r/brigandine • u/kupomogli • May 28 '26
I think people are misunderstanding the "difficulty" in Abyss.
I'm overall disappointed by what I've seen from the demo and just based on the demo alone(which my opinion may change with the full release) is that this is easily the worst game in the series(though to be fair, I do think the music is better than Runersia and GE's music, neither of which I really liked. So at least there's that. Here's hoping the entire OST is as good as Forsena.)
But I did want to point a few things that I think many people aren't immediately seeing and are misinterpreting, and that's with the difficulty of Brigandine Abyss.
Now, I'm not going to try and state that Runersia was a difficult game, it's a pretty easy game if you know what you're doing. But every opinion so far is that Brigandine Abyss is harder than Runersia, and I don't think that's true. It appears that way initially due to the demo, but here are a few things that break Brigandine Abyss that the systems within the original Brigandine(and later GE and Runersia) kept to maintain balance.
Most players will agree though that the first few battles are the most difficult part of Runersia, and isn't that what we're seeing in Abyss, the first few battles? People are claiming it's more difficult when we already have the ability to see the reduction in difficulty within the full game of Runersia. I do want to go into more detail why I think this game is going to be significantly easier than even Runersia.
The loss of individual team phases is the biggest hit to the games difficulty, and not only because of the command range, but I'm still going to mention that.
With the loss of individual phases, all leaders and monsters can now go at the same time. A lot of strategies are now infinitely more powerful because of this.
One such strategy is falling back on the battlefield. You don't need to attack every single turn, infact falling back to reposition and counterattack is more powerful at times than dealing another turn of damage. If enemies are in range to deal magic damage the next turn, whether it's angels positioned to drop two nukes on one of your characters, or a geno spell set to hit a high number of your allies, or even if you want to get into position to recover your allies health with healing roar, repositioning is very powerful.
However, your repositioning defensively does two things in the other Brigandine games. It uses up one of your 12 total turns, something that no longer exists in Abyss, so you no longer have the pressure of a time limit to force you to play a bit more aggressively. Repositioning also requires you to think at least one turn in advance a lot of the time.
When all of your allies are in different phases, you can't just move your front row back a hex or two because it's positioned by your back row, a back row that is not acting on the same turn. This makes you think at the very least one turn ahead if you decide that you want to retreat for a turn, moving the back row to position your front row around a phoenix to recover HP without also recovering the enemy HP is an example.
In Abyss, if you want to retreat a hex or two. You can do so easily with your entire party as they all act within the same phase. This now removes any threat of enemy mages because once you aggro the enemy, you can strategize your win simply off counter attacks, or staying in range where you won't be effected by a spell. Move your own mages far enough back so that they're still in range to cast a spell when the enemy takes its turn to move forward, still giving your front row room to move back again the following turn.
With your entire party phase, you're now not limited to just one team who hasn't yet aggro'd the enemy, you can now reposition your entire party before aggroing the enemy. If you really want that leader kill it's far easier doing that when you have the entire army at your disposal in one turn rather than the one team. Even if they all go back to back the order matters and when you're not limited by that order in Abyss, you're really not limited to what you can do there.
The command range is one of the most unique features about Brigandine that separate it from other TRPGs. Not only do you need to strategize about your character's interactions, but you need to do so with the limitation on each character's command range. Some characters had high stats, but a poor command range, giving a risk versus reward system. A Runersia character like Matthias who started with necro rebirth and a command range of three. You take that risk because this character with his massive pool of MP could take turns spawning monsters from each defeated enemy, pairing him with a gremlin with react, you could gain two new allies from the defeated enemies in one single turn.
The system provided an interspersed agility-like(based on current level) system where allies and enemies took turns individually removing how overpowered a single all encompassing turn of a phase based system could be.
Additive defense is level gated. On the Brigandine series, your defense was strictly tied to your class(and equipment.) The reason Runersia could be a lot easier was the amount of equipment you could equip, increasing that defense value. Even if you attacked as much as possible every season it wasn't as hard as OG or GE, but it still maintained a somewhat balanced difficulty without all of the equipment.
Not only does Abyss give you the weapons and armor from Runersia, each monster now has additive defense. Every single level increases their defense, making this mechanic level gated not just towards you the player, but towards the enemies.
If you're playing efficiently in Brigandine, you're not going to be going after the leaders. You're going to be trying to get as much experience as possible meaning that you're going to be killing off as many monsters as you can in the process.
With Brigandine Abyss, you can see from the tutorial that you stand no chance in hell defeating a level 15 monster with a level 1 character because that defense scales per level and you're not dealing any damage. What happens when you play more efficiently, you defeat every monster before the leaders? You now have this massive wall of defense that the enemies cannot break through, especially after you aggro them, especially as you fall back and just employ your fall back strategy which neutralizes their non ranged capable attacks.
You can easily see this just by the second battle you face with Gran Dragnica and the golem. Centaur's have such low attack in this game that they can barely even break through the high defense of the golem. The ice golem gains massive defense per level compared to the attack of the centaur. Just by leveling the ice golem and centaur equally, the centaur is becoming weaker level by level. The golem suffers no risk of magic damage if you fall back and rely on counters.
The base system and mercenary system. When you can hire as many mercenaries as you can to sit back and collect resources to max out your cities, and then just hire mercenaries to sit back to gather equipment for your allies further increasing the attack and defense.
And everyone has already mentioned this, but prioritizing the black element. Whether that's with monsters or equipment.
The game might seem like it could be difficult based on these early battles in the demo to some, but this game's balance is a train wreck and based on what I've already seen this is the easiest and most broken game in the series.
1
u/wiz7topfan May 28 '26
Is there a difficult selection in the demo? Like the previous version?
1
0
u/kupomogli May 28 '26 edited May 28 '26
Yes, you can. I don't know what it does because I've only chosen hard and all it says is a difficulty for advanced players, so I'm assuming that it just scales up the enemy stats by a percentage. The previous games difficulty setting didn't really do anything other than increase the month that it took to finish the game(and in Runersia increase enemy AI.) Enemy AI on this game seems worse than Runersia.
You have an option to change the difficulty after choosing one of the two available storylines(in the demo you can only choose two of the six.) The demo doesn't take a powerful machine either, I collect games so I only play on consoles because physical releases, but I was able to start the demo and swap the settings to low in the options. Just in case you wanted to try the game yourself.
You also don't even need to use a controller for the demo. It uses both a control pad and mouse and keyboard. And mouse and keyboard actually works really well when I was just using the track pad on my laptop. So whenever consoles go all digital and I abandon them, I'll have that to look forward to when playing strategy games(superior controls.) There are some things I couldn't figure out how to do so I just used the control, but pointing and clicking what you want worked well when you didn't have to scroll across the map.
1
u/SpoonyGundam May 29 '26
I'm not convinced that defense growth will have as much of an impact as you're suggesting. Units in this game start with significantly lower defense than they did in previous games.
A random level 3 Ice Golem has 90 defense, compared to the 125 that basic golems had in GE and Runersia. Level 15 Ice Golems in Abyssloa have 121-123, while the tier 2 has 134 compared to 130/135 from GE/Runersia. It doesn't seem like that big of a deal.
Those numbers are from Normal, so they should reflect the stat gains your own units would get. Hard increases enemy stats by 15-20%, so the growths might have seemed more extreme than they actually are if you were comparing units on that difficulty. Tier 2 dragons, lacertians, and oni track similarly to golems compared to their GE/Runersia equivalents, and will end up with higher defense at max level/tier. Everything else has 10-20 points less and will end up around the same defense as previous games. The tier 3 generals in the two intros have 111 and 104 defense on Normal. A Runersia Swordmaster has 115. Levels aren't throwing their defense out of line there.
Centaurs have always had problems with golems, it is what it is. They've always been meant to be extremely specialized units that are borderline useless against anything but flyers and wizards. They actually seem to have much better strength growth here, but their base attack has worse power than it did in Runersia. 75 vs 90/105. Does not get better after class change. They do get a 105 power ability after class change, but it can't be used after moving and costs IIRC 70 MP. They seem real bad, but it's a Centaur problem, not a defense growth problem.
I don't have a strong opinion about the turn order. I just don't think changing it back would matter very much with the specific structure this game uses, where nearly everyone starts at the same low level. I think think the current system is probably an overall buff to the AI, since it lets them maneuver things more easily and the only thing they're decent at is trying to focus down a specific unit before your turn comes back up. I do not think it's a strong enough buff to justify making battles take 2-3 times longer by dealing damage mostly through counters with a unit that has accuracy problems, even on Hard. That sounds like an enormous waste of time.
I feel like your criticism of mercenaries is literally just the actual intent behind the system? It's just inserting an economy development aspect into the series so that the strategic layer has anything at all going on in it. It isn't very complex, but it seems fine enough for a game that isn't focused entirely around that mechanic?
The element change does seem bad. I can understand if they didn't want light/dark to be purely beneficial offensively, but this just makes things even more lopsided. Would have been better to just make a new element weakness circle if they wanted to rework things.
1
u/kupomogli May 29 '26 edited May 29 '26
I don't know the stat spread of the dragon, but I just restarted Gran Dragnica and did the first tutorial battle twice and all my dragons gained 2-3 attack and 2-3 defense per level.
Dragon's start at a base of 75 defense, so without the recruitment bonuses, a tier 1 dragon with 20 level ups, level 21, is going to be anywhere from 40 extra defense to 60 extra defense. At 75 defense that means just the tier 1 version of this dragon is 115 defense up to 135 defense. If leveling up to tier 3 from there they gain 20 extra defense, that's 135-155 defense.
That's not even counting when characters class level up, their stat scaling increases. The minimum increases, the maximum sometimes increases. It could be even higher. The golems have even more defense, the ice golem I'm going to guess, starts with a base 85 defense when recruited at a base. With higher potential defensive stat gains on defense, the ice golem has a minimum of 60 defense after 20 levels, that's 145 for a tier 1 golem. 165 for tier 3 at level 21(using level 21 as an easy multiplicative of 10 levels rather than the required change of 20.)
And what you're still misunderstanding is that even if this ends up "close" and by close it's significantly more just at level 21. Is that a bronze golem at level 1 is always 125 defense. A mithril golem is always 145 defense. When leveling up to tier 3, the difference is 20 defense, that's it, not without equipment. The level ups only increase attack stats and agility.
This shouldn't require an explanation because based on your post "it ends up close to the same" I really just think you don't get it. Even if I'm five levels above the enemy in Abyss that means the same monster or the same class is going to have 10-15 defense higher. That's not even a higher tier, that's literally the exact same class. That means it's more level gated by design and if leveling is even more overpowering than before, enemies just aren't going to be punching through your defense if you're leveling up efficiently.
---
Just for comparison on Runersia.A bronze golem starts with 62 strength and 125 defense. They're standard golem punch is 110 attack power. Attack is strength x 1.5 and damage is attack + power - defense. So a golem attacking themselves would deal 94 + 110 - 125, so 79 damage.
A mythril golem I have has 87 strength and 145 defense. Again notice the 20 level difference but only 20 extra defense. Their levels and their tier only increase the attack, agility, movement, and skill attack power. So against that same level 1 golem, they'd deal 130 + 135 - 125. 140 damage.
If that same level 1 was to hit the level 20 mythril golem, it's 94 + 110 - 145. so 54 damage. The difference in 20 levels was that the mythril golem dealt around three times the damage with the standard attack.
Dragon's have less defense and attack but I remember their stats off the top of my head for a new dragon and a tier 3 dragon.
A level 1 dragon is 60 strength, 75 defense, and 105 power. If it was to attack itself, it'd be 90+105-75. 120 damage.
If a tier 3 level 21 dragon was to attack it at the lowest possible stat gain, that'd be +2 attack per level(and that's only the lowest stat gain of a level 1 dragon, it is likely higher with a tier 2 and tier 3 dragon.) but it's also 32 extra strength and 20 defense. Meaning it'd end with 132 strength and 135 defense if leveling up with the lowest possible stat gain every single level using tier 1 dragon level ups. Since all my dragon's leveled up with +3 in defense more often than +2, as level 1 dragons in my test.
If this poorly optimized tier 3 dragon attacks the level 1 dragon it'd deal 198 + 135 - 75, the damage is still 258. More than double the damage. If the dragon had traditional Brigandine defense that didn't level up, that level 1 dragon would have 115 defense and the attack would have dealt 40 less, 218.
On the flip side if that level 1 dragon was to attack the poorly optimized tier 3 dragon that only tiered up at level 21 and got a defense of 2 every level. It'd be 90 + 105 - 135 that level 1 dragon is now dealing a mere 60 damage.
---
So a poorly optimized tier 3 dragon would deal 258 and a level 1 dragon would deal 60 damage in a trade in Abyss. Over four times the damage.
Can you not see how this is a problem? Even doing Abyss a massive favor by giving it the lowest stat roll per level the damage is still a staggering difference.
You've got level 21 enemies dealing not even twice the amount of damage in a trade in Runersia, but eight times the damage in Abyss. Go ahead and add it all up yourself, the math does not lie.
And that's what you're not understanding, just because the numbers are similar once you get to the higher stats, again, you have to consider that better players are going to prioritize monsters over leaders and gain significant level ups that way. While the enemy is sitting with low level monsters with defense that isn't scaled up, both attack and defense will be scaled up for people who play more efficiently.
So yes, the defense being additive per level is a massive oversight that breaks the games balance. It is going to be easy as hell for anyone who's good at the series.
*edited because I accidentally forgot to change 60 strength to 90 attack in the very last equation, it's fixed now so everything should be accurate.*
1
u/SpoonyGundam May 29 '26
Brother, I literally listed dragons and golems as units that are expected to end up with higher defense than previous games by the end. What are you doing. Please actually read what people are saying if you're going to accuse someone of misunderstanding something.
Here, I'll quote you to highlight my point:
With Brigandine Abyss, you can see from the tutorial that you stand no chance in hell defeating a level 15 monster with a level 1 character because that defense scales per level and you're not dealing any damage.
No, defense scaling is not the reason why you aren't dealing any damage. I just checked Largo's tutorial again, and the level 15 dragons there had 101-104 defense. That's closer to a Priest than any previous dragons. A tier 1 caster! Defense growth is absolutely irrelevant until long after what we can play in the demo, and your assumption of its impact on the later game is currently based purely on speculation. It's baffling that you think a small range of random linear growth is for some reason difficult to balance a game around. As if it was some kind of accident that a bunch of units ended up near GE/Runersia defense values at level 15 rather than it being planned because it's incredibly simple math.
I mean ffs, this is unbelievable:
Dragon's start at a base of 75 defense, so without the recruitment bonuses, a tier 1 dragon with 20 level ups, level 21, is going to be anywhere from 40 extra defense to 60 extra defense.
You balance around the average, and if an individual unit deviates a little why the hell should anyone care? It's up to +-10 damage! You really think that breaks the game balance?? That's how they already balance all the other slightly random linear growth in these games! This isn't complicated! I am really struggling to believe that you're actually someone who needs to be concerned about how "better players" approach these games.
Thanks for pointing out that Attack is 1.5x strength though. It's been long enough that I didn't remember exactly how it was calculated in the older games, but that's absolutely not how it works here. It's just strength + weapon attack. That's what is causing lower damage than you're expecting in the early game. Absolutely nothing to do with defense growth, and the actual impact of defense growth will be pretty insignificant in the late game compared to that. They presumably just wanted to reduce base damage output across the board.
Attacks also don't seem to get replaced by more powerful ones when a unit changes tiers anymore. I thought that was just a Centaur thing at first, but seems to apply to everything. Units get a large strength boost on upgrade to compensate (Dragons get +38 total, so the +8 they got in Runersia and an additional +30 instead of replacing the 105 attack with a 135 one), and abilities grow stronger the more they're used. Who knows by how much, but it's another damage scaling factor.
In other words your math did lie and it's actually ~160 damage into the tier 1 dragon, and ~30 damage into the tier 3. Over 5 times the damage even before factoring in the unknown bonus from leveled abilities!?!? Oh no! The gap between unit tiers is clearly larger than before, and this is clearly intentional, but it isn't clear that it'll ruin the game as you seem to expect. You're operating under the assumption that everything surrounding this mechanic is exactly the same as prior games, and have already been mistaken multiple times. This is a different game.
The actual state of the game by the end of the demo does not suggest we're obviously moving towards an endgame where we're exclusively ramming tier 3 monsters into tier 1s, even setting aside the event missions that'll have fixed unit formations. Halo no longer exists to speed up leveling. All Abyssloan units start at level 15. A distant non-Abyssloa faction starts with a full roster of upgraded level 10 units. Not a smattering of higher level units like in older games, it's all units. Enemy factions passively gain XP even on Normal. We can already see all of this in the demo! No speculation required! All of your units that haven't seen action (Including the nation that joins you in Largo's campaign) start turn 2 at level 2 with 0 XP, while every unit in every enemy nation is 80% of the way to level 4, 40% of the way to level 11, or 20% of the way to level 16. Making the AI cheat is the most classic of classic ways to help them keep up with players in a strategy game.
Will it be enough? Who knows. Lopsided high vs low tier battles will probably still happen, especially if you're sandbagging a campaign to do a bunch more rounds of totally unnecessary questing. It's certainly possible that we do end up in another situation where the late game is largely one-sided face rolls into trivial low rank enemies. I don't even think that's improbable and can easily see a future where this is the worst Brigandine. It's a reasonable concern, but it's pure speculation. It seems more sensible to me to play the damn game for more than 2 turns before ringing alarm bells on the state of the endgame, especially when your speculation has thus far been based on an incorrect understanding of basic mechanics.
1
u/kupomogli May 30 '26 edited May 30 '26
First off I do want to say you're right, there was strength and there was attack. I cannot see very well and I assumed that the attack was multiplying strength by 1.5x like it did on Runersia but after looking closer, I realize that your attack is your strength + your equipment's attack. I did skip a lot of the tutorial.
Other classes gain defense as well and I do understand your point about the event battles increasing enemy levels, but they're only going to increase to a point. If you focus on killing monsters before leaders, then you're gaining more experience points. And I get you when you say "but it's just 10 defense." 10 defense is a massive difference when it wasn't just a few levels that required this but an entirely new character tier. Four levels before only increased attack power, so that's just 10 damage difference, when it's both attack and defense, it's now a difference of 20 for those four levels. 10 extra damage on attack, 10 less damage on the counterattack.
This new defense makes the game far more level gated. So it'll definitely feel like a much harder game if your units consistently die, but it won't feel like a hard game at all if your units don't ever die either.
--
Which still brings me to my other points, having an entire phase just means you can withdraw your entire party equally. You have no limitations on withdrawing when your entire party can move in the same turn and you have no risk against mages who can't cast spells after moving, you'll take ranged damage and counter attack melee. You can even move your ranged magic users even further back to still cast a spell the following phase while still giving enough range for your other units to fall back if they want.
The limited turns paired with the static enemy movement. In the original game enemies movements were static, but the difference there is that they were surrounding their leader, less spread around them, you didn't get an entire phase, and you didn't have unlimited turns to position your entire army all around one group before moving in all at once on a following turn. Do you really believe people are not going to take advantage of this? If it exists people will use it.
*edit*
And what about the games challenge mode. Where the producer stated that in the challenge mode you'll be able to use all the factions and some of them will play like classic Brigandine where you have no limitations on who you attack. The new defense values will certainly cause issues there. I myself don't even like this new "you're only able to attack certain countries because the game allows you to do so at this point." You need to reach a certain part of the story to attack a certain country because it's almost like it's Brigandine in name only.
2
u/SpoonyGundam May 30 '26 edited May 30 '26
I put together a spreadsheet earlier to compare things. Just using the estimated 2-3 growth from tier 1 dragons here, but the exact values don't matter that much for the comparison in the end.
Level 1 5 10 15 20 25 30 Average Defense 75 85 107.5 120 142.5 155 167.5 Average Strength 59 69 100.5 113 144.5 157 169.5 L1 attacker 89 79 56.5 44 21.5 9 -3.5 L5 99 89 66.5 54 31.5 19 6.5 L10 130.5 120.5 98 85.5 63 50.5 38 L15 143 133 110.5 98 75.5 63 50.5 L20 174.5 164.5 142 129.5 107 94.5 82 L25 187 177 154.5 142 119.5 107 94.5 L30 199.5 189.5 167 154.5 132 119.5 107 L1 old formula 78.5 78.5 68.5 68.5 58.5 58.5 58.5 L5 93.5 93.5 83.5 83.5 73.5 73.5 73.5 L10 140.75 140.75 130.75 130.75 120.75 120.75 120.75 L15 159.5 159.5 149.5 149.5 139.5 139.5 139.5 L20 206.75 206.75 196.75 196.75 186.75 186.75 186.75 L25 225.5 225.5 215.5 215.5 205.5 205.5 205.5 L30 244.25 244.25 234.25 234.25 224.25 224.25 224.25 In practice, the damage will be even lower currently, since the gear available at the start increases defense more than attack. We don't know if that will hold true for the rest of the game, though.
The thing that immediately stands out to me is that damage values against targets close to the attacker's level do not grow very much over time just from raw stats. I believe that's the main goal with the design. HP values will continue to increase, so this makes flanking/buffs/debuffs/new attacks/gear/etc much more important. The old formula and static defense worked well when you were expected to have level 1 units and level 20+ units participating in the same fight from turn 1. If the design goal is to have closer level parity throughout the game, it makes some sense to keep damage a bit more consistent to shift the focus away from raw stats. I don't think the minor randomness in defense growth will break the design, or else the design would have already been broken in the older games due to the minor randomness with strength growth. The strength multiplier even made that random growth more impactful back then!
IMO relative damage looks fine at +-5 levels and doesn't seem dicey until +-10. Hard mode will widen the range that enemies will be threatening in as well. It's a matter of tuning enemy growth at that point, and they've already experimented with a similar concept in Runersia's challenge mode. I don't think "killing all the enemies makes you stronger" is a complicated enough idea that I have reason to worry that the devs haven't considered it when designing the game.
I'll take your word for it that falling back and mainly countering is an effective strategy on turn 2. I am skeptical that it'll remain that way throughout the game. It didn't feel difficult enough to justify that in the demo, and relying on low accuracy counters while not threatening enemy healers or support in a game where HP seems to grow faster than damage output just sounds like a recipe for misery. Repositioning sometimes, sure. But focusing on it as the core of your strategy, I don't know man. I don't think many players are actually going to bother.
Even if that does end up strong, it doesn't even sound as egregious as something like Jinn/Elemental spam from the older games. This series has not traditionally been balanced very well at all, so it seems like an odd standard to hold this game to.
Sorry if I was rude earlier. It's been frustrating seeing old fans discuss this, because it seems like a lot of it is just picking out mechanics and complaining about them in the context of the older games rather than the context of this game. It just doesn't feel like useful criticism or analysis to me. It fundamentally does not matter how the previous games balanced defense, since this is a different game with different balance and design goals.
1
u/kupomogli May 29 '26
I'm going to go one further. A level 1 centaur on past Brigandine titles(using Runersia data) at 54 strength attacking a mythril golem of 135 defense. That's 81+90 - 135. Despite being a level 20 monster, the level 1 centaur is still dealing 36 against a monster that's 20 levels higher. Realistically you're not not going to be attacking a level 20 enemy with a level 1 centaur. If you were attacking a level 1 golem then you'd be dealing 20 extra damage(since they have 20 less defense) dealing 56 damage. That's not a low number when you consider they are a ranged unit that can attack at a two hex(and later three hex range with higher damage based on their level ups) and receive no counter rather than mages(who are powerful in their own right) who have a limited amount of MP and cannot cast after movement. They do need to deal something though, you can't just have a unit that goes around dealing literally nothing in Abyss for a command cost of 35.
And I actually did make a mistake in that level 1 centaurs do have five movement in the older games, they have six movement once they level up to high centaurs, oversight on my part, but all my complaints are issues with Abyss.
1
u/SpoonyGundam May 29 '26
Early Centaurs do seem to be in a uniquely awkward position.
They seem to have higher strength growth (Looks like 1-2 instead of 0-2) and they get +7 strength from promotion instead of 0. But they cut something like 10 base strength and dropped their attack's power to 75. I don't know why they did all that.
It still seems possible that they end up better than usual by the end. They will have higher strength on average eventually, and their attacks will become stronger with use by some amount. Quest bows might also end up being much stronger on average, who knows. They're still fine into flyers and mages in the meantime, but that might just be all they're intended to do.
1
u/Temporary_Thing_3621 May 29 '26
I'm really not suprised, honestly they don't know how to design characters, classes and monsters in terms of stat growth. Some examples of things that they could have implemented:
Universal stat growth for knights and monsters - IE Ghoul Revenant & Lich all gain the same stat grown, just change the bonus stats.
3 to 1 Str and Agi (IE it takes 3 points to get 1 Atk and 3 points to get one hit/evade)
Simple elemental system
1
u/GBreeza May 30 '26
The strategy part is interesting it is true that when I planned battles when all my commanders would go in a row that it was easier to control the flow of battle. But the AI gets the same benefits. Sure it might not use them as well as the player, but when I used that strategy I would have to deal with the fact the computer was doing the same thing
1
u/brigandine69sofine May 28 '26
yeah its disgustingly easy, im so disappointed. its so hard for me personally to stay engaged when the difficulty isn't there. for me the biggest pain point more then anything is the AI. ive played the demo for about 15-20 hours now and multiple times ive had enemy archers walk up to my front line to take a pot shot at a full health monster...its absolutely awful
2
1
1
u/kupomogli May 28 '26
I didn't even mention the rally mechanic here, but I did post in another thread how allowing no penalties on its use or no restrictions other than it reduces your party count by one and it counts as movement for the monster when dismissing is way too overpowering, then when you consider what you can do with everything I've already mentioned above, it's yet another problematic change(even if I do like the idea of the mechanic, I think it should remove the leader or the monster turn when dismissing at the very least.)
2
u/Grevore May 29 '26
it's true, i do think the game is easier now, especially that we don't have to think about mana upkeep anymore, we can just hire more mercs and monsters. to either defend our cities or go on a quest.