Putting the 'role' back in role-playing games since 2002.
Donate to Codex
Good Old Games
  • Welcome to rpgcodex.net, a site dedicated to discussing computer based role-playing games in a free and open fashion. We're less strict than other forums, but please refer to the rules.

    "This message is awaiting moderator approval": All new users must pass through our moderation queue before they will be able to post normally. Until your account has "passed" your posts will only be visible to yourself (and moderators) until they are approved. Give us a week to get around to approving / deleting / ignoring your mundane opinion on crap before hassling us about it. Once you have passed the moderation period (think of it as a test), you will be able to post normally, just like all the other retards.

Pillars of Eternity Beta Discussion [GAME RELEASED, GO TO NEW THREAD]

Sensuki

Arcane
Joined
Oct 26, 2012
Messages
9,800
Location
New North Korea
Codex 2014 Serpent in the Staglands Shadorwun: Hong Kong A Beautifully Desolate Campaign
Nah your CPU (in your dxdiag report) is a 64-bit one, should be easy to upgrade to Win7 64 if you so desire, just need a Windows 7 disc (whether burned or legit)

Good to report the bug anyway, but Hormalakh had to upgrade to win764 to stop having issues
 

SCO

Arcane
In My Safe Space
Joined
Feb 3, 2009
Messages
16,320
Shadorwun: Hong Kong
Dance the cha cha cha of sourceless hardware software upgrades.
 

Johannes

Arcane
Joined
Nov 20, 2010
Messages
10,524
Location
casting coach
I don't get it. Hotkeys is what you use for things you know by heart. Play through game once or twice first, learn those dozens of spells, then ask for hotkeys. Until then, you're probably going to be using the mouse anyway.
No, if I can help it I'll use hotkeys for the most commonly used stuff as soon as I identify them as commonly used. Whether I have to manually assign them myself or if the game already maps the keys.

If you yourself don't tend to use hotkeys at all... Maybe you're not the best person to talk about their implementation?
 

Kem0sabe

Arcane
Joined
Mar 7, 2011
Messages
13,093
Location
Azores Islands
Are there any plans to implement AI behaviors for companions? I enjoyed the community scripts that were released for the IE games as they enabled me to only worry about my own PC during most of the trash fights.
 

Athelas

Arcane
Joined
Jun 24, 2013
Messages
4,502
Any A.I. script more involved than 'stand stock-still' would probably get them killed from all the disengagement attacks.
 

Bester

⚰️☠️⚱️
Patron
Vatnik
Joined
Sep 28, 2014
Messages
11,128
Location
USSR
Any A.I. script more involved than 'stand stock-still' would probably get them killed from all the disengagement attacks.
The disengagement radius is now bigger, and so the enemy AI is now trying to run after its target and the disengagement attacks don't happen, as far as I understand.
 

Infinitron

I post news
Staff Member
Joined
Jan 28, 2011
Messages
97,506
Codex Year of the Donut Serpent in the Staglands Dead State Divinity: Original Sin Project: Eternity Torment: Tides of Numenera Wasteland 2 Shadorwun: Hong Kong Divinity: Original Sin 2 A Beautifully Desolate Campaign Pillars of Eternity 2: Deadfire Pathfinder: Kingmaker Pathfinder: Wrath I'm very into cock and ball torture I helped put crap in Monomyth
Any A.I. script more involved than 'stand stock-still' would probably get them killed from all the disengagement attacks.

Becoming engaged would probably halt the script, that's kind of the point

It'd be interesting if it could be programmed to "catch" engagement and react to it.

EDIT: I guess what they could do is have every AI script consist of two "threads". What to do when free, and what to do when engaged. When your character becomes engaged, the first "thread" is interrupted and you switch to the second one. You'd want your engaged script to have "attack current attacker" type stuff, and lots of conditionals for checking if it's worth risking breaking engagement. When you do break engagement, the game would shift your character back to the unengaged script.
 
Last edited:

Athelas

Arcane
Joined
Jun 24, 2013
Messages
4,502
Any A.I. script more involved than 'stand stock-still' would probably get them killed from all the disengagement attacks.

Becoming engaged would probably halt the script, that's kind of the point
In that case they would die/do poorly in combat from not being able to execute their script.

Any A.I. script more involved than 'stand stock-still' would probably get them killed from all the disengagement attacks.
The disengagement radius is now bigger, and so the enemy AI is now trying to run after its target and the disengagement attacks don't happen, as far as I understand.
They do appear to have changed some things about it. Two spiders just walked right past my fighter with defender mode on without suffering any disengagement attacks. It also appear to be easier to run away from engagement, whereas earlier you could get stuck in an endless loop with the hit animation giving the enemy time to catch up and engage you again.
 

Athelas

Arcane
Joined
Jun 24, 2013
Messages
4,502
It looks like the enemies don't chase down targets anymore if it means suffering disengagement attacks. Instead, they stop and switch to the target that would've given them an disengagement attack had they continued moving.

EDIT: I guess what they could do is have every AI script consist of two "threads". What to do when free, and what to do when engaged. When your character becomes engaged, the first "thread" is interrupted and you switch to the second one. You'd want your engaged script to have "attack current attacker" type stuff, and lots of conditionals for checking if it's worth risking breaking engagement. When you do break engagement, the game would shift your character back to the unengaged script.
I don't see how this would solve anything. If people can't count on their scripts being executed somewhat reliably (and on time!), there's no point in using them. The engagement system favors either standing completely still or very incremental and frequent micro-managing of movement, neither of which goes well with A.I. scripts.
 

Johannes

Arcane
Joined
Nov 20, 2010
Messages
10,524
Location
casting coach
Any idea what's the Obsidian/Sawyer position on the engagement system? Are the AoO's 100% determined to stay, have they at all considered other alternatives to achieving its goals, like everyone simply moving slower when close to an enemy, or such?
 

tuluse

Arcane
Joined
Jul 20, 2008
Messages
11,400
Serpent in the Staglands Divinity: Original Sin Project: Eternity Torment: Tides of Numenera Shadorwun: Hong Kong
Becoming engaged would probably halt the script, that's kind of the point

It'd be interesting if it could be programmed to "catch" engagement and react to it.

EDIT: I guess what they could do is have every AI script consist of two "threads". What to do when free, and what to do when engaged. When your character becomes engaged, the first "thread" is interrupted and you switch to the second one. You'd want your engaged script to have "attack current attacker" type stuff, and lots of conditionals for checking if it's worth risking breaking engagement. When you do break engagement, the game would shift your character back to the unengaged script.
You would actually want to use a state machine. Every x amount of time the character would check their state (engaged, not engaged, low heath, etc), and then make a decision on what to do.
 

Infinitron

I post news
Staff Member
Joined
Jan 28, 2011
Messages
97,506
Codex Year of the Donut Serpent in the Staglands Dead State Divinity: Original Sin Project: Eternity Torment: Tides of Numenera Wasteland 2 Shadorwun: Hong Kong Divinity: Original Sin 2 A Beautifully Desolate Campaign Pillars of Eternity 2: Deadfire Pathfinder: Kingmaker Pathfinder: Wrath I'm very into cock and ball torture I helped put crap in Monomyth
It looks like the enemies don't chase down targets anymore if it means suffering disengagement attacks. Instead, they stop and switch to the target that would've given them an disengagement attack had they continued moving.

I don't see how this would solve anything. If people can't count on their scripts being executed somewhat reliably (and on time!), there's no point in using them. The engagement system favors either standing completely still or very incremental and frequent micro-managing of movement, neither of which goes well with A.I. scripts.

What needs to be solved? When you become engaged, your "run around and do stuff" script stops. You don't get hit with disengagement attacks. However, your character doesn't just become idle. He switches to a DIFFERENT script, the "stand in place, fight back and try to escape" script. The player programs both scripts and his character functions the same way he might if controlled manually.
 

Kem0sabe

Arcane
Joined
Mar 7, 2011
Messages
13,093
Location
Azores Islands
Hmm, is it possible to "finish" Lle Rhemen temple without killing the mind flayer thing for the soul vessel? I mean, i have the weapon, i talked to the faces in the wall, but the final face in the wall says i need the weapon and the soul vessel, which i assume the D&D expat took with him.
 

Athelas

Arcane
Joined
Jun 24, 2013
Messages
4,502
The separation between combat state and non-combat state needs to go. Currently, using a spell like Charm beast is self-negating. To wit:

1. While stealthed, cast Charm Beast on a group of creatures, which triggers the combat state.
2. The creatures are made non-hostile friendlies, which ends the combat state.
3. Because status ailments end as soon as the combat state ends, the creatures are made hostile again.
4. This all happens within the span of a few seconds.

:hmmm:
 
Last edited:

Hormalakh

Magister
Joined
Nov 27, 2012
Messages
1,503
Any idea what's the Obsidian/Sawyer position on the engagement system? Are the AoO's 100% determined to stay, have they at all considered other alternatives to achieving its goals, like everyone simply moving slower when close to an enemy, or such?

It's here to stay.

The separation between combat state and non-combat state needs to go. Currently, using a spell like Charm beast is self-negating. To wit:

1. While stealthed, cast Charm Beast on a group of creatures, which triggers the combat state.
2. The creatures are made non-hostile friendlies, which ends the combat state.
3. Because status ailments end as soon as the combat state ends, the creatures are made hostile again.
4. This all happens within the span of a few seconds.

:hmmm:

Yeppppp. A lot of the "solutions" to their problems, end up making a whole bunch of other problems in the meantime. Similar things happen when you run away from combat completely... you're basically stuck in combat mode until the enemy is killed.

It's a shitty way of making sure that players don't game the system. Kind of like engagement. Two very shitty solutions to obviously big problems.
 

Duraframe300

Arcane
Joined
Dec 21, 2010
Messages
6,395
melnorme asked: Another example of "overcompensating fixes" to the Infinity Engine. You gave Fighters per-encounter abilities such as Knockdown to make them less boring and give them more control over the battlefield compared to the IE's "walk around and auto-attack" Fighter. But then you also added melee engagement to the game for largely the same reasons. Engagement sounds appealing when I imagine it overlayed on top of Baldur's Gate, but it seems less appropriate when you have so much other stuff to do.

I did a video update on melee engagement and making fighters “less boring” was not a reason I gave for its addition. Very early in development, players complained that IE melee characters were not sticky. Both 3.X and 4E D&D (especially the latter) have mechanics to address this. The AoO/OA systems can be triggered by many things — among them, moving away from a melee opponent who is adjacent to you (or who has marked you in 4E*).

PoE’s Disengagement Attacks are only triggered by movement and there are a number of things you can do to avoid Engagement, actively end Engagement, or passively exit Engagement with a high defense against Disengagement Attacks.

For fighters, using Knockdown is one way to quickly end Engagement against them by a single target because Prone ends Engagement. Graceful Retreat combined with a paladin’s Zealous Charge gives a total of +30 or +35 defense vs. Disengagement Attacks (the latter also increases movement speed, whether you want to waypoint around enemies or simply get away from them after being Engaged).

If a fighter is being Engaged by three+ opponents, it’s more difficult to get away, but fighters are also designed to more easily deal with being stuck in situations like that than a class like rogue. Rogues have access to abilities like Escape and Coordinated Positioning because they are more likely to have their faces stomped in if they try to take on three enemies in melee at once.

And again, it’s very easy to build front-line characters who are dominantly passive. For fighters, take Vigorous Defense at 1st, something like Confident Aim or Defender at 3rd (they currently have more options at 3rd than any other front line class), specialize at 5th, take Weapon Mastery at 7th, Armored Grace at 9th, and Critical Defense at 11th. You could play the entire game with a fighter who only has one active use, per encounter defensive ability. You don’t even have to target anyone with it.

* Marks do not always trigger “official” OAs, but mechanically they are very similar.
 

Athelas

Arcane
Joined
Jun 24, 2013
Messages
4,502
Very early in development, players complained that IE melee characters were not sticky.
I'm guessing these players only payed attention to damaging spells like Fireball, and completely overlooked the fact that status-inflicting spells like Web and Horror were the real nukes in a mage's arsenal (and capable of achieving the goals of 'stickiness').
 

Bester

⚰️☠️⚱️
Patron
Vatnik
Joined
Sep 28, 2014
Messages
11,128
Location
USSR
>Very early in development, players complained that IE melee characters were not sticky

Where, when?? Looks like a lie.
 

Athelas

Arcane
Joined
Jun 24, 2013
Messages
4,502
>Very early in development, players complained that IE melee characters were not sticky

Where, when?? Looks like a lie.
http://forums.obsidian.net/topic/60078-taunt-or-no-taunt/

Why not just let the warriors get something like an "attack of oppertunity" (like in D&D) when an enemy tries to move when he is close to a another character? That way it would actually matter how you position your characters in relation to the enviroment.

A cautionary tale on how Kickstarter devs shouldn't always listen to their backers.
 
Weasel
Joined
Dec 14, 2012
Messages
1,865,661
So a few tards complain about something they didn't like in the IE games and they're listened to and a mechanic implemented to satisfy them... other backers mention things they liked in the IE games that have disappeared and they are labeled grognards, mocked and ignored. Smacks of confirmation bias.

Can't say I ever wished for more "stickiness" or had excessive problems defending my mages in the IE games.
 

Gozma

Arcane
Joined
Aug 1, 2012
Messages
2,951
Did they ever try making "warriors" reduce movement speed in an area around them (maybe falling off with radius)? Has that ever been done in an MMO or something? Seems kinda natural and it would make it a really "analog" interaction that you wouldn't need to pause constantly to micromanage.
 

As an Amazon Associate, rpgcodex.net earns from qualifying purchases.
Back
Top Bottom