Engagement limit and flanked status

[moonbeaver]

On the wiki Flanked status description is "Engaged by more enemies than engagement limit".

My warrior has defender enabled (+2 engagement limit) and Starshatter hammer equipped (+1).

So, his engagement limit should be 1(base)+2+1 = 4, and he should be flanked if engaged by 5 or more enemies, right?

On the screenshot he is engaged by 3 people and is flanked.

Why is this happening? Am I not understanding engagement mechanics correctly?

 

Screenshot on imgur http://i.imgur.com/HzehEBq.jpg

 

[Boeroer]

The description is wrong. Maybe itwas like that when the game came out. But nowadays flanking has nothing to do with your own engagement limit. Atm one is flanked if he/she gets attacked in melee from opposite sides.

The only things that can alter this - so that more enemies are needed to flank you - are special items (there's a cloak in WM. You can buy it at the merchant with the waggon in Stalwart) or the barb's ability "One Stands Alone".

Edited February 20, 2017 by Boeroer

[Kaylon]

If I remember well you can be flanked either by having 2 enemies attacking you in melee from opposite sides or being attacked in melee by more than 2 enemies without positioning requirements - the engagement limit is 2 for all classes but can be increased with abilities, talents or items. By increasing your engagement limit you can avoid being flanked by keeping all enemies in front of you.

[Belfaldurnik]

The description is wrong. Maybe itwas like that when the game came out. But nowadays flanking has nothing to do with your own engagement limit. Atm one is flanked if he/she gets attacked in melee from opposite sides.

 

Topic comes up from time to time in Steam's forum. User ColorsFade has made a few screenshots today while testing it. To cause the Flanked affliction, it is necessary to engage the opponent with a companion in order to reach the opponent's engagement limit and then position the flanker within 180 degrees opposite to the engaged companion. It is not necessary to attack the opponent from behind. And attacking an opponent from behind with no companion engaging the opponent does not suffice as it does not cause Flanked status.

 

For the case of more than two attackers, a fighter with Defender (modal) +2 and Hold the Line (passive) +1 talents can be Flanked by four attackers already, but not by three. Perhaps something doesn't stack correctly? Similar to the Shatterstar hammer above.

Edited February 2, 2018 by Belfaldurnik

[draego]

Topic comes up from time to time in Steam's forum. User ColorsFade has made a few screenshots today while testing it. To cause the Flanked affliction, it is necessary to engage the opponent with a companion in order to reach the opponent's engagement limit and then position the flanker within 180 degrees opposite to the engaged companion. It is not necessary to attack the opponent from behind. And attacking an opponent from behind with no companion engaging the opponent does not suffice as it does not cause Flanked status.

 

For the case of more than two attackers, a fighter with Defender (modal) +2 and Hold the Line (passive) +1 talents can be Flanked by four attackers already, but not by three. Perhaps something doesn't stack correctly? Similar to the Shatterstar hammer above.

 

 i just test myself on random enemy because i use melee rangers and usually try to get flanking status. If you engage an enemy with just ranger and animal and then move another character like animal to opposite side it applies flanked. Not sure where the attack from behind comment is coming from. This never applied flanked with one character from behind or not. I also just ran up to the enemy with both characters close together and no flanking status. I guess i need to find enemy with more than one engagement slot to try to see if doing the opposite side thing causes flanking with only two characters but i really dont remember any creatures giving me trouble causing flanked with just two characters. Maybe a barb enemy with One Stands Alone or some other ability like that.

Edited February 2, 2018 by draego

[Boeroer]

If you attack an enemy and attack with another character from the opposite side (doesn't have to be 180°) you'll apply flanking. Both have to actively attack in melee. If you use Lay on Hands or whatever in between flanking is gone until you attack again.

 

I never experienced that enemies with more than 1 engagement slot don't get flanked. But there aren't that many, so it may be that they need an additional enemy. But usually this "flanking" where you attack with two characters from opposite sides (not from behind) works every time.

Edited February 2, 2018 by Boeroer

[Belfaldurnik]

If you attack an enemy and attack with another character from the opposite side (doesn't have to be 180°) you'll apply flanking.

Within 180 degrees. The flanker doesn't need to exactly on the opposite side. Here's an example showing how you can flank from the side:

http://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=1288492012

 

 

I never experienced that enemies with more than 1 engagement slot don't get flanked. But there aren't that many, so it may be that they need an additional enemy. But usually this "flanking" where you attack with two characters from opposite sides (not from behind) works every time.

 

If it were not linked to the engagement limit, the barbarian's One Stands Alone talent would not make sense. Whereas Phantom Foes explicitly reduces the number of attackers to cause Flanked status, the barbarian's talent explicitly increases the number of engagement slots.

 

Here are screenshots showing it for a Fighter with Defender and Hold the Line talents. Engagement limit is 1+2+1=4, but three attackers don't cause Flanked status despite two of them being even directly opposite of eachother:

http://steamcommunity.com/app/291650/discussions/0/1700541698686318723/?ctp=2#c1700541698687257905

 

What remains to be examined: Defender and Hold the Line probably don't stack with regard to the Flanked status, although they stack with regard to the engagement limit.

Edited February 2, 2018 by Belfaldurnik

[Boeroer]

 

[...] (doesn't have to be 180°) [...]

[...]The flanker doesn't need to exactly on the opposite side[...]

 

Yes... like I said?

One Stands Alone does not raise your engagement slots. You can't engage more enemies with One Stands Alone. You can't engage more enemies with Ruphec's Watchful Cloak MKII. Both will raise the number of enemies that are needed to flank you by 2 each.

 

A normal barbarian will get flanked by 2 enemies if they attack from opposite sides (does not have to be 180° - for me that's like the same as to say they don't have to be exactly on  opposite sides by the way). If you take One Stands Alone there will have to be 4 enemies attacking you. Same if you wear the cloak. I never checked if One Stands Alone and the cloak stack so that 6 enemies need to attack you in order to get flanked.

So, these abilites/items raise the numbers of flankers that are needed in order to trigger flanked on you. They do not increase the number of your engagement slots which which you could engage enemies (causing disengagement attacks and so on). 

 

I don't know how the game determines the numbers of enemies needed to flank you internally - but number of your own engagement slots (visible when looking at the green, curved arrows/lines in combat that will go from you to the enemies) doesn't determine 1:1 how many enemies are needed to flank you.

 

I never checked/tested if Defender or Hold the Line or even a guarding weapon will also prevent you from getting flanked by 2 (or three) people and increase the number of needed flankers. But it might very well be. But your own engagement slots (with which you engage enemies) and the number of flankers that are needed to trigger engagement on you are not directly connected. But it may be that Defender and Hold the Line also give an additional bonus when it comes to preventing flanked - like One Stands Alone.

Edited February 2, 2018 by Boeroer

[Belfaldurnik]

 

Yes... like I said?

 

We're talking past eachother. I refer to an arc of 180 degrees, you to an angle of 180 degrees. Not the same thing. The flanker may be positioned anywhere within the 180 degrees arc opposite of the companion.

 

Do you agreed with that?

 

 

One Stands Alone does not raise your engagement slots.

 

It still links the Flanked status to number of engaged enemies and not only the position of two attackers. Also, Hold the Line is a class neutral talent, so the barb could learn that, and it would need to be tested whether it stacks and how it stacks with regard to Flanked status checks.

 

I don't know how the game determines the numbers of enemies needed to flank you internally - but number of your own engagement slots (visible when looking at the green, curved arrows/lines in combat that will go from you to the enemies) doesn't determine 1:1 how many enemies are needed to flank you.

 

Well, we know that with base traits there must be at least one engaged companion to reach the engagement limit of 1, and only then the flanker can cause Flanked affliction. WIth raised engagement slots, it is more companions that are needed to engage first. As shown above.

 

I never checked/tested if Defender or Hold the Line or even a guarding weapon will also prevent you from getting flanked by

2 (or three) people and increase the number of needed flankers. But it might very well be.

 

 

 

 

See opening post in this topic. And see the screenshots in my previous reply. They are about a Defender with Hold the Line. Increasing the Fighters engagement slots increases the number of attackers that are needed to cause Flanked status. Although, similar to the opening post, something about the stacking seems to be wrong.

Edited February 2, 2018 by Belfaldurnik

[Boeroer]

You don't understand what I mean and maybe I'm poor at explaining it. Anyways - I'll just leave it like that and be good with it.

[Belfaldurnik]

What is there to understand? I've linked screenshots. You don't need to test anything yourself, but if you come up with a theory, it must match what can be demonstrated within the game and has been captured with screenshots.

 

Here's a specific one:

 

1) Fighter with Defender and Hold the Line talents. Four engagements slots.

2) Fighter engages four enemies. Green lines.

3) Three enemies engage the fighter. Red lines.

 

The theory for that test: The minimum of 2 attackers would not suffice anymore to cause Flanked status. Either 4+1 attackers are needed to caused Flanked, since that would exceed the engagement limit. Or only 4 attackers are needed as that would reach the engagement limit.

 

http://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=1288656630

 

4) Two of the enemies are positioned directly opposite of eachother, although that is no strict requirement for Flanked status.

5) If four enemies engage the fighter, they cause Flanked status.

6) If only three enemies engage the fighter, they do not cause Flanked status anymore. The fighter knocked down one enemy to stop being engaged by that enemy.

 

Conclusions? Indeed, Flanked status depends on number of engagement slots of the target. How exactly? Not known yet. It could be an off-by-one stacking bug somewhere or more complicated rules that would also explain the original post in this topic.

[Boeroer]

Nevermind, I'm so tired that I posted the same stuff twice because I forgot I already had.

Edited February 2, 2018 by Boeroer