How to fix combat? It's still the big offender in the BB.

[Stun]

We're not talking about the MMO, we're talking about River of Time, which didn't sell worth a damn even in Germany and ended up bankrupting its creator.

[Captain Shrek]

We're not talking about the MMO, we're talking about River of Time, which didn't sell worth a damn even in Germany and ended up bankrupting its creator.

 

The answer is NO I guess.

 

a) It is not turn based. It is RTwP. 

b) It has probably the best RTwP implementation in the history of RTwP. I am saying this as a stern critic of the mechanics,

c) It has actually a really great story which lacks in pace however.

 

Also, by your ridiculous standards of "sales" IWDs are probably even lower on your lists? 

[Stun]

 

We're not talking about the MMO, we're talking about River of Time, which didn't sell worth a damn even in Germany and ended up bankrupting its creator.

 

The answer is NO I guess.

 

a) It is not turn based. It is RTwP. 

b) It has probably the best RTwP implementation in the history of RTwP. I am saying this as a stern critic of the mechanics,

c) It has actually a really great story which lacks in pace however.

 

Also, by your ridiculous standards of "sales" IWDs are probably even lower on your lists?

 

Lower than D:RoT? Nope, since they both sold more. And I brought up sales only because you claimed it's 'tremendously popular' in Germany. It isn't. And never was. Edited October 30, 2014 by Stun

[Gladiuss8@gmail.com]

Darn, this discussion is so objective.

[Captain Shrek]

Lower than D:RoT? Nope, since they both sold more. And I brought up sales only because you claimed it's 'tremendously popular' in Germany. It isn't. And never was.

 

 

 

That was an error on my part. I meant that the Drakensang system (Das Schwarze auge) is popular in germany. 

[Sensuki]

I didn't make an assumption

 

Yes you did, let me quote it for you.

 

There's that arrogance to assume I care enough about -you- to research your past decisions?

 

That is an assumption. You assumed that the reason why I posted that you could look at my post history was that I expected you to "care" about me, likely out of perceived arrogance or self-importance. That is pretty presumptuous if you ask me. That is also not what I meant.

 

When making statements about other people on the internet, on a forum of which you are 'new' to (and by new I mean that you have never posted before, and am unaware of my post history), is it rash and kind of rude to be honest, to make statements about people such as "obsessively rehashing of ideas on the internet", "devoid of any practical analysis" and presuming to tell me the actual reasons of why I want Melee Engagement removed, when I had in fact already stated them, all without any perspective based on post history.

 

You say that "past actions do not matter, only the present does". I have already made practical analyses of the Melee Engagement system before this thread. I have told you that my opinion on the subject was once different and through practical analysis (you know, playing the game and then collecting my thoughts on my practical experience with the game into analyses) my opinion has been changed based on that.

 

You ignored those words in my reply to your first post. Instead, you decided to reply to my both civil and friendly post in a hostile and patronizing manner. Your

words below:

 

to assume I care enough about -you-

 

Not only did you attack me as a person in your first post, you have continued to do so after I responded in a civil fashion. It is incredibly rich of you to dismiss this, and then say "Please become more of an adult", "You have what the world of psychology calls "Cognitive dissonance"", "Challenging an immature, intentionally antagonistic person does not constitute vitriol in any form." and the absolute gas

 

Derisive laughter on the internet? Do you often attempted to dehumanize people in order to progress your point of view? Have you ever considered the type of person it makes you that when confronted with an opposing point of view you feel a need to attempt to insult someone for their particular point of view? Is that the type of person you would like to be? I'd reccommend you reevaluate your choices in the way you present yourself.

 

You already insulted me, and are trying to give an air of 'superiority' by attempting to mask your insults and hostility within your flowery words, sentence structures and vocabulary. I honestly can't believe that you presume to do that AND include that sentence in your post. Not the finest display of intellectualism, is it? 

 

You might argue in a fancier manner than I do (so adult!), but it doesn't really do you any favors.

 

The truth is you have your own mandate that you want to try and protect, and that is why you posted for the first time on the forum, because your mandate is being threatened. You have an ideology of what RPG combat should be like that is actually more extreme than any of the viewpoints that I have on the subject. I will outline that ideology based from the statements you have made in the quotes below for the rest of the readers to see clearly. 

 

By pushing the game to a point where mechanical skillcap becomes more important you are in effect decreasing the 'role-playing' aspects of the game. How you might ask? Because the purpose of an RPG is to create what we call an -abstraction- of a combat scenario. This abstraction layer can be complex or simple depending on the type of action that is attempted to be simplified into a numerical format. The reason we want there to be an abstraction rather than a mechanical skill component is that it is the characters -within- the game that are supposed to be the possesors of the abilities.

 

In this quote, you are saying that  (1) there should be less emphasis on player input in (at the very least) combat  in roleplaying games. You think that (2) less player input in an RPG equals 'abstraction' and (3) you seem to think that the more actions that are allowed to be micromanaged by the player, the more a game emphasizes mechanical skill over the skill of the unit in the game.

 

I am well aware that the player can control that...the point being that it -SHOULD NOT BE UP TO THE PLAYER- to replicate those actions. Being a real time game doesn't mean that the player should have the burden of micro movement for each individual character to perform feats of athleticism; this introduces a level of physical player skill and reaction time into the gameplay that limits the ability of the game to represent the raw skillset of a trained combatant.

 

.... This is not Starcraft 2 or Dow2. I'm happy for you that you like to play these games this way...but it's not how most people played them.

 

In this quote you reiterate (1), stressing in capital letters that combat in RPGs should have less mechanical input and that just because a game is real-time that the player should have to make unit actions.

 

I play RTS games. Being able to move to avoid the punishment of melee positioning is a flaw. It reduces tactical gameplay and increases micro gameplay.

 

In this quote, you (4) state that while you play RTS games, but you think that there is a flaw in RTS gameplay whereby units can move freely in melee.

 

Let me address these four points you try and make individually and make the case that you also have an ideology of how combat in RPGs (and Pillars of Eternity) should be

 

erragal's ideological assumption #1 - "there should be less emphasis on player input in (at the very least) combat in roleplaying games."

 

There are many styles of gameplay in RPGs - turn based, phase based, real-time/rtwp and action. There are also many subtypes of gameplay within those four distinctive RPG gameplay styles. There are real-time games that require very little player input, such as Star Wars Knights of the Old Republic, Neverwinter Nights and Drakensang: The River of Time (an attempt at a Dragon Age clone, as Stun has said).

 

These are games where tactical positioning and movement in combat are of little importance. Units run towards each other, stop when they get to melee range and then the player presses the mouse button and hotkeys to assign units actions. The player doesn't have to do any more than that, really. If that is your RTWP gameplay preference, then that's fine, but I believe it is in stark contrast to what the majority of the forum users here want (I can't speak for the backers at large, so I will not presume to) out of Pillars of Eternity.

 

You have stated that there should be less emphasis on player input in an RPG because of 'role-playing' and abstraction and that player input 'games' the combat system. Firstly, player input does not reduce the 'role-playing' in an RPG. Action RPGs require constant player input to control a single unit in combat, they often require more actions per minute than real-time with pause RPGs. If player input goes against the 'role-playing' of a character in an RPG, then why is an Action RPG considered an RPG ? What about a turn-based RPG? Turn-based RPGs have some automated systems (usually AoO and overwatch systems) but other than that everything requires player input and you may end up issuing more total commands in a combat encounter than you would in an RtWP one - only that units act one at a time and nothing is time critical (note that I have constantly reiterated that the pause in RTwP takes away pretty much all the time critical aspects from combat, other than the act of pausing itself - something which you have conveniently ignored as it trumps your argument about the lack of Melee Engagement requiring more mechanical skill).

 

This is just an ideology you have of what real-time RPG gameplay should be like. The fact is that an RPG is merely a sum of it's parts. The true definition of an RPG is a loose one, but usually it is simply a game that offers a form of gameplay with character advancement and at least combat. The earlier RPGs did not have as much focus on writing and dialogue as the later ones do, perhaps that is something you are also forgetting ? Most of the early RPGs were exploration and combat simulators with character advancement and the 'role playing' was assuming the role of those characters by controlling their movement, abstracted in the gameworld. The amount of control required has nothing to do with 'role-playing'.

 

erragal's ideological assumption #2 - "less player input in an RPG equals 'abstraction'"

 

Your highlight of abstraction in that quote is misused, you are talking as if the abstraction of reality in the game world should not be related to player input. In all games, "real-world" scenarios are abstracted in the game to a varying degree of simulation. It has nothing to do with how much the player controls it. Attacks of Opportunity exist in turn-based games both to abstract the 'tempo' of melee combat where both combatants make an opposing move to the other one's move and to prevent the unfair situation where the unit that acts first loses in games where AP or moves are shared between movement and attacks.

 

Neverwinter Nights was the first game (I believe) to port this concept over into real-time and it was a critical failure. The reason is because Attacks of Opportunity as implemented in any RTwP so far are abstract of time itself. The 'tempo' of melee combat exists in real-time/real-time with pause combat because both units can act at the same time and there is no situation where a unit can move freely in melee combat. For any move that a unit can make, units nearby can also make their own movements at the same time. The Attack of Opportunity mechanic is not required because the problems it fixes in turn-based don't exist in real-time.

 

I believe it is you who refuses to acknowledge my position on this subject.

 

erragal's ideological assumption #3 - "the more actions that are allowed to be micromanaged by the player, the more a game emphasizes mechanical skill over the skill of the unit in the game."

 

This statement would be true in a real-time only game. A game that did not allow the player to issue commands while paused. However it is largely not the case in real-time with pause games. The only act that is time critical is the act of pausing the game. Through pausing the game, the player removes the mechanical skill required to issue commands quickly and accurately. As I stated in my first reply to erragal's first post on the forum, the skill involved in real-time with pause games is realizing that you need to make an action in the first place, it is in the problem analysis and decision making. Pillars of Eternity offers both a pause and slow feature for players to take advantage of to mitigate the time critical aspect of real-time gameplay so that they are free to conduct their problem analysis and decision making at their own pace, while still enjoying the fluidity of real-time combat.

 

erragal's ideological assumption #4 - "there is a flaw in RTS gameplay whereby units can move freely in melee."

 

In my reply to your the second ideological assumption I believe you have made, I state that "The 'tempo' of melee combat exists in real-time/real-time with pause combat because both units can act at the same time and there is no situation where a unit can move freely in melee combat". No movement towards, in, or away from melee combat makes a unit free from the actions of other units. The specific example which I keep bringing up in this thread is that the Melee Engagement system prevents tactical retreating in combat. You have stated that you do not believe you should be able to tactically retreat from combat, likely because you feel it is 'cheap'. Firstly, when you decide to move a melee unit away from combat, it is not free. Any melee unit that is currently performing an attack can still hit and kill the unit retreating. Any melee unit that is currently targeting the unit you are retreating can follow that unit and if they have a higher movement speed and providing there is sufficient room, can attack you while moving. Any ranged unit that is currently targeting you from wherever can still hit you and kill you while you are moving away. 

 

I think it is you who are failing to realize or acknowledge that there are other possibilities outside of the Melee Engagement system that can also create 'sticky' melee combatants without trivializing all movement in melee combat or giving units a free attack against a moving unit independent of time itself. In DotA 2, the Omniknight gets a Degen Aura that gives up to 36% movement speed slow to enemies within a 200 AoE. This makes him incredibly sticky and very hard to escape from. You think that abilities such as Rogue Escape and Fighter Knockdown should be used to break Engagement and escape? You are forgetting that disables and disjointing movement abilities (such as Blink and Force Staff in DotA 2) can and are both used for 'stickiness' - chasing / preventing targets from getting away and escaping from melee. 

 

I think I offer incredibly reasonable arguments for the removal of Melee Engagement, while also identifying that one of the 'problems' that it exists to solve can be solved by other means that are far more sensible in the realm of real-time combat.

 

Yet you are calling me immature and intentionally antagonistic - let us look at the language you have used in your posts aimed at me

 

extraordinarily arrogant, obsessive, arguing in bad faith, aggressive and single minded, inflexibility, kid with the most time on his hands, devoid of any practical analysis, assume I care enough about -you-, predatory, melodramatic, Please become more of an adult, Challenging an immature, intentionally antagonistic

 

Is it me who's doing the bullying? Is it me who's arguing in bad faith? Is it me who's being aggressive and single minded? The language you have used to describe me in your three posts says otherwise. Why don't you take your own advise from your second post? (quote below)

 

 

Do you often attempted to dehumanize people in order to progress your point of view? Have you ever considered the type of person it makes you that when confronted with an opposing point of view you feel a need to attempt to insult someone for their particular point of view? Is that the type of person you would like to be? I'd reccommend you reevaluate your choices in the way you present yourself. Attempting to bully people is a sign of low moral character. You may think it's 'how the internet works' but the strength of being a better person is the ability to separate yourself from the 'normal' way of doing things and choosing the 'better' way of doing things.

 

 

Evaluate how much you've -attempted- to contribute. Five thousand posts? You know what they say about broken clocks.

I do not have to prove my contributions to you, it's your own fault that you won't look outside of a few posts in a thread. It is not for me to decide whether my contributions have been valuable or not, why don't you ask your fellow peers?

Edited October 30, 2014 by Sensuki

[prodigydancer]

I do not have to prove my contributions to you, it's your own fault that you won't look outside of a few posts in a thread. It is not for me to decide whether my contributions have been valuable or not, why don't you ask your fellow peers?

Why do you even bother to reply? Your contributions are well-known, appreciated and some of your suggestions are already in game. And that guy has contributed nothing constructive so far. Just /ignore him and move on.

Edited October 30, 2014 by prodigydancer

[Hiro Protagonist II]

Need to liven up the place. These sort of debates do the trick.

[Sensuki]

I don't mind a bit of a forum argument every now and again

[Cubiq]

I'm not sure i'll be able to do anymore testing so i'll just add 1 more review.

Based on my experience of playing sensuki's mod, i found out that running away without the engagement mechanic, won't be as easy as it was in IE games.

A lot of monsters have higher running speed than you and will eventually catch up.

PoE also doesen't have the mechanic of being able to run away during the enemy's swing animation, so when they swing they will make a hit roll regardless of how far you are when it ends. This means you will be taking damage if you are constantly running in circles. (This includes enemies that have the same speed as you)

Also versus humans you will find yourself stuck or slowed by movement imparing spells/abilities preventing you from running away, which is something i never even bothered to notice until now with the engagement mechanic removed.

Edited October 30, 2014 by Cubiq