Engagement Mechanics- Problems and Solutions

[Cubiq]

The dumb AI is there for people who support the engagement mechanic because controlling the enemy was too hard for them in IE games.

So it would make it play no different than it currently does.

If they actually make it so that the enemy could knock down your tank and disengage to each go after their own target you would be royally screwed with the current abilities in the game, because the tank would no longer be able to pick them up before someone would get killed.

Also one of the points of the mechanic was for you to more easily control the front line.

The game that you wish where the enemy can easily stride through your front line defense was never intended to begin with.

Imagine the amount of abilities/spells you would need to activate just to get all the enemy back to your tank/tanks (which may or may not actually hit), while also activating defensive abilities for the weaker characters and healing them.

And after you manage to reacquire all the enemies back to your tanks again, imagine him knocking you down again and doing everything over.

I can guarantee you that that would be much more tedious than simply moving the character away and blocking them with another character like in IE games.

Edited December 3, 2014 by Cubiq

[Sensuki]

I don't think it would be like that Cubiq, but enemies all going for the Wizard isn't smart. This game has narrow corridors as well as open spaces, all you have to do in corridors is physically block the pathing space with your frontline so that nothing can get through anyway.

 

Funny thing is that in v278, enemies did go for your backline if you opened combat with your backline. I have a Sensuki vs the Beatles series where I played around the fact that beetles would only target my Wizard. I put him in the center of my other characters and they could never reach him due to lack of pathing space.

[Cubiq]

Well yeah the pathing is a different issue. Sawyer said they are working on that atm i think, so who knows how that will turn out.

Edit: nvm i think i read that wrong, not sure if they are working on it.

Edited December 3, 2014 by Cubiq

[Chilloutman]

The dumb AI is there for people who support the engagement mechanic because controlling the enemy was too hard for them in IE games.

So it would make it play no different than it currently does.

If they actually make it so that the enemy could knock down your tank and disengage to each go after their own target you would be royally screwed with the current abilities in the game, because the tank would no longer be able to pick them up before someone would get killed.

Also one of the points of the mechanic was for you to more easily control the front line.

The game that you wish where the enemy can easily stride through your front line defense was never intended to begin with.

Imagine the amount of abilities/spells you would need to activate just to get all the enemy back to your tank/tanks (which may or may not actually hit), while also activating defensive abilities for the weaker characters and healing them.

And after you manage to reacquire all the enemies back to your tanks again, imagine him knocking you down again and doing everything over.

I can guarantee you that that would be much more tedious than simply moving the character away and blocking them with another character like in IE games.

Again, i see contradictions in your statements

 

The dumb AI is there for people who support the engagement mechanic because controlling the enemy was too hard for them in IE games.

 

What are you talking about? Enemies in IE games were completly dumb and attack first target they saw/atacked them, its quite similiar to what PoE have now

 

So it would make it play no different than it currently does.

If they actually make it so that the enemy could knock down your tank and disengage to each go after their own target you would be royally screwed with the current abilities in the game, because the tank would no longer be able to pick them up before someone would get killed.

 

Uhm so we want tactical combat - but easy because I dont want my character killed? WTF?

[Osvir]

The dumb AI is there for people who support the engagement mechanic because controlling the enemy was too hard for them in IE games.

So it would make it play no different than it currently does.

If they actually make it so that the enemy could knock down your tank and disengage to each go after their own target you would be royally screwed with the current abilities in the game, because the tank would no longer be able to pick them up before someone would get killed.

Also one of the points of the mechanic was for you to more easily control the front line.

The game that you wish where the enemy can easily stride through your front line defense was never intended to begin with.

Imagine the amount of abilities/spells you would need to activate just to get all the enemy back to your tank/tanks (which may or may not actually hit), while also activating defensive abilities for the weaker characters and healing them.

And after you manage to reacquire all the enemies back to your tanks again, imagine him knocking you down again and doing everything over.

I can guarantee you that that would be much more tedious than simply moving the character away and blocking them with another character like in IE games.

Well, according to both the Official Wiki (Vitality) and Update #24 (Kickstarter), there should be ways to bring back your characters in a fight. Maybe it'll be items, a talent, or class related abilities, I haven't found any of it in the Beta though (Which makes me come to the conclusion that, a bit of a "duh" moment incoming, the Beta might be holding out on us).

 

EDIT: My point is that, your Fighter gets knocked down, enemies re-target, they might take out one or two character, the Fighter gets up (because Knockdown is an ability), starts tanking again whilst other characters "Resurrects" the downed characters.

Edited December 3, 2014 by Osvir

[Sensuki]

What are you talking about? Enemies in IE games were completely dumb and attack first target they saw/attacked them, its quite similar to what PoE have now

 

Enemies rushing for the backline at the start of combat is not smart, nor challenging AI though. Any enemy that tries to run through Engagement will suffer damage from it and dealing damage to enemies is exactly what you want to do. That damage is FREE, it doesn't cost the player a single thing. If enemies rush through Engagement suffer a disengagement attack and I make my melee enemy hit them at the same time, that's one extra hit that I wouldn't have got if they had just attacked my Fighter instead - which is really stupid and makes it easier for the player to win.

[Cubiq]

Uhm so we want tactical combat - but easy because I dont want my character killed? WTF?

 

Yes i don't want to use 2-3 abilities for each enemy just so i can reengage them with my tank nearly every battle and repeat that again if my tank gets knocked down again.

Since you're so hardcore go play the beta, record it and send your weaker characters to the front, first wait a few seconds to simulate a knockdown on your tank and then use your tactics to save them. And then repeat that at every battle in the beta, then tell everyone on the forum how much fun you had and that this is how everyone should play. I'm sure you'll get great replies.

Edited December 3, 2014 by Cubiq

[Cubiq]

 

Well, according to both the Official Wiki (Vitality) and Update #24 (Kickstarter), there should be ways to bring back your characters in a fight. Maybe it'll be items, a talent, or class related abilities, I haven't found any of it in the Beta though (Which makes me come to the conclusion that, a bit of a "duh" moment incoming, the Beta might be holding out on us).

My point is that, your Fighter gets knocked down, enemies re-target, they might take out one or two character, the Fighter gets up (because Knockdown is an ability), starts tanking again whilst other characters "Resurrects" the downed characters.

 

I know that the priest and the chanter have a revive skill but i think they need to be level 7-8 to use it.

Still kind of a silly mechanic, it would be much easier to just cast Withdraw spell on them which i think is cheesy since it's too powerful for a level 1 and probably shouldn't even be in the game since it can be used on your tank to take 0 damage and also says: "i know you can't save your characters because of engagement but here's a spell that makes you invulnerable to fix it"

Edited December 3, 2014 by Cubiq

[Chilloutman]

 

What are you talking about? Enemies in IE games were completely dumb and attack first target they saw/attacked them, its quite similar to what PoE have now

 

Enemies rushing for the backline at the start of combat is not smart, nor challenging AI though. Any enemy that tries to run through Engagement will suffer damage from it and dealing damage to enemies is exactly what you want to do. That damage is FREE, it doesn't cost the player a single thing. If enemies rush through Engagement suffer a disengagement attack and I make my melee enemy hit them at the same time, that's one extra hit that I wouldn't have got if they had just attacked my Fighter instead - which is really stupid and makes it easier for the player to win.

 

 

What are you talking about? Enemies in IE games were completely dumb and attack first target they saw/attacked them, its quite similar to what PoE have now

 

Enemies rushing for the backline at the start of combat is not smart, nor challenging AI though. Any enemy that tries to run through Engagement will suffer damage from it and dealing damage to enemies is exactly what you want to do. That damage is FREE, it doesn't cost the player a single thing. If enemies rush through Engagement suffer a disengagement attack and I make my melee enemy hit them at the same time, that's one extra hit that I wouldn't have got if they had just attacked my Fighter instead - which is really stupid and makes it easier for the player to win.

 

Did I ever state they should do it without purpose? I clearly stated that there have to be AI (lets call it now simple decision table) and they should act accordingly, ofcourse enemy should not rush through engagement without thinking first if its worth it.

 

Lets create simple AI

 

Am I engaged? 1

Am I attacked? 3

Is nearby enemy I can finish quickly? (low endurance) 3

Is there spellcaster I can interupt? (enemy casting spell) 2

 

now lest say we have one NPC enemy engaged by one fighter with wizard(with low heath) behinde him casting spell

 

NPC is engaged and attacked by fighter 1+3 = 4

NPC sees low health mage casting spell 2+3 = 5

 

NPC try disengage and attack mage

 

Now same scenario but add another fighter

 

NPC is engaged and attacked by 2 figters 4+4 = 8

NPC sees low heath mage casting spell 2+3 = 5

 

NPC will stay and attack current target

 

Now you have somehow capable AI which can do reasonable decisions - its simple as that and there is absolutely no problem with engagement mechanic itself

I am engaged

[Cubiq]

Lol

Sensuki 5 fighters and 1 mage.

Imagine the fun with that.

[Chilloutman]

Lol

Sensuki 5 fighters and 1 mage.

Imagine the fun with that.

Dont know what you mean, or if you even uderstand that math above but if you refering to Sensuki video about abusing engagement then this is perfect solution, as enemy would not pursue mage against 5 disingagement attacks even if mage have low hp and casting spell (still refering to math above, which was just quick shot out of my head, sure the values will probably have to be more tinkered)

[Cubiq]

Nope it's not that, i'll let Sensuki decide whether he shows you or not, since it's his video.

[Namutree]

Nope it's not that, i'll let Sensuki decide whether he shows you or not, since it's his video.

I've seen it. It's hilarious!

[Chilloutman]

Nope it's not that, i'll let Sensuki decide whether he shows you or not, since it's his video.

I told you I seen it, I explain to you how my example solve that issue, yet you responded totaly out of context. please reply constructively or not at all.

[Cubiq]

I told you I seen it, I explain to you how my example solve that issue, yet you responded totaly out of context. please reply constructively or not at all.

No you didn't or you would know that the issue is that there is no way for the current AI to check where you are positioned and whether or not he will attempt to close the distance based on that knowledge.

[Chilloutman]

 

I told you I seen it, I explain to you how my example solve that issue, yet you responded totaly out of context. please reply constructively or not at all.

No you didn't or you would know that the issue is that there is no way for the current AI to check where you are positioned and whether or not he will attempt to close the distance based on that knowledge.

 

So you agree with me that problem is AI. Hurray. Yes currently AI so stupid that it would run through 5 disengagement attacks just to attack first enemy it sees

[Cubiq]

No the problem is the engagement since it's easier to fix than the AI.

 

If you serriosly expect them to make an AI so advanced it would be able to recognize your character position and whether or not you are baiting it to get hit then my answer is just:

lol

Edited December 3, 2014 by Cubiq

[Chilloutman]

No the problem is the engagement since it's easier to fix than the AI.

 

If you serriosly expect them to make an AI so advanced it would be able to recognize your character position and whether or not you are baiting it to get hit then my answer is just:

lol

Well I was able to do that AI in example above in 5 minutes, I expect OE devs to be more competent than me in that regard.

[Cubiq]

clearly not since it's not in the game is it

[Shevek]

Chilloutman:

 

Even though I am a proponent of engagement, those abuses are a bit too easy to pull off for my liking.

 

I have a feeling the devs will be able to fix or limit abuses with engagement. If they can, great. It stays and the system gets better. If they cant, then it might go. Either way, the game gets better.

 

Honestly, none of us know what the current AI can do or what it can be programmed to do or what have you. This is a good test. If AI can be modified to curb the worst of these abuses, then I think that will pretty much settle this issue.

 

I am sure the devs have perused Sensukis vids already. I am sure they are already talking about ways to address the exploits.

Edited December 3, 2014 by Shevek

[Chilloutman]

Chilloutman:

 

Even though I am a proponent of engagement, those abuses are a bit too easy to pull off for my liking.

 

I have a feeling the devs will be able to fix or limit abuses with engagement. If they can, great. It stays and the system gets better. If they cant, then it might go. Either way, the game gets better.

 

Honestly, none of us know what the current AI can do or what it can be programmed to do or what have you. This is a good test. If AI can be modified to curb the worst of these abuses, then I think that will pretty much settle this issue.

 

I am sure the devs have perused Sensukis vids already. I am sure they are already talking about ways to address the exploits.

True, I simply hope they try make better AI that to throw away mechanics

[Sensuki]

Now you have somehow capable AI which can do reasonable decisions - its simple as that and there is absolutely no problem with engagement mechanic itself

The player generally has a party of 3-6 characters and the situation is A LOT more complicated than you think. You can't use isolated examples like that. Here are some of the questions I would be asking in that situation

 

How many units does the player have

How many units does the player have that are currently engaged

is there pathing space available to get to the Wizard

what afflictions is that unit affected by

what is the current health of that unit that would attempt to target a low health character

how many enemies is the player fighting

how many are still alive

will they all attempt to beeline to the back and attack the wizard

 

With the engagement system it makes NO SENSE for enemies to change targets like that, because they could be killing themselves from disengagement attacks. The player can abuse the system. However with no engagement, it would make a bit more sense that an enemy a certain distance away from a low health character would re-acquire them as a target if there was available pathing space.

[Seari]

Dear god Chilloutman, you have no idea what you are talking about. Please stop.

[Chilloutman]

 

Now you have somehow capable AI which can do reasonable decisions - its simple as that and there is absolutely no problem with engagement mechanic itself

The player generally has a party of 3-6 characters and the situation is A LOT more complicated than you think. You can't use isolated examples like that. Here are some of the questions I would be asking in that situation

 

How many units does the player have

How many units does the player have that are currently engaged

is there pathing space available to get to the Wizard

what afflictions is that unit affected by

what is the current health of that unit that would attempt to target a low health character

how many enemies is the player fighting

how many are still alive

will they all attempt to beeline to the back and attack the wizard

 

With the engagement system it makes NO SENSE for enemies to change targets like that, because they could be killing themselves from disengagement attacks. The player can abuse the system. However with no engagement, it would make a bit more sense that an enemy a certain distance away from a low health character would re-acquire them as a target if there was available pathing space.

 

Ih ear what you say, problem is that you see abuse only on engagement, I see abuse if you use your tank to attract enemies and they will never attack mage, Its another type of abuse. Same as if you have 1 fighter and 5 clerics who heal that one fighter constantly. If enemy never change their target its just another form of abuse. All systems can be abused if you know how

[Sensuki]

I see abuse if you use your tank to attract enemies and they will never attack mage

Since when am I promoting this?

 

Look up my post history, you'll see me frequently requesting and advocating for better AI targeting and robust target re-acquisition. Melee Engagement removes the need for a lot of it, which is one of the (many) reasons why I want it removed.

Edited December 3, 2014 by Sensuki