411 réponses à ce sujet

[Leonia]

nightcobra8928 wrote...

i just worry that warriors would be useless in a scenario where the ranged enemy is in an unreachable terrain for the warrior to hit, for example a cliff between them or something similar.

To be fair, they haven't said that warriors won't be getting any ranged attacks/abilities, only that they won't wield bows. A templar in Origins had holy smite and there were many aura/taunt skills that could be used from range by warriors. So, we don't know for sure that a warrior will have to sit around twiddling their thumbs while the archers/mages lure the enemy to them.

Oh, and don't warriors get that "close-in" attack thing?

Modifié par leonia42, 12 décembre 2010 - 04:04 .

[TJPags]

nightcobra8928 wrote...

i just worry that warriors would be useless in a scenario where the ranged enemy is in an unreachable terrain for the warrior to hit, for example a cliff between them or something similar.

Indeed.  I really one random encounter in DA:O - I believe it was the triggering attack for Leli's quest - with the archers at the top of a hill, which is reached by crossing a bridge, and following a path behind the ridge (from the perspective of where the player enters).  With a few melee fighters to take out before the bridge.

No way a quick surge - even if it covers 20 feet in a split second - can reach those archers before they pincushion the party.

[nightcobra]

leonia42 wrote...

nightcobra8928 wrote...

i just worry that warriors would be useless in a scenario where the ranged enemy is in an unreachable terrain for the warrior to hit, for example a cliff between them or something similar.

To be fair, they haven't said that warriors won't be getting any ranged attacks/abilities, only that they won't wield bows. A templar in Origins had holy smite and there were many aura/taunt skills that could be used from range by warriors. So, we don't know for sure that a warrior will have to sit around twiddling their thumbs while the archers/mages lure the enemy to them.

 
i hope so... heck, make my warrior throw something!

*looks at varric*


you'll do^_^

[nightcobra]

leonia42 wrote...

nightcobra8928 wrote...

i just worry that warriors would be useless in a scenario where the ranged enemy is in an unreachable terrain for the warrior to hit, for example a cliff between them or something similar.

Oh, and don't warriors get that "close-in" attack thing?

i did say unreachable, unless the closing attack enables the warriors to ignore the terrain:P

Modifié par nightcobra8928, 12 décembre 2010 - 04:07 .

[upsettingshorts]

I don't think warriors need ranged attacks. Charging is cooler anyway. And if that means we simply don't get level designs like the endgame in DA:O where it is physically impossible to reach the enemy, so be it. Ambushes like the one targeting Leliana are still fine. So you're at a tactical disadvantage. So what. That was the point of the ambush.



*puts up Shield Cover in anticipation of other posters responses*

[crimzontearz]

Maria Caliban wrote...

Apollo Starflare wrote...

Just feel it's a bit early to start worrying about one class getting more than another, especially in a single player RPG.

What? Never.

In NWN I played a fighter or fighter/thief. In WoW, I played a warrior or paladin. In Mass Effect, I played a soldier. In Dragon Age, I played a sword and shield warrior.

I don't care if it's a single-player party-based game, my PC is a warrior. I am interested in how warriors are being treated.

a woman after my own heart.....only I play vanguards in ME

[Maria Caliban]

Ryzaki wrote...

Maria Caliban wrote...

Defense lowers your chance to be hit. Armor lowers damage taken. Dex adds to Defense and increases chance to hit.

Wiki link

And other than DEX what adds to defense?

Okay.

You're ignorant of the subject? That's fine.
You're ignorant of the subject but still argue you're right? That's fine.
You're ignorant of the subject, still argue you're right after I provide a link to the wiki, and ask me a question that I answered in my very first post? Oh, come on.

Maria Caliban wrote...

A shield increases your missile reflection and defense. Defense is a passive ability that lowers your chance to be hit.

Could it mean?

DEFENSE IS INCREASED BY SHIELDS.

Modifié par Maria Caliban, 12 décembre 2010 - 04:12 .

[crimzontearz]

Upsettingshorts wrote...

I don't think warriors need ranged attacks. Charging is cooler anyway. And if that means we simply don't get level designs like the endgame in DA:O where it is physically impossible to reach the enemy, so be it. Ambushes like the one targeting Leliana are still fine. So you're at a tactical disadvantage. So what. That was the point of the ambush.

*puts up Shield Cover in anticipation of other posters responses*

the lack of it should be balanced by something else tho

[upsettingshorts]

crimzontearz wrote...

the lack of it should be balanced by something else tho

Hence my mention of Charge.  The tactical utility of a charge, at least in my use of it in Age of Conan across multiple melee classes, can't really be overstated.

Modifié par Upsettingshorts, 12 décembre 2010 - 04:11 .

[nightcobra]

well now on DA2 as i understand it, cunning is the stat that will add to defense this time around.

[crimzontearz]

Upsettingshorts wrote...

crimzontearz wrote...

the lack of it should be balanced by something else tho

Hence my mention of Charge.

something equally useful.......

[Ryzaki]

Maria Caliban wrote...

Okay.

You're ignorant of the subject? That's fine.
You're ignorant of the subject but still argue you're right? That's fine.
You're ignorant of the subject, still argue you're right after I provide a link to the wiki, and ask me a question that I answered in my very first post? Oh, come on.

DEFENSE IS INCREASED BY SHIELDS.

Someone needs a chill pill..

And how is asking a question an arguement? You're awfully irritable.

A +6 defense boost same thing as the bard's dancing shoes. How unique and what an extreme massive difference between warriors and rogues?!? 
I mean it's completely unreplicable!

Modifié par Ryzaki, 12 décembre 2010 - 04:18 .

[upsettingshorts]

crimzontearz wrote...

something equally useful.......

...it is?

[Leonia]

I look forward to my rogue being a true scout-type character this time around. With my bow I will be able to set up ambushes and pull enemies to my group when my group is ready for them (or so it looks in my head) while the warrior can taunt them off of me and start tearing into them. It just means I am playing a role similar to a ranger/hunter/sniper, which is a role I am somewhat familiar with from different MMOs. Without all the combat-shuffle going on, this should work out a lot better in DA 2 than it did in Origins where my rogue would usually wind up dead while trying to pull mobs to the group.

*hands Maria a cup of soothing tea*

Modifié par leonia42, 12 décembre 2010 - 04:13 .

[crimzontearz]

Upsettingshorts wrote...

crimzontearz wrote...

something equally useful.......

...it is?

not really....not in my mind at least unless the "charge" feature in Conan had some sort of kick to it

[nightcobra]

Upsettingshorts wrote...

crimzontearz wrote...

something equally useful.......

...it is?

though just giving them the charge and nothing else would be a bit much and i doubt that would happen to be the case.

[upsettingshorts]

crimzontearz wrote...

not really....not in my mind at least unless the "charge" feature in Conan had some sort of kick to it

Rapidly closing range was extremely useful, considering how brutal soldiers would get up close. Guardians (a class of soldier) had a feated charge option that included a knockback. 

nightcobra8928 wrote...

though just giving them the charge and nothing else would be a bit much and i doubt that would happen to be the case.

It'd be enough for me, honestly, depending on how long the cooldown is.

Modifié par Upsettingshorts, 12 décembre 2010 - 04:15 .

[TJPags]

Upsettingshorts wrote...

I don't think warriors need ranged attacks. Charging is cooler anyway. And if that means we simply don't get level designs like the endgame in DA:O where it is physically impossible to reach the enemy, so be it. Ambushes like the one targeting Leliana are still fine. So you're at a tactical disadvantage. So what. That was the point of the ambush.

*puts up Shield Cover in anticipation of other posters responses*

I'm fine with ambushes, I'm fine with being at a tactical disadvantage, and I'm fine with the enemy using the terrain to their advantage.

Bothers me a little that, in some situations, there's no option to retreat (like in the Leli quest we're discussing) even though there's technically no path-blocking device (The tree Zev knocks down behind you, for example). 

But hey, battle odds or terrain shouldn't always be set in my favor, or even balanced.

[crimzontearz]

Upsettingshorts wrote...

crimzontearz wrote...

not really....not in my mind at least unless the "charge" feature in Conan had some sort of kick to it

Rapidly closing range was extremely useful, considering how brutal soldiers would get up close. Guardians (a class of soldier) had a feated charge option that included a knockback. 

nightcobra8928 wrote...

though just giving them the charge and nothing else would be a bit much and i doubt that would happen to be the case.

It'd be enough for me, honestly, depending on how long the cooldown is.

yes but think about it. Charge would work only for groups of enemies for a warrior, the moment enemies are spread you are pretty much in the same situation as before gettign drilled while you pummel someone...... which a Rogue will do better than a warrior anyway with the whole flicker ability and whatnot. JUST charge would not cut it

[upsettingshorts]

crimzontearz wrote...

yes but think about it. Charge would work only for groups of enemies for a warrior, the moment enemies are spread you are pretty much in the same situation as before gettign drilled while you pummel someone...... which a Rogue will do better than a warrior anyway with the whole flicker ability and whatnot. JUST charge would not cut it

Wait, what is it supposed to be replacing?  Scattershot?  That's the only thing I can think of Warrior losing that would be incredible in the situation you're describing.

[Apollo Starflare]

Maria Caliban wrote...

Apollo Starflare wrote...

Just feel it's a bit early to start worrying about one class getting more than another, especially in a single player RPG.

What? Never.

In NWN I played a fighter or fighter/thief. In WoW, I played a warrior or paladin. In Mass Effect, I played a soldier. In Dragon Age, I played a sword and shield warrior.

I don't care if it's a single-player party-based game, my PC is a warrior. I am interested in how warriors are being treated.

Well, good luck lobbying for er warrior talents? I mean as I said in my post I have no idea how you can complain about whether the warrior has gotten enough cool stuff ™ without first finding out what cool stuff warriors are actually getting. I can understand worrying your class won't be fun to play or something, but just worrying about other classes getting things? That's the realm of MMO class envy to me.

Anyway, Bioware have obviously got a good track record with warriors if your style of play is anything to go by so you should be fine. I must admit I am surprised at your narrow playstyle though, I find I try different classes all the time and as such take an almost equal interest in all of them, maybe that's why I'm less bothered about 'my' class getting left by the wayside. Although I do love rogues and support them at times.

[Leonia]

crimzontearz wrote...

yes but think about it. Charge would
work only for groups of enemies for a warrior, the moment enemies are
spread you are pretty much in the same situation as before gettign
drilled while you pummel someone...... which a Rogue will do better than
a warrior anyway with the whole flicker ability and whatnot. JUST
charge would not cut it

And that's where your mage and rogue come into keep the rest of the enemies pinned down/pre-occupied while your warrior is focusing on demolishing them, one at a time (actually I seem to recall warriors getting some AOE abilities too). You just use your charge skill on the weakest/easiest to take out target or (if it's more beneficial to do so) keep the warrior on the hardest mob while your party takes down the easier mobs. Charge is an excellent way to keep a mob focused on your tank/warrior.

Modifié par leonia42, 12 décembre 2010 - 04:21 .

[crimzontearz]

Upsettingshorts wrote...

crimzontearz wrote...

yes but think about it. Charge would work only for groups of enemies for a warrior, the moment enemies are spread you are pretty much in the same situation as before gettign drilled while you pummel someone...... which a Rogue will do better than a warrior anyway with the whole flicker ability and whatnot. JUST charge would not cut it

Wait, what is it supposed to be replacing?  Scattershot?  That's the only thing I can think of Warrior losing that would be incredible in the situation you're describing.

no it's supposed to make up for the utter lack of ranged attacks......now tho IF the charge was something like ME2 charge? I'd say ok

[crimzontearz]

leonia42 wrote...

crimzontearz wrote...

yes but think about it. Charge would
work only for groups of enemies for a warrior, the moment enemies are
spread you are pretty much in the same situation as before gettign
drilled while you pummel someone...... which a Rogue will do better than
a warrior anyway with the whole flicker ability and whatnot. JUST
charge would not cut it

And that's where your mage and rogue come into keep the rest of the enemies pinned down/pre-occupied while your warrior is focusing on demolishing them, one at a time (actually I seem to recall warriors getting some AOE abilities too). You just use your charge skill on the weakest/easiest to take out target or (if it's more beneficial to do so) keep the warrior on the hardest mob while your party takes down the easier mobs. Charge is an excellent way to keep a mob focused on your tank/warrior.

not the point, I'm talking about something to counterbalance something that was ripped out of the warrior class.......ranged attacks

[nightcobra]

Apollo Starflare wrote...

Maria Caliban wrote...

Apollo Starflare wrote...

Just feel it's a bit early to start worrying about one class getting more than another, especially in a single player RPG.

What? Never.

In NWN I played a fighter or fighter/thief. In WoW, I played a warrior or paladin. In Mass Effect, I played a soldier. In Dragon Age, I played a sword and shield warrior.

I don't care if it's a single-player party-based game, my PC is a warrior. I am interested in how warriors are being treated.

Well, good luck lobbying for er warrior talents? I mean as I said in my post I have no idea how you can complain about whether the warrior has gotten enough cool stuff ™ without first finding out what cool stuff warriors are actually getting. I can understand worrying your class won't be fun to play or something, but just worrying about other classes getting things? That's the realm of MMO class envy to me.

Anyway, Bioware have obviously got a good track record with warriors if your style of play is anything to go by so you should be fine. I must admit I am surprised at your narrow playstyle though, I find I try different classes all the time and as such take an almost equal interest in all of them, maybe that's why I'm less bothered about 'my' class getting left by the wayside. Although I do love rogues and support them at times.

i do experiment with all the classes, but deep down like maria... i'm a warrior at heart.


sometimes it pains me to see that a good number of people (not saying in this forum) see the warrior class as the stereotypical unintelligent meat for brains that goes hit, hit, smashy, smashy, bashy, bashy.