PrimeHydra

Awesome, can't wait to try it!

Ahaha! Pizz0wned! Now go buy the team a beer, they've earned it!

What I didn't get in Dragon Age: Origins, was how they had sexytime with their clothes on?

Just dropping in to say Dragon Age: Origins was a good game and did feedback well. *Escapes using jetpack*

I hope you're able to locate and iron out that bug quickly, cause I'm really excited to see the progress the game has made this past month. Anything I could do to help your programmers with their work? Praying to a god of their choice? Wishing on a star? Screaming at them in german? I discovered today the power of sport beans in boosting productivity. I was coding like Cornholio all morning. That's right, eating jelly beans is now an athletic activity!

Looks like they're currently wrestling with long load times.

Thanks for the update! In the future it would be nice to see a weekly status blurb. A little post goes a long way toward appeasing us, your voracious fans.

The PoE expansion and sequel. Is this even a question

It could be that the attacks of opportunity are a bit too vicious. Running away should incur a penalty (IMO) but it shouldn't mean instant death in every case. I haven't attempted enough escapes to get a feel whether the damage needs tweaking. As to running away: I'm going to play devil's advocate and suggest that escaping with your life should be harder in a game that gives you the option to avoid combat by sneaking past. IE games didn't really have an avoidance option--at least not with guys in your way--so escaping helped compensate. Engagement means you're committed to the attack, not just dipping your toes in and fleeing if it's too much. It makes sneaking vs. attacking an actual choice.

Aww Dragon Age is so cooote!

I think it's a good concept. Attacks of opportunity keep players from abusing hit-and-run, which was all too easy to do in the IE games. My main issue is with how the mechanic is explained in the game--it really isn't. This could be jarring to IE veterans who discover in their first fight that retreating their fighter incurred an extra attack against him. Also, it's not made clear what the "engagement limit" is, or what the consequences are for exceeding it.

It doesn't--if they added more micromanagement, it was through having more abilities per character. Look, I get it, you love the IE system enough to post 45-minute videos of you playing Icewind Dale. I respect your devotion, but at the same time I want Obsidian's design to be given a chance. It could be simply that disengagement feels too punishing right now to ever use it. They may need to tone down the attack of opportunity enough to make it a viable choice. It doesn't mean the whole system should be dismantled because you miss Icewind Dale. As for your example with ranged attacks, that has nothing to do with engagement or lack thereof. It's just an example of guns being overpowered. Clearly this conversation will continue to go in circles, so I'll let you have the last word. I got other stuff to do

If he wanted more movement micromanagement, I don't think he'd have chosen an engagement system. Sure it does. In PoE it's more important that you approach the enemy with heavy hitters in a good position; you can't just do a quick sneak attack with your rogue and then retreat him while the Barbarian charges in. Also my point about stealth was conveniently ignored--with the stealth system, you can set up good engagement. Even if you don't have enough time to get behind every monster, you can at least get a decent formation before time runs out. I think you just don't like how this mechanic plays, but you want to discredit it on a tactical basis rather than admit you simply preferred the IE system. As for AI, though, I agree we need a lot more of it such as simple AI scripts for players. This has nothing to do with abuse, though. Smarter monsters will take engagement into account too. In fact, I can easily see a custom AI script abusing non-engagement via hit-and-run.

It's true--I've dodged more than my share of blows in BG by "escaping" just before the Iron Golem laid the smack down. It always felt like gaming the system a bit. I like that PoE adds more defensive abilities so fighters can do more than hit and run. Haer Dalis's Defensive Spin was fun because I could up his tankyness without doing the usual dance of hit, take some damage, retreat, heal, repeat.

Not at all. No XP for combat works fine and it fixes various problems that the IE games had with their always being a 'best' option - that which gave the most XP. Melee Engagement is a creation to solve a problem which I think is overblown, and can actually be solved in other ways other than creating a turn-based inspired system for dealing with it. I gave the system the benefit of the doubt and actually didn't complain about it at all until giving it a good thrash. You'll find posts from 2 months ago on the RPGCodex where I defend the system, but after playtesting it thoroughly I have come to think that it stinks. OK, agree to disagree then--I've also played a lot of backer beta, and engagement felt right for the reasons I've already gone over.

I was exaggerating for lulz, sorry. It just creates an amusing image, everyone in a line running up to hit the big badass, then retreating to heal so the next guy in line can have a whack at it. I know this isn't actually what happens. And yes, the cost of moving away is harsh. With practice, you'll be able to tell when you'd better back out your fighter because he bit off more than he could chew. It probably won't be often that you have to do this, if you're properly supporting them. No engagement = hit-and-run attacks against foes that you'd never actually be able to tank with your, you know, tank. And please don't lecture me about how the game is an IE successor. That's precisely why I backed it. I'm not advocating them to make the game more like non-IE games than it already is. I'm advocating for them to leave this aspect of combat alone. We clearly disagree. That doesn't mean DA:O was a bad game (the user metscore is 8.6, even if you despise critical reviews that give it a 91 metascore). But that's another conversation. OE aren't slaves to the IE formula. They're breaking the mold in a few small but significant ways. IIRC you're not in favor of combat XP, either? So if it's something you like, they're being innovative, but if it's not, they're copying (insert game manufacturer you despise whose game employed said design).

Well, it is making you do more running around and less choosing whether to activate an ability that affects damage vs. defense. This system adds a dimension to combat; you have to give a crap who engages who and when. Aren't fights chaotic enough without having to run around like a chicken with your head cut off? I'd rather activate defensive abilities and support. Edit: Let's not forgot, you actually aren't rooted in place. Engagement simply adds a cost to escape--the attack of opportunity. This is a tactical design choice. Also, I don't get all the hate on Dragon Age: Origins. Yes, EA are evil, and the freaking $$DLC$$ spammers get outta my campsite! But the actual game? Loved it, played the hell out of it. It's not Baldur's Gate, but it's solid. The combat in particular was excellent, if not well-balanced.

I'm fine with engagement; combat shouldn't be balanced around knowing the player can step back and escape at any time. This makes "escape" skills more desirable. Maybe we could use a few more of those. Any kind of modal ability that lets you completely ignore engagement is probably a bad idea. I understand the appeal, especially for RTS fans, but IE-style games aren't really RTS. (OK, they blur the line a bit.) The focus is more on ability, spell and item usage then on placement/micromanagement. I don't really want to spend half or more of my time moving "units" around, like I do in Warcraft 3, Starcraft etc. Engagement would indeed feel silly in those games, where it's more about hit-and-run, and there are many more units with far fewer abilities per unit. I get that some people don't like engagement, but I've played the beta to completion and felt it made combat more tense and less fussy. Being face-to-face with an enemy feels more threatening, and there's more incentive to set up a good approach. Rather than have to reposition my guys every few seconds because damage was rebalanced around someone not liking this "restriction". Instead I can let my front line do its thing and focus on supporting them, activing/deactivating their own damage mitigation as needed. Also, the stealth system plays nicely with engagement because it lets you set up clever attacks with stealthy characters. If you could move away from the enemy at any time, this wouldn't be worth doing--except for the obvious sneak attack.

I remember playing my first 256-color(!!) VGA game: Quest for Glory III. I was absolutely blown away by the graphics.

Ah, that's news to me. It certainly helps, but...one would level up faster picking locks and disarming traps, so they'd be at an advantage facing higher-level challenges. Even if they end up capping out toward the very end regardless.

Are we seriously arguing about why OE called it a reticle? Damn, we need a new build to play stat!

Out of curiosity, does Sensuki have some special relationship with OE or does he just put a lot of time into photoshops, unofficial mods and youtube videos? I've seen lots of good ideas from him AND less freuent posters, plus many mockups/redesigns that make no sense to me. Here's hoping each suggestion is weighed on its own merit rather than whether it has an accompanying video and soundtrack. Oh, and new build NAO kthx.

And by looy I meant loot. Stupid edit permission timeout. Also I'll concede that invisibility could be considered a stealth mechanic in IE games. But ironically I only used it in combat.

Before OE revealed the stealth system, I too favored XP from combat. The issue is not that kill XP in PoE would be grindy (it wouldn't); the issue is that kill XP would discourage sneaking around or talking down enemies. The IE games had no real stealth system, unless you count the "Move Silently" skill. I never noticed any benefit from this skill because I never wanted to forgo experience by sneaking past foes. The unlimited resting in those games made it a question of when, not whether, to engage. I forsee stealth being an interesting choice in PoE on higher difficulties, particularly with Trial of Iron. Combat experience also goes explicitly against a kickstarter update--though I won't call it a promise, backers take these seriously--stating experience wouldn't be tied to body count. As to combat itself feeling less rewarding without XP? Yeah, that's a valid concern. The issue can be sufficiently minimized by: - tying the more significant or interesting fights to quest objectives, like the egg bandits in the backer beta. - making levels interesting without lots of annoying "trash fights". Putting looy behind monsters is fun because you can beat them up or slip past and still feel rewarded. - making combat itself as slick, responsive and fun as possible. The more they've improved fighting in the beta, the less I miss the XP because the experience is less annoying and more fun in itself. - rewarding xp for unlocking bestiary entries. This is oft-reviled, butwith the more important items above in place, it'll help.

So you do it again, then offer a sarcastic apology. Nice!