please recommend settings

[Lemernis]

No need to go into exhaustive detail (unless you want to, it's welcome), but what SCS II settings would you all recommend for a range of increased challenge? Let's say recommended settings via SCS II for 1) mildly increased level of difficulty, and 2) moderately increased level of difficulty.

 

I ask because I tried SCS II in its beta at the highest possible difficulty and found that, for me, it was not fun--far too many battles turned into a major chore to complete.

 

Actually, for BG2 the vanilla settings aren't too bad for my taste. So, personally, I would favor a mild to moderate increase in difficulty.

 

I definitely need to up the challenge in my current game, where I completed every sidequest in chapter 2, including Watcher's Keep. I also used the multiple strongholds tweak to complete all but two of the stronghold quests. So party is currently facing the Spellhold maze at the following levels:

 

PC Cleric 15/ Ranger 13

Imoen Thief 7/ Mage 13

Anomen Fighter 7/ Cleric 22

Korgan Berserker 21

Edwin Conjurer 18

Valygar Stalker 19

 

Except Imoen everyone has a couple HLAs by now. I have Quest Pack installed which does add some minor AI tweaks. But I still expect I'll probably be able to steamroll through the game at this point.

 

As a yardstick, I really like the level of difficulty presented by SCS in BG/Tales, pretty much with every component installed. I just find that, for example, if enemies in BG2 are given HLAs the game becomes extraordinarily difficult. Because BG2 presents such an endless slog of battles, I don't want the majority of them to take lots of reloads.

[Salk]

Hello!

 

When a game becomes a chore, it is no longer fun.

 

SCS (and SCS II) is not for all.

 

This phrase has been used many times and it's true.

 

Instead of recommending settings I would advice you to wait untill SCS II v8 is released.

 

DavidW says that it will be more explicit then what components of the mod will offer a smarter AI (which practically everyones wants - my only complaint being the necessary price to pay in terms of Detectable Spells/Effects) as opposed to just tougher encounters/enemies.

 

The latter has a rather wide scope and offers many interesting ideas like restored abilities and powers but also a beefing up (without though cheating with stats and HPs) that can make practically each battle a real pain.

 

The problem is: there are too many battles. Baldur's Gate could - in vanilla state - engage the player in many battles because most of them were harmless and quick.

 

But with SCS, things are different. Since we cannot really remove battles from the game, the question to ask ourselves is: am I ready to pay the price?

 

Personally, I have this dream of starting BGT and finish it without ever seeing the "Game Over" sequence (no reloads). It's already rather difficult in the vanilla game if you play without using cheesy tactics. It becomes almost impossible with SCS.

 

Having tougher opponents can really be funny because they become more unique and with specific powers that they should often have as for P&P rules. But then be warned: it won't be a stroll in the park.

 

In conclusion, even if DavidW said that the distinction between components that improve the AI only and those that toughens the challenge is pretty evident, it didn't come so natural to my eyes. Of course the Smarter AI speaks for itself but sometimes components are not so self-explicative in telling which of the two aspects they improve upon. I would have thought that it's most often both of them - in different measures.

 

Good luck with your game!

[Lemernis]

Thanks.

 

I'm tentatively thinking maybe just

 

* smarter general AI

* smarter mages and priests

* potions for NPCs

* better calls for help

 

and leave such monsters as dragons, liches, beholders, mindflayers, etc., vanilla.

[Icendoan]

The mages have scripts that utilize full spell combinations. I mean like Mislead and SI:D, as well as Greater Malison and Doom with spells like Chromatic Orb, Finger of Death, Disintegrate and Wail of the Banshee.

 

Watch out.

 

Icen

[Lemernis]

Agree totally that SoA/ToB just has too many high level battles, in seemingly endless succession, for one ballbusting battle after another to be fun for most players.

 

Ideally, increased difficulty comes by way of a combination of two things:

 

* smarter enemy behavior (spellcasting, spell detection, calls for help)

* better items at the enemies' disposal (better armor and weapons, potions, magic items such as wands).

 

What I personally would like to see is combinations of these two types of improvements at three different difficulty levels: mild, moderate, extreme.

 

And it seems to me that one of the things that can make the game too hard (and no longer fun) with SCS II scripting for most players' tastes is the enemy's ability to detect the spells the party has cast. Combat seasoned spellcasters can surmise a lot. But I would think it is also fair to argue that in the heat of battle it would be nigh but impossible to successfully guess at what an enemy is casting because one is concentrating on casting one's own spells. I would recommend keeping enemy spell detection available at the highest difficulty level, but remove it from mild and moderate difficulty levels.

 

 

 

 

 

 

* And to reemphasize, for my taste anyway, SCS for BG1/Tales works out perfectly--but that's because it doesn't have the party facing off against one high level spellcaster after another. It's the neverending slog of high level battles in BG2 that has SCS II turn the game into a chore for most players.

[Lemernis]

The mages have scripts that utilize full spell combinations. I mean like Mislead and SI:D, as well as Greater Malison and Doom with spells like Chromatic Orb, Finger of Death, Disintegrate and Wail of the Banshee.

 

Watch out.

 

Icen

 

Thanks for the head's up. If I start getting bored then I'll try those components and see how it goes. If it proves too much challenge to be fun (for me), then maybe I'll uninstall the components and just enjoy the fruits of my labors without SCS II, i.e., the levels gained by completing every sidequest and Watcher's Keep in chapter 2. Maybe it'll be fun in it's own way to simply clobber the enemy from here on out.

 

I'm blowing through the Spellhold maze right now, with the PC singlehandedly taking out most of the opponents. I haven't even had him use GWW yet. After the Underdark he'll have Crom Faeyr. I'm actually a bit curious to see how such a character fairs against the game's highest level enemies in ToB. (I usually don't play melee characters.)

[Bearwere]

And it seems to me that one of the things that can make the game too hard (and no longer fun) with SCS II scripting for most players' tastes is the enemy's ability to detect the spells the party has cast. Combat seasoned spellcasters can surmise a lot. But I would think it is also fair to argue that in the heat of battle it would be nigh but impossible to successfully guess at what an enemy is casting because one is concentrating on casting one's own spells. I would recommend keeping enemy spell detection available at the highest difficulty level, but remove it from mild and moderate difficulty levels.

1) I think it's absolutely impossible to do any smart scripting without knowing what your enemy is protected from.

2) the party knows the spells cast by enemy spellcasters. Would you prefer not to know them?

 

I'm blowing through the Spellhold maze right now, with the PC singlehandedly taking out most of the opponents. I haven't even had him use GWW yet. After the Underdark he'll have Crom Faeyr. I'm actually a bit curious to see how such a character fairs against the game's highest level enemies in ToB. (I usually don't play melee characters.)

You have GWW in Spellhold? Man, are you sure you need SCS?)

[Lemernis]

1) I think it's absolutely impossible to do any smart scripting without knowing what your enemy is protected from.

2) the party knows the spells cast by enemy spellcasters. Would you prefer not to know them?

 

I can't disagree with this logic. But for the sake of argument, is it possible, and then feasible, to vary how much spell detection there is for, let's say, three different difficulty levels? Eg,

 

low = no spell detection but mages use a better spell selection than the vanilla game

moderate = 1/2 of spells are randomly detected

high = all spells detected

 

You have GWW in Spellhold? Man, are you sure you need SCS?)

 

Lol, I wanted to see how the game played if I did everything in chapter 2 (including Watcher's Keep), plus multiple strongholds.

 

An unintended consequence of that is the party has gotten so powerful so early that the game has become too easy.