Combat Start: Ideas to fix it and Dev polling

[tdphys]

A common complaint has been said about the fact that one cannot start combat with a large aoe, also the fact that the party can't *stealth* during combat.  I'm not sure exactly what these mean, so this thread is to hopefully clarify the technical aspect of both of these issues,  offer brainstorming Ideas for ways that can *fix*  this, possibly in the short term, maybe in the long term,  and also a philosophical discussion on how to handle combat initiation and stealth.

 

This isn't a thread about pre-buffing.  

 

Combat Initiation:

 

From what I understand:  POE has a modal state,  one for combat, the other for non-combat.   Stealth is a condition where the party moves silently together, until noticed and combat is initiated.    For enemy mobs, this is the way to get into battle formation.   For neutral mobs that don't attack on sight, you can just walk up to them,  in this case, combat mode initiation happens when  dialogue triggers it,  or the  party attacks   (and this is where I'm unsure on what happens) .

 

Question 1:

 

What happens when you try and initiate with an AOE like fireball from non-combat mode?  is the problem the combat starts immediately when starting the action,  giving a bunch of reaction time to the enemy?   Or can you just not initiate combat because it starts on an attack hitting,  and you can't actually select some modals/ spells etc to initiate combat?

 

Question 2:

 

Stealth -  in all of the previous IE engines ( I'm not sure about PT )  the rogue could invis  and enter combat to wander around in combat till he stabs someone.   This obviously doesn't happen in POE.   Some people see this as yet another way that POE doesn't deliver the IE experience.  I'm not sure I mind this aspect,  I'd suggest it is supported by D&D  5th edition rules, which has different, looser stealth rules then previous editions:

 

From the 5e players hand-book:

 

"  In Combat, most creatures stay alert for signs of danger all around, so if you come out of hiding and approach a creature, it usually sees you  "

 

In 5e, rogues get sneak attack from flanking (like POE, I think)  and from attacking while hidden. 

 

Anyhow,  the walking around while not seen gameplay was still fun, and given that it is probably to hard to put the non-combat stealth effect into the combat mode,  I'm wondering if this type of gameplay can be added in by having some kind of  invisibility magic available ( Does this exist already? )

Edited February 18, 2015 by tdphys

[IndiraLightfoot]

My suggestion is to go for a simple solution.

 

As things are now, hostiles noticing you is some form of pre-combat mode, which unfortunately still triggers the battle music. Then combat mode ensues later, at the first attack issued or something.

 

This is how I'd like to have it:

-Hostile enemy spotted equals Combat Mode.

-If your party manages to disengage from that (via stealthing or running off), Combat Mode is off again (so no pre-buffing or auras going possible.) 

 

Just like that, nothing more, nothing less.

[wanderon]

I have started combat with a fireball - the issue folks are having I guess is the spell animation appears to alert the hostiles (stealth immediately fails for the character casting or attacking?) and thus unless you can guess where the enemy will be when the spell actually hits it's a real hit or miss situation  

 

 - in my case usually more miss than hit - this however seems to be dependent on the range of the spell or attack you open with as I have opened combat with the beetles usuing a firearm from a distance and they did not react until hit.

 

attacking neutrals - (Medreth or the Nyphre party) - is pretty simple as you can set up your party as you wish - pause - give everyone orders - and unpause to begin the battle. 

 

I battles like Medreth where you want to use dialgoe to begin you can still set up your party first and pause immediately when the foes end conversation and attack and give orders etc.

 

All in all I really don't have much of an issue with this as things currently stand.

[Havelok]

I agree with "Enemy Spotted" prompting Combat Mode. I always have enemy spotted selected as on for Auto-Pause (in IE games) and it would make sense that one someone from the party detects hostiles, they would be prepared for a fight and could ambush if they wanted. 

[tdphys]

My suggestion is to go for a simple solution.

 

As things are now, hostiles noticing you is some form of pre-combat mode, which unfortunately still triggers the battle music. Then combat mode ensues later, at the first attack issued or something.

 

This is how I'd like to have it:

-Hostile enemy spotted equals Combat Mode.

-If your party manages to disengage from that (via stealthing or running off), Combat Mode is off again (so no pre-buffing or auras going possible.) 

 

Just like that, nothing more, nothing less.

 

So the problem is that "stealth mode" isn't combat mode?     Maybe enemy spotted puts the party immediately into stealth mode, giving stealthy parties the opportunity to leave?  

 

I like having your fireball alert the mobs to your presence,  just cause it makes things more challenging, and gives reaction time (dex? )  meaning in combat.   

 

Maybe a feat/talant like " readied casting/ advanced readied casting  "   could halve/ quarter the cast time for your first spell, letting some people invest in the nuke initiation like in the IE games. 

[Sensuki]

This is how I'd like to have it:

-Hostile enemy spotted equals Combat Mode.

I agree with "Enemy Spotted" prompting Combat Mode. I always have enemy spotted selected as on for Auto-Pause (in IE games) and it would make sense that one someone from the party detects hostiles, they would be prepared for a fight and could ambush if they wanted.

 

This simply isn't good enough.

 

The problem with the combat state is it trivializes stealth and it makes you "game the system" for both stealth attacks and attacking NPCs.

 

If you have a party has a Paladin with Zealous Focus, you're always best letting the enemy see you first in all encounters, so you qualify for the +6 Accuracy on your first attack. If you have a Rogue with Reckless Assault, Dirty Fighting or Deep Wounds, or a Fighter with Disciplined Barrage and Knock Down combo, you want to open combat with a character that is not one of these, so that immediately after the hit frame of their opening attack, combat will begin and the Rogue passives will activate, and the Fighter will now be able to use Disciplined Barrage to buff his Accuracy for his Knock Down attack.

 

The combat state is extremely gamey and it has a lot of problems/inconsistencies and forces you to make some retarded plays just to get the bonuses that you should IMO always be getting.

 

It is also hugely inconsistent. Some abilities that are very similar might have one that's Combat only, another that isn't, and stuff like that.

Edited February 18, 2015 by Sensuki

[Shevek]

They need to scrap the the combat only flag for everything except stuff like chanter songs (since that would let them build up spell points out of combat - or rid of it for them too but only build up points in combat). The reason for this was save file corruption right (cant remember Brennekes post on this)? Heh, cant they just cancel out all abilities when making a save? Maybe have a dialog box pop up saying "Saving cancels all active spells, modals and other beneficial effects except for rest bonuses. Are you sure?" and bam, problem solved.

Edited February 18, 2015 by Shevek

[Luckmann]

I really don't have much to add to what Sensuki said, but I'll sum it up thusly; I feel like I'm fighting the system to do completely reasonable things. Instead of doing what you'd expect to do in a given situation (when initiating combat), you end up trying to game the system, such as not actually initiating with those you'd think would be the best at initiating, and so on.

To use Sensuki's example, what you'd expect to do would be to initiate combat by jumping in and using Knockdown, but you really want Reckless Assault to be active before you Knockdown, so you won't.

You'd really want to initiate combat with that Rogue, performing a backstab, but you won't, because if you do, it won't have Reckless Assault on yet.

Once you start learning the system, PoE takes a swing at you and forces you to fight it. The mechanics are not in line with what you actually want to do, or what you'd reasonably think would happen, or how you'd think things should work. It's inconsistent, jarring and frustrating, at times.

[Sensuki]

That wouldn't be a good way of doing it. You're right about it being a programming 'shortcut' to fix various issues with combat. I believe Adam did say that they would like to look at it again after release.

 

I wrote up an issue about several passives/modals being combat only that do not need to be. Just getting rid of those would remove several of the problems.

[Shevek]

Wouldnt be great I agree but preferable to the current implementation.

[Luckmann]

That wouldn't be a good way of doing it. You're right about it being a programming 'shortcut' to fix various issues with combat. I believe Adam did say that they would like to look at it again after release.

 

I wrote up an issue about several passives/modals being combat only that do not need to be. Just getting rid of those would remove several of the problems.

 

I'd feel far better if the only things that were "Combat Only" were the things that currently need to be. It would be annoying, but understandable. But right now, it feels like there's a few things that need to be "Combat Only", and then they added a heap of others just to make it seem like a concept/development decision, like "Well, the Chanter's things need to be Combat Only, we can't work around it at the moment, so, hey, let's make these Auras Combat Only too so it seems consistent.. oh, and Wall of Flame, because hey, why the hell not, Hazard AoE is almost like prebuffing, right? Right?".

[tdphys]

 

This is how I'd like to have it:

-Hostile enemy spotted equals Combat Mode.

I agree with "Enemy Spotted" prompting Combat Mode. I always have enemy spotted selected as on for Auto-Pause (in IE games) and it would make sense that one someone from the party detects hostiles, they would be prepared for a fight and could ambush if they wanted.

 

This simply isn't good enough.

 

The problem with the combat state is it trivializes stealth and it makes you "game the system" for both stealth attacks and attacking NPCs.

 

If you have a party has a Paladin with Zealous Focus, you're always best letting the enemy see you first in all encounters, so you qualify for the +6 Accuracy on your first attack. If you have a Rogue with Reckless Assault, Dirty Fighting or Deep Wounds, or a Fighter with Disciplined Barrage and Knock Down combo, you want to open combat with a character that is not one of these, so that immediately after the hit frame of their opening attack, combat will begin and the Rogue passives will activate, and the Fighter will now be able to use Disciplined Barrage to buff his Accuracy for his Knock Down attack.

 

The combat state is extremely gamey and it has a lot of problems/inconsistencies and forces you to make some retarded plays just to get the bonuses that you should IMO always be getting.

 

It is also hugely inconsistent. Some abilities that are very similar might have one that's Combat only, another that isn't, and stuff like that.

 

 

 

This confuses me a bit.   

 

I understood that combat starts either 

 

1.  As soon as the party exits stealth  ( enemy mob )

 

2.  As soon as the party starts an allowed out of combat mode combat action ( neutral ai  )

 

So If I understand correctly: 

 

1. the paladin should be seen, you're referring to letting stealth run out so the AI sees the party

 

2.  initiating from stealth, or on neutral ai ;  you should wait for combat to start to get all the modal/knockdown abilities for the fighter and rogue, etc...  so you don't use 

some allowed combat initiation powers which would benefit from these

 

I really like the above idea of having combat start when you come within range(sight) of the AI, I'd suggest that even if you're not stealthing,  you should automatically try to, with a penalty.   Then you could choose to back off, or use all combat abilities to initiate from stealth.

 

I'm not sure about the neutral NPC's,  I don't mind a bit of nerfing to starting combat against them.

 

So the question is,  (hopefully a Dev answer? )  how hard would it be to move stealth into the combat state?

Edited February 18, 2015 by tdphys

[Orogun01]

Stealth is useless in combat and makes rogues a one use card, I rather they would give them more freedom within the battlefield to turn them into either a skirmisher or a scout. Both being good at ambushes but with the former fighting in close quarters and sowing chaos among enemies and the latter hidden from a distance taking out targets of value. With the disadvantage of being vulnerable once discovered.

[Sensuki]

snip

In my experience, if you have a Paladin in the party and you have a character that makes a sneak attack from Stealth, the Paladin will automatically cast Zealous Focus as soon as the combat state begins, but the cast animation and delay of the aura hitting the characters doesn't proc in time to catch the first attack.

 

If you're attacking a neutral NPC, you'll never get the Zealous Focus accuracy bonus on the first attack.

[Veevoir]

To borrow something from TB games - how about "start/stop combat" toggle that turns combat state on?

how terrible is this idea?

[Clean&Clear]

To borrow something from TB games - how about "start/stop combat" toggle that turns combat state on?

 

how terrible is this idea?

 

Not a bad idea, but it would allow pre-buffing (not really, but technically), so I don't think they would go with it.

[Veevoir]

 

To borrow something from TB games - how about "start/stop combat" toggle that turns combat state on?

 

how terrible is this idea?

 

Not a bad idea, but it would allow pre-buffing (not really, but technically), so I don't think they would go with it.

 

AWith the length of buffs we currently have - prebuffing would be very, very hard even if allowed before combat (so yes, only technically). best case scenario a player would get a few seconds of buffs.

 

The whole war on prebuffing is stupid, but that's just for another thread.

Edited February 19, 2015 by Veevoir

[tdphys]

I assume that if you're not stealthing,  combat starts when you come within a certain range of mobs.  Why not just do the same, even if you're under stealth, and call that the start of "Combat" rather then when you come out of stealth?  Give starting abilities a penalty to stealth, but don't require them to instantly break stealth.  You might be able to get that AOE off,  if  your wizard is stealthy enough.  And modals could be triggered without penalty.

 

How do you know you're in combat mode if you're not stealthing?  Is there an icon that pops up and says "combat mode"  or is it just the combination of music and the fact a bunch of mobs are swarming you?

Edited February 19, 2015 by tdphys

[wanderon]

 

How do you know you're in combat mode if you're not stealthing?  Is there an icon that pops up and says "combat mode"  or is it just the combination of music and the fact a bunch of mobs are swarming you?

 

You have to watch for fire in their eyes! 

[Luckmann]

 

To borrow something from TB games - how about "start/stop combat" toggle that turns combat state on?

 

how terrible is this idea?

 

Not a bad idea, but it would allow pre-buffing (not really, but technically), so I don't think they would go with it.

 

 

We need to stop treating "pre-buffing" or specifically "avoiding pre-buffing" as a serious argument in favour of the "Combat Only" mechanics.

 

Not only is pre-buffing a non-issue by itself, but in PoE, it's a literal non-issue. There are no buffs, to the best of my knowledge, that can even be considered comparable to the buffing system of the IE games. Actual, systematized, long-term Pre-buffing is not an issue in PoE, and it won't become one just because the "Combat Only" crazyness is dropped. If you buff before combat, you are expending valuable time (because buffs are short-term) and resources (limited per-day spells), a very viable, acceptable trade-off.

 

Now, there may be other reasons a "start/stop combat"-toggle might not work with the current setup (I can think of a few issues at the top of my head) but we really need to stop taking "But the pre-buffing!" serious.

[Luckmann]

I assume that if you're not stealthing,  combat starts when you come within a certain range of mobs.  Why not just do the same, even if you're under stealth, and call that the start of "Combat" rather then when you come out of stealth?  Give starting abilities a penalty to stealth, but don't require them to instantly break stealth.  You might be able to get that AOE off,  if  your wizard is stealthy enough.  And modals could be triggered without penalty.

 

How do you know you're in combat mode if you're not stealthing?  Is there an icon that pops up and says "combat mode"  or is it just the combination of music and the fact a bunch of mobs are swarming you?

 

I can see issues with working out how in-combat Stealth would work (or wouldn't, as it were). Mostly it deals with detection and how someone would enter/exit stealth during combat, and how to get the AI to properly target things if they maybe only saw one of your party members from the beginning. Things like that. The way I understand it (or rather, had it explained to me) Stealth (or rather, "Scouting") is a specific Game State that essentially switches over to another state when combat starts, forcing everyone out of Stealth.

 

So at least we know that there won't be any backstabbing enemies either, like there's been in all other games of this type. So I guess that's something.

 

And you know that you're in combat mode because everyone with a modal that's "on" immediately activates them (Paladins activate their auras, for example, because Auras are now "Combat Only", so they spend the first seconds as soon as combat starts doing the activation animation; why are they Combat Only? Because pre-buffs, apparently. Auras are Pre-Buffs, Wall of Flame is Pre-Buffs, Modals are Pre-Buffs, apparently).

 

You know that you are in combat because you can suddenly use half your abilities again.

 

That being said, noticing you're in combat will never be an issue. It means that the enemy is engaging you, there's combat music, and there's clearly enemies on the screen, etc.

[tdphys]

 

I assume that if you're not stealthing,  combat starts when you come within a certain range of mobs.  Why not just do the same, even if you're under stealth, and call that the start of "Combat" rather then when you come out of stealth?  Give starting abilities a penalty to stealth, but don't require them to instantly break stealth.  You might be able to get that AOE off,  if  your wizard is stealthy enough.  And modals could be triggered without penalty.

 

How do you know you're in combat mode if you're not stealthing?  Is there an icon that pops up and says "combat mode"  or is it just the combination of music and the fact a bunch of mobs are swarming you?

 

I can see issues with working out how in-combat Stealth would work (or wouldn't, as it were). Mostly it deals with detection and how someone would enter/exit stealth during combat, and how to get the AI to properly target things if they maybe only saw one of your party members from the beginning. Things like that. The way I understand it (or rather, had it explained to me) Stealth (or rather, "Scouting") is a specific Game State that essentially switches over to another state when combat starts, forcing everyone out of Stealth.

 

 

I was expecting stealth to stay modal, and only as  a "start" of combat, with the whole party coming out of stealth together.  Pretty much the same as it is now ( I think )  just enabling all abilities during stealth, and allowing them to be clicked without breaking stealth.  ( what do you call the time spent from a ability activation, till it actually procs?  It's not "cooldown", maybe "warmup"?)    Of course, when any ability outside of modals or insta-buffs finally procs, that should bring everyone out of stealth immediately.

Edited February 19, 2015 by tdphys

[Lephys]

The "war on pre-buffing" is overly extreme. However, it's little more preposterous than the "OMG, changing the design of buffing at ALL is a horrendous mistake and a huge problem!" sentiments.

 

There would've been nothing wrong with simply having the buffs designed such that stacking 5 of them before initiating combat isn't really actually viable (because of durations, etc.). Basically, it's a different magic system and a different world, so maybe people can't protect themselves from fire and Evil, and raise their AC, block physical damage, and boost their weapon accuracy and speed for a whole day at a time.

 

There's nothing WRONG with that, but it's not "the right way" to do buffing magic, either.

[drunetovich]

I foresee one of the most popular mods will be the one that makes all abilities available out of combat.

[Clean&Clear]

 

 

To borrow something from TB games - how about "start/stop combat" toggle that turns combat state on?

 

how terrible is this idea?

 

Not a bad idea, but it would allow pre-buffing (not really, but technically), so I don't think they would go with it.

 

AWith the length of buffs we currently have - prebuffing would be very, very hard even if allowed before combat (so yes, only technically). best case scenario a player would get a few seconds of buffs.

 

The whole war on prebuffing is stupid, but that's just for another thread.

 

 

I totally agree.

 

 

 

To borrow something from TB games - how about "start/stop combat" toggle that turns combat state on?

 

how terrible is this idea?

 

Not a bad idea, but it would allow pre-buffing (not really, but technically), so I don't think they would go with it.

 

 

We need to stop treating "pre-buffing" or specifically "avoiding pre-buffing" as a serious argument in favour of the "Combat Only" mechanics.

 

Not only is pre-buffing a non-issue by itself, but in PoE, it's a literal non-issue. There are no buffs, to the best of my knowledge, that can even be considered comparable to the buffing system of the IE games. Actual, systematized, long-term Pre-buffing is not an issue in PoE, and it won't become one just because the "Combat Only" crazyness is dropped. If you buff before combat, you are expending valuable time (because buffs are short-term) and resources (limited per-day spells), a very viable, acceptable trade-off.

 

Now, there may be other reasons a "start/stop combat"-toggle might not work with the current setup (I can think of a few issues at the top of my head) but we really need to stop taking "But the pre-buffing!" serious.

 

 

I was trying to get the devs perspective why they wouldn't implement it. No prebuffing is a design goal they set on the very beginning and mechanically they are holding to it absolutely even though it has IMO proven to be just wrong (I mean the mechanical solution). I really don't see the pros of the mechanic. I started a thread about it here: http://forums.obsidian.net/topic/70324-removal-of-combat-only-suggestions-and-solutions/

Unfortunately, it didn't evolve into a larger discussion. I still hope combat only will be removed at least in the expansion.

 

I foresee one of the most popular mods will be the one that makes all abilities available out of combat.

 

Would be quite difficult due to save/load issues I guess. But it would be really nice.

Edited February 20, 2015 by Clean&Clear