Eternity Pillars of Eternity + The White March Expansion Thread

[Delterius]

Also, since the devs fixed it in PoE2,

I don't doubt that there's people who genuinely couldn't understand what was going on in PoE1. I could. Visual pollution matters much less when you're playing the game yourself. But I'm also sure there's people who still can't tell what's going on in PoE2 and will complain about it like it's a self evident truth. Just as there was people who couldn't tell what was going on in Baldur's Gate, Icewind Dale, Neverwinter Nights, and Dragon Age. And every time I believed them I was like 'that's it?'.

 

[TedNugent]

That is absolutely, fucking, retarded. That was a core mechanic in PoE. Did Sawyer hit his head on a rock before he made Deadfire?

The way it generally works, fighters, barbarians, enemies with shields will usually have engagement. It really singles out rogues and ciphers mostly, which works fine. High level rogues also have persistent distraction which is a massively effective engagement.

Does it make any sense that a man standing in front of you swinging a greatsword at you would be less engaged in combat than a man hiding behind a tower shield poking a dagger pensively at you?

If you turned your back to flee a pikeman, would you be more or less likely to suffer a puncture wound in your kidney versus the latter?

Ugh.

Let's be plain, this was a way for them to create soft tank loadouts.

 

[FreeKaner]

Does it make any sense that a man standing in front of you swinging a greatsword at you would be less engaged in combat than a man hiding behind a tower shield poking a dagger pensively at you

Both of these are same in PoE1 engagement wise. In PoE2 it is conceived as shield giving you opportunity to attack disengaging targets safely I suppose when it comes to logic of it. As well as styles of fighting giving you the same opportunity.

Gameplaywise however it means that not everyone with a dagger is able to pin down people.

 

[AwesomeButton]

Nothing wrong with engagement in a real time game. It makes martial classes just do their job, especially when the AI is designed to focus your squishies & casters instead of whomever is the closest. Especially the way it is in POE2 where it is limited to shields and abilities (though functionally most melees will still have it.)

Wait - Deadfire eliminated engagement for melee by default?

Only fighters, singe or multiclass, have engagement. For barbarians, I don't remember them having engagement, but if FreeKaner says so, maybe his memory is fresher than mine.

 

[TedNugent]

In PoE2 it is conceived as shield giving you opportunity to attack disengaging targets safely I suppose when it comes to logic of it.

The fuck - most casualties in this style of combat historically were from fleeing enemies. Do you want to take a guess as to why? If the opponent shows you his back, he is no longer a threat to you, and typically the army that smells blood goes in for the kill (also technically because it means they've broken formation). By contrast, an enemy who is -engaging- with you in close combat by using things like shield and weapon binds, stabbing you with a sword, etc, is more of a threat. The shield wouldn't make that any more or less safe, it would be null. You just stab the motherfucker in the back while he is running. Kind of like a....a.....a rogue? A rogue should even get bonuses on disengaging targets if it made sense.

Also, I'm pretty sure a two handed 10-14 foot weapon would be easier with which to stab a fleeing target than a shield. Especially considering you can't even attack with most shields in this game unless it's a unique shield (which is also nonsensical).

It makes no sense, it has no logic outside of being a game mechanic.

Only fighters, singe or multiclass, have engagement.

That makes even less sense. Just make fighters a tank class, and be done with it.

 

[FreeKaner]

In PoE2 it is conceived as shield giving you opportunity to attack disengaging targets safely I suppose when it comes to logic of it.

The fuck - most casualties in this style of combat historically were from fleeing enemies. Do you want to take a guess as to why? If the opponent shows you his back, he is no longer a threat to you, and typically the army that smells blood goes in for the kill (also technically because it means they've broken formation). By contrast, an enemy who is -engaging- with you in close combat by using things like shield and weapon binds, stabbing you with a sword, etc, is more of a threat. The shield wouldn't make that any more or less safe, it would be null. You just stab the motherfucker in the back while he is running. Kind of like a....a.....a rogue? A rogue should even get bonuses on disengaging targets if it made sense.

Also, I'm pretty sure a two handed 10-14 foot weapon would be easier with which to stab a fleeing target than a shield. Especially considering you can't even attack with most shields in this game unless it's a unique shield (which is also nonsensical).

The type of combat represented in RPGs is small scale skirmishes and brawls, not some sort of formation battle. Fleeing enemies in pursuit in actual battles die because they get cut down by chasing enemies, especially cavalry, not because they get AoO'd in a shield push. In general engagement is represented more as a fighting style in PoE2, as can be seen from the fact that fighters, barbarians and rogues can make attack of opportunity when it comes down to "logic" of it. Shields giving engagement I just consider shield making it safe for the person wielding it to make attacks of opportunity, that's all. Don't overthink it. It's certainly better than giving a priest being able to backstab fleeing people.

Only fighters, singe or multiclass, have engagement.

That makes even less sense. Just make fighters a tank class, and be done with it.

Fighters, Barbarians and Rogues all get engagement via passive abilities. Paladins may too but I am not certain right now.

 

[Ulfhednar]

Worldwound closed... Pillars installed...

 

[TedNugent]

Don't overthink it.

Dude turns back while you're swinging sword at him, do his defenses stay the same?

 

[FreeKaner]

Don't overthink it.

Dude turns back while you're swinging sword at him, do his defenses stay the same?

Why is the dude turning 180 degrees in place? By same logic everyone should get some sort of backstab too by the way.

 

[IHaveHugeNick]

some of the best Real Time Based Combat in the genre

Select all> attack> repeat until done.

 

[TedNugent]

Why is the dude turning 180 degrees in place? By same logic everyone should get some sort of backstab too by the way.

Don't overthink it.

It wasn't broke, don't fix it.

 

[Lyric Suite]

Wow, Durance is the most Codexer NPC i've ever seen. Actually, i'm starting to see a bit of myself in him lmao.

 

[Lacrymas]

I'm not sure he's intended to be inspirational or a role model. ;d

 

[FreeKaner]

It wasn't broke, don't fix it.

It was done because of gameplay mechanics, to make it so that only invested characters can zone with attack of opportunity. Considering there are many detractors of even that, there was probably some reason for changes between PoE1 and PoE2. Point was it isn't a mechanic that's hard to justify in terms of logic either.

I personally like it more in PoE2 but the major difference is really that not everyone in your party gets to engage and hold positions, plus not all enemies will have it though rogues with persistent distraction are a pain either way.

 

[AwesomeButton]

If going for realistm/autism, a "softer" approach would have been to have engagement on everyone, but with rebalanced probability of success, dependent on both the party members' stats and the enemy's stats, as well as rebalanced damage if successful. Something like a check of your dexterity vs the enemy's reflex, whether or not your AoO succeeds.

People seem to think of themselves as locked in engagement while in reality it represents the ability of the enemy to smack you as you try to distance yourself from him.

 

[CthuluIsSpy]

Wow, Durance is the most Codexer NPC i've ever seen. Actually, i'm starting to see a bit of myself in him lmao.

Durance is the best.
He's a bloody useful party member and he has the best dialogue. Love the bastard.

 

[Grunker]

But PoE's difficulty is way different than Deadfire's in my experience. The first is a linear curve that is hardest at level 1 and easiest at level 20, with the sole exception of megabosses. Whereas PoE has the easiest AND the hardest encounters on its high levels.

Not 100% accurate I'd say, at least if you also use level scaling and play the DLCs.

Sure, you get a major level/power boost by pacifist questing in Neketaka before mid-game and things can seem trivial for a while afterwards. That's why I recommend exploring a fair bit before landing in the main hub. Or at least make brakes in questing there, rather then try to do everything at once. That's good both for the challenge and game pacing.

But some late game encounters can be pretty brutal, if you're not good at it. A certain imp, the Splintered Reef, a certain battle lich and probably some more.
However the DLCs change this balance a lot. Even Beast of Winter provides a solid challenge when done at the recommended level (particularly the bridge section). Forgotten Sanctum and SSS both have the best end game encounters in the whole game.

Of the DLCs, only Forgotten Sanctum felt like a boost in difficulty for me. Beast is weird: it has a lot of defense bloat, so fights take longer, but it's just as easy as the main game in the sense that you're never in danger of dying.

 

[CthuluIsSpy]

How do you split mobs? I'm trying to get past floor 13 and there's like 6 animats, 2 adragans and a banshee who just swarm my party and chain stun them no matter how many potions I take. If I can separate out the animats I can probably take them but Adragans are fucking horseshit.

 

[AwesomeButton]

Of the DLCs, only Forgotten Sanctum felt like a boost in difficulty for me.

Agreed, but that's probably because it's balanced for 18-20lvl party. Easier to balance when you know the maximum level the party can possibly be in your areas

 

[AwesomeButton]

How do you split mobs? I'm trying to get past floor 13 and there's like 6 animats, 2 adragans and a banshee who just swarm my party and chain stun them no matter how many potions I take. If I can separate out the animats I can probably take them but Adragans are fucking horseshit.

Splitting mobs? The balance squad is here to get you, "degenerate player":

 

[IHaveHugeNick]

Difficulty wise Deadfire kinda got screwed on launch where everything was laughably easy even on PoTD. It really ruined a lot of good work they put into encounter design and levels this time. By the time difficulty got patched people already had encounters and metagame figured out, and there's no way around that.

 

[AwesomeButton]

Someone asked rethorically about this earlier, but I think adding too many difficulty options can indeed be bad. Makes it harder to balance the game for every difficulty, and harder for players to compare experiences.

 

[CthuluIsSpy]

Finally cleared floor 13. Sagani is a lot better than that Druid.
Also arquebuses are pretty good.

 

[purupuru]

harder to balance the game for every difficulty

I don't think you should. Just balance the game for the intended difficulty and if the player want an easy way out or punish themselves, it's their game and their choice.

harder for players to compare experiences.

Well, theoretically yes. But as long as there are still standardized difficulty levels I don't see this actually being a big problem. Owlcat's games offer loads of difficulty options but people have no problem talking about their "core" "unfair" experiences.

 

[Ulfhednar]

On no mercs, PotD, I have made it to Caed Nua just before the Maerwald fight.

It's interesting coming back to this after WotR, as the pre-buffing in Wrath has been taken to 11 and in PoE, you just cruise from one fight to the next. IE games are the happy medium.