666 réponses à ce sujet

[DragoonKain3]

Arcane Warrior's supposed 'invulnerability' is ONLY due to the fact that Shimmering Shield DOES NOT turn off when your mana runs out. Bringing an obvious exploit into the arguement that mages are OP'ed is just silly; for example, Shimmering Shield is roughly equivalent to a WoW Paladin exploiting an infinite Divine Shield bug, if the bug actually existed.

But I also thought the difficulty would go up by stacking three mages and neglecting to bring the other classes, just like what happened when I didn't bring the mage in those older games. The exact opposite happened in Dragon Age.

But as I said before PocketGB, the reason this works is because they allowed mage to have access to talents that normally would be allowed to two different classes (thankfully they're limited by their talent points, so they can only truly be 'specced' for one or they sacrifice something).

So with 3 mages here, you only have 1x the redunancy AT THE MOST. Compare this to a no mage class, which offers 2x redunandacy (2w/2r), 3x redundacny (3w/1r or 1r/3w), or 4x redundancy (4w or 4r). You see what I'm getting at?

[Pocketgb]

F-C wrote...

this is just too funny coming from you, the guy who has been rampaging about this issue for 8+ hours a day for a week.

you were nearly the sole reason the one thread got to 40 pages on the old forums, you just wont let it go.

and you call sticking the label on you unfair? are you delusional about your own actions?

The only time I had ever been rude or immature in that thread is when I first started having larger arguments with Dime.

I persisted largely because he did, but also because no one really gave me much of an explanation to their answers, and I'm still seeing that in this thread.

Simply put, why shouldn't a better balance be achieved?

DragoonKain3 wrote...

But as I said before PocketGB, the
reason this works is because they allowed mage to have access to
talents that normally would be allowed to two different classes
(thankfully they're limited by their talent points, so they can only
truly be 'specced' for one or they sacrifice something).
So with 3
mages here, you only have 1x the redunancy AT THE MOST. Compare this to
a no mage class, which offers 2x redunandacy (2w/2r), 3x redundacny
(3w/1r or 1r/3w), or 4x redundancy (4w or 4r). You see what I'm getting
at?

That would be a bit understandable if I wasn't really able to get away with what I'm doing right now at the moment: stacking heals, multiple cones of colds, blizz, etc. Things aren't terribly in-depth, but Nightmare doesn't really care.

Of course the question still comes as to why they were clearly interested in making the mage the bar-none most interesting class, and have the Rogue and War share two trees.

PS: this random formatting is weiiird.

Modifié par Pocketgb, 18 novembre 2009 - 05:13 .

[F-C]

Pocketgb wrote...

The only time I had ever been rude or immature in that thread is when I first started having larger arguments with Dime.

I persisted largely because he did, but also because no one really gave me much of an explanation to their answers, and I'm still seeing that in this thread.

Simply put, why shouldn't a better balance be achieved?

you wouldnt let the thread go for 8+ hours a day, you are one of those people who are being excessively vocal about this issue. dont try to act like you are just a bystander when you are the vocal minority.

you were there when bioware told us how it is.

you read the posts and responded.

you know bioware says the game is balanced on lore and the world.
you know bioware has no intention of doing any major class rebalancing or reducing mages.
you know bioware told you to use the toolkit to change things you dont like personally.


the game doesnt need to better balance because its perfect where it is.

it fits the holy trinity of all standard RPG games. you have tank-healer-damage.

if you want to use mages, rogues, or warriors for the damage slots it doesnt really matter except its how you want to play. you can still beat the game on the hardest setting with any combination of 2 damage classes.


adjusting the game to suit a few peoples personal needs will only create more people who hate those changes and whine about them. then they can change it again for those new whiners which create another set of whiners...  over and over and over forever and it will never end.

bioware does not need to waste their time on the issue, at all.

they have provided you with a toolkit so they dont need to bother with it.

they can spend their time developing DLC and improving the other areas of gameplay, which is much more productive.

[Schyzm]

DragoonKain3 wrote...

Arcane Warrior's supposed 'invulnerability' is ONLY due to the fact that Shimmering Shield DOES NOT turn off when your mana runs out. Bringing an obvious exploit into the arguement that mages are OP'ed is just silly; for example, Shimmering Shield is roughly equivalent to a WoW Paladin exploiting an infinite Divine Shield bug, if the bug actually existed.

But I also thought the difficulty would go up by stacking three mages and neglecting to bring the other classes, just like what happened when I didn't bring the mage in those older games. The exact opposite happened in Dragon Age.

But as I said before PocketGB, the reason this works is because they allowed mage to have access to talents that normally would be allowed to two different classes (thankfully they're limited by their talent points, so they can only truly be 'specced' for one or they sacrifice something).
So with 3 mages here, you only have 1x the redunancy AT THE MOST. Compare this to a no mage class, which offers 2x redunandacy (2w/2r), 3x redundacny (3w/1r or 1r/3w), or 4x redundancy (4w or 4r). You see what I'm getting at?

you can have a very good healer, a very good damage dealer and a very good ccer in a single mage.  you get I believe 23-25 talent pts.  even if you're talking midgame you can have 4 separate lines maxed out quite easily.  this idea that one mage is a "cleric" and the other is a "mage" is a total lie, no mage needs to just be a healing machine, no mage is denied access to the best damage abilities in the game.

[F-C]

Schyzm wrote...
you can have a very good healer, a very good damage dealer and a very good ccer in a single mage.  you get I believe 23-25 talent pts.  even if you're talking midgame you can have 4 separate lines maxed out quite easily.  this idea that one mage is a "cleric" and the other is a "mage" is a total lie, no mage needs to just be a healing machine, no mage is denied access to the best damage abilities in the game.

you can be mediocre and rather bad at everything, or you can be great at you chosen role.

you still make a tradeoff.


your do it all mage will suck at damage compared to a glass cannon build.
your do it all mage will suck at healing compared to a pure support build.
your do it all mage will suck at melee compared to one who specialized in buffs and persistent spells.

being mediocre is just mediocre.

[Schyzm]

F-C wrote...

Schyzm wrote...
you can have a very good healer, a very good damage dealer and a very good ccer in a single mage.  you get I believe 23-25 talent pts.  even if you're talking midgame you can have 4 separate lines maxed out quite easily.  this idea that one mage is a "cleric" and the other is a "mage" is a total lie, no mage needs to just be a healing machine, no mage is denied access to the best damage abilities in the game.

you can be mediocre and rather bad at everything, or you can be great at you chosen role.

you still make a tradeoff.


your do it all mage will suck at damage compared to a glass cannon build.
your do it all mage will suck at healing compared to a pure support build.
your do it all mage will suck at melee compared to one who specialized in buffs and persistent spells.

being mediocre is just mediocre.

it's just not true.  damage spells are not gimped by taking non-damage spells.  there are no synergies, you can tack cone of cold onto anything and its awesome.  honestly do you even play the game?  your trolling seems to develop in a vacuum of a person who has never even touched the game.

[surrealitycheck]

the game doesnt need to better balance because its perfect where it is.

It is evidently not perfect for a large number of people on the forum. So the question becomes this; if warriors and rogues had more utility, complexity and damage, would it make the game less good? If the answer to that question is no, and there is no reason it shouldn't be, then you have no reason to oppose

[DragoonKain3]

Stacking heals is overrated. Even at 100 spellpower, you only heal 80, and at nightmare, 68, with the enemy hitting harder as well. You're better off quaffing a potion; the only real use for a healer is if the target in question is temporarily disabled, so they can receive enough healing to stay alive in order for them to quaff a potion. All you need is one dedicated healer, so no need for stacking mages.



I don't find whats so good about stacking blizzards. One blizzard is enough to stop enemies in their tracks, so again, don't know why stacking mages is OP'ed apart from one other to cast Earthquake for those who resists the initial freeze. But the third mage? Doesn't contribute, as far as I'm concerned.



Cone of Colds (and force field being too cheap to cast/maintain) is truly the ONLY thing that is overpowered, but as I said before, it was the Devs mistake that they don't run on diminishing returns like stuns are. Fix that (like subsequent freezes get shorter over a 10 second time frame and it resets this 10 second timer with each freeze), and nothing about stacking mages is OP'ed.

[F-C]

Schyzm wrote...

it's just not true.  damage spells are not gimped by taking non-damage spells.  there are no synergies, you can tack cone of cold onto anything and its awesome.  honestly do you even play the game?  your trolling seems to develop in a vacuum of a person who has never even touched the game.

so you cast cone of cold then sit there on thumbs while it cools down?
so any situation where cone of cold isnt the best choice, you just sit on your thumbs?

you wont have the vast array of spells to choose from a glass cannon build will have. you wont have the utility spells that make them powerful either because you are trying to do everyting with one build.

you will just be bad most the time, though im sure you can cherry pick out a situation where it isnt terrible, thats not realistic.

[Pocketgb]

F-C wrote...


you wouldnt let the thread go for 8+ hours a day, you are one of
those people who are being excessively vocal about this issue. dont try
to act like you are just a bystander when you are the vocal minority..

I'm not sure I said otherwise.

I confess - I did "feed" a bit more than I should've. The discussion did go on for a long time and one can easily see that as rambling (i'd say that most did given that they'd come in and just see an argument between two people).

But mainly I'm attempting to point out and remind in which the manner I presented all of my arguments, and how I tried my hardest later on to respect Dime's viewpoints, despite his constant disrepect and lack of maturity.

F-C wrote...

the game doesnt need to better balance because its perfect where it is.

it fits the holy trinity of all standard RPG games. you have tank-healer-damage.

if you want to use mages, rogues, or warriors for the damage slots it doesnt really matter except its how you want to play. you can still beat the game on the hardest setting with any combination of 2 damage classes.

You can use anything in the game and get away with it. What that doesn't say is that some class combinations will have an easier time than others.

I typically consider a game advocating the "holy trinity" generally encourages it. Given some of the tools mages are provided and a lot in the way most encounters are built this isn't necessarily the case.

F-C wrote...

adjusting the game to suit a few peoples personal needs will only create more people who hate those changes and whine about them. then they can change it again for those new whiners which create another set of whiners...  over and over and over forever and it will never end.

And if they don't they still get whiners. You can't stop the qq ; p

Of course it's more the context of what the whiners are whining "about". I'm not sure what there is to whine about in attempting a more balanced game.

F-C wrote...

they can spend their time developing DLC and improving the other areas of gameplay, which is much more productive.

This is the only valid excuse I've seen thus far. Most people don't care about balance, so why spend time on it?

[F-C]

surrealitycheck wrote...

It is evidently not perfect for a large number of people on the forum. So the question becomes this; if warriors and rogues had more utility, complexity and damage, would it make the game less good? If the answer to that question is no, and there is no reason it shouldn't be, then you have no reason to oppose

the vocal minority who keeps trolling day in and day out does not equal a lot of people. ive made that point abundantly clear. it just means you have some no lifers who are revolving their life around pounding on an issue.


i also have never been against improving rogues or warriors, quite the opposite i have always supported people wanting to make them better.


however nerfing mages will not reach that goal. thats why i call them bitter little mage haters. if you want the other classes to be better, attacking mages does nothing to accomplish that goal.

crusade for them to be better classes, i will not oppose it in any way, i will support it.

Modifié par F-C, 18 novembre 2009 - 05:30 .

[Schyzm]

DragoonKain3 wrote...

Stacking heals is overrated. Even at 100 spellpower, you only heal 80, and at nightmare, 68, with the enemy hitting harder as well. You're better off quaffing a potion; the only real use for a healer is if the target in question is temporarily disabled, so they can receive enough healing to stay alive in order for them to quaff a potion. All you need is one dedicated healer, so no need for stacking mages.

I don't find whats so good about stacking blizzards. One blizzard is enough to stop enemies in their tracks, so again, don't know why stacking mages is OP'ed apart from one other to cast Earthquake for those who resists the initial freeze. But the third mage? Doesn't contribute, as far as I'm concerned.

Cone of Colds (and force field being too cheap to cast/maintain) is truly the ONLY thing that is overpowered, but as I said before, it was the Devs mistake that they don't run on diminishing returns like stuns are. Fix that (like subsequent freezes get shorter over a 10 second time frame and it resets this 10 second timer with each freeze), and nothing about stacking mages is OP'ed.

lots of bosses disable multiple ppl, but you're right potions is often nice because it has the added bonus of taking up your useless auto attacker's time instead of your precious mage time.  and there's tons of OP stuff that are on the horizon, forcefield cone of cold was just the first wave.  trust me there's enough insane mage spells you're gna see crazy game breaking stuff coming out for a while.

the third mage could drop a tempest onto them, another blizzard will further guarantee cc while layering on even more damage.  with mages, the more the merrier.

[surrealitycheck]

To be honest F-C, that's what balancing would entail. It's pretty evident that warriors and rogues need some tweaking, as auto-attack is their zenith. A few chaps early on were talking about nerfing, but I think most of the chaps in the last few pages would rather just that mages had their job more clearly defined, and warriors and rogues brought up to par.

[LGWu]

if you want to use mages, rogues, or warriors for the damage slots it doesnt really matter except its how you want to play. you can still beat the game on the hardest setting with any combination of 2 damage classes.

I go Dual wielding Gimli  with Alistair tank and Mor damage
Chuffles the wonder dog occasionally barks his desire so he gets an in.
We rarely get scratched let alone hurt

Tactical pause allows victory in near any situation 1st off. A lesson few really understand
the big bad mother with the tentacles.. no replay.. ded 1st off [ but close... hehe]
still on 1st play thu
like BG
Its life, but not as they know it.

right bones

[Schyzm]

F-C wrote...

Schyzm wrote...

it's just not true.  damage spells are not gimped by taking non-damage spells.  there are no synergies, you can tack cone of cold onto anything and its awesome.  honestly do you even play the game?  your trolling seems to develop in a vacuum of a person who has never even touched the game.

so you cast cone of cold then sit there on thumbs while it cools down?
so any situation where cone of cold isnt the best choice, you just sit on your thumbs?

you wont have the vast array of spells to choose from a glass cannon build will have. you wont have the utility spells that make them powerful either because you are trying to do everyting with one build.

you will just be bad most the time, though im sure you can cherry pick out a situation where it isnt terrible, thats not realistic.

seriously you just have never played.  and yes any mage with cone of cold doing insane damage, freezing everything in place plus a bunch of other spells is obviously a bad mage.  god you're horrible.  it's just embarassing.  I know this meme of yours has developed in the pretend world of your mind while trying to flame everyone on the forum constantly in your own personal crusade.  but its ridiculously ignorant.

[Pocketgb]

F-C wrote...

however nerfing mages will not reach that goal. thats why i call them bitter little mage haters. if you want the other classes to be better, attacking mages does nothing to accomplish that goal.

Some are against this path in the sense that it further decreases the challenge in the hardest settings, something many would claim are a bit too accessible even still. This is why I'd propose for in addition to buffing everyone else that they also make hard and nightmare a bit more difficult. The only problem is that it'd make the leap from Normal to Hard a bit more unfriendly.

[F-C]

Pocketgb wrote...

Some are against this path in the sense that it further decreases the challenge in the hardest settings, something many would claim are a bit too accessible even still. This is why I'd propose for in addition to buffing everyone else that they also make hard and nightmare a bit more difficult. The only problem is that it'd make the leap from Normal to Hard a bit more unfriendly.

you can solo nightmare with a rogue, so i fail to see how its going to be a big deal.

if you want to argue the entire game should be harder, then thats another issue, but it is not a mage issue when a rogue can solo nightmare.

[DragoonKain3]

@Schzym

Seriously, there are only two spells worth your time moving away from your 'spec', and those are cone of cold and force field. Nerf those two like I have suggested, and all of a sudden spending 2/1 talents just to get those spells aren't so hot anymore.



As I have said this in the old thread, but a pure support mage is...



4 Spirit Healr

4 Mass Rejuv

4 Glyph line

4 Haste

4 Stinging Swarm (grease for knockdown, spellbloom for mana regen spam, swarm is just gravy)

4 Anti Magic burst (dispelling CC is just too underrated)



... and that's 24 talent points, and a typical lvl 22 character has 24 talents. So if you stray from pure support, you do NOT have any talents for 'pure damage' or any other aspect without sacrificing something.



Of course, with multiple mages (I'm assuming 2) you can get away with hybridizing some or all of them to complement each other, but does not change the fact that even if you go 0.5wizard/0.5cleric for both of them, you still effectively have 1 wizard and 1 cleric in the end.





@surrealitycheck

But the thing is, Rogues have UNDOUBTEDLY the highest single dps in the game. They have awesome utility through lockpicking as well.



For Wars, they can go damage via dual wield, or insane utility by the ability to keep aggro and actually surviving it.



So I see no need for rebalancing.

[aberdash]

Looks like another fun day of pocket vs dimes. :/

[F-C]

aberdash wrote...

Looks like another fun day of pocket vs dimes. :/

it just reinforces the point that this issue is being hounded by a couple no lifer trolls all day every day.


until packet and schyzm started in on their rampage this thread had fallen off the front page for an hour. they get on and start rampaging about mages and blam we are right back here repeating the same things over and over.

[Pocketgb]

F-C wrote...

you can solo nightmare with a rogue, so i fail to see how its going to be a big deal.

if you want to argue the entire game should be harder, then thats another issue, but it is not a mage issue when a rogue can solo nightmare.

So are we in agreement then? Give undesirable paths more of a boost - or at the most, so it seems, giving the undesirable paths more of a boost would overall be good for the game?

Modifié par Pocketgb, 18 novembre 2009 - 05:44 .

[Schyzm]

DragoonKain3 wrote...

@Schzym
Seriously, there are only two spells worth your time moving away from your 'spec', and those are cone of cold and force field. Nerf those two like I have suggested, and all of a sudden spending 2/1 talents just to get those spells aren't so hot anymore.

As I have said this in the old thread, but a pure support mage is...

4 Spirit Healr
4 Mass Rejuv
4 Glyph line
4 Haste
4 Stinging Swarm (grease for knockdown, spellbloom for mana regen spam, swarm is just gravy)
4 Anti Magic burst (dispelling CC is just too underrated)

... and that's 24 talent points, and a typical lvl 22 character has 24 talents. So if you stray from pure support, you do NOT have any talents for 'pure damage' or any other aspect without sacrificing something.

Of course, with multiple mages (I'm assuming 2) you can get away with hybridizing some or all of them to complement each other, but does not change the fact that even if you go 0.5wizard/0.5cleric for both of them, you still effectively have 1 wizard and 1 cleric in the end.


@surrealitycheck
But the thing is, Rogues have UNDOUBTEDLY the highest single dps in the game. They have awesome utility through lockpicking as well.

For Wars, they can go damage via dual wield, or insane utility by the ability to keep aggro and actually surviving it.

So I see no need for rebalancing.

yes if you want to, for no good reason at all pickup every utility spell in the game, even the bad ones and purposefully avoid the better spells for no apparent reason then you have a "support mage."  but you've made your mage intentionally bad for no good reason.  there is no restriction that says after you've got spirit healing you need to go get other crappy support spells.  maybe you want to "roleplay" a cleric or something, but you can't bring that kind of intentional bad play into a balance discussion.

[Schyzm]

F-C wrote...

aberdash wrote...

Looks like another fun day of pocket vs dimes. :/

it just reinforces the point that this issue is being hounded by a couple no lifer trolls all day every day.


until packet and schyzm started in on their rampage this thread had fallen off the front page for an hour. they get on and start rampaging about mages and blam we are right back here repeating the same things over and over.

I'd love to be able to discuss the game mechanics and mages and spells and overall balance without your constant trolling.  because let's face it, you're the most useless counterproductive thing in this entire forum.  you're a giant hyper-active troll that is on a crusade.

the instant you stop the forum will 3x as much actual game discussion in it.

[F-C]

Pocketgb wrote...

So are we in agreement then? Give undesirable paths more of a boost?

if you want to make warriors and rogues a little better, i have never had an issue with that.

my issue completly lies in that people think nerfing mages is the way to go with things when it will have zero effect on improving the other classes.

if you find things too hard without mages now, and they nerf mages, its still going to be too hard for you without mages, that doesnt change.

this crusade to nerf mages has no purpose other than to satiate some bitter little peoples desire to see others people enjoyment ruined.

[Pocketgb]

Good, then we have a bit of closure here : ) At least for me.