Warhammer 40,000: Rogue Trader - a new cRPG from Owlcat Games

Antimatter

Administrator
Staff member
Messages
1,181
Well, I guess we'll see what the actual final product looks like, but this is what they said on Reddit: "It's inspired by the tabletop rpg, but doesn't copy it".

I've also found this article: https://www.ign.com/articles/warhammer-40000-rogue-trader-preview-rpg-combat

"I begin to realize that Rogue Trader has the potential to stand shoulder-to-shoulder with the most strategic RPG battle systems ever made. It draws on the unique opportunities of 40k lore, providing a huge library of combat skills that demand careful set-up to make the most of". So it seems the Warhammer sources are used for lore more.

 

alice_ashpool

Habitué
Messages
572
closed alpha is out

completely unrelated, there is a sucker born every minute:

evCmpIt.png
 

alice_ashpool

Habitué
Messages
572
Initial thoughts
The music is 100% fire.
The combat feels punchy enough that turn based is not as chore-some as it could be.
The dialogue so far seems to lean well into having the power of a rogue trader. everyone knows you are "hot shit". i wish there were some more options.
Visuals are ok so far.
Areas are pretty lackluster - all feels a bit plastick-y with large zones filled with endless copy-pasted npcs - i think this will change as in wotr things were spruced up right to the end.
no idea what is happening in the story.
Game runs like ass on my pc
 

alice_ashpool

Habitué
Messages
572
Some thoughts on combat.

Rogue Trader combat is turn based. I simultaneously find myself missing the frequency of RTwP combat while also finding that the combat encounters so far are in no way "tactical". They are slow filler, yet I find myself wishing for more combat, just not this combat. Individual shots, smacks and spells are satisfying, but the overall impact of combat is everything I don't like about stripped down Turn Based.

Each character-type has a movement pool and an action pool. The action pool allows you to use your special abilities, but this means every combat is basically the same, for each character you use the same abilities each time. There is no Vancian rationing and no pre-preperation for combat you just walk forward into an encounter and cycle the same junk each time.

A long chore of repeating the same button clicks. I'm reminded of when I hear mrLLama talking about how much he dislikes D3 and likes D2, and when people say "isn't D2 just blizzard spam" he goes well, but your constantly micromanaging on the fly making lots of rapid-fire decisions while D3 is just cooldown cycling and looking for a green arrow next to the gear you pick up.
 

Urdnot_Wrex

Habitué
Messages
576
constantly micromanaging on the fly making lots of rapid-fire decisions

That leads me to the question what the reason behind your dislike of the combat in Rogue Trader is.
Is it because you're used to and enjoy the fast decisions in real time or the "on the fly" way you do it in games like BG or PoE, where parallel micromanagement of several party members while pausing and unpausing several times per second is the norm?

Or do you like turn-based combat in other games (like the Divinity Original Sin games) and just don't find the combat in Rogue Trader challenging or complex enough?

Also, are you talking about low-level combat where you still have few tools at your disposal and therefore use the same ones over and over again, or have you reached a point where you'd expect well-designed complex boss encounters?

Just asking for clarification to figure out if you have the impression that maybe the devs don't have the knack for well-designed TB yet, if you haven't reached "epic" encounters with high level characters yet to make it more interesting, or if you're generally not a fan of that type of combat design where you study the chess board and move piece by piece instead of that quick pausing and parallel management.

Also, you mentioned it runs like ass on your PC. I suppose performance will be improved later but what are your specs?
 

alice_ashpool

Habitué
Messages
572
Hi @Urdnot_Wrex

No this is prefaced by saying it is an early alpha, there are only 4 classes and so on.

I like to automate repetitive actions and micro complex ones which require mental effort on decision making. I like to re-assess and have control over pausing. I like to be able to give orders then change them a fraction of a second later - I dislike commitment to actions and like to be able to change them if necessary, I don't like having to play out the last few turns when everything is really obviously over but you till have to move everyone painstakingly across the map, 6 tiles at a time, to kill that last long-ranged grunt who couldn't hit the broadside of a barn. I like spell slots because they add complexity and decision making and planning.

Honestly the combat as it stands is just much more basic than pathfinder, and combined with the skill tree approach to building characters that is all a significant step down at the complexity level, tied up with much slower combat which just pads it out.

Some of these issues will be reduced when there are more classes but compare:
WotR: 25 base classes with 6 subclasses each for a total of 150 options.
Rogue trader alpha: 4 classes.

///

System: laptop with Intel i7-8750H, 16Gb, GTX1070
 

alice_ashpool

Habitué
Messages
572
Also, are you talking about low-level combat where you still have few tools at your disposal and therefore use the same ones over and over again, or have you reached a point where you'd expect well-designed complex boss encounters?
On this, the alpha starts at level 15, so it is not a matter of low level combat I don't think. At the lower levels I would expect it to be even more repetative!
 

alice_ashpool

Habitué
Messages
572
The game also suffers a severe case of "turn based battle arena" design, complete with nonsensically placed shields, sandbags, boxes and explosive barrels. One of my absolute top hated features of turn based games. Recently only BGIII seems to have managed to sever itself from this dretch design principle. Its a real step back from WoTR map design which felt believable, to this: Robot Wars Arena

hMD06RT.png


(if you're wondering why the graffix look ass its because im playing on lowest quality XD)
 

alice_ashpool

Habitué
Messages
572
This is an example of the maddening "tactical" turn based combat

wDxl30M.png


All my people were on the high ground on the right, a sensible location for le tactical arena battle with exploding barrels game. We killed everyone except one sharpshooter on the other side of the map in heavy cover. After trading rounds for an intolerable 4 rounds of missing I have no recourse but to spend 5 rounds painfully running backwards off this high point, round the high point then forwards through the circus-ring of clown obstacles scattered around with no rhyme nor reason except "turn based combat game" to close distance, controlling one character at a time, for 6 squares of movement at a time, pressing "end turn" each time as we painfully inch forwards. Instead of say, selecting everyone and having them just run forwards over the course of a few rounds pausing when I need to, Truly the tactical experience I have been crying out for.
 

alice_ashpool

Habitué
Messages
572
Ok, so after 20 hours and some time to mull, here is my honest review on the combat system:

It is not weak because of turn based, it is weak full stop, turn-based just compounds some of the genuine issues and my own personal issues with the limitations and overly used crutches of turn based, But this same system in a rtwp adaptation would be equally weak in some variant on the current weakness.

This stems from a lack of complexity, and this lack of complexity then narrows the ways in which you can approach encounters. This lack of complexity manifests obviously in a lack of any sort of per-rest spellcasting system - all those hundreds of divine, arcane and druidic spells in patfinder are obviously nowhere - but FFG's pnp 40k stuff did have lots and lots of powers so there is clearly a degree of over-simplification going on. All the abilities are once per turn ad infinitum which just ends up with a cookie cutter MP/AP system so common across turn based games.

Overall I approached every single encounter in the same way, cycled my abilities in the same way for every encounter and won every encounter in the same way - absolutely no variety. Near zero thought required. I will repeat that this is not, primarily a turn based issue, its a system issue. I have a slight suspicion - this alpha launched surprisingly fast after the release of WotR, almost too fast. Development seems to have been compressed/crunched to the point that combat has been heavily de-complexified, even considering the already less complex FFG system compared to pathfinder.

This then is compounded with the serious issues with the turn based implementation: namely, the crappy "arena" style design. You always know when there is going to be an ambush because there are crates strategically placed all around - truly the nadir of "tactical turn based" over storytelling. Turn based was done so well in WotR because it was done alongside a rtwp design principle - now that owlcat have gone over to full turn based they have suddenly leapt on all the hackneyed platitudes of the over-saturated genre. Square grid based cover shooter with per-turn abilities and a Movement Point/Action Point system with explosive barrels and "cover" with not even a solitary bone thrown to verisimilitude in area design :rolleyes:

Combine this with the pure tedium which turn based can bring and the combat is orders of magnitude weaker than the other aspects of the game. Overall the combat system, as it stands is comparable to a much worse Solasta.

Also I will defend to the death the idea that a degree of "trash filler encounters" are a necessity for the power fantasy that cRPGs are and that turn based cannot fulfil that requirement because istead of sending forward your best fighter to clear out the trash while the rest of the group chills, you still have to do all the chillers turns. Wasteman.
 
Last edited:

Urdnot_Wrex

Habitué
Messages
576
Thanks for sharing the details to understand what you dislike about the combat and what the reasons behind that might be.

It sounds rather disappointing, but on the other hand, as you said, some part of it are personal preferences, so there's still hope it might turn out interesting enough for people who don't share those preferences.

For example, I'm not a rigid fan of per-rest-abilities, because sometimes that would make it even more likely to always use the same or similar approaches, the same overpowered spells or abilities. I like it when I see a battle went sideways that I can simply stare at my skill slots and pick different ones this time, combine differently, use positioning and synergy of party members in a different way, not travel back to an inn, decide which other 5 of my 20 spells for that level I might want to memorize, rest for 8 hours, and go back.

With that said, what you mentioned about being able to use the same abilities every turn is a different matter of course. Either the combat needs to be complex and difficult enough to require different approaches and skill mixes, or there needs to be a system to limit the use of very powerful stuff, like making some abilities "once per encounter" only or giving them different cooldowns.

There's also the fact that you're not the "average player", you have a lot of experience with challenging games on highest difficulty, so I'm hopeful that what you find boring might still offer enough of an interesting challenge for me ;)

For example, positioning is, or should be, an important factor in tactical fights, too. To some people that comes naturally or their minds are able to focus on that automatically, either through experience or a different overview.
For myself, I have observed that in RtwP games (and even more in action gameplay without pause), I start to overlook even the simplest basics of battlefield control, like fanning out to avoid everyone getting caught in the same AoE, like using bottlenecks or cover to my advantage, etc. It's getting better (started playing games regularly in 2019 only, and between work and children besides), but sometimes the barbarian part of my brain still takes over. In turn-based combat I can take a step back, breathe, switch from tunnel-visioned battle rage to board game mode and make more calculated decisions. The result is more satisfying to me than beating myself up for forgetting the obvious in the heat of the moment.

With that practice, I now manage more often to switch into that mindset when I hit Pause in a real time game, but it still happens occasionally that the adrenaline makes me rush in (yeah like a charging Krogan) and overlook the bigger picture.

Combining the factors that it's early alpha, that turn-based helps me use my brain's resources in a way that real time combat overrides with "berserk" alert, and that I'm a far less seasoned player, I'm hopeful Rogue Trader will still be fun. Also, combat is an important factor in games but it's not the only deciding factor for me personally.
 

alice_ashpool

Habitué
Messages
572
Thanks for sharing the details to understand what you dislike about the combat and what the reasons behind that might be.

It sounds rather disappointing, but on the other hand, as you said, some part of it are personal preferences, so there's still hope it might turn out interesting enough for people who don't share those preferences.

For example, I'm not a rigid fan of per-rest-abilities, because sometimes that would make it even more likely to always use the same or similar approaches, the same overpowered spells or abilities. I like it when I see a battle went sideways that I can simply stare at my skill slots and pick different ones this time, combine differently, use positioning and synergy of party members in a different way, not travel back to an inn, decide which other 5 of my 20 spells for that level I might want to memorize, rest for 8 hours, and go back.

With that said, what you mentioned about being able to use the same abilities every turn is a different matter of course. Either the combat needs to be complex and difficult enough to require different approaches and skill mixes, or there needs to be a system to limit the use of very powerful stuff, like making some abilities "once per encounter" only or giving them different cooldowns.

There's also the fact that you're not the "average player", you have a lot of experience with challenging games on highest difficulty, so I'm hopeful that what you find boring might still offer enough of an interesting challenge for me ;)

For example, positioning is, or should be, an important factor in tactical fights, too. To some people that comes naturally or their minds are able to focus on that automatically, either through experience or a different overview.
For myself, I have observed that in RtwP games (and even more in action gameplay without pause), I start to overlook even the simplest basics of battlefield control, like fanning out to avoid everyone getting caught in the same AoE, like using bottlenecks or cover to my advantage, etc. It's getting better (started playing games regularly in 2019 only, and between work and children besides), but sometimes the barbarian part of my brain still takes over. In turn-based combat I can take a step back, breathe, switch from tunnel-visioned battle rage to board game mode and make more calculated decisions. The result is more satisfying to me than beating myself up for forgetting the obvious in the heat of the moment.

With that practice, I now manage more often to switch into that mindset when I hit Pause in a real time game, but it still happens occasionally that the adrenaline makes me rush in (yeah like a charging Krogan) and overlook the bigger picture.

Combining the factors that it's early alpha, that turn-based helps me use my brain's resources in a way that real time combat overrides with "berserk" alert, and that I'm a far less seasoned player, I'm hopeful Rogue Trader will still be fun. Also, combat is an important factor in games but it's not the only deciding factor for me personally.
I had a think a bit more and the game the combat seems most similar to is the the Shadowrun games, which were shoestring budget.

Anyway, I have been playing on "core" and it is fundamentally no different to "normal". I have not had to reload once nor change my tactics ever.
 

Skatan

Innkeeper
Staff member
Messages
86
Thanks a bunch for sharing @alice_ashpool ! Great to read about your experiences so far. I was kinda decided on not buying the game myself since I am not a fan of owlcat games (I wish I were) and your commentary highlights many things I am sure I would feel "meh" about myself. Although an alpha of course is just an alpha and may change, the things you highlight about the battle maps and cycling abilities etc are things I am not a fan of.

Though, I loved the shadowrun games. Not for their combat, which was so-so, but for everything else.
 
Top Bottom