Bay 12 Games Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

Author Topic: The Banner Saga: Factions  (Read 1680 times)

Spitfire

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
The Banner Saga: Factions
« on: March 24, 2013, 05:08:57 pm »

Is anyone else playing this F2P?

It's a turn-based multiplayer combat with multiple units, similar to the battles of Heroes of Might & Magic. But instead of mere hitpoints, they thought up a nice system with HP and strength linked, armor and limited extra moves. To me the combat feels very balanced.

Apparently it's by some ex-Bioware guys who will bring out a full game sometime this year; they made the combat a standalone game, free to play, for PR.

And last: Real money can only buy cosmetics and quicker leveling, absolutely no advantage in the battles.

Official site:
www.thebannersaga.com
Logged
Quote from: Rex_Nex
Wanting boobs is primal, not something sparked by the degradation of humanity.

Hoverdog

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
    • StarLife
Re: The Banner Saga: Factions
« Reply #1 on: March 24, 2013, 06:02:35 pm »

I absolutely love the combat system. It's very simple, you could call it simplistic at first glance. But although it's easy to use, it has big potential, bolsters a wide variety of tactics and is hard to master. A gem.


The 2D graphics are also adorable.

However, they really should get some better servers. After several disconnections during battles (won ones, I might add) in a row, I ragequitted and never started the game up again since.

Draco18s

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: The Banner Saga: Factions
« Reply #2 on: March 24, 2013, 07:10:07 pm »

A friend of mine said, "I'm glad I didn't back the Kickstarter, the combat system is horrible."

Quote
The combat mechanics are poorly thought out, and the gameplay is slow.
Basically you have two stats, armor (flat damage reduction) and health (hit points and damage combined). Attacks can damage either.
The end result is that you "always" use willpower to do damage to their hit points directly, because willpower bonuses to damage bypass all DR and minimum damage to health is always (1).
The other stats don't largely matter...
Logged

Draco18s

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: The Banner Saga: Factions
« Reply #3 on: March 24, 2013, 07:11:54 pm »

Double post because 504.
« Last Edit: March 24, 2013, 07:15:14 pm by Draco18s »
Logged

Spitfire

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: The Banner Saga: Factions
« Reply #4 on: March 24, 2013, 08:38:01 pm »

Well that's not true.

Quote
minimum damage to health is always (1).
If the target's armor exceeds the attackers strength, the probability to hit goes down, effectivly reducing damage below 1.

Quote
because willpower bonuses to damage bypass all DR
Willpower bonuses are also affected by hit-probability. Let's say the target has 5 higher armor and you invest 2 willpower, there's a 50% chance you will do 3 damage, or else 0.

Quote
The end result is that you "always" use willpower to do damage to their hit points directly,
Though it seems tempting to always damage strength, other strategies are very feasible. I really like my archer dedicated to damaging armor.


But I have to say I don't like the introduction of chance with those hit-probabilities.
Logged
Quote from: Rex_Nex
Wanting boobs is primal, not something sparked by the degradation of humanity.

Megaman

  • Bay Watcher
  • What is love?
    • View Profile
Re: The Banner Saga: Factions
« Reply #5 on: March 24, 2013, 08:44:07 pm »

Saying that always doing strength damage is better is foolish, I just beat a Brazilian guy twice in a row because he always hit strength. I broke his armor and could take each unit down with a single hit. Also, the tohit thing does not effect armor.

Would recommend the hell out of this game, it feels like it might get old after a while in my opinion. But, it's free, so why not?
Logged
Hello Hunam

EnigmaticHat

  • Bay Watcher
  • I vibrate, I die, I vibrate again
    • View Profile
Re: The Banner Saga: Factions
« Reply #6 on: March 24, 2013, 09:34:43 pm »

I got annoyed at it because, well, because I kept losing, and I'm normally great at turn based games.  Also matchmaking was a bit messed up in a way that made it hard to train up new units, but I'm sure they will/already have fixed that.

The art style is great and I'm going to play the shit out of the single player.  And I'll go back to the multiplayer sometime when matchamking is polished and I'm feeling less easily frustrated.

A friend of mine said, "I'm glad I didn't back the Kickstarter, the combat system is horrible."

Quote
The combat mechanics are poorly thought out, and the gameplay is slow.
Basically you have two stats, armor (flat damage reduction) and health (hit points and damage combined). Attacks can damage either.
The end result is that you "always" use willpower to do damage to their hit points directly, because willpower bonuses to damage bypass all DR and minimum damage to health is always (1).
The other stats don't largely matter...

Yeah, as someone who played always attacking strength... it doesn't work.  What happens if you play like that and run up against a high armor team is you hit for strength at 3-5 for your early hits, and their early hits bash your armor down for 4-6.  The end result is that their frontline units end up weakened but not killed and you find yourself trying to break their armor anyway when you run out of will, while the archers and warriors (both great at punishing low armor units) that they've been keeping in the back start one-shotting your weakened guys.

Personally I think the combat has a bunch of great features.  Varl (horned giants) take up four squares instead of one, which makes them great blockers but also makes them vulnerable to being blocked or swarmed (although most Varl units have a way to discourage swarming them in melee).  Units larger than one tile almost never come up in TBS games, which is strange because its a great mechanic.  Willpower is implemented in a very interesting way, as you can add a certain amount of it (your exert stat) to each move or attack.  What's significant about that isn't just that you can pile up damage early in fights, but that base move speed is the same for all units of the seach type.  So fast movement isn't an innate property but a resource you have to decide when to use; low exert units can find themselves out of range and wasting precious turns, while high exert units can leap across the battlefield at roughly double their current move speed... and hope all the wp they just spent doesn't make them useless.

The turn system also adds depth.  Units take their turns one at a time, in a turn order that (with one notable exception) cannot be changed.  What this means is that once combat starts you're heavily encouraged to make sure that every unit attacks (or otherwise makes itself useful) every single turn, which lends the game a sense of aggression that is very appropriate for its viking inspiration.  There's also a whole strategy as to whether to maim enemy units and force the enemy to take useless turns, or kill them, and how to protect yourself against maiming, but I've gone on long enough and I'm also probably not the best source for strategy tips on this particular game.

My main complaint with it is the same one I have about Wesnoth: playing multiplayer requires you to commit to a game that might take 15 minutes or an hour, and its generally not polite to leave early (as opposed to FPSs where someone else will join and replace you).  Thankfully the games are pretty short compared to Wesnoth.
Logged
"T-take this non-euclidean geometry, h-humanity-baka. I m-made it, but not because I l-li-l-like you or anything! I just felt s-sorry for you, b-baka."
You misspelled seance.  Are possessing Draignean?  Are you actually a ghost in the shell? You have to tell us if you are, that's the rule