696 réponses à ce sujet

[G_Admiral_Thrawn]

Amioran wrote...

G_Admiral_Thrawn wrote...
Thank you for proving they ARE gimped. Mages are a support class. When was the last time that was true for a Bioware game, prior to DA2? In BG2, NWN, NWN2, KOTOR (Consulars were the "mage" class in that game), they were all "primary" classes that could destroy enemies by looking at them funny.

Thank you for not knowing anything at all of what make a mage powerful in reality. Mages have always being so powerful just because they can control the battlefield, primarily, NOT for damage. Surely they can also do extreme damage, in spikes, but their PRIMARY aspect, their MOST POWERFUL aspect, and why they are thought so overpowered in DnD etc. is because they can control the field as no other class can do. Damage is a SECONDARY aspect of this, a sort of side-effect. The motive for this is that mage's damage is at spikes, not constant.

The best mages builds have ALWAYS been the CC ones, NOT the damage ones. You should learn a little better of what you are talking about before trying to prove something you clearly don't know.

Really, guy, do you think the most powerful spell of all in DnD, Time Stop, is a DAMAGE spell? Or Wish? Or Imprisonment? I'm without words, seriously.

My prefered spells are not level 9 spells (which those are). I prefer the level 7 spells, with 2 third spells as honorable mentions. The spells I consider for a D&D mage to be indespensible are Fireball, NWN's Flame Arrow (the two honorable mention third level spells, Ice Storm (a 4th level spell) Chain Lightning, Isaac's Greater Missile Storm, Sunfire (a BG2 sixth level spell), Distinigrate, Flesh to Stone, Finger of Death, and Horrid Wilting (a level 8 spell).

And Imprisonment is an insta death spell (or has the end result of being Instadeath), so thank you for helping me prove my point, which a Mage's strength isn't damage (which I prefer), but versality. Need a controller? Get a mage. Need a solo burst damage user? Get a non-DA2 mage. Need substained DPS? Get a mage (and btw, that's where WoW mages shine). In this game, Mages can't do a DAMN THING without the aid of a warrior.

And I seem to remember having this same debate over in the BG2 forums, and I was in the minority there as well, but atleast in BG2, my way of playing a mage was HIGHLY effective. In this game, I mainly sit around wanding an enemy, simply because my spells just don't do the damage I need or am used to.

Modifié par G_Admiral_Thrawn, 25 mars 2011 - 09:54 .

[G_Admiral_Thrawn]

Nerivant wrote...

G_Admiral_Thrawn wrote...
Here, they sit back and wand while have Haste and Heroic Aura (which takes like 60% of your mana right there, add in EW and Arcane Barrier, and a AW/BM from DA:A has more mana free to cast spells. I'm surprised a mage has any mana to do damage with chain lightnings and crushing prisons.

There are ways around that. Easy ways.

I'm beginning to wonder if you have any idea how to play a mage.

I guess I did, in any game up to DA2, where mages had the firepower to deal with almost any threat, but in DA2 I'm not so sure

[Grumpy Old Wizard]

Graunt wrote...

Grumpy Old Wizard wrote...
Certainly it does not give a special bonus to electricity, but it is the hightest dps staff you can buy (base dps helps determine spell damage) and also boosts magic, which futhur boosts spell damage. I do not value staffs that boost a single element because the spells have such long cooldown that you lose damage if you do focus on a single element.


Oh, my final magic stat with gear was 89, as I posted in the other thread, which you certainly read because you commented on it.

social.bioware.com/forum/1/topic/305/index/6652644/18#6769750

Since you seem to keep missing it, or simply avoiding it.  Isn't it ironic that you didn't even take the single strongest area of effect spell for damage (not counting Walking Bomb...which you didn't take either) because you felt the need to up your defenses for survivability issues?  All of those points into Magic, and for what?

I did not want to role play a blood mage dude.

I did not take walking bomb becaus that is a very situational spell of rather limited use. I took spells that could be reliably be spammed in every battle. Of course, barring immunities.

I proved my spells did more damage than yours. That is the for what in pumping Magic.

Modifié par Grumpy Old Wizard, 25 mars 2011 - 09:58 .

[AreleX]

I had to see what all the fuss was about in this thread, so I'm here to say as a warrior player:

I NEED MAGES.

I. NEED. MAGES.

All the things that I do, and all the insanely fast clears/kills I get are due in VERY large part to mages. Be it them keeping me healed/buffed, capitalizing on my staggers, locking down tough enemies for me wail on, whatever, mages make it all possible.

If you watch my videos, and aren't too familiar with the game, you may attribute everything dying so quickly to me only, but this couldn't be further from the truth; it's a combination of myself, the mages, and Varric working together (what a novel idea!) to bring enemies down. Each part of the team has to pull their weight in their specific department, adding up to an equal sharing of the burden, or things go very badly, very fast. It's a TEAM EFFORT, by every definition.

If mages were truly gimped and useless, they would not be able to hold up their end, and I would die horribly, over and over and over.

I don't even know what this discussion/argument is about any more, I'm just here to say the one thing I know for sure, since it seems to be one of the current topics: if you believe the Warrior's success is solely dependant on the Warrior, you're very wrong.

Amioran wrote...

Fa1nT wrote...

Go watch some of the berserk reaver videos. They kill both large mobs and bosses faster than mages, and don't even require cross class combos. Just haste and heroic Aura and elemental weapons. (just anders can do all this)

OMG.

Try playing ALL the game with a warrior, you will see that those videos are not the average damage you do with a warrior, all the time. The videos you see are done purposedly to show the MAX damage the build can do, in favorable circumstances (meaning that all variables are adjusted for it) and many "runs" till you get perfection.

For a mage this is much more difficult to do for various reasons, that I have already elencated.

I don't know if you're referring to me, but if you are, none of this is true, except maybe 'favorable circumstances'. I change around my tactics (and maybe the weapons) depending on what I'm going up against, isn't that what you're supposed to do?

Modifié par AreleX, 25 mars 2011 - 10:31 .

[Grumpy Old Wizard]

G_Admiral_Thrawn wrote...

I guess I did, in any game up to DA2, where mages had the firepower to deal with almost any threat, but in DA2 I'm not so sure

One of the strenghts of mages in DnD is the many spells they can learn. They have spells to deal with any situation. DA2 has far fewer spells than DA:O and thus gives the mage fewer options. Not to mention that overall most spells are considerably weaker than DA:O spells and have longer cooldowns. And of course the increased enemy speeds put enemies in your face very quicky. Which brings up the rather long casting times of some spells.

Modifié par Grumpy Old Wizard, 25 mars 2011 - 10:07 .

[G_Admiral_Thrawn]

the point, atleast to me, is that mages have been reduced from glass nukes to healbots and buffbots.

[G_Admiral_Thrawn]

[quote]Grumpy Old Wizard wrote...

[quote]G_Admiral_Thrawn wrote...

[/quote]

I guess I did, in any game up to DA2, where mages had the firepower to deal with almost any threat, but in DA2 I'm not so sure

[/quote]

One of the strenghts of mages in DnD is the many spells they can learn. They have spells to deal with any situation. DA2 has far fewer spells than DA:O and thus gives the mage fewer options. Not to mention that overall most spells are considerably weaker than DA:O spells and have longer cooldowns. And of course the increased enemy speeds put enemies in your face very quicky. Which brings up the rather long casting times of some spells.

[/quote]

Thank you, thank you, thank you. You have admitted mages are gimped in this game. now if we can get these other people to admit it, maybe we can get somewhere, especially if a dev sees this.

[Grumpy Old Wizard]

If mages were truly gimped and useless, they would not be able to hold
up their end, and I would die horribly, over and over and over.

You as a warrior player may not see a problem with mages. But it is not fun to play a healbot/buffboy. Mage Hawke can't kill at anywhere close to the same speed as Warrior Hawke. There are balance issues that need to be addressed.

[G_Admiral_Thrawn]

and that's especially true when in the setting mages are supposed to be "dangerous maniacs." it's hard to say that when all you are is a glorified servant, puting Heroic Auras, hastes, and heals on a warrior, and allowing them to kill enemies.

[Amioran]

G_Admiral_Thrawn wrote...
My prefered spells are not level 9 spells (which those are). I prefer the level 7 spells, with 2 third spells as honorable mentions. The spells I consider for a D&D mage to be indespensible are Fireball, NWN's Flame Arrow (the two honorable mention third level spells, Ice Storm (a 4th level spell) Chain Lightning, Isaac's Greater Missile Storm, Sunfire (a BG2 sixth level spell), Distinigrate, Flesh to Stone, Finger of Death, and Horrid Wilting (a level 8 spell).

All your "favored" spells sucks great time, apart specific situations. They are sorcerer's spells, that are fine in a cRPG (not so much as others, but you can do good also with those), but they suck great time in a PnP setting where the variables are much more, in confront to many others that focus more on CC.

In reality with those spells you will have problems either in a cRPG in some more thoughtful encounter. I don't know, for example, how did you beat Gaxkang with your "preferred spells" on hardcore without other mages in the party.

G_Admiral_Thrawn wrote...
And Imprisonment is an insta death spell (or has the end result of being Instadeath), so thank you for helping me prove my point, which a Mage's strength isn't damage (which I prefer), but versality.

Didn't you state totally the contrary? I've seen you only complaining about damage for now, in fact. As for Imprisonment it is not a damage spell, for this it cannot be countered easily, differently from all your favored spells you mentioned just before.
 

G_Admiral_Thrawn wrote...
Need a controller? Get a mage. Need a solo burst damage user? Get a non-DA2 mage. Need substained DPS? Get a mage (and btw, that's where WoW mages shine). In this game, Mages can't do a DAMN THING without the aid of a warrior.

Actually all those things can be done fine by mages in DA2, especially CC. I don't really understand of what you are talking about. Certainly, as I stated, there are some spells that are not executed well (while the concept is fine), and this is a bit detrimental for the FULL potential a mage could have in DA2, but this is more a problem having to do with variability of builds or theoricrafting than real efficiency.

G_Admiral_Thrawn wrote...
And I seem to remember having this same debate over in the BG2 forums, and I was in the minority there as well, but atleast in BG2, my way of playing a mage was HIGHLY effective. In this game, I mainly sit around wanding an enemy, simply because my spells just don't do the damage I need or am used to.

Maybe you were in the minority because more experienced players know better, don't you think? But, apart this, that's not so relevant (also if you changed point of view suddenly, it seems), I cannot really get how can you only "sit around wanding" in DA2, since there are many CC/Support spells that works perfectly, and you can do a lot of damage with a bit of sinergy with the party.

[AreleX]

Grumpy Old Wizard wrote...

If mages were truly gimped and useless, they would not be able to hold
up their end, and I would die horribly, over and over and over.

You as a warrior player may not see a problem with mages. But it is not fun to play a healbot/buffboy. Mage Hawke can't kill at anywhere close to the same speed as Warrior Hawke. There are balance issues that need to be addressed.

I don't know anything at all about playing a mage in DA2, and I'm not claiming to.  I'm moreso addressing the people posting 'Warrior is so much better, it can do this and that and the third!', who don't realize that a Warrior's success can almost wholly be attributed to mages and good party dynamics/synergy.

Modifié par AreleX, 25 mars 2011 - 10:13 .

[Amioran]

AreleX wrote...
I don't know if you're referring to me, but if you are, none of this is true, except maybe 'favorable circumstances'. I change around my tactics (and maybe the weapons) depending on what I'm going up against, isn't that what you're supposed to do?

No, it wasn't referred to your videos specifically, that are well done and in "real time". However as you yourself stated mages are a very important part for the damage output of your warrior, and this must be taken in consideration. More, as your yourself state in the videos' explanation, you "prepare" the party before the encounters. In a typical situation, on the first run, you don't know what comes next so you cannot do this. Plus you setup specific tactics tailored specifically for the warrior (a thing that it is much more difficult to do with a mage, that should change targets continually), and so on.

Since I was talking about the average damage of a warrior, all these things must be considered.

Modifié par Amioran, 25 mars 2011 - 10:20 .

[Amioran]

Grumpy Old Wizard wrote...

If mages were truly gimped and useless, they would not be able to hold
up their end, and I would die horribly, over and over and over.

You as a warrior player may not see a problem with mages. But it is not fun to play a healbot/buffboy. Mage Hawke can't kill at anywhere close to the same speed as Warrior Hawke. There are balance issues that need to be addressed.

Again with this fable of "healbot/buffboy"? OMG. You really cannot say nothing different not consider nothing different, isn't it? Just because you played one (because your build really show this) and got bored doesn't mean that all mages builds must be the same or have the same efficiency.

[Amioran]

m14567 wrote...
When I play a mage I find I have to A) pause more frequently and fiddle with AOE markers (EDIT: and C) swap staves out for maximum damage) which I guess is a bit anti-climatic to me after mangling everything in my path when playing a warrior.

The gameplay of a mage requires you to pause much more. They have less resilence (at last if not supported by some specific ability, as it could be the Arcane Warrior spec in DAO) and many of their most powerful spells must be specifically targeted and considered in advance to be really effective; it is almost impossible to do this in real time.

To this add the fact that AoEs in DA2 cannot no more be tied to a target and you do the rest for yourself.

Modifié par Amioran, 25 mars 2011 - 10:23 .

[Graunt]

Grumpy Old Wizard wrote...
I did not want to role play a blood mage dude.

My bad, now I see what the biggest issue is here.  You aren't really interested in stats as much as you are "flavor" and if someone added a lot of extra salt to your particular flavor, you're upset by that.  Instead of constantly complaining that "Mages" are weak, why not just focus on the spells or abilities that are truly weak?  You have no argument if all you're doing is making sweeping generalizations using the weakest abilities as your base while throwing away everything that's good.

HOW are staggers easy to setup? My party consisted of Aveline, Merrill, Varric, and myself (mage). And Aveline was ordered (through tactics, so I don't have to micromanage EVERYTHING) to stagger a group of enemies (but rarely did so. And when an enemy WAS staggered, All I had a chance to do was Crushing Prison or Chain Lightning, because by the time the attack animation of FotM or Hemmorage was done, the stagger would be gone. I HATE the Cross class Combo idea. I prefer the self combos of DA:O.

They are extremely easy to setup, and 75% of the time all of your basic attacks/Assault/Scatter will have a chance to stagger normal enemies.  For everything else there's shield bash.  The AI seems to be able to launch any spell faster than you can as well on reaction, so if you setup Hemorrhage and don't control Hawke (you should be playing as Aveline most of the time anyway when actually going for staggers), he will be able to get it off reliably.  The other times you just have to already have your character selected and NOT be attacking with your staff when you know a stagger is about to hit.

Modifié par Graunt, 25 mars 2011 - 10:27 .

[Grumpy Old Wizard]

Amioran wrote...

Grumpy Old Wizard wrote...

If mages were truly gimped and useless, they would not be able to hold
up their end, and I would die horribly, over and over and over.

You as a warrior player may not see a problem with mages. But it is not fun to play a healbot/buffboy. Mage Hawke can't kill at anywhere close to the same speed as Warrior Hawke. There are balance issues that need to be addressed.

Again with this fable of "healbot/buffboy"? OMG. You really cannot say nothing different not consider nothing different, isn't it? Just because you played one (because your build really show this) and got bored doesn't mean that all mages builds must be the same or have the same efficiency.

Lol, my mage build has damage spells and some crowd control/debuffs. I left buffing and healing for Anders.

The problem is the damge of mages is pathetic. He can't kill as fast as warrior Hawke can', that is for certain.

[G_Admiral_Thrawn]

[quote]Amioran wrote...

[quote]G_Admiral_Thrawn wrote...
My prefered spells are not level 9 spells (which those are). I prefer the level 7 spells, with 2 third spells as honorable mentions. The spells I consider for a D&D mage to be indespensible are Fireball, NWN's Flame Arrow (the two honorable mention third level spells, Ice Storm (a 4th level spell) Chain Lightning, Isaac's Greater Missile Storm, Sunfire (a BG2 sixth level spell), Distinigrate, Flesh to Stone, Finger of Death, and Horrid Wilting (a level 8 spell).[/quote]

All your "favored" spells sucks great time, apart specific situations. They are sorcerer's spells, that are fine in a cRPG (not so much as others, but you can do good also with those), but they suck great time in a PnP setting where the variables are much more, in confront to many others that focus more on CC.

In reality with those spells you will have problems either in a cRPG in some more thoughtful encounter. I don't know, for example, how did you beat Gaxkang with your "preferred spells" on hardcore without other mages in the party..[/quote]

Easy. Mana Clashed him, Crushing Prison, and Winter's Grasped (or something like that) and he was dead. And as far as my favorite spells sucking, I don't know about that, because I kill almost everything that I come across. Sunfire is especially nice for getting rid of Drow because it ignores  (a drow's considerable) MR. And I only play cRPGs because when 2nd and 3rd editions were out, I couldn't get a group for them. Now that 4th edition is out (and it treats mages even worse than DA2), I don't want to find a group (even though I actually did find one).

[quote]G_Admiral_Thrawn wrote...
And Imprisonment is an insta death spell (or has the end result of being Instadeath), so thank you for helping me prove my point, which a Mage's strength isn't damage (which I prefer), but versality.

Didn't you state totally the contrary? I've seen you only complaining about damage for now, in fact. As for Imprisonment it is not a damage spell, for this it cannot be countered easily, differently from all your favored spells you mentioned just before..[/quote]

My complaint is killing things. In BG2, NWN, NWN2, and DA:O and Awakening, my mage could (and for the most part, does) solo the game (I have other party members for the interactions, but that's it). Either through damage, or through insta death spells.
 
[quote]G_Admiral_Thrawn wrote...
Need a controller? Get a mage. Need a solo burst damage user? Get a non-DA2 mage. Need substained DPS? Get a mage (and btw, that's where WoW mages shine). In this game, Mages can't do a DAMN THING without the aid of a warrior.[/quote]

Actually all those things can be done fine by mages in DA2, especially CC. I don't really understand of what you are talking about. Certainly, as I stated, there are some spells that are not executed well (while the concept is fine), and this is a bit detrimental for the FULL potential a mage could have in DA2, but this is more a problem having to do with variability of builds or theoricrafting than real efficiency..[/quote]

Aside from sleep, which only works on normal enemies (and only 50% of the time at that), and Cone of Cold/Winter's Grasp, which disables an enemy momentarily, what's a mage's CC? Horror? That works, but not by much. Crushing Prison? Need a warrior to stagger the enemy so it's paralyzed.

[quote]G_Admiral_Thrawn wrote...
And I seem to remember having this same debate over in the BG2 forums, and I was in the minority there as well, but atleast in BG2, my way of playing a mage was HIGHLY effective. In this game, I mainly sit around wanding an enemy, simply because my spells just don't do the damage I need or am used to.
[/quote]

Maybe you were in the minority because more experienced players know better, don't you think? But, apart this, that's not so relevant (also if you changed point of view suddenly, it seems), I cannot really get how can you only "sit around wanding" in DA2, since there are many CC/Support spells that works perfectly, and you can do a lot of damage with a bit of sinergy with the party.[/quote]

got the same thing there, and I completely disagree. My BG2 mage is a MIRV tactical nuke missile, and probably does more damage, and I'm INEXPERIENCED? That sounds like a warrior complaint that they don't do anything because I kill everything.

Modifié par G_Admiral_Thrawn, 25 mars 2011 - 10:39 .

[Grumpy Old Wizard]

Graunt wrote...

Grumpy Old Wizard wrote...
I did not want to role play a blood mage dude.

My bad, now I see what the biggest issue is here.  You aren't really interested in stats as much as you are "flavor" and if someone added a lot of extra salt to your particular flavor, you're upset by that.  Instead of constantly complaining that "Mages" are weak, why not just focus on the spells or abilities that are truly weak?  You have no argument if all you're doing is making sweeping generalizations using the weakest abilities as your base while throwing away everything that's good.

Dude, so you are saying everything but blood mages suck,eh?

Hemorhage is not the be all/end all of spells. You sacrifice a lot of spell picks to be a blood mage. And you sacrifice the Magic attribute which means you run with weaker spells.

Oh, and walking bomb is very dangerous and situational. From what I see posted the folks who use it on NM blow themselves up often.

Anyways, I'm still waiting for your mage vidoes that show your mage Hawke killing as fast as Warrior Hawke.

Modifié par Grumpy Old Wizard, 25 mars 2011 - 10:34 .

[Amioran]

Grumpy Old Wizard wrote...
Lol, my mage build has damage spells and some crowd control/debuffs. I left buffing and healing for Anders.

If you "left buffing and healing" for Anders why did you take many buffing spells and left aside the most damaging ones plus the most damaging CC/debuff ones?

As for your damage spells and CC/debuffs, you have only 2 tops of them (for damage), and only ONE really good for CC. Your build is ALL about buffs/support/jack-of-all-trades, it has almost nothing of real damage (apart 1) or CC.

No wonder you have all these problems, you don't either get fully what spells does what...

[Graunt]

Grumpy Old Wizard wrote...
The problem is the damge of mages is pathetic. He can't kill as fast as warrior Hawke can (using Claymore + Whirlwind + Scythe + Mighty Blow while Haste, Valiant Aura and Elemental Weapons are up) with only one spell, that is for certain.

Fixed.

[G_Admiral_Thrawn]

Amioran wrote...

Grumpy Old Wizard wrote...

If mages were truly gimped and useless, they would not be able to hold
up their end, and I would die horribly, over and over and over.

You as a warrior player may not see a problem with mages. But it is not fun to play a healbot/buffboy. Mage Hawke can't kill at anywhere close to the same speed as Warrior Hawke. There are balance issues that need to be addressed.

Again with this fable of "healbot/buffboy"? OMG. You really cannot say nothing different not consider nothing different, isn't it? Just because you played one (because your build really show this) and got bored doesn't mean that all mages builds must be the same or have the same efficiency.

Fable of healbot/buffboy? In my fight with both the High Dragon and Meredith, it was the warriors and rogues who did most of the work. I just stood there wanding and healing. Big change from DA:O where my mages were doing massive damage to the High Dragon. I'll admit, I did a little more in the Meredith fight, but only because Carver (I think) would stagger Meredith, and I'd Crushing Prison her, but even that didn't seem to do much damage (compared to the (mostly) unbuffed rogues and warriors. I ran through my mana twice (and used 3 or 4 Lyrium pots), and didn't do any damage to her. Or atleast, I didn't notice any damage, but I wasn't playing with the numbers floating. I could be wrong, and I did more damage to her than I thought, but I WILL say her life bar didn't move. Sure, I could have Hemoragged, but everytime I tried that, the stagger debuff left befor the Hemmorage set in.

[Amioran]

G_Admiral_Thrawn wrote...
Easy. Mana Clashed him, Crushing Prison, and Winter's Grasped (or something like that) and he was dead. And as far as my favorite spells sucking, I don't know about that, because I kill almost everything that I come across.

Sorry, my fault. I was talking about Kangaxx in BG2 and did confusion with the "parody" of DAO. As for your spells "sucking" I stated they they don't suck in general, but in confront to many others, that are much better.
 

G_Admiral_Thrawn wrote...
My complaint is killing things. In BG2, NWN, NWN2, and DA:O and Awakening, my mage could (and for the most part, does) solo the game (I have other party members for the interactions, but that's it). Either through damage, or through insta death spells.

In all the games you mentioned you can solo the game with a mage, yes, but there are always methods to do so. You cannot just play the game normally as you play with a party solo. You can do the same also in DA2. It requires a lot of kiting but you can do it.
 

G_Admiral_Thrawn wrote...
Aside from sleep, which only works on normal enemies (and only 50% of the time at that), and Cone of Cold/Winter's Grasp, which disables an enemy momentarily, what's a mage's CC? Horror? That works, but not by much. Crushing Prison? Need a warrior to stagger the enemy so it's paralyzed.

Petrify, Horror, Glyph of Paralysis, Gravitic Ring, either Pull of the Abyss and in some circumstance also Glyph of Repulsion are all powerful CC spells if used correctly (to not talk about some "mixed" choices as Tempest and Paralyzing Hemorrhage, that while stating it has a 40% chance in realtiy it "staggers" always, while doing damage, as Tempest). Actually, then, Gravitic is almost cheating in anything below nightmare difficulty.

G_Admiral_Thrawn wrote...
got the same thing there, and I completely disagree. My BG2 mage is a MIRV tactical nuke missile, and probably does more damage, and I'm INEXPERIENCED? That sounds like a warrior complaint that they don't do anything because I kill everything.

You are inexperienced on the fact that there are much better alternatives to damage for a mage build. All people that think as you do is because of this, and all people thought the same as you at beginning, just because the first thing (and probably either the easier) one think is necessary is damage, so one goes for it. Many, however, don't try alternatives, so they think the "destruction" they do is actually the most powerful way to play a mage. This, however, has been proved wrong many times, primarily by those that at first thought themselves damage the best option, then discovered by experimentation that it was not so.

Modifié par Amioran, 25 mars 2011 - 11:04 .

[AreleX]

G_Admiral_Thrawn wrote...

Fable
of healbot/buffboy? In my fight with both the High Dragon and Meredith,
it was the warriors and rogues who did most of the work. I just stood
there wanding and healing. Big change from DA:O where my mages were
doing massive damage to the High Dragon. I'll admit, I did a little more
in the Meredith fight, but only because Carver (I think) would stagger
Meredith, and I'd Crushing Prison her, but even that didn't seem to do
much damage (compared to the (mostly) unbuffed rogues and warriors. I
ran through my mana twice (and used 3 or 4 Lyrium pots), and didn't do
any damage to her. Or atleast, I didn't notice any damage, but I wasn't
playing with the numbers floating. I could be wrong, and I did more
damage to her than I thought, but I WILL say her life bar didn't move.
Sure, I could have Hemoragged, but everytime I tried that, the stagger
debuff left befor the Hemmorage set in.

In my 3-Minute Deep Roads Dragon Kill video, I just swung at his ass like a goober to slow him down/stagger him while Merrill and Varric destroyed him.

m14567 wrote...

@Arelex. Here is my take on it, when I play a warrior I find the game is 'easier', significantly so. When I play a mage, I find it harder. Maybe my mage builds are trash, I don't know, I've certainly fiddled with them.

But you have some great videos, so simply put do you think you could play a mage no pause style and get similar results as your warrior playthrough? My feeling is no but I'll gladly be proven wrong. I find in this game, against a lot of the tougher battles, I have to micro the warrior in the party, you can't really leave a warrior to be well handled by the AI. The AI seems to function better with ranged characters.

When I play a mage I find I have to A) pause more frequently and fiddle with AOE markers (EDIT: and C) swap staves out for maximum damage) which I guess is a bit anti-climatic to me after mangling everything in my path when playing a warrior.

Honest answer? Probably not. As I said, I don't know anything about playing a mage to say. I'm just pointing out how important mages are to my success, and that if they were as garbage as some people (not you) are claiming, that wouldn't be possible. 

And no, not just for a 'heal/buff bot'.

I'm bowing out of this thread, I only came in because I don't like ignorance, and Graunt is hilarious. I'm not interested in arguing, especially when those who are wrong choose to ignore facts.

The guilty will speak, on that.

Modifié par AreleX, 25 mars 2011 - 10:52 .

[Amioran]

G_Admiral_Thrawn wrote...
Fable of healbot/buffboy? In my fight with both the High Dragon and Meredith, it was the warriors and rogues who did most of the work.

So you think that casting Affliction Hex, Misdirection Hex, Petrify, Horror, Haste, etc. plus timed CCCs and AoEs /(to not talk about heals that are a necessity) means doing "less of the work"? Without those spells your other party members would take ages to kill the dragon, if they will be able to kill it at all without dying.

Then mages in DA2 are not very good against single target enemies for damage. This has been done to differentiate more the classes. You can also not agree with this, but you must consider this fact, and in so doing providing only an example that is really unfavorable for the class doesn't do any good.

Why don't we talk for example of encounters with a lot of powerful mobs as the Dissention quest line? I want to see if without a mage your party would either win in that situation without cheap tactics, and I would want to see who does the more damage with a good DPS build between a mage and a warrior/rogue, against ALL of them.

Modifié par Amioran, 25 mars 2011 - 11:00 .