187 réponses à ce sujet

[Aldandil]

Darkhour wrote...

Aldandil wrote...

Now you're being unreasonable. You can play the game without a rogue in the party, and skip loot/lockpicking XP. There's nothing wrong with that. You can play the game with a rogue in the party. That is definitely the way the game was intended (that you would have all classes in your party at the same time). You can skip having warriors but than you won't have anyone that can pull aggro, you can skip mages but you will have less CC/AoE, and you can skip rogues and not get lockpicking. Yes, I can also see the difference between the three of thém, but the point is that classes have different functions. If you want to be able to do everything, you got to bring a companion of each class, or play one yourself.

Wrong. As I just said I can get 99% of all the chests without ever taking a rogue into combat.  It is simply a matter of unnecessary inconvenience that only rogues can pick locks.  And as I said above, why should Leliana be "mandatory".  Why should she be elevated above all the other characters?  Why does it have to be class based and not character base so that, for instance, Morrigan, Leliana, Zevran and Ohgren can pick locks?

I'm not quite sure if I follow you here, but as far as I understand, you're saying that that you are required to have only mages and a tank at higher difficulty levels. I assure you that this is not the case, but if you feel that way, then why play at those levels? I would agree with you that it seems as if the "intended" experience is in conflict with your desired experience, but if the issue only consists of having a rogue in the party or skipping some pretty useless junk, it's certainly not a big deal.

I only play higher difficulties when playing a mage. Otherwise, to get he full experience I have to play on easy or find some kind of cheat mod.

I don't know if you're playing Xbox version or what (I've heard it's ridiculously easy compared to the PC), but if 20 hurlocks are engaging you Leliana, Sten, Dog, Zevran, Oghren, whoever is going to drop faster that a lead boulder in a direct assualt.  And those darkspawn don't die quickly either.  Even with everyone focus firing on one enemy it takes too long to bring them down when there are 19 more wailing away at you.  You need tons of CC to keep things managable and warriors and rogues cannot provide that. Even when fighting a Reverent (4 vs 1)  potions aren't enough to keep people alive.  I'll call anyone who says otherwise a cheater, Xbox player or liar.

I'm not a great cRPG-player myself, but I've never played the game with anything but a party consisting of mixed classes, and I've beaten it on a PC on both normal and hard. There are, however, a lot of people much better at these types of games than I have beaten it on Nightmare with lots and lots of different types of party setups. See if you can find a post by Soteria and have a look at his game play videos linked in his signature if you'd like to see how he does it. He beats the game on Nightmare without the use of pots and only one or no mages in the party. I can't play like that, but it's not impossible. The point of having different difficulty settings is letting different persons play the game that is challenging enough for them.

Why is a rogue elevated above all others, you ask. Well, I suppose that you could give everyone the possibility to pick locks. How would you design that skill? The skill now is based on Cunning, so only characters with a high Cunning-skill would be able to pick chests with a high rating. That will give you the same situation that we have now, that only rogues would be useful to pick the chests you really want to open. You would probably have to base the skill on each class primary stat, Strength for warriors and Magic for Mages.

Right now, you need to spend four talent points to get it, so it's something you need to prioritize over combat skill. I'll make a bit of a strawman argument here, and assume that such a decision will make people feel forced to take those talents in the same way you feel forced to bring a rogue, and then that will be an inconvenience as well. You could also make it into a skill.

Should you make it into a skill based on the main stat of each class, opening chests wouldn't really be a problem. I always have more skillpoints than I know what to do it. Dumping them into lock-picking would be a no-brainer. Suddenly everyone can open chests. Isn't that just giving away free XP? What's the point of having locked chests if anyone can open them?

The point of this strawman is that having a skill such as lock picking must come with some form of a trade-off. That trade-off has to be an inconvenience in some way. In DA:O it was that only rogues heavily invested in Deft Hands and Cunning could pick all locks in the game. Rogues specced like that were less effective in combat, so you got utility at the price of something else. Incidentally, those rogues were also great at detecting/disarming traps, so it's not just lock picking you get from bringing one of them. Giving the lock picking ability to a particular class with a particular specc is the way it was done in DA:O and apparently the way it will be done in DA2 too. You could do it differently, but if the trade-off isn't great enough, you might as well do away with locks and disarmable traps altogether.

[Aldandil]

nightcobra8928 wrote...

Aldandil wrote...

Now you're being unreasonable. You can play the game without a rogue in the party, and skip loot/lockpicking XP. There's nothing wrong with that. You can play the game with a rogue in the party. That is definitely the way the game was intended (that you would have all classes in your party at the same time). You can skip having warriors but than you won't have anyone that can pull aggro, you can skip mages but you will have less CC/AoE, and you can skip rogues and not get lockpicking. Yes, I can also see the difference between the three of thém, but the point is that classes have different functions. If you want to be able to do everything, you got to bring a companion of each class, or play one yourself.
I'm not quite sure if I follow you here, but as far as I understand, you're saying that that you are required to have only mages and a tank at higher difficulty levels. I assure you that this is not the case, but if you feel that way, then why play at those levels? I would agree with you that it seems as if the "intended" experience is in conflict with your desired experience, but if the issue only consists of having a rogue in the party or skipping some pretty useless junk, it's certainly not a big deal.

as i said before i don't mix combat skills with non-combat skills.
i don't have a beef with rogue having lockpick, what i'd like to see is for warriors and mages to be as useful as the rogue is in non combat situations in different ways.

reposting my proposition:

locked chest/doors that can be opened by rogues and is dependant on cunning stat.

magical locks and barriers that can be dispelled by mages (like how the spirit form in the fade did with transparent doorways) and is dependant on magic stat.

and large obstacles like boulders or toppled statues that can be destroyed by warriors (like how the golem form in the fade was able to burst open through heavy doors) and is dependant on strenght stat. 


if you think that leaves the rogue lacking in combat skills, then add some more of those to rogue as well.

I like your suggestion, but it won't solve the problem of people feeling forced to bring a rogue. On the contrary, they'll suddenly feel forced to bring a character of each class. I'm with you, though.

[PsychoBlonde]

Darkhour wrote...

As far as all warrior or all mage group is concenred it is MANDATORY for any difficulty setting of Normal greater difficulty to have a mage warden and bring Morrigan, Wynne and Alistair/Shale (to tank).  A rogue or even a non-tanking warrior is pretty damn useless against the sheer numbers of enemies that come at you at once.

*snort*  The only difference I found between Easy and Hard was how long it took to kill stuff.  I certainly didn't need 3 mages to do it.  It was just like Mass Effect--it just made the combat take longer and be more boring.  Granted, I played the higher difficulties on my invincible mage-tank, so meh.  When things can't hit you or deal damage, it doesn't really matter if they have 5 hit points or 500.  

[StingingVelvet]

I don't think it's fair that just because I want to be a warrior and kill stuff with my sword that I can't also shoot fireballs. I mean, I paid for the game, I want to shoot fireballs with my warrior!

ARGRGAGDGDFG!!!!!!

[nightcobra]

StingingVelvet wrote...

I don't think it's fair that just because I want to be a warrior and kill stuff with my sword that I can't also shoot fireballs. I mean, I paid for the game, I want to shoot fireballs with my warrior!
ARGRGAGDGDFG!!!!!!

actually a classless levelling system for the protagonist while retaining the class system for companions would be an interesting experiment.

[Aldandil]

nightcobra8928 wrote...

StingingVelvet wrote...

I don't think it's fair that just because I want to be a warrior and kill stuff with my sword that I can't also shoot fireballs. I mean, I paid for the game, I want to shoot fireballs with my warrior!
ARGRGAGDGDFG!!!!!!

actually a classless levelling system for the protagonist while retaining the class system for companions would be an interesting experiment.

You'd better hope Sylvius doesn't see this, or his head will explode .

[Nevara]

As much as I agree with what everyone is saying, I understand what they are getting at. I also didn't like the idea of practically resigning myself to being a rogue because I'm a perfectionist.

The only possible way I can wrap my mind around it is D&D standards. When we play it was DM rules whether we got to take a non-class skill. If it was allowed for that campaign that you had to learn it from someone else (like you do to get specializations in DAO) But you also had to have met certain requirements.

But there were also penalties to doing it- usually double points compared to your regular class points.

[Nevara]

StingingVelvet wrote...

I don't think it's fair that just because I want to be a warrior and kill stuff with my sword that I can't also shoot fireballs. I mean, I paid for the game, I want to shoot fireballs with my warrior!
ARGRGAGDGDFG!!!!!!

They should have skill books for that just limit them.  It'd be nice to actually make a decent battle mage. 

Modifié par Nevara, 21 novembre 2010 - 12:45 .

[Ortaya Alevli]

I want to be forced to bring at least one from each class.

Like, hello? Party-based stuff? Teamwork?

[nightcobra]

Ortaya Alevli wrote...

I want to be forced to bring at least one from each class.
Like, hello? Party-based stuff? Teamwork?

did you see my proposition?

[Ortaya Alevli]

nightcobra8928 wrote...

Ortaya Alevli wrote...

I want to be forced to bring at least one from each class.
Like, hello? Party-based stuff? Teamwork?

did you see my proposition?

Thanks, but I'm not into men. hehe

I like the idea in principle, and I'm pretty sure it can be readily expanded. It's only a matter of how far BioWare is willing to go with the teamwork concept.

[Xewaka]

nightcobra8928 wrote...

Ortaya Alevli wrote...

I want to be forced to bring at least one from each class.
Like, hello? Party-based stuff? Teamwork?

did you see my proposition?

I did. I still say that if two classes have two combat roles and a noncombat role, and another has a combat role and a noncombat role, that later class has a clear disadvantage. But I don't want to relive the argument we had in the other thread.

Modifié par Xewaka, 21 novembre 2010 - 01:22 .

[Nevara]

nightcobra8928 wrote...

PsychoBlonde wrote...

Selene Moonsong wrote...
Everyone uses coersion to some degree.

Except for spelling it correctly.  (It's coercion.)

I'd be happy if they got rid of the divide between skills and talents, personally.  (Especially since the idea that skills are for non-combat utility and talents are for combat is ridiculous: two of the skills did nothing but either give you more COMBAT tactics slots or let you get higher level COMBAT abilities.)  Give everyone the same number of points and let them go to town.  If you want to buy every single combat talent and no skills, go for it.  They may as well have not had skills for warriors at all, since you were pretty much required to put 4 of your points into Combat Training anyway.  If any skill needs to go, it's that one.

I'd also like to see a mage-oriented skill of some kind, maybe spell lore or something.  (And have goofy magical barriers/traps/locks in the game that you could get through with spell lore.  Then you'd have some parity:  Rogues could get some chests, mages could get some chests, and warriors could kick more ass.)  It'd be REALLY awesome if they gave you a Knowledge skill that a.) gave you more dialog options and b.) gave you more xp from codex entries.

how about this:

locked chest/doors that can be opened by rogues and is dependant on cunning stat.

magical locks and barriers that can be dispelled by mages (like how the spirit form in the fade did with transparent doorways) and is dependant on magic stat.

and large obstacles like boulders or toppled statues that can be destroyed by warriors (like how the golem form in the fade was able to burst open through heavy doors) and is dependant on strenght stat. 

I agree with your proposal.  The different classes were created for balance for a reason.  No one should be allowed to do everything.  I was just throwing ideas out there myself.

Modifié par Nevara, 21 novembre 2010 - 01:23 .

[Xewaka]

Nevara wrote...

I agree with your proposal.  The different classes were created for balance for a reason.  No one should be allowed to do everything.  I was just throwing ideas out there myself.

And that's why they removed the arcane warrior specialization.

[nightcobra]

Xewaka wrote...

nightcobra8928 wrote...

Ortaya Alevli wrote...

I want to be forced to bring at least one from each class.
Like, hello? Party-based stuff? Teamwork?

did you see my proposition?

I did. I still say that if two classes have two combat roles and a noncombat role, and another has a combat role and a noncombat role, that later class has a clear disadvantage. But I don't want to relive the argument we had in the other thread.

yes, we already had this discussion. but i still stand by wanting to see warriors/mages more than just combat only classes.
you said that would leave the rogues to a disadvantage on a combat-level, so i say, add something to the rogues combat-wise to even things out, what exactly though i have no idea at this point but it should be something to consider at least.

to put things in your terms, to be balanced i believe it is best for all classes to have the same amount of combat roles and non combat roles.

[Darkhour]

In Exile wrote...

Darkhour wrote...
So, in your opinion, a rogue is a warrior that can pick locks?

If not, please ellaborate on how lock picking has any effect on how a rogue is played?

What is with all the nonsensical questions?  Lockpicking makes a rogue non-identical to a warrior via added utility, which also comes from skills at every 2 levels instead of every 3. Backstabs make a rogue distinct.

OK, so since rogues can dish out more damage, sneak, debuffs, have feign death and focus on indirect melee (flanking). In addition they are the class that can excel at bow and arrow. So why do they need lock picking to set them apart from warriors????

[Xewaka]

nightcobra8928 wrote...

yes, we already had this discussion. but i still stand by wanting to see warriors/mages more than just combat only classes.
you said that would leave the rogues to a disadvantage on a combat-level, so i say, add something to the rogues combat-wise to even things out, what exactly though i have no idea at this point but it should be something to consider at least.

to put things in your terms, to be balanced i believe it is best for all classes to have the same amount of combat roles and non combat roles.

That is reasonable.

[Darkhour]

Aldandil wrote...
I'm not a great cRPG-player myself, but I've never played the game with anything but a party consisting of mixed classes, and I've beaten it on a PC on both normal and hard. There are, however, a lot of people much better at these types of games than I have beaten it on Nightmare with lots and lots of different types of party setups. See if you can find a post by Soteria and have a look at his game play videos linked in his signature if you'd like to see how he does it. He beats the game on Nightmare without the use of pots and only one or no mages in the party. I can't play like that, but it's not impossible. The point of having different difficulty settings is letting different persons play the game that is challenging enough for them.

Without pot spamming?  Impossible. Either Soteria is using a mod, my game is bugged in a bad way or his game is bugged in a good way.  He would have to be doing more damage or taking less damage (i.e mod). If he wasn't, then that means his characters take the same amount of dmg I take and dish the same (give or take).  He's facing the same amount of enemies I face. Stats are stats, numbers are numbers.  There is nothing more he can do than you or me when it comes to melee types.  So either his game disc is somehow different than ours or he is cheating (or a liar).  The only other way is with one high level mage that is spec for CC/debuff/buff only which would mean he played at a lower diffculty and switched to Nightmare after he was built up.

Why is a rogue elevated above all others, you ask. Well, I suppose that you could give everyone the possibility to pick locks. How would you design that skill? The skill now is based on Cunning, so only characters with a high Cunning-skill would be able to pick chests with a high rating. That will give you the same situation that we have now, that only rogues would be useful to pick the chests you really want to open. You would probably have to base the skill on each class primary stat, Strength for warriors and Magic for Mages.

It would be a character specific skill so that Leliana isn't the only one instead of a class specific skill. Preferrably, I'd remove cunning as the primary attribute in place of dexterity which is a attribute both rogues and warriors are likely to put points into.  Mages are badass enough and can do without lock picking.

Should you make it into a skill based on the main stat of each class, opening chests wouldn't really be a problem. I always have more skillpoints than I know what to do it. Dumping them into lock-picking would be a no-brainer. Suddenly everyone can open chests. Isn't that just giving away free XP? What's the point of having locked chests if anyone can open them?

That would depend on Bioware making other skills worth acquiring.  Poison making is meh, Survival is meh, trap making is meh, I don't even like using tactics because the party usually ends up wasting talents or mana. Coercion is the only one worthwhile besides maybe herbalism, but lo and behold it's geared toward rogues. You'd want to make everything worthwhile so that you wouldn't want to give everyone lock picking. Trap making should be trap detection as well so that you need to spec it seperately from lock picking.  Rogues do not suck.  There is no reason that they should have an edge over warriors.  As it stands they are better than warriors because of their utility, not even.

[Xewaka]

Darkhour wrote...

Coercion is the only one worthwhile [...] but lo and behold it's geared toward rogues.

Actually, it's geared towards both rogue and warrior. It uses Cunning for persuade and Strenght for Intimidate. I know I made good use of the skill with both classes.

[Aldandil]

Darkhour wrote...

Aldandil wrote...
I'm not a great cRPG-player myself, but I've never played the game with anything but a party consisting of mixed classes, and I've beaten it on a PC on both normal and hard. There are, however, a lot of people much better at these types of games than I have beaten it on Nightmare with lots and lots of different types of party setups. See if you can find a post by Soteria and have a look at his game play videos linked in his signature if you'd like to see how he does it. He beats the game on Nightmare without the use of pots and only one or no mages in the party. I can't play like that, but it's not impossible. The point of having different difficulty settings is letting different persons play the game that is challenging enough for them.

Without pot spamming?  Impossible. Either Soteria is using a mod, my game is bugged in a bad way or his game is bugged in a good way.  He would have to be doing more damage or taking less damage (i.e mod). If he wasn't, then that means his characters take the same amount of dmg I take and dish the same (give or take).  He's facing the same amount of enemies I face. Stats are stats, numbers are numbers.  There is nothing more he can do than you or me when it comes to melee types.  So either his game disc is somehow different than ours or he is cheating (or a liar).  The only other way is with one high level mage that is spec for CC/debuff/buff only which would mean he played at a lower diffculty and switched to Nightmare after he was built up.

Don't be silly. The game has been soloed on nightmare. It can be played on higher difficulty levels with a number of party setups. You do realize that saying it's impossible just because you can't do it sounds a bit odd?

First time I beat the game I played on normal and spammed pots as well as having a healer. Now I can beat it on hard with a Mage CC/Healer. This proves to me that being more skilled at the game makes a difference. 
I can't beat the game on nightmare without pots. That doesn't mean someone else can't.

Why is a rogue elevated above all others, you ask. Well, I suppose that you could give everyone the possibility to pick locks. How would you design that skill? The skill now is based on Cunning, so only characters with a high Cunning-skill would be able to pick chests with a high rating. That will give you the same situation that we have now, that only rogues would be useful to pick the chests you really want to open. You would probably have to base the skill on each class primary stat, Strength for warriors and Magic for Mages.

It would be a character specific skill so that Leliana isn't the only one instead of a class specific skill. Preferrably, I'd remove cunning as the primary attribute in place of dexterity which is a attribute both rogues and warriors are likely to put points into.  Mages are badass enough and can do without lock picking.[

Should you make it into a skill based on the main stat of each class, opening chests wouldn't really be a problem. I always have more skillpoints than I know what to do it. Dumping them into lock-picking would be a no-brainer. Suddenly everyone can open chests. Isn't that just giving away free XP? What's the point of having locked chests if anyone can open them?

That would depend on Bioware making other skills worth acquiring.  Poison making is meh, Survival is meh, trap making is meh, I don't even like using tactics because the party usually ends up wasting talents or mana. Coercion is the only one worthwhile besides maybe herbalism, but lo and behold it's geared toward rogues. You'd want to make everything worthwhile so that you wouldn't want to give everyone lock picking. Trap making should be trap detection as well so that you need to spec it seperately from lock picking.  Rogues do not suck.  There is no reason that they should have an edge over warriors.  As it stands they are better than warriors because of their utility, not even.

I don't quite follow you on the argument about the relative power of the classes. First you said that the only way to play the game on higher difficulty settings was with a tank and three mages. That led me to believe that you thought rogues were worse than warriors, and if not for lock picking could have been done away with altogether. Rogues are worse than warriors when it comes to grabbing and holding aggro, as well as not getting knocked over. Different classes, different functions. Why would you want to fill your party with rogues? Definitely not to open chests, since you only need one to do that. Diversity is key, in my opinion.

Please don't call me a liar for saying I've beaten the game on hard with only one mage in the party. It's doable. Ask anyone. As it stands, all classes bring something to the table when you play the game. You can finish it with a party where one of the classes is missing, but you won't be able to do everything you otherwise would have been able to do. This really isn't all that strange.

[In Exile]

nightcobra8928 wrote...
how about this:

locked chest/doors that can be opened by rogues and is dependant on cunning stat.

This is how it worked in DA:O. On the advice of several on this board, I started replaying DA:O recently with a dex/cun dagger/dagger rogue. You can open all the locked chests at Ostagar with a cunning of around 23 and 0 points in lockpicking.

Allegedly with a cun/dex builds and cunning around 70, you can open every chest in the game with 0 points in lockpicking.

[In Exile]

PsychoBlonde wrote...

*snort*  The only difference I found between Easy and Hard was how long it took to kill stuff.  I certainly didn't need 3 mages to do it.  It was just like Mass Effect--it just made the combat take longer and be more boring.  Granted, I played the higher difficulties on my invincible mage-tank, so meh.  When things can't hit you or deal damage, it doesn't really matter if they have 5 hit points or 500.  

4 archers. Nightmare. It can be done.

Darkhour wrote...

OK, so since rogues can dish out more
damage, sneak, debuffs, have feign death and focus on indirect melee
(flanking). In addition they are the class that can excel at bow and
arrow. So why do they need lock picking to set them apart from
warriors????

Let's say all rogues could do differently was sneak. How unique are they now? They are now a warrior who hides. Now let's add bigger backstabs. They are now a warrior who hides and has better backstabs. Let's add lockpicking. Now, let's add skills every 2 levels instead of 3. At this point, they are now a warrior who hides, backstabs and has utility.

Each feature separates the rouge slightly from the warrior. The rogue is distinct taking all the features as a whole.

[Darkhour]

Aldandil wrote...

Don't be silly. The game has been soloed on nightmare. It can be played on higher difficulty levels with a number of party setups. You do realize that saying it's impossible just because you can't do it sounds a bit odd?

I can't help but notice that this guy on "Nightmare" is not doing anything particularly special or outside the box. He makes several mistakes and yet his character seems to be killing the hurlocks faster with a 1 on 1 approach than my guys focus firing 4 v 1 on NORMAL.  So I'll say it again.  He's either full of **** or my game disc is bugged.  The tower of Ishal took alot of planning and strategy (particularly the room where you use the ballistas).  Simply running in and slashing away is not going to cut it unless you're on Easy.  

I was watching another video where a guy soloed Flemeth on "Nightmare".  The most telling thing was that she used that maul move very sparingly. That's all she does when I play and only Shale seems immune to it. Literally no regular humanoid can face her without being mauled to death over and over.  Shale is a tanking necessity and everyone else must either take their chances attacking from the rear or at range.  Please, ellaborate on how ANYONE can possible take her one with an all warrior/rogue group relying solely on pots without cheating?  Maybe if they wait til they are level 22 with the best armors and everything is easy mode, but that's not a matter of skill. 

First time I beat the game I played on normal and spammed pots as well as having a healer. Now I can beat it on hard with a Mage CC/Healer. This proves to me that being more skilled at the game makes a difference. 
I can't beat the game on nightmare without pots. That doesn't mean someone else can't.

I beat the game on normal without spamming pots the first time I played it. The game's mechanics aren't difficult. I can play on nightmare without pots (rarely use them), but not without 3 mages+tank. It's not so much that mages are needed as it is that warriors/rogue are useless. That is the point I am making.  Normal to Nightmare is not a big difference. I don't know why you can't do the same thing on Nightmare if you can do it on Hard.

I don't quite follow you on the argument about the relative power of the classes. First you said that the only way to play the game on higher difficulty settings was with a tank and three mages. That led me to believe that you thought rogues were worse than warriors, and if not for lock picking could have been done away with altogether. Rogues are worse than warriors when it comes to grabbing and holding aggro, as well as not getting knocked over. Different classes, different functions. Why would you want to fill your party with rogues? Definitely not to open chests, since you only need one to do that. Diversity is key, in my opinion.

Tanks = sword and shield or Shale, not warriors in general.  Sten and Oghren are just as useless as Leliana and Zevran.  And even then Alistair is only good as a meat shield. His dmg contribution is practically nil.  I'd swear Sten falls quicker than Leliana to tell you the truth.  

This is another difference we seem to face.  My warriors cannot hold aggro. The manual claims that heavier armor equals more aggro and I can have all the aggro sustainables on and use the activated ones, but they typically go for the mages regardless. I typically have to use the envornment and party positioning to put the enemies in a situation where they have to default to the tank because they can't reach the mages, in combination with CC.

Please don't call me a liar for saying I've beaten the game on hard with only one mage in the party. It's doable. Ask anyone. As it stands, all classes bring something to the table when you play the game. You can finish it with a party where one of the classes is missing, but you won't be able to do everything you otherwise would have been able to do. This really isn't all that strange.

If you set that one mage up with tons of CC/debuffs and carry loads of lyrium, sure. Maybe.  But I get the impression that my Normal is your Nightmare and your Hard is my Easy. The only difference between Nightmare and Normal is the amount of times enemies use special skills. I've looked a a few vids and based on the damage done and recieved I would figure they were playing on Easy to tell you the truth, but that could could be because their levels are so high. In that vid I linked, the genlock emissary in the tower did practically nothing but autoattack.  I could never get away with ignoring a mage or charge head first into a group of hurlocks without backup and not die.  How can player SKILL allow a player to play so UNSKILLFULLY and succeed? 

You say you play the PC version?

Modifié par Darkhour, 22 novembre 2010 - 04:40 .

[Nerivant]

Darkhour wrote...

Aldandil wrote...

Don't be silly. The game has been soloed on nightmare. It can be played on higher difficulty levels with a number of party setups. You do realize that saying it's impossible just because you can't do it sounds a bit odd?

I can't help but notice that this guy on "Nightmare" is not doing anything particularly special or outside the box. He makes several mistakes and yet his character seems to be killing the hurlocks faster with a 1 on 1 approach than my guys focus firing 4 v 1 on NORMAL.  So I'll say it again.  He's either full of **** or my game disc is bugged.

You just destroyed your credibility. He's not full of ****, and your disc isn't bugged. You just aren't as good as him. Or copying the right build.

[Darkhour]

Nerivant wrote...

Darkhour wrote...

Aldandil wrote...

Don't be silly. The game has been soloed on nightmare. It can be played on higher difficulty levels with a number of party setups. You do realize that saying it's impossible just because you can't do it sounds a bit odd?

I can't help but notice that this guy on "Nightmare" is not doing anything particularly special or outside the box. He makes several mistakes and yet his character seems to be killing the hurlocks faster with a 1 on 1 approach than my guys focus firing 4 v 1 on NORMAL.  So I'll say it again.  He's either full of **** or my game disc is bugged.

You just destroyed your credibility. He's not full of ****, and your disc isn't bugged. You just aren't as good as him. Or copying the right build.

He wrecklessly wailed away at the enemies and spammed pots as much as possble. Yeah, I could never pull that feat off.   He's a freakin tactical genuius.  Switch to Easy and claim its Nightmare.  Pure genius!!!

P.S. Not too much build divergence at the Battle of Ostagar.  Thanks for playing.  Ba-bye!

Modifié par Darkhour, 22 novembre 2010 - 05:38 .