9 réponses à ce sujet

[Chris Priestly]

On Friday last week we said this weeek would be warrior week. Well, here is the first update of new information on Warriors. The most physical of the classes in Dragon Age 2, a warrior is at his or her best when surrounded by foes, keeping their attention with powerful swings while allies wreak havoc in relative safety.

Read more about Warriors, check out screenshots of their abilities and their specializations HERE

[Peter Thomas]

crimzontearz wrote...

same for me

 and I'll specialize in 2 hander, Vanguard and Templar......and IF they fix Reaver that too......

Reaver is pretty nice. It's also pretty much the easiest spec to dabble in.

[Peter Thomas]

Sabresandiego wrote...

I have a question regarding warrior. Is there skill involved in playing the class? For example, assuming a non pause scenario, can one players be using the same exact warrior (skill and build wise) as another player but run through the game easily on nightmare because of their ability to control their character and use the right abilities at the right times, position themselves properly, etc... or is this a game with very little "twitch" skill required where basically there is little difference between a well controlled warrior and a poorly controlled warrior because the game is based mostly on stats rather than player control?

An example of a skill based RPG was mass effect 2. Using vanguard as an example, a poorly played vanguard was not a very good character regardless of stats and build. An expert however could wipe the floor with the enemy due to "user skill" above and beyond the character stats.

There is skill involved in playing every class, besides their stats and ability selection. The importance of this is magnified on the higher difficulties. Since this is a party-based game, however, the effect of an individual character generally isn't as great. Where and how you use individual characters and how they support or complement the other members of your party are important elements of gameplay.

The higher difficulties were designed around the player using his entire party, the lower difficulties are more forgiving. Being proficient with a single character may help on the lower difficulties, but the higher ones require you to be proficient with the party as a combined entity. You have mentioned in prior posts your intent to restrict yourself from using certain gameplay elements for your own purposes, but the game was designed and balanced with those elements in mind. Using the whole party and combining their strengths and weaknesses was one of those elements. A well controlled party can mop the floor with things a poorly controlled party can't.

[Peter Thomas]

crimzontearz wrote...

Sabresandiego wrote...

I have a question regarding warrior. Is there skill involved in playing the class? For example, assuming a non pause scenario, can one players be using the same exact warrior (skill and build wise) as another player but run through the game easily on nightmare because of their ability to control their character and use the right abilities at the right times, position themselves properly, etc... or is this a game with very little "twitch" skill required where basically there is little difference between a well controlled warrior and a poorly controlled warrior because the game is based mostly on stats rather than player control?

An example of a skill based RPG was mass effect 2. Using vanguard as an example, a poorly played vanguard was not a very good character regardless of stats and build. An expert however could wipe the floor with the enemy due to "user skill" above and beyond the character stats.

yeah but he is speaking about "twich" skill

He appears to be talking about skilled control of a single character. 'Twitch' is usually about timing. Timing is always a factor, but this isn't a game primarily about that. Skill in our game consists both of using a single character well (basic skill) and using multiple characters in a party well (advanced skill).

My point was that skilled use of a single character will have a greater influence on lower difficulties, but on higher diffidulties it will not be as much of a factor, since a different kind of skill is needed.

'Twitch' here would be responding to new events. That is always important, but because our game can be paused, a player can assess situations and decide a response at his leisure. Deliberately limiting yourself and choosing not to use it will make the game harder because it was designed with the ability to pause in mind.

[Peter Thomas]

Sabresandiego wrote...

The ability system you guys had in dragons age was so powerful that I could automate my entire party and just control a single person the entire time. This is how I prefer to play, controlling one character only, and relying on intelligent preset tactics for the rest of my party. I understand that this makes the game much harder than pausing and issuing commands to each party member seperately, but my goal is to defeat nightmare by only controlling my main character (warrior) and setting intelligent tactics which automate the rest of my party. Thats why I was asking about twich skill, will I be rewarded for moving out of incoming enemy fire, strafing to the back of opponents, interrupting spellcasts, retreating at the right time, advancing at the right time, killing the most important enemy first, using defensive abilities at the right time, etc: I am basically asking if the real time combat rewards "reactionary skill" and "quick decision making" if you choose to play without pausing.

Each of those things you mentioned can, and should, be done by a player. They are skill with an individual character, though. Nightmare was made so that you have to do that with everyone, working in tandem. It may be possible with the tactics system, but I haven't seen it.

[Peter Thomas]

jomonoe wrote...

I saw in an early dev post that sword and shield warriors and two handed warriors have comparable damage per swing when fighting one enemy. Is this still the case, or does has two handed changed to deliver more damage with each swing against a single enemy than sword and shield?

Their DPS is the same, however actual damage numbers on the weapon are different. The attack animations for Weapon and Shield are a bit faster, so their base damage is a bit lower.

[Peter Thomas]

Xewaka wrote...

If I understand this correctly, it means the main tradeoff between S&S and twohander is defense vs arc of attack width, exclusive skills notwhistanding. Is this correct? Or are there more mechanical differences to be taken into account, apart from the usability of either exclusive skill tree? Such as, are there stability bonus when wielding a shield compared to a higher Force multiplier when wielding a two-hander, etc?

Without taking into account exclusive skills, the two-hander affects a larger arc and does slightly more damage on a normal basic attack (because of a slightly slower animation speed). Because the amount of damage per hit is slightly higher, that also means that enemies have a bit more chance to be affected by the force of the swing.

Weapon and shield affects a smaller arc, but the character gains the additional armor and bonuses from the shield. Since he mitigates more of the damage, he is less likely to be affected by the force of the blow.

Modifié par Peter Thomas, 11 février 2011 - 05:54 .

[Peter Thomas]

BrotherWarth wrote...

It needs to be said as often as possible: Peter Thomas is AWESOME.

Tell that to Jade Raymond.


  ... that's a joke...

Modifié par Peter Thomas, 11 février 2011 - 07:25 .

[Peter Thomas]

Purple People Eater wrote...

Oh snap. You and Jade had a thing that went badly eh?...Did she steal your idea for Assasins Creed?

Originally it was more of a "Cooking Mama meets Doki Doki Panic" concept.

[Peter Thomas]

Augoeides wrote...

I'm really looking forward to seeing what has been done with the Reaver spec.

Looking at a screen shot of the tree should show at least one pretty important difference.