243 réponses à ce sujet

[vhatever]

I wouldn't mind the waves so much if they gave you the tools to better deal with them. Taunt has way too long of a cooldown, for one, So does heal. I like that they did try to make it legitmately harder, but really you are simply forced to rely on cheese to get anywhere. You will have to kite enemies around, you will have to pull enemies way back from where you initial encounter them.


the best group is probably 2 2hand warriors. You can destroy a single wave with cleave and all thier AoEs, then thy can second wind and do it again, then use your second 2hd warrior to taunt any straglers left on to him and he can go for 2 more waves. The rest of your chars could actually be playing a card game during all this, except for your healer.

Pretty sad actually. Kite and cheese is the name of the game.

[ZDProletariat]

I'm really surprised to see so much complaining about this choice that Bioware made. I personally find the waves fun, I enjoy many enemies coming at you at once with some being weak, some being tough etc. It makes this game much more dynamic than the formula they used for DA:O.

What is the actual complaint here? It does ad tactics since your squishy targets can now get attacked from behind. There is no safe spot especially when the enemy waves have assassins.

I think the confusion here is you guys are confusing tactics with strategy. DA:O was more strategic since you knew what enemies you were going to face, you planned accordingly, and you executed your plan on your own terms, usually with your tank pulling. It felt much more like an MMORPG than just an RPG. But DA2 has the enemies coming at you from all sides, which forces you (If you are playing on a high enough difficulty setting for it to matter) to constantly move your teammates, protect them, set them up to not die instantly etc. It's more tactical. But less Strategic.

I personally like the change. I feel that Bioware took a lot of what people liked in their change from Mass Effect to Mass Effect 2 and introduced it for DA2. I'm enjoying the game a lot, especially the battles which feel more fun. Also the bosses themselves add more tactical necessity as you need to learn their routine and shift accordingly during the battle. It's more like older games we remember so well.

So tell me, what's exactly the problem you guys have here?

[Wyndham711]

I agree. The constant waves in practically all battles is an issue among the plethora of faulty design decision that hinder this game. Sure, with something like demons I get it - they push themselves through the fade unpredictably, that works nicely and would be a nice mechanic when fighting demons, making those encounters more unique if the wave system was limited to just such creatures.
But when all enemy types do this, and furthermore do it constantly, it all becomes utterly ridiculous. People dropping out of the sky just doesn't work. Immersion breaking, arcadey, stupid and plain sloppy, in my opinion.

[Tankosaurus]

ZDProletariat wrote...

I'm really surprised to see so much complaining about this choice that Bioware made. I personally find the waves fun, I enjoy many enemies coming at you at once with some being weak, some being tough etc. It makes this game much more dynamic than the formula they used for DA:O.

What is the actual complaint here? It does ad tactics since your squishy targets can now get attacked from behind. There is no safe spot especially when the enemy waves have assassins.

I think the confusion here is you guys are confusing tactics with strategy. DA:O was more strategic since you knew what enemies you were going to face, you planned accordingly, and you executed your plan on your own terms, usually with your tank pulling. It felt much more like an MMORPG than just an RPG. But DA2 has the enemies coming at you from all sides, which forces you (If you are playing on a high enough difficulty setting for it to matter) to constantly move your teammates, protect them, set them up to not die instantly etc. It's more tactical. But less Strategic.

I personally like the change. I feel that Bioware took a lot of what people liked in their change from Mass Effect to Mass Effect 2 and introduced it for DA2. I'm enjoying the game a lot, especially the battles which feel more fun. Also the bosses themselves add more tactical necessity as you need to learn their routine and shift accordingly during the battle. It's more like older games we remember so well.

So tell me, what's exactly the problem you guys have here?

maybe you should read the post before you ask, if you're too lazy to read it im definitely too lazy to give you the cliff notes version

[ZDProletariat]

Tankosaurus wrote...
maybe you should read the post before you ask, if you're too lazy to read it im definitely too lazy to give you the cliff notes version

I did read the first post, I read the first page. I didn't see anything to justify the position being used, only a complaint.

Also I was throwing in my three cents more than just responding to you specifically or asking you to repeat yourself.

[Tankosaurus]

Filament wrote...

It does strain credulity that waves occur so often, but as far as tactics go, with your mage knowing that they do occur in this manner, that apparently the people of Kirkwall do love to rappel off of ceilings and jump out of second story windows, this can and should be accounted for. So I'm not seeing the loss really on that front, unless it strains credulity so much that you don't want to acknowledge or consider its existence in the game world.

Thinking about my judiciousness comment some more, though, I guess I'm not very judicious at all, that's why I chose the primal school. I just cast Tempest as often as possible, and Chain Lightning and Stone Fist and Petrify as often as possible, while trying to sync those with companions' abilities. (Shield Bash, Pinning Shot)

But being judicious doesn't really amount to just tickling them all the time with your staff, but taking into account  hence you should save your abilities for when they will be most effective, not just when they're ready to fire. It doesn't mean you don't use them at all.

i agree that this is the way to beat the game, its not as if im stuck, im basically doing the same thing as you, but in the larger and more difficult encounters this is impossible.

It's also why I feel a melee rogue is necessary if only for the sheer amount of burst dmg they can put out on a single target, if I couldnt just straight up make something dead in .5 seconds with my rogue I would be at a loss at to waht to do in some of the difficult fights.

[Tankosaurus]

ZDProletariat wrote...

Tankosaurus wrote...
maybe you should read the post before you ask, if you're too lazy to read it im definitely too lazy to give you the cliff notes version

I did read the first post, I read the first page. I didn't see anything to justify the position being used, only a complaint.

Also I was throwing in my three cents more than just responding to you specifically or asking you to repeat yourself.

then you should see that waves of guys is not tactics or strategy, it turns the game into double dragon, i know that is solely my opinion, but it seems to be the largest complaint about the game aside from the sheer repetitiveness of it all.

the game is overall not horrible, just not as high quality as I would expect out of one of my favorite rpg companies.  the waves in  combat and sheer repetitiveness of it and the environments really break the game

[ZDProletariat]

Tankosaurus wrote...
then you should see that waves of guys is not tactics or strategy, it turns the game into double dragon, i know that is solely my opinion, but it seems to be the largest complaint about the game aside from the sheer repetitiveness of it all.

the game is overall not horrible, just not as high quality as I would expect out of one of my favorite rpg companies.  the waves in  combat and sheer repetitiveness of it and the environments really break the game

Playing on normal, I can see that the game is very hack and slash, except with three extra guys that do their own thing. But if you play on hard or nightmare you do need to micromanage in the battles. That's tactics.
Even Bioware stated that you CAN play the game as a hack and slash if you want. Or you can play it on a harder difficulty. I don't see it as a black spot on the game to allow two different play styles. It's rather refreshing actually.

[AtreiyaN7]

Tankosaurus wrote...

AtreiyaN7 wrote...

See my other post, because I'm getting tired of the lack of reading comprehension. I never said that the new encounters were NOT predictable. In fact, if you'd actually read carefully, you'd see that I clearly said that the waves are predictable and that the numbers of enemies are the same, which I said because I had to reload quite a few times on some of the hard fights. What I said in that earlier post  (which I'll also repeat again) is that the difference lies in that the waves force you to react differently.

feigning frustration when you negate your own premise does not make what you said valid, it just shows you're goign to repeat what you have to say ad nauseum without contributing much else

on to other things, if you have to save and reload often on hard (think what nightmare is like) then I think you must at least admit this is either

A) poor design

or

We all suck at this game

Now, not to sound cocky, but I am usually pretty good at strategy rpgs, i get the basics and then I usually do well.  I am not frustrated by my 'lack' of being able to break this game or that im dying a lot.  its the WAY that its happening that is frustrating, it gives the appearance of being 'challenging' while in fact simply being corny.

I'm not negating my own premise, but feel free to believe that if it brings you some comfort. Maybe a numbered list will help:

• I said that it was interesting that people are complaining about it, given the criticisms aimed at DA:O about the static enemy placement and the low number of random encounters (random map encounters specifically)  in DA:O.
• I said that while the waves and enemy placement are predictable, the difference from DA:O is that you have to react to things as they come. It's more dynamic. Even with foreknowledge, I can tell you that that doesn't guarantee success even if you try to get to those choke points, etc.
• So far, I'm not bored, because in every encounter, I've had many different outcomes. It  has been far more challenging than cheesing my way through encounters in DA:O.
• I've also said the NUMBER of these random encounters was excessive, even for me. I still find it more interesting compared to DA:O encounters on the whole.

Modifié par AtreiyaN7, 12 mars 2011 - 11:19 .

[Tankosaurus]

ZDProletariat wrote...
Playing on normal, I can see that the game is very hack and slash, except with three extra guys that do their own thing. But if you play on hard or nightmare you do need to micromanage in the battles. That's tactics.
Even Bioware stated that you CAN play the game as a hack and slash if you want. Or you can play it on a harder difficulty. I don't see it as a black spot on the game to allow two different play styles. It's rather refreshing actually.

but that is our complaint is that waves make the game NOT tactical, i play on nightmare, i am required to reload fights 2 or 3 times so i can anticipate what is coming and that does not make the game tactical it turns the game into something that i didnt want which is a hack n slash.

[0rz0]

It really gets repetitive though when you're expecting waves and are actually suprised when there are none. I though the wavey encounters would be to spice things up and test the party flexibility, not just drag the enounter.

[lizzbee]

ZDProletariat wrote...

So tell me, what's exactly the problem you guys have here?

Lots.  Every conversation funnels you into combat with someone who always has waves of minions hiding in the ether.  Endless faceless enemies try to kill you, and you can't really figure out why until you kill enough of them and wipe out their hideouts.  What did the Invisible Sisters want?  I don't know.  I got so bored killing them in endless ambushes that I didn't even bother to destroy their headquarters.

What I miss from DA:O is your chance to talk to the people who might try to kill you.  Like the bandits in Lothering.  You could persuade your way out of the encounter and make money to boot if you really wanted to.  Instead, they anonymously whack away at you for no particular reason.  And they do it endlessly.  Yawn.

I also hate that trash mobs spawn half the map away, and as long as your weapons are drawn, you're stuck fighting them.  I finish everything off, and then I'm standing there with weapons drawn, just waiting to see if there's just one assassin I haven't finished off yet, or if the battle's finally over.  I don't know until my rogue or Anders takes a long-delayed knife to the back.  It's boring and repetitive. When you add in the navigating back to your original path to your destination, it starts to become completely infuriating.  Especially when you haven't actually cleaned up anything, and more respawns nab you on the reverse path to the exit point.

Combat's an endless, boring chore.  If Hawke had to scrub toilets in a five-minute minigame to avoid boring mobs, I'd probably do it once in a while for variety.

[Tankosaurus]

Filament wrote...

Tankosaurus wrote...

i agree that this is the way to beat the game, its not as if im stuck, im basically doing the same thing as you, but in the larger and more difficult encounters this is impossible.

It's also why I feel a melee rogue is necessary if only for the sheer amount of burst dmg they can put out on a single target, if I couldnt just straight up make something dead in .5 seconds with my rogue I would be at a loss at to waht to do in some of the difficult fights.

I must be building DWers wrong, I'm finding Varric way more useful at the moment than Isabela.

assassinate + pinpoint strikes + hexes are your friends

[Gatt9]

Andante78 wrote...

There was tactics in BG2? Once I figured out the mechanics of D&D... there were no tactics.

All I remember was being a human lvl 9 kensai/lvl 17 mage steamrolling everything

Exploiting the system,  and a system berefet of tactics are two different things.

In fact,  IIRC,  Bioware wasn't going to include the Kensai because it was gamebreaking,  until people really expressed the desire for it.

So in short,  before you claim there weren't any tactics,  perhaps you should go back and play it in something other than God mode?

[WuWeiWu]

By the time you reach Act 2, you should know what mobs do what. Y'all are scoffing at the idea of having to use actual tactics as opposed to the in-game tactics menu. Is this not what you, the collective mass, wanted? A tactical game set in the Dragon Age universe?

Woe is the man/woman who has to actually formulate plans for each type of mob that can adapt and change to what is currently on cooldown!

lizzbee wrote...





What I miss from DA:O is your chance to talk to the people who might try to kill you.  Like the bandits in Lothering.  You could persuade your way out of the encounter and make money to boot if you really wanted to.

That's
probably because the bandits on the bridge wanted your coin to ensure
your 'safe passage'. The Invisible Sisters? They want to make a name
for themselves in Kirkwall as ruthless street thugs who own the city at
night. They want the stuff you carry around on your back; a slit
throat, not words.

Did you get a chance to talk to the bandit groups after the first bridge in Lothering? The ones for the Chantry Board?

Comparison fail.

Modifié par WuWeiWu, 12 mars 2011 - 11:33 .

[flushfire]

ZDProletariat wrote...
It's more tactical. But less Strategic.

You sir, are correct. The fact that Jagged Alliance 2, a tactical RPG considered by lovers of the subgenre one of it's best, does not have multiple waves of enemies appearing out of thin air, is proof that it is inferior. It's fans are just confused, JA2 is just probably more strategic. After all, waves = tactics.

How dare Square use the word Tactics in Final Fantasy Tactics' title? Thare isn't even half the quantity of waves in DA2 there. It should be named Final Fantasy Strategy.

Dragon Age 2 should've been called Dragon Age: Tactics. Problem solved, people will no longer complain about the waves.

[Johanry]

Personally I like the idea of waves and cutting down hordes of enemies.

However its really annoying that they spawn from seemingly random places, I'd like to be able to place my mages in a 'safe' spot and not have 5 rogues randomly decide to spawn there.

[Tankosaurus]

WuWeiWu wrote...

By the time you reach Act 2, you should know what mobs do what. Y'all are scoffing at the idea of having to use actual tactics as opposed to the in-game tactics menu. Is this not what you, the collective mass, wanted? A tactical game set in the Dragon Age universe?

Woe is the man/woman who has to actually formulate plans for each type of mob that can adapt and change to what is currently on cooldown!

waves of nameless minions spawning on top of oyu every fight =/= tactics, welcome to the thread

[WuWeiWu]

Tankosaurus wrote...

WuWeiWu wrote...

By the time you reach Act 2, you should know what mobs do what. Y'all are scoffing at the idea of having to use actual tactics as opposed to the in-game tactics menu. Is this not what you, the collective mass, wanted? A tactical game set in the Dragon Age universe?

Woe is the man/woman who has to actually formulate plans for each type of mob that can adapt and change to what is currently on cooldown!

waves of nameless minions spawning on top of oyu every fight =/= tactics, welcome to the thread

Do you know what the idea of tactics entails? For a poor analogy, a military commander has waves of nameless minions spawning on top of them every fight - do they whine over 'tactics'? No, they write several hundred books about it (tactics).

May I put it another way? Tactics in DA2 aren't just setting up spell combos or coordinating attacks on a specific enemy in the faceless horde - you can bottleneck, you can group, you can ungroup, you can control.

[lizzbee]

WuWeiWu wrote...

lizzbee wrote...


What I miss from DA:O is your chance to talk to the people who might try to kill you.  Like the bandits in Lothering.  You could persuade your way out of the encounter and make money to boot if you really wanted to.

That's probably because the bandits on the bridge wanted your coin to ensure
your 'safe passage'. The Invisible Sisters? They want to make a name
for themselves in Kirkwall as ruthless street thugs who own the city at
night. They want the stuff you carry around on your back; a slit
throat, not words.

Did you get a chance to talk to the bandit groups after the first bridge in Lothering? The ones for the Chantry Board?

Comparison fail.

Yeah, three bandit groups.  The next ambushing bandits had an amusing convo, and some variety in how you could handle the situation.  Leave, ambush them, or just hack you way through them.

All I'm saying is that motiveless anonymous mobs are boring.  Period.  DA:O was nice enough to give you a little variety in your banditry, and maybe a little amusement to boot.

[GregoriusMaximus]

Agree with OP.

The fights in this game are repetitive and tedious. The number of enemies who have special or interesting attacks is minimal... oh i'd better stop there or it'll be a full-page rant on all the corners cut with this game...

[GregoriusMaximus]

I mean RPG fights are never anything special, but that's usually compensated for by focusing on the deep RPG elements...

... since those are gone...