Jump to content

ResJudicator

Members
  • Content Count

    8
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

25 Excellent

About ResJudicator

  • Rank
    (1) Prestidigitator
  1. Not at all. Phantoms/shades IGNORE engagement. I'm not asking for other enemies to do this. I'm simply asking for enemies to at some point consider whether to disengage -- and eat the disengagement attack -- in order to attack a squishier target. There is no sensible reason why "intelligent" enemies should all clump around a single tank that is doing absolutely no damage, and ignore the super-squishy backline that is presenting all of the threat. Would you have your party beat on a pile of bricks while the enemy rogue sneak attacks you from 5 feet away? Obviously not. So why should t
  2. I think you misread my post. I didn't say I was min-maxing, only that this proposal would address several issues, including min-maxing. And of course combat feels fine if you're soloing -- at that point the enemy AI doesn't have to make any decisions about who to attack. Of course, soloing is a pretty simple matter that just involves exploiting the AI in other ways that are beyond the scope of this thread. Pretty much this.
  3. Tanks currently don't want might. Combat recovery is unnecessary when your tank isn't getting hit, which is most fights for a properly built tank on PotD. And for the fights where your tank is getting hit, the extra healing you'd get from combat recovery at 18 might vs 3 might is too miniscule to make a difference. Doesn't mean you can't take might on tanks, it just means that it's currently not optimal. On a side note, I don't really care about the min-maxing issue, but some people do so I pointed out how it might be affected. In any difficult setting, you're going to want to optimiz
  4. Making the enemies behave more intelligently would not make the battlefield "chaotic." Sure, it'd introduce some variation between fights, but that's not the same as pure, unpredictable chaos. If your rogue is out of position and plinking away with high-damage sneak attacks, you can bet that some enemies will move to engage him/her. It really sounds to me that your complaint boils down to two components: (1) it would make the game harder; and (2) wizards might not be balanced for fights against intelligent enemies. I think Point #1 is actually a plus for people who want to play POTD, and I
  5. I tried. The overwhelming majority of them are completely and utterly worthless. They are a waste of time (you can't pre-buff and combat is really fast!), they are a waste of spells and most of the time they're not good enough to avoid being clobbered anyway. You are much, much better off using offensive abilities like Slicken, Confusion, Call to Slumber and Gaze of the Ardagan which are both more likely to stop enemies from hurting you and actually do something useful for the party. The same is true of Cipher abilties (I haven't tried Druid yet) -- they have plenty of stuff which stuns or kno
  6. I don't consider this to be an anti-engagement suggestion, since I'm not asking for engagement to be removed or diminished in any way. I'm just asking for enemies to be smarter about it (ie not piling on top of the tank where they do absolutely no damage and just wait to get knocked out).
  7. The engagement system, with a smarter AI as I discussed, would be fine. The problems you are raising can be countered by better strategy and control. (1) There are many ways to avoid engagement in the first place via control spells, snares, and repositioning skills. (2) You can also break engagement via repositioning skills or by CCing the enemy. (3) Your "tankier" fighters can still hold aggro, they just need to be built so that they present enough of a threat to justify being attacked. And when you build them this way, the enemy will either continue attacking them or take substantia
  8. Right now, a Fighter with 3 might wielding a wet noodle and a large shield can lock down 3-4 targets in engagement, even though there is absolutely no sensible reason for the enemies to be attacking him. What the enemies should be doing is to disengage from the fighter, eat the fighter's disengagement attack (that will probably miss anyway or graze for 1 dmg), and attack the wizards/rogues/ciphers in the backline that are doing 100+ damage and would die in 2-3 attacks. Under the current system, all the enemies end up clustering around the frontline tank, doing minimal damage (on POTD), wh
×
×
  • Create New...