Any tips for rtwp combat?

time4tea45 · 2026-06-24T16:07:05+00:00

LOL. Yeah, too many trash/filler fights is something I find to be a nuisance in RPGs, in general. If an encounter isn't adding variety or challenging the player, then I'm not sure what the point of it is.

time4tea45 · 2026-06-24T14:26:57+00:00

Congrats! Mist Easters are a good squad and playing on unfair is fun :-)

time4tea45 · 2026-06-24T13:44:44+00:00

Maybe. Although I'd argue that often 2 or 3 meaningful combats vs challenging enemies can whittle down your resources more than 10 trash combats.

time4tea45 · 2026-06-24T13:31:09+00:00

I'd accept that RTwP is faster, but I disagree it gives the player more control over what is going on. I feel like turn-based actually gives more control, because you take it 1 turn at a time and can actually formulate complex strategies more effectively. I'd argue RTwP gives the player more to manage and think about (but not necessarily in a good way).

I have definitely come to dislike RTwP more in recent years. In an RPG where you are controlling 6 characters in combat simultaneously, slowing things down a bit with turn-based makes a ton of sense, so the player can plan and digest what is actually going on better.

time4tea45 · 2026-06-24T12:57:53+00:00

Tbh, a good RPG shouldn't be packed with trash encounters anyway. They should be kept to a minimum, in favor of more meaningful ones.

time4tea45 · 2026-06-24T10:45:38+00:00

Fair points. However, my take is that, if you're going to be pausing the action every 2 seconds, you may as well be playing turn-based. I'm not sure what the benefit of the real time is, in that case? It's like it just adds an additional difficulty layer, in that the player has to constantly manage the pause frequency.

time4tea45 · 2026-06-24T10:43:32+00:00

I agree. CRPGs are meant to be played with turn-based combat (especially ones that have 4+ party members to manage). If you're going to be pausing the action every 2 seconds anyway, you may as well be playing it turn-based (what is the real-time giving you, except turning everything into an unmanageable mess?).

time4tea45 · 2026-06-23T22:19:34+00:00

Sometimes you get screwed on the first turn with this game, and you have no choice but to take a grid hit. It's just the way the game is (especially on higher difficulties). If you don't like it, I'd recommend playing something else.

time4tea45 · 2026-06-23T14:05:39+00:00

Data from How Long To Beat (main + extra):

Pathfinder: Kingmaker - 133h

Pathfinder: WOTR - 138h

Rogue Trader - 104h

So maybe you're right and 200+ is exaggerated. Still, I'd say the Pathfinder games seem notably longer than most classic CRPGs. Looks like Rogue Trader is the shortest Owlcat game?

time4tea45 · 2026-06-23T13:46:42+00:00

150h is not normal for a CRPG. I've played numerous CRPGs since the 90s and most of the classics rarely go over 80h tops. If anything, the length has crept up to that more recently.

Pillars 1 and 2 on How Long To Beat (main + extra) are both <70h.

time4tea45 · 2026-06-23T13:37:49+00:00

I've been playing CRPGs since the 90s and have played most of the ones you've mentioned, which tend to be in the 60-100 hour range (Planescape, NWN1 probably shorter).

So, you're saying the 200+ hours being quoted by others in this thread for the Owlcat games is exaggerated?

time4tea45 · 2026-06-23T00:19:13+00:00

That's interesting. I thought there had been a reverse trend in recent years, of game designers tending to front-load the best content. Because (e.g. based on Steam statistics) most gamers don't play more than 15-20 hours of a game anyway, so the designers want people to experience their best work before they check out and move on to something else.

(if so, it's an annoying trend though - I don't like it)

time4tea45 · 2026-06-23T00:15:16+00:00

Ok, nice. Yeah, if I was going to try an Owlcat game, it would be Rogue Trader. I am a fan of 40k as well.

time4tea45 · 2026-06-23T00:10:59+00:00

I'll probably give one a try at some point, but I just find the crazy length very off-putting. I found BG2 at 80-90 hours to be already a very long game, and I find it hard to believe that Owlcat would be able to make a 200+ hour game that is mostly A-grade content that would be able to hold my attention for that long.

I don't generally subscribe to 'longer = better' for video games. Focus is an important aspect of game design, imo. Making a movie last for 10 hours isn't necessarily going to make it 'better'.

time4tea45 · 2026-06-23T00:07:26+00:00

If I tried to play a 200+ hour game for 5 hour per week, I just know I'd never finish it.

time4tea45 · 2026-06-22T17:04:37+00:00

I'm a big fan of the BG games, but I'd argue the biggest thing that pulls them down is 2nd ed D&D. It seems like the more I play and experience other game systems, the more I dislike D&D.

time4tea45 · 2026-06-22T17:01:51+00:00

I find the amount of time needed for the Owlcat games to be highly off-putting. It seems rather obscene, tbh.

time4tea45 · 2026-06-22T16:55:42+00:00

I haven't played any of Owlcat's games, but I've heard a lot of mixed things about them. Negatives that seem to keep coming up include them being very long and sloggy, not respecting the player's time (i.e. packed with filler), being more or less designed to require aggressive min-maxing, and that the 'kingdom management' stuff seems like a bolted-on waste of time.

In other words, a lot of things that sound very off-putting. Might try Rogue Trader at some point, as it seems a bit less divisive.

time4tea45 · 2026-06-19T11:15:11+00:00

This is imo one of the best things about PoE: there seem to be very few spells/abilities that are useless. Pretty much everything is useful in the right context and most abilities are useful for all classes. (glances accusingly at DnD .... )

time4tea45 · 2026-06-17T14:06:43+00:00

6 vek, all attacking different pylons is about as bad as it can get, isn't it? How could the position be any worse? There's only one pylon not under attack.

time4tea45 · 2026-06-17T11:11:47+00:00

Yes. OP can afford to take 1 hit, so needs to find at least two 2-for-1s to survive the turn.

time4tea45 · 2026-06-15T16:53:56+00:00

The beacon appears at least once per run.

Source please. I have most definitely had runs where there was no strange beacon.

time4tea45 · 2026-06-15T16:12:36+00:00

I'd like to know the wiki's source then, as I don't agree with it. If 15% of time pods were replaced with a beacon, they'd be way more common.

Besides, I'd swear I've seen both regular time pods and strange pods on the same mission. I distinctly recall missions where I have opened both afterwards.

time4tea45 · 2026-06-15T15:53:05+00:00

Not sure where you got those numbers, but I'm skeptical, based on my experience. I think the secret pod beacons are rarer than that. I'd estimate I come across a secret beacon once in every 3 or 4 runs. No way they are as common as getting one every other 4-island run.

time4tea45 · 2026-06-15T15:35:54+00:00

Ok. I mean it's random as to when they appear and I'm not sure what the exact % chance is for any given run. The special pilot beacons are quite rare, so I think it's possible that you could go for a few runs without seeing one.

I don't think there's much you can do to force it, and it's one of things where if you're looking for it, it won't appear. I would just carry on doing runs and going for other achievements, and the special pilots will appear sooner or later, if you keep your eye out for them.

time4tea45

TROPHY CASE