So, why aren't there any abilities that improve/change Disengagement attacks?

[hk79v1]

I mean, I've played the game fully as a full tank fighter and with the new A.I. patterns, they just decide to rush past him. Why not add some Fighter only abilities to boost Disengagement range/damage/attack frequency or even add effects? Would make Tanking less about pure damage mitigation and more about ACTUALLY holding the line against enemies. Engagement was a good start and has a decent Accuracy boost but it's ONE attack and even a Fighter that doesn't have Might as a dump stat won't cause more than a nuisance's worth of damage to an escaping enemy.

 

Unless of course, I'm missing something in the Offensive or Utility trees that buffed up Disengagement to be a TRUE threat to enemies and not just a slap on the wrist?

[Springwight]

Nope. Didn't miss anything that improved disengagement attacks (or else we both did). I wish there were something like that. There should be general talents like that for everyone, and something special for fighters and maybe paladins.

Edited August 26, 2015 by Springwight

[Katarack21]

Yes. So that you can build a fighter not just to engage multiple enemies, but to hold multiple enemies. So that you can play that way--if you want to.

[hk79v1]

Yes. So that you can build a fighter not just to engage multiple enemies, but to hold multiple enemies. So that you can play that way--if you want to.

I mean hell, it was your post about them rushing past your tank to rush your squishies. Sure you can build a hybrid but the way combat works in this, they just aren't good enough to hold the line and die too quickly even with support against truly outrageous offense(I'm looking at YOU Secret Boss of That Place I won't mention because no spoilers).

Give us talents that improve Disengagement attacks! Increase the range, frequency of attack, damage. Make it a Modal, have it reduce REGULAR attack speed or something.

[Heijoushin]

More abilities is always good. I like this idea.

[archangel979]

Haha, first people complained Disengagement attacks are too powerful and now they are too weak. How about you install IE mod, turn them off and kite like you are supposed to be able to?

[Katarack21]

Haha, first people complained Disengagement attacks are too powerful and now they are too weak. How about you install IE mod, turn them off and kite like you are supposed to be able to?

 

If you have to kite, **** ain't working right. Kiting is what you do to deal with enemies to big and nasty to take on directly, or to deal with ****ty tanking systems where the tanks don't actually tank.

[Judicator]

I like this idea, disengagement attacks are too weak against anything other than squishy casters. Some talents that boost damage would be good, or maybe have some talents that increase crit chance or induce conditions like prone or stun. That would make holding the line far more viable.

[View619]

Haha, first people complained Disengagement attacks are too powerful and now they are too weak. How about you install IE mod, turn them off and kite like you are supposed to be able to?

 

Maybe he doesn't want a situation where his ranged units and spell-casters can run away without any problems, and enemies chase down a single melee unit while eating melee and ranged strikes from your friends? Outside of SCS mods, the AI and proper threat identification in the IE games is terrible.

 

But disengagement attacks are already strong enough. They are free, instant attacks with increased accuracy and damage; if your base melee strikes are weak then your disengagement strikes will be weak.

Edited August 26, 2015 by View619

[Matt516]

I'm a bit confused by all this hubbub. What, exactly, changed about disengagement attacks that moved them from "too powerful" (the prevailing opinion before the patch) to "too weak"? I agree with View619, they're already quite powerful enough. The issue is that everyone's gotten used to playing with AI that's too stupid to realize it can often just take a hit to get to the squishies. So they've built their tanks for pure survivability, leaving them with crap damage. Well guess what... if you build your tanks with crap damage they're going to do crap damage. That's no longer as viable a strategy - and I'm fine with that, personally. 

[Francis Ironwood]

I'm a bit confused by all this hubbub. What, exactly, changed about disengagement attacks that moved them from "too powerful" (the prevailing opinion before the patch) to "too weak"? I agree with View619, they're already quite powerful enough. The issue is that everyone's gotten used to playing with AI that's too stupid to realize it can often just take a hit to get to the squishies. So they've built their tanks for pure survivability, leaving them with crap damage. Well guess what... if you build your tanks with crap damage they're going to do crap damage. That's no longer as viable a strategy - and I'm fine with that, personally. 

We're talking about player made disengagement attacks here right? Did anyone ever think those were strong? I think people were saying that disengagement attacks made by the enemies were too punishing and really restricted movement in combat, but now with the ai improvements people are complaining about their disengagement attacks not being strong enough. I atleast didn't really think about disengagement attacks before White March, because the enemy wasn't smart enough to make me use them.

[curryinahurry]

^ So this is about people building defense only characters and then wondering why they can't hit/ damage anything?  I hate to be the one to break the news, but expect more of these types of changes in the future.  The whole point behind the attribute system was to make all attributes viable to all classes; the corollary result being to make min/ maxing less viable.  Niche builds will still be possible, just not invulnerable or fool-proof (possibly).

[Springwight]

^ So this is about people building defense only characters and then wondering why they can't hit/ damage anything?  I hate to be the one to break the news, but expect more of these types of changes in the future.  The whole point behind the attribute system was to make all attributes viable to all classes; the corollary result being to make min/ maxing less viable.  Niche builds will still be possible, just not invulnerable or fool-proof (possibly).

For me, it's just about wanting more character options. I do feel there is a distinct lack of abilities that build on engagement, and they would be really cool to have. As Francis pointed out, in the past, disengagement attacks were pretty rare anyway, because enemies rarely disengaged. What the OP suggests is a situation where tanks aren't just slabs of meat, but rather one where they also need to focus on the damage of their attacks, and use that as a deterrent against rush tactics. It actually sounds very interesting to me, and kind of a subversion of the entire role/trope. It does eventually mean that tanks will be less min/maxed.

Edited August 26, 2015 by Springwight

[curryinahurry]

That's fair, but it's hard to know what people are complaining about without knowing how builds are being put together.  I might be assuming the worst, and certainly, the idea of building around a defensive character that can handle disengagement is viable, but accuracy will have to play a role in that equation so the dumping of xyz stat to pump resolve, con, etc.and wielding hatchet and tower shield will be filtered out by obsidiian in the future.  That was my point. 

 

I also think that 2.0 is part of the ongoing adjustment of the game to create more balance, but it can also provide more opportunity for the kind of builds you are proposing.  i think it might be be worthwhile to propose abiltiies/ talents for future iterations that allow for the type of build you're lookignfor that don't run counter to what Obsidian wants for the overall structure of character building. 

 

Two examples could be like; 1.  A talent that does + 20% disengagement damage at a -5 to hit, or 2. a Trip talent that knocks (+10 vs reflex) disengaging opponents prone at a 5 second -10 penalty to defense.

[hk79v1]

Haha, first people complained Disengagement attacks are too powerful and now they are too weak. How about you install IE mod, turn them off and kite like you are supposed to be able to?

IEMod currently doesn't work with the 2.0 version for one, for two they aren't that powerful to begin with. Yeah, they get a hefty accuracy boost but damage is the same far as I can tell(sure as heck never noticed any higher numbers when it did happen).

[archangel979]

 

Haha, first people complained Disengagement attacks are too powerful and now they are too weak. How about you install IE mod, turn them off and kite like you are supposed to be able to?

IEMod currently doesn't work with the 2.0 version for one, for two they aren't that powerful to begin with. Yeah, they get a hefty accuracy boost but damage is the same far as I can tell(sure as heck never noticed any higher numbers when it did happen).

 

Accuracy boosts turns into more likely criticals which turns into more damage.

[hk79v1]

^ So this is about people building defense only characters and then wondering why they can't hit/ damage anything?  I hate to be the one to break the news, but expect more of these types of changes in the future.  The whole point behind the attribute system was to make all attributes viable to all classes; the corollary result being to make min/ maxing less viable.  Niche builds will still be possible, just not invulnerable or fool-proof (possibly).

Not really, I'm not worried about my tank doing damage, I'm worried about him keeping the enemies heavy hitters busy while my ranged back line and melee fighters take out their squishier/more dangerous fellows. But, Engagement is the ONLY thing that keeps an enemies attention on your tank and it seems the only way now for them to be effective is to do damage. But, if they're doing damage their defenses must be lacking which means their ability to stand toe-to-toe longer than the other guy is compromised.

 

Honestly at this point, I'm gonna try a Pale Elf Barbarian with Cautious Attack, Hold the Line, a few of the elemental damage Utility talents and with high Perception so his attacks will actually land.

[curryinahurry]

 

^ So this is about people building defense only characters and then wondering why they can't hit/ damage anything?  I hate to be the one to break the news, but expect more of these types of changes in the future.  The whole point behind the attribute system was to make all attributes viable to all classes; the corollary result being to make min/ maxing less viable.  Niche builds will still be possible, just not invulnerable or fool-proof (possibly).

Not really, I'm not worried about my tank doing damage, I'm worried about him keeping the enemies heavy hitters busy while my ranged back line and melee fighters take out their squishier/more dangerous fellows. But, Engagement is the ONLY thing that keeps an enemies attention on your tank and it seems the only way now for them to be effective is to do damage. But, if they're doing damage their defenses must be lacking which means their ability to stand toe-to-toe longer than the other guy is compromised.

 

Honestly at this point, I'm gonna try a Pale Elf Barbarian with Cautious Attack, Hold the Line, a few of the elemental damage Utility talents and with high Perception so his attacks will actually land.

 

 

I'll have to look at the numbers next time I play, but I'm currently using Eder as my main tank (playing on Hard) and with buffs etc. he's doing fine with regards to Disengagement attack (currently level 8 party).  What I'm finding in 2.0 is that I have to switch from ranged to melee with Pallegina and Kana more often because of AI behavior.  

[hk79v1]

 

 

^ So this is about people building defense only characters and then wondering why they can't hit/ damage anything?  I hate to be the one to break the news, but expect more of these types of changes in the future.  The whole point behind the attribute system was to make all attributes viable to all classes; the corollary result being to make min/ maxing less viable.  Niche builds will still be possible, just not invulnerable or fool-proof (possibly).

Not really, I'm not worried about my tank doing damage, I'm worried about him keeping the enemies heavy hitters busy while my ranged back line and melee fighters take out their squishier/more dangerous fellows. But, Engagement is the ONLY thing that keeps an enemies attention on your tank and it seems the only way now for them to be effective is to do damage. But, if they're doing damage their defenses must be lacking which means their ability to stand toe-to-toe longer than the other guy is compromised.

 

Honestly at this point, I'm gonna try a Pale Elf Barbarian with Cautious Attack, Hold the Line, a few of the elemental damage Utility talents and with high Perception so his attacks will actually land.

 

 

I'll have to look at the numbers next time I play, but I'm currently using Eder as my main tank (playing on Hard) and with buffs etc. he's doing fine with regards to Disengagement attack (currently level 8 party).  What I'm finding in 2.0 is that I have to switch from ranged to melee with Pallegina and Kana more often because of AI behavior.  

 

He shouldn't NEED to be buffed to to make him an effective blocker and wall though, that's the thing. He should be able to do that on his own and the buffing should be there to improve that. Besides Hard doesn't change stats, just numbers of enemies. You want to REALLY test the numbers, pull it on TOI mode.

[View619]

 

 

 

^ So this is about people building defense only characters and then wondering why they can't hit/ damage anything?  I hate to be the one to break the news, but expect more of these types of changes in the future.  The whole point behind the attribute system was to make all attributes viable to all classes; the corollary result being to make min/ maxing less viable.  Niche builds will still be possible, just not invulnerable or fool-proof (possibly).

Not really, I'm not worried about my tank doing damage, I'm worried about him keeping the enemies heavy hitters busy while my ranged back line and melee fighters take out their squishier/more dangerous fellows. But, Engagement is the ONLY thing that keeps an enemies attention on your tank and it seems the only way now for them to be effective is to do damage. But, if they're doing damage their defenses must be lacking which means their ability to stand toe-to-toe longer than the other guy is compromised.

 

Honestly at this point, I'm gonna try a Pale Elf Barbarian with Cautious Attack, Hold the Line, a few of the elemental damage Utility talents and with high Perception so his attacks will actually land.

 

 

I'll have to look at the numbers next time I play, but I'm currently using Eder as my main tank (playing on Hard) and with buffs etc. he's doing fine with regards to Disengagement attack (currently level 8 party).  What I'm finding in 2.0 is that I have to switch from ranged to melee with Pallegina and Kana more often because of AI behavior.  

 

He shouldn't NEED to be buffed to to make him an effective blocker and wall though, that's the thing. He should be able to do that on his own and the buffing should be there to improve that. Besides Hard doesn't change stats, just numbers of enemies. You want to REALLY test the numbers, pull it on TOI mode.

 

 

1. Trial of Iron mode doesn't increase difficulty, it just removes the ability to reload.
2. The game was balanced for Hard mode.

[Katarack21]

 

 

 

 

^ So this is about people building defense only characters and then wondering why they can't hit/ damage anything?  I hate to be the one to break the news, but expect more of these types of changes in the future.  The whole point behind the attribute system was to make all attributes viable to all classes; the corollary result being to make min/ maxing less viable.  Niche builds will still be possible, just not invulnerable or fool-proof (possibly).

Not really, I'm not worried about my tank doing damage, I'm worried about him keeping the enemies heavy hitters busy while my ranged back line and melee fighters take out their squishier/more dangerous fellows. But, Engagement is the ONLY thing that keeps an enemies attention on your tank and it seems the only way now for them to be effective is to do damage. But, if they're doing damage their defenses must be lacking which means their ability to stand toe-to-toe longer than the other guy is compromised.

 

Honestly at this point, I'm gonna try a Pale Elf Barbarian with Cautious Attack, Hold the Line, a few of the elemental damage Utility talents and with high Perception so his attacks will actually land.

 

 

I'll have to look at the numbers next time I play, but I'm currently using Eder as my main tank (playing on Hard) and with buffs etc. he's doing fine with regards to Disengagement attack (currently level 8 party).  What I'm finding in 2.0 is that I have to switch from ranged to melee with Pallegina and Kana more often because of AI behavior.  

 

He shouldn't NEED to be buffed to to make him an effective blocker and wall though, that's the thing. He should be able to do that on his own and the buffing should be there to improve that. Besides Hard doesn't change stats, just numbers of enemies. You want to REALLY test the numbers, pull it on TOI mode.

 

 

1. Trial of Iron mode doesn't increase difficulty, it just removes the ability to reload.
2. The game was balanced for Hard mode.

 

1) Correct. He was probably thinking Path of the Damned.

 

2) Also correct. That's why it's clear that the balance is off--on the game that it was designed to play, you have to buff in order to to have an effective tank. You should have an effective tank with base abilities, and have to buff to augment that in some scenarios.

[hk79v1]

 

 

 

 

^ So this is about people building defense only characters and then wondering why they can't hit/ damage anything?  I hate to be the one to break the news, but expect more of these types of changes in the future.  The whole point behind the attribute system was to make all attributes viable to all classes; the corollary result being to make min/ maxing less viable.  Niche builds will still be possible, just not invulnerable or fool-proof (possibly).

Not really, I'm not worried about my tank doing damage, I'm worried about him keeping the enemies heavy hitters busy while my ranged back line and melee fighters take out their squishier/more dangerous fellows. But, Engagement is the ONLY thing that keeps an enemies attention on your tank and it seems the only way now for them to be effective is to do damage. But, if they're doing damage their defenses must be lacking which means their ability to stand toe-to-toe longer than the other guy is compromised.

 

Honestly at this point, I'm gonna try a Pale Elf Barbarian with Cautious Attack, Hold the Line, a few of the elemental damage Utility talents and with high Perception so his attacks will actually land.

 

 

I'll have to look at the numbers next time I play, but I'm currently using Eder as my main tank (playing on Hard) and with buffs etc. he's doing fine with regards to Disengagement attack (currently level 8 party).  What I'm finding in 2.0 is that I have to switch from ranged to melee with Pallegina and Kana more often because of AI behavior.  

 

He shouldn't NEED to be buffed to to make him an effective blocker and wall though, that's the thing. He should be able to do that on his own and the buffing should be there to improve that. Besides Hard doesn't change stats, just numbers of enemies. You want to REALLY test the numbers, pull it on TOI mode.

 

 

1. Trial of Iron mode doesn't increase difficulty, it just removes the ability to reload.
2. The game was balanced for Hard mode.

 

The game was balanced for Hard Mode? Really? Because my entire party got wiped by a damn no-name Mercenary Brawler that almost literally TELEPORTED on top of my back row and wiped them out in a few seconds before I could even get my spells set up. Rushed right past the guy I sent ahead(FAR ahead mind you) at least 2 screens worth.

Anyway yes I meant Path of the Damned not Tide of Iron.