Skip to content

To us SCS, or not to use SCS, that is the question....

jjstraka34jjstraka34 Member Posts: 9,850
I've never actually installed this mod, indeed the only two I have found essential in all my searching and surfing are the BG NPC mod and the improved Wizard Slayer kit. What kind of difficulty increase am I looking at on Core difficulty?? Is it a across the board nerve-wracking every battle is knock down drag out fight, or just a more intelligent and strategic way to play the game?? And any other mods that are required to go with it??
«1

Comments

  • BlackravenBlackraven Member Posts: 3,486

    Is it a across the board nerve-wracking every battle is knock down drag out fight, or just a more intelligent and strategic way to play the game?? And any other mods that are required to go with it??

    It can be both. If you don't adapt to smarter enemies, because that's the essence of SCS imo, every fight can turn into a nightmare even on core mode. However if you expect enemies to be smarter, to cooperate better, to use the right spells at the right time, etc then SCS will be mostly about more intelligent and strategic gameplay.

    One disclaimer: SCS is not only smarter enemies; some fights are simply harder because certain enemies get beefed up or receive special abilities that make them significantly harder to beat. You will most likely be forced to reload in those encounters.
    The good thing is that you can pick the components of the mod that you want to install. I'd recommend you to take a look at the readme and decide which components appeal to you.

    And any other mods that are required to go with it??

    There is no need to play SCS together with any other mod, but you could combine it with other difficulty-increasing mods if you wanted to.
    demented
  • jjstraka34jjstraka34 Member Posts: 9,850
    Yeah, the read me is long and involved, and I would definitely take it somewhat piecemeal. I don't like the idea of outright removing items from the game, but that is what the install is for. BG vanilla especially suffer from incredibly easy fights once your reach level 6 or 7 (and I never am a "sprint to the mines" type of player) so was just seeing what everyone's general preferences are.
    Blackraven
  • shylamanshylaman Member Posts: 173
    edited July 2014
    I don't play without it. Though I do not install every component. I find Smarter AI and smarter Wizards/Priests essential, but the chapter/boss fights OP and didn't install them on my last build.
    Post edited by shylaman on
  • comebackhomecomebackhome Member Posts: 254
    Always SCS. I'd recommend SCS, + BP-Ascension - I cannot go back after using these. The game seems far to easy even with difficulty slider maxed.
  • The user and all related content has been deleted.
    CrevsDaakDexter
  • AnonymousHeroAnonymousHero Member Posts: 98
    Agreed with @subtledoctor‌ . At first, I'd go with the "Smarter General AI" and "Better Calls For Help" components, perhaps with a little bit of the "Improved monster type X" and "nerf item X" bits. That by itself ups the difficulty considerably -- you won't be able to lure enemies one by one via the FoW, for example.

    Once you've had a few playthroughs of that, I'd go for Smarter Mages/Priests *without* short-lasting prebuffs.

    If, after that, you're feeling like you've mastered things you can move on to Smarter Mages/Priests *with* short-lasting prebuffs. I'm not yet at the stage where I'm comfortable with that, personally, but then I *do* play exclusively solo no-reload, so YMMV...
    CrevsDaakDexterGirewan
  • AstroBryGuyAstroBryGuy Member Posts: 3,437

    Absolutely 100% use SCS.
    Start out with a relatively conservative install to get a sense of it, then later you can better decide which of the more involved components are to your taste.

    That was my plan when I installed SCS for the first time. Then I was like a kid in a candy store during the install, "Ooooo.... Improved Mages... that sounds good!"

    Accepted Garrick's job offer in Beregost. Silke's no problem, right? Just whack her 'til she falls over. Pre-buff Stoneskin, Improved Invisibility! Holy cr*p on a stick! I can't see her to attack, and when the invisibility drops for her to cast a spell, she's invulnerable! She slaughtered my party in nothing flat. I was left staring at the screen. Whoa.
    CrevsDaakArdulAlonso
  • DreadKhanDreadKhan Member Posts: 3,857
    Bg2 imho ends up a bit silly, with some spells functioning in very strange ways... pretty sure Dispel Magic for exampleis supposed to be able to disspell protections... spell immunity probably shouldnt have been implemented, since it really is wonky, clunky and brutally overpowered as is. Until you get the warrior dispelling rod, warriors cant fight mages really in scs other than waiting them out, which is boring and tedius. Even after you get that rod, you're still luck-reliant and probably reloading a lot. I dislike games that strictly force you to play a certain way in RPGs... this isnt Super Mario, you shouldnt feel tacticly railroaded. That said, finding a new viable tactic for an encounter can be rewarding, even if its strictly worse than anothe tactic (ie getting by without Spell Immunity).

    However, the ai improvements are VERY fun, especially in BG1. But if you're soloing with a caster, be ready to have certain enemy casters actively disrupt you. :p Think Magic Missile is always better than Larloch's Minor Drain? You've never had your solo sorcerer locked down then. :@ Keep darts ready and use potions... and get your Khalid on! "Better part of valour!" There may not be much dignity in running like a scared kitten, but there is less dignity in a reload. ;)
  • DreadKhanDreadKhan Member Posts: 3,857
    My issue is more designing a class that only that class can deal wih, and requiring you to deal with it in a very specific way. I'm aware of the system, and it works well in vanilla where for a while the primary use of Spell Immunity was to block Imprisonment.

    Making Dispel Magic 100% ineffective essentially states that only mages can actually take on mages, not even other casters. Imo, this is a poor design choice, but again, in vanilla bg2 it wasnt a big deal. If the developers didnt want to make Dispel able to dispell high level protections, they might have added a higher level version, ie Greater Dispel, or even Disjunction (...without the 'kill magic items' part). If Greater Dispel was a 6th or 7th level cleric or druid spell, it would allow more builds to have a tool to utilize. 5th level spells shouldnt be able to eat 9th level spells. Its bad balancing imo.

    Just offering personal opinion, not sweeping universals. That said, if you're actually PLAYING a mage, something like Smarter Mages is a really good inclusion, if a bit restrictive at times. After all, you'll be using most of the protections yourself anyways!
    TJ_Hooker
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 0
    edited July 2014
    The user and all related content has been deleted.
    chickenhed
  • AstroBryGuyAstroBryGuy Member Posts: 3,437
    edited July 2014

    I'm not sure - the whole point of magic is that it lets you do things normal people can't. Mike Tyson going after Harry Potter would be completely ineffective. Why? Because Harry is magic! That seems about right to me. In a world like FR, if six nonmagical thugs think they can go up against a powerful wizard, I think they should be in for a rude awakening.

    True, but Drizzt should still be a threat. This is just D&D's whole "linear fighter/quadratic wizard" issue.
    CrevsDaak
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 0
    edited July 2014
    The user and all related content has been deleted.
  • The user and all related content has been deleted.
  • DemivrgvsDemivrgvs Member Posts: 315
    edited July 2014
    I'm sympathetic to what @DreadKhan and I hate Spell Immunity just as much as him, if not more (I have a long list of reasons), but it's not DavidW's fault if such spell exist in BG. SCS simply tries to optimize mages AI, using all the available spells. Discarding such a powerful spell for the AI would be like handicapping itself (though SCS do skipped the use of Spell Shield when it was a bit "bugged").

    Speaking of which, when I discovered how to fix Spell Shield I was hoping @DavidW would stop using SI:Abj and simply replace it with Spell Shield, but I think such change involved too much work to re-do all SCS defensive scripts, and he probably "needed" SI's dispel immunity. :(

    @subtledoctor simply replacing SI:Abj with Spell Shield messes up with the AI (trust me, we tested it within the current beta for Spell Revision V4), especially if you want such tweak to work together with SCS (you'll end up with SCS mages wasting spells by casting multiple Spell Shields at once). Some of your other suggested tweaks are a problem too for a competent AI script because it cannot cope with some changes making it behave sub-optimally.
  • DreadKhanDreadKhan Member Posts: 3,857
    @subtledoctor‌ I can very easily think of a strategy for Mr. Tyson vs Potter... just punch him when he's not expecting it. Harry has a pencil neck, he'll be dead as a door nail. Or very concussed. Harry has no contingencies etc, so it'd be done. Frankly, the magic system of core DnD isnt all its cracked up to be. Imho, its amongmthe worst I've ever read. :s I grew out of high magic systems awhile back, about when I started reading low fantasy settings.

    I didnt blame anyone but whoever did the original designing of the Spell Immunity spell. I stand by that specific spell being unbalanced, and Dispel being unnecessarily nerfed vs spell protection. In PnP spellcasting defence and counters certainly exist, but in 3rd edition at least they are costly to cast. The best example of spell defence in PnP dnd iirc is Chromatic Sphere, which is a pain to dispel and protects the caster rather thoroughly. I can disagree with someone's choice to use a spell in a certain way in a mod, and as this is a thread where someone is asking for opinioms on said mod, I am fully justified to bring up this in a negative light, provided I am polite. I have been polite.

    In PnP, the classes arent anywhere near as unbalanced in 2nd ed as they are in BG2. Divine casters and bards are both very weak compared to mages. In BG1, a similar level fighter can have a decent shot when fighting a mage, but in bg2, they cant scratch a mage played properly, LITERALLY. Clerics and druids are also helpless, and bards really not much better, since 6th level isnt high enough for the big counters. Heck, if the game had skipped contingencies, triggers and sequencers the game would be vastly more balanced.

    However, whats done is done. The game is what it is, and as such, I likely wont play improved mages when not soloing a mage. I recomend the same to most people that ask.
    Blackraven
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 0
    edited July 2014
    The user and all related content has been deleted.
    Post edited by [Deleted User] on
  • DavidWDavidW Member Posts: 823
    DreadKhan said:

    My issue is more designing a class that only that class can deal wih, and requiring you to deal with it in a very specific way.

    I think one basic point at issue here is that SCS (and indeed BG2) is designed for a party. So yes, you'd better have a wizard in the party to bring down those defences that only wizards can touch, but once that's done there's plenty for other party members to do. By analogy: if you fight a modern war without air support, you're in trouble, but that doesn't mean your ground and naval forces are useless.

    I'm happy to concede that if you're playing a solo non-mage, SCS might not be a good idea (to my surprise lots of people do solo SCS with a mixture of classes, but it's not really what it's designed for).


    A mage should lead with his best defensive spell, pretty much always. If he detects I only have +2 weapons, he could cast Mantle instead if PfMW or Abs. Immunity, but what does he gain by that choice?

    Protection from the party's nonmagical weapons, which they would be well advised to bring as spares for exactly this situation. (If you're a vampire, rakshasa or lich, then absolutely there's no advantage in casting Mantle rather than PMW - though actually there can be some advantages in *learning* Mantle rather than PMW, as 6th level has a number of absolutely crucial spells.
    chickenhed
  • tennisgolfbolltennisgolfboll Member Posts: 457
    Hell no. The game is great as is. This mod just makes it worse
  • DexterDexter Member Posts: 253

    Certainly better than the alternative of casting SI and now the spells like Secret Word and Pierce Magic, that this game invented for this specific purpose, no longer work?

    Wait a minute, technical question here: secret word and pierce magic *do* dispel SI:abjuration. I can't play BG saga without SCS, been playing this mod for years, and I'm quite sure they do.
    SI:Abjuration protects the mage from Breach, so the usual combo SI:Abjuration, Spell shield, PfMW (that's the usual spell trigger of SCS mages) need 2xsecret word followed by breach to dispel both spell and combat protections. I'm I wrong? I'm I missing something? I swear that's how I deal with those f*ing smart mages (kidding, I really love them)

    Sorry for grammar mistakes :-)
  • AnonymousHeroAnonymousHero Member Posts: 98
    edited July 2014

    Hell no. The game is great as is. This mod just makes it worse

    It certainly makes it actually moderately challenging and to do so without just heaping on cheese (as e.g. Tactics did with many of its so-called tactical challenges) is quite an achievement IMO. After playing with SCS I've found it impossible to go back to the original game, it's just way too easy. With the "Smarter Mages/Priests" components, I also like there's a certain amount of randomness in what mages/priests cast and have memorized -- it means that there isn't just a fixed and set recipe for each individual encounter. You kind of have to be prepared for everything. (Yes, this means that arcane casters become more or less unavoidable unless you're up for somewhat boring "protect yourself from everything they can throw at you and wait them out" type of game.)

    If "difficult" implies "worse" in your opinion, that's fine. I'm curious -- have you actually tried it? (Perchance with only the "Better calls for help" and "Smarter general AI" options?)
  • DexterDexter Member Posts: 253

    Hell no. The game is great as is. This mod just makes it worse

    Vanilla is way too easy. "Hey look, it's a yuanti mage, watch out for chaos followed by true sight". Always
  • AnonymousHeroAnonymousHero Member Posts: 98
    Dexter said:

    Certainly better than the alternative of casting SI and now the spells like Secret Word and Pierce Magic, that this game invented for this specific purpose, no longer work?

    Wait a minute, technical question here: secret word and pierce magic *do* dispel SI:abjuration. I can't play BG saga without SCS, been playing this mod for years, and I'm quite sure they do.
    SI:Abjuration protects the mage from Breach, so the usual combo SI:Abjuration, Spell shield, PfMW (that's the usual spell trigger of SCS mages) need 2xsecret word followed by breach to dispel both spell and combat protections. I'm I wrong? I'm I missing something? I swear that's how I deal with those f*ing smart mages (kidding, I really love them)
    AFAICT Secret Word is abjuration and so should be blocked by SI:A even though it can dispel any other SI:*. I know there are some modifications made by SCS to Secret Word, but IIRC that just has to do with targeting.
    I tend to find that RRR works pretty well -- I don't think I've ever seen a mage cast SI:Alteration in SCS. (Finally a use for it as opposed to the vanilla game!)
  •  TheArtisan TheArtisan Member Posts: 3,277
    Please people, don't derail this thread into an argument between pro-SCS and anti-SCS. There are plenty of people who find vanilla BG2 challenging (gasp! No seriously it's true, not everyone has played through the game 100 times and know how to deal with every enemy by memory) and there are people (myself included) who prefer some extra difficulty and for the AI to have more options.

    As for the topic, SCS is good if you're (unsurprisingly) a tactical player. It's very difficult to strong-arm your way through many encounters or use the same tricks every time to guaranteed success without your party being flat-out more powerful than the opposition. Because of this, you MUST use every advantage available if you want to win a fight because the AI is not "stupid". If you can't win a fight, you might not be using enough potions/wands/buffs, etc.

    That said, there are some options which flat out alter gameplay (e.g. moving certain items like Robe of Vecna and giving unique abilities to certain enemies) but SCS is good in that almost everything is up to your discretion. It gives options on whether or not you want to add in basically all of its content individually. At least, that's my experience with the mod. Not to say it isn't INTENSELY frustrating at times, I rage a little in every lich fight. Odamaron and his lich apprentice makes me want to rip my hair out.
    chickenhed
  • DavidWDavidW Member Posts: 823

    Dexter said:

    Certainly better than the alternative of casting SI and now the spells like Secret Word and Pierce Magic, that this game invented for this specific purpose, no longer work?

    Wait a minute, technical question here: secret word and pierce magic *do* dispel SI:abjuration. I can't play BG saga without SCS, been playing this mod for years, and I'm quite sure they do.
    SI:Abjuration protects the mage from Breach, so the usual combo SI:Abjuration, Spell shield, PfMW (that's the usual spell trigger of SCS mages) need 2xsecret word followed by breach to dispel both spell and combat protections. I'm I wrong? I'm I missing something? I swear that's how I deal with those f*ing smart mages (kidding, I really love them)
    AFAICT Secret Word is abjuration and so should be blocked by SI:A even though it can dispel any other SI:*. I know there are some modifications made by SCS to Secret Word, but IIRC that just has to do with targeting.
    I tend to find that RRR works pretty well -- I don't think I've ever seen a mage cast SI:Alteration in SCS. (Finally a use for it as opposed to the vanilla game!)
    In vanilla BG2, and also in SCS, any spell that takes down spell protections (e.g., Spell Thrust, Secret Word, Ruby Ray) is flagged to bypass Spell Immunity. The main point of Spell Immunity: Abjuration in practice is to protect from Dispel/Remove Magic.
    Dexterchickenhed
  • tennisgolfbolltennisgolfboll Member Posts: 457

    Hell no. The game is great as is. This mod just makes it worse

    It certainly makes it actually moderately challenging and to do so without just heaping on cheese (as e.g. Tactics did with many of its so-called tactical challenges) is quite an achievement IMO. After playing with SCS I've found it impossible to go back to the original game, it's just way too easy. With the "Smarter Mages/Priests" components, I also like there's a certain amount of randomness in what mages/priests cast and have memorized -- it means that there isn't just a fixed and set recipe for each individual encounter. You kind of have to be prepared for everything. (Yes, this means that arcane casters become more or less unavoidable unless you're up for somewhat boring "protect yourself from everything they can throw at you and wait them out" type of game.)

    If "difficult" implies "worse" in your opinion, that's fine. I'm curious -- have you actually tried it? (Perchance with only the "Better calls for help" and "Smarter general AI" options?)
    If you by more difficult you mean that you need to do more steps to dominate then yes. These steps add nothing for my enjoyment. And i think its a terrible mod (im not to fond of mods at all i like it the way its made, and i think because it was made that way it became so popular and great).

    Vanilla is alot better imo.

    But you can use any mod/cheat/trainer etc that you have the most fun with. To me its like pissing on a Mona Lisa.
  • CrevsDaakCrevsDaak Member Posts: 7,155
    DavidW said:

    I'm happy to concede that if you're playing a solo non-mage, SCS might not be a good idea (to my surprise lots of people do solo SCS with a mixture of classes, but it's not really what it's designed for).

    That's because the game is designed to be played with a party too, and the AI are, well, they handle targeting in a much worse way and stuff. Also, I've found that the game is even better when you solo it with a F/M/T or a C/T, both multi-classes are probably the most OP in the whole game, besides F/M/C which I don't like much.
  • The user and all related content has been deleted.
  • CrevsDaakCrevsDaak Member Posts: 7,155

    Why didn't they simply flag Spell Shield, and maybe the other protection spells, to ignore Dispel/Remove Magic? It would be a much less roundabout way to get a similar result.

    Because Spell Shield is *completely* bugged, in vanilla BG2, it protects against _magic attacks_ sub-category (and it's the same in the EE), while some mods fix it (IIRC SCS fixes it, or maybe it was DS... no idea), which makes it completely over-powered, since all of the innate Dragon abilities are marked as Magic attacks...
  • The user and all related content has been deleted.
Sign In or Register to comment.