473 réponses à ce sujet

[MindRaven]

hmmmmm.........when I saw this thread, I actually thought it would be a new preview article.........lol.

[Maria Caliban]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

This will make it even harder to spec out a party as you see fit.  The tactical options in DA2 are now severely limited when compared to DAO - I'd suggest this is a bigger change than anything we saw between ME and ME2.

I thought ME 2 did exactly the same thing? In ME 1, I could tell Liara, an adept, to equip an assault rifle. In ME 2, neither biotic squad-members nor the Commander can equip them save for Samara.

[upsettingshorts]

TMZuk wrote...

There is! It's the ONLY "tactic" available to warriors. Charge in, swing the the sword, and hit two and a half enemy with each swing.

And unless you can create a 4-person two-handed warrior party, that's not really all there is to it, is it?

TMZuk wrote...

Missiles? No. Attempting to take the enemy one by one (aka: common sense) no. Dumb? Yes.

Who says you can't take on an enemy one-by-one utilizing aggro management or crowd control?  The 2.5 number was used to describe how many enemies on average a AoE warrior would have to hit to equal the DPS of a rogue that is limited to 1 target.  

2.5W = R

That's all that number means.  Everything else being equal.

Modifié par Upsettingshorts, 30 décembre 2010 - 09:18 .

[Snoteye]

Yellow Words wrote...

... Imoen from Baldur's Gate.

As an aside, I really don't like when family plays a major role in a game. I will defend the pre-defined character a long way, but nobody else can decide how my character should feel about its family. It didn't help that Imoen was so annoying.

[IRMcGhee]

TMZuk wrote...

Upsettingshorts wrote...
You'd be right if that tactic worked every time in every situation with every character on every difficulty, though.  And there's no evidence that it does, is there?

There is! It's the ONLY "tactic" available to warriors. Charge in, swing the the sword, and hit two and a half enemy with each swing. Missiles? No. Attempting to take the enemy one by one (aka: common sense) no. Dumb? Yes.

That only applies if you were only playing a single character with no party to back them up. It's stupid to charge into the middle of the enemy if you don't use your other characters to disable or disrupt them first. 

[ToJKa1]

crimzontearz wrote...

- you need constant math and floating numbers numbers to realize whether or not something is doing more damage (or taking more damage) than something else?

I bought NWN2 and King's Bounty games from Steam holiday sales, and yes, those logs help, a lot. I can imagine the reasons why BioWare wants to hide the background workings of the game, but i disagree with that decision.

[Ziggeh]

Sharn01 wrote...
I am not saying I agree or disagree with the OP, its probably a mix of both actually, but the reality is a lot of the fans of the older style games are seeing one of the last companies that actually makes games geared towards them switching its style, with no other company in sight willing to pick up the empty space they are leaving behind.  You may disagree, but that doesnt change the way they feel, which is alienated by the game developers. 

The trouble with this, and I do agree with the sentiment, is that it does largely appear to be a feeling rather than a fact. Aside from the more defined character and thus potential limit to roleplaying, I've yet to read a well defined or commonly held position on what the old style games represented. I think it's unrealistic to expect developers to adhere to something so ill defined, and unreasonable to expect them to not seek to advance their medium, but I entirely agree that it's an effect people feel when mechanics they might have previously enjoyed aren't fully replicated.

[soteria]

TMZuk wrote...

There is! It's the ONLY "tactic" available to warriors. Charge in, swing the the sword, and hit two and a half enemy with each swing. Missiles? No. Attempting to take the enemy one by one (aka: common sense) no. Dumb? Yes.

Errr... attacking someone in melee combat ("charge in and swing the sword") isn't a tactic. That's an action. Attacking someone with a bow isn't a tactic, either. We could talk about the tactics involved in melee combat, but that would require knowing what abilities are available. What you imply is that warriors can only autoattack, and that's patently false. Are you just trying to imply outrageously untrue things?

[crimzontearz]

ToJKa1 wrote...

crimzontearz wrote...

- you need constant math and floating numbers numbers to realize whether or not something is doing more damage (or taking more damage) than something else?

I bought NWN2 and King's Bounty games from Steam holiday sales, and yes, those logs help, a lot. I can imagine the reasons why BioWare wants to hide the background workings of the game, but i disagree with that decision.

really?

ok answer my question then, do you NEED those numbers to tell you exactly how much damage you are dealing? or are you able to understand that a sword that has a damage of 25 as per inveontory stats will be more useful than one that has a damage of 15? Or that  a sword that causes 25 damage plus 10 fire damage (again as per inventory stats) will be more effective than a plain sword dealing 30 damage?

come on now...

[Dave of Canada]

TMZuk wrote...

There is! It's the ONLY "tactic" available to warriors. Charge in, swing the the sword, and hit two and a half enemy with each swing. Missiles? No. Attempting to take the enemy one by one (aka: common sense) no. Dumb? Yes.

So there's no tactics in Origins? No tactics in anything at all with a melee class?

Right, you're a fun sort to try and please.

[TMZuk]

Upsettingshorts wrote...

Who says you can't take on an enemy one-by-one utilizing aggro management or crowd control?  The 2.5 number was used to describe how many enemies on average a AoE warrior would have to hit to equal the DPS of a rogue that is limited to 1 target.  

2.5W = R

That's all that number means.  Everything else being equal.

And that means that if I play a warrior, I have to accept that he/she do less damage with each attack than a rogue. So the only way to use a warrior "sensible" is by charging into the middle of a group of warriors so the arc-damage can be utilized.

In other words, Bioware is forcing a specific way of playing warriors on the players, wether they like that or not.

But never mind, they are not changing the game, and I am not buying it, so I should really stay away from these discussions. If it fails they might return to make games I like.

[bsbcaer]

Snoteye wrote...

Yellow Words wrote...

... Imoen from Baldur's Gate.

As an aside, I really don't like when family plays a major role in a game. I will defend the pre-defined character a long way, but nobody else can decide how my character should feel about its family. It didn't help that Imoen was so annoying.

Nobody is deciding how your character feels about its family; they are providing options in how you react to your family...based on the different tones, there's always the option that you could be a sarcastic snot to your mother or overly protective of your herpy-derpy younger brother 

[TMZuk]

Dave of Canada wrote...

TMZuk wrote...

There is! It's the ONLY "tactic" available to warriors. Charge in, swing the the sword, and hit two and a half enemy with each swing. Missiles? No. Attempting to take the enemy one by one (aka: common sense) no. Dumb? Yes.

So there's no tactics in Origins? No tactics in anything at all with a melee class?

Right, you're a fun sort to try and please.

I haven't mentioned Origins with a word. In origins I had the choice, and you know what? The warriors I played in that game was learning both melee and missile skills. Because; that is the sort of characters I like.

[Dave of Canada]

TMZuk wrote...

And that means that if I play a warrior, I have to accept that he/she do less damage with each attack than a rogue. So the only way to use a warrior "sensible" is by charging into the middle of a group of warriors so the arc-damage can be utilized.

Or you can lure them behind a corner where they'll all be in close quarters.
Or you can make the tank "gather" them up.
Or you can freeze them in place.
Or you can knock them around with knockbacks until they are in a single "pile".

ect

[upsettingshorts]

TMZuk wrote...

And that means that if I play a warrior, I have to accept that he/she do less damage with each attack than a rogue. So the only way to use a warrior "sensible" is by charging into the middle of a group of warriors so the arc-damage can be utilized.

Only if you're solely concerned with maximizing the DPS of every character in your party at all times.  That's not tactics either.

Not to mention what Dave said are all viable alternatives.

Modifié par Upsettingshorts, 30 décembre 2010 - 09:32 .

[UHITTHEJACKPOTMOFO]

I'm a console gamer and I hate the direction dragon age 2 is taking.

[soteria]

TMZuk wrote...

And that means that if I play a warrior, I have to accept that he/she do less damage with each attack than a rogue. So the only way to use a warrior "sensible" is by charging into the middle of a group of warriors so the arc-damage can be utilized.

Baloney. I have tentative plans for how to take advantage of the arc damage, and they don't involve a warrior being surrounded and being attacked by lots of enemies. They aren't forcing a specific way of playing a warrior any more than Origins forced a specific way of playing a rogue.

[crimzontearz]

TMZuk wrote...

Upsettingshorts wrote...

Who says you can't take on an enemy one-by-one utilizing aggro management or crowd control?  The 2.5 number was used to describe how many enemies on average a AoE warrior would have to hit to equal the DPS of a rogue that is limited to 1 target.  

2.5W = R

That's all that number means.  Everything else being equal.

And that means that if I play a warrior, I have to accept that he/she do less damage with each attack than a rogue. So the only way to use a warrior "sensible" is by charging into the middle of a group of warriors so the arc-damage can be utilized.

In other words, Bioware is forcing a specific way of playing warriors on the players, wether they like that or not.

But never mind, they are not changing the game, and I am not buying it, so I should really stay away from these discussions. If it fails they might return to make games I like.

uh,,,no......Bioare is differentiation the 2 fighters in the game

the 2 fighters are warrior and rogue (yes Bioware devs said before that the rogue is NOT a thief)

Warriors- do AOE damage by default, can use shields and swords
Rogues- can dual wield and use ranged weapons like bows

Warriors- soak more damage
Rogues- avoid more hits

Warriors- can call aggro with talents to call MORE enemies to themselves and use their AOE attacks
Rogues- have positioning talents to manouver themselves within the battlefield

on the side

Rogues- can lockpick + steal (huge advantage)
Warriors- may have passive telents for in combat stamina regeneration per kill (huge advantage)

the way YOU use your fightersplaying up to their strength is up to you.....but you are the one assuming the the "warrior" is the only fighter in the game

[Warheadz]

I can't say that i hate the direction DA 2 is taking since I haven't played it for a single minute yet, but I am nervous after Civilization V took a new direction and everyone assured "It's going to be awesome!"

[Ziggeh]

Personally I think the word "direction" used in this sense is just vague rhetoric.

Modifié par Ziggeh, 30 décembre 2010 - 09:39 .

[Sharn01]

crimzontearz wrote...

ToJKa1 wrote...

crimzontearz wrote...

- you need constant math and floating numbers numbers to realize whether or not something is doing more damage (or taking more damage) than something else?

I bought NWN2 and King's Bounty games from Steam holiday sales, and yes, those logs help, a lot. I can imagine the reasons why BioWare wants to hide the background workings of the game, but i disagree with that decision.

really?

ok answer my question then, do you NEED those numbers to tell you exactly how much damage you are dealing? or are you able to understand that a sword that has a damage of 25 as per inveontory stats will be more useful than one that has a damage of 15? Or that  a sword that causes 25 damage plus 10 fire damage (again as per inventory stats) will be more effective than a plain sword dealing 30 damage?

come on now...

Well, its not always that simple, a 25 damage dagger did do more damage then a 30 damage sword for instance, and for a rogue when backstabbing you always backstabbed with the main hand, so you wanted the fastest off hand possible to ensure faster backstabs.

I do like combat logs myself, not so much for damage but to see the math behind  what is going on. When getting hit six times in a row with a character that is supposed to be hard to hit, I want to know if that hit streak was luck or if the enemy is skilled enough that hitting my character is not difficult for it.

[Snoteye]

crimzontearz wrote...

really?

A combat log is much more than just spelling out the damage being dealt. NWN/2 and BG/II had fairly good combat logs. The "constant math and floating numbers" is a gross simplification.

UHITTHEJACKPOTMOFO wrote...

I'm a console gamer and I hate the direction dragon age 2 is taking.

Will you elaborate on that?

Warheadz wrote...

I can't say that i hate the direction DA 2 is taking since I haven't played it for a single minute yet, but I am nervous after Civilization V took a new direction and everyone assured "It's going to be awesome!":?

That could still prove true. It probably won't but it could.

Modifié par Snoteye, 30 décembre 2010 - 09:42 .

[In Exile]

IRMcGhee wrote...

That only applies if you were only playing a single character with no party to back them up. It's stupid to charge into the middle of the enemy if you don't use your other characters to disable or disrupt them first. 

Unless you want that character to draw in all the aggro. Even without the force field exploit, sacrifical tactics worked very well in DA:O (especially with the dragon plate armour that was highly resistant to fire).

[WidowMaker9394]

"...lose your fanbase..."?



I like where DA2 is going Mr. Hardcore. I've no intention of leaving.

[crimzontearz]

Snoteye wrote...

crimzontearz wrote...

really?

A combat log is much more than just spelling out the damage being dealt. NWN/2 and BG/II had fairly good combat logs. The "constant math and floating numbers" is a gross simplification.
.

I disagree......if you are given the formulas you can pretty much figure it out on your own


of course

that requires the damn formulas