Stop Right Now Thankyou Very Much

[Hassat Hunter]

For all who don't have access to the beta:

Let me correct that for you:

 

Who do you trust more on the issue of the engagement system?

A) A guy who obsessivly dismantles the game to the pixel, finds obscure bugs because of his attention to detail, who's first RPG was Baldurs Gate, has hours upon hours of footage and many more hours of gametime invested in the beta

 

or

 

B) A guy who obsessivly dismantles games to the pixel, finds obscure bugs because of his attention to detail, who's first RPG was Baldurs Gate, has spend a good 5 years or so on a fanpatch to another Obsidian Game (removing almost all scripted bugs from the game), and has a character in the popular Divinity: Original Sin not because he was backer, but because of his many bugreport

 

or

 

C) The developers

 

Also known as the improved haste button

+ Rest

* Repeat

 

I think Cloudkilling things offscreen so the AI didn't react was also a fan favorite.

But let's ignore facts now and continue on with the discussion.

[Lephys]

That "who do you trust more" question is silly. Sensuki has a boatload of very valid, significant points. He collects oodles of objective data on the game. Doesn't mean his conclusions on what to do about things are absolute and perfect. And THAT doesn't mean they're all flawed, either.

 

Everything's made up of a bunch of stuff, some useful, some not. All the bickering in this thread -- not useful. The stuff interspersed throughout the bickering? Useful. The useful and useless can co-exist in the same response, even.

 

Anwyho, this isn't even a "OMG let's make sure we convert everyone to exactly one favorite conclusion" thread, either. I really don't understand why everyone's butting heads so badly.

 

I sincerely believe engagement can be done well. I don't think it will be done well, because I don't claim to know the future. I only know what can happen, and what cannot happen. And I don't believe that "rip it out of the game and stomp on it 'til it's dead[/i] is some obviously superior conclusion to be reached, especially based on the reasoning given.

 

The fact of the matter is, engagement doesn't need to do half the things people are currently pointing out as problems in order to be engagement. So, I still haven't seen any solid reasoning on why fixing it will somehow be pointless or futile, as opposed to completely retooling the whole rest of the combat system in such a way that it perfectly makes up for "stickiness" or what-have-you. That's the only reason I don't, right at this moment, think "Hmmm, yeah, better remove it." We could remove it and rely on things that already exist in the game to achieve the same goal, but I think that would be more trouble than its worth, honestly.

 

Fix it. It isn't great right now. Fix it. I'm not defending the current game build. I'm defending the concept of working with something to make it better before deciding you can't or it's not prudent.

 

A) Expand the disengagement options. If the current disengagement abilities are free, maybe offer a way to disengage without getting hit, but still getting some other penalty instead (increased recovery time, increased incoming damage if you DO get hit for the next 3 seconds, etc.).

B) Account for disengagement attacks. Play an animation for them. Give them a recovery time, etc. This isn't hard.

C) Allow for movement, just not 100% free movement. Maybe you move more slowly, and/or must face your attacker, etc. Engagement need not immobilize you. That's not even the point. The point is that it is something you must deal with, because ignoring it comes with penalties.

 

There are more things that can be done to it. Then, 90% of people's woes in here would suddenly vanish.

 

The mechanic itself isn't anti-tactical. It's just too heavy-handed right now.

 

I really think the focus of the effects of engagement and disengagement should focus on the target, and not on the attackers. It shouldn't be that everyone gets free extra things going on. It should be that you, the disengager, suffer something. As someone pointed out in another thread (I think... I don't even know which thread anymore), it would make a lot of sense, at the very least, if extra combatants were the only ones who got disengagement attacks when you disengaged, because you're so busy not-incurring one from the person with whom you were engaged. That sort of thing. Suddenly, it becomes a bit more tactical. But, I think it works even better with passive effects to the disengager. If you can freely disengage whenever you want, but you get -10 to Deflection for the next 5 seconds (for example), then it becomes a much more tactical decision. What's the likelihood of my getting hit a lot soon? Are there 4 other people swarming me? Then maybe I don't just jog away right now and take that penalty. Maybe I need to knock them down first to get away, etc.

 

Or, maybe you get an accuracy penalty. Something to make defensive disengagement easier than offensive disengagement (retreating easier than blowing past opponents to further opponents).

 

But, come on, people. Either changes, in concept, are prudent, or they aren't. Even if you don't think it's worth the effort. If you don't even want to fathom changes to the current implementation to fix it, then don't even address them. Addressing them like they're preposterous just because you don't think they'll happen, or you'd rather something else happen, is just plain folly.

[Shevek]

Engagement feels good to me. As I grow accustomed to it, I find that I still have plenty of mobility.

 

When I go for the Dragon Egg bandits, for example, the first instinct is to make a b-line for the mage. Instead, I send I leave one guy to tie up Sevis and I move unengaged targets to the mage. I find myself making decisions like this with increasing frequency.

 

As the ui/feedback improves, it will be easier to see who is engaged with who. This way, you know who you can move without getting disengagement attacks. I think this adds quite a bit to combat. Rather than move with impunity, I am traversing the battlefield methodically and thinking about my actions. I can still move (especially with the aid of certain abilities) but I must do so carefully.

 

Personally, I think the system is pretty good now. With the changes the devs announced, it should be just about right.

Edited December 9, 2014 by Shevek

[Sensuki]

I wasn't sure if I would be able to get Obsidian to remove the system. I tried, but I failed. The Tamerlane goons that prefer bad combat win. However with the improved AI, there's only two other things that need to be done for my no engagement mod to be really good, and since those are both technically bugs in the game, hopefully I can get them fixed. 

 

Bester has a point though, I've never known a game where the first mods will be ripping systems and features out of the game, rather than adding them in. Especially UI related ones. The amount of poor UI decisions is mind boggling sometimes.

Edited December 9, 2014 by Sensuki

[Zoolimar]

It is also possible to remake engagement and what it does or change how it does things.

 

Variant 1: Standard disengagement attacks but you can make only X attacks within the span of Y sec. Where X is maximum number of possible engagements (don't have beta but as I understand fighters can have 2 or more engagements, right ?) for character and Y is his weapon attack recovery time.

 

So a character with light weapons and multiple disengagement attacks can slice anyone who tries to run past him and a warrior with heavy weapon and single engagement can attack only once and then they will have to wait until they can react again.

 

Variant 2: Characters that are not engaged by enemy get bonus to attack speed. Movement is inertial so the longer character runs the faster he moves up until he reaches maximum speed. Characters without armour have better acceleration but same maximum speed (without feats or other abilities).

 

Someone tries to disengage ? His opponent gets a bonus to attack speed and character still needs time to run from him. Character tries to attack an archer ? There is a chance someone will whack him in the back (with bonus speed) and archer will just change weapons to melee set.

 

On the other hand archers will need to wear light armour and start their running in circles long before their enraged target reaches them or they won't be able to escape.

[lordkim]

Someone named them "Bugsidian" the other day.. Can we expect another delay with all  the stuff/bugs that has bin found and keep turning up ?

[Kjaamor]

Bester has a point though, I've never known a game where the first mods will be ripping systems and features out of the game, rather than adding them in. Especially UI related ones. The amount of poor UI decisions is mind boggling sometimes.

 

If the original BG had been pitched as a modern day tribute to the D&D crpgs of old, given a relatively easy to mod system of coding, and was based upon large-scale beta from a kickstarted format, you can bet your teeth that some incredibly enthusiastic bod would have modded out half the features and systems.

[Sensuki]

I doubt that, actually. Especially considering it was D&D. People would have added more 2E stuff.

Edited December 9, 2014 by Sensuki

[Malekith]

Sensuki, on 09 Dec 2014 - 06:20 AM, said:

I wasn't sure if I would be able to get Obsidian to remove the system. I tried, but I failed. The Tamerlane goons that prefer bad combat win. However with the improved AI, there's only two other things that need to be done for my no engagement mod to be really good, and since those are both technically bugs in the game, hopefully I can get them fixed. 

 

Bester has a point though, I've never known a game where the first mods will be ripping systems and features out of the game, rather than adding them in. Especially UI related ones. The amount of poor UI decisions is mind boggling sometimes.

To be fair, i don't know any game what was backed beforehand (more investment for people than buying after release) because of the promise to be like IE games (BG2 in the minds of most people), and then the game plays completely different. Many people wanted an IE game by Obsidian, not a game made by Obsidian without publiser. Others apparently wanted the exact opposite. So it's natural that one group will feel ripped off.

 

Agree 100% about the UI though, it's prety bad.

[archangel979]

 

In that case you don't have a problem if developers put a "I win button!" as an ability for all classes. After all, it is a player that chooses to use or not use it.

The "I win" button existed in every IE game in the form of a console command that will kill any targeted enemy. Was you game broken by its existence?

 

That is not a I win button. I didn't even know it existed or how to access it (or console). The true I win button is at least as accessible as broken engagement system. Edited December 9, 2014 by archangel979

[morhilane]

Someone named them "Bugsidian" the other day.. Can we expect another delay with all  the stuff/bugs that has bin found and keep turning up ?

 

They pushed the game back to early 2015 without a specific date, they can release anywhere from January to early April with such a vague target.

[Chilloutman]

 

Sensuki, on 09 Dec 2014 - 06:20 AM, said:

 

I wasn't sure if I would be able to get Obsidian to remove the system. I tried, but I failed. The Tamerlane goons that prefer bad combat win. However with the improved AI, there's only two other things that need to be done for my no engagement mod to be really good, and since those are both technically bugs in the game, hopefully I can get them fixed. 

 

Bester has a point though, I've never known a game where the first mods will be ripping systems and features out of the game, rather than adding them in. Especially UI related ones. The amount of poor UI decisions is mind boggling sometimes.

To be fair, i don't know any game what was backed beforehand (more investment for people than buying after release) because of the promise to be like IE games (BG2 in the minds of most people), and then the game plays completely different. Many people wanted an IE game by Obsidian, not a game made by Obsidian without publiser. Others apparently wanted the exact opposite. So it's natural that one group will feel ripped off.

 

Agree 100% about the UI though, it's prety bad.

 

Yeah but IE games are based on D&D which they clearly stated dont have rights for and dont even want to make it because of limits of ruleset for PC game

[Captain Shrek]

 

Yeah but IE games are based on D&D which they clearly stated dont have rights for and dont even want to make it because of limits of ruleset for PC game

 

 

This is false. 

 

http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=d20/oglfaq/20040123f

[MReed]

In practice, I don't think this would be feasible.  See http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=d20/oglfaq/20040123i -- in particular, the portion of making all of the OGL content "easily accessible" to the end users.  As a developer, meeting the terms of this license would be difficult, at best.

[Captain Shrek]

In practice, I don't think this would be feasible.  See http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=d20/oglfaq/20040123i -- in particular, the portion of making all of the OGL content "easily accessible" to the end users.  As a developer, meeting the terms of this license would be difficult, at best.

 

Knights of the Chalice. The best D&D based game out there. It's based on OGL. 

[archangel979]

Sawyer wanted to show the world he knows better than 100s of designers at Wizards that worked on different editions of D&D and that is only reason why they are using this system.

Edited December 9, 2014 by archangel979

[Shevek]

And he did a darned good job too.

[Gfted1]

Based on what, the feature incomplete beta?

[Shevek]

Yes

[Gfted1]

Seems legit.

[Sensuki]

I like the goals behind many of the design decisions (obviously not this one), but the implementation/actual mechanics leave much to be desired.

 

If anything, many of the mechanics have proven exactly why the tried and true ways of doing things are good ways of doing things.

Edited December 9, 2014 by Sensuki

[Guest 4ward]

yeah, i think i maybe have also become too negative or criticizing of the devs lately, sorry for that. Gfted1 got me there with 'feature incomplete beta' I think i was expecting another game and the disappointment sits with me. I was really looking forward to this game but in the end, the game's not my cup of tea. But there's people who'll enjoy it and Obsidian has put a lot of hard work into this game. This is one of the few party-rpgs that's being developped for the PC exclusively after all and yes Josh Sawyer and team imho have put a lot of effort into it. Wish those guys all the best with this game.

[AndreaColombo]

I normally only lurk but as Sensuki has been described as a single very loud individual, I wanted to point out that I agree with pretty much everything he said about the engagement system; I just didn't bother posting about it because he already had my back covered and explained things much better than I ever could.

 

However, to recap:

 

• Engagement does nothing to prevent kiting. Sensuki's videos clearly demonstrate that kiting is still very much possible.
• Engagement makes certain playing styles (that were never a problem to begin with) not viable for no good reason.
• Engagement adds zero value to combat.

So far I have not seen a single post providing evidence to the contrary of any of the above.

 

 

Re: exploitable mechanics in IE games.

 

Just because IE games had exploitable mechanics, it doesn't mean PoE should too. Spiritual successors are not supposed to bring back the bad sides of the games they pay homage to.

 

PoE, being the spiritual successor to IE games that it is, should have BG/IWD-like combat minus the dumb A.I. and exploitable systems. End of story—no two ways about it.

Edited December 9, 2014 by AndreaColombo

[archangel979]

 

Someone named them "Bugsidian" the other day.. Can we expect another delay with all  the stuff/bugs that has bin found and keep turning up ?

 

They pushed the game back to early 2015 without a specific date, they can release anywhere from January to early April with such a vague target.

 

And with Witcher 3 being pushed back to May now they even got more choice when to release as long as it is at least one month before TW3 (because some people will rather spend their paycheck on TW3 than PoE if they release in same month).

[archangel979]

And he did a darned good job too.

Lol. Since I didn't play the beta I cannot be 100% sure but I read enough about missing options that that is not likely. The game does not come close to complexity of NWN2, and IE games still are on whole another level.