• Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

1 Neutral

About kjinn22

  • Rank

Personal Information

  • Favorite Games
    Final Fantasy VI, Mana Series
  1. Forgot to mention this suggestion and was reminded by its inclusion as an optional difficulty modifier in DQXI: Any thoughts about adding a modifier to reduce experience gained by a fight if you over-level the monsters you are fighting? Could be based on monster level vs. party average or vs. highest level character in the party, depending on what you exactly wanted to achieve. Should be a good way to reduce the complaint of over-leveling and encourage switching characters.
  2. Can we get a leak of that new version?
  3. Says they were made with a headered. I also tinkered around with an editor but with a headered rom, everything has worked perfectly
  4. Steps between encounters, although I'm going out of my way to get into random encounters to test this
  5. I reapplied the patch, so will try again and make sure to note the location if I run into the same issue. It was early as the cave to South Figaro though Edit: Yeah, reapplied, started a new game, and ran into it again. The last area when you're on the cave from Figaro Castle to South Figaro I only had 4 steps before going into an encounter. Everything else seems fine.
  6. Is that RNG patch being tested by anyone else? I actually don't have any problems with how it performs personally, but the 9 steps until encounter in dungeons part doesn't seem to be accurate. Sometimes it'll just be 4 or 5 steps until an encounter.
  7. Is the aquatic caves patch BNW compatible? Also, there was a better looking reflection patch I saved from the ID forums, anyone try that patch for a while? Thinking I'll do those two plus that RNG and PUB/Silence patches and then dive in. Just hoping there aren't any conflicts.
  8. Can't wait to try it out! thanks for this!
  9. Ah, alright, that makes sense. It would be a bit strange to defend, to not defending for a covered hit, to defending again. So my votes would be any statuses are selfish, defending being either compromise (take hit defended, drop afterwards) or selfish, and row being anything (selfish, selfless, or compromise all have merit). Prefer that either defend or row are selfish, though. And no evade tanking is fair. That sounds oxymoronic and unbalanced.
  10. Noobie here but just tossing in an opinion...I dislike the "compromise" option for defend/statuses. Having cover remove those abilities just makes cover feel like a liability. Especially if cover will be inherent on certain weapons such as spears, I don't think cover should be a forced liability, but one you can adapt to the situation. I'd be up for Row disabling Cover, while Defend/statuses act selfishly or selflessly.