That is well known, but you misunderstand. I'm talking about what happens for the player during combat, the combat feedback for the player - how tangible and usable it is - and not about what happens under the hood. Without such a "system of rounds", I can assure that the IE games and the NWN games would be almost unrecognizable. By this I mean everything, spell descriptions, durations, actions taken, bla, bla, bla.

 

I'm pretty sure that when people complain about "desynchronized rounds" it's because they think they're pausing more because their characters don't finish doing everything at the same time - something that was never the case in the IE games.

 

The spell duration descriptions in the IE games, which were given inconsistently in terms of rounds, turns, etc, were pretty bad.

Edited November 16, 201411 yr by Infinitron

Rounds weren't synchronized in the IE games. Even if you ordered everyone to attack at the same time, they would still attack at different times, because they would be standing at different positions, and the enemies would also be standing at different positions, and they would move around. Their next rounds would then all start at different times.

 

The reason why there is a difference in perception is because this game makes its 'combat rounds' visible with the bars ticking down above their heads. The IE games also used cosmetic attacks, so it always looked like all the classes were roughly equally busy with attacking despite not all of them having the same attacks per round.

Edited November 16, 201411 yr by Quetzalcoatl

For spellcasters though it was about the same because the cast range was fairly big. Those were usually the only chars you needed to issue new actions to, for others you needed to change targeting and positioning, and use items.

 

PE removes most of the changing targeting and positioning though for melee characters.

Just for the record Shevek I didn't mean to say you were using a Druid or a Cipher.  I simply meant that anyone who doesn't use the adventurers hall (which be honest, will be most players) is going to have much more limited choices about their party.  If there is a super uber good guy Fighter in the game but you are playing a slimy Rogue out only for themselves they probably won't fit in your party... which means if you don't get to have a Fighter cause you are only using NPC's.  You see my point right? 

 

Think about it, there are 11 classes.... but only what... 8-9 companions?  There will be at least a couple classes that literally have no NPC at all and will be adventurer's hall or player character only.

 

Also no, you don't have to be a munchkin to make a "successful" party.  You do have to be a munchkin (or playing like one) to make a party that can breeze through entire maps on hard mode or higher and never have any issues at all outside of "hard" fights.  Also no offense, playing that way is a legitimate way to beat the game, but you also seem to imply from your post history that that is exactly how you play Eternity and the games before it like BG2.

Rounds weren't synchronized in the IE games. Even if you ordered everyone to attack at the same time, they would still attack at different times, because they would be standing at different positions, and the enemies would also be standing at different positions, and they would move around. Their next rounds would then all start at different times.

 

The reason why there is a difference in perception is because this game makes its 'combat rounds' visible with the bars ticking down above their heads. The IE games also used cosmetic attacks, so it always looked like all the classes were roughly equally busy with attacking despite not all of them having the same attacks per round.

My thoughts exactly, plus I've recently tested it. The two main differences I can see between IE games and PoE in terms of how combat actions are taken are, first, that the hit/talent actions take 2 seconds to cool down and casting takes 3 seconds in PoE whereas in the IE games all actions had a bit longer cooldown (or so it seems when I test out combat in BG, I may try to record the times), and for casting it was different for each spell, and second, it is my feeling (haven't experimented to prove it), that in the IE games there was a larger number of hit animations being played per one battle, but more were misses and few were hits, which made combat seem as if it's taking longer, and presented important information (about hits) at a slower pace to the player, while in PoE there is a large percentage of grazes (hits which cause negligible amounts of damage but can pile up over a long battle) and relatively few misses. Of course these percentages and the frequencies of grazes/misses will vary from one battle to another, depending on party gear and enemies. Don't forget guys, we are seeing very little of the final game's content here.

 

Anyway, my conclusion, as I've written in other threads, is that the devs should double the animation speeds and cooldown times, provide a better-than-current solution for the UI that will show the player whose turn it will be next, and combat will become much easier for a player to understand, also pausing will not be required as it de facto is right now.

 

As for how to make combat more interesting, by means of adding character talents, or game mechanics such as engagement, I can't really make suggestions, as I have too little experience with PoE and other combat systems, and this is a really complicated matter for me to be certain of any proposed solution. I have enough faith in the developers to try out whatever they consider is good, and when I know more, I will possibly make suggestions then.

Edited November 17, 201411 yr by Gairnulf

Just for the record Shevek I didn't mean to say you were using a Druid or a Cipher. I simply meant that anyone who doesn't use the adventurers hall (which be honest, will be most players) is going to have much more limited choices about their party. If there is a super uber good guy Fighter in the game but you are playing a slimy Rogue out only for themselves they probably won't fit in your party... which means if you don't get to have a Fighter cause you are only using NPC's. You see my point right?

 

Think about it, there are 11 classes.... but only what... 8-9 companions? There will be at least a couple classes that literally have no NPC at all and will be adventurer's hall or player character only.

 

Also no, you don't have to be a munchkin to make a "successful" party. You do have to be a munchkin (or playing like one) to make a party that can breeze through entire maps on hard mode or higher and never have any issues at all outside of "hard" fights. Also no offense, playing that way is a legitimate way to beat the game, but you also seem to imply from your post history that that is exactly how you play Eternity and the games before it like BG2.

1. I understand and appreciate those points. In the video I comment that I dislike that fighters (or monks) are needed to "tank." That being said both a fighter and a monk are joinable npcs. Also, I think the paladin would make a respectable tank if they pick up the modal that gives them some deflection and they pick up weapon/shield style (especially with LoH). The paladin is another joinable npc, btw. Any of those can serve as a party tank or, of course, a player made character.

 

2. Basically, the game gives you options when it comes to party members and talents to deal with its challenges.

 

3. I actually don't think you have to use these strategies to beat hard either. I was just showing that their are ways to play without excessive micro on hard.

 

As an aside, I was hoping more classes could fill this kind of role. OE claimed that classes would be a bit more flexible. That is not the fault of core combat mechanics tho. It is an issue with character development.

Edited November 17, 201411 yr by Shevek

Well, I for one was put off from this forum after seeing all those "my sausage is bigger than yours" posts, like some of the replies to the video. I'll go away from here again and just play the game instead when it is out. Talk about bad modding. Those posts should be deleted.

I like the video, it does give lots of clarity. No ill intended Sensuki, but I only managed to listen to your Part 1 response for maybe 10-15 seconds (also Shevek, I think you should view his video as a "Forum Reply", but in video format instead of text format )

Shevek's video also gives me lots of insight:
- Shevek likes to play in a different way, and he's fine with playing his way than the way I am playing the game. I enjoy the way I play the game (With more micro-management, more actions, abilities, spells, tactics and strategies). But, playing the game like I do requires more pausing, and perhaps that's the problem more so than the combat animations and the pace of combat... namely: The way I play the game is the problem I have with it xD it's all my fault!

When I was testing, searching for bugs, I didn't consider the gameplay much (and it was way more difficult in earlier builds to get a sense of what was going on at all times). This build however, I am being taught the system (through the GUI/Ring helpers), and playability is stable and much more optimized. It's fun! :D but I wouldn't mind some more tweaking in visual clarity, and a bit more slower paced combat, and other minor tweaks to make readability better (Your Combat Log also seems to function properly, mine does not).

Insight:
- Other people likes to play differently. They'll have different builds, different characters, different gear, positioning, strategies, tactics. I feel the more hardcore tacticians want their playstyle to be supported more, and casuals are fine with a simplistic combat (as seen in your video). For tacticians it's a question about AI, I suppose, something that isn't entirely tuned at this point.

I do think, seeing what's going on in the video, that Hard might be a bit too easy though (Again, AI tuning and balance).

I like the Engagement Mechanic, but I think the Disengagement Mechanic should be tuned/tweaked a bit (For instance: A Fighter holding 2 enemies should be able to switch between those two, presumably adjacent targets, without getting Disengagement Attacks, because he's essentially engaged with both of them. But the enemy he chooses to not actively Target, should not suffer a Disengagement Attack from the Fighter, if the AI so would choose to go after another Party Member. This could help AI targeting, without having them stomped by the Players Disengagement Attacks).

If my Barbarian is attacking and targeting a Beetle that is focusing on attacking my Fighter, then the Barbarian shouldn't get a Disengagement Attack when leaving that target (in my opinion). I made examples in another thread, about "Facing". That is a bit of a "grand" idea though, and I don't mind if it's not considered/developed, but I believe the Disengagement Mechanic could become more interesting with it.

Some of the Beetles are thrash mobs, wolves, the wyverns, but Medreth's group shouldn't be a thrash mob (and you dealt with him and his cowled followers as if they were nothing), neither should the adventurer's party in Dyrford Crossing, or even the Crystal Eaters, or Kongrak.

This is Beta. AI isn't tuned until much later, or might be more of a focus now that more people can play the Beta without the bugs of past builds. Or perhaps AI is really well done, but stuff like optimization (it's Beta), balance bugs (It's Beta), or AI bugs (it's Beta) or pathfinding bugs (it's Beta), stutter lag (it's Beta), or lag spikes (it's Beta), is so appearant (it is Beta) that it takes so much attention from the Player's enjoyment of the title (it's Beta).

If Baldur's Gate was stuttering, laggy, AI behaved oddly at times, pathfinding, it wouldn't be very fun. In fact, playing Icewind Dale 2 on my machine is no fun at all, because first I need to get several mod fixes and patches to even make it work, and even then it can suffer massive slow-downs and graphical artifacts. It's because it's an old game, and it has bad compatability with my OS (Known issue).

But when Icewind Dale 2 works properly without lag or slowdown, it's super fun! :D

Parallely: When Pillars of Eternity has no slowdown or lag, it's going to be even more fun than it already is

Edited November 30, 201411 yr by Osvir

Attention everyone. This thread has been pruned with extreme prejudice. There has been too much trolling, nonsense and off-topicness in this thread. I'd like to point out that private messages are meant to be private (it's in the freaking name) and are not allowed to be shared without permission of the sender and also that making videos ridiculing other members is frowned upon, but most of all: Discuss the topic, not each other.