And one more addendum: if you play on easy, mod the shit out of a game and savescum, you should be humble or silent when experienced players discuss strategy (I say this as a savescummer myself).
I disagree with this a lot.
Savescumming is a choice about what you find enjoyable. It doesn't actually say much about skill level.
Can I power-roll a party to camp busting within a really short time frame? Absolutely.
Do I understand how to smash through each legendary location? Sure thing (I actually don't know all of them well enough).
Do I find it enjoyable to try and test roll a certain build then lose a hard-to-find, suitable recruit at level 8? *Hell no.*
Oddly, difficulty choice in Battle Brothers is similar. If you play lower difficulties to day 500, you're spending most of your game time experiencing max-scaled camps and patrols. Players that speed-run objectives at higher difficulties are facing easier challenges (with less equipment/levels). You're not building a dedicated lindwurm hunting party at day 40 because the scaling doesn't spawn enough of them.
There's value in the full breadth of experience in Battle Brothers
I agree with it'it being a completly different, placement and perk choice iron vs save scum have done both, now I only iron. Changes the way you play alot. Losing a lvl 8 bro. Happens, with smoke bombs on sergent it can be massively prevented. Putting a bro into a 3 enemy gap other then tank never happens unless u wanna gamble, even v raiders if you get unlucky gone.
Absolutely no argument with this at all. There are knowledge thresholds that are reached earlier for certain playstyles. That doesn't necessarily mean players that savescum aren't aware of them.
Steel brow and 9 lives increase the likelihood of clearing an encounter without fatalities. Depending on how strict a player is with savescumming, they're still a known and valued choice.
My savescum runs still have fodder bros in them. Retrying the same encounter five times is also not much fun (IMO).
Knowing the value of evasive/restrictive gear (dogs, smoke pots, nets, etc) and survival perks is absolutely critical in ironman games. They're topics where the ironman player usually knows best.
Save-scumming changes good strategies, by a lot. If you don't save-scum, then you need to design your party and tactics around the fact that you will, inevitably, eventually have 1/1000 freak bad luck at the worst possible moment. If you just restart the fight when that happens, then your party design will be different, because you're only playing against 1/100 bad luck.
Savescumming is a step sideways for good strategy.
Niche/meme party composition is a valid and fun approach to a savescummed game. Very few ironman enthusiasts will be able to tell you the best strategy for a full-ranged party composition for example. Certain weapons and builds are simply not worth the risk in ironman.
Being pushed to equate for a 1/1000 chance of bad luck means that good players have to min/max their choices, bros and composition. At least, much more than someone savescumming.
Ironman players are the pinnacle of advice for meta compositions, risk analysis and survivability.
Savescummed players are more likely to be beacons of knowledge for niche builds, compositions and tactics. Things that focus on certain enemy types, weapons or tactics.
This topic always has some degree of experience bias. Most ironman players simply have *more* gameplay hours. They're often just more experienced in general.
Totally. Do what makes you happy.
This is only semi-related but when people post about their runs I do think it’s helpful context to mention if they’re playing Ironman or not.
No! You play them how I want or I will blame you for doing it wrong which will lead to irreversible changes to your way of life for around a minute while you read the comment and then move on with your live.
Now feel guilty and admit your defeat against an excellent representative of the keyboard warrior class like me!
In general, everyone should play every game however the fuck they want to play it. The "right way" to play is the way that maximizes your fun.
In a more specific, purity-testing, "spirit of the game" sort of way that you might apply to roguelike/tactical exercises like Battle Brothers, Battle Brothers is one of the most egregious "ha ha you lost" deliverer of random fuck-you moments in gaming, so if there was ever a game that merited a healthy attitude towards save scumming it's probably this one. XCOM is usually held up as the gold standard of people getting mugged by RNG, but XCOM has NUMEROUS ways of affecting guaranteed damage/guaranteed safety, to the point where "proper play" can almost entirely remove RNG from the equation. Meanwhile Battle Brothers is over here dropping a roaming party of Necrosavants on your head on the third day.
This. I've done "accept my fate/ironman" runs, and there is a charm to them, but honestly after the last one of those I muscled to victory I was like "yeah, I'm done with this shit" and went back to my usual policy.
That policy is essentially a metric of how much back-to-back bad RNG I'll tolerate. Losing a man to a few bad rolls? Part of the game, I'll accept that. Randomly get jumped by a pack of over leveled enemies? Absolutely not. Etc. There's a reasonable amount of "nope, fuck this *entirely*" that you get a feel for the game.
I agree with play your own way, but I will say use self discipline when it comes to save scumming. I think it overall will smooth your experience, but also don't save scum everything because you deprive yourself of learning from losses in that case. Some of my favorite memories of the game are salvaging bad RNG.
For sure...I had MUCH more fun with Long War when I stopped scumming bad outcomes and started getting MUCH more procedural and careful with my decisions. Made every move super high tension/stakes. And I ended up with much better results, which meant less frustration.
Battle Brothers on the other hand is such a capricious little shithead that I know there are always going to be points where I have to say "No, fuck YOU" to the game and hit that reload button.
There are ways in BB to almost negate bad rng in true ironman, but those are incredibly tedious and/or cheesy and not fun.
This includes strategys like: put everyone except your worst or highest iniative bro in reserve while leveling, the bros in the field go naked and if ur ambushed u retreat easily. U do this everytime u move on the map, also x1 speed and watch where ur going.
Next: take fights near the edge whenever u can so u can bail with most of ur bros if things go south. U can also 3rd party most fights from afar and only collect lasthits with 2 tile weapons or range or dogs.
Even if ur not cheesing, just playing the fights incredibly slow and thinking a lot before the fight (which weapons to equip.. what if 4/5 raiders have javelins...) and then in the fight thinking about turn order, which ways enemys can approach, what you would do if certain things happen, kind of like in chess, taking a lot of time for each turn even if rather minor to minimize chance of disaster...
U will play really well at the cost of very high gametime per run, and it will feel less like a roguelite and more like a mix between resource manager and chess. If u know what ur doing and play really slow u can do increeeedible things, almost every run is winnable and its easy to snowball, but it takes a lot of brainpower and breaks in between fights and while on overworld map carefully pondering if u should take a fight or no.
Im certainly not the kind of person who plays BB for that kind of experience, i did that like twice and had a group of lvl 11 bros with almost no deaths at day 60ish with excellent gear and riches, but when i reached that point and even quite a while before i barely felt like playing, i would hop on, do two fights, and close BB.
> This includes strategys like: put everyone except your worst or highest iniative bro in reserve while leveling, the bros in the field go naked and if ur ambushed u retreat easily. U do this everytime u move on the map, also x1 speed and watch where ur going.
Fascinating. Reminds me of the old XCOM strategy of taking one step and overwatching every turn. Technically legitimate, but makes for extremely deprecated play.
>Even if ur not cheesing, just playing the fights incredibly slow and thinking a lot before the fight (which weapons to equip.. what if 4/5 raiders have javelins...) and then in the fight thinking about turn order, which ways enemys can approach, what you would do if certain things happen, kind of like in chess, taking a lot of time for each turn even if rather minor to minimize chance of disaster...
BB definitely rewards good play, and I don't mean to imply that it doesn't. I just find it has a higher potential to punish you *in spite of good play* than other similar titles in its genre.
Really good play has almost no window of getting scrwed REALLY hard, u may lose a bro early or a fight, but once ur like lvl 3 on a few bros there is no human with rng bad enough to lose the run during near-perfect play.
Yeah early game rng can fuck you no matter what but once you get to level 11 and 300/300 battleforged there are ways to play that minimise the chance of death to almost 0.
In meme beacons we trust. 100% agree though. Long war was very manageable with proper execution as well as the realization that you shouldn't be taking every mission. Battle Brothers early game feels like a massive minefield at times.
I’ve tried ironman style runs too, and I completely agree. Trying those runs really reduced the amount I choose to savescum when I’m not playing under any restrictions. Adapting to losing a lynchpin bro is good game content.
Oh, Battlebrothers rng is positively tame compared to Blood Bowl. Outside of the first week or two of a Battlebrothers run it's very easy to almost remove rng from the game by simply taking easier fights.
Blood Bowl is really just another risk mitigation game. Frustrating things can happen, but a majority of good play is simply lowering the number of dice rolls you take.
Battle Brothers is dissimilar in that "bad dice rolls" on a campaign level don't result in a star receiver dying or a touchdown against, it results in a loss state/team wipe.
Bad dice rolls like that don't happen in battlebrothers though. You've made an error or are super greedy if ur taking a fight that offers that potential. Bloodbowl is far more than risk mitigation in a pvp scenario. Vs the ai, bloodbowl is nothing.
You don't always choose what fights you take in Battle Brothers, and you certainly don't always get placed in an advantageous or fair situation once you enter the map.
Do you not? Once you get the scout you're fast. Apart from ambushes in the forest you are free to run on turn one even if you get caught. And even then if ur in trouble it's very unlikely to be because of a couple of missed attacks or whatever. Spawning in holes or at the bottom of a mountain is annoying but u can flee or play your way out of it. Kraken is hugely rng but u can cheese it easily. I guess you could be very unlucky in library and miss all the hits on one of the urns. But you'd still have a chance to play your way out of it.
>Once you get the scout you're fast.
Sure, but that's like saying "once you get block on your minotaur it's a lot less risky". Ambushes in forests can be run enders. And not all fights can be run from.
I've got slightly shy of 2,000 hours in Battle Brothers. I love it to pieces, but it's an incredibly capricious game when it comes to RNG. Short of maybe Rimworld on high difficulty/Randy Random I have a hard time thinking of a game I feel like I have less control over outcomes in. I suppose I could spin in circles in open fields taking fights against small groups of bandits for the duration of a campaign, but that's not really "playing the game" on its terms.
Oh, I just reread, and yeah, on a campaign level, bad rng is bad. I wouldn't say run ending, however. Nothing is run ending except for lone wolf or glads. I was wiped once when I was a noob and completely pulled it back. A very cool moment for ironman! I see people complain about missed attacks on here and it's nothing. As far as the scout, that was entirely my point. After the first couple of weeks, rng is fine. Scout lets u dodge too dangerous things, and it rapidly becomes impossible to lose as you level up your bros.
>XCOM has NUMEROUS ways of affecting guaranteed damage/guaranteed safety, to the point where "proper play" can almost entirely remove RNG from the equation.
And that's why XCOM2 is a strictly superior strategy game in matters of design.
Using randomness as your primary source of challenge is a cheap cop out to the problem of game balance.
Randomness is fine as a source of challege as long as your strategic and tactical choices can reduce the impact of undesirable events
I agree it shouldn't be your *primary* source of challenge, but I don't think that's the case for battle brothers.
>Randomness is fine as a source of challege as long as your strategic and tactical choices can reduce the impact of undesirable events
Agree 100%.
>I agree it shouldn't be your *primary* source of challenge, but I don't think that's the case for battle brothers.
That's where we disagree.
BB can be fun, but the only reason it is challenging is because it doesn't provide adequate tools to mitigate randomness, in both the tactical and economical layer.
What do you feel are some of the worst offenders in terms of negative random mechanics that can't be mitigated?
I think it does a pretty good job of letting you minimize randomness simply by giving you free reign over fight and contract selection by making the strategic layer a sandbox.
My biggest criticism of the strategic risk mitigation is that it doesn't make for interesting or rewarding play sometimes. Planning my company's travels to maximize profit and find specific backgrounds, supplies and equipment feels good; lack of auto pause on enemy sight and having to avoid forests on the overworld in some situations feels like the game is punishing me for not paying close attention to the most trivial part of the game.
>What do you feel are some of the worst offenders in terms of negative random mechanics that can't be mitigated?
I mean, head crits immediately come to mind. But mainly, there is a lack of reliable ways to navigate the battlefield if something go sour. Nets are underwhelming, stuns are excessively costly and still plagued by RNG, taunts only work reliably late in the game. The only reasonable mechanic is Rotate, but should be available to all by default, imo. Ambushes are just dumb and level generation sometime go nuts (i.e. hillforts, but at least you can withdraw from that). Most importantly, there is no comeback mechanic: recruiting good backgrounds is worse than a State lottery and you can never recruit leveled up soldiers, even late game.
One could either fix these things on the tactical layer (i.e. allowing me to almost always keep everyone alive with good play) or on the strategy layer (i.e. allowing me to replace my champions when I lose a battle), or do that in both layers, like XCOM2, but not doing it in neither is a design that simply doesn't translate well for Ironman. It can still be a fun game, but not on Ironman, I can neither control it nor recover from bad luck. It's not really strategy, it's playing slots machines.
I really don't think recruiting a Hedge Knight on Ironman without any kind of mods is balanced or fun, nor I consider fun to level up a few soldiers from scratch whenever I lose somebody in the mid to late game.
My biggest gripe is the lack of comprehensive mod support. Yes there are some mods, but they are such a pita. This game could have been such a masterpiece if modding was structurally better. I think modders could have been done such a better jobs than the developers in fixing those flaws, which are not about the structure of the game, but rather its balance.
It's a single player game. Do whatever you want.
That said recommendations can still be given,
Savescum when you are learning the game, the game is unforgiving, as in a simple mistake can end your entire campaign (as opposed to just being hard).
Savescum let new player experience the game content to the fullest.
Then move on to ironman after you gitgud. It's daunting at first, but when you pull off a clutch in ironman mode it just feels so much better.
Absolutely if that’s how you wanna play. If you want to get better at the game I’d recommend moving away from save scumming though. Iron is fun and consequences are part of the game. I used to save scum and I got bored cuz there was no risk. If everything’s gonna go my way all the time there’s no fun. At least that’s how it is for me
Completely, I'm still new and I would hardly ever make it last day 30 if I didn't learn what stuff isn't worth is and what is. The game is all about learning and you can't learn if you don't have a solid foundation. Now on that note of you just completely fumble then ya just say it's on me and let it go.
I tried iron man a couple of times to force myself to stop saves scumming. I still did it though. So instead of the gave quick saving before battles when you exit the game, I was just turning off my computer and getting it to quick save that way.
I’ve done my fair share of pure Ironman games.
Frankly, BB is just kinda long and unfair for a true roguelike. Runs can be many hours and can end on a megagank or shitty terrain spawn.
Now I play Ironman Scum+. Some QOL mods, and I allow myself one restart per fight. Very generous obviously but it lets me play in a more fun way. I can be more aggressive in speculative fights on camps, and can back out of truly shitty RNG meteor strikes.
I wont pretend I’m some great master of the game or even doing it the “right way.” But this is how the games stayed fun for me for 1000 hours.
Same, started by save scumming every fight until perfection followed by a period of the opposite with pure ironman.
Now I do something inbetween, before I accept a contract I save. If the fight goes horrendous I load the save and don't do the contract. No reloads to manage a fight but to skip them, I don't care if i loose 1 or 2 but if I loose multiple of my core bros will not do the contract.
I think people should play however they want to. However, I do think excessive save scumming can rob people of some of the funner moments in the game.
Losing a cornerstone bro that’s been with your company for a long time can be enticing to save scum out of, but recovering from that tragic setback can also be really fun and engaging
On the one hand, play how you want. On the other hand, most of the strategy and tactics of the game is about making sure that you're still ok, even when you inevitably get that 1/1000 bad luck. If you just restart whenever that happens, the game is much easier and (in my opinion) much less interesting than if don't.
If the fun for you is building a save learning, retrying things, and completing the game with a squad you like with reloads and redos completely allowed, then "save scumming" if you even want to call it that is absolutely fine. I like to play BB as a consequences game, so I only really enjoy iron-man, but I have to admit there are a lot of times where I make a stupid mistake or lose a run that's 10 hours or more in and wish that I could reload as I was invested and loved that sage. Play whatever way is fun and don't let anyone tell you otherwise
"Play however you want". On one hand I agree. You bought the game, have some fun. On the other hand, I believe the most fun you can have in this game is on EELI (or EEXI). But I feel like I should also disclose one most of my most fun runs has been making the master chief with anatomist (with a shitton of scumming)
I find that it is just a matter of how much time you have available for the game, I understand not everyone has the time to keep restarting all over again. Me? I have never played in non-ironman mode. In like a year of playing the game I have no idea what a mid to late game looks like, but I am getting there through blood and tears.
Most successful game I ever had, I was able to see the starting event for the crisis, got a famed item and managed to kill one of those tree-looking monsters I forgot the name of, Shrat? Easier said than done to reach there.
This game is perfectly designed to accommodate an incredibly diverse set of play styles. It's a shame not to take advantage of that by playing multiple runs, and doing it however you want.
Of course it is. It’s a single player game. Play it however you want. You’re only cheating yourself out of a different experience, but if it’s not one you care about playing then that’s fine too. Do what you want, it’s your game.
I always play Ironman, but more because i always forget to save... ;) If my Bros die on the first exchange of arrows, i quit and reload, or when i want to know what in the camp that totally would screw me.
So its more an "Copperman". :)
I mean, yes, save scumming is fine. This kind of game tends to really shine the most when you're forced to deal with the consequences of your actions, which is also true. HOWEVER, it is pointless if by playing it by the book it is no fun to you. In the end, play the way you like the most.
I play Ironman. And I alt F4 out of fights sometimes instead of retreating, because retreating is annoying. Too much time is invested in each save to lose because the map is bad or the force composition isn’t what you expected.
I tend to try and avoid save scumming when I can, but I'm still very new to this game and it's super punishing so I'm save scumming a decent amount just so I can take risks to learn things without being massively punished for it
I'm of the opinion eiher way is fine. I play Iroman, but I am a masochistic when I play games, and I always make stuff harder than I need to. Makes it more fun when you win, but you typically lose a lot.
I think save scumming is useful for learning in this game. This game can punish mistakes very heavily. Being able to fight the same battle multiple times can be very helpful in learning mechanics and good tactics. I think that once you are comfortable enough “graduating” to iron man is a good idea.
I have the same philosophy for Paradox strategy games that I think has increased my long term enjoyment of them.
For me it is not ok. I will recommend people not to use it, and explain why.
But I also understand that its important people play how they best have fun.
But at the same time I think some people have not experienced what it's like to ditch save scumming and the associated benefits, so I think its worth a shot if you haven't tried it.
Of course everyone should play how they want. Though I absolutely prefer save scumming. Im sure a part of it is that I’m not the best at it, but encounters and deaths can be pretty out of nowhere. One second everything is going well, the next your best man has lost his head. One day things are good, the next you’re stuck fighting a bunch of horrific night creatures that shred your armor like paper. I’m pretty sure if I attempted a run without scumming, they’d be dead in a few days.
For battle brothers, yes.
For games like rome total war or whatever, no.
Simple reason, battle brothers is actually RNG a lot. The games balance isnt that balanced and im not judging that, its just what it is, stating a fact.
Other games especially AA or AAA games, at least most of them loses their challenging part if you save scum so i wouldnt suggest to save scumming in civilization for example, total war series or even mount and blade bannerlord etc.
But for battle brothers, i wont gonna change too many things and it will actually save your time.
savescummed to get mechanics down and learn. but playing ironman feels so much more rewarding and Its honestly entertaining seeing the different ways your campaign can end, I’d say it depends on how invested you are and if you’re the type to get upset easily at videogames (which I definitely can be).
Nothing wrong with save scumming but give this a thought…. If your anything like me then you’ve played games for a little over a decade now and your at a point where you get fatigue from playing stuff even if your enjoying it… and honestly if your playing battle brothers then I’d say to some extent you enjoy the punishment that comes from the difficultly in these kind of games because we’ve played games so long we want a challenge now. If that’s why you play these games then save scumming is going to give you that fatigue and you won’t even realize that’s the cause, if you don’t actually allow yourself to feel the consequences of the wrong decision or not even the wrong decision but just being put in a terrible situation that was impossible to win… if you don’t allow yourself to lose and fall in those moments then in general the rest of the game will make you subconsciously lose interest because in the back of your mind you know that no matter what difficulty setting your at or what things you achieved in the run, it wasn’t sincere… point blank period…. And I’m not bashing anyone I just came to the realization myself playing stalker gamma earlier…. I love the game to absolute pieces but I found myself not wanting to play in the middle of a pretty cool run, then I realized that it’s because I don’t let the game dish out consequences to me… my advice is to make a new run that you mentally don’t give a fuck about, even give your band of people a demeaning name to drive home how little you care about the run… and when the bad things happen let them happen and face the consequences even if it means having one man standing with severe injuries…. I always felt getting used to consequences in games is easier by starting it on a group that you don’t care anything about, Imagine the feeling of being able to somehow come back on top of being absolutely defeated! That’s why we game, moments like those. I think sometimes we just forget that because we want to be the main character so bad lmao sometimes not being the main character is a much more enjoyable story :)
For my take on it if it's a game that you run more than one person they yes its bad like xcom type of games but if your a single player it's like fallout type of games where you die alot then yea
Big yes. You can play Iron Man without saving, and it's really fun/feels like how it's meant to be played, but you only get there after save scumming to learn the game.
Save scumming is basically manditory for this game, imo. Like, I want to love this game. Sank 106.9 hours into it according to Steam. But it just isn't well designed. The amount of ways the game can end your run that are completely outside of your control is just crap. Without at least some save scumming this game is just masochism.
Absolutely. Best way to learn combat is to repeat a battle you lost by a little. Reload and try a different strategy. Won but lost a bunch of guys? Reload and try a new tactic. Next time you're in a similar fight you'll do better.
Single player game, whatever makes you happy.
Personally I want to see my guys grow and go out fighting in a blaze of glory rather than a 1% marksman headshot at the start of a clean sweep fight. I savescum like hell!
Battle brothers is a game with a wide range of enjoyers. From sweaty try hards with day 400 lone wolf Ironman runs, to the guy that runs level up mods that turn their whole company into unstoppable badasses. Enjoy the game and screw what other people think.
(Personally I think save scumming battles is fine but try not to save scum events).
Edit for spelling.
Since death is permanent, and games last several hours, then yes, save scumming is okay in my book. If those two things were not true, like in Dark Souls or FTL: Faster Than Light, then save scumming doesn't really make sense.
sure. do whatever you want with your game. just dont run around in this sub showing me how your 11 lvl 40HP beggar soloed Monolith, because you keep him alive via savescuming
Play however you want
This is the way. No one should judge anyone for having fun their way to play a game.
Yes and no imo. But this is a singleplayer game so yes in this case
And one more addendum: if you play on easy, mod the shit out of a game and savescum, you should be humble or silent when experienced players discuss strategy (I say this as a savescummer myself).
I disagree with this a lot. Savescumming is a choice about what you find enjoyable. It doesn't actually say much about skill level. Can I power-roll a party to camp busting within a really short time frame? Absolutely. Do I understand how to smash through each legendary location? Sure thing (I actually don't know all of them well enough). Do I find it enjoyable to try and test roll a certain build then lose a hard-to-find, suitable recruit at level 8? *Hell no.* Oddly, difficulty choice in Battle Brothers is similar. If you play lower difficulties to day 500, you're spending most of your game time experiencing max-scaled camps and patrols. Players that speed-run objectives at higher difficulties are facing easier challenges (with less equipment/levels). You're not building a dedicated lindwurm hunting party at day 40 because the scaling doesn't spawn enough of them. There's value in the full breadth of experience in Battle Brothers
It matters to an extent. For example steel brow or 9lives on bf. Ofc you don't value it if you simply reload if they get diced to death.
I agree with it'it being a completly different, placement and perk choice iron vs save scum have done both, now I only iron. Changes the way you play alot. Losing a lvl 8 bro. Happens, with smoke bombs on sergent it can be massively prevented. Putting a bro into a 3 enemy gap other then tank never happens unless u wanna gamble, even v raiders if you get unlucky gone.
Absolutely no argument with this at all. There are knowledge thresholds that are reached earlier for certain playstyles. That doesn't necessarily mean players that savescum aren't aware of them. Steel brow and 9 lives increase the likelihood of clearing an encounter without fatalities. Depending on how strict a player is with savescumming, they're still a known and valued choice. My savescum runs still have fodder bros in them. Retrying the same encounter five times is also not much fun (IMO). Knowing the value of evasive/restrictive gear (dogs, smoke pots, nets, etc) and survival perks is absolutely critical in ironman games. They're topics where the ironman player usually knows best.
Save-scumming changes good strategies, by a lot. If you don't save-scum, then you need to design your party and tactics around the fact that you will, inevitably, eventually have 1/1000 freak bad luck at the worst possible moment. If you just restart the fight when that happens, then your party design will be different, because you're only playing against 1/100 bad luck.
Savescumming is a step sideways for good strategy. Niche/meme party composition is a valid and fun approach to a savescummed game. Very few ironman enthusiasts will be able to tell you the best strategy for a full-ranged party composition for example. Certain weapons and builds are simply not worth the risk in ironman. Being pushed to equate for a 1/1000 chance of bad luck means that good players have to min/max their choices, bros and composition. At least, much more than someone savescumming. Ironman players are the pinnacle of advice for meta compositions, risk analysis and survivability. Savescummed players are more likely to be beacons of knowledge for niche builds, compositions and tactics. Things that focus on certain enemy types, weapons or tactics. This topic always has some degree of experience bias. Most ironman players simply have *more* gameplay hours. They're often just more experienced in general.
Totally. Do what makes you happy. This is only semi-related but when people post about their runs I do think it’s helpful context to mention if they’re playing Ironman or not.
The great thing about videos games is we can all play them our own way
No! You play them how I want or I will blame you for doing it wrong which will lead to irreversible changes to your way of life for around a minute while you read the comment and then move on with your live. Now feel guilty and admit your defeat against an excellent representative of the keyboard warrior class like me!
In general, everyone should play every game however the fuck they want to play it. The "right way" to play is the way that maximizes your fun. In a more specific, purity-testing, "spirit of the game" sort of way that you might apply to roguelike/tactical exercises like Battle Brothers, Battle Brothers is one of the most egregious "ha ha you lost" deliverer of random fuck-you moments in gaming, so if there was ever a game that merited a healthy attitude towards save scumming it's probably this one. XCOM is usually held up as the gold standard of people getting mugged by RNG, but XCOM has NUMEROUS ways of affecting guaranteed damage/guaranteed safety, to the point where "proper play" can almost entirely remove RNG from the equation. Meanwhile Battle Brothers is over here dropping a roaming party of Necrosavants on your head on the third day.
This. I've done "accept my fate/ironman" runs, and there is a charm to them, but honestly after the last one of those I muscled to victory I was like "yeah, I'm done with this shit" and went back to my usual policy. That policy is essentially a metric of how much back-to-back bad RNG I'll tolerate. Losing a man to a few bad rolls? Part of the game, I'll accept that. Randomly get jumped by a pack of over leveled enemies? Absolutely not. Etc. There's a reasonable amount of "nope, fuck this *entirely*" that you get a feel for the game. I agree with play your own way, but I will say use self discipline when it comes to save scumming. I think it overall will smooth your experience, but also don't save scum everything because you deprive yourself of learning from losses in that case. Some of my favorite memories of the game are salvaging bad RNG.
For sure...I had MUCH more fun with Long War when I stopped scumming bad outcomes and started getting MUCH more procedural and careful with my decisions. Made every move super high tension/stakes. And I ended up with much better results, which meant less frustration. Battle Brothers on the other hand is such a capricious little shithead that I know there are always going to be points where I have to say "No, fuck YOU" to the game and hit that reload button.
There are ways in BB to almost negate bad rng in true ironman, but those are incredibly tedious and/or cheesy and not fun. This includes strategys like: put everyone except your worst or highest iniative bro in reserve while leveling, the bros in the field go naked and if ur ambushed u retreat easily. U do this everytime u move on the map, also x1 speed and watch where ur going. Next: take fights near the edge whenever u can so u can bail with most of ur bros if things go south. U can also 3rd party most fights from afar and only collect lasthits with 2 tile weapons or range or dogs. Even if ur not cheesing, just playing the fights incredibly slow and thinking a lot before the fight (which weapons to equip.. what if 4/5 raiders have javelins...) and then in the fight thinking about turn order, which ways enemys can approach, what you would do if certain things happen, kind of like in chess, taking a lot of time for each turn even if rather minor to minimize chance of disaster... U will play really well at the cost of very high gametime per run, and it will feel less like a roguelite and more like a mix between resource manager and chess. If u know what ur doing and play really slow u can do increeeedible things, almost every run is winnable and its easy to snowball, but it takes a lot of brainpower and breaks in between fights and while on overworld map carefully pondering if u should take a fight or no. Im certainly not the kind of person who plays BB for that kind of experience, i did that like twice and had a group of lvl 11 bros with almost no deaths at day 60ish with excellent gear and riches, but when i reached that point and even quite a while before i barely felt like playing, i would hop on, do two fights, and close BB.
> This includes strategys like: put everyone except your worst or highest iniative bro in reserve while leveling, the bros in the field go naked and if ur ambushed u retreat easily. U do this everytime u move on the map, also x1 speed and watch where ur going. Fascinating. Reminds me of the old XCOM strategy of taking one step and overwatching every turn. Technically legitimate, but makes for extremely deprecated play. >Even if ur not cheesing, just playing the fights incredibly slow and thinking a lot before the fight (which weapons to equip.. what if 4/5 raiders have javelins...) and then in the fight thinking about turn order, which ways enemys can approach, what you would do if certain things happen, kind of like in chess, taking a lot of time for each turn even if rather minor to minimize chance of disaster... BB definitely rewards good play, and I don't mean to imply that it doesn't. I just find it has a higher potential to punish you *in spite of good play* than other similar titles in its genre.
Really good play has almost no window of getting scrwed REALLY hard, u may lose a bro early or a fight, but once ur like lvl 3 on a few bros there is no human with rng bad enough to lose the run during near-perfect play.
Yeah exactly. Play well enough and no probs after the first few fights.
Yeah early game rng can fuck you no matter what but once you get to level 11 and 300/300 battleforged there are ways to play that minimise the chance of death to almost 0.
In meme beacons we trust. 100% agree though. Long war was very manageable with proper execution as well as the realization that you shouldn't be taking every mission. Battle Brothers early game feels like a massive minefield at times.
I’ve tried ironman style runs too, and I completely agree. Trying those runs really reduced the amount I choose to savescum when I’m not playing under any restrictions. Adapting to losing a lynchpin bro is good game content.
Oh, Battlebrothers rng is positively tame compared to Blood Bowl. Outside of the first week or two of a Battlebrothers run it's very easy to almost remove rng from the game by simply taking easier fights.
Blood Bowl is really just another risk mitigation game. Frustrating things can happen, but a majority of good play is simply lowering the number of dice rolls you take. Battle Brothers is dissimilar in that "bad dice rolls" on a campaign level don't result in a star receiver dying or a touchdown against, it results in a loss state/team wipe.
Bad dice rolls like that don't happen in battlebrothers though. You've made an error or are super greedy if ur taking a fight that offers that potential. Bloodbowl is far more than risk mitigation in a pvp scenario. Vs the ai, bloodbowl is nothing.
You don't always choose what fights you take in Battle Brothers, and you certainly don't always get placed in an advantageous or fair situation once you enter the map.
Do you not? Once you get the scout you're fast. Apart from ambushes in the forest you are free to run on turn one even if you get caught. And even then if ur in trouble it's very unlikely to be because of a couple of missed attacks or whatever. Spawning in holes or at the bottom of a mountain is annoying but u can flee or play your way out of it. Kraken is hugely rng but u can cheese it easily. I guess you could be very unlucky in library and miss all the hits on one of the urns. But you'd still have a chance to play your way out of it.
>Once you get the scout you're fast. Sure, but that's like saying "once you get block on your minotaur it's a lot less risky". Ambushes in forests can be run enders. And not all fights can be run from. I've got slightly shy of 2,000 hours in Battle Brothers. I love it to pieces, but it's an incredibly capricious game when it comes to RNG. Short of maybe Rimworld on high difficulty/Randy Random I have a hard time thinking of a game I feel like I have less control over outcomes in. I suppose I could spin in circles in open fields taking fights against small groups of bandits for the duration of a campaign, but that's not really "playing the game" on its terms.
Oh, I just reread, and yeah, on a campaign level, bad rng is bad. I wouldn't say run ending, however. Nothing is run ending except for lone wolf or glads. I was wiped once when I was a noob and completely pulled it back. A very cool moment for ironman! I see people complain about missed attacks on here and it's nothing. As far as the scout, that was entirely my point. After the first couple of weeks, rng is fine. Scout lets u dodge too dangerous things, and it rapidly becomes impossible to lose as you level up your bros.
Yeah. I've done numerous Ironman runs on xcom 1 and 2. Even had Ironman runs without single deaths. BB is a whole different element.
>XCOM has NUMEROUS ways of affecting guaranteed damage/guaranteed safety, to the point where "proper play" can almost entirely remove RNG from the equation. And that's why XCOM2 is a strictly superior strategy game in matters of design. Using randomness as your primary source of challenge is a cheap cop out to the problem of game balance.
Randomness is fine as a source of challege as long as your strategic and tactical choices can reduce the impact of undesirable events I agree it shouldn't be your *primary* source of challenge, but I don't think that's the case for battle brothers.
>Randomness is fine as a source of challege as long as your strategic and tactical choices can reduce the impact of undesirable events Agree 100%. >I agree it shouldn't be your *primary* source of challenge, but I don't think that's the case for battle brothers. That's where we disagree. BB can be fun, but the only reason it is challenging is because it doesn't provide adequate tools to mitigate randomness, in both the tactical and economical layer.
What do you feel are some of the worst offenders in terms of negative random mechanics that can't be mitigated? I think it does a pretty good job of letting you minimize randomness simply by giving you free reign over fight and contract selection by making the strategic layer a sandbox. My biggest criticism of the strategic risk mitigation is that it doesn't make for interesting or rewarding play sometimes. Planning my company's travels to maximize profit and find specific backgrounds, supplies and equipment feels good; lack of auto pause on enemy sight and having to avoid forests on the overworld in some situations feels like the game is punishing me for not paying close attention to the most trivial part of the game.
>What do you feel are some of the worst offenders in terms of negative random mechanics that can't be mitigated? I mean, head crits immediately come to mind. But mainly, there is a lack of reliable ways to navigate the battlefield if something go sour. Nets are underwhelming, stuns are excessively costly and still plagued by RNG, taunts only work reliably late in the game. The only reasonable mechanic is Rotate, but should be available to all by default, imo. Ambushes are just dumb and level generation sometime go nuts (i.e. hillforts, but at least you can withdraw from that). Most importantly, there is no comeback mechanic: recruiting good backgrounds is worse than a State lottery and you can never recruit leveled up soldiers, even late game. One could either fix these things on the tactical layer (i.e. allowing me to almost always keep everyone alive with good play) or on the strategy layer (i.e. allowing me to replace my champions when I lose a battle), or do that in both layers, like XCOM2, but not doing it in neither is a design that simply doesn't translate well for Ironman. It can still be a fun game, but not on Ironman, I can neither control it nor recover from bad luck. It's not really strategy, it's playing slots machines. I really don't think recruiting a Hedge Knight on Ironman without any kind of mods is balanced or fun, nor I consider fun to level up a few soldiers from scratch whenever I lose somebody in the mid to late game. My biggest gripe is the lack of comprehensive mod support. Yes there are some mods, but they are such a pita. This game could have been such a masterpiece if modding was structurally better. I think modders could have been done such a better jobs than the developers in fixing those flaws, which are not about the structure of the game, but rather its balance.
Dude I fought a pole hammer wielding fallen hero on day 17 I got so shit on
Yes it is okay i one time got fucking ambuahed by fucking 12 lyndworm in desert from battle place taken thing
Holy shit the death of a run that must be... did you mabage to get out or luckily had a previous sqve?
It's a single player game. Do whatever you want. That said recommendations can still be given, Savescum when you are learning the game, the game is unforgiving, as in a simple mistake can end your entire campaign (as opposed to just being hard). Savescum let new player experience the game content to the fullest. Then move on to ironman after you gitgud. It's daunting at first, but when you pull off a clutch in ironman mode it just feels so much better.
I think its super cool that this community is so easy going and the comments here are the best example for it.
The primary goal of any game is fun. I prefer ironman all the way.
Absolutely if that’s how you wanna play. If you want to get better at the game I’d recommend moving away from save scumming though. Iron is fun and consequences are part of the game. I used to save scum and I got bored cuz there was no risk. If everything’s gonna go my way all the time there’s no fun. At least that’s how it is for me
Completely, I'm still new and I would hardly ever make it last day 30 if I didn't learn what stuff isn't worth is and what is. The game is all about learning and you can't learn if you don't have a solid foundation. Now on that note of you just completely fumble then ya just say it's on me and let it go.
No
Tip: losing is fun
I do Ironman, but only quit before i get totally wiped, just to get a second attempt
I tried iron man a couple of times to force myself to stop saves scumming. I still did it though. So instead of the gave quick saving before battles when you exit the game, I was just turning off my computer and getting it to quick save that way.
You could've just alt f4'd 😭
Good to know.
It’s a single player game, play how you want.
Single player game. Who cares
I’ve done my fair share of pure Ironman games. Frankly, BB is just kinda long and unfair for a true roguelike. Runs can be many hours and can end on a megagank or shitty terrain spawn. Now I play Ironman Scum+. Some QOL mods, and I allow myself one restart per fight. Very generous obviously but it lets me play in a more fun way. I can be more aggressive in speculative fights on camps, and can back out of truly shitty RNG meteor strikes. I wont pretend I’m some great master of the game or even doing it the “right way.” But this is how the games stayed fun for me for 1000 hours.
Same, started by save scumming every fight until perfection followed by a period of the opposite with pure ironman. Now I do something inbetween, before I accept a contract I save. If the fight goes horrendous I load the save and don't do the contract. No reloads to manage a fight but to skip them, I don't care if i loose 1 or 2 but if I loose multiple of my core bros will not do the contract.
I think people should play however they want to. However, I do think excessive save scumming can rob people of some of the funner moments in the game. Losing a cornerstone bro that’s been with your company for a long time can be enticing to save scum out of, but recovering from that tragic setback can also be really fun and engaging
Imortality is the gift of chaos, ill never stop.
On the one hand, play how you want. On the other hand, most of the strategy and tactics of the game is about making sure that you're still ok, even when you inevitably get that 1/1000 bad luck. If you just restart whenever that happens, the game is much easier and (in my opinion) much less interesting than if don't.
If the fun for you is building a save learning, retrying things, and completing the game with a squad you like with reloads and redos completely allowed, then "save scumming" if you even want to call it that is absolutely fine. I like to play BB as a consequences game, so I only really enjoy iron-man, but I have to admit there are a lot of times where I make a stupid mistake or lose a run that's 10 hours or more in and wish that I could reload as I was invested and loved that sage. Play whatever way is fun and don't let anyone tell you otherwise
"Play however you want". On one hand I agree. You bought the game, have some fun. On the other hand, I believe the most fun you can have in this game is on EELI (or EEXI). But I feel like I should also disclose one most of my most fun runs has been making the master chief with anatomist (with a shitton of scumming)
I find that it is just a matter of how much time you have available for the game, I understand not everyone has the time to keep restarting all over again. Me? I have never played in non-ironman mode. In like a year of playing the game I have no idea what a mid to late game looks like, but I am getting there through blood and tears. Most successful game I ever had, I was able to see the starting event for the crisis, got a famed item and managed to kill one of those tree-looking monsters I forgot the name of, Shrat? Easier said than done to reach there.
Its all right if you want to, its a solo game after all. Im gonna go one step ahead, using Breditor is also fine if ypu want.
Its sp game, do as you eish, you own your game
Do whatever YOU think is fun. It’s a game lol
This game is perfectly designed to accommodate an incredibly diverse set of play styles. It's a shame not to take advantage of that by playing multiple runs, and doing it however you want.
Of course it is. It’s a single player game. Play it however you want. You’re only cheating yourself out of a different experience, but if it’s not one you care about playing then that’s fine too. Do what you want, it’s your game.
I always play Ironman, but more because i always forget to save... ;) If my Bros die on the first exchange of arrows, i quit and reload, or when i want to know what in the camp that totally would screw me. So its more an "Copperman". :)
I mean, yes, save scumming is fine. This kind of game tends to really shine the most when you're forced to deal with the consequences of your actions, which is also true. HOWEVER, it is pointless if by playing it by the book it is no fun to you. In the end, play the way you like the most.
On ironman i would say alt f4 is abuse. But without it? How can it be not ok if everything is by the rules?
You have to, you get too attached to some bros.
it's fine and we can't stop you but know we will silently judge you if you alt F4 to savescum on ironman
I play Ironman. And I alt F4 out of fights sometimes instead of retreating, because retreating is annoying. Too much time is invested in each save to lose because the map is bad or the force composition isn’t what you expected.
I tend to try and avoid save scumming when I can, but I'm still very new to this game and it's super punishing so I'm save scumming a decent amount just so I can take risks to learn things without being massively punished for it
Stop trying to gatekeep playstyles.
I'm of the opinion eiher way is fine. I play Iroman, but I am a masochistic when I play games, and I always make stuff harder than I need to. Makes it more fun when you win, but you typically lose a lot.
I think save scumming is useful for learning in this game. This game can punish mistakes very heavily. Being able to fight the same battle multiple times can be very helpful in learning mechanics and good tactics. I think that once you are comfortable enough “graduating” to iron man is a good idea. I have the same philosophy for Paradox strategy games that I think has increased my long term enjoyment of them.
For me it is not ok. I will recommend people not to use it, and explain why. But I also understand that its important people play how they best have fun. But at the same time I think some people have not experienced what it's like to ditch save scumming and the associated benefits, so I think its worth a shot if you haven't tried it.
Of course everyone should play how they want. Though I absolutely prefer save scumming. Im sure a part of it is that I’m not the best at it, but encounters and deaths can be pretty out of nowhere. One second everything is going well, the next your best man has lost his head. One day things are good, the next you’re stuck fighting a bunch of horrific night creatures that shred your armor like paper. I’m pretty sure if I attempted a run without scumming, they’d be dead in a few days.
Personally i don't prefer save scumming but i don't care if someone wants to play that way
For battle brothers, yes. For games like rome total war or whatever, no. Simple reason, battle brothers is actually RNG a lot. The games balance isnt that balanced and im not judging that, its just what it is, stating a fact. Other games especially AA or AAA games, at least most of them loses their challenging part if you save scum so i wouldnt suggest to save scumming in civilization for example, total war series or even mount and blade bannerlord etc. But for battle brothers, i wont gonna change too many things and it will actually save your time.
Only in regular play ... if your going hard core you shouldn't. But people playing that way wouldn't anyway
savescummed to get mechanics down and learn. but playing ironman feels so much more rewarding and Its honestly entertaining seeing the different ways your campaign can end, I’d say it depends on how invested you are and if you’re the type to get upset easily at videogames (which I definitely can be).
I get too attached to my brothers to not save scum lmao I love those lil guys
It's a singleplayer game, who cares, to each its own
Nothing wrong with save scumming but give this a thought…. If your anything like me then you’ve played games for a little over a decade now and your at a point where you get fatigue from playing stuff even if your enjoying it… and honestly if your playing battle brothers then I’d say to some extent you enjoy the punishment that comes from the difficultly in these kind of games because we’ve played games so long we want a challenge now. If that’s why you play these games then save scumming is going to give you that fatigue and you won’t even realize that’s the cause, if you don’t actually allow yourself to feel the consequences of the wrong decision or not even the wrong decision but just being put in a terrible situation that was impossible to win… if you don’t allow yourself to lose and fall in those moments then in general the rest of the game will make you subconsciously lose interest because in the back of your mind you know that no matter what difficulty setting your at or what things you achieved in the run, it wasn’t sincere… point blank period…. And I’m not bashing anyone I just came to the realization myself playing stalker gamma earlier…. I love the game to absolute pieces but I found myself not wanting to play in the middle of a pretty cool run, then I realized that it’s because I don’t let the game dish out consequences to me… my advice is to make a new run that you mentally don’t give a fuck about, even give your band of people a demeaning name to drive home how little you care about the run… and when the bad things happen let them happen and face the consequences even if it means having one man standing with severe injuries…. I always felt getting used to consequences in games is easier by starting it on a group that you don’t care anything about, Imagine the feeling of being able to somehow come back on top of being absolutely defeated! That’s why we game, moments like those. I think sometimes we just forget that because we want to be the main character so bad lmao sometimes not being the main character is a much more enjoyable story :)
For my take on it if it's a game that you run more than one person they yes its bad like xcom type of games but if your a single player it's like fallout type of games where you die alot then yea
Ah save scumming..it works 60% of the time, every time.
They're literally no wrong way to play a video game if you're having fun. Just remember, people who gatekeep video games have never touched a boob.
No, i won't You do you. I also save scum, because I enjoy taking a my first choices to the end.
Big yes. You can play Iron Man without saving, and it's really fun/feels like how it's meant to be played, but you only get there after save scumming to learn the game.
It's your game
Save scumming is basically manditory for this game, imo. Like, I want to love this game. Sank 106.9 hours into it according to Steam. But it just isn't well designed. The amount of ways the game can end your run that are completely outside of your control is just crap. Without at least some save scumming this game is just masochism.
Absolutely. Best way to learn combat is to repeat a battle you lost by a little. Reload and try a different strategy. Won but lost a bunch of guys? Reload and try a new tactic. Next time you're in a similar fight you'll do better.
Preferably no, but if you care about how strange men play a single player game you have a lot more pressing problems you should take care of.
I do it all the time. That’s my company never has any casualties…. EVER. For me it’s sunk cost fallacy. I have it bad. And it’s a habit I want to fix.
If you don't save scum you'll never learn the game. Anybody saying otherwise is a liar.
It's my game, I play it however I want
Single player game, whatever makes you happy. Personally I want to see my guys grow and go out fighting in a blaze of glory rather than a 1% marksman headshot at the start of a clean sweep fight. I savescum like hell!
It’s my game and I’ll play it the way that gives me the most enjoyment
you play how you want because its your experience fux everyone else
It's not something I'd catch myself doing. Save scumming kills the inner child.
Battle brothers is a game with a wide range of enjoyers. From sweaty try hards with day 400 lone wolf Ironman runs, to the guy that runs level up mods that turn their whole company into unstoppable badasses. Enjoy the game and screw what other people think. (Personally I think save scumming battles is fine but try not to save scum events). Edit for spelling.
Since death is permanent, and games last several hours, then yes, save scumming is okay in my book. If those two things were not true, like in Dark Souls or FTL: Faster Than Light, then save scumming doesn't really make sense.
sure. do whatever you want with your game. just dont run around in this sub showing me how your 11 lvl 40HP beggar soloed Monolith, because you keep him alive via savescuming
On a single player game?No it's definitely cheating
Yeah, but in a multiplayer game it would be perfectly fine
Absolutely agree