Wasteland 2 Ask a Dev Answers #2

WorstUsernameEver

But best title ever!
We have rounded up another batch of developer replies from the Wasteland 2 Ask a Dev forums.

On combat and action points:<blockquote>Combat will be action point based. There are no defined rounds for "rangers turn" and "enemies turn". Instead it is based on the speed attribute of each party member. Characters with higher speed attributes will get more turns than those with lower speed attributes. Put more points into speed if you'd like to attack more in any given combat encounter.
</blockquote>On healing and health systems:<blockquote>Still undecided on "instant heal" items. We're hoping to err on the side of not having them, but if they're needed for the type of combat experience we want, we are reserving the right to include them We have many combat mechanics coded at a base level, so we're starting to get a feel for it.

I would like to balance the Field Medic and Surgeon skills to handle most healing on the battlefield. They don't need items to help their basic form of healing, but for advanced types, they'll use consumables. A skilled surgeon can heal increasingly negative status effects from UNC -></blockquote>On stealing:<blockquote>The player characters won't have a steal skill that they can use, but occasionally an CNPC that the players come across might have the ability to do this. It came down to a question of time and resources. Stealing is a cool skill in games, but any skills we added we want to have a good amount of reactivity. When we starting discussing a design for stealing, it turned into a major task. Ability to steal items, what kind of items can be stolen, what if you get caught, how does the NPC react in the future if you're caught. It turned out to be something we didn't think was core to the experience for the amount of time needed to add it correctly.</blockquote>On drugs:<blockquote>There will definitely be drugs in this game. They might even be helpful for a certain type of player.
</blockquote>On cover:<blockquote>We do have cover in the game. It is similar to the way broken cover in the M.S.P.E. rule set works. There is a "block line of sight" system naturally in our game but we also have objects in the play space that the PCs and acceptable enemy AI can use as cover objects. The attackers chance to hit will be reduced when their target is in viable cover. Their animation state will change as well, visually showing them ducking into the cover.</blockquote>On backgrounds/traits:<blockquote>Somewhat, but not as deep as is discussed here. We wanted to leave the PC's mostly free of having their own personalities, backgrounds and hobbies on purpose. In the original, the PC's didn't talk so they were essentially left to the imagination of the player. In WL2, we are attempting to do the same. There is some light background setup in character customization but that can be overridden with a "custom" setup easily.</blockquote>On Stackpole and Avellone's novellas:<blockquote>Now that the scripting is in the near complete state the novellas can begin. Chris and Mike are starting to pour through the the detail so they can formulate their clever take on the contents of the novella. If there are any particular subjects that people would like to see detailed I would be interested in your thoughts. The cults of LA...The history of the Synths...A story of adventure from Wasteland 1 etc....</blockquote>On crafting:<blockquote>We are currently thinking you will need to go to specific locations for most difficult crafting. For example, when using the weapon smithing skill, you will mostly need to be at a bench. There are elements of crafting that can be done on the road though. I'm being vague on purpose as there are some interesting elements to it that I don't want to reveal right now.

Crafting recipes can be learned as well as available when you hit specific skill levels with that particular skill. There will be unique items that you can craft that aren't available for purchase.</blockquote>
 
Apparently combat being action point based is CONTROVERSIAL. coz some prefer the two-action-per-turn kind of stuff of the new XCOM, or one point per action with like 3-4 points.

Really? Is action points such a problem? What does NMA, hive of Fallout fans, think? :lalala:
 
I agree with the decision with stealing, it is a useless skill that is ignored anyways with save/load ad infinitum.
 
Action points based all the way. They just don't want to do maths and use their head. Curse of the 'dumb' masses!
 
Brother None said:
Apparently combat being action point based is CONTROVERSIAL. coz some prefer the two-action-per-turn kind of stuff of the new XCOM, or one point per action with like 3-4 points.

Really? Is action points such a problem? What does NMA, hive of Fallout fans, think? :lalala:
I rather have AP than the streamlined shit that is XCOM. However AP does have it's share of pros and cons. The real question is wheather a NPCs AP is based solely on the Speed attribute or if a char specialized in combat with an extremely high skill value gets bonus APs when using said weapon that cover his shtick?
 
I'm sure AP is a good system but to be honest i have not play the new Xcom so i can't say if it is a good system too or not.
 
There's nothing wrong with action points. Actually, I'm playing Fallout: Tactics right this way.
 
Ap, cover, water - all good news.
On the other hand there will be no cars and climbing wasn't confirmed. But i guess it's good somehow. They looks aware of their limitations and most likely won't stuck with some impossible tasks.

This AP discusions is weird. First page in this thread seems reasonable. Waiting for every druggie in town to move is boring. I would like to know more about connections between attributes and ap/sequence too.
But suddenly:
Fallout's AP system was bad imo. I couldn't even finish the game because of it, and that was with just one character. Wasteland will have 7 characters.
 
I'm tempted to say more flexibility is always better. That might not really be the case, but we're definitely in the constrained end of the spectrum when talking about XCOM's system.

I don't like that at all, personally. I want to be able to move a little and fire my weapon with slightly affected accuracy, or comparable things. Just allow the player to do whatever he wants with his turn, that he's capable of within the alloted time, and if someone is faster or whatever you want to call it then they're able to do a bit more.
 
I would love an action point system but it did become troublesome when an entire town decided to run up to you (or run away from you) in Fallout. To me the problem/solution lies in ai. As a player I definitely like to take my time during turns, but I want to spend my time on meaningful/stimulating combat.

Mixed feelings about stealing but I get their point. I'll try to think of it as a good call.
 
I don't see the infinite hooker problem as inherent to AP, honestly. Just make every character not in the party move simultaneously, or close to it, especially non-combatants.
 
That would certainly be better in that scenario, but I kind of feel that most often all npcs in an area seemed to be super attached to every single npc around. Shoot one, all attack. I'd much rather be able to have a pub brawl and still be welcomed at the pub across the street (unless there is an obvious connection between the two or the area) since brawls is a supposedly common thing in that kind of world.

How to pull this kind of system off without choking yourself on code I don't know.
 
I like everything I'm hearing.

The only negative reaction I had was about stealing, but I gave it some thought, and in a party based game with 7 other rangers it does seem completely out of place. Someone in this thread also mentioned the fact that stealing mechanics can be highly abused with save games, and I totally agree with not having it now.

On movement, I'm glad they're going with AP. However, I did actually play Xcom Enemy Unknown, and I found the combat to be very enjoyable. It is a true turn based game, and I'm still amazed a big publisher took a chance on it. It's not perfect, but quite frankly the combat in the original UFO Defense was fairly clunky and prone to causing mistakes that are out of the players control. So while Enemy Unknown revamped a lot of systems, they didn't go and turn it into a first person shooter (even though that's what the suits originally wanted).
 
SumsoluS said:
Action points based all the way. They just don't want to do maths and use their head. Curse of the 'dumb' masses!

The delusional nature of this comment is absolutely laughable.

Or just sarcasm. Not sure.
 
Beelzebud said:
The only negative reaction I had was about stealing, but I gave it some thought, and in a party based game with 7 other rangers it does seem completely out of place. Someone in this thread also mentioned the fact that stealing mechanics can be highly abused with save games, and I totally agree with not having it now.

Stealing and reloading has always been a pain in many a game...and not just the Fallout series. Stealing shouldn't be critical for the player to obtain items.
 
One could argue that theft added to the setting in Fallout, making the player more aware of the lack of resources. Every man for himself type of thing. In Wasteland you're a group, so naturally you'll beat or talk your way to the lunch money. ;)
 
It's hard to say whether AP based combat or the new X-com combat is better, having played both. I think either system could end up feeling shitty if the AI doesn't take full use of it. In theory, a game could have entirely "dumbed down for the masses" turn based combat, but if executed by the AI as challenging the player, IMO would end up being better than a more complicated system where the AI simply "runs into your hail of bullets." (cough looking at you! Jagged Alliance: Back in Action)

Simply, if the AI can handle an in-depth AP based rule-set, I'm all for it. But if the AI can only pose a challenge on a more basic ruleset, a-la X-Com 2012, I vote for that instead.
 
Back
Top