85 réponses à ce sujet

[1varangian]

Scattershot... an arrow that "splinters" and stuns a crowd? Excuse me, what?? How??



I will buy mostly any magic spell doing whatever because it is magic. But a regular arrow with AoE stun is just utterly silly and completely wrong. And very annoying when enemy archers spam it.

[GMOS_inc]

I'm personally experiencing most issues with Archers as well (They aren't hard... but significantly stronger than anything else.) Str is 40/ Dex at 36 and Co at 42. Spells aren't an issue with the right gear.



Then again... they're still very doable on Nightmare. So I don't see how it can be such an insane issue as the OP is making it out to be. ._.

[Solwen_Polyhymnia]

It could be worse.. Replace the same number of archers with mages and have them all cast fireball follow up by blizzard. or have them all cast sleep and horror or cone of cold or a number of spells and most party will likely be wipe out in about 5 seconds. It has friendly fire so the enemy next to you will likely also be dead but it will not help you out a lot.



And even minion level mages do have those spells. They just don't put more than 2 mages in any encounter. The same logic that make nerfing scatter shot because 4-5 archer all using it can be lethal should also lead to the nerfing of about all mage spells that have crowd control component or have ae damage to it. Because they have the potential to do the same thing if you design an encounter where their are a bunch of them standing away from battle behind a cover shooting at you. The reason that doesn't happen with mages is that currently they wisely decide not to place that number of mages in an encounter. The solution to scatter shooting archer is than to design the encounter so either they don't fire scatter shot or there is less of them shooting scatter shot or design the setup so that the party have an area to run for cover.



For people wanting to nerf scatter shot. Try having the mage in your party cast cone of cold (a tier 3 talent) in one battle and than having your archer in your party use scatter shot (a tier 4 talent) in an other battle and tell me which one change the course of battle more. Or for distant range attacks try fire ball vs scatter shot.

[1varangian]

Well the issue of Scattershot being a silly ability has nothing to do with Mages being the most powerful class in DaO. Scattershot should be replaced by another, more believable talent.



Suggestion: Doubleshot / Tripleshot, fires multiple arrows at the same target for higher damage

[XOGHunter246]

It doesn't matter what bioware do there will always be someone saying a spell or talent is overpowered but there always ways round these issue or nobody would of completed the game.

[nuculerman]

XOGHunter246 wrote...

It doesn't matter what bioware do there will always be someone saying a spell or talent is overpowered but there always ways round these issue or nobody would of completed the game.

Yes... but archers ARE overpowered AND underpowered.  They're underpowered when there is just one of them in a group and they're way overpowered when there are more than four.  If you could run around with 6 archer companions and a tank in this game, people wouldn't be complaining about how underpowered their archers are.  Because give all of them fire arrows, a long bow, 40+ cunning, lethality and use scattershot in succession.... everything in a room would die. In fact just make three of them do that, then spam armor debuffs on the bosses with the other three, and once again, everything in a room would die, including the bosses.

As someone has already said (maybe multiple people, I didn't read the whole thread) this is probably why archers seem underpowered solo, because in playthroughs Bioware realized that 4+ archers could tear your party a new one in a matter of seconds.  It's really a pity.  They should have just either decreased the amount of archers in enemy parties or nerfed only enemy archers.  Because without the dex fix, archers in your party kinda suck.

[Steeltrap67]

The thing I find odd is nobody has posted about what I believe to be the greatest issue with archers: they can fire into melee without any chance of hitting allies.



Fact is this is just wrong. There should be a risk associated with firing into melee. A typical melee involves moving around to the point that it is ridiculous 4+ archers can fire into it and only hit/miss their targets at no risk to their allies.



THAT is what should be addressed IMO.

[Ranik15]

Steeltrap67 wrote...

The thing I find odd is nobody has posted about what I believe to be the greatest issue with archers: they can fire into melee without any chance of hitting allies.

Fact is this is just wrong. There should be a risk associated with firing into melee. A typical melee involves moving around to the point that it is ridiculous 4+ archers can fire into it and only hit/miss their targets at no risk to their allies.

THAT is what should be addressed IMO.

Then we should make melee attacks, activated and auto-attacks run the risk of hurting nearby allies too.

I don't see why you're demanding that kind of realism when you're playing a game that has freaking spellcasters in it.

[Steeltrap67]

Ranik15 wrote...

Steeltrap67 wrote...

The thing I find odd is nobody has posted about what I believe to be the greatest issue with archers: they can fire into melee without any chance of hitting allies.

Fact is this is just wrong. There should be a risk associated with firing into melee. A typical melee involves moving around to the point that it is ridiculous 4+ archers can fire into it and only hit/miss their targets at no risk to their allies.

THAT is what should be addressed IMO.

Then we should make melee attacks, activated and auto-attacks run the risk of hurting nearby allies too.

I don't see why you're demanding that kind of realism when you're playing a game that has freaking spellcasters in it.

The point about magic is moot; magic is, well, magic, so they can make it work any way they want.

The question you raise about melee touches on the other thing I really don't like about the game design: enemies can run straight through my melee specialists on a bee-line to archers/mages. The whole system of raising 'aggro' so everyone attacks a character 'involuntarily' is also crap IMO.

Face it, warriors trained from an early stage to fight cooperatively. They would often team up to fight back to back so as to prevent flanking/rear attacks. Two well-trained warriors could create a choke point to prevent superiority of numbers adding much value other than inevitable attrition/fatigue of defenders. Entire fortifications were built around this principle.

In DAO they just run straight through your lines with no penalty. I would prefer a game design that pays some lip service to objective 'reality' in so far as that is achievable. Maybe 'zones of control' through which people cannot run without suffering auto-hit (and maybe upgrade to critical). Some combat skills around fighting in tandem.

It wouldn't be hard to design so that combat, outside magic, reflected the wealth of historical records depicting how it was.

Lazy design creating patently silly behaviour. I don't see why that is a good thing.

Put it differently: why would it be a BAD thing to do this?

Cheers

[tranj84cl]

Try something different. Archers are hard if you have a squishy party and are lower level. Leave those mages behind . Also, archers tend to be in large groups, which, well sucks if they have Scattershot. I rolled through Denerim on nightmare with a 4-warrior party, no deaths. I was around level 15 or so.

[Lord Phoebus]

I've found sleep+blizzardx2 will take down any group of archers, but that means you have to carry around two mages. or sleep+mass paralysis +blizzard and another AoE damage spell will also work. But the mass archer fights are difficult, I miss Wall of Force and Protection from Arrows in D&D.