Engagement Mechanics- Problems and Solutions

[Sensuki]

Watching Sensuki's latest video and how he describes all the ways to fight disengagement and I come away with the mindset that it just adds more tactical decisions to the gameplay.

 

I don't believe it adds any decisions. By default without engagement the same decisions exist, it's just that there is no penalty for disengaging. All disengagement attacks do is penalize you for one certain action (moving while engaged) which actually makes that option not very viable compared to the other options available.

 

The IE mod removes the disengagement attacks but keeps the AI part of the system, and IMO it's a lot better because it doesn't punish movement in combat. Positioning is still important and you now have the option to re-configure your frontline without penalty.

 

The things that break engagement (interrupts, disables, movement abilities) are all just as good as they were before, IMO.

 

I deliberately tried to keep my opinion on the system in the video pretty muted so people could make up their own minds, and tried to clearly explain how to play with the system. 

Edited March 26, 2015 by Sensuki

[Luckmann]

And yet you haven't actually played with it have you? I can't understand how you can be so convinced that something is terrible having never even tried it yourself.

See, this here is the saddest part, where you clearly haven't even skimmed through the threads before you start mouthing off nonsense about things you know nothing about. I've played extensively between BBv333 and BBv480. Before I started BBv333, I was very positive towards Engagement, I was completely sold on the pitch, and then I started playing, looking at how it functioned, considered the arguments, and then re-evaluated my position.

 

The little backer icon isn't the end-all be-all of who has access to the beta. The only thing that stopped me from becoming a backer was rampant poverty.

 

I don't believe it adds any decisions. By default without engagement the same decisions exist, it's just that there is no penalty for disengaging. All disengagement attacks do is penalize you for one certain action (moving while engaged) which actually makes that option not very viable compared to the other options available.

 

The IE mod removes the disengagement attacks but keeps the AI part of the system, and IMO it's a lot better because it doesn't punish movement in combat. Positioning is still important and you now have the option to re-configure your frontline without penalty.

 

The things that break engagement (interrupts, disables, movement abilities) are all just as good as they were before, IMO.

 

I deliberately tried to keep my opinion on the system in the video pretty muted so people could make up their own minds, and tried to clearly explain how to play with the system.

^ It's a guide, not a soapbox.

 

Also, I said he couldn't do it. I still haven't seen the video, but I will examine it with a magnifying glass to make sure.

Edited March 26, 2015 by Luckmann

[Answermancer]

See, this here is the saddest part, where you clearly haven't even skimmed through the threads before you start mouthing off nonsense about things you know nothing about. I've played extensively between BBv333 and BBv480. Before I started BBv333, I was very positive towards Engagement, I was completely sold on the pitch, and then I started playing, looking at how it functioned, considered the arguments, and then re-evaluated my position.

Then I am mistaken about that part and I apologize for it. I must have confused you with someone else who doesn't have the beta.

 

I don't love engagement either by the way, after playing the beta, but I also don't think it's garbage or terrible, just half-baked. I would prefer it if you could move around in melee like you were supposed to be able to originally, and if more classes had engagement-breaking abilities (or if everyone had a basic Disengage ability that traded an action for free movement). But I still prefer the current implementation to "nothing" and enjoy the game fine with it as it is.

 

I still find cynical hyperbole and non-constructive snarkiness to be extremely obnoxious but that's just me.

[Endrosz]

I'll bring you all down, foul Necromantic cabal!

[wanderon]

 

See, this here is the saddest part, where you clearly haven't even skimmed through the threads before you start mouthing off nonsense about things you know nothing about. I've played extensively between BBv333 and BBv480. Before I started BBv333, I was very positive towards Engagement, I was completely sold on the pitch, and then I started playing, looking at how it functioned, considered the arguments, and then re-evaluated my position.

Then I am mistaken about that part and I apologize for it. I must have confused you with someone else who doesn't have the beta.

 

I don't love engagement either by the way, after playing the beta, but I also don't think it's garbage or terrible, just half-baked. I would prefer it if you could move around in melee like you were supposed to be able to originally, and if more classes had engagement-breaking abilities (or if everyone had a basic Disengage ability that traded an action for free movement). But I still prefer the current implementation to "nothing" and enjoy the game fine with it as it is.

 

I still find cynical hyperbole and non-constructive snarkiness to be extremely obnoxious but that's just me.

 

 

Does this mean that non-cynical hyperbole and constructive snarkiness would be more acceptable? 

[Answermancer]

 

I still find cynical hyperbole and non-constructive snarkiness to be extremely obnoxious but that's just me.

 

 

Does this mean that non-cynical hyperbole and constructive snarkiness would be more acceptable? 

I suppose. I suppose that is technically correct.

 

The best kind of correct.