Shevek

Sharp_one: You must be confused. None of my characters were maimed and died.

The combat did its job. It posed mild to moderate challenge while causing some damage. This poses a mild to moderate drain on resources (rest supplies). This is more of a function than trash combats fulfilled in the IE games. I dunno, I think it feels about right. There were some additional combats in the zone that were a good bit tougher like the Ents and Druids (or whatever they are called) to the east of the zone but I would prefer to level once more before taking them on.

I do not pause much. I just pause to switch targets for the most part. In fact, I pause about as much as I pause for the IE games. Also, combat speed is fine. Combat in general is fine. I outline this in the combat vid I posted.

Oh, I think its plenty fun. I was just fighting trash and I had a crap day at work so was a bit crabby. I will say that I find fighting trash in this game about 1000x more interesting than executing entire generations of gibberlings and gnolls in the IE games. Also, ultimately, I really feel like I am playing an IE game for the most part. In fact, I feel like I am playing an IE game with pretty darned good encounter design. On hard. Playing on normal won't be quite that punitive. To me, thats fine. Difficult difficulty is difficult. Still, I always led with my tanks in the IE games. I can see how that can be an issue for some. That right there is an easy issue to mod. Jumbled melee is an IE staple. The bright FX thing I agree with. The big annoying fx just need to be real translucent. I would have liked a bit more build variability within classes as well. However, I am still pleased with the character development system we have. Ultimately, this is a party based game. If you take a step back and look at the PARTIES you can make, you have quite a bit freedom to make an interesting assortment of parties. Moreover, PoE is showcasing a very new system and time needs to be given for it to mature. Perhaps with expansions and sequels, the number of talents, possible class abilities selectable on level up and the like will grow and allow for more variability of builds within the classes themselves. This is akin to how the IE games themselves developed. Look at how moving from BG1 to IWD to BG2 to ToB led to massive increases in available spells, kits, etc etc etc.

I went ahead and posted my perception of combat on Hard difficulty using a fully custom party. The recording software I use seriously sucks so it was making my PC frame heavily in parts (I still managed to play through). The gist of the video is I think the combat is fine and I wanted to show what my idea of fine is. Now, I didn't focus on boss battle or anything like that that require actual tactics. I just wanted to show what combat was like against non-named mobs right as you zone into Dyrford Crossing (basically, beetles and wolves). I showed the Medreth fight as well. Part of me wanted to keep going and show more combat but I felt the point is made with the combat shown. I want to apologize if I sound a bit crabby in the vid. It was a long...LONG... day at work. The video quality is crappy right now but it will get better when Youtube gets around to making the HD versions available. LINK

The chanter has a song to reduce accuracy of disengagement attacks as well - that one is AoE. There are plenty of ways to react to engagement. Players also have to option to eat an engagement attack if its from a crappy enough enemy or they have taken talents to improve their defense against engagement attacks.

No its not. We are playing a small slice of the game. They may be playing a wider array of content across a wider array of levels using varying bits of itemization, abilities, and so on. Their perspective is much much different from ours.

I cleared most of Dyrford Crossing except for the Druids with little ability use other than like Cipher blind on the tough mobs. The egg thieves are easy. The wolves are easy. The beetles are easy. No excessive micro needed. I admit, I leave the Druids for later. In the Spider Cave, the crytal eaters were a problem but that OP AoE ice ability was the only issue in that area. Etc etc etc.. Just average toe to toe stuff felt fine. Edit: Btw, the only skill my custom ranged rogue uses is the snare and I rarely use it. Theres a difference when you build a guy from the ground up rather than try to shoehorn a gameplay style on a suboptimal build with suboptimal gear.

Look, I pause when I kill stuff and switch targets. I also cast stuff on REALLY tough enemies like Adra beetles. I lead with my tank as well. This is exactly how I played the IE games when I fought trash (and didnt want to cheese things with web and stinking cloud). The game plays fine. Hell, we dont even have all our tools yet and I can play it just fine. Wait till we get traps, and usable items, and enchanted crap, and weapons that leech, and etc etc etc.

I think people are testing the system primarily with the BB Npcs. Those are poorly built. They have poor stats and talent selection. If they want to use different weapons they end up using level 1 stuff that is way under level (loses 25% dmg + accuracy bonus). This is a flawed testing methodology. We are playing undergeared with poorly built npcs. I dont think internal testers are limited in this way which is why I am sure OE listens to them more. I made a full line of custom guys fully set up for my style. This is how I plan on playing in the actual game. I am still undergeared (no rings, boots, etc; just fine weaps and armor) but it still works quite well.

I play passively on trash and active on named/tough mobs. Works very well. Love the system. It is quite fun. If you choose active builds and complain about pausing you are causing your own problems.

Fun is such a vague and subjective thing. How much will the fun of the system be affected by proper gear, a more comprehensive talent list and a more refined ui? The fun of combat is an extremely subjective thing that is heavily impacted by a multitude of factors not just one. Also, I am finding it pretty fun. Everyone has their own idea of fun. One person should not declare something unfun as if they speak for all. Could it be better? Sure, everything in this life can improve. I still say the current implementation is quite decent and plays well with a decently geared party. I made a full party of custom guys that had fine armor and weapons (comparable gear to BB Npcs) and I rather enjoyed my run thru Dyrford.

Honestly I dont think engagement is bad right now on hard. It hits a bit too hard but its manageable. With gear appropo to the level, it may even be just right. I could see nerfing the damage a bit but I just do not see massive issues with the current implementation. Mags implementation above would work but I would be against the accuracy penalty. Chanter has a song that does that already.

Seems to me that engagement is promoting sensible tactics. I will put out a gameplay vid on hard tonight or tomorrow. I do not pause much at all and combat feels very fluid. Also, you are never stuck in engagement. You can always move and eat at attack then let the tank step in. You can also use any number if abilities to break engagement or lessen the efficacy of engagement attacks. Edit: I use 3 ranged characters and I never run around like a headless anything.

1. Even in movies, when an enemy engages you, you do not simply run past. Enemies, when engaged, stop and face eachother. 2. Ninjitsu huh? Sorry, just dont see the relevance. Rogues can do your special ninja move in this game btw. But thats part of what makes then rogues. See the engagement system even adds to class differentiation and balance. 3. Moving prior to engaging the enemy is fine. But once its on you cant up and decide to stroll away from a dude swinging an axe at you - unless you can legitimately break engagement first. 4. I dont mind a move to heal so long as engagement is, once again, legitimately broken by a stun or a groin kick or something. You cant just call time out to run behind a rock and open up a coke. Again, the system has both gamist and simulationist reasons to exist. It has solid mechanics. In my testing, it feels solid but could use a slight tuning dmg wise.

AoOs are not just to penalize using ranged in melee. They are also used to limit unrealistic movement past and near combat. One thing I dont consider a legitimate tactic is doing donuts in the middle of battle while popping potions and recovering health. Yet Ive seen folks try to pawn that off as "tactical retreat and potion use" or some foolishness. If you are running around in circles popping potions both of those actions should be eliciting some kind of penalty on you. If Im in an actual sword fight, I would need to free a hand to start drinking a coke much less to drink a coke and turn my back on an enemy to start movibg around. Similarly, you shouldnt be able to skirt around enemies to hit the one you want while another is in the way. Again, that kind of movement past armed melee opponents should have immediate consequences. Sensuki's alternatives he listed earlier is more active skills like stuns. Personally, that does mot seem like a good solution to me. This sounds like more pausing. This game has enough active skill use as it is. AoOs have a legitimate SET of functions. AoOs can work and in my estimation are almost working now. They just need to be tuned a bit. Edit: I would point point that this games implementation of AoOs is fairly tame since it requires engagement. Most other AoO implementations require only proximity.

1. Your opinions about "combat feel" are not concrete reasons to change a fundamental game system. You simply stating that AoO in NWN was a failure does not make it true either. Declarative statements are not definitive facts. 2. Again, I hear no rationale from you. You say no implentation will work as if your declaration alone is all thats needed. Ive done some tests on hard. With a full custom party with okish non-enchanted gear, combat felt pretty good to me. Should feel even better with endurance draining weapons, enchanted rings and stat boosting armor. Now, I am not saying that my perception of combat feels trumps yours or anyone else's but your statements do not contain sufficient concrete observation to make me question my own viewpoints on the matter. 3. If you backed this for an IE game you missed that this was inspired by the IE games not an IE clone. They repeatedly mentioned changes to combat (the loss of rounds, etc). They were fairly upfront about changes to the IE formula.

I tell you one thing I hated about IE magic: stripping layers of mage protections. That was a real chore. I am glad thats gone.

I don't get whats wrong with AoO's in a RT game. I have not heard any concrete arguments against this that don't simply boil down to personal preference. Just because RT games have not widely employed AoOs does not automatically make AoOs bad in RT. Also, while NWN was not a shining example of great combat or anything, I don't think its implementation of AoO was terribly bad or that it detracted from the game. Look, I am not saying the current implementation of engagement is optimal or that combat is perfect at present. I do think its OK (plays just fine on normal for the most part) but I also believe that it can and will be better. However, I would be incredibly upset to see OE take the advice of some and just gut the engagement system to try something else. As a backer, I want to see the funds I put forward put to good use. As a gamer, I want to see a good game come out of this. This will not happen if OE starts ripping game systems out before the development cycle gives the systems time to mature. Thats just inefficient. Why don't we do something productive and suggest small fixes that would make the engagement system, combat and the like more enjoyable? Again, nerf engagement attack dmg a bit, tweak enemy movement speed, perhaps look at overall dmg numbers, etc. These are all spreadsheet fixes. They are small. Making these changes can drastically affect gameplay but they do not lengthen development time significantly. Similar suggestions can be made to UI/combat feedback. Just my two cents.

I wouldnt add ACC to 2handers. That is what makes 1h special. I would keep the bonus to deflection but I would make it higher.

There are talents that give bonuses to elemental dmg.

Well, in the IE games, the Wizard wasn't casting every fight (constantly) unless you rest spammed (or were in the high levels). By design, Wizards are very slow firing glass cannons.

I disagree that the fix for wizard is just to let them cast more. Wizards are about infrequent awesomeness. Basically, they should cast crap once in a while and when they do, it should be game changing. I say keep the current amount of casts and double (or more) the power of the spells.

I think the current implementation might be ok if they drastically improve wizard spell power (like double it or maybe more). Wizard spells need to be really intense to stack up well against a Cipher and his infinite spell casting or the Chanter and its Summons/Buffs. Still, if OE doesn't do that, hopefully that is something we players will be able to mod in. Ultimately, for the implementation to be really good, wizards need to be cheap. You need to abuse crap with them - thats why people like them. You want to cast a massive stinking cloud/web combo on things so you can murder them with impunity using cloudkill or archers. You spam skull trap and then watch with glee as some moron explodes into them. You need to have spell sequencers that take down resistances and screw stuff over with Chromatic Orbs. Basically, this is how the player should feel playing a wizard: They need to be a cheap, unfair class. I don't think OE wants to do that though.

Sensuki: Just found Bester's mod. I'm gonna try my party with a fine pollaxe and a fine pike. I should steam roll through stuff with the added dmg. Cubiq: I guess I am just lost when I try to get your point. Path of the Damned is hard. So? Its supposed to be. Look, all I am saying is reduce engagement attack dmg. Keep it relevant (especially vs groups) but not overly punitive. I would drop the dmg down to where engagement attacks are mostly grazes with the occaisonal regular hit and that it gives a minor snare. Players may just deal raw dmg or ignore it vs single regular enemies but against groups or bosses, they may need to rethink things a bit. I don't see how difficulty settings matter in this discussion. Ya, on Path of the Damned, you may be screwed when trying to move regardless. Well, guess what, its called Path of the Damned.