Stop Right Now Thankyou Very Much

[constantine]

The archer and the bear example got me thinking..

 

 

If you watch game-play vids from the upcoming Torment:Tides of Numenera game, characters move slower when they get their first move command until they reach their 'full-speed'. This emulates real world movement, like you can't kite a bear in real life as you would stop to shoot and then move slower when you start moving again. Or in a melee situation, your opponent *will* get a free atk when you turn back and start moving away from them.

 

I don't know if that reduction in mv speed is there just for aesthetics in Torment, but it looks like if it was to be modified to fit in Pillars (and also if turning your character also had a time cost) all the kiting problems of the IE games lineage would be solved, and as an added benefit, combat would feel more realistic.

 

No complex mechanic like engagement would be needed.

[Sensuki]

Torment has reduced starting and stopping movement speed because the lead animator wanted to try a more simulationist animation style. That's Torment tech, and it's also not Infinity Engine style - so no, not gonna happen.

Edited December 12, 2014 by Sensuki

[constantine]

Torment has reduced starting and stopping movement speed because the lead animator wanted to try a more simulationist animation style. That's Torment tech, and it's also not Infinity Engine style - so no, not gonna happen.

No, it's not. But it would be better than engagement if it did and IMO it would be an evolution to the IE style. Evolution is good. (IMO)

Edited December 12, 2014 by constantine

[archangel979]

And thank you archangel for making my point, now with a perfect example added to it.

 

See what happens if one tries to adjust some of those exploitable mechanics?

A better attempt 3/10. I am sure you can try even better? Edited December 12, 2014 by archangel979

[Hassat Hunter]

And there it is...

"We want an IE-game but without the issues it had"

*fix issue*

"No, you can't do that, it wasn't in the IE-games"

 

Nice Catch-22 for OE.

 

How is that an exploit? Is something that remotely has anything to do with the player putting 2 and 2 together and getting an advantage for something an exploit to you?

 

*calls something an exploit*

*expects me to explain the exploit*

What?

I don't even know what the hell you exploited... just that you freely admitted that you exploited that battle was what I was after... and that was what this thread's all about, no?

[Sensuki]

And there it is...

"We want an IE-game but without the issues it had"

*fix issue*

"No, you can't do that, it wasn't in the IE-games"

 

Nice Catch-22 for OE.

Evidence that you clearly didn't read the OP. They didn't fix the issue AND they created new ones.

 

*calls something an exploit*

*expects me to explain the exploit*

What?

I don't even know what the hell you exploited... just that you freely admitted that you exploited that battle was what I was after... and that was what this thread's all about, no?

Also evidence of not reading the OP.

 

And to that I say - **** you, ****poster.

[Sedrefilos]

 

Torment has reduced starting and stopping movement speed because the lead animator wanted to try a more simulationist animation style. That's Torment tech, and it's also not Infinity Engine style - so no, not gonna happen.

No, it's not. But it would be better than engagement if it did and IMO it would be an evolution to the IE style. Evolution is good. (IMO)

 

Careful what you state as evolution in these forums

 

I liked your proposition btw

[Sensuki]

No, it's not. But it would be better than engagement if it did and IMO it would be an evolution to the IE style. Evolution is good. (IMO)

I think flat abstracted movement speed much better suits Pillars of Eternity. TBH I'd prefer a walking animation & speed over running too (but yeah, not happening).

Edited December 12, 2014 by Sensuki

[archangel979]

And there it is...

"We want an IE-game but without the issues it had"

*fix issue*

"No, you can't do that, it wasn't in the IE-games"

 

Nice Catch-22 for OE.

#1 Who defines what is an exploit and what isn't?

#2 Main arguments for keeping Combat XP were not because "IE games had it" . If you forgot them, go read up on multiple topics.

#3 stop trolling, you are bad at it

[Sensuki]

Equipping items for bonuses is apparently exploitation.

[lordkim]

"And to that I say - **** you, ****poster."

 

 

 

 

Wooow, thats mature..................... Christ....

 

 

Edited December 12, 2014 by lordkim

[Hassat Hunter]

Flames going high, but I don't have time now to reply to all of it.

 

Lastly, I have *no idea* what you defined as exploit. You just said you exploited the fight. Making my point that with or without engagement you would exploit mechanics. And that the IE-mechanics obviously weren't infallible aswell since you could exploit it, but now blame Obsidian for the same in an unfinished game even.

It's rather funny I apparently now need to explain what exploit you used... as I have no clue what it is. Everyone's pulling stuff in now that I apparently called exploit but the "I love that exploit" were it was actually aimed on.

 

Don't hate me for actually reading what you write.

 

EDIT:

@ Archangel; Don't really want to fight more about the XP system. About a dozen threads are on it, all is said, and I know your side is a big giant wall where it's no point talking to, so why should we waste time on that.

And yes, I read them... if you would have you'd known I have participated in most most valiantly...

 

Still, it's a valid question; "what is called an exploit" and obviously many people disagree with Obsidian's definition of it (like restspam) and then go in arms to get it back the way it was. Since most really don't need their IE-issues fixed... apparently.

Edited December 12, 2014 by Hassat Hunter

[archangel979]

Flames going high, but I don't have time now to reply to all of it.

 

Lastly, I have *no idea* what you defined as exploit. You just said you exploited the fight. Making my point that with or without engagement you would exploit mechanics. And that the IE-mechanics obviously weren't infallible aswell since you could exploit it, but now blame Obsidian for the same in an unfinished game even.

It's rather funny I apparently now need to explain what exploit you used... as I have no clue what it is. Everyone's pulling stuff in now that I apparently called exploit but the "I love that exploit" were it was actually aimed on.

 

Don't hate me for actually reading what you write.

No, your reading is really bad. I am talking about combat XP only. You are not sure who you are talking to or what you are talking about it seems.

 

As for calling you a bad troll, I take that back. Since you managed to get Sensuki to flame you, I guess you are a good troll 8/10. For more you need to get more people to flame you.

[Osvir]

Still, it's a valid question; "what is called an exploit" and obviously many people disagree with Obsidian's definition of it (like restspam) and then go in arms to get it back the way it was. Since most really don't need their IE-issues fixed... apparently.

The thing I have seen/heard about that is most likely an exploit is:

- Disengagement Attacks, tricking the AI to move in and out of disengagement, without taking a single point of damage. You're basically meta-gaming and abusing a faulty AI or code-string which allows you to be "God Mode" and defeat enemies with little risk whatsoever.

 

This is an exploit, found by Sensuki, and I think Obsidian is working on dealing with it to be less OP.

[Sensuki]

You just said you exploited the fight. Making my point that with or without engagement you would exploit mechanics.

Nope. I'm doing testing. In the Infinity Engine games I do not rest spam, I don't spam web and cloudkill combos. If you want to watch how I play the Infinity Engine games, I have a Let's Play of Icewind Dale right here - https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLIRfCmyR7ijJU11xQVn2SXIwmeuajTkom (which of course, you probably don't)

 

I power game, but I play fairly.

 

And that the IE-mechanics obviously weren't infallible as well since you could exploit it, but now blame Obsidian for the same in an unfinished game even.

Nope. That's not what I did. That's just what you're saying I did.

 

It's rather funny I apparently now need to explain what exploit you used... as I have no clue what it is. Everyone's pulling stuff in now that I apparently called exploit but the "I love that exploit" were it was actually aimed on.

 

Don't hate me for actually reading what you write.

You didn't read what I wrote. I was asking you to explain exactly what I exploited in my BG1 example - not Pillars of Eternity. That's you not reading posts properly - and I'm not the only one in this thread that is calling you out for it.

Edited December 12, 2014 by Sensuki

[Hassat Hunter]

Dude, how the hell can *I* know what exploit you used. I'm not you, I can't watch you game... all I can see is "I love that exploit"...

I doubt you called it that if the devs intend it. Stop asking me to explain your actions, you should know them better than I do.

 

@ Osvir; Yes, and we all want that fixed, but this thread is

"I cast cloudkill ofscreen and all enemies died without responding"

>

"Obviously we need to remove cloudkill from the game"

[Sensuki]

Oh right, you're referring to the Tagousz Khosann exploit. What you do is you go to the bandit camp as a recruit where you have to fight Tazok to prove your worth, you use Algernon's Cloak or a Dire Charm scroll to charm Tagousz Khosann and get him to kill Tazok off screen. Tazok dies, and does not appear in the final battle at the end of the game.

 

It is an exploit, but I like it because I think it's cool that you can change the story a little bit by doing that. It's a good example of the player being creative to create a story through the game mechanics. I can't recall if Tazok has any good items on him or not, I think he might have a Gauntlet of Weapon Focus or something.

 

I don't think it has a huge impact on the game, because you only have to kill Sarevok to win the game, you can completely ignore Tazok in the final battle anyway.

Edited December 12, 2014 by Sensuki

[GreyFox]

 Why would anyone want to defend this ****ty mechanic?

 

Dunno but I don't like it either...I'll play with a mod that removes it if they leave it in and I'll be fine to deal with any glitches that come from it.

 

Looks like they removed the paused recovery time while moving which is a great thing.

[YunikoYokai5]

There is so much hate in thread. 

 

From what I can understand, there are roughly 3 corners to this triangle: Those for, those against and those in the middle. Those for may like it because you need to be a little more tactical (eg, having a second character knock down a foe locked with another character to they can escape without being injured further). Those against are saying it is against free movement. Those in the middle, such as myself, neither like or hate the feature and may want to suggest either alternatives or food for thought (such as constantine). I agree with everything but I occupy the middle since I don't like how it restricts free movement however, I can also see some potential with some serious tweeking to add a little more tactical possibilities. 

 

Also, can I just say thank you to Sensuki for testing this game so rigorously. You've probably found more bugs than most of us combined. However, I do wish to point something out:

 

And I didn't pay for a game with bad combat.

 

This is the danger to kickstarter projects (or buying any game that isn't complete). You have no idea what you are getting in the end. One famous Youtuber, TotalBiscuit, does talk about kickstarting in his Kickstarter vs Pre-order video and says you should only kickstart if you have disposable income and if you do, why not use your money on something that is actually complete and you know it is good/what the mechanics are rather than something that the marketing material may be over embellishing and is not necessarily representative of the product you eventually get? There is always a danger that you are throwing money away on something you may or may not enjoy 2 or so years down the line. Just trying to play devil's advocate here, sorry.

Edited December 12, 2014 by YunikoYokai5

[ISC]

Those for may like it because you need to be a little more tactical (eg, having a second character knock down a foe locked with another character to they can escape without being injured further). Those against are saying it is against free movement. Those in the middle, such as myself, neither like or hate the feature and may want to suggest either alternatives or food for thought (such as constantine).

 

It seems to escape the discussion all the time, but the crowd against engagement points out that it creates more problems than it solves (if any), which is an important critique imo. 

[YunikoYokai5]

 

Those for may like it because you need to be a little more tactical (eg, having a second character knock down a foe locked with another character to they can escape without being injured further). Those against are saying it is against free movement. Those in the middle, such as myself, neither like or hate the feature and may want to suggest either alternatives or food for thought (such as constantine).

 

It seems to escape the discussion all the time, but the crowd against engagement points out that it creates more problems than it solves (if any), which is an important critique imo. 

 

 

Of course, I have no doubt that many points are missed. I'll admit I've severely skim read this entire thread (14 pages of people talking in circles...) and I don't completely understand engagement other than you get damaged when you try to move away from an enemy and the AI fixates itself onto a single target so you could run circles and let archers and mages take care of the enemy while he does nothing. There are far more problems than this, I realise, but there is simply too much to read and there is far too much...bias and/or passion for people's corners (For or Against) it is difficult to gauge the pros and cons for the entire thing .

Edited December 12, 2014 by YunikoYokai5

[archangel979]

Talking in circles is what we specialized in here my dear lady

The wait until the release is long and needs to be filled with circles.

Edited December 12, 2014 by archangel979

[Hormalakh]

 

Those for may like it because you need to be a little more tactical (eg, having a second character knock down a foe locked with another character to they can escape without being injured further). Those against are saying it is against free movement. Those in the middle, such as myself, neither like or hate the feature and may want to suggest either alternatives or food for thought (such as constantine).

 

It seems to escape the discussion all the time, but the crowd against engagement points out that it creates more problems than it solves (if any), which is an important critique imo. 

 

 

Right. And not only that, but that there are other solutions to this problem which really preclude Obsidian from having to recreate the wheel. Some of these solutions are more elegant because they are made for real-time games with real-time mechanics in mind (DoTA's turn rate for example).

 

1- Assertion: Engagement is messed up in that it's less tactical.

2- Assertion: Engagement creates more problems than it solves.

3- Assertion: Engagement is a new solution to an age-old problem,.

4- Assertion: Other solutions are just as valid as engagement.

4a - Assertion: Some might be more elegant and tactical than engagement.

5- Conclusion: If there are other solutions then Obsidian should (have?) looked at those solutions.

 

Though, it seems that, at this point, engagement is here to stay and that only minor/major adjustments can be made.

 

I would ask the developers to keep a close eye on this mechanic and consider if it should stay in PoE2. Or even the expansion.

[Katarack21]

I would ask the developers to keep a close eye on this mechanic and consider if it should stay in PoE2. Or even the expansion.

 

Best suggestion I've seen all day.

[Katarack21]

Still, it's a valid question; "what is called an exploit" and obviously many people disagree with Obsidian's definition of it (like restspam)

Excellent point. I'll freely admit, I rest spammed. Constantly, all the time. I never considered it exploiting, never considered it cheating. It was simply the manner in which I played the game. I have beaten it with out rest spamming, since then, but originally I rest spammed by way through it without thinking about it.