not something about the stage that hurts. That said, anything that you include WILL make certain characters better at using it than others, it'll make grabs more powerful, etc, so it's another thing to balance against. I agree with Math_Mage here that the thing is that it just tends towards C, annoying. And why bother adding annoyance? It just doesn't really add anything much, even if you could theoretically work it out to be balanced.

[Tsuzurao]

Sorry about jumping to the older subject, rather than the newer one, but this is something that I feel needed to be addressed.

I think part of the issue you're having with the damage that the D'gons are putting out is that Fireball is a Physical attack, not a Magic one, so you would be trying to adapt for the wrong thing if you try to build up Magic Defense.

A general tip - unless the attack is very explicitly a spell (like what Black and White Mages do), the attack probably runs off of Physical Attack. Fireballs, breath attacks, energy waves, things like those hit for Physical damage.


EDIT - I missed the post saying you got past that. Still, I hope the above advice helps for the future.
EDIT 2 - Meep. I missed something very important. Fireball is a Defense-piercing move, so having high Physical Defense wouldn't help against that particular move (high HP would serve better against that one).

As an aside, you said that your Water-element attacks don't do much of anything to D'gons unless you use a Spell Fencer? That's odd... do you mean that a Black Mage's Blizzard spells aren't doing much damage to them?