Stop Right Now Thankyou Very Much

[Lephys]

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.

It is a very important critique, from which we should take "how do we make it not create so many problems?". What's not a good critique is "obviously, it just inherently creates infinite problems."

 

Also, everything isn't just a binary switch. The "problems" it's trying to fix aren't really like "Oh noes! The game's 100% bad. But don't worry, we fixed it, so now it's 100% good!". They're just design goal issues. Or... unwanted side effects.

 

I agree that the implementation of engagement introduced more unwanted side effects. But, the whole purpose of design is to try and get rid of all of them, ideally. So, while it's currently a bit heavy-handed, I think the sheer idea of representing melee engagement is a good one. Maybe it should be something more passive, like turn-speed, or actual movement acceleration from a stand-still, etc. And/or just something akin to flanking bonuses (like in DA:I, where "flanking" is just a passive condition -- you're either attacking someone who isn't facing you, or you aren't).

 

The thing is, I don't think anyone's fabricating something that doesn't exist with the sheer concept of melee engagement. When people are attacking you and you aren't paying attention to them, they get an advantage, and it's not just because they employed a slow aura, or specifically utilized an ability to knock you down (that already knocks you down even if you ARE putting 100% of your focus on that person). Worse things happen when you dance around within melee range of someone but don't really apply any focus to that someone. And I think that, if it's possible to feasibly represent that in an effective fashion, however it's done, that's a valiant thing to try for. I don't think "Nah, let's just stay in the age of 'you get hit with fireballs and morning stars in your face, but you just keep on freely jogging and moving around and attacking whenever your next attack is up' forever!" is a very constructive attitude.

 

If engagement isn't doing that (which it isn't "effectively," I don't think), then it either needs to do that, or it needs to be scrapped. But, there is no obvious option, here, until we see that it can't do (rather than just happenstancically isn't currently doing) that.

 

Anywho, I'm just saying, there are people saying "Hey, guys, how can we improve engagement?", and there are other people acting like those people are insane. Like improving a system is some fictional thing or something. That's what I don't comprehend.

[Katarack21]

I actually like idea they used in 3.5 D&D, where they had forms of sticky melee but also the ability to build around it.

They don't have an equivalent to "Tumble" in PoE, for example. In 3.5, if you chose to do it you could build a character around a tumble score, so they basically have a high chance of avoiding any attack of opportunity and thus avoid one of the major consequences of moving in melee in D&D. Doing this would often cost you, however; if nothing else you have to devote some feats and skill points to it so you lose out on other abilities that do things like increase damage or make hitting more likely. You could build a character designed to go through the melee and attack the healer standing behind their tank, for example. It created more options in combat, with you never being positive if everything was going to say in a clump or if the enemy could move towards your backup. My parties would have lots of discussions about how to prepare, even keeping our mobile character back to meet and block equally mobile opposing forces after melee began, to protect our sorcerer or archer.

I don't see any way in PoE to build a character with a trade-off like that, so that they can move more freely around the battlefield but suffer in other areas. If that ability was in the game, I wouldn't have so many problems with melee engagement.

Edited December 13, 2014 by Katarack21

[Osvir]

I actually like idea they used in 3.5 D&D, where they had forms of sticky melee but also the ability to build around it.

 

They don't have an equivalent to "Tumble" in PoE, for example. In 3.5, if you chose to do it you could build a character around a tumble score, so they basically have a high chance of avoiding any attack of opportunity and thus avoid one of the major consequences of moving in melee in D&D. Doing this would often cost you, however; if nothing else you have to devote some feats and skill points to it so you lose out on other abilities that do things like increase damage or make hitting more likely. You could build a character designed to go through the melee and attack the healer standing behind their tank, for example. It created more options in combat, with you never being positive if everything was going to say in a clump or if the enemy could move towards your backup. My parties would have lots of discussions about how to prepare, even keeping our mobile character back to meet and block equally mobile opposing forces after melee began, to protect our sorcerer or archer.

 

I don't see any way in PoE to build a character with a trade-off like that, so that they can move more freely around the battlefield but suffer in other areas. If that ability was in the game, I wouldn't have so many problems with melee engagement.

 

False, there's actually a couple of skills, talents, attributes, abilities that aid a "Tumble" build, but I think the components may be named differently. I've seen a couple of "+15 Disengagement Defense", so you can totally build a "Tumbler" character, but it doesn't quite feel optimal in the Beta, because of bugs. My ranged characters can get disengage attacks by just moving a bit against melee enemies blocked by my melee units.

Edited December 13, 2014 by Osvir

[Katarack21]

 

I actually like idea they used in 3.5 D&D, where they had forms of sticky melee but also the ability to build around it.

 

They don't have an equivalent to "Tumble" in PoE, for example. In 3.5, if you chose to do it you could build a character around a tumble score, so they basically have a high chance of avoiding any attack of opportunity and thus avoid one of the major consequences of moving in melee in D&D. Doing this would often cost you, however; if nothing else you have to devote some feats and skill points to it so you lose out on other abilities that do things like increase damage or make hitting more likely. You could build a character designed to go through the melee and attack the healer standing behind their tank, for example. It created more options in combat, with you never being positive if everything was going to say in a clump or if the enemy could move towards your backup. My parties would have lots of discussions about how to prepare, even keeping our mobile character back to meet and block equally mobile opposing forces after melee began, to protect our sorcerer or archer.

 

I don't see any way in PoE to build a character with a trade-off like that, so that they can move more freely around the battlefield but suffer in other areas. If that ability was in the game, I wouldn't have so many problems with melee engagement.

 

False, there's actually a couple of skills, talents, attributes, abilities that aid a "Tumble" build, but I think the components may be named differently. I've seen a couple of "+15 Disengagement Defense", so you can totally build a "Tumbler" character, but it doesn't quite feel optimal in the Beta, because of bugs. My ranged characters can get disengage attacks by just moving a bit against melee enemies blocked by my melee units.

 

I may be wrong. I haven't actually played the beta, just been reading voraciously and watching videos. I haven't seen or heard anything about it until now.

 

Can somebody experiment with a build like this? Is it even possible in the beta?

[Rostere]

As I see it, any faults with engagement boils down to AI.

[ISC]

Anywho, I'm just saying, there are people saying "Hey, guys, how can we improve engagement?", and there are other people acting like those people are insane. Like improving a system is some fictional thing or something. That's what I don't comprehend.

 

 

It's not that the system can't be improved, it is that it takes more effort to improve it than to remove it, while ending up in about the same place anyway.

 

For the record, I personally think it will be fine enough anyway, I'm just trying to convey the argument which people seem to be missing when pointing out that the engagement mechanic can be improved. No one is denying that it can be improved, but some claim that it is not very meaningful.

[Osvir]

It's not that the system can't be improved, it is that it takes more effort to improve it than to remove it, while ending up in about the same place anyway.

 

For the record, I personally think it will be fine enough anyway, I'm just trying to convey the argument which people seem to be missing when pointing out that the engagement mechanic can be improved. No one is denying that it can be improved, but some claim that it is not very meaningful.

I'm no professional but pondering and wondering about this... I think that removing Engagement would take probably more effort.

 

A) Obsidian has developed the Engagement mechanic for 18-24 months, that's what's on their minds. "How to solve this or that?". Problem/Solution within the bounds of the Engagement mechanic a la "How to improve this or that?".

B) Removing Engagement will cause lots of trouble with already existant skills, abilities, talents (which would then need to be accommodated in already written code, and strings, triggers, scripts, it would all have to be re-evaluated).

C) Not that the AI is superb at the moment, but I think a Sticky Engagement has more potential for AI Behavior than "Free Movement" has. Furthermore, there already is AI for the current system, and removing Engagement would require more revisions in the code. Rather than just improving on what already exists.

D) New bugs too. Removing Engagement is pretty much: "Let's not fix the bugs in Engagement Mechanic, and let's fix the bugs in the not designed/not produced non-Engagement Mechanic".

 

I admit I might be completely wrong, and that I am no professional, but having been part of the Kickstarter project since near-start and followed each update and am interested in development/design outside of these forums, I think I've gained some insight over the some 10 years of gathered game development knowledge.

Edited December 13, 2014 by Osvir

[Shevek]

It took one of their guys 2 afternoons to fix the abuses mentioned in this thread. That tells me that making improvements to the mechanic is not especially difficult or time consuming.

 

We may be losing sight of this being beta. Stuff needing the occaisional fix is normal.

 

In any case, I hope we can find ways to offer more constructive criticism.

 

(Edited for increased positivty, hehe)

Edited December 13, 2014 by Shevek

[Cubiq]

 

 

I actually like idea they used in 3.5 D&D, where they had forms of sticky melee but also the ability to build around it.

 

They don't have an equivalent to "Tumble" in PoE, for example. In 3.5, if you chose to do it you could build a character around a tumble score, so they basically have a high chance of avoiding any attack of opportunity and thus avoid one of the major consequences of moving in melee in D&D. Doing this would often cost you, however; if nothing else you have to devote some feats and skill points to it so you lose out on other abilities that do things like increase damage or make hitting more likely. You could build a character designed to go through the melee and attack the healer standing behind their tank, for example. It created more options in combat, with you never being positive if everything was going to say in a clump or if the enemy could move towards your backup. My parties would have lots of discussions about how to prepare, even keeping our mobile character back to meet and block equally mobile opposing forces after melee began, to protect our sorcerer or archer.

 

I don't see any way in PoE to build a character with a trade-off like that, so that they can move more freely around the battlefield but suffer in other areas. If that ability was in the game, I wouldn't have so many problems with melee engagement.

 

False, there's actually a couple of skills, talents, attributes, abilities that aid a "Tumble" build, but I think the components may be named differently. I've seen a couple of "+15 Disengagement Defense", so you can totally build a "Tumbler" character, but it doesn't quite feel optimal in the Beta, because of bugs. My ranged characters can get disengage attacks by just moving a bit against melee enemies blocked by my melee units.

 

I may be wrong. I haven't actually played the beta, just been reading voraciously and watching videos. I haven't seen or heard anything about it until now.

 

Can somebody experiment with a build like this? Is it even possible in the beta?

 

Graceful retreat talent gives you +12 defense on disengagement.

The disengaging Chant from the chanter lowers the accuracy of the enemy by 20 on disengagement attacks.

 

No, you will be making a gimped character with that built.

The game is made for you not having to move at all if you position your character at the start of combat so wasting any points in to creating such a character is simply not worth it.

If you go on Hard and engage 2 beetles with your custom level 5 fighter with bbfighter plate and bbpriest shield, with Graceful Retreat and Cautious Attack talents, I can guarantee you that you will most likely need to waste a heal on your fighter if you disengage, unless they both miss.

If you are unlucky with the rolls so that all of the swings on you are hits you can be left with about 10% hp. If you get crit by a normal auto attack right before moving away there's a chance you'll be dead.

And this is only if your fighter has full health. So you will likely need to spend 2 heals to move your fighter from 2 beetles. One to top your fighter off and one to use after an unlucky roll. (you usually pull 3 beetles on Hard when there's a group of them or 4 if you screw up).

You can forget doing this with any other character that doesn't have plate armor and unless your characters are level 5 you can't get these talents.

 

If you create your fighter with those talents to also have 18 intellect for maximum deflection and bring along your Chanter to lower the disengagement roll of the enemy with their chant, and pop the Vigorous Defense for +20 defense then you can successfully make all the beetles only graze you on disengagement.

Versus your 135 deflection (assuming you aren't flanked) the chance of graze against you are:

Adra beettle: 20%

Stone beetle 10%

Wood beetle 3%

The rest of the attacks will be misses.

 

On a side note:

These are considered trash mobs, i have no idea how effective this is versus bosses.

The Adra beetle can graze you for 22 damage.

The wood beetle can also do around 20 damage if he manages to graze you with poison.

So there's still a chance you'll get killed on the next 2-3 attacks when they catch up so again it's still better to fully heal your tank before disengaging

 

On the other side you have cheese spells like Withdraw, so that if one of the enemy does run/teleport past your front line, you just use that spell and save yourself 1-2 heals and a CC (to actually disengage your back character as well). Or you just dps the enemy down, which works most of the time.

 

I've had less time to experiment disengaging back line character from weaker enemies, (like spiders) so i don't know if it's really worth it, but you need a free offtank to pick them up if you do, so it's easier for me to just heal, and dps them down.

 

From my experience disengaging is always a last resort and building your characters for that isn't worth it and it works even less on Path of the damned.

Edited December 13, 2014 by Cubiq

[Osvir]

Graceful retreat talent gives you +12 defense on disengagement.

The disengaging Chant from the chanter lowers the accuracy of the enemy by 20 on disengagement attacks.

 

No, you will be making a gimped character with that built.

The game is made for you not having to move at all if you position your character at the start of combat so wasting any points in to creating such a character is simply not worth it.

Paladin also has a disengagement, Fighter has knockdown, Rogue has Escape, Barbarian has Wild Sprint (which is riskful and hurtful if you use to move away from engagement). Wizard can teleport/swap positions with a friendly target.

 

Regardless, I stopped at your post here for a reason: The game is made for you to play like you want to play. I can make a party and build my strategy around disengagement and mobility, with lesser tanks and more damage, or with debuffs/buffs to make a weak un-tanky character into a tanky character (relatively speaking, if I do -10 on one enemies accuracy, and +10 deflection on my character or whatnot).

 

However, you can choose to position yourself at start of combat and play more Sticky, secure, and probably more safe/less risk without worrying about disengagement as much.

 

My point? You'll waste points if that's what you feel you are doing. Parallely, if I want to build a Ranged Fighter (which is far from optimal on any level), I can do so and I can put points into building a Ranged Fighter, without wasting any points towards doing it. However, if I want a Ranged Fighter, but I put all points into Melee Engagement, then I am wasting points (because I'm not building like I want to build).

 

EDIT: There's tons of material, resources, tools, for you, as the Player, to pick and choose from the Strategy Basket to create your party. Of course, some strategies will be better than others at general playthroughs (Good at everything) and niche playthroughs (Good at specific playstyle).

Edited December 13, 2014 by Osvir

[Katarack21]

Right, but is it possible to pick ONE character, and over time build that character into a tactical movement character--so that I can move that character around the battlefield with relative freedom, without dying or suffering the major disengagement drawbacks, at the cost of not being particularly damaging/accurate/whatever? If this ability was in the game, it would drastically increase the tactical capabilities, as you would have to adapt to occasional movement-capable enemies and you yourself would have to decide how best to use the character you designed for mobility, if you chose to do so. If you didn't, of course, such opposing characters could be taken care off with spells, off-tanks, knock down and move, etc.

It's just a choice, an option for building a character, that I feel allows some leniency in the engagement system without completely undoing it and also increases tactical and strategic options.

[Shevek]

Look up the Monk, Katarack21.

[Osvir]

Right, but is it possible to pick ONE character, and over time build that character into a tactical movement character--so that I can move that character around the battlefield with relative freedom, without dying or suffering the major disengagement drawbacks, at the cost of not being particularly damaging/accurate/whatever?

Sure, I suppose, by picking the options/skills/talents/abilities that aid dodging as you level up you'll become more and more dodgy. Max out Intelligence for Deflection, and I think Constitution as well for the least risk if you get hit.

 

Class & Race would be relevant as well, if you want to optimize it.

 

Uhm so let's see... (copy+pasted from Official Wiki, // are comments)

 

RACE

 

Aumaua

- Coastal Aumaua - Towering Physique: Coastal Aumaua gain bonuses to defend against Prone and Stun effects.

- Island Aumaua - Long Stride: Island Aumaua move 5% faster in combat.

 

// The Coastal seems promising, as you'd be able to disengage better without getting knocked down or stunned. Island too, if you want a faster character that you can move around and get to places with, and then you'll add talents/abilities as you level up.

 

Dwarf

- Boreal Dwarf - Hunter's Instincts - Boreal Dwarves gain +15 accuracy against any creature of the Wilder or Primordial types.

- Mountain Dwarf - Hale and Hardy - Mountain Dwarves have a bonus to defend against Poison and Disease attacks.

 

// Not really optimal.

 

Elf

- Pale Elf - Elemental Endurance: The Damage Thresholds for all Pale Elves are increased by 20% for all Burn and Freeze damage.

- Wood Elf - Distant Advantage: Against any enemy that is more than 4m away, Wood Elves gain bonuses to Accuracy, Deflection, and Reflexes.

 

// The Wood Elf seems promising, hit and run. Attack, disengage, and 4m away you get better deflection.. but then again, might not be very optimal still (as it's mostly good vs Ranged attacks I presume).

 

Godlike

- Death's Usher (Death godlike) – increases their damage against enemies with a low percentage of remaining Stamina.

- Wellspring of Life(Nature Godlike) – All Stamina recovery that occurs over time, happens 25% faster for Nature Godlike.

- Battle-Forged(Fire Godlike) – When reduced below 50% Stamina Fire godlike glow like metall in a forge and have higher damage Threshold.

- Silver Tide(Moon Godlike) – Every Encounter when reduced below 75%, 50%, or 25% Stamina moon Godlike generate waves of healing moonlight that heals Stamina to them and their allies.

 

// A Nature Godlike Fighter (With Constant Recovery) could disengage, take a hit or two, and recover a lot, and then head straight back in. The Fire Godlike, if disengaging and below 50%, gains higher damage threshold, and could function in the strategy, and the Moon Godlike could disengage, and if hit, it'll heal everyone else whilst doing it.

 

Human

- Fighting Spirit: Once per encounter, 5 seconds after being reduced below 50% Stamina, Folk temporarily gain bonuses to Accuracy and damage.

 

// Not optimal.

 

Orlan

- Hearth Orlan - Minor Threat: When attacking any target that is also being targeted by a teammate, Hearth Orlan convert some of their Hits into Crits.

- Wild Orlan - Defiant Resolve: After being subjected to a Will attack, Wild Orlan temporarily gain a bonus to all defenses.

 

// Not optimal, or... maybe the Wild Orlan...?

 

-------------------------------------------------------

 

Most optimal would probably be a Nature Godlike, Moon Godlike, or Coastal Aumaua.

 

-------------------------------------------------------

 

CLASS

// Going to run through these quickly without much comment.

 

- Barbarian: No //A Barbarian benefits most from stationary attacks against mobs.

- Chanter: No //A Melee Chanter that is in need of escape, but other than that, it wouldn't be particularly useful. 

- Cipher: No

- Druid: No

- Fighter: Yes //Duh

- Monk: Yes //Disengage into potential Wounds into counter-attack/counter-engage

- Paladin: Yes

- Priest: No

- Ranger: No/Yes //No as a ranged Ranger, Yes as a melee Ranger+Animal Companion benefits

- Rogue: Yes //Duh

- Wizard: No

 

-------------------------------------------------------

 

These are simply thoughts on what would be most optimal as a starting choice, but I think that with Talents picks and specific Spell/Ability picks for a dodgy build could be viable with all of them.

 

-------------------------------------------------------

 

TALENTS

// Only picking those that are "ALL". You can follow the link to check it out further.

 

- Cautious Attack [All] The character attacks from a defensive posture, taking care to never expose vulnerable openings. From this stance, characters receive a penalty to Speed (x0.8 ) but increase their Deflection (+15).

 

- Weapon and Shield Style [All] Improve your mastery of shields. Increases equipped shield's deflection bonus by +10 and gives a reflex bonus equal to your shield's deflection bonus.

// Two-Handed Weapon Style also gives deflection, but I didn't include it.

 

- Superior Deflection [All] Increases the character's Deflection defense.

 

- Wild Running [] These Glanfathan techniques help you resist immobilization and dodge disengagement attacks.

 

 // Wild Running might be Quest/Trained by NPC, because it doesn't have "All" or "Class" tied to it. Or it might be a scrapped old talent.

 

- Graceful Retreat [All] Grants a bonus to all defenses against Disengagement Attacks.

 

- Snake's Reflexes [All] Increases the character's Reflex defense by +10.

 

-------------------------------------------------------

 

Be sure to check the "Talents" link (to the Official Wiki). Each Class has options to raise their Deflection values.

 

-------------------------------------------------------

 

ATTRIBUTES

 

- Deflection (DEF): Represents a character's ability to deflect direct melee and ranged attacks, and can be modified by a shield. It is mostly determined by level and class and is not influenced by any attribute.

- Reflex (REF): Represents a character's ability to dodge area of effect attacks. It is based on Dexterity and Perception.

 

// Dexterity, Perception and Intelligence would be the most important statistics for a dodgy character. I think the Wiki needs updating because "Intellect" does improve Deflection in the current build.

Edited December 13, 2014 by Osvir

[Cubiq]

Paladin also has a disengagement

The Paladin aura doesn't work this version and i have no idea if it stacks with the talent or not.

 

Fighter has knockdown

Not if you have Cautious Attack and Vigorous Defense already.

And you do need to actually have high accuracy for that ability to be semi reliable.

 

Rogue has Escape

But this isn't really mobility, it's an escape and it works 1 time, for 1 class.

Which also proves my point that using this is better than suffering a disengagement attack so i don't really get why these are mentioned.

 

Wild Sprint

 

You don't want to do that to disengage. The way disengagement works now is you will be able to get away every time so you don't need to sacrifice -20 deflection to do it.

 

There's tons of material, resources, tools, for you, as the Player, to pick and choose from the Strategy Basket to create your party. Of course, some strategies will be better than others at general playthroughs (Good at everything) and niche playthroughs (Good at specific playstyle).

 

No playing a strategy which you need to sacrifice classes, chants, talents and auras to actually work and isn't up to pair with the rest is not good.

There may be some people that will attempt to play this way but it's like calling a "no healing" playthrough a strategy.

It's not really.

Also it requires levels before you can actually attempt to play it, which makes it even more questionable.

Edited December 13, 2014 by Cubiq

[Cubiq]

Right, but is it possible to pick ONE character, and over time build that character into a tactical movement character--so that I can move that character around the battlefield with relative freedom, without dying or suffering the major disengagement drawbacks, at the cost of not being particularly damaging/accurate/whatever?

 

On Hard no.

Even with all the talents/abilities you will be able to disengage once or twice before needing a heal.

On easy maybe

I have no idea how it's on normal.

Edited December 13, 2014 by Cubiq

[Osvir]

Paladin also has a disengagement

The Paladin aura doesn't work this version and i have no idea if it stacks with the talent or not.

 

I should've clarified, the Paladin has a spell/ability (IIRC the Shieldbearer) that they can use on an ally character/friendly target that allows them to escape (not on him/herself though).

 

@Escape: Mobile, it serves the purpose of re-positioning, a.k.a. moving around.

 

@Wild Sprint: Yep, it's not the best, but it does the job of breaking engagement in a pinch.

 

@Not good strategy: *shrug* like I said, it is up to you to build that way or not. That does not mean that it is a non-existant strategy. You have 6 characters in your party to build. You don't have to build all 6 of them to be "dodgy". And like I said, it might not be the "best" strategy, but it's still a "strategy". A "No Healing" playthrough is not a strategy, but you can build a strategy around "No Healing".

 

Strategy:

b :  the art of devising or employing plans or stratagems toward a goal

 

But of course, "Strategy" is only half the joy. You'll need to deploy a different "Tactic" for different Strategies. Positioning in combat in a "No Healing" playthrough would be a lot different than in a "Standard" playthrough.

 

I use strategy and tactics differently on Path of the Damned, than what I do on Easy, for instance.

Edited December 13, 2014 by Osvir

[Hormalakh]

It took one of their guys 2 afternoons to fix the abuses mentioned in this thread. That tells me that making improvements to the mechanic is not especially difficult or time consuming.

Are you sure they're "fixed?" Because we haven't been really testing them "out in the wild" yet.

 

So here's my concession. Playing BG1 now and I'll have to say that it's extremely annoying when the AI runs away or tries to kite (which it does quite often because everything is ranged) and the lack of many stuns or abilities to hold them in place. Many times hold person or other spells are saved against.

 

Then again I'm playing Strategems, so it's possible that the initial AI didn't know to kite. And it showcases how stun abilities are extremely needed. I guess engagement is supposed to solve this, but then again, it was also changed to not be able to re-engage for the next 30 seconds. Which solves one problem. But what if I need to hold a person down again? Or what if the computer uses my engagement "ability" on an enemy which didn't need it? Now when I want to hold down the next enemy, I really can't (and have to chase them) for the next 30 seconds.

 

I would argue for just more active stuns/holds abilities than a passive engagement mechanic. It's the same deal really, but I get to choose who gets stunned/engaged and who doesn't.

 

Actually, why not make "engage" an active ability that you have to trigger? I don't have an issue with "engage" being something that my player or the computer has to use, but - especially now that it has a cooldown - let me choose who to use it on and who not to. I need it against ranged fools, not melee xaurips. So let me choose when to enable it so that I can be more tactical with my engagement. And let the computer do the same thing.

Edited December 14, 2014 by Hormalakh

[archangel979]

Base AI in Bg1 does not kite or it does so very rarely. BG1EE AI also does not kite.

[Lord Wafflebum]

Gamers invented kiting when Baldur's Gate came out.

[anameforobsidian]

BG1 kites plenty.  Try having a hasted character go crazy / lose morale.  If they're strong enough, it takes forever to take em down with bows.

[archangel979]

BG1 kites plenty.  Try having a hasted character go crazy / lose morale.  If they're strong enough, it takes forever to take em down with bows.

That is not kiting lol, that is just an enemy running away scared.

[Captain Shrek]

Daily reminder: There is nothing wrong with kiting whatsoever. 

[Elerond]

Daily reminder: There is nothing wrong with kiting whatsoever. 

 

I strongly disagree, because kiting is silly tactic that works only because AI programming is poor. Which of course don't mean that players should not use it in their tactics repertory if it works in the game, but if it works it is mostly because developers didn't do perfect job. 

[Captain Shrek]

 

Daily reminder: There is nothing wrong with kiting whatsoever. 

 

I strongly disagree, because kiting is silly tactic that works only because AI programming is poor. Which of course don't mean that players should not use it in their tactics repertory if it works in the game, but if it works it is mostly because developers didn't do perfect job. 

 

 

Well, you are wrong then. Kiting does not work because AI is bad. Kiting works because it is a good tactic. What AI fails at is to respond to it. In fact, I would ENCOURAGE kiting by adding special talents and skills (tumble). By default, Kiting should have penalties i.e. moving and hitting gives you a penalty to attack roll etc. ,

[Sensuki]