Sensuki

Or you could simply go with - if it aint broke don't fix it and use a combat log just like most isometric games of this type do. You know, the sensible thing to do.

With damage floats and combat HUDs turned off you need to pay pretty close attention to the combat log. It's difficult in it's current state because of how fast it moves due to the amount of stuff that is written to the log (such as the Fighter passive stamina heals). Reading on the fly is annoying because you constantly have to flick your eyes up and left, down and right so you don't miss any action. It's not so bad when paused, but I don't tend to pause the combat heaps. Then there's my focal points argument which I made in the OP. Left and Center are far more natural positions for it. In the center you can see the lines in your peripheral vision, so it only takes a focus adjustment rather than a focus shift, and the left of the screen is a far more natural focal point for the eyes (due to reasons stated in the OP). On larger monitors (such as 1440p+) it's even more of an issue.

I've already suggested this in the thread because for people that read the combat log on the fly, the right side of the screen is the absolute worst position for it. The OP is quite literally the UI elements re arranged to support that, which wouldn't change much for anyone else. Log and Menu are still collapsible, but portraits now centered (which is probably better even).

I think the Melee Engagement system still comes from a turn-based design mentality rather than a real-time mentality. There's a bunch of other ways that it could be implemented. The Melee Engagement system works on paper, because well it's based off P&P design.

Agree.

In the old threads you said your preference was for the combat log and such to be minimized most of the time, and you'd only open it when you needed to. I intend to play the game more akin to how I played the IE games. Turn off the combat HUDs and damage floats and read the combat in the log on the fly. I already know that, I've made bug reports on damage value maths incorrectly displaying in the log, too. What I am talking about is seeing the actual raw dice roll in the line without having to mouse over, like in the IE games. If you play on Expert mode I think the detailed combat log values are supposed to be obscured. Would be nice to see the raw dice roll still. Turn off damage floats and collapse the log, and tell me how much damage your character did. Or what type of hit they scored.

Be nice if you could see the die rolls in the log too such as Graze (32) or whatever, YMMV.

I do agree with that, although I have a feeling that everyone appears to be getting 35 points of accuracy to spread across both values, in which case values of 20 and 15 wouldn't be too bad.

Well if you ignore a fair portion of your userbase when designing a UI then you mustn't be very good at your job. The stock PE UI design is actually for people who don't use the combat log and as much work has been put into place so that people can do without it - Combat HUDs, floating numbers and the like. This is the issue with it as it ignores everyone else. However half of the IE crowd here use the combat log, and many people also disable the "accessibility" options that the game provides. You can turn off damage floats, Combat HUDs and all that stuff and pretty much give yourself a vanilla IE experience. There is Expert mode - which automatically disables everything for your whole play through. Combat log on the right side of the screen is bad for everyone that intends to use it. It's fine for those that don't.

lol Play on Expert mode with the combat log minimized. Tell me what's happening in combat? Answer: You can't People who disable the tooltips, damage floats and HUDs etc need the log more than anyone.

My entire main post is the argument.

As long as a solid background is still an option (Y)

You seem more Codexian than me the way you keep attacking me

Josh has a lot of funny beliefs and I don't necessarily agree with all of them. The fact that your avatar is a picture of Baldur's Gate with Degenerative Gameplay with a teardrop over it does not help you come across as a person to take seriously when talking about this subject

My OP questions why the encounter is even there. Why do you place an encounter in the game? 1. Tactical challenge - That pack of Wolves is *the* easiest encounter I have come across in the game, it requires no micro whatsoever. The 5 guys in your party without completing any quests, buying any gear or doing anything can aggro the wolves together and auto attack away to an easy victory. 2. To protect loot - Encounters of these types of games are placed as an obstacle to loot. Originally I did not find the secret stash inside the broken down tower wall because when I had sneak on, I aggro'd the wolf inside the tower and then walked out of the tower and turned sneak on and searched the other ruins after I had killed the wolves. There is actually some loot there. So this point is kind of covered. 3. To alter the adventuring pace - This encounter is out of the way, not on a direct path to any of the quests or major locations in the area so it doesn't tick this box either 4. To drain your strategical resources - Encounters are often placed in levels to 'soften' you up for later encounters. This ties into point number three, altering the adventuring pace. The Wolves do do some Health damage to you, but even just auto attacking them, they don't really do much to soften you up for the other encounters that you likely haven't faced in the levels yet (Ogre Cave, Wurmhunters). 5. In games where XP for kills is by design, monsters are placed in a level for you to farm XP from. That can be a reason for an encounter's existence. Generally it's not great design though and apart from Icewind Dale 2, the IE games encounters generally felt well paced. Due to the fact that these Wolves are not tied to any quests or Objectives, this nullifies this point. 6. Narrative - Since only one of these points is half covered by the encounter itself (protecting loot), the only other justification I can come up with for the encounter to exist is some kind of narrative in the area, as to which none exists - which is why I suggested one in the OP. Satisfied?

Rogue can already be ranged, and most people probably use them as a ranged character anyway (such as with a firearm). The 4E class design of itself was pretty uniform. Most Encounter and Daily powers that were non utility were actives that made some specific type of attack with a special property. For instance the Fighter's at wills were : Cleave - hit guy next to you for 3 + Str damage or whatever. Sure Strike - +2 accuracy, Tide of Iron - push back one square Most encounter and daily powers were of the same nature for all classes. This is what I found boring about 4th edition. Thankfully the 4E influence hasn't spread too far into ability design for this game, phew.

I was just using that example song to relate to of the points war:head was making in his post about instant memorability. Most of the music I listen to is not memorable on the first listen and a lot of it has taken many repeated listens to even enjoy. I don't tend to listen to that much music that has much silence in it, but I do really like Bohren & der Club of Gore - Black Earth, which relishes on minimalism and also a fair bit of Dark Ambient stuff. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k1b0GO7_uXU My personal issue with the soundtrack direction is as I've stated many times - it doesn't use the production style of the IE games with the foreground instruments / melody and background everything else. This prevents me from thinking of it as "IE-like" but you've mentioned that you've gone your own direction many times and I'm okay with that. I do like the main theme and I like the classical guitar piece in the Inn. The trailer music was alright too. It will be interesting to see what the full game soundtrack has to offer.

The selection circles of NPCs are the same color as the player color, UNINSTALL GAME IMMEDIATELY

I agree. It would be cool if you could have a Fighter and a Paladin, or a Fighter and a Monk and NOT use the Fighter as the main tank but use them in a different role somehow with more flexibility. Currently if you are not using the Fighter as your main tank, the character is not being used properly. Every other class has more flexibility than this. The Fighter needs more.

Back to the XP for combat thread mate, which I have never posted in.

Not everyone agreed with that and actives is not going to make the class fun to play, or versatile. Movement and positioning is a bit more important in the IE games than it appears to be in MMOs. The Kensai was an awesome class to play even if all you really did was auto attack and use Kai. Somehow it was fun with just one active omg!

I've already described that you can maneuver the Fighter many different ways in the IE games in my videos (in BG2 you got abilities with Kits and HLAs) and you could use them ranged or melee unless you were a Kensai. Therefore, the IE games Fighter is a more flexible class (and less boring) than the done to death boring Tank Aggro 101 MMO Fighter design that PE has. Yawn.

That's funny I've heard most people saying the contrary. Baldur's Gate 1 Wilderness areas were awesome. My gripe with them is the lack of quests. There is only one (sometimes two) minor quests in each area. Most of the areas actually have plenty of encounters, even if a lot of them are minor ones.

Because you can in the IE games, of course.

Dire is probably taboo now due to Game of Thrones heh, wish that show was never made tbh.