1380 réponses à ce sujet

[CaisLaochach]

How is there a problem with this?



I played through Origins three times, twice as a rogue, once as a dual-wield warrior (I originally only intended on doing it twice, but my hard-drive died, so I went and did it again.)



I ended up using a DW warrior because tanking's boring, while 2H damage is non-existent. The only difference between my rogue and my warrior was my rogue always had to be behind mobs while my warrior had to remember to use berserk.



A viable 2H tree would be much more interesting.

[Telum101]

Ok, I think an issue here is that some aren't seeing it from a roleplaying perspective, rather than just seeing the practical side within Origins, sort of in the same way that some prefer a voiced PC, but for others (including me), it breaks the immersion.



Personally, I never completely felt that the gameplay was incredibly different between warriors and rogues (which is what a lot of people are saying), but the characterization just felt much more different to me. When I envision a typical rogue, I think of stealth and speed etc. so I play a character with that play-style. For warriors however, I'm someone who runs headstrong into battle, tries to intimidate and overpower enemies head to head etc.

Not to be offensive or anything, but I guess it's partially a matter of the player's creativity.



I still stand by my statement that removing DW is lazy. instead of outlining those differences through gameplay changes, Bioware is (or is being forced to) just pretending a problem never existed.

[jsachun]

Check out the seismic slam ability of the Barbarian. Either Bioware have done their research or it's a pure coincidence that Hawk is going to have a similar ability. When you see the character design here, I don't think there'll be an argument for the art of DW being better suited to an agile character as oppose to brute force and pure athleticism.

Modifié par jsachun, 07 septembre 2010 - 10:42 .

[Tirigon]

jsachun wrote...

Check out the seismic slam ability of the Barbarian. Either Bioware have done their research or it's a pure coincidence that Hawk is going to have a similar ability. When you see the character design here, I don't think there'll be an argument for the art of DW being better suited to an agile character as oppose to brute force and pure athleticism.

Blizzard has recently become a better company than BioWare, sad as it may be....

[upsettingshorts]

lol, Blizzard please.

[Ken555]

Blizzard has recently become a better company than BioWare, sad as it may be....

[/quote]
I guess some people have that way of thinking though Bioware isn't promoting itself that well with DA2 as it is not so good. Perhaps it is falling back and letting time take over. I always say that if you don't keep up you don't exist.

[Icinix]

Trigon wrote...

Blizzard has recently become a better company than BioWare, sad as it may be....

Ken555 wrote...
I guess some people have that way of thinking though Bioware isn't promoting itself that well with DA2 as it is not so good. Perhaps it is falling back and letting time take over. I always say that if you don't keep up you don't exist.

....and if you get too far ahead you're classed as too radical and fade into obscurity.....sometimes the bleeding edge and the long tail are really crap places to be

Modifié par Icinix, 07 septembre 2010 - 10:59 .

[upsettingshorts]

I suppose one has to give a crap about at least one of the following - Starcraft, Diablo, or WoW - to even entertain that idea. I however, do not, so the idea of Blizzard being better than anyone isn't one I can understand.

[Akka le Vil]

jsachun wrote...

Check out the seismic slam ability of the Barbarian. Either Bioware have done their research or it's a pure coincidence that Hawk is going to have a similar ability. When you see the character design here, I don't think there'll be an argument for the art of DW being better suited to an agile character as oppose to brute force and pure athleticism.

If you're going to use Blizzard, then have a look at the fury tree of the warrior in WoW.
A purely DW tree for a strength class. And funnily enough, it's by FAR the most popular tree of the warrior.
So yes, it is quite possible to argue in the other way about the art of DW being better suited to an agile character if you're going to follow Blizzard's design.

Edit : reformulated a sentence.

Modifié par Akka le Vil, 07 septembre 2010 - 02:16 .

[upsettingshorts]

Psh, look at the Conqueror for Age of Conan.

In all manners combat, Age of Conan blows WoW away. It's not even a competition. In fact, it's an even better example for this case because the Carnage (DW) Conqueror warrior is pretty different from the Reaver (DW) Barbarian rogue.

Though in both cases they are mostly about DPS.

Modifié par Upsettingshorts, 07 septembre 2010 - 11:12 .

[jsachun]

Akka le Vil wrote...

jsachun wrote...

Check out the seismic slam ability of the Barbarian. Either Bioware have done their research or it's a pure coincidence that Hawk is going to have a similar ability. When you see the character design here, I don't think there'll be an argument for the art of DW being better suited to an agile character as oppose to brute force and pure athleticism.

If you're going to use Blizzard, then have a look at the fury tree of the warrior in WoW.
A purely DW tree for a strength class. And funnily enough, it's by FAR the most popular tree of the warrior.
So yes, there is quite an argument for the art of DW being better suited to an agile character if you're going to follow Blizzard's design.

Actually that not true. All you need is 50 dex to max out DW tree in O & A. Therefore warrior will need to pump rest of the stat into strength for damage & talent bonuses where as in rogue will need to put the rest into cunning. In a sense Diablo does this better by limiting stats(ie max 60 dex for warrior & max 60 strength for rogue)  as oppose to limiting style of combat for each classes. 

Edit:
This also allows for better discrimination of classes as a rogue will no longer be able equip equipment designed for warriors and vice versa. If the arguement for limitation of DW combat skill in DA2 is purely based on disability to differentiate between a strength based trait & a cunning based trait then let there be discrimnation of stats to limit the use of equipment designed for rogues or warriors.

Modifié par jsachun, 07 septembre 2010 - 11:47 .

[jsachun]

Besides a high level cunning rogue with backstab ability has no need for DW talents to do massive damage or high dps anyway. Even momentum is unnecessary as swift wil make your rogue backstab just as fast if not faster.

Modifié par jsachun, 07 septembre 2010 - 12:06 .

[Akka le Vil]

jsachun wrote...

Actually that not true. All you need is 50 dex to max out DW tree in O & A. Therefore warrior will need to pump rest of the stat into strength for damage & talent bonuses where as in rogue will need to put the rest into cunning. In a sense Diablo does this better by limiting stats(ie max 60 dex for warrior & max 60 strength for rogue)  as oppose to limiting style of combat for each classes.

Mmh, what is not true ? Because I don't really see how what you say contradict what I said here.

[jsachun]

Akka le Vil wrote...

jsachun wrote...

Actually that not true. All you need is 50 dex to max out DW tree in O & A. Therefore warrior will need to pump rest of the stat into strength for damage & talent bonuses where as in rogue will need to put the rest into cunning. In a sense Diablo does this better by limiting stats(ie max 60 dex for warrior & max 60 strength for rogue)  as oppose to limiting style of combat for each classes.

Mmh, what is not true ? Because I don't really see how what you say contradict what I said here.

Actually you contradicted yourself. You mentioned Blizzard DW warrior tree being based on strength, yet you mention this gives grounds for DW talent being suited for an agile character.
If you read my previous post my opinion was based on the character design for the barbarian class & not other character design that Blizzad have engaged in. Yet you've assumed that I was taking path of all the DW design that Blizzard may have done. Anyway Off topic I don'y play WOW because I don't believe in subscription fees for stand alone games.

Modifié par jsachun, 07 septembre 2010 - 12:59 .

[Jimmy Fury]

Lilacs wrote...
Of course that was meant to be a useless reason to have a rogue in your party.  You miss the point here.  Read what was written, and read what I have written about rogues.  Personally, I love rogues.  I want Bioware to improve their abilities.  I simply do not desire Bioware to streamline another class in order to make the other distinct.

Apologies then.  I had read what you wrote before (because... well... it's a forum. There is no other option than to read what has been written. Really useless statement imho.) but mostly when you were agreeing with the guy who wanted to strip all weapon skills from rogues. Thus making it appear to be yet another statement requesting rogues be thrown under the bus and not allowed to do anything but pick locks and disarm traps.

But I still don't comprehend why so many people refuse to apply their own course of logic to their arguments... If it's such a wonderful solution to just give rogues new abilities, why can't Warriors just be given new abilities? It works both ways. Claiming that the best way to make the classes distinct is to give 1 class new abilities can apply to both rogues and warriors.

[Akka le Vil]

jsachun wrote...

Actually you contradicted yourself. You mentioned Blizzard DW warrior tree being based on strength, yet you mention this gives grounds for DW talent being suited for an agile character.

Aaaah ok, I see what's the problem.
My bad, I simply was wrong in how I made my sentence. Ended up saying the opposite of what I meant. Yes, I wanted to imply that DW isn't necessarily grounded in agility - in fact, I pointed in a previous post that DW is more about skill than anything.

I'll edit to make it clearer.

If you read my previous post my opinion was based on the character design for the barbarian class & not other character design that Blizzad have engaged in. Yet you've assumed that I was taking path of all the DW design that Blizzard may have done. Anyway Off topic I don'y play WOW because I don't believe in subscription fees for stand alone games.

I was just pointing that if someone is gonna to use Blizzard's design to make a point, we could use another Blizzard's design to make another point

[Akka le Vil]

Jimmy Fury wrote...

Apologies then.  I had read what you wrote before (because... well... it's a forum. There is no other option than to read what has been written. Really useless statement imho.)

Not really, sadly. Many people don't read what someone said and answer to it, but actually just skip most of the content in the post and answer to an imaginary post that is completely remade in their head and has little to do with what was written in the first place.

But I still don't comprehend why so many people refuse to apply their own course of logic to their arguments... If it's such a wonderful solution to just give rogues new abilities, why can't Warriors just be given new abilities? It works both ways. Claiming that the best way to make the classes distinct is to give 1 class new abilities can apply to both rogues and warriors.

I don't see where anyone disagreed about giving warriors more abilities. I saw people being mad about warriors having abilities REMOVED.

[Jimmy Fury]

Akka le Vil wrote...
I don't see where anyone disagreed about giving warriors more abilities. I saw people being mad about warriors having abilities REMOVED.

I didn't say they disagreed with it, I said they never acknowledge the possibility at all. They say "Just give rogues new abilities" but never stop to consider that Warriors will be getting new abilities instead. Should that occur then it can't be said that warriors have been streamlined or crippled or forced into the other 2 known weapons trees.

Edit: incidentally does anyone honestly believe abilities won't be removed from Rogues and Mages as well? Everything I've read about the new skill system tells me everyone is getting redundant, useless, or irrelivant skills removed in order to better distinguish the three classes and create a skill system that builds instead of populates (as in, a focus on upgrading skills instead of just getting more skills which what they're doing to mages)

Modifié par Jimmy Fury, 07 septembre 2010 - 02:32 .

[Akka le Vil]

Jimmy Fury wrote...

I didn't say they disagreed with it, I said they never acknowledge the possibility at all. They say "Just give rogues new abilities" but never stop to consider that Warriors will be getting new abilities instead. Should that occur then it can't be said that warriors have been streamlined or crippled or forced into the other 2 known weapons trees.

You still don't understand that what makes people mad is that warriors won't be able to DW anymore ?
I mean, that's the whole point of the thread, that's the TITLE OF THE THREAD, and you still don't get it ?

And you wonder why people make "useless comment" about wondering if you're reading the post or not ? :-/

Modifié par Akka le Vil, 07 septembre 2010 - 03:57 .

[PsyrenY]

LEAKED SCREENSHOT OF WARRIOR LADY HAWKE!

[lazytopaz]

From my point of view its not a nerf anyway. When i tried to spec warrior dual wielding long swords or whatever he wasnt as nearly effective dpser as a rogue, with 2x daggers backstab critting for 60. Taking down targets like warm knife through butter in a matter of seconds. 2x dagger + rogue with proper melee skills/passives just pewpewpew the **** outta anything that moves. And daggers are loads faster than (long?)swords.
Hey Drizzit Do Urden fans i know its cool... but you know he was taught by unmatched swordmaster(probably the best living/ever warrior in whole Dark Elf history) and had hundreds of years of battle experience and training of blade wielding arts.
Tho to some extent there should be an option/class that could be able dual wield scimitars in same manner which would be a balance between slow big hitting long swords and fast hitting low dmg daggers. It might be tied to a specific skill/passive + stat/race/level requirement

Modifié par lazytopaz, 07 septembre 2010 - 04:56 .

[Monica83]

Anyways remove a warrior ability only to keep class distinct is a stupid things... It's strange bioware maded this choices its very strange.. Im a bit disappointed of that.. Bioware are a nice team.. It's possible they see only this way to keep class "distinct?".. mmmh ill hope DA2 its not a "Static game" like many others around....

[AlanC9]

lazytopaz wrote...

From my point of view its not a nerf anyway. When i tried to spec warrior dual wielding long swords or whatever he wasnt as nearly effective dpser as a rogue with 2x daggers backstab critting for 60 burning down targets like warm knife through butter. 2x dagger + rogue with proper melee skills/passives just pewpewpew the **** outta anything that moves. And daggers are loads faster than swords.

That's the weird thing. The only way the change really makes classes more distinct is if there were a lot of DW warriors in the first place, but I've never seen why they'd be a good class.

And please, could we all not mention that drow again?

[Jimmy Fury]

Akka le Vil wrote...
You still don't understand that what makes people mad is that warriors won't be able to DW anymore ?
I mean, that's the whole point of the thread, that's the TITLE OF THE THREAD, and you still don't get it ?

Ah yes, I disagree therefore I don't get it and can't read. <_<

Of course I understand that people are upset because warriors can't DW anymore. But no, honestly, I can't for the life of me figure out why because nobody has formed a single logical argument for it with a premise based entirely on verifiable fact and a conclusion that stems directly from that premise. AKA a logical argument. There haven't been any.
Every single rant about why it sucks uses 3 things.
1: WoW classes as "proof" that something belongs entirely to one class.
-Invalid because this is DA not WoW-
2: Some "standard definition" of a rogue or a warrior.
-Invalid because Bioware is not using those definitions for its classes.-
3: assumptions that exclude logical possibilities.

So no, I don't get it. I don't get why "we moved the DW specialization" seems to mean "warriors can't pick up a second weapon" to some people. I don't get absurd leaps in logic or unsound arguments that say a = b  therefore a = c + pi + nugbombs + doom. I don't get why people take Laidlaw's statement to mean Warriors won't have any fighting ability anymore. I don't get why people can't comprehend the difference between a strength based class and a dexterity based class. I don't get why me and every other person who has pointed this out gets accused of being illiterate just because we think you're jumping to unfounded conclusions.

AND what does that have to do with giving rogues new abilities then? If I can't bring up giving warriors new abilities because it's not in line with the threads title; then why so much focus on how to change rogues?
What does "R.I.P. Dual-wielding warrior" have to do with giving rogues throwing knives?
If those who agree with you can bring up the subject of handing out new abilities then so can those of us who disagree.

Not to mention that you just proved my point. Instead of acknowledging the possiblity of warriors getting new abilities you claimed, yet again, that I'm not reading what people are writing.
Yes, I know, people are mad. My point is that they shouldn't be because we don't know the whole story. Are you reading what i'm writing now?

-edited for clarity and typos weeeeee -

Modifié par Jimmy Fury, 07 septembre 2010 - 05:01 .