Engagement Mechanics- Problems and Solutions

[constantine]

 

Adding a loop for reevaluation of targeting preferences (implying there will be a number of such preferences) is what I expected would happen. To think of all the hundreds of kilobytes collectively written on how exploitable Engagement is, addressed in a couple of sentences...

I don't think that completely addresses it. It should still technically be possible to get an opening round of disengagement attacks by luring melee foes to a clump of your characters, particularly with Fighters who have multiple engagements. I will try to achieve that in the next build and see how I go.

 

You saw that I was able to achieve at least one disengagement attack per-character with my Rogue and Barbarian examples, while smarter targeting may make that harder to achieve, should still be possible, and if so - will remain the best way to open combat against a group of melee opponents.

 

From my perspective, going through the trouble to pull this off is completely legit- your cunning strategic party formation outsmarted your opponents.

 

And it may as well be the best opening to a fight (there's always a best opening in every fight), but not everyone will go through the trouble to achieve this.

[Kjaamor]

From my perspective, going through the trouble to pull this off is completely legit- your cunning strategic party formation outsmarted your opponents.

And it may as well be the best opening to a fight (there's always a best opening in every fight), but not everyone will go through the trouble to achieve this.

 

The other thing to note with this strategy is that it falls apart instantly should the onus be upon you to charge your opponents, for example if they start with superior ranged force to you.

 

I don't know if there is an AI script yet that works on a guard mechanic, but that would combine with this to bring a new strategic/tactical edge to battle.

[Captain Shrek]

I am actually not sure how engagement mechanics is a solution for kiting. can someone explain to me how that adds up? I have been hearing this thing for quite a while now. 

[Jon of the Wired]

I am actually not sure how engagement mechanics is a solution for kiting. can someone explain to me how that adds up? I have been hearing this thing for quite a while now.

It's not a full solution to kiting, but it does discourage kiting in some circumstances. Specifically, it discourages kiting with a character that has already been engaged, because they would need to suffer a disengagement attack (or take some action to prevent one) before they can begin kiting. It doesn't help a melee character catch a kiting character in the first place, though, which is why it's not a full solution.

 

I don't think there's any single mechanic that can solve kiting. Any solution has to be a combination of mechanics, AI, and encounter design.

Edited December 6, 2014 by Jon of the Wired

[Captain Shrek]

I am not even sure Kiting needs to be solved. In fact, it needs to be encouraged through certain abilities or talents. 

[Kjaamor]

Tactical movement should be encouraged, but the sort of kiting that the IE games oft had was incongruous to the theme and would benefit from removal. Benny Hill combat =/= epic combat.

 

Edit: That is to say, that tactical combat based upon varying risk/reward is a good thing, but strategic combat based upon the tactical risk-free movement of characters is not.

Edited December 6, 2014 by Kjaamor

[archangel979]

 

 

the content of patches seem to get better and better. so the main question now is probably when the next patch is going to arrive.

 

Let's hope they delay this game again if needed. I'm not sure they got enough time to polish this in time for early 2015 release.

 

 

Don't see that happening. v364 is already in a playable state, though still rough arround the edges.

With likely 4 more patches to go, if the pace remains about the same, I really can't see why you'd even call for another delay.

 

I don't know if that is true. So far people are still mostly giving feedback on almost basic combat elements. You know the game is close to done once feedback is only about balance of individual skills.

Some things that have been marked as not good enough from day 1 of beta (like characters not standing out enough from background) are still a problem 3.5 months later.

 

And who knows how many quest bugs are in the whole game. Inxile did a mistake by not letting beta players get access to second part of the game and it was filled with bugs as a result. I am afraid the rest of PoE will be full of quest and story bugs once the game is released.

[archangel979]

Tactical movement should be encouraged, but the sort of kiting that the IE games oft had was incongruous to the theme and would benefit from removal. Benny Hill combat =/= epic combat.

 

Edit: That is to say, that tactical combat based upon varying risk/reward is a good thing, but strategic combat based upon the tactical risk-free movement of characters is not.

That "benny hill combat" was also normal part of pen&paper D&D. It is also part of LotR movies. You don't see Legolas standing still. In the first movie, the fight around the well inside dwarven kingdom was full of all kinds of movement.

 

If you are ranged and can move and shoot that is a normal tactic.

[Shevek]

In DnD you have to build for that mobility. It does not come standard. Look at Shot on the Run (3E). Even after a host of feats to get it, you only get to make a single attack while moving.

 

http://www.dandwiki.com/wiki/SRD:Shot_on_the_Run

 

Also, its kinda funny that you list DnD concerning this.

 

http://dnd4.wikia.com/wiki/Opportunity_attack

http://www.d20srd.org/srd/combat/attacksOfOpportunity.htm

Edited December 6, 2014 by Shevek

[Kjaamor]

 

Tactical movement should be encouraged, but the sort of kiting that the IE games oft had was incongruous to the theme and would benefit from removal. Benny Hill combat =/= epic combat.

 

Edit: That is to say, that tactical combat based upon varying risk/reward is a good thing, but strategic combat based upon the tactical risk-free movement of characters is not.

That "benny hill combat" was also normal part of pen&paper D&D. It is also part of LotR movies. You don't see Legolas standing still. In the first movie, the fight around the well inside dwarven kingdom was full of all kinds of movement.

 

If you are ranged and can move and shoot that is a normal tactic.

 

 

Similarly, however, if the most rudimentary tactics turn your characters invulnerable, a la the end of An Unexpected Journey, there is by definition no peril but for ineptitude and the scene or game become as interesting as an extended version of Bilbo chopping up cheese for him and Gandalf.

[Zoolimar]

 

In DnD you have to build for that mobility. It does not come standard. Look at Shot on the Run (3E). Even after a host of feats to get it, you only get to make a single attack while moving.

Not true. You always can move and shoot. You just can't shoot mid movement without feats. There is even a class (scout) that specializes on this kind of thing.

 

Also you can't shoot into combat between your comrades and enemies without risking to hit allies or taking penalties on attacks.

 

And attacks of opportunity are limited in number per round (standard is 1).

 

The reason why kiting doesn't work so good in D&D is that there is a "charge" movement. Characters can rush into close combat with double movement in straight line and it can't be done while trying to shoot on the run. So ranged characters are always slower if they want to continue their attacks and need some cover to not die to charge attacks. Fighters covering straight lines is a good candidate.  

[archangel979]

In DnD you have to build for that mobility. It does not come standard. Look at Shot on the Run (3E). Even after a host of feats to get it, you only get to make a single attack while moving.

 

http://www.dandwiki.com/wiki/SRD:Shot_on_the_Run

 

Also, its kinda funny that you list DnD concerning this.

 

http://dnd4.wikia.com/wiki/Opportunity_attack

http://www.d20srd.org/srd/combat/attacksOfOpportunity.htm

So does PoE have less attacks. If you are running back you are not getting most DPS as you have slower recovery times.

 

And in 5e you can move and do all attacks. And you could do so in 2e as well (which IE games are based on).

[Shevek]

"So does PoE have less attacks. If you are running back you are not getting most DPS as you have slower recovery times."

 

Im confused. Are you against opportunity cost for movement or for it?

 

"And in 5e you can move and do all attacks. And you could do so in 2e as well (which IE games are based on)."

 

Two points:

1.Except IWD2.

2.And it was clear this would use a propietary rules system from the get go.

[Jon of the Wired]

 

In DnD you have to build for that mobility. It does not come standard. Look at Shot on the Run (3E). Even after a host of feats to get it, you only get to make a single attack while moving.

 

http://www.dandwiki.com/wiki/SRD:Shot_on_the_Run

 

Also, its kinda funny that you list DnD concerning this.

 

http://dnd4.wikia.com/wiki/Opportunity_attack

http://www.d20srd.org/srd/combat/attacksOfOpportunity.htm

So does PoE have less attacks. If you are running back you are not getting most DPS as you have slower recovery times.

 

And in 5e you can move and do all attacks. And you could do so in 2e as well (which IE games are based on).

 

 

In neither 5e or 2e could you kite, however. In either system, the pursuer can move twice as fast as a character moving and shooting, and once the pursuer catches the kiting character, the kiting character is screwed. They can either run, or move and shoot, at which point they provoke an attack of opportunity (rules for that were in 2e, though under a different name and not implemented in IE) or they can safely disengage and move at normal speed. Either way, next turn the pursuer just catches up to them again.

[archangel979]

 

 

In DnD you have to build for that mobility. It does not come standard. Look at Shot on the Run (3E). Even after a host of feats to get it, you only get to make a single attack while moving.

 

http://www.dandwiki.com/wiki/SRD:Shot_on_the_Run

 

Also, its kinda funny that you list DnD concerning this.

 

http://dnd4.wikia.com/wiki/Opportunity_attack

http://www.d20srd.org/srd/combat/attacksOfOpportunity.htm

So does PoE have less attacks. If you are running back you are not getting most DPS as you have slower recovery times.

 

And in 5e you can move and do all attacks. And you could do so in 2e as well (which IE games are based on).

 

 

In neither 5e or 2e could you kite, however. In either system, the pursuer can move twice as fast as a character moving and shooting, and once the pursuer catches the kiting character, the kiting character is screwed. They can either run, or move and shoot, at which point they provoke an attack of opportunity (rules for that were in 2e, though under a different name and not implemented in IE) or they can safely disengage and move at normal speed. Either way, next turn the pursuer just catches up to them again.

 

No they are not screwed. They are still better to move away and use all their attacks while melee guy only gets his opportunity attack. That is of course if the ranged guy is faster than melee guy. Just like in IE games, you could not kite 1v1 if you were not faster. Edited December 6, 2014 by archangel979

[archangel979]

"So does PoE have less attacks. If you are running back you are not getting most DPS as you have slower recovery times."

 

Im confused. Are you against opportunity cost for movement or for it?

 

"And in 5e you can move and do all attacks. And you could do so in 2e as well (which IE games are based on)."

 

Two points:

1.Except IWD2.

2.And it was clear this would use a propietary rules system from the get go.

I am for kiting not being free but it should be possible if your character is faster then one chasing you. And I don't see kiting as something bad. Edited December 7, 2014 by archangel979

[Shevek]

"However, a micro-oriented player with a party of high movement characters devoted to kiting presents, if not an unsolvable problem, one where investing serious programming time to it has diminishing returns."

-JE Sawyer

 

Its possible and will stay possible. It just isnt easy.

Edited December 7, 2014 by Shevek

[Jon of the Wired]

 

 

 

In DnD you have to build for that mobility. It does not come standard. Look at Shot on the Run (3E). Even after a host of feats to get it, you only get to make a single attack while moving.

 

http://www.dandwiki.com/wiki/SRD:Shot_on_the_Run

 

Also, its kinda funny that you list DnD concerning this.

 

http://dnd4.wikia.com/wiki/Opportunity_attack

http://www.d20srd.org/srd/combat/attacksOfOpportunity.htm

So does PoE have less attacks. If you are running back you are not getting most DPS as you have slower recovery times.

 

And in 5e you can move and do all attacks. And you could do so in 2e as well (which IE games are based on).

 

 

In neither 5e or 2e could you kite, however. In either system, the pursuer can move twice as fast as a character moving and shooting, and once the pursuer catches the kiting character, the kiting character is screwed. They can either run, or move and shoot, at which point they provoke an attack of opportunity (rules for that were in 2e, though under a different name and not implemented in IE) or they can safely disengage and move at normal speed. Either way, next turn the pursuer just catches up to them again.

 

No they are not screwed. They are still better to move away and use all their attacks while melee guy only gets his opportunity attack. That is of course if the ranged guy is faster than melee guy. Just like in IE games, you could not kite 1v1 if you were not faster.

 

 

That's true in 5e, assuming the the pursuer doesn't have the "Charger" feat, but not in previous editions, and especially not in 2e. In editions prior to 5e, charging was a thing anyone could do, so a kiter would have to be at least twice as fast as their pursuer, or they would suffer an attack of opportunity and a charge for every attack they made. I was just flipping through my 2e PHB, and it turns out in that edition things are even worse. The rules for withdrawing from melee are so harsh that unless you have another friendly character next to you to block your pursuer, there's almost no point in bothering. It's not even clear that you can move out of melee and attack in the same turn, but assuming it is permitted, your pursuer would first get a free attack on you, or multiple attacks if they have them, and then next turn they can just charge you. Charging lets you move 150% of your speed and then attack (with a bonus to hit), whereas you can only move 50% of your speed and make a ranged attack, so unless the kiter is more than three times faster than their pursuer, they are seriously screwed.

[Sensuki]

From my perspective, going through the trouble to pull this off is completely legit- your cunning strategic party formation outsmarted your opponents.

 

And it may as well be the best opening to a fight (there's always a best opening in every fight), but not everyone will go through the trouble to achieve this.

Abusing a system for free attacks is not outsmarting your opponents, it is abuse of a broken system.

[Mr. Magniloquent]

"However, a micro-oriented player with a party of high movement characters devoted to kiting presents, if not an unsolvable problem, one where investing serious programming time to it has diminishing returns."

-JE Sawyer

 

Its possible and will stay possible. It just isnt easy.

 

I just made a party of 6 orlan rogues specialized to attack speed/critical hits using pikes. Absolute murder. I would stealth my party into position around the enemy in pairs, then ambush. The only thing that caused them to even momentarily blink was engagement. Considering this party needed to be highly mobile, I found engagement irritating for the first time. Not really making a point of any kind, just sharing.

[Kjaamor]

Abusing a system for free attacks is not outsmarting your opponents, it is abuse of a broken system.

 

True.

 

While still deeply flawed at this point, this why we have engagement.

[Sensuki]

Nice joke. 

[Karkarov]

This thread still isn't dead?  Anything of possible value to the devs has been said.  If we keep bickering like a bunch of old ladies at a bingo parlor we are just going to chase devs away from the legitimate points in the thread cause they won't want to wade through a mountain of crap to find them.  Let's move on to a new subject already.

[Kjaamor]

Two little ducks: Attribute rebalance.

[Tsuga C]

...since they have to build the AI from the ground up, the PE AI will probably be more on the simple side for the first installment.

Crap, crap, and triple crap. Underperforming AIs are one of the primary banes of cRPGs. Release the thing in July of 2015 if you must, Obsidian, but please let us enjoy a solid AI with the game.

Edited December 18, 2014 by Tsuga C