187 réponses à ce sujet

[Nerivant]

Darkhour wrote...

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!

P.S. You still haven't replicated his feat.

[Aldandil]

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.  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?

The most probable answer here is that your game is bugged so that it's harder than everybody else's. The guy below me plays the game in a certain fashion that seems to work pretty well for him. I don't think he's lying, his game plays the same way as mine on different difficulty levels:

http://social.biowar...66/index/552558

That said, our disagreement about party roles will have to be put on ice if we don't seem to be playing the same game. In my game, a dual-wielding warrior and a two-handed sword wielding warrior can tank on Hard and on Nightmare. On Nightmare, I play with the character respecc mod and Dog as pet mod, so I can't use that as an argument when it comes to gameplay difficulty, but my warrior can grab and hold aggro. This does not seem to be the case for you, so clearly, something is different with our games.

[Xewaka]

Darkhour wrote...

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 genius.

CREEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEED!!

[Nerivant]

Xewaka wrote...

Darkhour wrote...

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 genius.

CREEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEED!!

Sneaky Warhound Titan sees what you did there.

[DoomBlackDragon]

I agrea it was poor planning to make it so only rogue could pick locks. Specailly after playing the mage starting story line which you had a fire rod to melt the locks. While I did have a rogue in my party. It was only an acher cause they seem to be the best 1 on 1 damage type. Stacking dex and cunning wow did my archer have some nasty skills. I also downloaded the bash mod. It was nice to have and even happier when I saw that I some how would destory like 30 copper. Made no sence how I would randomly destory some of my objects but still liked how bashing lockes did not always mean I got everything inside.

[SnakeStrike8]

What I disliked about restricting lock-picking to rogues is that it makes playing as anything other than that becomes less appealing. Me playing a warrior means that I've locked myself out of at least half of the early game loot since I can't pick locks, and a good chunk of XP as well. And there's now less reason to play said warrior. The use of shields or two-handers is not enough justification to put such restriction in, so I think.

[Ortaya Alevli]

SnakeStrike8 wrote...

What I disliked about restricting lock-picking to rogues is that it makes playing as anything other than that becomes less appealing. Me playing a warrior means that I've locked myself out of at least half of the early game loot since I can't pick locks, and a good chunk of XP as well. And there's now less reason to play said warrior. The use of shields or two-handers is not enough justification to put such restriction in, so I think.

Err, that's why it's called a choice, you see. While I myself will take a rogue Warden over a warrior any day, it appears there a quite a few people who don't care much about lockpicking and go with shield bashing and armor sundering instead.

[SnakeStrike8]

Ortaya Alevli wrote...

SnakeStrike8 wrote...

What I disliked about restricting lock-picking to rogues is that it makes playing as anything other than that becomes less appealing. Me playing a warrior means that I've locked myself out of at least half of the early game loot since I can't pick locks, and a good chunk of XP as well. And there's now less reason to play said warrior. The use of shields or two-handers is not enough justification to put such restriction in, so I think.

Err, that's why it's called a choice, you see. While I myself will take a rogue Warden over a warrior any day, it appears there a quite a few people who don't care much about lockpicking and go with shield bashing and armor sundering instead.

It becomes less of a choice when one choice holds so little value as compared to the other. The sole reason I played warriors for role-playing aspects; Garrath Aeducan is too proud to stab his foes in the back! He stabs from the front!
And Aevas of the Dalish simply had no opportunity to learn how to pick locks or use poisons. Why would he? There's no opportunity for such things will surrounded by trusted family and kin!

Anyway, point is: I see too little value in being a warrior as compared to a rogue, and this ought to be remedied, either by making lockpicking a universal skill (like coercion, and thus still not 'free'), or by giving some significant gameplay advantage to the warrior so that said advantages pu them on par with rogues and their lockpicking skills.

[Ortaya Alevli]

SnakeStrike8 wrote...

It becomes less of a choice when one choice holds so little value as compared to the other. The sole reason I played warriors for role-playing aspects; Garrath Aeducan is too proud to stab his foes in the back! He stabs from the front!
And Aevas of the Dalish simply had no opportunity to learn how to pick locks or use poisons. Why would he? There's no opportunity for such things will surrounded by trusted family and kin!

Anyway, point is: I see too little value in being a warrior as compared to a rogue, and this ought to be remedied, either by making lockpicking a universal skill (like coercion, and thus still not 'free'), or by giving some significant gameplay advantage to the warrior so that said advantages pu them on par with rogues and their lockpicking skills.

That's exactly the point. You and I see too little value in being a warrior. Some others see too little value in lockpicking and such. To them, sword and board fighting (replace that with any other random warrior aspect) is enjoyable enough to forego that inconsequential triviality called mundane tasks. Highly subjective.

[Xewaka]

Ortaya Alevli wrote...

That's exactly the point. You and I see too little value in being a warrior. Some others see too little value in lockpicking and such. To them, sword and board fighting (replace that with any other random warrior aspect) is enjoyable enough to forego that inconsequential triviality called mundane tasks. Highly subjective.

I have played both a Rogue and a Warrior to completion. The Warrior was sword and shield, the rogue was dual-wielding. The Warrior achieved a higher total damage percent in the party, while keeping the attention of six or more mooks. My rogue picked locks and dealed damage (more than the rest of the party but less total percentage than the warrior).
I'd say warriors have increased endurace and aggro control, (that is, tanking) and good damage abilities.
Mages have stupid good damage abilities and healing.
Rogues have good damage abilities and security bypass abilities (trap-finding, lockpicking, stealth).
Each class has two roles, one shared across all and another exclusive.
If you want to add mundane tasks to warrior and mages, you break this hipotethical role balance. Adding rogues a second combat role would balance that.
Yes, mages have the Arcane Warrior-Blood Mage combo so they can hog all three combat roles. Warriors should have beef with mages stealing their thunder, not with poor rogues.

[Qset]

Why should every class be able to pick locks? You want class defining skills and a rogue being able to disable traps and pick locks is a pretty solid archtype. Not saying it can't be varied or opened up but if you keep saying this skill or that should be allowed for all then in the limit you end up with one class and I don't think anyone wants that



I understand the argument about missing out on xp and loot at the beginning if you don't select rogue but that could be easily addressed with proper npc placement anyway to ensure there is always a rogue option available if needed. One of my minor bugbears was that in Ostagar Daveth had no lockpicking skills, a single box would have allowed him to open up all locks. Luckily I play on PC so a mod took care of that for all but my first playthrough when I wasn't playing rogue. I like the idea of a bash open option as well native in game rather than modded - never used that mod myself.

The other thing I didnt like was that rogues got faster skill progression. From dev posts in this thread I can see that they have addressed that in DA2.



I guess I like balanced parties and skill/role choices. I don't expect my PC to be able to do everything. I also would be intending to play through more than once anyway so I don't mind missing out on some stuff as I know i'll get it at the 2nd or 3rd run through

[Darkhour]

Nerivant wrote...

Darkhour wrote...

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!

P.S. You still haven't replicated his feat.

P.S.S I have indeed beaten Ishal on Easy which was what his feat was.

P.S.S.S ...and on Normal and Nightmare.   

[Darkhour]

Aldandil wrote...

The most probable answer here is that your game is bugged so that it's harder than everybody else's. The guy below me plays the game in a certain fashion that seems to work pretty well for him. I don't think he's lying, his game plays the same way as mine on different difficulty levels:

http://social.biowar...66/index/552558

That said, our disagreement about party roles will have to be put on ice if we don't seem to be playing the same game. In my game, a dual-wielding warrior and a two-handed sword wielding warrior can tank on Hard and on Nightmare. On Nightmare, I play with the character respecc mod and Dog as pet mod, so I can't use that as an argument when it comes to gameplay difficulty, but my warrior can grab and hold aggro. This does not seem to be the case for you, so clearly, something is different with our games.

I had to update to use my Ultimate Edition DLC.  Wondering if the original game is more difficult then the updated version.  I recall bringing up this issue back when the game came out and everyone agreed with me accept Xbox players.  For me Normal and Nightmare play nearly identically.  If enough people **** about it being unbalanced they may have made tweeks in the updates.