666 réponses à ce sujet

[Schyzm]

Shadow_Viper wrote...

Kahryl wrote...

F-C wrote...

these posts are just turning into bitter little men being angry lunatics now.

i doubt anyone will ever get through to them short of finding where they live and pulling them out of their moms basement to smack some reality into them.

Well personally I'm just frustrated that you are excusing Bioware for bad design.

It used to be considered a game flaw when one class was massively stronger than the others.  Now you have legions of fanboys that will excuse anything.

It's seriously annoying and troublesome to have to constantly restrict what spells I use if I don't want to make the game ridiculously easy.  I should be able to get a challenge with any mage build.

And here we see the CDM "Fanboy" label coming into play that I mentioned eariler.

If you believe the game to be broken, and it's that big of a deal for you, then don't play. Simple as that.

But whether you decide to play or not, neither choice requires running to the forums and crying.

discussing the terribleness of the game mechanics on the forums is massively more pertinent than your stupid trolling.  one is discussing the ACTUAL GAME, the other is just a lame attempt to constantly flame a person.

[Shadow_Viper]

Schyzm wrote...

Shadow_Viper wrote...

Schyzm wrote...

Kahryl wrote...

F-C wrote...

if you played wow you would know what a never-ending cycle trying to balance classes to placate the vocal minority is.

wow has been trying to balance classes to keep people happy for 5 years and they still cant do it.

their method now is to just switch the powerful class from patch to patch. one patch its mages, next patch its paladins, next patch its warlocks, next patch its warriors....

bioware doesnt need to waste their time on that never ending cycle.

that is why they provide you with a toolkit so you can play how you see fit.

Nobody is asking for MMO-type balance and you know it.  If DA:O had anywhere near the balance that WoW classes had when WoW FIRST CAME OUT (and let me tell you as a Druid player, it wasn't pretty) I'd be more than happy.

if dragon age's balance was only 3x as bad as the balance of WOW's worst state of balance it would be workable.  this isn't a case of "its a single player game so we didn't fine tune the balance." this is a case of a completely broken combat system where spells even used practically as they're described in the tooltip have been called exploits on this forum.  where warrior and rogue fourth tier abilities are actually inferior to auto attacks.

Just because you believe something to be "completely broken" doesn't mean it actually is.

yes the class with all the best abilities and unlimited resource pool is obviously inferior the classes whose resources run out after like 4 uses and have abilities so awful they are inferior to the auto attack.

I guess if I said the earth was round you'd say "lol just cause you say earth is round doesn't mean it is!!!!!"  like I said, such aggressive ignorance.

Funny how you label people "ignorant" and yet believe D&D to be balanced.

I can say the sky is green as many times as I wish, doesn't mean it's actually green. It only means it's green in my opinion. There, is that simple enough for you?

[Shadow_Viper]

Schyzm wrote...

Shadow_Viper wrote...

Kahryl wrote...

F-C wrote...

these posts are just turning into bitter little men being angry lunatics now.

i doubt anyone will ever get through to them short of finding where they live and pulling them out of their moms basement to smack some reality into them.

Well personally I'm just frustrated that you are excusing Bioware for bad design.

It used to be considered a game flaw when one class was massively stronger than the others.  Now you have legions of fanboys that will excuse anything.

It's seriously annoying and troublesome to have to constantly restrict what spells I use if I don't want to make the game ridiculously easy.  I should be able to get a challenge with any mage build.

And here we see the CDM "Fanboy" label coming into play that I mentioned eariler.

If you believe the game to be broken, and it's that big of a deal for you, then don't play. Simple as that.

But whether you decide to play or not, neither choice requires running to the forums and crying.

discussing the terribleness of the game mechanics on the forums is massively more pertinent than your stupid trolling.  one is discussing the ACTUAL GAME, the other is just a lame attempt to constantly flame a person.

If the game is so terrible, then don't play it. Simple as that.

But there is no need for the whining and crying.

[phordicus]

i'm glad that 1 for 1, mages are more powerful. it makes sense in the world they designed.



if you've played any kind of points-based buy system game (like a tabletop miniature wargame or Total War), it's pretty easy to accept that certain unit types are far more powerful and proportionately more expensive, and yes, if you could field a tiny army of these uber units then you would, in all likelihood, lolwtfpwn just about any other army "build" that didn't do the same thing. those games also arbitrarily limit the amount and availability of those units, whether for historical reasons, gameworld design, or just to force more creative builds rather than the most efficient. DAO sort of does this by having only 2 NPC mages, and by giving them somewhat less than optimal starting spells.



there's no question that mages are vastly more powerful and versatile than warriors or rogues, but in this kind of game, that's how it should be. if you want 1=1=1=1 across the board for all classes, look forward to diablo 3 or something (i am).

[F-C]

i keep seeing people say its so much harder to do this and that without mages, yet its a fact that a rogue has completed the game solo on nightmare.



its a fact that people have completed the game on nightmare only using wynn as a healbot with no other mages.



it seems to me that alot of you people just lack the skillset of other players.



also nerfing mages wont make your other classes better, at all.





if you find it hard to do something without mages now, and they nerf mages, it will still be just as hard without mages as it is now. that wont change.



these nerf cries just reek of bitter little men who are looking for an excuse to blame their ineptitude on.

[Kahryl]

phordicus wrote...

i'm glad that 1 for 1, mages are more powerful. it makes sense in the world they designed.

if you've played any kind of points-based buy system game (like a tabletop miniature wargame or Total War), it's pretty easy to accept that certain unit types are far more powerful and proportionately more expensive, and yes, if you could field a tiny army of these uber units then you would, in all likelihood, lolwtfpwn just about any other army "build" that didn't do the same thing. those games also arbitrarily limit the amount and availability of those units, whether for historical reasons, gameworld design, or just to force more creative builds rather than the most efficient. DAO sort of does this by having only 2 NPC mages, and by giving them somewhat less than optimal starting spells.

there's no question that mages are vastly more powerful and versatile than warriors or rogues, but in this kind of game, that's how it should be. if you want 1=1=1=1 across the board for all classes, look forward to diablo 3 or something (i am).

It would be fine if mages were say, 3x as powerful as the other classes if they took 3 party slots or had some other similar disadvantage.  But they only take one slot.

[Schyzm]

BlueEyes_Austin wrote...

Schyzm wrote...

AshedMan wrote...

You're not playing an MMO. You aren't competing against other people. Why do folks insist the classes need to be balanced with one another? Who gives a rip if a mage's spells are more powerful than the warrior's attack? You can have both in your party! And they both serve their purpose.

balance existed before mmo's.  stop saying this, you are being completely and totally ignorant.  dnd the father of all rpgs considers balance, releases balance patches and it always has.  balance has always been a consideration, you are only proving your ignorance by stating otherwise.

I don't think you have the slightest clue what you are talking about.

In D&D, old school D&D, such "balance" as there was occured across the lifetime of characters.  For the first levels fighters and clerics were far more powerful than rogues and magic users.  Rogues never caught up, always basically being a support class with some damage capacity.  Over time, magic users would begin to increase in power relative to fighters and clerics.  By, say, tenth level or thereabouts, a mage would be far, far more deadly than any other class.

People who played fighters got the benefit of being the powerful class early.  People who played magic users got the benefit of it later.  Thieves got to sneak around.  The "ending power" of the characters was essentially meaningless.  THIS IS THE BASIC LOGIC OF ALL D&D-BASED CPRGS!

Now think about this for a second.  Sure you can jury rig a mage to act like a warrior in DA...by the time they are level 11 or 12!  But you've got to GET THEM TO that level first.  What WOW has done to pervert people's view of CPRGs so that the "final build" of a toon is now seen as important (because of end-game raiding).  In a CPRG, however, you've already played the vast majority of the game before reaching some of these super-builds.

I believe forcefield, probably the most powerful spell in the game can be gotten at lvl 2, when making your arcane warrior you can't specialize till lvl 8, but you'll still be uberpowerful as a mage till then.  mages are gods from the very first level to the last in dragon age, there is no super endgame power you need to get to make mages uber.  the best spell in the game is second tier, and the second best is third tier you could have both by like lvl 6(or wutever) if you wanted to.

 your concept of dnd is basically crap, dnd has balance issues.  but they have always tried to address them to at least some degree, and fourth edition does an even better job of addressing these issues at both early game and endgame.  dnd is responsive to the idea of balance in all its aspects, even if they do not perfect it.

again this has nothing to do with your ignorant and prejudiced view of mmo's.  balance has existed forever in gaming.  mmo's did not invent balance, or discussion of balance nor did they invent the idea that balance is a desirable trait.  so please stop flooding us with this crap about mmo's.

[Shadow_Viper]

Kahryl wrote...

Shadow_Viper wrote...

Kahryl wrote...

F-C wrote...

these posts are just turning into bitter little men being angry lunatics now.

i doubt anyone will ever get through to them short of finding where they live and pulling them out of their moms basement to smack some reality into them.

Well personally I'm just frustrated that you are excusing Bioware for bad design.

It used to be considered a game flaw when one class was massively stronger than the others.  Now you have legions of fanboys that will excuse anything.

It's seriously annoying and troublesome to have to constantly restrict what spells I use if I don't want to make the game ridiculously easy.  I should be able to get a challenge with any mage build.

And here we see the CDM "Fanboy" label coming into play that I mentioned eariler.

If you believe the game to be broken, and it's that big of a deal for you, then don't play. Simple as that.

But whether you decide to play or not, neither choice requires running to the forums and crying.

You really don't know the purpose of player feedback?  The larger these topics are pointing out mages are broken (and thank you for contributing to them) the more likely Bioware is to get it thru their skulls that having 2/3 classes inferior is not a good thing.  And maybe their next game will have that fixed. Games don't fall out of the sky you know.

If you believe Warriors and Rogues to be inferior, I would suggest spending your time Learning To Play. Rather than wasting it needlessly whining on the forums.

[Elanareon]

F-C wrote...

i keep seeing people say its so much harder to do this and that without mages, yet its a fact that a rogue has completed the game solo on nightmare.

its a fact that people have completed the game on nightmare only using wynn as a healbot with no other mages.

it seems to me that alot of you people just lack the skillset of other players.

also nerfing mages wont make your other classes better, at all.


if you find it hard to do something without mages now, and they nerf mages, it will still be just as hard without mages as it is now. that wont change.

these nerf cries just reek of bitter little men who are looking for an excuse to blame their ineptitude on.

QFT!!!

[Kahryl]

F-C wrote...

i keep seeing people say its so much harder to do this and that without mages, yet its a fact that a rogue has completed the game solo on nightmare.

its a fact that people have completed the game on nightmare only using wynn as a healbot with no other mages.

it seems to me that alot of you people just lack the skillset of other players.

also nerfing mages wont make your other classes better, at all.


if you find it hard to do something without mages now, and they nerf mages, it will still be just as hard without mages as it is now. that wont change.

these nerf cries just reek of bitter little men who are looking for an excuse to blame their ineptitude on.

It's amazing how you flail around for insults.  Nobody in this entire thread has complained about the game being generally too hard but you have to make it up because you can't think of anything else to say.

[Fishy]

Also 2 Hand weapons.It's so frigging slow it's unbelievable.If you miss an attack .. you gonna wait another 5 sec before another swing.It's does not feel powerful .. It's feel slow.Very Slow... It's like you're holding a sword/axe that weight 100 pounds.





Plus tank suffer from pathing problem unlike mage.It's much easier to attack an ennemy with a mage than a warrior.When you move and click a monster your character slow down .. Than it basicly can take several sec before your character position itself and start attacking and sometime he simply won't because of pathing.



I know but .. That why i love so much the combat system of Age of Conan..It's much more addicting for melee.The melee system feel outdated with all these pathing problem.





Dual wield it's much more powerful .. One hand dmg do basicly the same dmg than 2 Hand..



Hell my mage can basicly stay in the middle of an horde of monster and survive.

I never liked playing has a mage really.I hate wearing a robe .. I prefeer a bad ass armor with a giant sword stained in blood .But wow .. My tank don't feel like a tank

[Shadow_Viper]

F-C wrote...

i keep seeing people say its so much harder to do this and that without mages, yet its a fact that a rogue has completed the game solo on nightmare.

its a fact that people have completed the game on nightmare only using wynn as a healbot with no other mages.

it seems to me that alot of you people just lack the skillset of other players.

also nerfing mages wont make your other classes better, at all.


if you find it hard to do something without mages now, and they nerf mages, it will still be just as hard without mages as it is now. that wont change.

these nerf cries just reek of bitter little men who are looking for an excuse to blame their ineptitude on.

QFE, well said. It's clear these WoW Kiddies are just whining for the sake of whining.

[surrealitycheck]

If you believe Warriors and Rogues to be inferior, I would suggest
spending your time Learning To Play. Rather than wasting it needlessly
whining on the forums. ../../../images/forum/emoticons/wink.png

Well....

Let me have a quick think.

They do less single target damage (using entropic death and a party of 3 mages, you can kill almost every boss in the game in between 5-6 seconds). They do less aoe damage (absolutely no comparison to blood wound + SotC). They do less CC. The comparison is just embarassing.

The question is, of course, not whether or not mages should be nerfed - but why it should be accepted that warriors and rogues have a vastly more boring set of skills, with fewer abilities, no combos and generally inferior capability. Why is this a good thing? The fact that something IS a certain way is not a reason - you have to give a positive reason why it should remain that way, when it is fairly evident on even a simple level that they lack the complexity and interest of mages. When you add in sharing about 45% of their abilities with another class, it just becomes a little sad.

[surrealitycheck]

Also 2 Hand weapons.It's so frigging slow it's unbelievable.If you miss
an attack .. you gonna wait another 5 sec before another swing.It's
does not feel powerful .. It's feel slow.Very Slow... It's like you're
holding a sword/axe that weight 100 pounds.

Not that this will necessarily solve all your problems, but if you have Warden's Keep as DLC I suggest going there and picking up bloodthirst as soon as possible. With that and haste you will find that you will attack rather quickly! It certainly made a huge difference to me, when comparing to vanilla 2-hander speeds.

[addiction21]

Kahryl wrote...

Shadow_Viper wrote...

Kahryl wrote...

F-C wrote...

these posts are just turning into bitter little men being angry lunatics now.

i doubt anyone will ever get through to them short of finding where they live and pulling them out of their moms basement to smack some reality into them.

Well personally I'm just frustrated that you are excusing Bioware for bad design.

It used to be considered a game flaw when one class was massively stronger than the others.  Now you have legions of fanboys that will excuse anything.

It's seriously annoying and troublesome to have to constantly restrict what spells I use if I don't want to make the game ridiculously easy.  I should be able to get a challenge with any mage build.

And here we see the CDM "Fanboy" label coming into play that I mentioned eariler.

If you believe the game to be broken, and it's that big of a deal for you, then don't play. Simple as that.

But whether you decide to play or not, neither choice requires running to the forums and crying.

You really don't know the purpose of player feedback?  The larger these topics are pointing out mages are broken (and thank you for contributing to them) the more likely Bioware is to get it thru their skulls that having 2/3 classes inferior is not a good thing.  And maybe their next game will have that fixed. Games don't fall out of the sky you know.

To bad the vast majority of these posts are not discussions but just flame wars. Take schyism/shadow_viper  for example. They are not helping their cause's any by berating and insulting the opposite side (just using them since they are most obvious and seems to be vocal ones in these threads).

Both sides are getting of acting like children on the playground fighting over the swing.  If your not going to discuss it then frankly you need to shut up and if there is someone trolling then why even respond to them? It does nothing but take it off track and then you get this very thread. 10 pages of "no your wrong" "nu uh your wrong and a poopy head also" and any constructive pertinent posts are lost in the flames.

It might be a shocker but there are more ways to discuss something other then to claim those with a opposing opnion are trolls, morons, fanboys, tards, etc etc etc...

Modifié par addiction21, 17 novembre 2009 - 11:27 .

[Shadow_Viper]

Schyzm wrote...

BlueEyes_Austin wrote...

Schyzm wrote...

AshedMan wrote...

You're not playing an MMO. You aren't competing against other people. Why do folks insist the classes need to be balanced with one another? Who gives a rip if a mage's spells are more powerful than the warrior's attack? You can have both in your party! And they both serve their purpose.

balance existed before mmo's.  stop saying this, you are being completely and totally ignorant.  dnd the father of all rpgs considers balance, releases balance patches and it always has.  balance has always been a consideration, you are only proving your ignorance by stating otherwise.

I don't think you have the slightest clue what you are talking about.

In D&D, old school D&D, such "balance" as there was occured across the lifetime of characters.  For the first levels fighters and clerics were far more powerful than rogues and magic users.  Rogues never caught up, always basically being a support class with some damage capacity.  Over time, magic users would begin to increase in power relative to fighters and clerics.  By, say, tenth level or thereabouts, a mage would be far, far more deadly than any other class.

People who played fighters got the benefit of being the powerful class early.  People who played magic users got the benefit of it later.  Thieves got to sneak around.  The "ending power" of the characters was essentially meaningless.  THIS IS THE BASIC LOGIC OF ALL D&D-BASED CPRGS!

Now think about this for a second.  Sure you can jury rig a mage to act like a warrior in DA...by the time they are level 11 or 12!  But you've got to GET THEM TO that level first.  What WOW has done to pervert people's view of CPRGs so that the "final build" of a toon is now seen as important (because of end-game raiding).  In a CPRG, however, you've already played the vast majority of the game before reaching some of these super-builds.

I believe forcefield, probably the most powerful spell in the game can be gotten at lvl 2, when making your arcane warrior you can't specialize till lvl 8, but you'll still be uberpowerful as a mage till then.  mages are gods from the very first level to the last in dragon age, there is no super endgame power you need to get to make mages uber.  the best spell in the game is second tier, and the second best is third tier you could have both by like lvl 6(or wutever) if you wanted to.

 your concept of dnd is basically crap, dnd has balance issues.  but they have always tried to address them to at least some degree, and fourth edition does an even better job of addressing these issues at both early game and endgame.  dnd is responsive to the idea of balance in all its aspects, even if they do not perfect it.

again this has nothing to do with your ignorant and prejudiced view of mmo's.  balance has existed forever in gaming.  mmo's did not invent balance, or discussion of balance nor did they invent the idea that balance is a desirable trait.  so please stop flooding us with this crap about mmo's.

If you believe mages are so powerful, then just play them and enjoy the game. There's no need for the constant whining and crying that has become an epidemic on these forums.

As I've pointed out before, you label people "ignorant" and yet believe D&D to be "balanced".

[BlueEyes_Austin]

Schyzm wrote...

 your concept of dnd is basically crap, dnd has balance issues.  but they have always tried to address them to at least some degree, and fourth edition does an even better job of addressing these issues at both early game and endgame.  dnd is responsive to the idea of balance in all its aspects, even if they do not perfect it.

again this has nothing to do with your ignorant and prejudiced view of mmo's.  balance has existed forever in gaming.  mmo's did not invent balance, or discussion of balance nor did they invent the idea that balance is a desirable trait.  so please stop flooding us with this crap about mmo's.

Son, I played D&D before AD&D existed and I've played every system since.  In all of them but 4.0 the daily accumulation of spells ALWAYS makes mages stronger at higher levels and weaker at lower levels.  4.0 isn't D&D in aything but name any more (not to say it isn't a good system.

I also was an endgame raider in WOW so I'm not anti-WOW.  I am anti-idiots who compare "final builds" of D&D characters as if they are something meaningful.

[phordicus]

Kahryl wrote...

It would be fine if mages were say, 3x as powerful as the other classes if they took 3 party slots or had some other similar disadvantage.  But they only take one slot.

think of it like this.

nothing obligates you to run four characters.  if you think a mage, perfectly built and controlled, is worth 3 party slots instead of 1, then take one mage with your PC and nothing else.

as it is, you can gimp yourself however you want to.  the game allows that.  it also allows for people who want to trample over every combat in less than 20 seconds by exploiting taunt+forcefield+kiting.  i for one would rather the game have that flexibility rather than forcing me to use one of 2 or 3 ideal party configurations.

so much of this seems to be about the challenge level.  if it's too easy because you rock with mages, then don't take one, much less 2 or 3 or 4.  one of my playthroughs now is trying to use an all-rogue, all-stealth party and even though i'm getting my ass kicked on occassion, it is, to quote a wise green cephalopod, funner than hell.  i don't want the option to do so taken away for the sake of making all classes equal.

[Kahryl]

addiction21 wrote...

Kahryl wrote...

Shadow_Viper wrote...

Kahryl wrote...

F-C wrote...

these posts are just turning into bitter little men being angry lunatics now.

i doubt anyone will ever get through to them short of finding where they live and pulling them out of their moms basement to smack some reality into them.

Well personally I'm just frustrated that you are excusing Bioware for bad design.

It used to be considered a game flaw when one class was massively stronger than the others.  Now you have legions of fanboys that will excuse anything.

It's seriously annoying and troublesome to have to constantly restrict what spells I use if I don't want to make the game ridiculously easy.  I should be able to get a challenge with any mage build.

And here we see the CDM "Fanboy" label coming into play that I mentioned eariler.

If you believe the game to be broken, and it's that big of a deal for you, then don't play. Simple as that.

But whether you decide to play or not, neither choice requires running to the forums and crying.

You really don't know the purpose of player feedback?  The larger these topics are pointing out mages are broken (and thank you for contributing to them) the more likely Bioware is to get it thru their skulls that having 2/3 classes inferior is not a good thing.  And maybe their next game will have that fixed. Games don't fall out of the sky you know.

To bad the vast majority of these posts are not discussions but just flame wars. Take schyism for example. He's not helping his cause any by berating and insulting the opposite side (just using him since he is the most obvious and seems to be vocal one in these threads).

Both sides are getting of acting like children on the playground fighting over the swing.  If your not going to discuss it then frankly you need to shut up and if there is someone trolling then why even respond to them? It does nothing but take it off track and then you get this very thread. 10 pages of "no your wrong" "nu uh your wrong and a poopy head also" and any constructive pertinent posts are lost in the flames.

It might be a shocker but there are more ways to discuss something other then to claim those with a opposing opnion are trolls, morons, fanboys, tards, etc etc etc...

Wow you seriously think Schyism is the troll.  Look at his last post. Then look at F_C and Shadow_Viper's last three posts.  Amazing.

[Schyzm]

addiction21 wrote...

Kahryl wrote...

Shadow_Viper wrote...

Kahryl wrote...

F-C wrote...

these posts are just turning into bitter little men being angry lunatics now.

i doubt anyone will ever get through to them short of finding where they live and pulling them out of their moms basement to smack some reality into them.

Well personally I'm just frustrated that you are excusing Bioware for bad design.

It used to be considered a game flaw when one class was massively stronger than the others.  Now you have legions of fanboys that will excuse anything.

It's seriously annoying and troublesome to have to constantly restrict what spells I use if I don't want to make the game ridiculously easy.  I should be able to get a challenge with any mage build.

And here we see the CDM "Fanboy" label coming into play that I mentioned eariler.

If you believe the game to be broken, and it's that big of a deal for you, then don't play. Simple as that.

But whether you decide to play or not, neither choice requires running to the forums and crying.

You really don't know the purpose of player feedback?  The larger these topics are pointing out mages are broken (and thank you for contributing to them) the more likely Bioware is to get it thru their skulls that having 2/3 classes inferior is not a good thing.  And maybe their next game will have that fixed. Games don't fall out of the sky you know.

To bad the vast majority of these posts are not discussions but just flame wars. Take schyism for example. He's not helping his cause any by berating and insulting the opposite side (just using him since he is the most obvious and seems to be vocal one in these threads).

Both sides are getting of acting like children on the playground fighting over the swing.  If your not going to discuss it then frankly you need to shut up and if there is someone trolling then why even respond to them? It does nothing but take it off track and then you get this very thread. 10 pages of "no your wrong" "nu uh your wrong and a poopy head also" and any constructive pertinent posts are lost in the flames.

It might be a shocker but there are more ways to discuss something other then to claim those with a opposing opnion are trolls, morons, fanboys, tards, etc etc etc...

I'm not a perfectly civil person, perhaps that's my fault.  but the basic dynamic is this is a thread for the discussion of game mechanics, wherein trolls that hate their game being maligned come in and flame flame flame flame flame.   I'm perfectly happy to actually discuss how the game plays out, to some extent I worry that the trolls actually can't retort back though.  they have very little in the way of argument besides  flaming.

[Shadow_Viper]

surrealitycheck wrote...

If you believe Warriors and Rogues to be inferior, I would suggest
spending your time Learning To Play. Rather than wasting it needlessly
whining on the forums. ../../../images/forum/emoticons/wink.png

Well....

Let me have a quick think.

They do less single target damage (using entropic death and a party of 3 mages, you can kill almost every boss in the game in between 5-6 seconds). They do less aoe damage (absolutely no comparison to blood wound + SotC). They do less CC. The comparison is just embarassing.

The question is, of course, not whether or not mages should be nerfed - but why it should be accepted that warriors and rogues have a vastly more boring set of skills, with fewer abilities, no combos and generally inferior capability. Why is this a good thing? The fact that something IS a certain way is not a reason - you have to give a positive reason why it should remain that way, when it is fairly evident on even a simple level that they lack the complexity and interest of mages. When you add in sharing about 45% of their abilities with another class, it just becomes a little sad.

When pondering whether a class needs nerfed or not. It's best to remind one's self that:  It's Fine, I just need to Learn To Play. 

In short, IFL2P.

[Schyzm]

Shadow_Viper wrote...

Schyzm wrote...

BlueEyes_Austin wrote...

Schyzm wrote...

AshedMan wrote...

You're not playing an MMO. You aren't competing against other people. Why do folks insist the classes need to be balanced with one another? Who gives a rip if a mage's spells are more powerful than the warrior's attack? You can have both in your party! And they both serve their purpose.

balance existed before mmo's.  stop saying this, you are being completely and totally ignorant.  dnd the father of all rpgs considers balance, releases balance patches and it always has.  balance has always been a consideration, you are only proving your ignorance by stating otherwise.

I don't think you have the slightest clue what you are talking about.

In D&D, old school D&D, such "balance" as there was occured across the lifetime of characters.  For the first levels fighters and clerics were far more powerful than rogues and magic users.  Rogues never caught up, always basically being a support class with some damage capacity.  Over time, magic users would begin to increase in power relative to fighters and clerics.  By, say, tenth level or thereabouts, a mage would be far, far more deadly than any other class.

People who played fighters got the benefit of being the powerful class early.  People who played magic users got the benefit of it later.  Thieves got to sneak around.  The "ending power" of the characters was essentially meaningless.  THIS IS THE BASIC LOGIC OF ALL D&D-BASED CPRGS!

Now think about this for a second.  Sure you can jury rig a mage to act like a warrior in DA...by the time they are level 11 or 12!  But you've got to GET THEM TO that level first.  What WOW has done to pervert people's view of CPRGs so that the "final build" of a toon is now seen as important (because of end-game raiding).  In a CPRG, however, you've already played the vast majority of the game before reaching some of these super-builds.

I believe forcefield, probably the most powerful spell in the game can be gotten at lvl 2, when making your arcane warrior you can't specialize till lvl 8, but you'll still be uberpowerful as a mage till then.  mages are gods from the very first level to the last in dragon age, there is no super endgame power you need to get to make mages uber.  the best spell in the game is second tier, and the second best is third tier you could have both by like lvl 6(or wutever) if you wanted to.

 your concept of dnd is basically crap, dnd has balance issues.  but they have always tried to address them to at least some degree, and fourth edition does an even better job of addressing these issues at both early game and endgame.  dnd is responsive to the idea of balance in all its aspects, even if they do not perfect it.

again this has nothing to do with your ignorant and prejudiced view of mmo's.  balance has existed forever in gaming.  mmo's did not invent balance, or discussion of balance nor did they invent the idea that balance is a desirable trait.  so please stop flooding us with this crap about mmo's.

If you believe mages are so powerful, then just play them and enjoy the game. There's no need for the constant whining and crying that has become an epidemic on these forums.

As I've pointed out before, you label people "ignorant" and yet believe D&D to be "balanced".

I didn't say dnd was balanced I said dnd cares about balance and considers it in building their game.  honestly if you just flat out lie about everything I say do you think it makes you look like a good person?

[chizow]

F-C wrote...

i keep seeing people say its so much harder to do this and that without mages, yet its a fact that a rogue has completed the game solo on nightmare.

Yet, that doesn't change the fact the game is in fact, much harder to do this and that without mages lol.  Just because a rogue can solo the game by meticulously setting traps, constantly kiting, stealthing, restealthing, doubling back, throwing bombs, taking advantage of AI deficiencies etc. well enough to beat Nightmare with a Rogue doesn't change the fact doing anything on that Rogue is in fact, harder than doing it with a mage. 

This really has nothing to do with skill, as you claim, it has everything to do with one class being superior at [everything] in the game to the point it significantly invalidates or makes other playstyles significantly less enjoyable.  It really has about as much to do with skill or tactics as setting up dominoes or laying a track for your model trains....I guess its fun for some people...

[surrealitycheck]

When pondering whether a class needs nerfed or not. It's best to
remind one's self that:  It's Fine, I just need to Learn To Play. 

In short, IFL2P. ../../../images/forum/emoticons/wink.png

That's interesting. You managed to read a post in which I specifically said that mages SHOULDN'T be nerfed, and that warriors and rogues should have their moveset expanded, and you interpret it as a question of nerfing! Perhaps you should spend a little bit more time reading?

Modifié par surrealitycheck, 17 novembre 2009 - 11:32 .

[Fishy]

Kahryl wrote...

phordicus wrote...

i'm glad that 1 for 1, mages are more powerful. it makes sense in the world they designed.

if you've played any kind of points-based buy system game (like a tabletop miniature wargame or Total War), it's pretty easy to accept that certain unit types are far more powerful and proportionately more expensive, and yes, if you could field a tiny army of these uber units then you would, in all likelihood, lolwtfpwn just about any other army "build" that didn't do the same thing. those games also arbitrarily limit the amount and availability of those units, whether for historical reasons, gameworld design, or just to force more creative builds rather than the most efficient. DAO sort of does this by having only 2 NPC mages, and by giving them somewhat less than optimal starting spells.

there's no question that mages are vastly more powerful and versatile than warriors or rogues, but in this kind of game, that's how it should be. if you want 1=1=1=1 across the board for all classes, look forward to diablo 3 or something (i am).

It would be fine if mages were say, 3x as powerful as the other classes if they took 3 party slots or had some other similar disadvantage.  But they only take one slot.

No they aren't more powerful.

and that how it's should be ...?
 
Yeah right .. Most grey Warden are warrior.The main protagonist in most DA trailer's a warrior.Most who defeated the archdemon were warrior and the most respected warrior and declared hero of ferelden is also a warrior.Qunarri are warrior and i doubt Sten fear any mage.


Plus it's a video game .. Making a class inferior  because it's should be like that that just retarded.You talk like a mage fanboy really..

Also i tell you that .. Most ppl want to play a bad ass warrior .. Not a wimp wearing a robe and farting fire from 10 mile away.