Actively working to deprive enemies of high ground when they have it because you feel you must in order to be effective IS being forced to work with the mechanic even if you hate the fact of it. By talking about all the things you could do, and suggesting that lots of people do them regardless of their feelings on the matter, you're proving the point that others are making, Rag.
So you take it to THAT extreme ...
You know when i read all those crying post from all those people i allways thought that high ground bothered them bcs they was "forced to center whole combat around it" ...
Wich i understand as being unable to play properly without geting High Ground, since half of their attacks missed ... being unable to attack enemies who have high ground, again since half attacks missed ... and that they were frustrated that there is no effective way to defend yourself, while you are geting high ground too ...
You know, something that bothers you majority ... or preferably whole combat.
If i thought that all those complains about how is hight ground stupidly overpowered and how is game centralized around it was actualy complaining that you have to waste litteraly single action to throw Void Bulb ...
Well ...
Calm down, Rag. That's a bit silly to disingenuously nag at others for crying at, well, anything. No need to be so antagonistic about it, if anything you're just as guilty of what you claim others to be guilty of. Focus on the subject, not the feeling. If you have a perspective on why something is perceived as a problem and have counter-thoughts to present, great! But keep it at that. There will always be some main elements that recur in discussions for any game, particularly in regards to feedback. If not high-ground, then something else. And there are good reasons for those opinions, whether you agree with them or not. Right now, it seems you want to shut down a differing opinion, because you disagree with it. That's not healthy for a feedback environment.
players might not actually like the way they play, they could simply have no choice.
I would dare to once again say that this is nonsence ...
I mean sure, there could be "some" players unable to think outside their box, so they adapt to system they hate instead of going around it ... teoreticaly, but i still have troubles imagine it. O_o
You used high ground as example ...
I would say that high ground specificly can be easily overcome ... by Arrows or roaring thunder, misty stepp and thunderwave, void bulbs (wich are surprisingly effective, when used on edge ... not even sure if there is a change to resist their pull), stealthing and shoving (wich have 100% chance for success), thorn Whip if you are Druid ... and i bet i forgot some options.
I mean, there is quite a lot options for us to use ... how is that possible that so many people believes that everyone choosed "do what i hate and complain on forum"?
This is bad, Rag. Just bad. This is the kind of behavior you need to hard-stop with. No matter of context, if people don't like something, you have no position or right to claim that it's nonsense. There may come a day where you don't enjoy some part of a game, and you should be able to say "I don't like it", too. For example, in DOS2 it's a lot more effective running a party of the same damage type, to a point where once you learn that, playing a split party just feels bad because you know you're kneecapping yourself. Players may not like the feeling for that, as it "feels like" the game forces them to play a certain way, if they want to be optimal. So if you want a party with a tank, a healer, a rogue and a magic user, you're SOL in Dos2. (Of course you still -can-, but if this needs explaining at this point, then you're just not getting the point.)
This same thing goes for high-ground in BG3. I personally don't have any issue with it at all, but I do see why people wouldn't enjoy it. To flip it a little, if say Larian addressed the issues some people have with the perceived importance of high-ground, and found a viable solution to fix that problem, would it even matter to the way you prefer to play the game, or is it a win for everyone? I suspect you wouldn't even notice it. So why nitpick at legitimate feedback and issues others have. Just because you disagree, doesn't mean you have to try and "debunk" the value of which ever it is you disagree with. Lift people up, offer ideas, other perspectives. But don't shut others down. That's a job for moderation, and I am specifically addressing you right now. Take some time to reflect why.
There's a reason why the Pokemon games are turning away from forced random encounters too. I'm one of those that generally don't enjoy combat in games (it's complicated), particularly random encounters. I find them annoying, disruptive and doesn't add anything to the game but pointless grind to waste my time. Your argument could be translated to "Just buy lots of repel items and spend most of your game experience playing item menu simulator to activate a new repel every 40 seconds, duh." - Completely evading the point in the first place. A mechanic or design that someone express an opinion about, is not devalued by a solution to it. The fact that people don't enjoy highground isn't because of what they can or can't do to overcome it, but rather that the game feel bad; That they feel like they're playing bad or doing something wrong if they're not utilizing the most effective solutions at any given moment, further emphasized by enemy encounters often starting with advantage unless you have pre-existing knowledge of encounters ahead and can sneak/position yourself for it. There's valid arguments to be made of why that isn't always very good either. Anyway, I think you're completely missing the point, so stop trying to argue why oranges are good for you when everyone's talking about apples.
