Geneforge 2 - levelling

[Lorn]

Am I wrong, or mobs do level up with you? 

Edited April 4 by Slarzahl
thread title

[alhoon]

No, your supporting creations level up when you increase the relevant Shaping skills (Fire/Battle/Magic Shaping and the Creation type specialty)

[Lorn]

thanks. This comment by Jeff made me think that enemies levelled up with you: https://www.reddit.com/r/Games/comments/1bq30sn/comment/kx17d0y/

[Aoslare]

That comment is just in reference to how enemy stats scale with that enemy's level.  "Scaling to your level" is only one type of scaling.

[Jawaj]

Don't the Queen's Wish games have some soft level scaling, where the enemies will increase in level somewhat as you do but you'll still outpace them in growth?

Edited April 4 by Jawaj

[Mechalibur]

Yeah, enemies demonstrably do scale in Queen's Wish, up to your level-1 (although they also have a minimum level, so they can potentially be higher level based on where you're going).

[Aoslare]

I seem to have repressed the memory of this.

 

Why wouldn't I have repressed the memory of the G3 boats instead...

[mikeprichard]

It's one of several reasons I'm not a big fan of QW 1 and 2 (I understand why Jeff implemented level scaling there - I just don't like it). But yeah, there's none of that in the Geneforge, Avernum, or Avadon series.

[Mechalibur]

Probably getting a bit off topic here, but I think level scaling gets a pretty bad rap due to being poorly implemented (quite famously in the Elder Scrolls Oblivion), but I don't really see the issue if it's done well, especially in games where you can explore major areas in pretty much any order. When implemented well, a lot of people don't even notice it's there, like I've never seen complaints about level scaling in Dragon Age Origins even though it's present, and plenty of people didn't even realize it was in Queen's Wish. I remember there was even a post in the steam forums complaining about how level scaling ruined games and there was no reason to have it in QW2 even when it wasn't in the first game... even though it was and they just didn't realize it!

Edited April 4 by Mechalibur

[Aoslare]

I think the issue is more that even level scaling doesn't hurt the game (which I'd argue for QW) it never really makes it better than it would be without the scaling.

 

Like in QW the whole point is that it facilitates a very order-agnostic open world.  But lots of other SW games have had a world like that (or a more open one, in the case of E/A 1-3).

 

There are well-known issues that can come with level scaling.  I just don't really understand the potential benefit.

[alhoon]

The potential benefit, as we saw in Oblivion was that you could pick up the questline 813 or 141 or 722 at any level, and it would be balanced for you. Theoretically. 

For me, the major downside is the break in believability that comes with it. 

You may be level 1 or level 30 and the guards would be as hard. Questline 813 could as easily be "stop that doomsday cult from activating the byebye world device" which feels adequately epic for high level BUT you could do it at ridiculously low levels or it could be "save Tony's best sheep from the three goblins that stole it!". And facing those three goblins that stole the sheep at level 30 would be as hard as facing those same goblins 20 levels before. 

 

Mind you, it is not just scale with level that leads to such paradoxes. Warcraft is famous for having "bring me 5 bananas from the forest with the nasty blue squirrels!" quests at level 60 after you have defeated a couple of godly beings.  

But Scale with level, unless done correctly it WILL lead to such paradoxes. 

 

I think what they did in Skyrim was that the enemies had lower-and-higher level and that "Scaling" could mean adding more enemies. I.e. instead of 3 level 3 goblins you face 5 level 5 goblins. etc. 

[mikeprichard]

Yeah, although it's a cliche/meme at this point, the way Oblivion in particular handled level scaling was laughably bad for the reasons discussed ad nauseam on the nets. It absolutely destroyed any semblance of immersion, aside from its lopsided effects on gameplay balance. But even when scaling is not at its "worst", I strongly dislike the notion of any game world illogically revolving around the player in this way. I'd much prefer a mix of challenges in a truly open world, and the thrill of encountering and besting a challenge high above your "expected" level - which, as Slarty pointed out, was in fact the case in many/most other open Spiderweb games - rather than an attempt to force the balance of every area to be at a generally similar "middle-of-the-road" level.

I fully understand the reasons why devs, including Jeff, feel the need to implement various types of scaling (and nod at alhoon's point that various CRPGs have certainly not implemented enemy - or other (inventory etc.) - scaling in a monolithic way), but I think there's always a way to build an enjoyable experience that doesn't need to rely on such a crutch. Of course, doing so is generally more time-consuming and therefore expensive, but IMO from an immersion/fun perspective, it always wins.

/rant, whew, lol.

Edited April 4 by mikeprichard

[Mechalibur]

1 hour ago, Slarzahl said:

I think the issue is more that even level scaling doesn't hurt the game (which I'd argue for QW) it never really makes it better than it would be without the scaling.

 

Like in QW the whole point is that it facilitates a very order-agnostic open world.  But lots of other SW games have had a world like that (or a more open one, in the case of E/A 1-3).

 

There are well-known issues that can come with level scaling.  I just don't really understand the potential benefit.

 

I actually thought that was a weakness of the Avernum series. The open-ended nature meant a huge amount of the content was just trivially easy because of the order you picked.

[Randomizer]

E/A 1-3 and GF1 are the only real open worlds that Jeff made. After that he went to closed worlds with barriers to restrict players. It made it easier to balance the game so they didn't fight too many things above their level on normal difficulty. No more explore where you want until you die. If you were good at his games you could get through the difficult places and become powerful really early.

[alhoon]

Well, that scaling in GF games is also causing immersion breaking issues. Alwan's soldiers are the best of the best ... and just check the soldiers of the desert than have 1000+ hp each and one of them would wipe the floor with 3 of Alwan's soldiers. 

The balance issue is to keep the soldiers semi-challenging against a level 30-40 player that would be with 2 war tralls, 2 Drakons and 2 Gazers at that point and easily level 40+ towards the end. But should simple soldiers be anything but a trivial challenge for a Mad Geneforged freak that will soon bring the Shaper Empire to its knees or the Rebellion to its knees? And this is one of many examples where enemies that scale with you ... should not be scaling. 

Specifically, GF2 is better than other versions of the series in that regard; there are reasons the various soldiers are weaker / stronger between factions. Namely, they are different types. Stronger factions have stronger soldiers. 

[Mechalibur]

2 hours ago, alhoon said:

Well, that scaling in GF games is also causing immersion breaking issues. Alwan's soldiers are the best of the best ... and just check the soldiers of the desert than have 1000+ hp each and one of them would wipe the floor with 3 of Alwan's soldiers. 

 

 

That's already an issue! Have you seen how high a level and hp all of Drypeak's guards are (except Zora)?

 

Edit: Although I agree level scaling isn't really a good fit for Geneforge. 3-5 are pretty linear, and 1+2 mostly have an intended path for you to follow level-wise.

Edited April 5 by Mechalibur

[Aoslare]

Even in open world games, what's the benefit?  Would Avernum really be more interesting if you miss a goblin or nephil cave, go back to it late game, and discover they all have the stats of a Haakai?

 

(Also, G2 and G5 are still pretty open world, with open-ended progression -- just as much as G1's, I'd argue.  Certainly they are more like G1 then they are like the strictly sequenced areas of G3/4, A4/5, or Avadon.

[alhoon]

1 hour ago, Mechalibur said:

 

That's already an issue! Have you seen how high a level and hp all of Drypeak's guards are (except Zora)?

 

It's not an issue though, unless the areas I have not reached have weak guards. I mean, Drypeak's guards are level 10 with 400 hp. Unless the drakon guards of the Takers or the warbred servile guards of the Barzites are actually weaker than this, which I do not expect, then it is not at all an issue. 

 

 

25 minutes ago, Slarzahl said:

Even in open world games, what's the benefit?  Would Avernum really be more interesting if you miss a goblin or nephil cave, go back to it late game, and discover they all have the stats of a Haakai?

 

(Also, G2 and G5 are still pretty open world, with open-ended progression -- just as much as G1's, I'd argue.  Certainly they are more like G1 then they are like the strictly sequenced areas of G3/4, A4/5, or Avadon.

 

G5 is a conglomerate of 5 pretty open worlds one after the other, with clear quest-borders in the midst. You cannot go to Taygen's desert without finishing Rawal's, Astoria's, Alwan's and the rebel section paths. 

 

And you see the guards progressing in level from one area to the next, which in some cases doesn't make sense. You won't return to kill Rawal before Ghaldring tells you to at "part 4", so there's no reason to have level 5 guards with 60 hp there. 

Edited April 5 by alhoon

[Mechalibur]

18 minutes ago, alhoon said:

It's not an issue though, unless the areas I have not reached have weak guards. I mean, Drypeak's guards are level 10 with 400 hp. Unless the drakon guards of the Takers or the warbred servile guards of the Barzites are actually weaker than this, which I do not expect, then it is not at all an issue. 

 

Surprisingly, they do have less hp. I was more referencing Zakary's guards who are even higher level than that with more hp.

 

I got quite familiar with weirdly high guard hp when doing the psychopath run 😄

Edited April 5 by Mechalibur

[alhoon]

36 minutes ago, Mechalibur said:

 

Surprisingly, they do have less hp.

Wait, what? the DRAKONS of the Barzites and the Takers have less hp? 

thinking of it... the two battle-?? next to the Shaper that is quick to tell you he is innocent before you ever find out that there were crimes conducted there, have less hp than the rank-and-file soldier of Drypeak.

 

But as ... Randomizer I think? Slarti? have said in the past, the mechanics of Geneforge do not work well with the world info. I.e. that we see level 10 guards with 400 hp that could stand toe-to-toe with a battle alpha doesn't reflect the nuissances of the world. Probably those 400 hp soldiers represent "groups" of soldiers.  

Edited April 5 by alhoon

[Mechalibur]

Depends on the drakon in question, but yeah, some have less hp than the generic 500hp warriors in Zakary's warren.

 

Yes, it's best not to think about it too much.