Engagement Indication

[Pray]

Is there some indication when engagement occurs? Is there a UI flash, animation, or indicator? 

 

Every time I watch a stream I'm always wondering about who has engaged who, but there never seems to be any way to tell other than just knowing or guessing.

[PrimeJunta]

No, but there bloody well ought to be.

 

(It does show up in the combat log, but that's generally useless ATM so it doesn't help much.)

[IndiraLightfoot]

In BG, the battle music alone is a reliable cue. In the PoE BB, this is not the case, unfortunately, so I agree with Mr PJ!

[I Roll 20]

Shouldn't there be an auto-pause feature at least? How about "You have been waylaid by enemies and must defend yourself"?

[Pray]

You guys did not read my post carefully or understand the mechanic (Except for PJ) ((or i was not clear enough which engagement I was talking about))

 

When a champion comes into melee ranged of an enemy, it engages, and is sometimes engaged by that enemy. This means that if you dissengage from the enemy by moving away, baring any extraneous other mechanic, you take a free dissengagement attack from the enemy.

[Sedrefilos]

One nice way to indicate combat engagement would be if the characters walk aroung with their weapon sheathed, but when an enemy is spotter they draw them and take combat stances (along with the combat music starting, of course).

[BlueLion]

Maybe a momentary increase in size of the selection circles beneath the character and the target it has successfully engaged; almost like a single pulse?

[I Roll 20]

You guys did not read my post carefully or understand the mechanic (Except for PJ) ((or i was not clear enough which engagement I was talking about))

 

When a champion comes into melee ranged of an enemy, it engages, and is sometimes engaged by that enemy. This means that if you dissengage from the enemy by moving away, baring any extraneous other mechanic, you take a free dissengagement attack from the enemy.

I understand now. Maybe each companion in your party will have different coloured circles and whoever the enemies engage will turn into that colour. Meh, I'm sure you guys can up with a better idea

Edited September 7, 2014 by I Roll 20

[I Roll 20]

A question; has any games with AoO/engagement-disengagement rules come up with any indicators before or do we have to look at combat logs? I'm glad this has been brought up.

 

Maybe a red line that connects you and the enemy when they are engaged. Meh, still sounds like a bad idea. Let's hear what the others can come up with.

Edited September 7, 2014 by I Roll 20

[salo]

In DOS an enemy unit that's engaged you gets a wider circle around them, and if you move your character outside this circle you disengage, and incur a disengagement attack. This means that you are sort of free to position or reposition yourself around your enemy, but you can't escape without getting hit.

 

Edit: I suppose the type of indicator used would be dependent on which type of disengagement mechanic PoE uses, but I haven't played the beta so I don't know how it works.

Edited September 7, 2014 by salo

[PrimeJunta]

It shouldn't be hard to add this. Just have an arrowhead pointing out from each selection circle at each enemy the combatant is engaging. If two combatants are engaging each other, have the arrowheads change shape, into a diamond or a link or whatever looks clearest.

[BlueLion]

It shouldn't be hard to add this. Just have an arrowhead pointing out from each selection circle at each enemy the combatant is engaging. If two combatants are engaging each other, have the arrowheads change shape, into a diamond or a link or whatever looks clearest.

 

This sounds good. Clear but unobtrusive.

[Lephys]

It shouldn't be hard to add this. Just have an arrowhead pointing out from each selection circle at each enemy the combatant is engaging. If two combatants are engaging each other, have the arrowheads change shape, into a diamond or a link or whatever looks clearest.

That might suffice. If not, some kind of selection-circle link would be nice. It's not like the link visuals would ever span the whole battlefield or anything (we're talking melee engagement here), so I don't even worry about that sort of thing becoming intrusive. But, I think having definitive visual connections between both entities might be the best way to go. Especially if you ever get a big clusterfest going on (which I've done a few times now in the beta).

 

I fear that an arrow may lead to "wait, am I engaged with Orc A, or Orc B who's standing directly behind him?! They're both attacking me!" Especially with the whole "I've got a spear/polearm and can engage you from behind this other guy" mechanic. *shrug*

[Ink Blot]

Put your mouse over the character in question. The circle(s) under the enemy/enemies that have them engaged will flash.

[PrimeJunta]

Not enough. I need to see at a glance what's going on.

 

Same applies in general to the mouseover-based combat info. It is there, yes, but it's murky and clunky to access.

[Ink Blot]

Not enough. I need to see at a glance what's going on.

 

Same applies in general to the mouseover-based combat info. It is there, yes, but it's murky and clunky to access.

I wasn't making a pronouncement on whether it's enough or not. Just answering the OP's question. FWIW, I agree with you on the murkiness aspect of the info.

[Kaz]

Two things will be happening in future patches.

• The pulse effect on tagets will be replaced with proper targeting graphics
• Melee engagement will get proper UI (there is none atm)

Displaying melee engagement info is tricky because A, characters tend to clump together so I can't rely on the spaces between them, and B, spell effects (especially late game) often cover up the selection circles, which is another convenient area to display this stuff. I have a few ideas kicking around and hope to have something for you guys soon. Thanks for your patience.

[PrimeJunta]

Great. The main thing is it's being worked on. 

 

If clumps and spell effects are making things more difficult, why not do something to those features as well? Clumps aren't good in any case, and while spell effects are obviously a crucial part of the experience, perhaps they don't need to be that dramatic -- at least other than the momentaneous ones.

[Sensuki]

Two things will be happening in future patches.

• The pulse effect on tagets will be replaced with proper targeting graphics
• Melee engagement will get proper UI (there is none atm)

Displaying melee engagement info is tricky because A, characters tend to clump together so I can't rely on the spaces between them, and B, spell effects (especially late game) often cover up the selection circles, which is another convenient area to display this stuff. I have a few ideas kicking around and hope to have something for you guys soon. Thanks for your patience.

 

Will it be the same targeting reticle as the IE games ?

 

Spell FX also need to be toned down. There is no need for any FX for buff and debuffs other than a per-unit effect, as per the IE games, unless it is a persistent effect such as Circle of Protection, or a Web spell, etc.

 

The IE games Spell FX followed some of the principles that RTS games from the same era used to avoid such muddled combat.

Edited September 8, 2014 by Sensuki

[archangel979]

Yea, I also don't want spell FX to ruin combat readability. NWN2 was way over the top, please have spell effects more like IE games with minimalistic FX for any spell with durations more than instantaneous. 

[FireExit]

Granted it was a Turn-Based combat system, but the engagement effects in TOEE I've always found to be quite nice