313 réponses à ce sujet

[Phoenixliger]

I've played games where u define a class for u Oblivion as an example but by end game i could have an arch mage who knew only alchemy and was really a warrior does that make sense.[alchemy only meant potion making]

[Phoenixliger]

Mass Effect was admittedly more shooter than rpg but I think that is what they set out to do and they did a great job at it

[CruserBoii]

Vanguard Shepard in ME.
Vanguard Hawke in DA2. >

Modifié par CruserBoii, 11 février 2011 - 02:56 .

[Phoenixliger]

Sounds like a great combo

[crimzontearz]

CruserBoii wrote...

Vanguard Shepard in ME.
Vanguard Hawke in DA2. >

same for me

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

[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.

[crimzontearz]

Peter Thomas wrote...

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.

I dunno....in origins the whole "soul eating" thing never worked.......ever

maybe it was a bug?

Modifié par crimzontearz, 11 février 2011 - 03:19 .

[Sabresandiego]

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.

Modifié par Sabresandiego, 11 février 2011 - 03:33 .

[lazuli]

crimzontearz wrote...
I dunno....in origins the whole "soul eating" thing never worked.......ever

maybe it was a bug?

You mean Devour, I believe.

Corpse exploitation abilities in DA:O were difficult to pull off because of a small window of opportunity available before the corpse "decayed," for lack of a better word.  This made Animate Dead hard to use as well.  I thought it was broken until I checked the wiki.

[crimzontearz]

lazuli wrote...

crimzontearz wrote...
I dunno....in origins the whole "soul eating" thing never worked.......ever

maybe it was a bug?

You mean Devour, I believe.

Corpse exploitation abilities in DA:O were difficult to pull off because of a small window of opportunity available before the corpse "decayed," for lack of a better word.  This made Animate Dead hard to use as well.  I thought it was broken until I checked the wiki.

I believe that warrants fixing then hehe

[crimzontearz]

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.

in all honesty.....if you ask me adding "player skill" to the mix breaks part of the fundamental concept of an RPG 

as far as I know according to the vids the level of twich in DA2 is VERY low

[Sabresandiego]

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.

in all honesty.....if you ask me adding "player skill" to the mix breaks part of the fundamental concept of an RPG 

as far as I know according to the vids the level of twich in DA2 is VERY low

I thought the whole point of DA2's new action RPG mode (when you dont pause) is to reward those with high player skill, meanwhile the ability to pause is left in for those who would rely more on slow tactics rather than twitch based player skill.

[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.

[lazuli]

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.

It's hard to compare the combat systems of the Dragon Age and Mass Effect series though.  Although it lacks any sort of tactical pause feature, Guild Wars might be a closer example to Dragon Age of a skill based RPG.  In Guild Wars, you hit the max level fairly quickly and most of the valuable gear is only valuable for its cosmetic purposes.  Consumable items have no place in PVP.  In Guild Wars, any idiot can load out a top tier Monk build.  But his team will succeed or fail depending on his skill at the game more than any other aspect.  Any idiot can equip a highly rated Mesmer build.  But if she's too slow to counter enemy skills, her team will crumble.

To answer your question, though, I think we need to examine what you mean by "skill."  If it's reaction time and nothing else, then I doubt it, as we'll have a tactical pause at our fingertips.  But if your definition of "skill" includes the ability to read a battlefield and use your team's resources effectively in diverse situations, then I certainly hope the game requires skill.

[crimzontearz]

Sabresandiego wrote...

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.

in all honesty.....if you ask me adding "player skill" to the mix breaks part of the fundamental concept of an RPG 

as far as I know according to the vids the level of twich in DA2 is VERY low

I thought the whole point of DA2's new action RPG mode (when you dont pause) is to reward those with high player skill, meanwhile the ability to pause is left in for those who would rely more on slow tactics rather than twitch based player skill.

Mike himself said that DAO was, according to him, an action RPG.......just throwing it there

[crimzontearz]

Peter Thomas 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.

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.

yeah but he is speaking about "twich" skill

[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.

[Sabresandiego]

Peter Thomas wrote...

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.

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.

Modifié par Sabresandiego, 11 février 2011 - 04:36 .

[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.

[Sabresandiego]

Peter Thomas wrote...

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.

I see, well Im gonna try to run through nightmare without pausing by using a very efficient tactics setup and only controlling my main character. Hopefully it works! 

[Dark Knight X]

Peter Thomas wrote...

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

That's great to hear!  Does Reaver fit nicely with the other 2 specs?  I'm planning on creating a Reaver/Berserker 2h death-dealing Warrior!  Although a Reaver-Templar does sound interesting from a role-playing perspective.....

also......can you confirm if the "Charge" talent has been renamed to Scythe?

Do Sword and Shield warriors get some kind of "charging" talent?

thanks.

[atheelogos]

Peter Thomas wrote...

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.

Can you confirm that Reavers come from drinking dragon blood and not learning it from demons?

[jomonoe]

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?

[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.

[ClassyUnicorn]

How are the warriors different weapon types different from each other. By that I mean how does a sword differ from an axe or a mace beyond appearance?