77 réponses à ce sujet

[Popinjay]

Periodiko wrote...

Maria Caliban wrote...

That's still not ironic.

"Isn't that ironic" has become a way of saying "isn't that interesting" for people who think they're smarter than they actually are. I blame Alanis Morissette.

It's not ironic when the very thing you would expect to happen, happens, and does so in a very straightforward way. That is pretty much the opposite of ironic!

Now now, there is no need to pick on Alanis.  Her song "Ironic" is incredibly ironic in that nothing that she claims (in the song) is ironic actually is. =D irony

However, "Isn't that an unfortunate co-incidence?" somehow lacks the same power as "Isn't that ironic?" - so I think her choice is explicable at least.

Sorry.  What were we talking about?

[soteria]

Rzepik wrote...

FalloutBoy wrote...

Have you played Baldur's Gate lately? Because this game blows it away. Take off the rose-colored glasses.

The DA world is full of history and changes based on your actions and by the progression of the plot. There are complex party interactions. The boss fights are generally more complex. You aren't forced to use a rogue to clear out all the big red trap squares out of every dungeon before you can continue playing the game. The plot is somewhat non-linear and yet maintains a challenge no matter where you go.

- I played BG2 three months ago, or so... And it was a great fun, even without mods.
- More complex boss fights?  Okay, I have to admit that DA:O is the first cRPG game where big enemies are making use of their size. Ahhh... dragon chewing a warrior. classic fantasy.  Although as I wrote: If tactic worked on dragon, it will also work on Revenant/Uldred/Cauthrien. In Baldur's Gate 2 there's a damn BIG difference between fighting , for example,a dragon and a lich.
- Necessity of rouge in BG is rather a neutral feature than advantage/disadvantage <_<   
- Plot in DA: 1. Origin (I wasn't sure at first.... but it turned out to be a marvelous idea. Possibility of belonging to pathological dwarven family is  a true revolution in gaming XD)   ---> Few main loooong linear crawls to chose in any order. With an important decision at the end. Oh Joy. (the longest and the worst part of the game. Actually my main accusation) + side quests (Honestly. There is few good from NPCs... But this whole idea with simple kill/bring  quests from notice board smells like... urgh... MMO?   ---> Cool ending with some important decisions.
You see... BG2 don't have so many decisions that shape the world, but:
- Crawls are neutralized by riddles, and well-developed side quests
- There's no crawling in the middle of the game. The core of game is made of side quests of every kind. Perfect balance between linearity and freedom.

I played through BG 1, 2, and TOB for the first time a month ago.  Good stories, interesting games, but held up on a pedestal I don't think they deserve.  I'll ignore BG, since BG2 is the game most people talk about (and it was a superior experience, imo).  The core of BG2 was not sidequests at all.  The second chapter was heavy with them, and that was it.  After that, it was almost perfectly linear, except for a part where you could skip a whole chapter.  The side quests were no more or less plentiful after chapter 2 than they are in DA:O--much less plentiful if you exclude the mage, thief, chantry and mercenary quests. 

Even if you ignore those (and I've ignored a lot of them for RP reasons) you still have a lot of content in DA:O, and more freedom in how you carry out the main quest than you did in BG2.  In BG2 you at each stage you could generally choose the "good" or "evil" path/faction to side with, but it was still completely linear.  In DA:O you can go wherever you want after a few hours and still have at least two ways to complete every part of the main quest, and it's seldom (never?) as obvious which way is the "good" way to complete a quest.

So much for story comparison.  I think the gameplay is far superior as well.  Sure, you had liches and dragons and trolls and all that had their unique ways of fighting and dying.  But, to be perfectly honest, most of the "sound strategies" were just cheese.  Lay a bunch of traps in front of a dragon (or heck, Irenicus, why not), use "fake talk," or abuse simulcrum and aoe spells from out of range.  Fighting a lich?  Pick up a few handy scrolls of lich killing, use the mace of insta-lich-gibbing +2, or just turn undead at higher levels and watch them explode!  Here's to unique monster types and tactics for defeating them.  Of course, you could just solo the game with a Kensai/Thief wielding a staff of the ram running around one-shotting everything.  Or, if you can't backstab it, just drop a time trap or a half-dozen spike traps.  That's the great thing about BG2, lots of varied strategies, right?

About the only thing I agreed about was that some of the dungeons were excessively long.  I won't mention any specific dungeons, but a few times I would begin to wonder if I would ever see the light of day.

[horang]

Raisthlin Arckon wrote...
more non offensive spells ? theres dozens of them...what the hell are you talking about ?
identical battles ? did you actually beat the game ?
one tactic in 95% of battle ? of course yes...you obviously played on easy or normal setting,. try nightmare. which i did and i can assure you there no one tactic that works 95% of the time.

While I really enjoy the game, he is correct that one strategy works on just about every group.  I was surprised at how little the difficultly increased from Hard>Nightmare.  At this point I've run into a grand total of two bosses that required a shift in strategy (Revenant and Dragon).  Otherwise its Cone of Cold/Petrify the 'grey' difficulty critters and shatter them with Stone Fist/Overpower/Critical Shot and rinse and repeat while the melees occupy any 'yellow' or 'red' difficulty critters with the mages healing as necessary. 


Edit: On a side note- are yellow/red critters hard coded to resist shatter or is there actually a small chance they will break under the correct circumstances?

Modifié par horang, 15 novembre 2009 - 04:11 .

[soteria]

horang wrote...

Raisthlin Arckon wrote...
more non offensive spells ? theres dozens of them...what the hell are you talking about ?
identical battles ? did you actually beat the game ?
one tactic in 95% of battle ? of course yes...you obviously played on easy or normal setting,. try nightmare. which i did and i can assure you there no one tactic that works 95% of the time.

While I really enjoy the game, he is correct that one strategy works on just about every group.  I was surprised at how little the difficultly increased from Hard>Nightmare.  At this point I've run into a grand total of two bosses that required a shift in strategy (Revenant and Dragon).  Otherwise its Cone of Cold/Petrify the 'grey' difficulty critters and shatter them with Stone Fist/Overpower/Critical Shot and rinse and repeat while the melees occupy any 'yellow' or 'red' difficulty critters with the mages healing as necessary. 


Edit: On a side note- are yellow/red critters hard coded to resist shatter or is there actually a small chance they will break under the correct circumstances?

I'm not sure.  I *think* I shattered a yellow enemy once, but couldn't confirm that.  It's certainly a very low chance if it is possible.

[Rzepik]

Velz wrote...

Dear OP:

Your opinion is duly noted but unfortunately fall well within the 5% of players who are disappointed in the game, and who therefore do not matter in the grand scheme of things. We cannot please everyone. Feel free to recommend the disapproving playerbase another game that meets your standards and please enjoy re-playing that particular game to quell your thirst for immersion, lack of self-character importance in game and these crazy non-repetitive battles that you speak of.

Thanks, Sincerely: Not a developer.

Dear Velz  (Not a developer)

I'm glad my opinion was noted. Sharing thoughts about the product is an essential part of the free market.

Thank you, Sincerely: also not a developer.

vizering wrote...
But don't worry about it, DA:O is the foundation and it is really well done. Bioware will only add to this and it will grow into a sick world that could possibly equal or outdo the bg2 universe.

Well... it has a lot of potential. Especially with those awesome modding tools!

horang wrote...
While I really enjoy the game, he is correct that one strategy works on just about every group. I was surprised at how little the difficultly increased from Hard>Nightmare. At this point I've run into a grand total of two bosses that required a shift in strategy (Revenant and Dragon). Otherwise its Cone of Cold/Petrify the 'grey' difficulty critters and shatter them with Stone Fist/Overpower/Critical Shot and rinse and repeat while the melees occupy any 'yellow' or 'red' difficulty critters with the mages healing as necessary. 

Someone agreed with me? It cannot be XD
One important thing. I never said DA:O is bad. It is quite good.
I'm disappointed because I think it lacks of many great things that BioWre achieved in previous games.
And I hate long dungeon crawl with simple mechanics.

Modifié par Rzepik, 15 novembre 2009 - 04:37 .

[micheal001]

Like you I've been playing DOA. Well last night I finished the game and I felt cheated. Alot of what I've read about this game such as 100hrs of game play or its a Dark fantasy in my eyes just isn't true. I'm not here too fight about my account of the game or what I think about it its only my opion and your opion will differ then and I respect that.

With that being said I finished DAO in 38hrs on the normal setting. I found DAO very linear and ends up pushing your character down a single path and that is too help unite the land against the blight. I ground the game with (my character) (Healer) (Dwarf) (Morgan) (War Dog). All healing potion either made or found I used sparely and saved my coin. My healer kept the group alive and Morgan was able too heal the group as well. The end quest too fight the dragon is were the saved healing potions came into play the ones that I have saved over the 38hrs of game play.

As for the game DAO itself I was disappointed in this game. Why was I disappointed it is the claims that Bioware had made with its 100hrs of game play and its a Dark fantasy. I was overwhelmed that bioware went out of there way too create such a game and I was excited. But alot of game play was spent watching in-game cut scenes when my character or grp interacted or finished a quest. I would have like too have had less visual i-candy (cut scenes) and more games play. There is a cut-scene for almost everything which makes your charcter feel less important. I played this game for a chance for my charcter to become more then what he was when I created him and he became less so during and at the end of the game. As I progressed through DAO I found that I couldn't have a castle of my own as I hoped since this was considered a dark epic fantasy. I could have my own dark army or pick sides as I hoped I could in this dark epic fantasy. Your charcter is left feeling like sniveling child doing the work of the Grey Wardens then carving a true path for himself. With such a grand campign and war against the blight and civil war you need a king. You yourself are not given this chance to be king even after all the heroic battles and deeds but you end up putting Alistair on the throne.

So what do you consider too be dark fantasy is it the sight of seeing a dragon or the chance for your character too do a dark deed. Now that I've finished the main story line time too remove it from my game rig.

Good-night

PS: Bioware mods are moving posts to hide links

[Sylixe]

Rzepik wrote...

I finished game yesterday and I'm a bit disappointed...


Few words about Dragon Age (subjectively)

Advantages:
- Difficulty! At last! Some challenges!
- Quite comfortable interface, camera control etc. (Hey, it is important! Remember Neverwinter Nights? Gods, it was a nightmare.)
- Origins. Although I would like to see more dialogues, deeper relations with family/friends from 's past, more real influence on game.
- Gay dwarf - elf romance? HELL YEAH! XD
- It forces to use some tactics in battle...

Disadvantages:
- ... But one good tactic works in 95 % of encounters. There is no need for any flexibility, almost every fight looks the same.
- Obvious dungeon crawl! Core of the main plot is built just like in the ME: few BIG BORING LINEAR dungeon crawls.
(Identical battles + crawling = epic boredom)
- Extending game length at every opportunity. Mages just can't have a normal storage room in their tower. Noooooo! They need a small labyrinth!!! LONG cRPG is not equal to GOOD cRPG!
- Magic system needs more non-offensive spells. Summons, buffs, defense etc.


Disadvantages (100% Subjectively):
- I'm sick of being important from (almost) the very beginning.
- I experienced "immersion" only in the beginning and at the end of the game :/
- DA world is just... nothing special.

---

IMHO DA:O is a spiritual successor to... Neverwinter Nights (With a sprinkle of Mass Effect). Just good, nothing more. Probably best BioWare game since 2000, but there is absolutely no comparison to Baldur's Gate.
But... maybe I'm just sentimental fool...

So... Anyone thinks the same? 

This is what happens when you min/max play and put together the perfect group for each encounter.  Try playing without huge amount sof AoE dmg and CC and you'll have a different play experience.  Not to mention your tactics will change between each encounter.

[toronto13]

micheal001 wrote...

Like you I've been playing DOA. Well last night I finished the game and I felt cheated. Alot of what I've read about this game such as 100hrs of game play or its a Dark fantasy in my eyes just isn't true. I'm not here too fight about my account of the game or what I think about it its only my opion and your opion will differ then and I respect that.

With that being said I finished DAO in 38hrs on the normal setting. I found DAO very linear and ends up pushing your character down a single path and that is too help unite the land against the blight.
As for the game DAO itself I was disappointed in this game. Why was I disappointed it is the claims that Bioware had made with its 100hrs of game play and its a Dark fantasy.
PS: Bioware mods are moving posts to hide links

Huh,until this moment i have played 49 hours,18% of the game completed,33% of the world explored.........so they didn,t lied.

[Vagranci]

I have to disagree with most of them as those are what you basically have to expect from most of RPGs my friend 

or maybe do you have any other sp rpg to compare with?

+1 to below

GhoXen wrote...

DAO is disappointed with you.

[MariusODF]

The game is nice, but not much more unfortunately. The flaws become most apparent in the second half of the game. Level scaling together with a too much dungeoncrawling and a bad combatsystem drags the game down. It feels more like IWD than BG2 in its focus on the combat. It might have benefitted from another 6 months or so to fill out the long and boring dungeons with some more interesting things, fixing the combat system, making some more interesting dialogue trees, removing bugs etc making it great instead of merely good. Skipping voiceacting and going for more dialogue instead would greatly improve the game for me since I just skip the talking and read the dialogue it anyway.

[micheal001]

I'm disappointed with DA:O. I don't consider it a dark fantasy in a sense your character ends up being a hero one way or the other at the end. Most rpg fantasy novels have dragons/creatures that need killing and wouldn't be considered a dark fantasy. What makes DA:O a dark fantasy for you. Is it because it has a dragon or evil creature or is it the setting of the game.

For me a dark fantasy epic is a chance too watch my character progress through a story line that is made "by" the character and does not become a hero at the end of the adventure. DAO I found din't let my character truly act the way i created him. I mean I din't have a castle I didn't have a dark spawn army. I didn't excute any kings or lords and I couldn't create my own plot but followed a linear plot that was laid out for my character.

But I did like the chance too call in reinforcements in DA:O at the end of the adventure. So working with that idea you should be able too have your own army and have the npc's seek you out because of the choices you make in the game either they be good or evil.

I hope with the expansion they will rework how and what they condsider dark fantasy.

[Trybbles]

Rzepik wrote...

I finished game yesterday and I'm a bit disappointed...


Few words about Dragon Age (subjectively)

Advantages:
- Difficulty! At last! Some challenges!
- Quite comfortable interface, camera control etc. (Hey, it is important! Remember Neverwinter Nights? Gods, it was a nightmare.)
- Origins. Although I would like to see more dialogues, deeper relations with family/friends from 's past, more real influence on game.
- Gay dwarf - elf romance? HELL YEAH! XD
- It forces to use some tactics in battle...

Disadvantages:
- ... But one good tactic works in 95 % of encounters. There is no need for any flexibility, almost every fight looks the same.
- Obvious dungeon crawl! Core of the main plot is built just like in the ME: few BIG BORING LINEAR dungeon crawls.
(Identical battles + crawling = epic boredom)
- Extending game length at every opportunity. Mages just can't have a normal storage room in their tower. Noooooo! They need a small labyrinth!!! LONG cRPG is not equal to GOOD cRPG!
- Magic system needs more non-offensive spells. Summons, buffs, defense etc.


Disadvantages (100% Subjectively):
- I'm sick of being important from (almost) the very beginning.
- I experienced "immersion" only in the beginning and at the end of the game :/
- DA world is just... nothing special.

---

IMHO DA:O is a spiritual successor to... Neverwinter Nights (With a sprinkle of Mass Effect). Just good, nothing more. Probably best BioWare game since 2000, but there is absolutely no comparison to Baldur's Gate.
But... maybe I'm just sentimental fool...

So... Anyone thinks the same? 

As you get older, and you play more and more games, you will always find that the newer games never give you the same satisfaction that the older ones do. Then, you start making up reasons like "I'm sick of being important from (almost) the very beginning."

Things like that only take away from the game for you because you let them. You conjure reasons why no game ever lives up to your expectations. I know this, because I often do the same thing.

It's like a drug, you see. When you first started playing RPGs, they did not really have to be that good to really impress you. It's like the first time you take ecstacy. It's just incredible. Then, every time you do it from then on, it's never as good as the first time. Before long, you're popping more than one pill just wishing you could get back to that first time. Sorry dude, first time is gone forever. Games that would have entertained you endlessly 10 years ago are now below standards for a plethora of reasons.

No game will ever be perfect. After a while where I made whine posts just like yours, I finally learned to see the glass as half full. Now I'm enjoying DAO more than I've enjoyed any game in recent memory.

[VanDraegon]

micheal001 wrote...

my account of the game or what I think about it its only my opion and your opion will differ then and I respect that.

With that being said I finished DAO in 38hrs on the normal setting. I found DAO very linear and ends up pushing your character down a single path and that is too help unite the land against the blight.

Then you rushed through the game. I am at 84 hours and just started the Landsmeet quest.

[Nathan Pinard]

This game isn't nearly as immersive story and character banter wise as BG was, but it's a step in the right direction. The side quests actually seem to have a purpose other than grabbing XP. Mass Effect literally was crappy planet missions for XP and cash, and that was it. Otherwise you could finish the game plot really quickly.

My biggest gripe with DA is the tactics system. I don't really agree with having a number of slots at the beginning where your party can only use a certain amount of abilities with the AI. I think it's a useless hamper in the game, and it was a lot better when characters had their own scripts, or you could make your own. Wynne is mainly such a useful mage because she has TONS of tactics slots compared to Morrigan.

Also...mages are nuts in this game. I'm on that fight on the way to the urn of ashes, where you talk then fight the leader of the cult. And there's two ice spec'd mages in the back that freeze or kill before anyone gets to them. This is where the non-linear path is nice, because I can stop there and move to the other objectives, which I did when the fight was too frustrating.

Modifié par Nathan Pinard, 15 novembre 2009 - 08:38 .

[Velz]

horang wrote...

While I really enjoy the game, he is correct that one strategy works on just about every group.  I was surprised at how little the difficultly increased from Hard>Nightmare.  At this point I've run into a grand total of two bosses that required a shift in strategy (Revenant and Dragon).  Otherwise its Cone of Cold/Petrify the 'grey' difficulty critters and shatter them with Stone Fist/Overpower/Critical Shot and rinse and repeat while the melees occupy any 'yellow' or 'red' difficulty critters with the mages healing as necessary. 

And how exactly would you change it? Combat is about one thing: One person dies, one lives. There's only so many means to an end. Would you rather not have the force fields or petrifies? What do you want the NPC's to do in combat, turn into dolphins that sing you songs that you have to sit through and engage in a mini game where you have press the correct buttons at the right time or you explode in a burst of confetti?

You're playing a game set in a high fantasy world. There's magic and theres swords and shields.

What do you want? How do you propose combat SHOULD be? As I said and will reiterate: there are only SO MANY means to an end when it comes to combat.

Modifié par Velz, 15 novembre 2009 - 08:57 .

[Greye]

Rzepik wrote...

- DA world is just... nothing special.

IMHO DA:O is a spiritual successor to... Neverwinter Nights (With a sprinkle of Mass Effect).

So... Anyone thinks the same? 

Yes, I agree with the above points.  The DA world is overboiled, for lack of a better word.  I really do appreciate what Bioware tried to do here, and the action is great, but the low magic doesn't cut it.  The races are very generic.  The religious systems could be more interesting if the conflict were *shown* more, not told.  Then the anomalies.  Low magic, but then my flaming/lightning weapons are so overdone, they look like they should be destroying through my back armor.  Put in weapon trails if you have to, but low magic does not involve a raging bonfire on my ball mace.

The elf pre-history is interesting, but doesn't come through enough.  As someone else said, no Pixies, fairies, magical creatures, trolls, etc.  The magic in this game is walled off for its own protection, but then you go inside the walls, and it seems like several levels of bunk beds and bookshelves??

I play DA and I love DA but when I think of the next game I want to play, it isn't DA2, it's the next Elder Scrolls, with drugged-out cat people and mysterious dark elves who worship insane gods.

Modifié par Greye, 15 novembre 2009 - 09:13 .

[horang]

Velz wrote...
And how exactly would you change it? Combat is about one thing: One person dies, one lives. There's only so many means to an end. Would you rather not have the force fields or petrifies? What do you want the NPC's to do in combat, turn into dolphins that sing you songs that you have to sit through and engage in a mini game where you have press the correct buttons at the right time or you explode in a burst of confetti?

You're playing a game set in a high fantasy world. There's magic and theres swords and shields.

What do you want? How do you propose combat SHOULD be? As I said and will reiterate: there are only SO MANY means to an end when it comes to combat.

Hah, well a dolphin minigame would certainly add some flavor.    Seriously though, a few starters would be to add more immunities and vulnerabilities to the critters.  Even better, I would like to see creatures have more special moves in line with the force pull/wing buffet the revenants and dragons have.   Abilities that disrupt standard tactics and force the player to make serious tactical adjustments.  Shatter should probably be reduced to natural critical hits to make it more of an unexpected bonus rather then a nearly infallible death spell.  A more fundamental issue is that the enemy AI just doesnt think tactically.  It goes from 100% passive to single-minded killer.  If the mages would periodically give magical protection to their accompanying warriors (magic reflections etc) in anticipation of potential trouble or heck just heal each other on a consistent basis, the tactical aspect of the game would increase.  Abandon the WoW style targeting system and allow enemies to make good tactical decisions regardless of how much 'reduces aggression' equipment a player is wearing.  I realize that an enemy mage is a squishy target and the enemy warrior will deflect most of the damage from my daggers, why can't we allow the AI to do the same?  How about having to silence enemies before they can sound an alarm and bring the entire dungeon of 100 enemies down on you?

Modifié par horang, 15 novembre 2009 - 09:30 .

[Dam Wookie]

Completely agree with the original post.



I introduced a handful of friends to the BG's individually when I had found out that they actually read books and amongst them enjoyed reading the odd bit of fantasy. They all played the games mouth open, eyes transfixed and loved them.



This game more focused on a different audience. It's more people with an interest in games and interest in DAO stems from watching LOTR and playing mass effect or WoW. In this case I'm not sure your disadvantages have as much meaning.



I enjoyed the game but at the same time I don't want to play so I can be the big man and have the world revolve around me right from the start.



Fallout, BG and Torment are still my classics and I don't think DAO will convince those who really appreciated those that there is another addition.

[Kwonne]

Loved Baldurs, but i think DA is better.

[Velz]

horang wrote...

Velz wrote...
And how exactly would you change it? Combat is about one thing: One person dies, one lives. There's only so many means to an end. Would you rather not have the force fields or petrifies? What do you want the NPC's to do in combat, turn into dolphins that sing you songs that you have to sit through and engage in a mini game where you have press the correct buttons at the right time or you explode in a burst of confetti?

You're playing a game set in a high fantasy world. There's magic and theres swords and shields.

What do you want? How do you propose combat SHOULD be? As I said and will reiterate: there are only SO MANY means to an end when it comes to combat.

Hah, well a dolphin minigame would certainly add some flavor.    Seriously though, a few starters would be to add more immunities and vulnerabilities to the critters.  Even better, I would like to see creatures have more special moves in line with the force pull/wing buffet the revenants and dragons have.   Abilities that disrupt standard tactics and force the player to make serious tactical adjustments.  Shatter should probably be reduced to natural critical hits to make it more of an unexpected bonus rather then a nearly infallible death spell.  A more fundamental issue is that the enemy AI just doesnt think tactically.  It goes from 100% passive to single-minded killer.  If the mages would periodically give magical protection to their accompanying warriors (magic reflections etc) in anticipation of potential trouble or heck just heal each other on a consistent basis, the tactical aspect of the game would increase.  Abandon the WoW style targeting system and allow enemies to make good tactical decisions regardless of how much 'reduces aggression' equipment a player is wearing.  I realize that an enemy mage is a squishy target and the enemy warrior will deflect most of the damage from my daggers, why can't we allow the AI to do the same?  How about having to silence enemies before they can sound an alarm and bring the entire dungeon of 100 enemies down on you?

What you suggest would still boil combat down to simply doing the same thing every match to combat what you propose. All yorue doing is proposing a different obstacle to what we have now.

Currently battles go like this: Crowd control the mage, or any orange/yellow named mobs. Single target DPS till all are dead. Set ehaler to heal and buff.

Combat wouldnt change at all with your suggestion. You'd still have to crowd control the mage so they dont heal or place magic shields, youd still have to crowd control the orange or yellow named mob. The only thing you might have to do would be dispell a shield a mage placed on another mob.

It's like I said there's only so many means to an end and no amount of extra actions they gave to mobs would ever change the fact that combat will boil down to the same exact flow. Crowd control, and single target DPS. That is the fundamental nature of combat.

[Dam Wookie]

Trybbles wrote...
As you get older, and you play more and more games, you will always find that the newer games never give you the same satisfaction that the older ones do. Then, you start making up reasons like "I'm sick of being important from (almost) the very beginning."

Maybe but the point is a genuine valid reason. Very few if any good adventure books have the main character as I'm badAss McCool and the world revolves around me from the very beginning. There is a little something called character development.

[fairandbalancedfan]

The OP is not a troll I think, so I don't get some of the disrespectful comments from some members. The rabid fanboys here are as bad as the trolls in the social site. It seems even if you point out some flaws in the game you still get picked on by some people.

[horang]

Velz wrote...
What you suggest would still boil combat down to simply doing the same thing every match to combat what you propose. All yorue doing is proposing a different obstacle to what we have now.

Currently battles go like this: Crowd control the mage, or any orange/yellow named mobs. Single target DPS till all are dead. Set ehaler to heal and buff.

Combat wouldnt change at all with your suggestion. You'd still have to crowd control the mage so they dont heal or place magic shields, youd still have to crowd control the orange or yellow named mob. The only thing you might have to do would be dispell a shield a mage placed on another mob.

It's like I said there's only so many means to an end and no amount of extra actions they gave to mobs would ever change the fact that combat will boil down to the same exact flow. Crowd control, and single target DPS. That is the fundamental nature of combat.

In a way yes, I am proposing different obstacles.  At the moment there are essentially no obstacles- there shouldn't be one set of two skills that works virtually every time.   Make me at least think about what kind of creatures I'm fighting before clicking unpause.  I was suggesting that the mages buff up their allies prior to battle.  Have normal creatures that are immune to certain types of CC and/or DPS while being vulnerable to spell/skill combinations.  For example, have many varieties of the combos such as petrify/stonefist except have them only work against certain limited types of creatures- this would add an extra facet for collecting scrolls and books that detail these kind of twists.   At the moment there’s no need for CCing any 'grey' character including mages- Petrify/Stonefist works on virtually all of em.  Have creatures that will reincarnate unless you use a specific form of damage etc. There are plenty of ways to add spice to what is at the moment rather one-track combat.

Modifié par horang, 15 novembre 2009 - 11:42 .