Also why are we arguing about this even? Battle Brothers is also called a "tactical RPG" and no one tells to discuss it on /vrpg/ whenever it gets a thread. Also people talk about Crudader Kings here when it had very little strategy in it
I'll be playing Darkest Dungeon again because why not
Also is DD 2 good or not
[...]
By the literal meaning of the terms "strategy" and "RPG", Darkest Dungeon, FFT and others belongs on here, while CK2/3 belong on vrpg, but video Game Genres Are More About typical Genre conventions Rather thAn literal Definition.
So Ck2 Is aIs aIs aa Strategy Because You Move unibreasts about While looking At aAt aAt a Mapmap And Darkest Dungeon Is An RPG because you control a party With Stats In A dungeon .
Like there is a lot of overlap. If there is a Tactical RPG where do you go? Do you go yo /vrpg/ to talk about the story and to /vst/ to talk about the combat? Where is the fricking line if there is any in the first place. Because at the moment a tolerance zone is more likely.
Is there a way to win this game? I always thought it was some kind of roguelite but numerous reviews tell me there is no actual win condition and all you do is battle until you die
Huh? Yeah, Darkest Dungeon does have a win condition, and that is essentially to go to Hell and defeat a cosmic God (or at least buy humanity some more time)
In GTA:SA, I can recruit/dismiss troops (the number I can recruit increases throughout the game), tell them to stand in certain places, to attack or defend and the ultimate goal is to seize territory. Therefore, since it has many strategy elements, GTA:SA is a /vst/ game and can be discussed here.
honestly why no other gta ir gta-like clone game did that again? the only other one that comes to mind was the the godfather game.
it was a pretty nice mechanic imh
What is wrong with all those fricking idiots than think a rpg based on grinding is a strategic game lmao
Also ck is a strategy game, but it's huge replayability and not pefect mechanics watered down the strategic "part" after each playthrough. which is true for every strategy game ever, but very few play other /vst/ enough for that to matter or they are simply intelligents and dont care
DD2 is pretty good, but making into more of a roguelite is one of those things that some people will simply like or dislike, you have to figure out yourself where you stand on that. It's also fairly barebones for now, the game still isn't really out yet. They spent a lot of time refining the core mechanics of the game and only really started adding more content recently, but I think it certainly has the potential to be a worthy sequel and better than the first game eventually, so keep this in mind before going into it.
I went back to DD recently after really exhausting the sequel and despite the lack of content it still kept me entertained for a long time.
I do love Darkest Dungeon. Spent a lot of time cheesing that game. Not a lot of people know that the very first dungeon run is always the same. If you leave before finishing, you can do it again; you suffer a stress penalty, but you also keep all the loot. It's not too hard to keep the stress down. After a few runs you have the potential to pick up some mercenaries you like and save up enough gold and relics and shit to get you a great head-start. If you can get an antiquarian, then you'll be set.
Another thing not a lot of people know is you can do this same thing to the Crocodilian in the expansion pack and just milk item sets out of him until you're ready to deal with the Crimson Curse.
Otherwise, I've found an Antiquarian spamming group Dodge is actually strong enough to basically cheese the entire game and Highwayman with the Gunman's Belt can single-handedly DPS through the whole game. I actually ran an Anti-Vestal-Dismas-Reynauld setup and it decimated the hardest dungeons. In fact, it got me real far in the endless mode, too. Took Dis and Rey through the last stage of the Heart of Darkness and pulled them out of that shit still alive. Loved that team.
For me, the best team setup was:
Antiquarian Antiquarian Man-at-Arms Highwayman
First the antiquarians make the man-at-arms and highwayman defend them. Then
you activate the highwayman's and man-at-arm's riposte move. Then, on every turn that you don't spend reactivating the defense/riposte, the antiquarians buff the dodge of the whole group, and the highwayman either uses his point-blank shot ore he uses that atack that moves him forward in order to get ready for the next point-blank shot
>Also is DD 2 good or not
You tell me.
For one, I like how the characters look better in DD2.
It also too a jab of woke, if you happen to care about that.
This game is more /vst/ than /vrpg/
You can bet if I go there they will tell me to go back here
And its more strategy than RPG.
Also why are we arguing about this even? Battle Brothers is also called a "tactical RPG" and no one tells to discuss it on /vrpg/ whenever it gets a thread. Also people talk about Crudader Kings here when it had very little strategy in it
>grand strategy
It's really not.
Ok bro explain the deep roleplaying elements that make Darkest Dungeon more a rpg than strategy
Just like Doom, and yet we don't argue about Doom strategies here.
If FFT belongs on there, so does Darkest Dungeon.
By the literal meaning of the terms "strategy" and "RPG", Darkest Dungeon, FFT and others belongs on here, while CK2/3 belong on vrpg, but video Game Genres Are More About typical Genre conventions Rather thAn literal Definition.
So Ck2 Is aIs aIs aa Strategy Because You Move unibreasts about While looking At aAt aAt a Mapmap And Darkest Dungeon Is An RPG because you control a party With Stats In A dungeon .
Like there is a lot of overlap. If there is a Tactical RPG where do you go? Do you go yo /vrpg/ to talk about the story and to /vst/ to talk about the combat? Where is the fricking line if there is any in the first place. Because at the moment a tolerance zone is more likely.
Crusader Kings isn't a strategy game now?
are you having a seizure
kinda agree but still its more of strategy game than half of the games shilled here
Is there a way to win this game? I always thought it was some kind of roguelite but numerous reviews tell me there is no actual win condition and all you do is battle until you die
lol wut
Huh? Yeah, Darkest Dungeon does have a win condition, and that is essentially to go to Hell and defeat a cosmic God (or at least buy humanity some more time)
not /vst/
Justify
Darkest Dungeon is more of a strategy game than EU4
darkest dungeons is more of a strategy game than anyhting paradox has ever created
In GTA:SA, I can recruit/dismiss troops (the number I can recruit increases throughout the game), tell them to stand in certain places, to attack or defend and the ultimate goal is to seize territory. Therefore, since it has many strategy elements, GTA:SA is a /vst/ game and can be discussed here.
yes
honestly why no other gta ir gta-like clone game did that again? the only other one that comes to mind was the the godfather game.
it was a pretty nice mechanic imh
Freedom Fighters was based around a mechanic like that
What is wrong with all those fricking idiots than think a rpg based on grinding is a strategic game lmao
Also ck is a strategy game, but it's huge replayability and not pefect mechanics watered down the strategic "part" after each playthrough. which is true for every strategy game ever, but very few play other /vst/ enough for that to matter or they are simply intelligents and dont care
>JRPG mechanics
>card games
Begone Plebe
How is DD a card game shizo
DD2 is pretty good, but making into more of a roguelite is one of those things that some people will simply like or dislike, you have to figure out yourself where you stand on that. It's also fairly barebones for now, the game still isn't really out yet. They spent a lot of time refining the core mechanics of the game and only really started adding more content recently, but I think it certainly has the potential to be a worthy sequel and better than the first game eventually, so keep this in mind before going into it.
I went back to DD recently after really exhausting the sequel and despite the lack of content it still kept me entertained for a long time.
getting rid of the pointless grind is a huge step forward for DD
I do love Darkest Dungeon. Spent a lot of time cheesing that game. Not a lot of people know that the very first dungeon run is always the same. If you leave before finishing, you can do it again; you suffer a stress penalty, but you also keep all the loot. It's not too hard to keep the stress down. After a few runs you have the potential to pick up some mercenaries you like and save up enough gold and relics and shit to get you a great head-start. If you can get an antiquarian, then you'll be set.
Another thing not a lot of people know is you can do this same thing to the Crocodilian in the expansion pack and just milk item sets out of him until you're ready to deal with the Crimson Curse.
Otherwise, I've found an Antiquarian spamming group Dodge is actually strong enough to basically cheese the entire game and Highwayman with the Gunman's Belt can single-handedly DPS through the whole game. I actually ran an Anti-Vestal-Dismas-Reynauld setup and it decimated the hardest dungeons. In fact, it got me real far in the endless mode, too. Took Dis and Rey through the last stage of the Heart of Darkness and pulled them out of that shit still alive. Loved that team.
For me, the best team setup was:
Antiquarian Antiquarian Man-at-Arms Highwayman
First the antiquarians make the man-at-arms and highwayman defend them. Then
you activate the highwayman's and man-at-arm's riposte move. Then, on every turn that you don't spend reactivating the defense/riposte, the antiquarians buff the dodge of the whole group, and the highwayman either uses his point-blank shot ore he uses that atack that moves him forward in order to get ready for the next point-blank shot
>Also is DD 2 good or not
You tell me.
For one, I like how the characters look better in DD2.
It also too a jab of woke, if you happen to care about that.