So that was terrible...

[Katarack21]

During my fourth battle in the expansion, the damn thing lasted over 15 minutes because the enemies kept disengaging from my two fighters and straight-up rushing my main character (a cipher). Six times this happened. In a row. I counted. I'd manuever my fighters back over, engage the enemy, move my cipher across the entire battlefield--and three seconds later "Disengagmenet!" and they literally run across the entire battlefield ignoring everybody else just to melee attack my cipher again.

Is this expected behavior? New AI for the expansion? Or is my luck just that terrible?

[View619]

Well, it seems like the AI is working properly now! Do your fighters do any form of damage when landing disengagement strikes or are they fully defensive with weak damage output? If they have bad accuracy and do low damage overall, you should reconsider their set-up.

Edited August 25, 2015 by View619

[Gizmo]

So long as they get their parting shot from the fighter ~for disengaging, I don't see what the problem is.

[Springwight]

If the end result is something that harms you, rather than benefits you, those enemies were acting correctly. If it's too difficult, you should lower the difficulty.

 

That said, I'll probably have to change my strategy as well now  

[View619]

R.I.P. Tank & Spank?!

[Springwight]

R.I.P. Tank & Spank?!

I kind of hope so. It was getting too repetitive. On the other hand, it's a bit unfair to set some classes up for tanking and then make the whole thing kind'a useless.

[Karkarov]

Yeah this sort of sounds... good?  The game needed many combat tweaks it was far too easy especially late game.

[Cottonmouth]

Sounds annoying. I know everyone's constantly complaining how easy the game is with their TOI POTD solo deliberately gimped character is and ideally you'd want the AI to be using expert cheese tactics like the human players themselves, but there is a trade off here.

I'm not keen on every fight requiring a huge amount of micromanagement because the AI is now playing like humans.

Edited August 25, 2015 by Cottonmouth

[MunoValente]

Sounds like great news if it's actually working like this.

[Bill Gates' Son]

If this is true, then awesome.  The stale tank and spank was one of the worst things about the battle system pre patch 2.0

[Katarack21]

It's not. It's terrible news. What's the point of having a combat-sticky engagement mechanic if it's just ignored by the enemies? The whole purpose of "engagement", from what I understood, was to avoid the BG scenario where your ranged squishies are just constantly rushed. Like in actual D&D, where there are limitations on combat movement and a tank character can actually hold enemies and protect ranged characters.

This is exactly the worse aspect of BG combat--the total inability for a tank to tank. It does seem to be a regular part of combat in the expansion and it's ****ing ****. I don't want to have to drag my goddamn fighters across the battle field five goddamn times while constantly re-positioning my main character to avoid instantaneous melee death *EVERY GODDAMN BATTLE*. My tanks are built defensive, with ****ing multiple-engagement talents and deflection and ****, to ****ing tank--to hold multiple enemies on them. Literally my entire party is built around the simple concept of holding enemies on my tanks and dealing damage with my damage dealers. Every item I have, every talent I took, every spell I know--it's all built around that one simple strategy.

If they're just going to completely ignore engagement and run off after my casters every. single. time. (as they have been doing) then this entire expansion will be nothing but a constant micromanagement slag of chasing characters around a battlefield. How fun. Yay.

[Ink Blot]

If they're just going to completely ignore engagement and run off after my casters every. single. time. (as they have been doing) then this entire expansion will be nothing but a constant micromanagement slag of chasing characters around a battlefield. How fun. Yay.

So this makes me wonder about engagement from the other angle: are you able to disengage as easily as the mobs do? If so, I guess we have the return of kiting. If not, then... WTF, huh?

[evilcat]

So Con 3 Naked Cipher is no longer easy win?

 

Uninstal, refund!

[View619]

It's not. It's terrible news. What's the point of having a combat-sticky engagement mechanic if it's just ignored by the enemies? The whole purpose of "engagement", from what I understood, was to avoid the BG scenario where your ranged squishies are just constantly rushed. Like in actual D&D, where there are limitations on combat movement and a tank character can actually hold enemies and protect ranged characters.

 

This is exactly the worse aspect of BG combat--the total inability for a tank to tank. It does seem to be a regular part of combat in the expansion and it's ****ing ****. I don't want to have to drag my goddamn fighters across the battle field five goddamn times while constantly re-positioning my main character to avoid instantaneous melee death *EVERY GODDAMN BATTLE*. My tanks are built defensive, with ****ing multiple-engagement talents and deflection and ****, to ****ing tank--to hold multiple enemies on them. Literally my entire party is built around the simple concept of holding enemies on my tanks and dealing damage with my damage dealers. Every item I have, every talent I took, every spell I know--it's all built around that one simple strategy.

 

If they're just going to completely ignore engagement and run off after my casters every. single. time. (as they have been doing) then this entire expansion will be nothing but a constant micromanagement slag of chasing characters around a battlefield. How fun. Yay.

 

The point of engagement is to slow-down and punish units for mindlessly disengaging, which leads to scenarios where melee units are less willing to just rush the back-line. If the enemy units are completely ignoring your low accuracy, low damage tanks because your disengagement attacks are a joke then Obsidian has done an amazing job on the combat AI.

 

Try changing your front-line setup so your disengagement attacks mean something. But, it does seem like the death of Tank & Spank based on your post. Good news!

Edited August 25, 2015 by View619

[Skie Nightfall]

It's not. It's terrible news. What's the point of having a combat-sticky engagement mechanic if it's just ignored by the enemies? The whole purpose of "engagement", from what I understood, was to avoid the BG scenario where your ranged squishies are just constantly rushed. Like in actual D&D, where there are limitations on combat movement and a tank character can actually hold enemies and protect ranged characters.

 

This is exactly the worse aspect of BG combat--the total inability for a tank to tank. It does seem to be a regular part of combat in the expansion and it's ****ing ****. I don't want to have to drag my goddamn fighters across the battle field five goddamn times while constantly re-positioning my main character to avoid instantaneous melee death *EVERY GODDAMN BATTLE*. My tanks are built defensive, with ****ing multiple-engagement talents and deflection and ****, to ****ing tank--to hold multiple enemies on them. Literally my entire party is built around the simple concept of holding enemies on my tanks and dealing damage with my damage dealers. Every item I have, every talent I took, every spell I know--it's all built around that one simple strategy.

 

If they're just going to completely ignore engagement and run off after my casters every. single. time. (as they have been doing) then this entire expansion will be nothing but a constant micromanagement slag of chasing characters around a battlefield. How fun. Yay.

 

Wow. First time I see a post of someone who understands BG combat wasn't perfect, and that the engagement idea is there for a reason. Finally.

The things I suffered in the beta forums

 

I'm guessing some more balancing is needed. Obviously the fighter can't have high deflection + high accuracy + extra engagements + high damage. So saying it's the op's problem if his/her fighter doesn't punish disengagement is kinda silly.

[Katarack21]

So Con 3 Naked Cipher is no longer easy win?

 

Uninstal, refund!

 

I do not run a Con 3 Naked Cipher. My Con is 10. What I do have is a ranged spell damage-focused Cipher. My main char is not in any way meant for melee; there is no way for me to survive for any length of time with two fighters or barbarians meleeing with me. My 65 deflection and 123 endurance simply will not take it.

[View619]

Quick reply, I'm not telling the OP to Learn-2-Play. I'm saying that he should try another front-line configuration and see if the AI acts in the same way. Maybe a calculation is being made regarding his damage potential with disengagement attacks and the enemies are disengaging based on that.

Edited August 25, 2015 by View619

[Cottonmouth]

Seems like glass cannon/impotent tank teams are going to require substantial micromanagement.

[Katarack21]

Quick reply, I'm not telling the OP to Learn-2-Play. I'm saying that he should try another front-line configuration and see if the AI acts in the same way. Maybe a calculation is being made regarding his damage potential with disengagement attacks and the enemies are disengaging based on that.

 

That's totally legit. This whole deal was so frustrating and so overall terrible that I actually just went and respecced Eder and am about to do the same for Pallegina. I hope I can figure out a way to work around this, because I really do not have the words to explain exactly how frustrating that first hour or so of play was.

[Katarack21]

So, something else that just happened:

I went to redo my own attributes and saw that I had -15 points to spend. I was attempting to redistribute my points from resolve to...something useful. But when I pulled my points off resolve, it just put me "up" to having 1 point to spend. So...the hell?

[anameforobsidian]

Can't talk about the latter, but have you thought about putting armor on your casters for that specific fight?  It sounds like the hit cushion armor provides could do a world of difference.

[Katarack21]

That is also something that I just did, along with chaning Eder's and Palleginas weapon specs (since I switched them over to weapon/shield instead of the two-handers). I never ran with a naked Cipher, but I *have* been using some heavily enchanted Cultist's Robes on him for a long time now, so I switched them up for some medium armor with a few upgrades on it.

I'm sweating this hard. I'm the first one to admit that I'm not the best in the world at games of this style; as much as I love Baldur's Gate II (I've beaten it 3 times, once with a 100% complete) the fact is the combat has *always* been difficult for me. I was extremely frustrated when I started the expansion and realized that the game I haven't had any serious problems with (except for Raedric and one of the bounties, admittedly) was suddenly beating my ****ing ass.

[Kilburn]

 

It's not. It's terrible news. What's the point of having a combat-sticky engagement mechanic if it's just ignored by the enemies? The whole purpose of "engagement", from what I understood, was to avoid the BG scenario where your ranged squishies are just constantly rushed. Like in actual D&D, where there are limitations on combat movement and a tank character can actually hold enemies and protect ranged characters.

 

This is exactly the worse aspect of BG combat--the total inability for a tank to tank. It does seem to be a regular part of combat in the expansion and it's ****ing ****. I don't want to have to drag my goddamn fighters across the battle field five goddamn times while constantly re-positioning my main character to avoid instantaneous melee death *EVERY GODDAMN BATTLE*. My tanks are built defensive, with ****ing multiple-engagement talents and deflection and ****, to ****ing tank--to hold multiple enemies on them. Literally my entire party is built around the simple concept of holding enemies on my tanks and dealing damage with my damage dealers. Every item I have, every talent I took, every spell I know--it's all built around that one simple strategy.

 

If they're just going to completely ignore engagement and run off after my casters every. single. time. (as they have been doing) then this entire expansion will be nothing but a constant micromanagement slag of chasing characters around a battlefield. How fun. Yay.

 

Wow. First time I see a post of someone who understands BG combat wasn't perfect, and that the engagement idea is there for a reason. Finally.

The things I suffered in the beta forums

 

I'm guessing some more balancing is needed. Obviously the fighter can't have high deflection + high accuracy + extra engagements + high damage. So saying it's the op's problem if his/her fighter doesn't punish disengagement is kinda silly.

 

 

It is absolutely your problem if you treat all offensive stats as dump stats to go max deflection.

 

And it is possible to make an effective hybrid - High deflection while still maintaining offense.

 

My dual wield hatchet paladin was very good in melee and pushed high deflection. 90 deflection with max might and dexterity.

[Katarack21]

 

 

It's not. It's terrible news. What's the point of having a combat-sticky engagement mechanic if it's just ignored by the enemies? The whole purpose of "engagement", from what I understood, was to avoid the BG scenario where your ranged squishies are just constantly rushed. Like in actual D&D, where there are limitations on combat movement and a tank character can actually hold enemies and protect ranged characters.

 

This is exactly the worse aspect of BG combat--the total inability for a tank to tank. It does seem to be a regular part of combat in the expansion and it's ****ing ****. I don't want to have to drag my goddamn fighters across the battle field five goddamn times while constantly re-positioning my main character to avoid instantaneous melee death *EVERY GODDAMN BATTLE*. My tanks are built defensive, with ****ing multiple-engagement talents and deflection and ****, to ****ing tank--to hold multiple enemies on them. Literally my entire party is built around the simple concept of holding enemies on my tanks and dealing damage with my damage dealers. Every item I have, every talent I took, every spell I know--it's all built around that one simple strategy.

 

If they're just going to completely ignore engagement and run off after my casters every. single. time. (as they have been doing) then this entire expansion will be nothing but a constant micromanagement slag of chasing characters around a battlefield. How fun. Yay.

 

Wow. First time I see a post of someone who understands BG combat wasn't perfect, and that the engagement idea is there for a reason. Finally.

The things I suffered in the beta forums

 

I'm guessing some more balancing is needed. Obviously the fighter can't have high deflection + high accuracy + extra engagements + high damage. So saying it's the op's problem if his/her fighter doesn't punish disengagement is kinda silly.

 

 

It is absolutely your problem if you treat all offensive stats as dump stats to go max deflection.

 

And it is possible to make an effective hybrid - High deflection while still maintaining offense.

 

My dual wield hatchet paladin was very good in melee and pushed high deflection. 90 deflection with max might and dexterity.

 

Congrats, you created a balanced character with trade offs and sacrifices. Nobody ever said that wasn't possible. What IS impossible is to have a character with high deflection, high accuracy, high endurance, high action speed, max engagement, and high damage. You can't have it all.

 

What I don't understand is what the hell I am supposed to do about the fact that they COMPLETELY IGNORE my engagement. They don't stop--they don't hold. At all. In any way. Every. Single. Combat. Ends with three people shooting past my paladin, fighter, and priest and immediatly face-stomping my casters.

 

Every time. Every. Single time. Engagement means *nothing* because they ignore it, consistently, without fail. No enemy is held, ever. They get engaged, they stop, they go one round and then immediately break engagement and attack my two ciphers and mage in melee combat. Before the respec, after the respect. With various weapons. With various shields and armors.

 

Never do they hold. I understand the idea of "tactical combat", but this isn't tactical combat. This is zerg rushing my ranged party members.

[Springwight]

That is also something that I just did, along with chaning Eder's and Palleginas weapon specs (since I switched them over to weapon/shield instead of the two-handers). I never ran with a naked Cipher, but I *have* been using some heavily enchanted Cultist's Robes on him for a long time now, so I switched them up for some medium armor with a few upgrades on it.

 

I'm sweating this hard. I'm the first one to admit that I'm not the best in the world at games of this style; as much as I love Baldur's Gate II (I've beaten it 3 times, once with a 100% complete) the fact is the combat has *always* been difficult for me. I was extremely frustrated when I started the expansion and realized that the game I haven't had any serious problems with (except for Raedric and one of the bounties, admittedly) was suddenly beating my ****ing ass.

What difficulty are you playing at? This is important, because if you're playing on Easy, this can be considered a technical issue, since that difficulty was presumably meant for people who don't want to do difficult combat. The other difficulties basically say "this isn't going to be easy", and things like NOT RECOMMENDED, and explicitly state they require optimization and micromanagement. 

 

I chose one of the harder difficulty settings because I do want difficult combat, and so far the game hasn't delivered (some of the early levels notwithstanding).