The hassle of increased move speed

[cogline1987]

As I am currently playing through Baldur's Gate 2 (again) as a monk, I find myself wishing for one thing. One thing that could easily be avoided in Project Eternity. It's not a big deal, just a small quality-of-life thing, but I must make the attempt:

If any of your classes/feats/skills/whatever increase the movement speed of a character, please take a cue from Age of Empires II (if I recall correctly), and have the option to toggle a "walk at speed of slowest selected character" button.

 

It's frustrating to either have to babysit my monk constantly while simply walking around, or risk starting every fight with all enemies focused on the monk because he or she gleefully sprinted ahead of the group into danger (which, until the monk hits high levels an becomes practically invincible, is a serious problem). With a toggle like this, especially if it automatically suppressed its functionality while in of combat, it would be so much simpler to enjoy the benefits of increased move speed while in combat, and avoid the frustrations of suddenly finding yourself alone and vulnerable in combat against overwhelming odds, while the rest of your party is half a map away.

 

Thanks for taking the time to read this.

[Sabotin]

Take it a step further and have a "maintain formation" check box or something similar in which case the party would try to stay in a relative position to each other for the whole trip.

[Sensuki]

I don't think there will be any walk/run speed differences between characters in Project Eternity outside of combat.

 

They seem to be keeping combat and non-combat stuff (perhaps even as far as UI goes) separate.

[Keyrock]

I don't think there will be any walk/run speed differences between characters in Project Eternity outside of combat.

 

They seem to be keeping combat and non-combat stuff (perhaps even as far as UI goes) separate.

But how do we know what's combat and non-combat situations?  There was no clear differentiation in IE games.  There was no clear transition, it just sort of happened on the fly.  Does it go from non-combat to combat when any NPC/monster/beastie turns hostile (the circle around them turns red)?  Can you force yourself to go into "combat-mode" on your own, before anyone turns hostile, by clicking a button?

[Sensuki]

There will be a combat 'state'. A noticeable combat state in another game would be The Witcher.

 

There was a combat state in BG etc as well but as you said it was basically just 'enemy nearby'.

 

Basically what I am assuming is that while exploring, the UI will be fairly minimal kind of like Dark Sun Shattered Lands, but then when you enter combat it will change along with stuff like inventory being locked out etc.

[ShadowTiger]

I actually loved having a few members with boots of speed that could scout ahead and pull enemies while the rest of the party caught up. It saved a bunch of exploration time finding dead ends and doubling back. This is all in Baldur's Gate 2.  

 

I agree sometimes it can be annoying to wait for the slower members to catch up, but that would be just as bad if nobody got a speed boost. Maybe a nice compromise would be to make all speed boosts Auras (at least outside of combat)... its not very realistic but much more convenient. 

[Ffordesoon]

I think the deeper issue here is one that's common to the IE games, and which is honestly my biggest issue with RTwP combat in most games that feature it: when your dudes see an enemy, they rush immediately to bash the hell out of it no matter what you do. Even if you direct them away from the enemy, it's usually only momentary; the AI overrides anything you might want to do with its Doom-monster-level kamikaze silliness.

 

I'd like to see a couple of changes to the system in PE that make it less aggravating. They've already announced the melee engagement system and, blessedly, a state in between real-time and pause, so that's good. What would make those systems even better are the following:

 

1. A defensive AI template that's actually, you know, defensive, as opposed to slightly less suicidal. An archer on the defensive might automatically run to an area with adequate cover when they spot an enemy, for example. This is in stark contrast to even Dragon Age, where the only thing archers did was run to a certain distance and fire until enemies crossed an invisible line, at which point they would run to the acceptable minimum distance again, etc. The difference here would be that they would run to cover and stay there until they're flanked or the rest of the party dies.

 

2. A readying system. This works well with the engagement system already announced, and gives the player an opportunity to set up genuine choke points, as opposed to telling your dudes to stand somewhere, and then watching them go to that spot, stay there for one picosecond, then run back towards the approaching enemies. If you want to tell a warrior to stand next to a doorway and ready his sword to attack the first goblin he sees, you should be able to do that. The engagement system already permits such behavior; this would simply complement it.

 

3. A button that makes all of your selected characters immediately stop and hold their positions. Yeah, yeah, the Space Bar pauses the game, I know. What I'm talking about is a button that lets you stop your dudes in their tracks without pausing the action or forcing you to turn off Party AI. They will attack when enemies are in range, but they won't go wandering off like a dog every time they hear a twig snap.

 

4. An "attack move" command like those found in many RTS games.

 

5. God help me, I'm going to suggest a feature from Jagged Alliance: Back In Action. Yes, it's generally a rather mediocre title, but one thing I liked was the ability to plan multiple actions in advance during the pause state. Frozen Synapse did it way better, obviously, but that was a turn-based game. The only RTwP example I can think of right now is unfortunately JA:BiA, but I'll happily substitute it with something less lame if anyone can think of a better RTwP game that does the same thing.

 

I feel like I had a couple of other ideas, but I can't seem to remember them right now. Oh well. Five is enough for now.

[Lephys]

One thing that I'm remound of is something I mentioned in another thread: A "step where I step" option/formation/move mode for your party, so that they can follow the stealthiest person and actually not step in traps and on loud floor materials, etc. I think maybe even a bonus to sneaking for the whole party, while in that admittedly slow movement mode, would be in order.

[Randomthom]

5. God help me, I'm going to suggest a feature from Jagged Alliance: Back In Action. Yes, it's generally a rather mediocre title, but one thing I liked was the ability to plan multiple actions in advance during the pause state. Frozen Synapse did it way better, obviously, but that was a turn-based game. The only RTwP example I can think of right now is unfortunately JA:BiA, but I'll happily substitute it with something less lame if anyone can think of a better RTwP game that does the same thing.

 

Neverwinter Nights 2 allowed for the queueing of multiple actions e.g. spells & special abilities.

[Sensuki]

I found this in the Kickstarter Q&A thread

 

Q: An idea for you guys. If you can queue actions (use this skill, then this skill, then go here, then attack this guy), you could do tactical combat pause style, but then unpause and watch the action unfold for a bit.

A: Absolutely, we are going to have a queue system so that when you un-pause your party will follow a certain number of them. Not sure on the number exactly yet, probably around three though.

Personally I really don't like action queues. Not necessarily the feature itself but because of poor implementation. The one in SW:KotOR2 sucked, to issue a time-critical move command you had to click on the action queuer and cancel all current actions and then click move, which I thought was annoying as hell.

 

I'd rather no action queue bar than a not very well implemented one, and/or the ability to disable it.

[Bartimaeus]

I think the deeper issue here is one that's common to the IE games, and which is honestly my biggest issue with RTwP combat in most games that feature it: when your dudes see an enemy, they rush immediately to bash the hell out of it no matter what you do. Even if you direct them away from the enemy, it's usually only momentary; the AI overrides anything you might want to do with its Doom-monster-level kamikaze silliness.

 

 

I have no idea what you're talking about. Turn off or change your party AI, perhaps?

[Gfted1]

^Or auto pause on enemy sighted.

[Lephys]

 

I think the deeper issue here is one that's common to the IE games, and which is honestly my biggest issue with RTwP combat in most games that feature it: when your dudes see an enemy, they rush immediately to bash the hell out of it no matter what you do. Even if you direct them away from the enemy, it's usually only momentary; the AI overrides anything you might want to do with its Doom-monster-level kamikaze silliness.

 

I have no idea what you're talking about. Turn off or change your party AI, perhaps?

 

Yeah, sounds like behavior to me. *shrug*

[Ffordesoon]

*sigh*

 

I knew someone was going to question that bit.

 

I'm not going to defend my statement, for that way lies madness. It's based on memories, after all, and my memory is as imperfect as anyone's. I don't want to fire up Dragon Age: Origins and do research, because that would involve getting into combat in Dragon Age: Origins, which I enjoy about as much as punching myself in the throat repeatedly. Enjoyed the game, despised the combat.

 

Also, I played in third-person. On the PC. Because I'm an idiot.

Edited May 14, 2013 by Ffordesoon

[Lephys]

^ For what it's worth, I'm not saying your dudes charging everything that's hostile and visible isn't a problem. I'm just saying that I think that's something that should be controlled by behavior/AI options and not by a command-queue. The command-queue would kinda be a middle man. You'd control their "come at me bro!"ness rather heavy-handedly by always making sure they had some other order that prevented them from executing the "Come at me bro!" order, rather than altering their default order in the first place.

 

At least, that's how it seems to me. o_o

[Bartimaeus]

*sigh*

 

I knew someone was going to question that bit.

 

I'm not going to defend my statement, for that way lies madness. It's based on memories, after all, and my memory is as imperfect as anyone's. I don't want to fire up Dragon Age: Origins and do research, because that would involve getting into combat in Dragon Age: Origins, which I enjoy about as much as punching myself in the throat repeatedly. Enjoyed the game, despised the combat.

 

Also, I played in third-person. On the PC. Because I'm an idiot.

 

Wait, what? You were talking about the IE games, not Dragon Age. I actually had the same problem in Dragon Age...but that's because I wouldn't turn off the AI because I absolutely hated controlling more than one character in that game, (third person / limited overhead views suck...). Player-defined actions were often overrode, yes, with the AI. But the IE games had the same problem...but the party AI was a little more definable, and party members were much more easily controllable if you wanted to turn it off completely.

 

Since this game will have a true overhead view ala the Infinity Engine Games, I don't anticipate having any sort of AI enabled (for myself).

Edited May 15, 2013 by Bartimaeus

[Ffordesoon]

I was mainly talking about Dragon Age, actually. I know I said I was talking about the IE games, but to be perfectly honest, I was using that as an excuse to bash Dragon Age's combat, which I found uniquely awful. No idea why I felt the need to be slightly dishonest about where I was coming from, but there you go.

[J.E. Sawyer]

We are planning to allow you to set non-combat movement to the speed of the slowest party member.  This option will be on by default.  Our monk with Transcendent Suffering can already fly ahead of the party very quickly in open spaces.

[Lephys]

We are planning to allow you to set non-combat movement to the speed of the slowest party member.  This option will be on by default.  Our monk with Transcendent Suffering can already fly ahead of the party very quickly in open spaces.

Great... Now we've got flying Monks. -___-...

 

 

Seriously though, good call. It's the little cracks that make the game brittle. Things like the lack of that option, in other games, just make things unnecessarily complex. "My party are all masters of movement and combat, yet I'm literally having to juggle them across the screen in an attempt to keep them together. o_o". ^_^

[Iron_JG]

I prefer the idea of being able to toggle "maintain formation" as Sabotin suggested. Depending on implementation, maybe "move with slowest character" wouldn't be functionally different -- if it's fast/easy to turn on or off, then w/e. But having speedy characters for quick scouting is awesome and should stay.

 

Question: Could there be an individual and shared action queue? What I mean is, a queue where a party member acts independently, and one where an action is specifically embargoed, so to speak, until another action occurs?

 

Example: I want Fighter to continue hacking down Orc until it's dead. I queue hack-slash-chop (pretend those are special abilities) in his individual queue, so he doesn't really care what anyone else is doing. But I want Mage to cast Fireball on Kobold Jerk only after my rogue throws a flask of oil on him. I queue throw flask, then fireball in the joint queue. Meanwhile, their individual queues guide, if there are other commands (like Mage keeps throwing crappy darts at Orc, because it's super effective!). I know it may seem lazy on my part, or something to addressed through party member's tactics settings, but it seemed like a cool idea, and maybe a little more streamlined than a list of 20 "if, then" statements that you tend to manually override in most fights anyway.