Pathfinder: Wrath of the Righteous - Survey
 

Owlcat Games has started a survey to understand what to improve in the future. It's not too long, 16 questions.

More information.

Yay more surveys time to do my job for the cause once again.:biggrin:

I was positive overall and left some comments on things they can improve.

I have not yet done the survey and only had a quick peek but I like the questions - good to see they ask about chap5&6 and crusade combat in detail because those def could use some improvements.

I shall do my duty as a fan and provide the feedback after work today :)

I will make sure to tell them to drop the crusade management and kingdom management mini game systems in future games, and in no uncertain terms… :p

Likewise!

I like the crusade management.
But if you don't like it, I am pretty sure you can turn it on auto right?
I am loving WotR… but I haven't gotten beyond chapter 3 yet lol! Too many choices on character creation.

I like crusade management but not crusade combat - it's not unbearable and I certainly like it more than kingdom management but wish it was better implemented.

All I want is an automatic SORT button for the inventory!! :)

There is a mod for better inventory, but TBH it is not much better!
Yes I reckon crusade management is better than kingdom management from kingmaker.
I don't mind the tactical battles.. .Bit simple

I've reached Act 5 and stopped playing. I've already put over 140 hours in the game (and no, I didn't spend many hours figuring out who I wanted to play nor did I restarted it a single time. It's this single playthrough that is taking that much time (I'm thourough in exploration, a curse).

But I reached a point where in combat, it's really hard to hit an enemy. Their too high AC makes my spells useless and my fighters barely land a hit on certain enemies (while almost one hit killing others).

And I'm not in the mood to respec my PC or favorite NPCs to try to adapt them better for this late game. When losing a combat where I barely hit the enemy or in a certain combat the enemies are like that AND respawning infinitely while I don't deactivate certain statues or whatever… I lose the will and quit. After several days I launch again… Same battles, same little patience for it. Quit again. I'm at a point in Act 5 that there's really no other content/quest to keep me going and keep getting stronger, so I can return to those difficult battles and maybe have an easier time.

Of course, Disciples Liberation managed to hook me, which kepts me aways from Pathfinder, letting my will to play pathfinder cool down even more. Oh well…

Maybe it's time to finally move on to Encased.

I never found kingdom management a chore as it fit the setting. You were a lowly baron who started small and became king eventually. So the entire system indeed made sense.

Same with the crusade management and combat system you are in charge of a holy crusade. Anyway sounds like many gamer's were spoiled by modern hero focused RPGs.

I tend to be with purple in preferring the crusade management, and the council board, a lot more than the combat part.

For myself I think the crusade stuff is important to the game flavor - as it adds the aspect that you are the Knight Commander. W/out it I think it would feel odd as it would not be a crusade. Still if you were just a party sent ahead (or alongside) the crusade that would also work and think I would be fine with that as well.

I did the survey and left plenty of feedback.

That sounds like the most hated battle in the game, which was created by the CODEX. The forced TB combat with respawning enemies, mirror image spells, and so on.

That all being said you can adjust the difficulty if the battles are too hard, that is why they have a ton of difficulty settings and options after all.

I don't play to get stressed or frustrated so if a fight becomes too hard, and I have tried a few tactics, I lower the difficulty.

It certainly fit the setting. The whole story is centered around the fact that you are *the* commander so it's logical to have this strategic part in the game. Still, that doesn't make it good.

Personally, I like to play strategy games and I also like to play rpgs (duh!). Wotr, it's basically a 85% rpg / 15% strategy. The strategy part isn't nearly as polished as the rpg part. It's fairly basic. Pretty much every turn based strategy games are much better that what we are being offered in this game. It ends up being distracting, annoying and I think it adds very little to the fun the game provides. I really hope their next game doesn't make you a general / leader / whatever or make it very non intrusive (Like BG2 fortress you "win" from the trolls). They should stick to what they are best with, that is providing great adventures, exploration, cool party based tactical combat, good NPCs, interesting villains, well written dialogs, and a compelling story. That's plenty enough.

Also replied - and suggested a move away from the non-RPG 'mangement' aspects in future. Thematically, managing the crusade fits - I get that. But I don't like that stuff personally and… I have minions for that, trusted commanders etc. Let me issue some directives and have others carry out my will. When the time is right, I should be allowed to lead the crusade (as they did with city liberation). I really am not intetested in shuffling armies acros a board and enagging in grid-based combat. I thought DA:Inquisition did this well - building your inquistion, managing some strategic decisons in the war room, but it was never onerous (to me). If the management had not included the army combat parts, it would have been fine in my opinion - I don't need that level of control granularity.

And yes, while you can turn it off - I did, about 90% into game, after pouring huge amounts of time an money into it - the game is much blander without it. It is clear you are supposed to use it and the game is designed around that. While I like both PF:K and PF:WotR a great deal, I don't know why Owlcat are so keen (obsessed?) on adventure paths that require this level of management. There are plenty of Pathfinder AP's that don't that are also interesting .

You can use the lowest difficulty level for the crusade system, not sure if that helps much.

I think they just want to bring something more than the "normal" level of such games, and at the same time push what's already there, in order to make an outstanding game but also to please people with different expectations.

In Kingmaker they chose the most complex ruleset and implemented a vast number of classes (and gave the choice between TB/RTwP later), but they also added the kingdom management. In WotR they added yet more classes, improved the management level, companions and C&C, and added the mythic paths. You can clearly see them push every feature and stretch the game to its limits, while offering the choice to bypass them.

Which explains why it's not entirely stable when it's released, unfortunately.

Yes, the crusade management is fitting for this game. And I really like playing strategy games.
But it's just not done well in WotR. It's just like a mediocre strategy game from some small start-up indie dev. There's nothing fundamentally wrong with it, but it's quite shallow and the usability is horrendous.

Just some random tips:
Most enemies have a weak spot. If regular AC is too, check touch AC and saving throws. If touch AC is low, hit with touch attacks. If a saving throw is low, attack with appropriate spells. Often your fighters are just there to take hits (or better not take hits) and let your casters do the damage.

If it doesn't work out, just lower the difficulty.

It was the last feature they added, I'm sure they ran out of time.

I hope they continue working on it to reach the same level of quality as the other features, and I wouldn't be surprised if that was the plan. But it may just be wishful thinking. @purpleblob1 did you hear anything about that?

No I haven't heard anything but fingers crossed it will be improved based on the feedback we provide.

Unfortunately, crusade combat content/functionality kept getting overhauled during beta, so beta testers haven't had much chance to provide feedback on it.