A question of game balance came up in
one of the recent comments. I thought that I would address this concern.
I feel that it is unjust to determine whether or not something is balanced without examining the scale used to measure that balance. For example, would it be fair to say that it is unbalanced to place an Orga Fury in one of the rat towers or on Kitty Beach? I say that it
is unbalanced, because this monster doesn't fit the scale of the other monsters found in those areas. It's too large and too tough and too overpowering for the skill level of the players who hunt those areas.
On the other hand, would it be unbalancing to find an Orga Fury in the Slate Caverns? I am of the opinion that an Orga Fury in the Slate Caverns would be marked as "junk," because the threat of an Orga Fury does not measure to the threat of an Albino Arachnoid. In this setting, the Orga Fury falls on the other end of the scale.
The new monster AIs will need to have their degree of threat weighed, and then monsters running those AIs will be placed in an appropriate area for that level of risk. In the example of monsters flanking players, it is unlikely that you will see this tactic used on Kitty Beach (although the thought of Rockodiles trying to maneuver around players makes for an amusing mental picture). However in a place like the Orga Village where the threat level is already rather high, having some Orga try to maneuver around the players to cut off their escape makes for a new and exciting combat experience. This tactic would not be unbalanced within such a dangerous area, so a flanking AI scales well for that hunting ground.
So yeah, no Flanking Rockodiles for Kitty Beach. The new monster tactic AIs will need to scale into hunting areas that match the risk level of that area.