I really like the idea for this mod, but simply does not work well with bg1, esp the beginning. The difference in AC between armours is pretty slim, and with enemies doing damage of little numerical value the percentage resistance does not matter, steps of 5% simply do not change anything. At the same time penalties mean that basic leather armour is actually better than studded leather.
The solution may be unrealistic but should work in game terms, i.e. tutu armour should have different values from bg2 ones.
A need to rebalance the mod for bg1tutu
Started by Guest_Chainmail_*, Jan 04 2011 01:36 AM
4 replies to this topic
#2
Posted 04 January 2011 - 11:27 AM
I like the thought. Do you have any concrete ideas you want to explore?
#3 Guest_Chainmail_*
Posted 05 January 2011 - 02:35 PM
erik, on Jan 4 2011, 11:27 AM, said:
I like the thought. Do you have any concrete ideas you want to explore?
#4
Posted 06 January 2011 - 10:56 AM
Playing around with the numbers in thebiglist.txt and reinstalling can give you an idea pretty quickly. And I have sympathy for the idea.
Of course, early tutu is basically based on luck. With 4 HP you can die very easily no matter what.
Of course, early tutu is basically based on luck. With 4 HP you can die very easily no matter what.
#5
Posted 05 December 2012 - 03:30 AM
What about simply lowering of the same amount ALL the AC values of armors, thus bringing non magical heavy armors closer to their vanilla statistics (making them probably moer powerfull due to added DR, but, like you noted, BG1 maybe needed a tweak to make each blow less lethal) and making high-end armor even better.. Many also say (and I agree with them) that in BG2-TOB high levels (where you get uber magic equipment) AC becomes to be less relevant due to Thac0 skyrocketing.. so this would actually address both issues imho, while saving the concept of your mod (high AC-> light armor, High DR -> heavy armor).
What do you think?
What do you think?
Edited by Cremo, 05 December 2012 - 03:32 AM.
Reply to this topic

1 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users











