This game needs some serious rebalancing.

[KombatCZ]

This game needs some serious rebalancing.

I don´t know about you guys, but when it comes to building and developing my character in RPG´s, I´m not the one, that would play it safe. Whether its TES or Witcher I always either build full swordsman or a pure mage.

My first playthrough of the game went rather well. I was only puting poinst into the sword abilities and never touched anything that resembled magic. The game was really enjoyable with a good challenge in normal fights and in boss fights.

The second playthrough was a little different. Being a full mage proved to be quite useful when fighting multiple enemies or even some bosses. Stunlocking almost any enemy with the burning effect meant, that most of the game was super easy. I was however forced to wear light armor, so a single mistake more often than not meant death, so the challenge there was appropriate.

It was however, when I got to fight Imlerith and Eredin, when I realised just how badly balanced this game can be. Because of their immunity to burning, I was forced to only use my sword, which was only slightly more effective, than using my fists. Because of this, both of the fights became an incredibly boring chore.

Was this an actual design decision? Did they mean to make full mage build super strong in normal fights but an absolute garbage in most of the main boss fights? Maybe this was their idea of balance, but who knows.

So, what do you guys think? Does anyone else share this opinion/experience or did I just overlook something? Please, let me know.

 

[Gerald01]

A few observations:
1)Magic build would benefit from Griffin medium armor not light, with Griffin School perk+ others

2)Witchers are NOT mages, you cannot expect a pure mage build to be as effective as a pure warrior 100%.
Signs are intended to support the swordmanship more than be 100% of the offensive capability.

3) having said that, yes, some particular single signs (including Igni itself) and the pure sword build can be OP as heck. Also some decoctions and potions too. There's quite a few exploits needin' fixing.

4) Some creatures, even monsters are naturally immune to FIRE (Igni). It's obvious that if your build is that of a firemage, you're screwed. As in any RPG.
Witchers just so happen to have only FIRE as a purely offensive Sign. Can't be avoided, it's in the lore.

5) In conclusion... through good timing, it happens you can avoid using Signs and just use swords 100% of time, while the opposite in not true. Nor should be. I did a 100% Mage build too plus some Generic perks (yellow) and had no big issues on Hard difficulty except immunities.
It's easy to have a mixed build though, 90% Magic plus some Sword if you feel like it's too hard.

6)PS: yes the game has balance issues. But your assumption that Swordmanship and Magic (Signs) should both be equivalent and self-sufficient is faulty.

 

[GZulu]

A few observations:
1)Magic build would benefit from Griffin medium armor not light, with Griffin School perk+ others

2)Witchers are NOT mages, you cannot expect a pure mage build to be as effective as a pure warrior 100%.
Signs are intended to support the swordmanship more than be 100% of the offensive capability.

3) having said that, yes, some particular single signs (including Igni itself) and the pure sword build can be OP as heck. Also some decoctions and potions too. There's quite a few exploits needin' fixing.

4) Some creatures, even monsters are naturally immune to FIRE (Igni). It's obvious that if your build is that of a firemage, you're screwed. As in any RPG.
Witchers just so happen to have only FIRE as a purely offensive Sign. Can't be avoided, it's in the lore.

5) In conclusion... through good timing, it happens you can avoid using Signs and just use swords 100% of time, while the opposite in not true. Nor should be. I did a 100% Mage build too plus some Generic perks (yellow) and had no big issues on Hard difficulty except immunities.
It's easy to have a mixed build though, 90% Magic plus some Sword if you feel like it's too hard.

6)PS: yes the game has balance issues. But your assumption that Swordmanship and Magic (Signs) should both be equivalent and self-sufficient is faulty.

I agree 100%.

Witchers aren't mages. They are closer to Warlocks...they are swordsmen that dab a little into magic. How many times did Geralt actually NEED to use signs in offensive situations (in the novels)? The first time I read The Last Wish he used Aard against Adda the Strigga, then after that Yrden (was it Yrden?) to seal the Tomb Lid. Both of these signs aren't offensive spells at all. And I believe Witchers use Igni very seldomly (Haven't read all the books to say that it's 100% fact, sorry. Only my opinion)

Playing a Witcher Game as a purely Mage Build does us no favours when the main attack method is obviously with a blade.

 

[evilhippo]

This game needs some serious rebalancing

Not really, you just need a better build. Signs are a compliment to swords, not a replacement thereof. Triss is a mage, Yennifer is a mage, Geralt is not a mage, he is a mystic swordsmen... you made him very mystic but not much of a swordsman, which as you have discovered does not really work Fortunately if you have a spare 1000 gold coins, you can respec him.

 

[ShinGnosis]

Witchers aren't mages, you're supposed to use signs to complement the swords. Not replaces them. It's not unbalanced, it's exactly how it should be.

All monsters with fur and feathers are very susceptible to fire, golems and gargoyles are nearly invulnerable to it etc etc. It makes perfect sense.

You can easily build a very powerful sign character that uses quen shield and yrden against the bosses, only focusing on igni is frankly your own mistake.

 

[prottenstein]

@KombatCZ Are you using potions and decoctions?
Ekhidna Decoction is a must if using a sign-heavy build.

 

[BlacJAC]

Nothing to really add on top of what others have said other than they speaketh the truth. I suppose you can always dip into alchemy if you really aren't intent on using swords as often as you are. There's some powerful stuff hidden away in there which a lot of people bypass because the descriptions do the skills next to no service at all.

 

[Gerald01]

I agree 100%.

Witchers aren't mages. They are closer to Warlocks...they are swordsmen that dab a little into magic. How many times did Geralt actually NEED to use signs in offensive situations (in the novels)? The first time I read The Last Wish he used Aard against Adda the Strigga, then after that Yrden (was it Yrden?) to seal the Tomb Lid. Both of these signs aren't offensive spells at all. And I believe Witchers use Igni very seldomly (Haven't read all the books to say that it's 100% fact, sorry. Only my opinion)

Playing a Witcher Game as a purely Mage Build does us no favours when the main attack method is obviously with a blade.

Well what a Witcher's fighting style is supposed to be in the game world (don't want to make this all about lore, plus I haven't read all the books, not even most of them either) you can infer from Letho's fights in Witcher 2 and Lambert+ Eskel.
Against generic enemies, they can fluently interject signs both as offensive, defensive and diversion means.

Signs are also extremely useful against particular kinds of monsters, due to their characteristics and esp. weakness. The games hold your hand in this regard.
For instance you'll have Yrden for immaterial foes. Axii can be invaluable against human/oids. Aard can be an asset vs mobs of lesser monsters and to clear obsticles.

They're a great secondary tool for a witcher, along with their in-depth knowledge of alchemy and their unrivaled swordmanship.

The game DO NOT, as other Rpgs, allow a PURE build. They allow you to place emphasis (to a great degree in Witcher 3) on one aspect or the other of the Witcher fighting style, with the rest still playing a part.

And the 3 main groups (a trinity of sorts) are only apparently on par and equivalent as far as importance goes. But in reality the Sword one is king no matter the build, if only for a matter of realism and immersion.

Now I would argue the game does a pretty good job at allowing you to mix things up or forge your own fighting style, both in terms of depht and variety, given the lore impositions.
Confronting this to an ES is not fair, it's faceless do-it-yourself PC versus a very much estabilished one, with the added handicap of his caste/group itself having all sorts of lore limitations and peculiarities.
But even then, Witcher 3 doesn't come out humiliated, quite the contrary. And compared to other franchises, it wins hands down.

 

[BlacJAC]

@KombatCZ Are you using potions and decoctions?
Ekhidna Decoction is a must if using a sign-heavy build.

Nothing is really a must. I got by on Death March without even using that potion and I had a sign heavy build. Basically, everything that goes down with Igni goes down fine, everything that is virtually immune to it goes down easily enough with swords. I'm quite shit at games, so I'm not exactly boasting.

 

[GZulu]

Well what a Witcher's fighting style is supposed to be in the game world (don't want to make this all about lore, plus I haven't read all the books, not even most of them either) you can infer from Letho's fights in Witcher 2 and Lambert+ Eskel.
Against generic enemies, they can fluently interject signs both as offensive, defensive and diversion means.

Signs are also extremely useful against particular kinds of monsters, due to their characteristics and esp. weakness. The games hold your hand in this regard.
For instance you'll have Yrden for immaterial foes. Axii can be invaluable against human/oids. Aard can be an asset vs mobs of lesser monsters and to clear obsticles.

They're a great secondary tool for a witcher, along with their in-depth knowledge of alchemy and their unrivaled swordmanship.

The game DO NOT, as other Rpgs, allow a PURE build. They allow you to place emphasis (to a great degree in Witcher 3) on one aspect or the other of the Witcher fighting style, with the rest still playing a part.

And the 3 main groups (a trinity of sorts) are only apparently on par and equivalent as far as importance goes. But in reality the Sword one is king no matter the build, if only for a matter of realism and immersion.

Now I would argue the game does a pretty good job at allowing you to mix things up or forge your own fighting style, both in terms of depht and variety, given the lore impositions.
Confronting this to an ES is not fair, it's faceless do-it-yourself PC versus a very much estabilished one, with the added handicap of his caste/group itself having all sorts of lore limitations and peculiarities.
But even then, Witcher 3 doesn't come out humiliated, quite the contrary. And compared to other franchises, it wins hands down.

Agreed, agreed, agreed.....

fking agreed.

 

[Frybread]

I agree 100%.

Witchers aren't mages. They are closer to Warlocks...they are swordsmen that dab a little into magic. How many times did Geralt actually NEED to use signs in offensive situations (in the novels)? The first time I read The Last Wish he used Aard against Adda the Strigga, then after that Yrden (was it Yrden?) to seal the Tomb Lid. Both of these signs aren't offensive spells at all. And I believe Witchers use Igni very seldomly (Haven't read all the books to say that it's 100% fact, sorry. Only my opinion)

Playing a Witcher Game as a purely Mage Build does us no favours when the main attack method is obviously with a blade.

Geralt very rarely uses Signs in the saga. He does use them more frequently in "Season of Storms" but he is primarily a swordsman. Looking at the short stories and novels, I'd say he's either 90-10 or 80-20 swordsman to mage.

 

[GZulu]

Geralt very rarely uses Signs in the saga. He does use them more frequently in "Season of Storms" but he is primarily a swordsman. Looking at the short stories and novels, I'd say he's either 90-10 or 80-20 swordsman to mage.

That looks like a very accurate estimate from my perspective.
Geralt is known as one of the best "Swordsmen" of the north. He's not known for his magic abilities.

 

[prottenstein]

Nothing is really a must. I got by on Death March without even using that potion and I had a sign heavy build. Basically, everything that goes down with Igni goes down fine, everything that is virtually immune to it goes down easily enough with swords. I'm quite shit at games, so I'm not exactly boasting.

It's not necessary but it's indeed very useful: you regain health for each sign you cast and even for rolling away.

 

[lordlokai]

Sign Build, and why its pointless

So i always love magic heavy builds in games, are usually what is fun and very much in this game i did the same thing. Focusing on a very offensive sign heavy build. However now facing the wild hunt, i am thrust into a situation where you have rendered my entire build USELESS....yes i am looking at you dear Devs. Who thought would be a good idea to require geralt to be FORCED to use melee combat primarily because you made your bosses and enemies IMMUNE to sign damage.

Igni: Suppose to be the primary form of offensive damage for a witcher, and for most of the game that is true (igni has a ton of issues i wont get into, its to strong vs most enemies and totally useless vs others.) but you made the main enemy of the game the wild hunt IMMUNE or near immune to its damage. They cant be set on fire EVEN with 100% chance for burn via talents STILL cant be set on fire...

Yarden: While mostly good the issue with yarden is that its stationary and takes way to long to set up, so vs any boss attacks quickly its sucide to use its alt fire, WHICH won't matter much anyway since its damage is pretty low. The slow effect is mostly not all to useful i think been one or two times i found it useful, and the dot is so horribly low even with talents that i cant see why i even speced for that now.

Aard: I recall a time i found this super useful its been the least used sign for me over all, it doesnt do much but knock back which just puts enemies out of your reach unless you are super high level compared to enemy then it MIGHT knock them down. Its a nice trash clearer for weak enemies.

Quen: only sign is useful through the whole game it absorbs a ton of damage, and does exactly what its suppose to, and the regen is pretty solid for the most part with its alt fire.

Axii: Honestly, i used this thing a few times at the start was good to help clear enemies puppet ability MIGHT be somewhat useful, but i just didnt use it that often to say its good or bad, maybe its solid for group fights.

Point is if you want to be an offensive sign user, you are kind of out of luck once you hit end tier bosses. Because they cant be hurt by it, so if you are like me and have a ton of runes, talents, and focus on sign intensity and igni damage you kind of get screwed... because guess what? igni DOESNT DO ANY DAMAGE! i just hit carathir for 50 damage with igni 250%+ sign intensity, and 5-6 greater igni runs ( thats 50-60% extra damage).

SO someone explain why it was ok for the devs to make my entire build useless and expect me to fall back on my sword which i have zero talents for... i really hoped that was just one boss was like that but now i realize... next 2 end bosses are both going to be immune to all my sign damage arent they? meanwhile my friends combat build has had ZERO issues and is plowing through the game because he never hits an enemy is immune to physical damage---- i just---

I REALLY want to like your game but this kind of shit is off putting....

 

[Exentryk]

Sign build is great for pretty much 90% of the enemies. For the 10% that don't burn, you use Archgriffin decoction. Put some points in Acquired Tolerance.

I do see your overall sentiment though. One solution could have been to give Yrden percentage based damage of enemy health.

Some examples of Sign build in action:
Fiend (Lv 22 Monster / Lv 15 Geralt) - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R-PPA0gHvL
Earth Elemental (Level 24 monster / Lv 17 Geralt) - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uCahNuZhqtk

 

[cloolvl]

Igni: Suppose to be the primary form of offensive damage for a witcher

we rewritin lore now

 

[Gerald01]

BS.
Also see this, posted a few hours ago and very similar to yours:
http://forums.cdprojektred.com/threads/51187-This-game-needs-some-serious-rebalancing

 

[Exentryk]

I like threads that say Sign build is weak. Please devs, give Signs MORE POWER!!!

*Evil Laugh*

 

[bundito]

If this game (and game world) allowed for fully custom builds, I would have constructed my classic thief/sniper from Skyrim and Fallout. I cleared half the dungeons in Skyrim with long-range bow shots. ("Is that someone there?" *thwack* *arrow in head*)

But witchers don't sneak. They chop bad guys in half.

To me, the most important "magic" in the game is the blade oils. Having the correct one applied makes an enormous difference. I've worked my white-haired butt off searching for the ingredients for the higher level oils.

And it should go without saying that continually upgrading/updating/repairing your armor and weapons is crucial. Can't be sentimental. Even when I got

Spoiler

Winter's Blade from Crach an Craite

I already had a silver sword that was better. The special one in the spoiler box would have been very appropriate to use under the circumstances, but I'm in this to win this. So I use the best I can get.

 

[Kungfumasta]

I would agree with you if this was a TES game where you can be anyone or anything. Your character is a swordsman and that is that. Just like you cannot go rampage on a town and murder civilians Geralt just would not do that stuff. Look at this game as an action/adventure game with RPG aspects over a full blown RPG... No character creation or rolling for beginning stats killed any idea of this game being an RPG in my eyes... It is like Red Dead Redemption just with more outfits and guns.. and Geralt, being badass.. is no John Marston..